Wednesday, October 14, 2009

Is the Grass Really Greener on the Other Side?

Or is it just the vocal minority just being particularly vocal? I've been sick for the past two days, lying in my death bed and whatnot, hoping that this illness that's been spreading around campus isn't gonna mutate into the zombie plague.

Other than sleeping and studying for my midterm tomorrow, I've been reading quite a few forums have come across a rather common consensus.

Everyone on the forums thinks that their codex blows. That's right. Everyone (with exception to the Space Wolves players who are still on their honeymoon). All across we have complaints from Chaos Marine players, Ork players, Space Marine Players, Eldar players, Tyranid players and whatnot about how there are so many things wrong with their codex, every other army has it much better than them and how it should be GW's priority to release a new codex for their army to fix all their problems and make them the uber army of 5th edition 40k.

Why is this? Well, I think that it's just a whole lot of hodge-podge steam venting from a very vocal minority. These are the kinds of people who will go into every thread and every forum hijacking the thread into "Sisters of Battle need an update" or flaunt their own superiority for choosing to play with an outdated codex. I don't really see why they have to do this. Frankly, you CHOOSE your army and before making a $300+ investment in models, you presumably understand the decision you are making. No one is forcing you to play Sisters, Daemonhunters, Dark Eldar or Necrons. You made the decision.

Yes, the Chaos Space Marine codex was effectively castrated fluff wise in terms of army building. Most players are going to accept this and realize that it also opens up tons of army building options. Yes, the Witch Hunters codex is old and harder to play. But that is the nature of anything with a metagame. As the metagame evolves, some options get left behind and some options become awesome. Your army will never be on top forever (I remember the fall of the Dual Biker Nobz list to the IG - a list that was supposedly fool proof in execution).

To sum it up - every player has a choice in the army that they play and should choose it carefully. When starting an army, you should realize that the game will change and evolve as new armies and codexes are released. No army will be perfect forever, no strategy is unbeatable. We play a game that is as quick to change as the seasons.


  1. I couldn't agree more. Heck my two primary armies are Black Templars and Sisters of Battle. Would it be nice to have a codex update, sure. Can I play just fine with my currents Dexs, damn skippy I can!


  2. I'm thinking about starting Daemonhunters myself.

  3. Heh. Usually these players are just trying to boost their own ego. They're trying to show off how good a person they are to play a "handicapped" army. Typically they're the same ones running cookie-cutter power builds they got off the internet, play like pricks, beat down a bunch of kids or newbs, think they're hot stuff and then wonder why nobody local wants to play them.

    You forgot to mention how these players are also running around decrying every newer codex to be victim of "codex creep", "broken", "cheese", or otherwise "OMFG, the sky is falling and 40k is ruined!".

    Is every Codex perfect? Pfagh. Not even SW is perfect. There's slight imbalances in all of them. These people need to get over themselves. Winning isn't all about the Codex; the army list is just the part you control going in. Knowing how to USE it (and a little luck) makes just as much difference. Yeah, there is a learning curve of about 3 months where a new Codex will dominate top tables... and then people will learn how to deal with it, adapt their metagame and it will absorb into the commonality. Meh.

  4. ...nids need a new dex...just saying

  5. The grass is occasionally slightly greener on the other side.

    In truth, some codexes DO have some deficiencies (IE: Orks vs Land Raiders = Sad Orks) and most units COULD use a minor tweak in some of the older units. 'nids kind of suffer because, oh, they have NO shooting. I could go on, but that's neither here nor there.

    On the other hand, a lot of people will just bitch to bitch.

    Every time the core rules change or a new codex hits, things change a little bit. It's just the way it is. Dverning pretty much hit it.

  6. I agree. I haven't actually played at a local store yet mainly because I have this believe of not fielding a nice, completed, painted army, but I've listen to the talk. I think so many people miss the point. This is a hobby, and a game. They are meant to be fun and relaxing.
    I've noticed that when ever a new codex is released. That particular army is the cream of the crop.

  7. Ron - Best of luck to you with that choice!

    Dverning hit it right on the head - no codex is perfect and no codex ever will be perfect. Why assume otherwise?

    Yes, Anon. Nids need a new dex. I'm not denying it. It's been a rough time in 5e for them since their only tank-busting option is to throw a Carni or a Tyrant into CC.

    Barrykiker - thank you for seeing that this is first and foremost a means of entertainment rather than another thing to complain about.

  8. I agree with you on this, except that I really like playing Chaos Daemons. I actually almost didn't play them since the Spearhead is tough to find (found one luckily). I was a bit skeptical from what I read from ranting about their codex, but trying them out I like them very much and think the Codex works pretty good.

  9. i kind of disagree with you. It annoys the crap the number of whiners who would cry no matter what about how underpowered they are. Usually the same gamers who just want cheese to exploit.

    But there is truth in the fact that 5e changed so much and certain stats and abilities were worth a lot more in 3e and 4e than they are in 5e, so the units with them are now very overpriced.

    This wouldn't be a problem if GW was able to write more than 20 pages every 6 months. The new codex always just copies the fluff sections from the old so really only the rules section needs redone. I mean seriously, some codexs are 10 years or older. In any other game of this variety if a sourcebook was over 10 years old it would be laughable and the gamers would consider that game obsolete and a mockery.

    It's made even worse by the fact that between every xeno codex they need to release yet another SM dex.

    so is it valid to gripe about every codex, no. but do people who play with codexs a decade and 2 editions old have a valid gripe, yes.