Would you take the old codex back?

[mattblowers]

Nostalgia, or, as I like to call it, false memories, is something we all fall into. Things usually remember better than they actually were. Take Nintendo NES, I still have mine and most of the games are completely unplayable. They remember well, but when I sit down to play them I find they are better in memory than reality. Super mario bros is still great and I still play Tecmo Super Bowl on a nearly daily basis (it's how I destress after a long evening of doing psychotherapy), but otherwise (excitebike, kung fu fighter, double dragon, etc) aren't nearly as good as they remember.

This brings us to our codex. We see a lot of complaints and wishes for things that we used to have. The question is, would you take the 5th ed. codex back if you could? Before you answer lets list what we lost:

1. access to 2+ armor
2. ymargle genestealers
3. doom
4. parasite
5. scy tal buff
6. easy synapse threat
7. micetic spore (gain t-cyte, so sort of a wash)
8. access to psychic disciplines
9. buffs to tervigon

It's not all good news though, in order to go back we would lose the following:

1. Hive Crone
2. Exocrine
3. Haruspex (not many would miss him)
4. Mucolids
5. Toxicrene
6. T-cyte (but gain micetic spore so a wash)
7. nurenthrope
8. access to FNP
9. venomthrope/malanthrope buff (this is huge and would make many of my current lists unplayable)
10. buffs to biovores
11. true ignores cover for hive guard (I may be the only player who uses this a lot)
12. mixed weapons on gaunts


I know I'm missing a bunch of other little things, but I have put the things that I think most important. I purposefully didn't do point cost comparisons, b/c that's another thing all together.

So, would you? Knowing what you now know about where 40K has gone, would you give back our current codex for the old one? I would not. Once I listed things out it was an easy call for me. Funny things is, since our codex has dropped I have thought I would. When I stopped and actually evaluated though, I wouldn't anymore. The nerf to smash and the other changes to meta have gone to a point where I think we are better off with our current codex than we would in the current environment with the old codex.

[swarm492]

I want to say yes, ..I really wanted to

[angelwing]

No, as the 5th ed codex was an under play tested sloppy mess. Internal balance was almost non existent and the FAQ needed flushing down the toilet.
It had some great stuff in it and plenty of fun could be had, but it read like a 1st draft that got rushed out to coincide with the space hulk release.

[biomassbob]

Apr 18, 2015 15:03:33 GMT angelwing said:

No, as the 5th ed codex was an under play tested sloppy mess. Internal balance was almost non existent and the FAQ needed flushing down the toilet.
It had some great stuff in it and plenty of fun could be had, but it read like a 1st draft that got rushed out to coincide with the space hulk release.

This^. You're asking "Well, if you feel our current dex was a punch to the throat that left you gagging and you feel that a new dex will be a kick to the groin, would you go back to the 5th ed nid dex that was only a brick to the face, knocking you down and then having your lunch money stolen."

If we want to really wishlist and pick and choose I might start with the 4th edition dex and fix it's problems (elite carnifex were absurd, etc), add the new units (and make their rules work (trygon tunnel) and ensure they have a role/purpose in the army)(drop what doesn't belong) while working out the philosophy behind how our army should operate and function on the battlefield. This might entail re-writing BRB rules or just ensuring regardless of stupid BRB CC rules nids would have their own rules that ensures the army can operate efficiently - so CC units can fight in close combat better than non-close combat units. So a carnifex carrying 2 sets of guns would move a lot slower than a fex with 2 sets of CC biomorphs.

[gigasnail]

I'll pass. It would be 6th edition VS, FMC rules, and book psychic powers I'd go for.

[Kwodd]

Because the malanthrope, and leviathan came along to save our current codex I say no.

[eskimo]

The more you think about it the more you lean to "no".

Though the new models are cool, poor rules aside.

[nurglitch]

Nope.

[blackrainbow]

I guess I'm in the "yes" side of things. Though I do love many new monsters, it appears (in simple form of your lists) that we swapped more stuff for more creatures. I'd rather have the old stuff, as if we had that codex, with the new style, most of the "new" creatures would probably get added via data-slates anyways. Does this mean I want a combo of the two? Yup. But as as strict choice, I still feel more comfortable with ymgarl options. This is not saying I'd prefer 5th Ed over current, that is a default - I choose you 7th Ed. Only because I'm more familiar with it. I have the old books and read them often enough to stay nostalgic, so that may influence my choice. Sans playing a 5th Ed game to refresh things.

[Col. Duke LaCrosse]

I'm probably in the minority here but I hated nearly everything about the 5th ed. codex. It was unbalanced, weak, frustrating, and boring to play. The only viable units were specifically the units I didn't care to play (Trygons, Tervigons, Flyrants, Hive Guard...ummm I can't remember any other units that were worth bringing). The book was terribly unbalanced to the point that it was a near certain loss (as near as you can get in a dice game) unless you spammed those 4 or so units). Every interesting unit I wanted to play (Old One Eye, the Parasite, Rippers, Carnifexes, T Primes, Mawlocs, Genestealers, Lictors, Warriors) were damn near unplayable and absurdly over-costed. Let's not forget the special rules that were unplayable (everything associated with the pyrovore), useless (trygon tunnel and pheromone trail), and totally irrelevant in all games BY DESIGN (living battering ram on Old One Eye). Games against all but the most fluffy lists and armies were a complete slog and very dull.

I've played Tyranids in every edition from 3rd through to their current codex. I have enjoyed every edition except 5th. I actually quit 40k and sold my 'nids after playing the 5th Ed. book for several months. I just hated it that much. Just my opinion I know, but I'd play SPACE MARINES before playing that codex again.

[gigasnail]

lol no, you're not on the minority with this one.

[Anggul]

Heck no. The 6th edition codex was a huge disappointment because it only made a couple of things better and still gave out plenty of new rubbish. That's still a couple of things better than the previous one though. It's rubbish, but slightly better than the previous rubbish.

[blackrainbow]

So it basically comes down to which piece of poorly conceived and implemented codex we prefer? A choice of which set of creatures we prefer, characers vs new-shiny and flyers, and the difference in rules that the two provide, which comes at a personal set of preferences of which units we liked. Did we favor the models with coolness factor and that we had history with or that we identified with from the fluff, or the ones with usable rules? Do we adapt to changes designed either poorly, randomly, or financially motivated by GW? That is an old argument. So... I choose you, fandex!

[mattblowers]

Apr 19, 2015 16:29:12 GMT blackrainbow said:

financially motivated by GW?

Did you ever believe that something else motivated them? Like what? Altruism? Benevolence?

[nikh]

The thought of playing the 5th edition book against current edition armies makes me cringe.