Dawn of War Codex

oh...... My bad, still they are the ONLY ones who actually get a melta-pistol. Who else in CR equipped the Traitor's Sidearm?

Them and Raptors

Oh. So Chaos is the only to use the RIDICULOUSLY multi-purpose Melta-pistol? Blimy.

haven't played inquisitor much have yeh? wait we are counting the inferno pistol right?

Everything is relative. When he says a pretty cheap melee unit slugga boyz come to mind who are exactly pretty cheap or banshees who are still cheaper than khorne marines and perform better. This is why calling them pretty cheap is wrong. It is like saying that tactical marines are pretty cheap but there are guardsmen who outperform them as an anti-infantry squad and cost less.

But if you have in mind ogryns and purifiers then khorne marines indeed become pretty cheap. But how do we compare T1 and T2 units? Nohow. And I don't think the costs of purifiers and ogryns are balanced as well.

Funny fact that whenever anybody says that tzeentch marines are OP (and they are) defenders of them (basically everyone) come and tell that they are expensive hence allowed to deal such damage. BS, isn't it? Khorne marines cost almost the exact same amount (55 req less) of resources and apparently they are pretty cheap.

haven't played inquisitor much have yeh? wait we are counting the inferno pistol right?

He means amongst infantry. And yes it does seem so. Even vanguard veterans with an AV upgrade don't get a melta pistol. And if anything a T3 unit deserves to have that rather than a T2 unit.

What Tex said. KCSM are a well balanced unit. They are vulnerable to melee counters as they lack any abilities (like a dash, jump, suppression immunity etc), but will run RIOT if not properly countered. They are also really cheap to reinforce and due to the mark system they are easy to transition into, or threaten transitioning.

Arguments that they are UP seem to come from 3v3 players primarily, where melee under preforms in general.

Sub_Zero wrote:Everything is relative. When he says a pretty cheap melee unit slugga boyz come to mind who are exactly pretty cheap or banshees who are still cheaper than khorne marines and perform better. This is why calling them pretty cheap is wrong. It is like saying that tactical marines are pretty cheap but there are guardsmen who outperform them as an anti-infantry squad and cost less.

But if you have in mind ogryns and purifiers then khorne marines indeed become pretty cheap. But how do we compare T1 and T2 units? Nohow. And I don't think the costs of purifiers and ogryns are balanced as well.

Funny fact that whenever anybody says that tzeentch marines are OP (and they are) defenders of them (basically everyone) come and tell that they are expensive hence allowed to deal such damage. BS, isn't it? Khorne marines cost almost the exact same amount (55 req less) of resources and apparently they are pretty cheap.

haven't played inquisitor much have yeh? wait we are counting the inferno pistol right?

He means amongst infantry. And yes it does seem so. Even vanguard veterans with an AV upgrade don't get a melta pistol. And if anything a T3 unit deserves to have that rather than a T2 unit.

Well there is your issue right there,

if you want to compare kcsm to banshees and sluggas, then you also need to compare csm to guardians and shootaboys. (hint dont do that, please dont).

They arent the same kind of unit.
banshees ,sluggas , shootas and guardians are purpose built cheap damage over durability and cost units. That is the core concept of most light infantry damage and numbers over hp and durability. really the only squad that effectively rebukes this trend is the ig guardsman squad.

csm , tacs ,strikes and all of their various upgrades and versions are not about cheap damage. they are durability and damage at the expense of cost.

As i said earlier most melee units have certain damage thresholds they can deal with before losing effectiveness. heavy infantry based melee units like kcsm have higher thresholds. that is what you are paying for. That is why they cost more.

But in terms for what you get for a heavy infantry melee unit.. they are dirt cheap.

It's ironic how a good-in-all master-in-none squad could be so situacional. XD

Well I'm not sure they should be so scarcely used. The vast majority of chaos builds include CSM in T1. It falls to the fact that people upgrade to TCSM in T2 by reflex. But when TCSM are not particularly needed, KCSM will certainly do fine, and in 1v1 make great capping units with their high speed and good duel prowess.

but will run RIOT if not properly countered.

I can get reasonable points but these ones always make me cringe. Like wtf? "Support them and they will shine!", "If they are not countered properly they will be great!"

Huh? Isn't that applied to ABSOLUTELY every single thing in this game? You need to support everything to maximize its effectiveness. You need to counter everything to make sure it doesn't do much harm. This is how the game works for every single thing. And when you use these lines to justify one thing's viability you don't really add any valuable argument to support your position.

Well said, but you should've opened with a NO!


....Cus your using the Boreale picture
On a more serious note: What he says is indeed true, properly supported anything could work, it's just people USUALLY favor certain things because they are easier to make work. Not sure I just put that well, but I hope you get the point.

I dunno I actually think you're agreeing with Cyris if you're claiming that this assessment is obvious. Cyris is saying that kcsm are well balanced and aren't shit- in the right circumstances with support they can wreck face, but without those they're underwhelming, implying they probably occupy a nice balanced middle ground.

As opposed to op units that can function well as a single unit vanguard of doom (e.g. Paladins) or units that it's hard to get value out of even with support (dark reapers?)

I saw somebody mention something about power costs, and I kind of agree. With the internal competition between KCSM and TCSM, I have a hard time of understanding why the marks are so close in cost when TCSM offers soooooooooooooooo much more safety in terms of a permanent upgrade.

It might be that way because of purifiers and ogryns. That would explain kcsm and its cost hike a little.

People have already grumbled many times about how expensive those two units (which fill similar rolls) are when compared to kcsm.

you knock the mark down to say 20 power (which i think it might have been at some point) and now you end up with a unit that is basically half the power cost of purifiers and ogryns while also having possibly the best chase potential and the lowest bleed of exactly zero power.

as for the tcsm vs kcsm issue. I chock that up to the melee vs ranged theme. in the right situation kcsm wipe the floor with tcsm.

just like how well played storm boyz can destroy people. by that same token once a certain threshold of damage is reached it becomes far more practical to just go ranged and avoid most of that damage all together. But that does not mean kcsm arent worth that power investment. Ranged > melee more often than melee > Ranged. people invented bows and guns for a reason.

you knock the mark down to say 20 power (which i think it might have been at some point) and now you end up with a unit that is basically half the power cost of purifiers and ogryns while also having possibly the best chase potential and the lowest bleed of exactly zero power.

Which will resonate with people and prompt many minds to think that perhaps ogryns and purifiers are too expenisve. A good thing I would say.

Well they are , but we don't need cheaper kcsm to tell us that.. is what i am saying

It is always an impossible thing to convince someone that one particular cost is wrong. There is no formula to build a cost relying on (considering) the benefits that come for this cost. The only possible way to present one cost as inappropriate is to compare it to something similar. But then again nobody seems to like comparisons and that is the only meaningful way here to determine whether that cost is balanced or not. Tanks. How we determine costs for them? We compare them all and basically count strenghts/weaknesses, the strongest one should have the highest cost, the weakest one should have the lowest cost. The same thing with dreadnought-type units, transports. Or ranged upgrades that allow to do increased damage to HI/SHI. Or flamers. Or something else. But how can you prove that the cost of mark of Khorne is wrong? If we had nemesis focus for SS and it gave worse benefits and had a lower cost then you could say that the cost for mark of Khorne is well-deserved. Because both these units are very similar.

Someone could (oh, that they most likely will if I don't mention that myself) say that costs are also built around one race's economy. Some races spend more power, some tend to spend more req. Costs have to reflect that and compensate that and in some cases it is the other way around.

But I think no matter what arguments are given one's perception (in context of this that is the feeling that exactly this number is right) will never change (but that is probably true for anything that involves subjectivity).

Or we go a less complicated way and look strictly at the costs of the upgrades within a particular unit? Let us say tactical marines. Their most expensive upgrade is the missile launcher. Do I agree with that? I think I do. Why? If I am to rate the efficiency of tactical marines when they have a certain upgrade then I will say that the best variation of tactical marines is the variation of them with a missile launcher. I love that high damage and the ability to be constantly on the move reloading the weapon. IMO this upgrade is the way to go for SM. Purchase a vehicle, force your opponent to answer with a vehicle. Then you can make all the difference with your tactical marines. OK, now CSM. Tell me with sincerity what is the best of the two (the best one should be more expensive, the other one is less so)? I think 90% players will tell that it is mark of Tzeentch. Why? That is obvious, you don't get another powerful ranged unit untill T3 whereas the faction is crawling with better melee variants who fullfil roles khorne marines can't do propely (heretics are more competent at counter-initiation, raptors are the way to go against ranged units, and you know everything about bloodletters' strength). What are the reasons to ever buy khorne marines? - 1) to kill units in retreat (khorne marines are the best at that); 2) map control purposes (really nice to have something that can run fast); 3) specific cases when this upgrade is more beneficial than the other one. But these reasons don't neccessarily mean that the cost is right! It only means that this upgrade is viable and has its uses. But what are your reasons to justify this cost? Here is another reasoning why tactical marines' upgrades have the respective costs - HI/SHI are usually more expensive, something that counters them should be expensive (mark of khorne has the effective damage type against these targets hence the high cost is justified); vehicles tend to be even more expensive hence the missile launcher has the highest cost. Seeing as both CSM upgrades are designed to counter HI you could claim that they should be equally expensive power-wise to be in line with other upgrades that counter HI. But then again they aren't really so equal in doing that. A more safer way to deliver damage is via a ranged source and the only difference in terms of damage is 13 DPS (EW and champion, %40 damage reduction from melee sources most HI units have were taken into account when I made this calculation). Another point in favour of tzeentch mark is that when you have tzeentch marines you have a very strong unit that can engage with no fear almost anything at range. And whenever you have khorne marines you have to be very cautious and hesitant when you engage a lot of other melee units because these fights will most likely not go in favour of your warriors. All that leads me to a conclusion that mark of Tzeentch is the better upgrade here and should have a distinctively higher cost. And since it already does have a higher requisition requirement now we just have to make sure that the power cost is higher as well by either making it 35 (and why not?) or making the cost of mark of Khorne 25/20.

In other words I am really out of ideas how to craft my arguments to convince (not just state my opinion but to make you think otherwise) you that this cost is wrong. There are so many factors that have to be pulled together and considered. I would love to hear out how you try to convince me that this very cost is right. Perhaps we should collectively invent a principle how to determine whether any particular cost is right.

Still it is not entirely impossible to convince someone that a cost is wrong, because costs for units have changed.

The thing is in this very particular case (Kcsm) i feel the cost is not wrong. Rather I think that it is simply the unfortunate lot in the life of a melee unit to not be as universally useful as a ranged unit. kcsm when compared to tcsm do often seen expensive for what they do. But for a heavy inf melee unit they are still technically very cheap. And there are situations where they are more cost effective than tcsm.

Not every tool needs to be used all of the time. it is perfectly fine to have situational tools available. Not everyone uses raptors, not everyone uses noisemarines, heck I dont use tanks because fuck those assholes and their drunk drivers. But none of those units are bad either. Tcsm just got the lucky draw as being part of the core unit composition of any army.. your conventional ranged infantry unit.

you could make them 45 - 50 power and it wont change the fact that they without doubt the right tool for more jobs.

Aren't kcsm supposed to be based on Khorne Berzerkers? By all right they should be THE melee superiority unit of DoWII, not the worst. The fact that they lose to cheap T1 units like Banshees and Sluggas is laughable. How could anyone think their cost is fine? It's ok that they suck to the point that the only thing they excel at (chasing for wipe potential) is easily achieved with good micro thus making them redundant if you're good enough (and knowing 'chasing' is only a small consolation compared what Raptors, Tics and Bloodletters can offer you), but they also HAVE to be as power costly as tcsm, a unit on a completely different level. It's almost like a joke.

I honestly don't see a problem with KCSM being too weak (this is coming from someone who has mained Chaos longer than I care to admit). They are a bit more situational especially since (T)CSM are the only real conventional ranged unit so that kinda discourages getting KCSM.

KCSM are extremely useful in certain situations (mostly 1v1 much like Ogryns and Lulifiers). I think people underestimate the impact they can make and the value of being able to go from ranged unit to rather tanky melee unit rather fast.

Anyway I would most certainly not call KCSM UP. The overall cost of the squad is quite high but you don't have to pay it all at once (you pay 400 and then some time later 60/15 and then at some point you get an AC or a mark etc). Getting a new CSM just to make them KCSM would be dumb. It would take too long with the immobile upgrade on top of production time and the cost would be a bit too high. Letters would do the same job far better and cheaper.

The idea for KCSM is that you can transform your ranged squad into a melee squad for the price of a Tactical Marine weapon upgrade. That is what makes them strong especially combined with a timing push. Also the extra speed makes then great at flanking positions.

They still cost too much for what little they do, though.

Paradise Lost wrote:They still cost too much for what little they do, though.

Good argument. Here us mine: No they don't, see the rest of the thread.

OP? thats a rly stupid thing what u said how can those guys be op? as people said they lose vs ogryns storm boys banshees and purificers wich cost more or less the same. They are not cheap to reinforce and they dont jump so u can control them with a supresion or any anti meele thing. And about chaos being versatile vs ur sm maxium chaos right now still require synergy and a good use of heretics while as space marine the only hot key u need to use to win its just the scout shotgun blast.

Dark Riku wrote:

Paradise Lost wrote:They still cost too much for what little they do, though.

Good argument. Here us mine: No they don't, see the rest of the thread.

Good argument. Here's mine: Yes they do, see the rest of the thread.

If i would have to pay 530/45 + 75/25 for KCSM at once to field them, I would never get them. However it is not the case, hence I find them to be in a good spot tbf. They are an upgrade to a ranged squad after all.

they are fine. here is a video of me using them vs orks

sluggas, storms, and the boss

YES I DID IT SUBZERO im looking at you its possible.

paradise also your opinion is much less than rikus just by experience alone.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0OhaDoL59xM

Paradise Lost wrote:Good argument. Here's mine: Yes they do, see the rest of the thread.

I suggest a re-read

Paradise Lost wrote:

Dark Riku wrote:

Paradise Lost wrote:They still cost too much for what little they do, though.

Good argument. Here us mine: No they don't, see the rest of the thread.

Good argument. Here's mine: Yes they do, see the rest of the thread.

Are you seriously starting a 1 line per post poo flinging match? cmon. just stop posting

DandyFrontline wrote:This guy also said kasrkins are OP and ruin 3vs3 games (ofc without explanation), so i guess he is just on drugs.

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL you may be right !

mmm yeah... khorne marines OP... i would say tzeench marines are borderline op. in the 2-3 years i have played the game i never ever heard people complain about khornemarines except that they are not very good compared to mark of T.. and that is mostly true. they do go well together with sorc and skilllord since you can speed them up greatly witt khorne worship or hide them with tzeench worship.. but OP?.. i really fail to see it.

they are at least fun 2 use... way more than the same old mark of T spam i see every day.