I recently played a game with my space marine army accompanied by solomon lok. He was the only forge world unit in my army, i had his stats with me and he doesn't exactly do anything that is out there. one opponent was totally on board and we had a great game.
my second guy of the night started off being a bit weird about it, making comments that forgeworld is outside the game. When i produced the pages that word for word say that most forge world units are meant for standard games he stopped for a while. Latter when he had some bad shooting due to Lok's warlord trait giving my marines fnp while they sat on the deciding objective, he had a mini freakout claiming that Lok's warlord trait is grossly over powered. the game was not fun from there on.
Has anyone else had people react negatively to a forge world unit, even ones that don't seem particularly cheesy (unless someone wants to argue that Lok is OP)
I have the book and rules on me though. If anyone wants to see the rules i'll share. I doubt most people own every single codex and supplement unless they got them through less than legal means but I would refuse to play an army just because i don't have my own copy of that book.
I actually find VERY few things from FW to be that game breaking and, if anything, they help plug possible holes in your army and overall just give more options.
Loom at the Land Raider for example. They're awesome looking but blow up too easily. When I came across the rules for the Spartan, it blew my mind. It was way more expensive, but it had more room, an extra HP, and the option for Ceramite. Now, anything not a D weapon has a much harder time stopping Tyberos and his Centurions from getting across the board.
GW (not forgeworld) needs to mention that forgeworld is perfectly acceptable for normal play in the rulebook. Until then there will always be that guy that talks about how forgeworld is overpowered and pay to win.
HoundsofDemos wrote: I recently played a game with my space marine army accompanied by solomon lok. He was the only forge world unit in my army, i had his stats with me and he doesn't exactly do anything that is out there. one opponent was totally on board and we had a great game.
my second guy of the night started off being a bit weird about it, making comments that forgeworld is outside the game. When i produced the pages that word for word say that most forge world units are meant for standard games he stopped for a while. Latter when he had some bad shooting due to Lok's warlord trait giving my marines fnp while they sat on the deciding objective, he had a mini freakout claiming that Lok's warlord trait is grossly over powered. the game was not fun from there on.
Has anyone else had people react negatively to a forge world unit, even ones that don't seem particularly cheesy (unless someone wants to argue that Lok is OP)
It's always been a crutch for people to complain about when things don't go their way. There's nothing from FW that matches the power of anything from GW's mainline offerings. Sure, some stuff can be abused, and a couple of notably overpowered things, but not anything more than anything else really. Certainly nothing like GW putting D weapons on 35pt infantry or sub 300pt D-weapon toting Gargantuan Creatures.
I agree on forgeworld not being an issue normally, but I have seen the leaked dataslate for their updated revenant titan.
Absolutely terrifying. Made it better at the things it was already annoyingly capable at (movement and shooting) then made it near impossible to defeat in close combat as well! They have the nerve to actually leave it at the same points value on top of that.
So unnecessary, so very very unnecessary.
But, to the op. He's just salty, it happens, enjoy your games without him!
All through 6th people gave me a hard time when I wanted to run my Mortis dread with my DA. It's the same as the dual AC dreads in the 6th ed DA book, but for a few more points gave me my only viable anti air.
Best part, some of the people complaining didn't even have fliers or anything DSing.
because sme people are unwilling to drop that kind of money on getting a unit. i think largely the forgeworld units remain taboo as a relic of days gone by when players only bought things over the counter or via catalogues. web transactions were this black market esque thing to some people and they thought it unfair that because he bought things online with a credit card he could do things with his army the other guys couldnt consider or build armies around. today virtually everyone will shop online for something eventually heck ive done it probably 2 dozen times.
i also feel that people always have viewed forgeworld as the apocalypse store. its where you go to buy obscene things like warhouds and stormlords things that remove whole squadrons of models from ables at a time and as a result of apocalypse being besically killed as a game mode 40k players view their taboo ban on forgeworld as their only way to keep some semblance of a barrier between them and the doomsday weapons that in their eyes are impossible to counter with conventional means (even though their not that scary really except for maybe the warlord ).
Swabby wrote: GW (not forgeworld) needs to mention that forgeworld is perfectly acceptable for normal play in the rulebook. Until then there will always be that guy that talks about how forgeworld is overpowered and pay to win.
There is no distinction between GW and Forgeworld.
FW is a design studio of the GW company. When they make stuff for 40k games, that has exactly the same legality as any supplement made by GW.
The reason why people still complain is because they are bad losers. Funnily enough, FW stuff is not nearly as OP as some main codex stuff.
Most of the non-Lord of war forgeworld models are actually quite tsme, if not underpowered/overpriced due to the face paced release schedule for games workshop. However, many forgeworld super heavies are really difficult to deal with in a non-apocalypse match. I once played against a chaos player who used grimoired of true names on a brass scorpion against my white scars. I didn't kill anything.
Martel732 wrote: For all the complaining, FW has never put out anything as broken as a scatterbike.
Ha ha ha. HA HA HA!!
HA HAHAHAH AAHAH A!!!
In 5th Edition, for example, the Achilles Land Raider (I think it was the Achilles pattern? I could be remembering wrong) was basically completely un-killable unless you had a Titan. Has it really been THAT long that people forgot about the R'Varna Battlesuit? Then you've got stuff like the Necron Pylons that are just crazy broken. The Tyranid Malanthrope costs 45 points more than his little brother the Venomthrope, yet he's worth easily twice what you pay for him. Eldar Hornets? I'm not even getting into the crazy big stuff!!
The list goes on and on.
New, younger players I imagine don't have much of an issue with Forgeworld. For those of us who have been playing a long time though, Forge World is where you got models to play Apocalypse battles. The rules for all the models was for the most part SO out of this world and broken that you ONLY would use them in Apocalypse battles where you were fighting with other people using the same kinds of toys. The points values for all the Forgeworld models were basically set with this in mind! You didn't balance the point cost of a Forge World Land Raider with the existing Space Marine codex. You balanced the cost of that Land Raider in the context of the Imperial Armour book that it was printed in. That Imperial Armour book had Titans, and all kinds of other hugely powerful units in it as well. So generally your Land Raider would need to be either a) pretty strong or b) pretty cheap in points to fit into the book. Sometimes both!
That is why Forgeworld has had a loooooooong reputation for making overpowered and undercosted items, and why allowing them in regular 40k battles was always based on permission from your opponent.
Bringing Forgeworld items to regular 40k battles is a VERY new phenomena considering how long the 40k game has been in existence. Forgeworld is doing a much better job within the past 3-5 years of balancing their units to be more in line with Warhammer 40k and not Apocalypse. Even then, they have a very very long back catalog of models that originally came out in 4th or 5th Edition, whose points are based on Imperial Armour, and who don't fit easily into the present game without an understanding from your opponent.
On the OPPOSITE side of the spectrum, Games Workshop has pretty much ELIMINATED Apocalypse and merged what used to be Apocalypse into normal 40k. Five years ago it would have been UNHEARD OF to think of D Weapons in a normal 40k game. Now they are fairly commonplace. So Forgeworld seems a bit more tame by comparison to what it was a few years back.
Gamers have long memories. Forgeworld made overpowered units for a LOOOOONG time. Not enough time has passed, and most gamers rarely see Forgeworld units due to the cost and rarity. So you plop down a Forgeworld unit, and gamers get scared because of what they've HEARD about the reputation of Forgeworld, regardless of whether or not it still holds true for whatever model you've put on the table.
Martel732 wrote: For all the complaining, FW has never put out anything as broken as a scatterbike.
Ha ha ha. HA HA HA!!
HA HAHAHAH AAHAH A!!!
In 5th Edition, for example, the Achilles Land Raider (I think it was the Achilles pattern? I could be remembering wrong) was basically completely un-killable unless you had a Titan.
After they increased it's price and made a couple other adjustments after its initial expiermentail rules, it was strong but hardly the most broken thing at 325pts with no assault ramp and a transport capacity of 6.
Has it really been THAT long that people forgot about the R'Varna Battlesuit?
The one that got nerfed after its initial experimental rules and that very few people ever bother with?
Then you've got stuff like the Necron Pylons that are just crazy broken.
The Superheavy Gauss Pylon? In previous editions it was an Apocalypse unit, so largely it was irrelevant. Even now, It's immobile unit, with no more firepower than something like an Eldar Scorpion, and is hardly anything near the best investment for a superheavy.
The Tyranid Malanthrope costs 45 points more than his little brother the Venomthrope, yet he's worth easily twice what you pay for him.
It's extremely situational in usefulness. Sure it's probably better than a Venomthrope, but it's hardly the most broken unit in the game,
Eldar Hornets?
They're good, but hardly overpoweringly broken. You certainly don't see them in any power build armies sweeping tournaments.
I'm not even getting into the crazy big stuff!!
Guess who writes most of the rules for the "crazy big stuff"? GW. They took over things like the Manta, Thunderhawk, Reaver Titan, etc.
That is why Forgeworld has had a loooooooong reputation for making overpowered and undercosted items
No more so than anything out of the core GW studio. People like to nitpick a few things, but they don't seem to take it in any sort of comparison with core GW stuff. Like infiltrating Jump Daemon Pirnces int he 3.5E CSM book, 4E Eldar Invinci-skimmers, Vendettas, 3E Necron Monoliths, 5E Vulkan He'Stan, Lash of Submission, etc ad nauseum.
and why allowing them in regular 40k battles was always based on permission from your opponent.
No moreso than anything else, everything is always pretty much "opponent's permission".
Gamers have long memories. Forgeworld made overpowered units for a LOOOOONG time.
Very few relative to the overall size of their catalog, a couple of boogeymans (usually also played incorrectly) that spoiled everything. Nobody talks about things like Leman Russ Annihilators, Sentinel Power Lifters, Tauros Venators, the original rules for Valkyries and Hydra Flak tanks, Eldar Firestorms, Hyperios Whirlwinds, Land Seeder Typhoons, Mortis Dreadnoughts, Damocles Command Rhinos, Tau Heavy Gun Drones, Hazard Suits, Sensor Turrets, Barracudas, Eldar Nightwings, Phoenix Bombers, Ravens & Razorwings, Gunwagons, Grot Bomba Launchas, Mega Dreads, etc
Plus you always got to add the TFG factor. TFG always has the money to go buy a Titan and throw it in a game. Way back in the day your average non forgeworld army didn't have the means to deal with things like Titans. Heck some armies didn't have anything in foregworld either to deal with it in the very early days.
TFG's as usual, ruined it for everyone. Now it's not as big as a deal with all the craziness in the regular codexes.
Plus you always got to add the TFG factor. TFG always has the money to go buy a Titan and throw it in a game.
While true, this is not an issue with Forgeworld really. GW writes the rules for most of the titans as they are at this point, and core GW wrote the rules that allowed them to be taken in non-apocalypse games. FW just casts the resin. When FW wrote the rules for them, they were never intended to be allowed in just any game.
HoundsofDemos wrote: there the same company though, so saying you need permission is like saying i need permission to run a demi company.
Not exactly. Regardless of the fact that Forgeworld are owned by GW, people are always going to see them as a separate entity to the main studio - because they are. They design their stuff completely independantly of the main 40K range, and so people see them as something different to the main game.
Rightly or wrongly, without something concrete from the actual studio stating that Forgeworld should be considered 'standard', there are always going to be those who refuse to take the word of the outside studio that they have any sort of 'authority' to claim their rules as 'official'.
That's a part of the problem. The other part, I think, is just familiarity. Or, more precisely, lack of same.
HoundsofDemos wrote: there the same company though, so saying you need permission is like saying i need permission to run a demi company.
They design their stuff completely independantly of the main 40K range, and so people see them as something different to the main game.
Given the way GW operates at this point, I'm not sure how relevant this line of thinking is. With GW's design philosophies changing radically on a near yearly basis, you get a whole lot more variation from Codex material than you do with FW material. Add to that the fact that GW is rather open about its relative lack of interest in rules in general, and it's hard to see where this line of thinking should really hold any weight anymore.
Additionally, FW does a lot of stuff that has at some point come out of the core studio, the Imperial Guard Griffon for instance (which has gone from being a 2E/3E codex unit, to a 3.5E FW unit, to a 5E Codex unit, to a 6E FW unit...) or things like Rapiers and Thudd Guns that used to be main studio units.
Before any game, players must agree how they are going to select their armies, and if any restrictions apply to the number and type of models they can use.
As long as wording like that is in the rulebook, you'll never see Games Workshop give any sort of 'official' status to Forge World.
Vaktathi wrote: Given the way GW operates at this point, I'm not sure how relevant this line of thinking is. With GW's design philosophies changing radically on a near yearly basis, you get a whole lot more variation from Codex material than you do with FW material. Add to that the fact that GW is rather open about its relative lack of interest in rules in general, and it's hard to see where this line of thinking should really hold any weight anymore.
Sure. I never said that it made sense, just that it's what a lot of people still think.
When it comes to Forgeworld its best to think of like any other supplement to the main game. There should be a conversation about what your playing and you shouldn't take for granted that it might not be something other people like.
FW used to put out some OP rules, but that was back before I started playing (start of 6th edition). I have always found FW to put out pretty balanced units. I say that as someone who doesn't use FW units, but has absolutely no problems playing against them. Beautiful models, good rules. Where's the problem?
AKA i treat it like any other unit, i hand over my list and offer to show my opponent the rules. Truthfully any player is within there right to refuse to play a game but to treat some books over others as more legitimate at face value is odd.
Most of the time FW are better then usual units. This is actually the reason why you can't bring any models or a limited numbers of FW's models to most of the tournements. However, i think bringing 1 unit is no big deal but you have to discuss about it with your opponent. Personally, if you show me more then 2 FW's models ill probably pass my turn, except if it is a competitive game. Have fun !
Most tournaments use ITC rules which fully allow FW. I'm also going to ask for specific examples of FW units that are better than the codex equivalent.
alex0911 wrote: Most of the time FW are better then usual units.
Um, how so? Is a Leman Russ Annihilator better than any other Leman Russ? A sentinel powerlifter better than any other Sentinel? A Land Raider Proteus better than a normal Land Raider? Even when they are "better", they usually cost a whole lot more as well (e.g. Contemptor dreads at ~200+pts over basic ~100pt Dreadnoughts). They've got a couple of goofs, but it's hardly a consistent trend.
This is actually the reason why you can't bring any models or a limited numbers of FW's models to most of the tournements.
No, it's not. The reason is that including FW means more work for the organizers and fewer people are familiar with their rules since they're not as easily available, or, in the case of store-supported events, they can't make money off FW stuff and thus don't want to deal with it. It has nothing to do with power level, and you'll find that in tournaments that allow FW units, very few (if any) top placing armies include FW at all.
HoundsofDemos wrote: I recently played a game with my space marine army accompanied by solomon lok. He was the only forge world unit in my army, i had his stats with me and he doesn't exactly do anything that is out there. one opponent was totally on board and we had a great game.
my second guy of the night started off being a bit weird about it, making comments that forgeworld is outside the game. When i produced the pages that word for word say that most forge world units are meant for standard games he stopped for a while. Latter when he had some bad shooting due to Lok's warlord trait giving my marines fnp while they sat on the deciding objective, he had a mini freakout claiming that Lok's warlord trait is grossly over powered. the game was not fun from there on.
Has anyone else had people react negatively to a forge world unit, even ones that don't seem particularly cheesy (unless someone wants to argue that Lok is OP)
It's always been a crutch for people to complain about when things don't go their way. There's nothing from FW that matches the power of anything from GW's mainline offerings. Sure, some stuff can be abused, and a couple of notably overpowered things, but not anything more than anything else really. Certainly nothing like GW putting D weapons on 35pt infantry or sub 300pt D-weapon toting Gargantuan Creatures.
Mostly it's a boogeyman.
And yet literally every game I play there's someone saying "oh that codex unit stinks, you need to use the Forgeworld version" and it'll cost 3x in dollars for the model and 2x in dollars for the book.
TheManWithNoPlan wrote:Nobody wants to play against my Death Korps because they are unfamiliar with the rules.
It's 95% an Imperial Guard army without access to half the stuff and an extra special rule, can't they not be bothered to read the like couple pages of extra stuff for them?
TheSilo wrote:
And yet literally every game I play there's someone saying "oh that codex unit stinks, you need to use the Forgeworld version" and it'll cost 3x in dollars for the model and 2x in dollars for the book.
For which army? About the only army I can think of where that might hold true is for CSM's, but that's really more the fault of the CSM codex being designed and costed for a 4E/5E paradigm than any issues with FW really.
If I were to whip out 3 Big Squiggoths (not Giant Squiggoths,) then proceed to open the Apocalypse book for the rules, would people complain that I was taking an Apocalypse unit? Is there any difference in opinion regarding Apocalypse units, IA Units and "rules included in the box" units?
TheManWithNoPlan wrote: Nobody wants to play against my Death Korps because they are unfamiliar with the rules.
"Unfamiliar with the rules" really is the most important thing here. The FW books cost molto dollars and few game shops carry them so you can't really take a peek before the game. And it does slow things down if your opponent wants to read your entire FW book while you're setting up the game. Facing unfamiliar units straight up is always going to annoy some of us, and it's even more annoying to take a shot at something you think should die if your opponent then shows you Special Rule X that you didn't know about. Knowing what the units are, what they do and how tough they are is a pretty important part of doing a 40K battle.
If I were to whip out 3 Big Squiggoths (not Giant Squiggoths,) then proceed to open the Apocalypse book for the rules, would people complain that I was taking an Apocalypse unit? Is there any difference in opinion regarding Apocalypse units, IA Units and "rules included in the box" units?
Some might, but that would probably because they don't like playing with those units, and less that they "don't know the rules". Which has always seemed like a bit of a half-assed excuse to me. I mean, do you have to memorize every aspect of your opponents codex before you will play them? If you are really that concerned, just spend 2 minutes looking at their rules.
I find the i'm unfamiliar a weak excuse. This is the internet age. If you want to know something you can find it. that being said any opponent should have a copy of their unit's rules on them.
Sorry a lynx on a skyshield and hornet add power to an already broken army. You cant say "majority of forgeworld is no more broken" when people arent bringing the reasonable stuff. Look at the ork biker boss. Everyone says he is practically mandatory for a competative ork list, and most tournament lists run him. Because he is flat out the best choice, besides being able to take bikes as troops again, he gets an at innitiative power klaw. You can say hes not strictly better because "he dosent have access to lucky stick" but so what. People run that space marine librarian who always gets invis specifically because there is no roll for it.
All that being said, none of it matters anymore because the game is so fundementally broken its like telling a pyro to put the lighter down before he sets the drapes on fire, while the whole house is already burning.
Orock wrote: Sorry a lynx on a skyshield and hornet add power to an already broken army. You cant say "majority of forgeworld is no more broken" when people arent bringing the reasonable stuff.
Nobody is saying you can't break Forgeworld stuff, anything can be made broken. You can put a Reaver Titan on a skyshield too and FW has nothing to do with that aside from casting the resin. What people are saying is that FW stuff isn't any more egregious than anything else. FW aren't the guys that wrote rules for 35pt T6 Fearless infantry with D weapons either.
Look at the ork biker boss. Everyone says he is practically mandatory for a competative ork list, and most tournament lists run him. Because he is flat out the best choice, besides being able to take bikes as troops again, he gets an at innitiative power klaw. You can say hes not strictly better because "he dosent have access to lucky stick" but so what.
The book he's from came out in 2009 early 2010 (two editions ago), nobody seemed to even realize he existed until relatively recently. Is he good? Sure. is he particularly overpowered? Not really. He's got a 4+ armor and 4+ Cover with 3 wounds. Yeah, the I4 powerfist is sweet, but he's also not going to survive the way a TWC Wolf Lord (and accompanying unit) will. Hardly the most broken thing out there.
People run that space marine librarian who always gets invis specifically because there is no roll for it.
Tigurius will generally be a greater value in most instances.
Forgeworld really helps some armies massively, CSM being an example, and with all the stuff recently produced by GW proper, I don't think its as out there as it used to be... It also adds a lot of flavour and variety to lists, and FW models are beautiful to look at
Quickjager wrote: FW is essentially confirmation bias. No one takes it unless it is good, so when you do see it you automatically think it all is good.
[Raises hand] I take FW pieces based on how amusing I find them.
HBD and Aquila Lander are my fave toys ever. Are they OP, or verging on useful? Not even a little.
On the "It's FW, it must be OP." subject, I took that Aquila to a tournament where for the fifth round, you could challenge an opponent you'd seen during the day and felt could be fun.
Guy with a Warhound Titan challenged me because he wanted "to see if I can beat that flyer."
A medium pressure fart could beat the AL, I blocked the challenge as my list was absolute fluff.
TheSilo wrote: And yet literally every game I play there's someone saying "oh that codex unit stinks, you need to use the Forgeworld version" and it'll cost 3x in dollars for the model and 2x in dollars for the book.
I suppose you just ignore the times when someone says "that FW unit stinks, you need to use the codex version"? Most of the time when someone is saying "use the FW version" it's not because the FW version is overpowered relative to 40k as a whole, it's because GW sucks at game balance and put a garbage unit in the codex.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Orock wrote: Sorry a lynx on a skyshield and hornet add power to an already broken army.
So FW is broken because skyshield camps are overpowered? You do realize that the skyshield is a "codex" unit, right?
People run that space marine librarian who always gets invis specifically because there is no roll for it.
And, like the skyshield, this is a problem with invisibility being blatantly overpowered and one of the worst examples of bad game design I've ever seen. If GW hadn't broken the "codex" rules the FW character would be a non-issue.
TheManWithNoPlan wrote: Nobody wants to play against my Death Korps because they are unfamiliar with the rules.
"Unfamiliar with the rules" really is the most important thing here. The FW books cost molto dollars and few game shops carry them so you can't really take a peek before the game. And it does slow things down if your opponent wants to read your entire FW book while you're setting up the game. Facing unfamiliar units straight up is always going to annoy some of us, and it's even more annoying to take a shot at something you think should die if your opponent then shows you Special Rule X that you didn't know about. Knowing what the units are, what they do and how tough they are is a pretty important part of doing a 40K battle.
Unless you feel like buying every Codex that holds true for main GW rules too.
Main reason it's banned in my local meta is for the same reason Magic the Gathering disallows sets outside of the most recent blocks for Standard. Power creep options lead to hyper-spending and that pay to win feeling.
If you've ever played a collectible card game, you'll notice how they will usually prohibit old cards from being used in tournaments. Allowing a massive pool of options, some of which are significantly more expensive (like picking up a Black Lotus for Commander), only creates power vacuums between players willing to drop thousands on the hobby versus players willing to drop tens of thousands. Veterans and Casuals, New Players and Old, too great a gulf exists when every model under the sun is permissible in the game. The players are strongly encouraged to drop money on Forgeworld models just to remain competitive, something they aren't always willing to do and that kills the customer base.
Limiting the game to just the official GW codex releases ensures there is a fixed cap for all armies that doesn't require much from the players to keep track of as new rules and models are rarely added to the fold. Like sets in a card game, GW releases batches of rules in a single book periodically and that's where the bulk of the rules come from. Dataslates are already skirting the line with what they can provide but are accepted as e-Books and codex patches still founded within the same gaming system.
It's not about not knowing the rules, those are easy to look up or ask about. It's just about not dissuading players from continuing the game by increasing the options players can draw from to fill out their list synergy with barely affordable models. There will always be some guys who can't keep up and prefer the easier to manage hobby while others will adhere to the "Gotta catch 'em all!" motto and buy out the store. Balancing the game for both sides isn't easy but clearly forcing the loaded guy to bring fewer models is the better answer over making the smaller army hobbyists dig deeper into their wallets.
So, according to your meta, it's cool to run Wraithknights because it's a GW book and thus puts a cap on the number of units they can run. But if someone runs a Contemptor dreadnought that suddenly ruins the meta and turns the game into a P2W system? It seems like a really self-contradictory reason to institute a ban like that.
In fact, using that logic, why not ban all dataslates, supplements and expansions? Actually, why not ban all Codices except the Codex: Space Marines? That way people will easily remember all their available units easily.
In my experience it's players who have been playing 40k for a long time who see FW as the overpowered stuff. At the same time, those are the ones to play games with mostly marine armies using the same units every time, never buying anything new, not keeping up with newer editions of the game, and so on.
I respect their decision to stick with their classic units/armies and not spend tons of money on new stuff like I have, but by the same token they hold onto those old ways of thinking about the game without really understanding what it's become in the context of all the armies, all the forge world books, stronghold assault, and so on.
TheCustomLime wrote: So, according to your meta, it's cool to run Wraithknights because it's a GW book and thus puts a cap on the number of units they can run. But if someone runs a Contemptor dreadnought that suddenly ruins the meta and turns the game into a P2W system? It seems like a really self-contradictory reason to institute a ban like that.
In fact, using that logic, why not ban all dataslates, supplements and expansions? Actually, why not ban all Codices except the Codex: Space Marines? That way people will easily remember all their available units easily.
Same reason Magic the Gathering doesn't ban all but the current set... it's too small an options pool if you do, just as allowing every card from the past 20+ years is too large a pool. It was decided that the Realm of Game Workshop Only was a reasonably diverse enough and affordable enough option for players to get into and maintain. Adding more to that would just be overdoing it. Wraithknights taken from the Craftworlds codex are also prohibited due to being Gargantuan Creatures, another restricted element regardless of their GW status. It isn't just Forgeworld that is banned... Lords of War, Super Heavies, most Fortifications, heck even Allies because they encourage owning multiple armies (along with Battle Brother shenanigans). It's particularly brutal on me as a Chaos Space Marine player because I'm forbidden from using Chaos Daemons unless I summon them, yet it's better for the guys who only own a Dark Angels army and nothing else.
As with card games, there can exist busted cards in any meta, you can choose to live with it or ban them. Doing the latter will just move other cards to the new broken-as-hell status because there will always be something better than something else. The current Wraithknights and Codices are of the latest sets or versions, they will cycle out eventually just as cards in a usability pool do. The local meta accepts some things and denies others purely to prevent the game from being viewed as pay-to-win and preventing the bringing of five Wraithknights and a Windrider Host to the table. When you allow these things, your players have to buy their own equivalents and many would rather just quit the game at that point. The Plasma Obliterator was a perfect example of Limited Edition pay-to-win nonsense where anyone with a credit card and a distaste for money can venture over to Ebay and pick up a Heavy Support that surpasses most other codex options. I own three so I can field them in Apocalypse games but I'm not allowed to run them in the regular events to be fair to everyone.
The rules make perfect sense to the community, no one is forcing you to use them yourself. Rules don't get arbitrarily made, they come as a result of negative play experiences and the subsequent restrictions that return the game to a collectively acceptable state.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Wolf_in_Human_Shape wrote: In my experience it's players who have been playing 40k for a long time who see FW as the overpowered stuff. At the same time, those are the ones to play games with mostly marine armies using the same units every time, never buying anything new, not keeping up with newer editions of the game, and so on.
I respect their decision to stick with their classic units/armies and not spend tons of money on new stuff like I have, but by the same token they hold onto those old ways of thinking about the game without really understanding what it's become in the context of all the armies, all the forge world books, stronghold assault, and so on.
Likewise, I respect the decision of new players who look at Forgeworld, Fortifications, Lords of War, and other extra expenses in the game and withdraw from the daunting pricetag it all entails. Why hello there, Timmy! Are you interested in getting into Warhammer? That'll be $5000 please. Yes, we do accept American Express.
The pill is easier to swallow when it's strictly what's available in the codex and supplements/dataslates. Especially since the supplements/dataslates usually use the SAME models with different rules and don't require additional purchases unless it's a special character or something.
Arkaine wrote: Main reason it's banned in my local meta is for the same reason Magic the Gathering disallows sets outside of the most recent blocks for Standard. Power creep options lead to hyper-spending and that pay to win feeling.
If you've ever played a collectible card game, you'll notice how they will usually prohibit old cards from being used in tournaments. Allowing a massive pool of options, some of which are significantly more expensive (like picking up a Black Lotus for Commander), only creates power vacuums between players willing to drop thousands on the hobby versus players willing to drop tens of thousands.
More to the point, older cards can only be re-sold on secondary markets, and thus generate no revenue for the producer of the game.
Limiting the game to just the official GW codex releases ensures there is a fixed cap for all armies that doesn't require much from the players to keep track of as new rules and models are rarely added to the fold.
This assumes that FW adds a whole new power level, which there is relatively little evidence for, particularly as events that allow FW don't commonly see armies using FW (either entire lists or single units) placing spectacularly high on any sort of routine basis.
By far a larger problem is having things like formations exclusive to web bundles, random $4.99 unit dataslates & formations, etc, but nobody seems to want to ban those.
Vaktathi wrote: More to the point, older cards can only be re-sold on secondary markets, and thus generate no revenue for the producer of the game.
Ah but this wasn't true of the newer Game of Thrones LCG which was only five years old at its death. The new Game of Thrones: Second Edition LCG came as a direct result of the card pool growing too large, the ban list getting out of hand, and new players being discouraged from joining the game due to the huge cardpool they would need to purchase. Availability wasn't the issue because Fantasy Flight was reprinting the old packs regularly. The prohibitive cost to join and power creep stemming from a bloat of options was the reason behind switching to a retiring set system like other collectible card games. Even Games Workshop retires old codexes by replacing them with new versions that supplant the old rules, keeping the options limited and manageable even if they're grown a bit over the years as the game develops.
Limiting the game to just the official GW codex releases ensures there is a fixed cap for all armies that doesn't require much from the players to keep track of as new rules and models are rarely added to the fold.
This assumes that FW adds a whole new power level, which there is relatively little evidence for, particularly as events that allow FW don't commonly see armies using FW (either entire lists or single units) placing spectacularly high on any sort of routine basis.
Not at all, the power level of Forgeworld is not the issue. It just adds another layer to the game like a new set or expansion does to other games, only it's a particularly large set that offers tactics and strengths the default codex wouldn't normally be capable of such as the Gargantuan Tyranid creatures or the Chaos Dreadclaws. As again with card games, even if you create two completely balanced sets, once you allow them to be used in tandem unexpected synergies will begin to appear that are more efficient than the self-contained set combos alone. Ergo, allowing Forgeworld makes buying Forgeworld mandatory. It doesn't have to be strong, it just has to be different. People will find complementary models for their army on their own.
Vaktathi wrote: By far a larger problem is having things like formations exclusive to web bundles, random $4.99 unit dataslates & formations, etc, but nobody seems to want to ban those.
Mainly because those can be shared. They're ebooks, once one of the community buys it, everyone has access to it.
Arkaine wrote: Ergo, allowing Forgeworld makes buying Forgeworld mandatory.
Ergo, allowing ANY option makes buying those options mandatory. Therefore only generic 5-man tactical squads with no upgrades and a single captain with no upgrades should be allowed. After all, options make the game more expensive, so why draw the line at removing FW?
Mainly because those can be shared. They're ebooks, once one of the community buys it, everyone has access to it.
I see, so because you can pirate rules it doesn't matter how much it costs to buy them legally, but the same argument doesn't apply to FW books?
Peregrine wrote: Ergo, allowing ANY option makes buying those options mandatory. Therefore only generic 5-man tactical squads with no upgrades and a single captain with no upgrades should be allowed. After all, options make the game more expensive, so why draw the line at removing FW?
I already answered that, see above for the explanation. Indeed, the more options allowed, the more mandatory purchases exist, but you've got to start somewhere. Forgeworld simply happens to be such a large subset of the models that exist that it's simple enough to quarantine. Dataslates and other official products are minor in comparison. Rather than going through every codex and determining what can and cannot be brought (such as your example of "BUILD MORE TAC SQUADS!"), it's all permitted. Rather than going through every piece of Forgeworld and doing the same, it's all prohibited. Similar wide restrictions exist for things like Lords of War, which don't differentiate between "fair" LoWs and Wraithknights.
Could we limit everything to just 5-man tac squads? Of course. But then the store would never sell anything and we'd be out of a venue. If there's such a thing as too much, then there's also such a thing as too little.
Peregrine wrote: I see, so because you can pirate rules it doesn't matter how much it costs to buy them legally, but the same argument doesn't apply to FW books?
Who said anything about pirating? A player buys a dataslate and now everyone at the game store has access to it. It's called borrowing. Asking someone for rules out of an ebook is way different from borrowing their Dimachaeron.
Branding? As a recently returning player I come from an era of FW basically being the "Titan" shop, so it's weird coming back to a more general FW world.
More so, GW and FW are in a way two different companies which is very harsh for newer players. Heck I'm sure I've seen a thread here where someone stated their GW store didn't allow FW models, which doesn't help either.
It's just for two companies working together, they feel like a hot mess.
Arkaine wrote: Ah but this wasn't true of the newer Game of Thrones LCG which was only five years old at its death. The new Game of Thrones: Second Edition LCG came as a direct result of the card pool growing too large, the ban list getting out of hand, and new players being discouraged from joining the game due to the huge cardpool they would need to purchase. Availability wasn't the issue because Fantasy Flight was reprinting the old packs regularly. The prohibitive cost to join and power creep stemming from a bloat of options was the reason behind switching to a retiring set system like other collectible card games.
Methinks restricting FW on that count is kind of like pissing into an ocean of piss, FW is a very minor issue there.Such creep already killed Fantasy which had almost zero FW products, 40k's already got that problem with core Codex stuff, FW doesn't really make it any worse (and again, one will note, in tournaments where FW is allowed, it doesn't seem to be any sort of game-changers)
Even Games Workshop retires old codexes by replacing them with new versions that supplant the old rules, keeping the options limited and manageable even if they're grown a bit over the years as the game develops.
I'm not seeing how this applies to the above point, it's not like they remove tons of stuff with each codex typically, they just add more in most cases, there's generally (outside of a handful of exceptions like CSM's) just more stuff added.
Limiting the game to just the official GW codex releases ensures there is a fixed cap for all armies that doesn't require much from the players to keep track of as new rules and models are rarely added to the fold.
This assumes that FW adds a whole new power level, which there is relatively little evidence for, particularly as events that allow FW don't commonly see armies using FW (either entire lists or single units) placing spectacularly high on any sort of routine basis.
Not at all, the power level of Forgeworld is not the issue. It just adds another layer to the game like a new set or expansion does to other games, only it's a particularly large set that offers tactics and strengths the default codex wouldn't normally be capable of such as the Gargantuan Tyranid creatures or the Chaos Dreadclaws. As again with card games, even if you create two completely balanced sets, once you allow them to be used in tandem unexpected synergies will begin to appear that are more efficient than the self-contained set combos alone.
Using the examples you've listed, it's hard to buy them as major problems worthy of banning. Dreadclaws aren't something people can't deal with if they can already deal with drop pods or flyers (and you won't find many CSM players exactly rushing to go out and include Dreadclaws). Likewise, the Tyranid GC's aren't even FW units, FW just casts the resin, but their rules and the rules that allow their inclusion into non-Apocalypse games are written by GW's core studio and not Forgeworld.
As for balanced sets and unexpected synergies, you'd reap far greater rewards banning allies, multiple detachments, formations, etc than banning FW. That's where you have problems with unexpected synergies.
Ergo, allowing Forgeworld makes buying Forgeworld mandatory.
There's absolutely zero evidence for this except in the minds of people who are going out of their way to look for reasons to ban FW.
Again, look at events and tournaments that allow FW and you'll see that FW inclusion is far from mandatory, most armies still don't include any FW stuff, and FW stuff certainly isn't sweeping top places.
Mainly because those can be shared. They're ebooks, once one of the community buys it, everyone has access to it.
If we're talking about people sharing e-books (without others purchasing them) well, people can share every Imperial Armour book too if they want, there's certainly copies out there, and there's nothing against you scanning your own copy for your own personal use
Tinkrr wrote: Branding? As a recently returning player I come from an era of FW basically being the "Titan" shop, so it's weird coming back to a more general FW world.
FW doesn't even write the rules for most of the Titans anymore, they just cast the resin.
More so, GW and FW are in a way two different companies which is very harsh for newer players.
They are not two different companies at all. FW is a sub-department of GW, like Accounting or Finance, located at GW's HQ and staffed by GW employees. They make stuff that's just not practical for the primary production facilities to do in plastic, but that they can do in smaller runs with different materials.
Heck I'm sure I've seen a thread here where someone stated their GW store didn't allow FW models, which doesn't help either.
Indeed, it doesn't help, but that's a problem with GW's internal pressures and the sales goals of individual stores.
Arkaine wrote: Indeed, the more options allowed, the more mandatory purchases exist, but you've got to start somewhere.
And that somewhere is the "captains and tactical squads" game. What you're proposing is that we allow the options that you personally want to use, but ban the options that you have no interest in. And that's blatantly unfair.
Who said anything about pirating? A player buys a dataslate and now everyone at the game store has access to it. It's called borrowing. Asking someone for rules out of an ebook is way different from borrowing their Dimachaeron.
Why are you comparing rules to models? If you're talking about borrowing rules then a person can borrow a copy of a FW book. If you're talking about borrowing models then a FW model is no different than a GW model, if a Dimachaeron should be illegal because you can't borrow it then why should you be allowed to use tactical squads in your army when I can't borrow those models?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Tinkrr wrote: More so, GW and FW are in a way two different companies which is very harsh for newer players.
Nope. FW is no more a "different company" than Citadel is. Forge World is a brand name used by GW for some of their product lines, nothing more.
Heck I'm sure I've seen a thread here where someone stated their GW store didn't allow FW models, which doesn't help either.
You know why? Because GW store employees have sales quotas, and for some idiotic reason GW doesn't count online purchases towards that quota even if the player is a regular customer at the store and buying stuff specifically to use there. If you spend $100 at that particular cash register then the employee gets credit, if you go home and spend that $100 on GW's website and have it delivered to the local GW store then the employee gets nothing. Those FW bans have nothing to do with what is good for the game, it's entirely about the employee's personal benefits.
FW doesn't even write the rules for most of the Titans anymore, they just cast the resin.
I come from third edition, this is not what I know, I know FW as Titan Shop...
They are not two different companies at all. FW is a sub-department of GW, like Accounting or Finance, located at GW's HQ and staffed by GW employees. They make stuff that's just not practical for the primary production facilities to do in plastic, but that they can do in smaller runs with different materials.
Indeed, it doesn't help, but that's a problem with GW's internal pressures and the sales goals of individual stores.
No, that's literally when one company becomes two.
Honestly, that's basically the plot to the Horus Heresy, which is ironic since FW is all about the Horus Heresy these days >.>
But seriously, this discussion should end at GW stores not allowing FW models, as that's literally the opposite of it being one whole company. There's no reasonable situation in which one company intends to spite itself without being two different companies.
Nope. FW is no more a "different company" than Citadel is. Forge World is a brand name used by GW for some of their product lines, nothing more.
You know why? Because GW store employees have sales quotas, and for some idiotic reason GW doesn't count online purchases towards that quota even if the player is a regular customer at the store and buying stuff specifically to use there. If you spend $100 at that particular cash register then the employee gets credit, if you go home and spend that $100 on GW's website and have it delivered to the local GW store then the employee gets nothing. Those FW bans have nothing to do with what is good for the game, it's entirely about the employee's personal benefits.
I understand this, but seriously, this baffles me. I've worked as a buyer, I've worked trade shows (Pax and more) and this is literally so incredibly stupid that it's like cutting your nose off to spite your own face.
I'm sorry, maybe I'm missing something, but I can never take a company as a whole seriously when it splits itself down the middle as heavily as GW and FW has. That's just not reasonable, and I've worked for some incredibly scummy companies before that still knew better.
Tinkrr wrote: I come from third edition, this is not what I know, I know FW as Titan Shop...
Then, honestly, maybe you should do some research about the current state of the game before you try to argue about what should or shouldn't be legal.
But seriously, this discussion should end at GW stores not allowing FW models, as that's literally the opposite of it being one whole company.
I've already told you the reason, and it has nothing to do with being a separate company. GW stores sometimes ban FW models for the same reason that they beg you to come into the store and use the store's computer to place your online orders instead of doing it at home. Are you suggesting that tactical squads should be banned because, from the point of view of a GW store employee, the tactical squad I bought on the GW website (from my home computer) is a rival product?
There's no reasonable situation in which one company intends to spite itself without being two different companies.
You're right, there's no reasonable situation. What you should be realizing here is that GW is not a reasonable company. This is just one example among many of the sheer idiocy of GW's management.
GW's business logic has been, well, poor, for years. That's why they're on an 11 year revenue decline. Same company that *borrowed* money to pay dividends.
FW's operations are all in house, the FW books all have a GW copyright and state that they're published by GW, and are written by people on GW payroll, FW is nothing more than a sales channel, but they seem to continually treat it like some weird 3rd party.
Then, honestly, maybe you should do some research about the current state of the game before you try to argue about what should or shouldn't be legal.
Wait, what? I don't think I made any claim of what should or shouldn't be legal, I simply stated what the perception of FW some people might have. I actually think things like the Remoras and Tetras are very reasonable for my army.
I've already told you the reason, and it has nothing to do with being a separate company. GW stores sometimes ban FW models for the same reason that they beg you to come into the store and use the store's computer to place your online orders instead of doing it at home. Are you suggesting that tactical squads should be banned because, from the point of view of a GW store employee, the tactical squad I bought on the GW website (from my home computer) is a rival product?
Um, no. I'm saying that it's absurd that GW stores can ban FW models at all.
Here, let me make my stance on this very clear: "If they want to be one company, then GW stores should allow FW with no exceptions."
I'd rather have the policy that GW stores allow FW completely, as opposed to them being able to ban it, since that's not at all reasonable if they are actually one company. It's as if they could just opt to ban random codices that are popular in order to sell less popular ones, assuming they are one company.
You're right, there's no reasonable situation. What you should be realizing here is that GW is not a reasonable company. This is just one example among many of the sheer idiocy of GW's management.
That's literally my point, and why some people have stigma against FW.
I personally don't and would like a world where GW stores are prohibited from banning FW, along with both companies showing a unified front. As it stands now, they simply aren't one company in behavior, and that's just sad. does that make sense to you?
Vaktathi wrote: Methinks restricting FW on that count is kind of like pissing into an ocean of piss, FW is a very minor issue there.Such creep already killed Fantasy which had almost zero FW products, 40k's already got that problem with core Codex stuff, FW doesn't really make it any worse (and again, one will note, in tournaments where FW is allowed, it doesn't seem to be any sort of game-changers)
A humorous analogy but as mentioned it's really not about the power level of FW products, just the options they provide. When Games Workshop releases new Tau models for their upcoming Codex, surely you'd agree it's changing the game and expanding the possibilities? Limiting FW limits that growth and in turn reduces the barrier to entry.
Even Games Workshop retires old codexes by replacing them with new versions that supplant the old rules, keeping the options limited and manageable even if they're grown a bit over the years as the game develops.
I'm not seeing how this applies to the above point, it's not like they remove tons of stuff with each codex typically, they just add more in most cases, there's generally (outside of a handful of exceptions like CSM's) just more stuff added.
It applies in the context that as old unit rules are retired and replaced with new versions, most of the game remains same in terms of cost because you're reusing your existing models. On the other hand, Forgeworld is continually adding new models to the store that are not replacements for older versions, expanding the total number of models frequently. Games Workshop has been doing that too just at a slower and more manageable rate for aspiring collectors.
Vaktathi wrote: Using the examples you've listed, it's hard to buy them as major problems worthy of banning. Dreadclaws aren't something people can't deal with if they can already deal with drop pods or flyers (and you won't find many CSM players exactly rushing to go out and include Dreadclaws). Likewise, the Tyranid GC's aren't even FW units, FW just casts the resin, but their rules and the rules that allow their inclusion into non-Apocalypse games are written by GW's core studio and not Forgeworld. As for balanced sets and unexpected synergies, you'd reap far greater rewards banning allies, multiple detachments, formations, etc than banning FW. That's where you have problems with unexpected synergies.
Those are all often banned already depending on the event, FW is not the only restriction. It's again not about the power of Forgeworld options but of the versatility the selection provides. The cited examples are purely to illustrate things the ordinary codices cannot normally do, such as taking a Drop Pod in a Chaos Space Marine army. Forgeworld expands the possibilities beyond the limits of the regular codex (at substantial monetary cost) and that is something the playerbase has determined to be unwanted due to the cost involved. There is a direct and real advantage taken when you are capable of performing actions ordinarily barred to you simply because you spent money on figures and rules exclusive to Forgeworld.
Ergo, allowing Forgeworld makes buying Forgeworld mandatory.
There's absolutely zero evidence for this except in the minds of people who are going out of their way to look for reasons to ban FW.
Again, look at events and tournaments that allow FW and you'll see that FW inclusion is far from mandatory, most armies still don't include any FW stuff, and FW stuff certainly isn't sweeping top places.
And yet the decision to ban Forgeworld was done collectively after several tournaments where it was brought to the field. Simply because most of the players didn't want to spend more on models that provided that same level of versatility to their own factions. Again, it's not about being overpowered, it's about making tactics possible that the regular codex cannot accomplish. The local meta is of the friendly variety with many new players involved and only a handful of veterans. We already stomp the newbies with standard codex equipment, giving us extra options is unnecessary and only puts strain on their spending by opening up those avenues.
I must stress the fact that the decision to prohibit Forgeworld was agreed upon as a community in order to limit the costs involved with playing the game. No one wants to feel like they can't afford the nice things everyone else is bringing from the land of Rainbows and Unicorns. So those things simply aren't brought.
Tinkrr wrote: Wait, what? I don't think I made any claim of what should or shouldn't be legal, I simply stated what the perception of FW some people might have. I actually think things like the Remoras and Tetras are very reasonable for my army.
Never mind, got my posts mixed up.
Um, no. I'm saying that it's absurd that GW stores can ban FW models at all.
Yes, it is absurd. Well-run companies don't ban their own products.
Here, let me make my stance on this very clear: "If they want to be one company, then GW stores should allow FW with no exceptions."
Most GW stores do. There is no blanket ban on FW in GW's own stores, it's a policy by individual store employees.
It's as if they could just opt to ban random codices that are popular in order to sell less popular ones, assuming they are one company.
That's exactly what they could do. There's nothing stopping GW from banning older codices, just like there's nothing stopping GW stores from banning your entire army from the store if you haven't bought enough stuff recently (which some stores have done). And TBH, I suspect the only reason they don't ban certain codices is that those banned books/units are still on the shelf waiting to be bought, and it's kind of hard to sell something if you have a policy that people aren't allowed to use it in your store.
does that make sense to you?
It makes sense that it's kind of sad when it happens, but I think you're drawing strong conclusions from the actions of a few random GW stores.
Arkaine wrote: Indeed, the more options allowed, the more mandatory purchases exist, but you've got to start somewhere.
And that somewhere is the "captains and tactical squads" game. What you're proposing is that we allow the options that you personally want to use, but ban the options that you have no interest in. And that's blatantly unfair.
Not at all, the decision was agreed upon by everyone who plays in the local meta. It was determined more fair for the new players. I never stated you had to use these rules yourself, only described for the purpose of the topic the reason our meta uses them.
Peregrine wrote: Why are you comparing rules to models? If you're talking about borrowing rules then a person can borrow a copy of a FW book. If you're talking about borrowing models then a FW model is no different than a GW model, if a Dimachaeron should be illegal because you can't borrow it then why should you be allowed to use tactical squads in your army when I can't borrow those models?
You seem to be confused here... there is no comparison. All Forgeworld is banned, rules and models, because of the price of the models. The rules are cheap, the models are not. One can be borrowed and the other... well how often would you trust someone handling your expensive toys?
Arkaine wrote: A humorous analogy but as mentioned it's really not about the power level of FW products, just the options they provide. When Games Workshop releases new Tau models for their upcoming Codex, surely you'd agree it's changing the game and expanding the possibilities? Limiting FW limits that growth and in turn reduces the barrier to entry.
And banning Tau would also reduce the barrier to entry. So why should Tau be legal while FW units aren't?
It applies in the context that as old unit rules are retired and replaced with new versions, most of the game remains same in terms of cost because you're reusing your existing models.
Err, lol? Have you seen GW's new releases lately? Even when they aren't releasing new (and often powerful) kits they're publishing blatantly overpowered formations that encourage you to buy tons of new models to complete them.
There is a direct and real advantage taken when you are capable of performing actions ordinarily barred to you simply because you spent money on figures and rules exclusive to Forgeworld.
And there is a direct and real advantage taken when you are capable of performing actions ordinarily barred to you simply because you spent money on figures and rules exclusive to the Tau army. So why should FW be banned while Tau are legal? Why should I have to choose between limiting my options or spending hundreds of dollars on the new Tau models?
I must stress the fact that the decision to prohibit Forgeworld was agreed upon as a community in order to limit the costs involved with playing the game. No one wants to feel like they can't afford the nice things everyone else is bringing from the land of Rainbows and Unicorns. So those things simply aren't brought.
I see. So it's ok to ban FW models and demand that people who did buy FW armies buy a bunch of new stuff? Why is it ok to insist that I spend hundreds or even thousands of dollars on new models so that you don't have to be threatened by the existence of new options? Why is your hobby budget more important than mine?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Arkaine wrote: Not at all, the decision was agreed upon by everyone who plays in the local meta. It was determined more fair for the new players. I never stated you had to use these rules yourself, only described for the purpose of the topic the reason our meta uses them.
I see, so you never get new players? And if nobody wants to use FW rules then why do they need to be banned? A ban implies that at least some people would use them if they could, you don't need to ban stuff that nobody has any interest in using.
Yes, it is absurd. Well-run companies don't ban their own products.
This is simply not ok for a company the size of GW.
Most GW stores do. There is no blanket ban on FW in GW's own stores, it's a policy by individual store employees.
One store, is one too many. It's one thing if they have certain tournament rules for various tournament rules, it's another if they ever say they aren't allowed.
If a single store says FW isn't allowed as a whole, then it's not one company.
That's exactly what they could do. There's nothing stopping GW from banning older codices, just like there's nothing stopping GW stores from banning your entire army from the store if you haven't bought enough stuff recently (which some stores have done). And TBH, I suspect the only reason they don't ban certain codices is that those banned books/units are still on the shelf waiting to be bought, and it's kind of hard to sell something if you have a policy that people aren't allowed to use it in your store.
I'm fine with multi-format tournaments where you can only use certain things, I am not fine with the idea of not allowing people to play certain things at all.
The day I hear GW make a claim on this, is the day I literally walk away from 40k and don't look back. There is never, and should never, be a reason to harm your own product in such a manner. This isn't even an idealistic thing in terms of ethics, it's simply economics at that point, because their game is dead at that point and I should bother.
It makes sense that it's kind of sad when it happens, but I think you're drawing strong conclusions from the actions of a few random GW stores.
What other company has such a divide between two of its own brands?
This is pretty much the only company that I've heard so much justification for, despite how many negative things it has outwardly stated. This is coming from someone who plays WoW, a game that has recently seen such a massive drop that even those who make their living off of it are saying that the next expansion might just be the end.
Tinkrr wrote: If a single store says FW isn't allowed as a whole, then it's not one company.
Except that has nothing to do with whether or not it's one company. Forge World models are sold by GW, shipped from GW, published in GW magazines, etc. Their copyrights are even owned by GW. It is indisputably a brand name and logo used by GW for some of their product lines, not a separate company. And no amount of stupid policies from random GW employees (who have absolutely no power to determine anything outside of their own store) will change this fact.
I'm fine with multi-format tournaments where you can only use certain things, I am not fine with the idea of not allowing people to play certain things at all.
Then complain if a GW store in your area does it. I'm not defending the practice, I'm just telling you that it's about sales quotas and individual store employees caring more about filling their quota than what benefits the community, not some kind of division between FW and GW. Beyond that I really don't see what your point here is.
Arkaine wrote: Ergo, allowing Forgeworld makes buying Forgeworld mandatory.
Que? I've been rolling a Death Korps army for a while now, using FW rules and noone, litteraly noone went ''hey I could really use that FW unit to beat that FW list'' Heck I don't even remember facing FW stuff at all.
Except that has nothing to do with whether or not it's one company. Forge World models are sold by GW, shipped from GW, published in GW magazines, etc. Their copyrights are even owned by GW. It is indisputably a brand name and logo used by GW for some of their product lines, not a separate company. And no amount of stupid policies from random GW employees (who have absolutely no power to determine anything outside of their own store) will change this fact.
And yet an employee of GW can ban FW from a store. Justify that please.
Let's start with that, why is it allowed at all, if it's one company. I don't care about sales records of a GW employee or whatever, I just want a justification for why a company can ban a section of its own product in its own facilities, despite still being part of that company.
Tinkrr wrote: Let's start with that, why is it allowed at all, if it's one company. I don't care about sales records of a GW employee or whatever, I just want a justification for why a company can ban a section of its own product in its own facilities, despite still being part of that company.
Because GW is dysfunctional, and has been for over a decade.
Legally they are one company, any other definition is just one you're making up.
A humorous analogy but as mentioned it's really not about the power level of FW products, just the options they provide. When Games Workshop releases new Tau models for their upcoming Codex, surely you'd agree it's changing the game and expanding the possibilities? Limiting FW limits that growth and in turn reduces the barrier to entry.
It limited growth but the idea that FW is a barrier to entry only holds true if you believe FW is mandatory, and it would only be mandatory if its conferring some sort of power advantage, for which there is no evidence.
It applies in the context that as old unit rules are retired and replaced with new versions, most of the game remains same in terms of cost because you're reusing your existing models. On the other hand, Forgeworld is continually adding new models to the store that are not replacements for older versions, expanding the total number of models frequently. Games Workshop has been doing that too just at a slower and more manageable rate for aspiring collectors.
Have you looked at the last three years of GW releases? I don't think that argument holds any water, especially if you're not counting HH stuff. Relatively little FW stuff introduces truly new capabilities to armies that didn't have them before, and in some cases where it does, it's often very much needed.
Those are all often banned already depending on the event, FW is not the only restriction.
Allies and multiple detachments and formations are rarely banned, most big tournaments put a couple of relatively light restrictions on there (like a maximum of 3 detachments), but aside from that allow people to go balls-hog on allies and formations.
It's again not about the power of Forgeworld options but of the versatility the selection provides. The cited examples are purely to illustrate things the ordinary codices cannot normally do, such as taking a Drop Pod in a Chaos Space Marine army.
Sure, a Drop Pod in a CSM army is theoretically not organic to a strictly Codex CSM army. However given that a Dreadclaw is *triple* the cost of a basic drop pod, it's not an option you'll see utilized very option, especially considering CSM's don't have many units that could take tremendous advantage of the capabilities in the way say, combat=squading Sternguard can. If people can deal with SM armies with drop pods, Dreadclaws are absolutely not going to throw a wrench into anyone's works.
Forgeworld expands the possibilities beyond the limits of the regular codex (at substantial monetary cost) and that is something the playerbase has determined to be unwanted due to the cost involved. There is a direct and real advantage taken when you are capable of performing actions ordinarily barred to you simply because you spent money on figures and rules exclusive to Forgeworld.
And yet nobody has a problem with allies and multiple detachments doing this exact thing, but on an order of magnitude worse?
Additionally, FW's cost is increasingly less of an issue. Cost might have been a reasonable argument when codex books were $20, characters were $8-15, and10man squad of infantry was $25-30. When Codex books are now nearly $60, characters are $25-35, and ten man squads of many infantry are commonly $50-70 or more, the cost difference is negligible when equivalent FW models are often the same price and Imperial Armour books often are the same price or only a little bit more.
Hell, my Death Korps Grenadiers are no more expensive than plastic Tempestus Scions or Dire Avengers.
GW's plastic Magos Dominus is in fact more expensive than FW's. GW's clampack characters are pretty much all on par with FW's pricing at this point.
And yet the decision to ban Forgeworld was done collectively after several tournaments where it was brought to the field. Simply because most of the players didn't want to spend more on models that provided that same level of versatility to their own factions. Again, it's not about being overpowered, it's about making tactics possible that the regular codex cannot accomplish.
And is there a similar ban on allies, formations, and multiple detachments? If not, then the ban on FW is absurd. Likewise, the overwhelmingly vast majority of FW stuff doesn't bring in any major new capabilities. A Leman Russ Annihilator isn't bringing some radical new capability to an IG army, any more than a Decimator Daemon Engine is to a CSM army. In the cases where you do get capabilities, in many instances they're often critically needed to enable some factions to have a realistic chance against many newer armies, such as with Sicarans and CSM's against FMC spam or Eldar.
I must stress the fact that the decision to prohibit Forgeworld was agreed upon as a community in order to limit the costs involved with playing the game. No one wants to feel like they can't afford the nice things everyone else is bringing from the land of Rainbows and Unicorns. So those things simply aren't brought.
Again, when GW's prices are increasingly matching, and in some cases, exceeding FW's prices, it's hard to see where this argument has continued merit.
Except that has nothing to do with whether or not it's one company. Forge World models are sold by GW, shipped from GW, published in GW magazines, etc. Their copyrights are even owned by GW. It is indisputably a brand name and logo used by GW for some of their product lines, not a separate company. And no amount of stupid policies from random GW employees (who have absolutely no power to determine anything outside of their own store) will change this fact.
And yet an employee of GW can ban FW from a store. Justify that please.
Let's start with that, why is it allowed at all, if it's one company. I don't care about sales records of a GW employee or whatever, I just want a justification for why a company can ban a section of its own product in its own facilities, despite still being part of that company.
Because it's all still ultimately their company and they're allowed to do stupid things if they want to.
Just like they can (and will) prevent you from playing Necromunda or 2nd edition 40k in many stores.
Tinkrr wrote: And yet an employee of GW can ban FW from a store. Justify that please.
What is there to justify? A GW employee can ban you and your GW products from the store because because they don't like the color you painted them. A random GW employee banning stuff has nothing to do with high-level policy decisions about what is and isn't part of GW the company.
The point you keep missing is that there is no law that all products sold by company X must be allowed in their stores. There's no law that company X has to allow gaming in their store at all. They can ban anything they want, for any reason they want, at any time they want. And banning a certain product doesn't mean that it's somehow sold by a different company, it just means that company X sells products that you can't play with in their stores.
Tinkrr wrote: Let's start with that, why is it allowed at all, if it's one company. I don't care about sales records of a GW employee or whatever, I just want a justification for why a company can ban a section of its own product in its own facilities, despite still being part of that company.
Because GW is dysfunctional, and has been for over a decade.
Legally they are one company, any other definition is just one you're making up.
So here, why am I supporting this company? I just came back to this hobby, and I just want to know if I should leave now.
What is there to justify? A GW employee can ban you and your GW products from the store because because they don't like the color you painted them. A random GW employee banning stuff has nothing to do with high-level policy decisions about what is and isn't part of GW the company.
The point you keep missing is that there is no law that all products sold by company X must be allowed in their stores. There's no law that company X has to allow gaming in their store at all. They can ban anything they want, for any reason they want, at any time they want. And banning a certain product doesn't mean that it's somehow sold by a different company, it just means that company X sells products that you can't play with in their stores.
Thank you, that's what I wanted to hear.
I am done with anything they produce. I am happy I left now, instead of buying anything more.
Because it's all still ultimately their company and they're allowed to do stupid things if they want to.
Just like they can (and will) prevent you from playing Necromunda or 2nd edition 40k in many stores.
Tinkrr wrote: Let's start with that, why is it allowed at all, if it's one company. I don't care about sales records of a GW employee or whatever, I just want a justification for why a company can ban a section of its own product in its own facilities, despite still being part of that company.
Because GW is dysfunctional, and has been for over a decade.
Legally they are one company, any other definition is just one you're making up.
So here, why am I supporting this company? I just came back to this hobby, and I just want to know if I should leave now.
If you have a decent playgroup with an established base of 40k stuff, and people can agree to play a certain way (e.g. not bringing gobs of D-weapons or pentatyrant builds to every session), you can still have fun. If you're going to have to buy a ton of stuff and/or are primarily looking at pickup games at a GW store, getting back in would probably be a poor idea.
The only reason I still play is that I have some people I enjoy playing with and a great store to play in, but I've also stopped attending tournaments (which seem to have fewer people than they did in the past as well).
Tinkrr wrote: Let's start with that, why is it allowed at all, if it's one company. I don't care about sales records of a GW employee or whatever, I just want a justification for why a company can ban a section of its own product in its own facilities, despite still being part of that company.
Because GW is dysfunctional, and has been for over a decade.
Legally they are one company, any other definition is just one you're making up.
So here, why am I supporting this company? I just came back to this hobby, and I just want to know if I should leave now.
If you have a decent playgroup with an established base of 40k stuff, and people can agree to play a certain way (e.g. not bringing gobs of D-weapons or pentatyrant builds to every session), you can still have fun. If you're going to have to buy a ton of stuff and/or are primarily looking at pickup games at a GW store, getting back in would probably be a poor idea.
The only reason I still play is that I have some people I enjoy playing with and a great store to play in, but I've also stopped attending tournaments (which seem to have fewer people than they did in the past as well).
So I got back into it because some people I knew had nostalgia for it and wanted to give it a shot again. More so, I had access to a lot of NiB product from a company I worked for at a very cheap rate (60-70% off).
I'll probably keep the Tau products that I have and play small games with some people I know, but I'm probably going to sell the SM and GK stuff I have that's still NIB. I was planning to trade it for the new Tau stuff, but I just don't care anymore.
Honestly, I'm very thankful to the community here, they're very honest, and I respect them for that. That being said, I've never seen a community so complacent with such horrible business practices and I just don't want to be part of that. No, I'm not looking for a company that's a charity, or one that is perfect in how it behaves, I simply want one that doesn't leave their fan base in this desperate a state.
Because GW's own stores are essentially irrelevant in the US. I don't really care what random GW store employees ban or don't ban because I have very little interest in playing in a GW store, there are plenty of independent stores that are far superior in every way. I guess I could get outraged and boycott them on general principle, but I'm not going to give up a hobby that I love just because some random employee that I'll never interact with at all made a stupid decision.
Peregrine wrote: And banning Tau would also reduce the barrier to entry. So why should Tau be legal while FW units aren't?
Tau isn't a barrier to entry for a Dark Angels player. No one has asked to ban Tau as its existence doesn't affect the price of your own army. Unless you play Tau. Then banning it is kind of counterproductive, eh?
It applies in the context that as old unit rules are retired and replaced with new versions, most of the game remains same in terms of cost because you're reusing your existing models.
Err, lol? Have you seen GW's new releases lately? Even when they aren't releasing new (and often powerful) kits they're publishing blatantly overpowered formations that encourage you to buy tons of new models to complete them.
Just as Forgeworld was banned because the players did not want it, if formations prove to be an issue, they would get the same treatment. So far though no one is complaining about those. Most of them can be run with minimal squad sizes and the largest ones don't fit the point values of most games. Formations are actually a neat way to get players to buy LESS because they can do MORE with fewer models by specializing their army in a certain direction.
There is a direct and real advantage taken when you are capable of performing actions ordinarily barred to you simply because you spent money on figures and rules exclusive to Forgeworld.
And there is a direct and real advantage taken when you are capable of performing actions ordinarily barred to you simply because you spent money on figures and rules exclusive to the Tau army. So why should FW be banned while Tau are legal? Why should I have to choose between limiting my options or spending hundreds of dollars on the new Tau models?
I haven't limited your options at all. Our community elected to limit our options. You are still free to do whatever you want at your local meta. As for why Tau are permitted? Because you have to start somewhere and that somewhere is the GW Core codices and their associated models. Frankly, Orks are more expensive to play.
Peregrine wrote: I must stress the fact that the decision to prohibit Forgeworld was agreed upon as a community in order to limit the costs involved with playing the game. No one wants to feel like they can't afford the nice things everyone else is bringing from the land of Rainbows and Unicorns. So those things simply aren't brought.
I see. So it's ok to ban FW models and demand that people who did buy FW armies buy a bunch of new stuff? Why is it ok to insist that I spend hundreds or even thousands of dollars on new models so that you don't have to be threatened by the existence of new options? Why is your hobby budget more important than mine?
You seem rather adamant on blaming me for something that was decided by majority opinion. If you purchased an army exclusive to Forgeworld, then seek a Forgeworld hosted event. Our local meta plays with Games Workshop armies only. You have as much right to complain that a Warmachine tournament forbids using your Hordes army...
Arkaine wrote: Not at all, the decision was agreed upon by everyone who plays in the local meta. It was determined more fair for the new players. I never stated you had to use these rules yourself, only described for the purpose of the topic the reason our meta uses them.
I see, so you never get new players? And if nobody wants to use FW rules then why do they need to be banned? A ban implies that at least some people would use them if they could, you don't need to ban stuff that nobody has any interest in using.
We have loads of new players, I'm not even sure what you're getting at. FW was banned after a few events with it hitting the table and the people who used the models were okay with it. Never stated no one wants to use FW, I personally flourish using them due to Chaos Space Marines being lackluster without it. At least some people want to use Lords of War, heck we even have one guy who owns two Titans, yet those are just as much restricted as FW stuff. Don't ask me about it, the rules aren't mine to decide. I am but one vote, yet I'd still vote against given how many new players we have. Let them spend their money on Core models that we know will continue to get revisions and updates in a future codex version.
Tinkrr wrote: Let's start with that, why is it allowed at all, if it's one company. I don't care about sales records of a GW employee or whatever, I just want a justification for why a company can ban a section of its own product in its own facilities, despite still being part of that company.
Because GW is dysfunctional, and has been for over a decade.
Legally they are one company, any other definition is just one you're making up.
So here, why am I supporting this company? I just came back to this hobby, and I just want to know if I should leave now.
If you have a decent playgroup with an established base of 40k stuff, and people can agree to play a certain way (e.g. not bringing gobs of D-weapons or pentatyrant builds to every session), you can still have fun. If you're going to have to buy a ton of stuff and/or are primarily looking at pickup games at a GW store, getting back in would probably be a poor idea.
The only reason I still play is that I have some people I enjoy playing with and a great store to play in, but I've also stopped attending tournaments (which seem to have fewer people than they did in the past as well).
So I got back into it because some people I knew had nostalgia for it and wanted to give it a shot again. More so, I had access to a lot of NiB product from a company I worked for at a very cheap rate (60-70% off).
I'll probably keep the Tau products that I have and play small games with some people I know, but I'm probably going to sell the SM and GK stuff I have that's still NIB. I was planning to trade it for the new Tau stuff, but I just don't care anymore.
Honestly, I'm very thankful to the community here, they're very honest, and I respect them for that. That being said, I've never seen a community so complacent with such horrible business practices and I just don't want to be part of that. No, I'm not looking for a company that's a charity, or one that is perfect in how it behaves, I simply want one that doesn't leave their fan base in this desperate a state.
I don't know if it's complacency, we complain loudly about it on forums like this, but we also know that GW isn't listening. There's also a "well *** 'em, we'll do our own thing" type deal, and with tournaments & events, those are pretty much entirely player organized and run independently of GW, and you get a lot of house rules and changes there.
I mean, I think I've played a grand total of two games in an actual GW shop ever? And that was when they still had a battle bunker in LA. Aside from that it's all been FLGS stores, so what GW stores do in their house is largely irrelevant to me at this point
However, I, and many other people obviously, have also dramatically scaled back spending on GW products as backlash against many of their practices, as evidenced by the fact that their last revenue report shows they're back to about where they were in 1997 (adjusted for inflation) and are selling fewer products to fewer people than they have been in the past.
Because GW's own stores are essentially irrelevant in the US. I don't really care what random GW store employees ban or don't ban because I have very little interest in playing in a GW store, there are plenty of independent stores that are far superior in every way. I guess I could get outraged and boycott them on general principle, but I'm not going to give up a hobby that I love just because some random employee that I'll never interact with at all made a stupid decision.
I think someone who was famous once said something along the lines of "A company divide against itself can not stand." (Yes I know the original quote)
I'm not asking you to boycott them, there's no reason for that as those who have already invested enough aren't exactly investing more. I also understand that as someone who is just returning to the hobby, with little stock in the product doesn't exactly experience the same sunken cost fallacies as others may have.
All I'm saying is that this franchise is rather depressing to an outsider, and it doesn't really create a welcoming atmosphere, not because of the community which is actually the major selling point, but because of the company. You and your playgroup will probably be fine, as you have each other, but for someone like me, and many others looking to come back, or simply to get into the GW line, there's honestly almost no reason to do so. As such, I'm sorry if it offends you, or any others, but I no longer intend to play the game or purchase their product. I'll paint what I have, unsubscribe from my recent MWG Vault membership, and move on with my life. I wish you all the best.
Tinkrr wrote: and it doesn't really create a welcoming atmosphere
How exactly is that? If you're one of the vast majority of GW customers in the US who have access to non-GW stores why does it matter how welcoming their own retail stores are? I can count on one hand the number of times I've ever been in one, and I don't feel like I've missed out on anything. It might be annoying that GW's own stores suck but it's an issue that doesn't really matter here. Go play the game and have fun at a nice welcoming independent store, or even with friends outside of a store.
Also, remember that this "hostility" is not standard GW policy. It's an occasional thing we hear about random GW stores doing. Most of the time FW models are legal, and the few times I've been in a GW store I've had no problems at all with using mine.
Tinkrr wrote: Let's start with that, why is it allowed at all, if it's one company. I don't care about sales records of a GW employee or whatever, I just want a justification for why a company can ban a section of its own product in its own facilities, despite still being part of that company.
Because GW is dysfunctional, and has been for over a decade.
Legally they are one company, any other definition is just one you're making up.
So here, why am I supporting this company? I just came back to this hobby, and I just want to know if I should leave now.
If you have a decent playgroup with an established base of 40k stuff, and people can agree to play a certain way (e.g. not bringing gobs of D-weapons or pentatyrant builds to every session), you can still have fun. If you're going to have to buy a ton of stuff and/or are primarily looking at pickup games at a GW store, getting back in would probably be a poor idea.
The only reason I still play is that I have some people I enjoy playing with and a great store to play in, but I've also stopped attending tournaments (which seem to have fewer people than they did in the past as well).
So I got back into it because some people I knew had nostalgia for it and wanted to give it a shot again. More so, I had access to a lot of NiB product from a company I worked for at a very cheap rate (60-70% off).
I'll probably keep the Tau products that I have and play small games with some people I know, but I'm probably going to sell the SM and GK stuff I have that's still NIB. I was planning to trade it for the new Tau stuff, but I just don't care anymore.
Honestly, I'm very thankful to the community here, they're very honest, and I respect them for that. That being said, I've never seen a community so complacent with such horrible business practices and I just don't want to be part of that. No, I'm not looking for a company that's a charity, or one that is perfect in how it behaves, I simply want one that doesn't leave their fan base in this desperate a state.
I don't know if it's complacency, we complain loudly about it on forums like this, but we also know that GW isn't listening. There's also a "well *** 'em, we'll do our own thing" type deal, and with tournaments & events, those are pretty much entirely player organized and run independently of GW, and you get a lot of house rules and changes there.
I mean, I think I've played a grand total of two games in an actual GW shop ever? And that was when they still had a battle bunker in LA. Aside from that it's all been FLGS stores, so what GW stores do in their house is largely irrelevant to me at this point
However, I, and many other people obviously, have also dramatically scaled back spending on GW products as backlash against many of their practices, as evidenced by the fact that their last revenue report shows they're back to about where they were in 1997 (adjusted for inflation) and are selling fewer products to fewer people than they have been in the past.
Actually, that's the definition of complacency. Though I do want to state right now that I actually highly respect the community around the company, especially groups like Frontline Gaming who make a lot of the tournament rules, as the ITC format does seem rather amazing, it's just that everything I've read on here, especially from moderate people seems so discouraging, yourself included, and I think you're actually a very reasonable person.
So I've worked for FLGS before, and I've had positions that made me look over their finances and more. More importantly I worked enough conventions for them, everything from large scale shows like PAX to small anime expos, and the one product we basically never brought was GW, despite it being in the store, it simply didn't warrant the shelf space there, and whenever a store like that went out of business, the product that rotted the most was GW product. That's just not right, especially in a world where MtG cards that are worth hundreds of dollars each have a turn around rate faster than they could keep in stock.
See, I don't like that. The same thing is happening now with WoW, and it just makes me feel bad that these two nostalgic things for me are slowly dying. Granted, WoW's loss is magnitudes greater than GW could ever hope to even imagine being able to lose and still being the biggest.
Tinkrr wrote: and it doesn't really create a welcoming atmosphere
How exactly is that? If you're one of the vast majority of GW customers in the US who have access to non-GW stores why does it matter how welcoming their own retail stores are? I can count on one hand the number of times I've ever been in one, and I don't feel like I've missed out on anything. It might be annoying that GW's own stores suck but it's an issue that doesn't really matter here. Go play the game and have fun at a nice welcoming independent store, or even with friends outside of a store.
Also, remember that this "hostility" is not standard GW policy. It's an occasional thing we hear about random GW stores doing. Most of the time FW models are legal, and the few times I've been in a GW store I've had no problems at all with using mine.
Do you understand that when there are such problems, no matter how minor, and the parent company doesn't step in to quash them, it creates an incredibly toxic atmosphere for anyone coming into the franchise?
Tinkrr wrote: Let's start with that, why is it allowed at all, if it's one company. I don't care about sales records of a GW employee or whatever, I just want a justification for why a company can ban a section of its own product in its own facilities, despite still being part of that company.
Because GW is dysfunctional, and has been for over a decade.
Legally they are one company, any other definition is just one you're making up.
So here, why am I supporting this company? I just came back to this hobby, and I just want to know if I should leave now.
If you have a decent playgroup with an established base of 40k stuff, and people can agree to play a certain way (e.g. not bringing gobs of D-weapons or pentatyrant builds to every session), you can still have fun. If you're going to have to buy a ton of stuff and/or are primarily looking at pickup games at a GW store, getting back in would probably be a poor idea.
The only reason I still play is that I have some people I enjoy playing with and a great store to play in, but I've also stopped attending tournaments (which seem to have fewer people than they did in the past as well).
So I got back into it because some people I knew had nostalgia for it and wanted to give it a shot again. More so, I had access to a lot of NiB product from a company I worked for at a very cheap rate (60-70% off).
I'll probably keep the Tau products that I have and play small games with some people I know, but I'm probably going to sell the SM and GK stuff I have that's still NIB. I was planning to trade it for the new Tau stuff, but I just don't care anymore.
Honestly, I'm very thankful to the community here, they're very honest, and I respect them for that. That being said, I've never seen a community so complacent with such horrible business practices and I just don't want to be part of that. No, I'm not looking for a company that's a charity, or one that is perfect in how it behaves, I simply want one that doesn't leave their fan base in this desperate a state.
I don't know if it's complacency, we complain loudly about it on forums like this, but we also know that GW isn't listening. There's also a "well *** 'em, we'll do our own thing" type deal, and with tournaments & events, those are pretty much entirely player organized and run independently of GW, and you get a lot of house rules and changes there.
I mean, I think I've played a grand total of two games in an actual GW shop ever? And that was when they still had a battle bunker in LA. Aside from that it's all been FLGS stores, so what GW stores do in their house is largely irrelevant to me at this point
However, I, and many other people obviously, have also dramatically scaled back spending on GW products as backlash against many of their practices, as evidenced by the fact that their last revenue report shows they're back to about where they were in 1997 (adjusted for inflation) and are selling fewer products to fewer people than they have been in the past.
Actually, that's the definition of complacency. Though I do want to state right now that I actually highly respect the community around the company, especially groups like Frontline Gaming who make a lot of the tournament rules, as the ITC format does seem rather amazing, it's just that everything I've read on here, especially from moderate people seems so discouraging, yourself included, and I think you're actually a very reasonable person.
So I've worked for FLGS before, and I've had positions that made me look over their finances and more. More importantly I worked enough conventions for them, everything from large scale shows like PAX to small anime expos, and the one product we basically never brought was GW, despite it being in the store, it simply didn't warrant the shelf space there, and whenever a store like that went out of business, the product that rotted the most was GW product. That's just not right, especially in a world where MtG cards that are worth hundreds of dollars each have a turn around rate faster than they could keep in stock.
See, I don't like that. The same thing is happening now with WoW, and it just makes me feel bad that these two nostalgic things for me are slowly dying. Granted, WoW's loss is magnitudes greater than GW could ever hope to even imagine being able to lose and still being the biggest.
Fundamentally, GW's made it clear they're not listening. They proudly state how they don't do market research in their reports to investors, how they're a model company (and *not* a game company) in said reports as well, they've shut down basically every avenue of communication they've had between their GT's and Games Days, White Dwarf letters, Designers Notes, their own Forums, and dismantled their Facebook pages. The only way to make anything felt by GW is to hit that pocketbook, and I think the last time I bought anything GW was 8 months ago? The last time I bought a Codex book was the current IG book at the end of 6E I think? It's the only route left open.
GW's been having problems. Fantasy died because of them and the absurdly high cost of entry, Age of Sigmar doesn't look to be doing any better, and 40k is getting increasingly outrageous and Marketing driven (with things like Web-Bundle exclusive Rules and the like).
Tinkrr wrote: Do you understand that when there are such problems, no matter how minor, and the parent company doesn't step in to quash them, it creates an incredibly toxic atmosphere for anyone coming into the franchise?
It doesn't create a toxic atmosphere for the community because most US customers are never in a GW store to experience the bad policies. If you're a new player coming into the franchise then it has little or no effect on you because most of the time you're going to be playing at an independent store and the only time you'll ever hear about the existence of GW's own retail stores is when one of your fellow players says "I'm glad we have a good store to play at, GW stores suck". I'm not going to defend the decision to ban FW products, but you're making a big deal out of an issue that has no measurable impact on your own gaming experience, or on the gaming experiences of most 40k players in the US.
Tinkrr wrote: Let's start with that, why is it allowed at all, if it's one company. I don't care about sales records of a GW employee or whatever, I just want a justification for why a company can ban a section of its own product in its own facilities, despite still being part of that company.
Because GW is dysfunctional, and has been for over a decade.
Legally they are one company, any other definition is just one you're making up.
So here, why am I supporting this company? I just came back to this hobby, and I just want to know if I should leave now.
If you have a decent playgroup with an established base of 40k stuff, and people can agree to play a certain way (e.g. not bringing gobs of D-weapons or pentatyrant builds to every session), you can still have fun. If you're going to have to buy a ton of stuff and/or are primarily looking at pickup games at a GW store, getting back in would probably be a poor idea.
The only reason I still play is that I have some people I enjoy playing with and a great store to play in, but I've also stopped attending tournaments (which seem to have fewer people than they did in the past as well).
So I got back into it because some people I knew had nostalgia for it and wanted to give it a shot again. More so, I had access to a lot of NiB product from a company I worked for at a very cheap rate (60-70% off).
I'll probably keep the Tau products that I have and play small games with some people I know, but I'm probably going to sell the SM and GK stuff I have that's still NIB. I was planning to trade it for the new Tau stuff, but I just don't care anymore.
Honestly, I'm very thankful to the community here, they're very honest, and I respect them for that. That being said, I've never seen a community so complacent with such horrible business practices and I just don't want to be part of that. No, I'm not looking for a company that's a charity, or one that is perfect in how it behaves, I simply want one that doesn't leave their fan base in this desperate a state.
I don't know if it's complacency, we complain loudly about it on forums like this, but we also know that GW isn't listening. There's also a "well *** 'em, we'll do our own thing" type deal, and with tournaments & events, those are pretty much entirely player organized and run independently of GW, and you get a lot of house rules and changes there.
I mean, I think I've played a grand total of two games in an actual GW shop ever? And that was when they still had a battle bunker in LA. Aside from that it's all been FLGS stores, so what GW stores do in their house is largely irrelevant to me at this point
However, I, and many other people obviously, have also dramatically scaled back spending on GW products as backlash against many of their practices, as evidenced by the fact that their last revenue report shows they're back to about where they were in 1997 (adjusted for inflation) and are selling fewer products to fewer people than they have been in the past.
Actually, that's the definition of complacency. Though I do want to state right now that I actually highly respect the community around the company, especially groups like Frontline Gaming who make a lot of the tournament rules, as the ITC format does seem rather amazing, it's just that everything I've read on here, especially from moderate people seems so discouraging, yourself included, and I think you're actually a very reasonable person.
So I've worked for FLGS before, and I've had positions that made me look over their finances and more. More importantly I worked enough conventions for them, everything from large scale shows like PAX to small anime expos, and the one product we basically never brought was GW, despite it being in the store, it simply didn't warrant the shelf space there, and whenever a store like that went out of business, the product that rotted the most was GW product. That's just not right, especially in a world where MtG cards that are worth hundreds of dollars each have a turn around rate faster than they could keep in stock.
See, I don't like that. The same thing is happening now with WoW, and it just makes me feel bad that these two nostalgic things for me are slowly dying. Granted, WoW's loss is magnitudes greater than GW could ever hope to even imagine being able to lose and still being the biggest.
Fundamentally, GW's made it clear they're not listening. They proudly state how they don't do market research in their reports to investors, how they're a model company (and *not* a game company) in said reports as well, they've shut down basically every avenue of communication they've had between their GT's and Games Days, White Dwarf letters, Designers Notes, their own Forums, and dismantled their Facebook pages. The only way to make anything felt by GW is to hit that pocketbook, and I think the last time I bought anything GW was 8 months ago? The last time I bought a Codex book was the current IG book at the end of 6E I think? It's the only route left open.
GW's been having problems. Fantasy died because of them and the absurdly high cost of entry, Age of Sigmar doesn't look to be doing any better, and 40k is getting increasingly outrageous and Marketing driven (with things like Web-Bundle exclusive Rules and the like).
This is actually something I hear all the time, even the ITC guys said that GW states only "20%" of the people who buy their product play the game but at the same time GW states they don't do market research, so they have no idea where that number originates from. I just don't really understand what that company is planning, or thinking, but at least Mantic isn't too worried about which models are used and maybe it'll catch on, right? The whole genre just needs a company to throw it into the spotlight, but I'm not sure Mantic is the one.
I mean I understand why GW was a model company and not a game company for a long time, as it's really easy to pirate a rule set for a game, but really hard to pirate models. However, with the introduction of more companies producing models, and the format of game companies receiving heavy support despite being free to play, simply because they produce a quality product, it's just weird they cling to that concept.
Tinkrr wrote: Do you understand that when there are such problems, no matter how minor, and the parent company doesn't step in to quash them, it creates an incredibly toxic atmosphere for anyone coming into the franchise?
It doesn't create a toxic atmosphere for the community because most US customers are never in a GW store to experience the bad policies. If you're a new player coming into the franchise then it has little or no effect on you because most of the time you're going to be playing at an independent store and the only time you'll ever hear about the existence of GW's own retail stores is when one of your fellow players says "I'm glad we have a good store to play at, GW stores suck". I'm not going to defend the decision to ban FW products, but you're making a big deal out of an issue that has no measurable impact on your own gaming experience, or on the gaming experiences of most 40k players in the US.
Look, I don't know how to put it more clearly to you. The last time I played was in 3rd Edition, I just came back to the game and the first thing I saw on these forums was the thread about a GW store banning FW products, despite playing in only FLGS in the past. That is one of the worst welcomes I've ever had to a game.
I know you might believe one thing or another, but I am essentially a new player, and after our conversation, and what I've seen on here in a myriad of threads, and not just that one about FW, I don't want to play this game. I'm sorry, but that's just the case, and I know the people who have gotten back into the game with me, lost interest too, and well before me. This is not a good environment for new players, or ones returning to the game, and this is coming from groups of players who have returned to many franchises that aren't seen as particularly great.
Vaktathi wrote: It limited growth but the idea that FW is a barrier to entry only holds true if you believe FW is mandatory, and it would only be mandatory if its conferring some sort of power advantage, for which there is no evidence.
Power as in winning? Or power as in allowing new tactics? Or even flat out replacing existing units? All of these exist for some FW models and it's not our goal to separate the wheat from the chaff. More options exist, some good and some not so good, and that's enough. Perhaps you don't understand what is meant by the term mandatory and are taking it too strongly. Strictly speaking, there aren't many models in any codex that are mandatory to play the faction, even a Land Raider is optional. But its existence and the tactics associated with it make grabbing one mandatory if you are looking to employ those options. Denying Forgeworld means you aren't losing out on options by not purchasing the models because the options are forbidden outright.
Vaktathi wrote: Have you looked at the last three years of GW releases? I don't think that argument holds any water, especially if you're not counting HH stuff. Relatively little FW stuff introduces truly new capabilities to armies that didn't have them before, and in some cases where it does, it's often very much needed.
Very much needed... as in Mandatory? Again, since we're not looking to separate the good from the bad, it's just all prohibited. Like saying Lords of War are prohibited even if mine is an 888 pt tracked behemoth and yours is a 200 pt special character.
Vaktathi wrote: Allies and multiple detachments and formations are rarely banned, most big tournaments put a couple of relatively light restrictions on there (like a maximum of 3 detachments), but aside from that allow people to go balls-hog on allies and formations.
That's nice for those tournaments??? But we've been discussing my local meta here for two pages and Allies are indeed banned with multiple detachments/formations occasionally so.
Vaktathi wrote: Sure, a Drop Pod in a CSM army is theoretically not organic to a strictly Codex CSM army. However given that a Dreadclaw is *triple* the cost of a basic drop pod, it's not an option you'll see utilized very option, especially considering CSM's don't have many units that could take tremendous advantage of the capabilities in the way say, combat=squading Sternguard can. If people can deal with SM armies with drop pods, Dreadclaws are absolutely not going to throw a wrench into anyone's works.
Right, and I totally agree with you that it's not some huge advantage or that it will be taken in every army ever made. But the fact that it would taken at all, that it adds a new way to play CSM, that it can potentially encourage players to purchase it and bring it to the table means it has value. Forgeworld was banned to eliminate its value so players would not feel the need to pick up something like a Dreadclaw under any circumstances. Playing with Forgeworld is like playing a video game with all the expansions when some of the players you're up against only went and bought the base game. You have more options available to you... that's all it takes to make some people not want expansions at all. It may not even provide you with a tactical advantage if you never use the units or features given by the expansions. Yet people who haven't purchased the expansions will always feel like they are at disadvantage. That's the element we're attempting to avoid by evening the playing field (or spending field, in this case).
Forgeworld expands the possibilities beyond the limits of the regular codex (at substantial monetary cost) and that is something the playerbase has determined to be unwanted due to the cost involved. There is a direct and real advantage taken when you are capable of performing actions ordinarily barred to you simply because you spent money on figures and rules exclusive to Forgeworld.
And yet nobody has a problem with allies and multiple detachments doing this exact thing, but on an order of magnitude worse?
Actually, allies are very much considered a problem, especially in my meta where most of the players play a single faction. Even here on Dakka it's addressed, check out the general discussion boards once in a while. We do have a problem with Allies and they are banned. Formations/detachments are still permitted though often restricted in number. They have actually been instrumental in focusing armies and providing the necessary buffs to field lists of units players actually want to paint instead of the ones that are most effective standalone. They have even succeeded in turning some worthless units into solid picks, which made the veterans and inexperienced newbies who bought those models quite happy.
As for FW pricing, think of it this way... playing 40k with just GW means you spent $100 Chaos Dollars. Playing with GW -and- FW means you've probably spent $150 Chaos Dollars. It's still more money to play the same game which is bad for the new players and bad for the business being a barrier to entry and all. It doesn't matter if you think FW is similar in price to GW (and I really disagree on that, some models are over $300). What matters is it's a greater expense for the community. Even if you don't buy FW yourself, you're up against folks who do, and I've already illustrated why that would be a problem. A huge chunk of the meta is players new to the game and limiting the rules is the best way to ease them into the hobby. These aren't the ancient times of 40k where we could buy a squad and a captain and be done collecting.
Vaktathi wrote: And is there a similar ban on allies, formations, and multiple detachments? If not, then the ban on FW is absurd. Likewise, the overwhelmingly vast majority of FW stuff doesn't bring in any major new capabilities. A Leman Russ Annihilator isn't bringing some radical new capability to an IG army, any more than a Decimator Daemon Engine is to a CSM army. In the cases where you do get capabilities, in many instances they're often critically needed to enable some factions to have a realistic chance against many newer armies, such as with Sicarans and CSM's against FMC spam or Eldar.
There is a ban on loads of things, actually.
No Allies
No Lords of War
No Super Heavies
No Gargantuan Creatures
No Fortifications other than Aegis Defense Line
No ForgeWorld rules
No Apocalypse formations
No more than two CAD/detachments/formations/auxiliary
angelofvengeance wrote: @Tinkrr: No offence, but it feels like you're getting your panties in a bunch over a very trivial thing.
No offense taken, and my panties aren't bunched at all D:
It's not really that one thing that bothers me, if it was just that I could probably just ignore it and move on, but time and time again I just hear things on here that aren't very flattering about GW. The ITC folks, along with many others really make me want to enjoy the game, but I just don't hear anything that makes me feel like it's not, well, inhospitable.
Back when 400k came out, GW didn't even make the models, Citadel did.
So, FW is no different to that, apart from GW now selling the standard models themselves now.
Vaktathi wrote: It limited growth but the idea that FW is a barrier to entry only holds true if you believe FW is mandatory, and it would only be mandatory if its conferring some sort of power advantage, for which there is no evidence.
Power as in winning? Or power as in allowing new tactics? Or even flat out replacing existing units? All of these exist for some FW models and it's not our goal to separate the wheat from the chaff. More options exist, some good and some not so good, and that's enough.
It seems a rather arbitrary, and thin, line to draw in the sand however.
Perhaps you don't understand what is meant by the term mandatory and are taking it too strongly. Strictly speaking, there aren't many models in any codex that are mandatory to play the faction, even a Land Raider is optional. But its existence and the tactics associated with it make grabbing one mandatory if you are looking to employ those options. Denying Forgeworld means you aren't losing out on options by not purchasing the models because the options are forbidden outright.
That's taking the idea to a somewhat absurd extreme however. "Oh man, this army doesn't have X in the codex, if FW allows it it'll totally mess up every game ever and so many things will have to change to adapt!" There's nothing to back that up, particularly with the way GW's codex releases have gone of late. The existence of FW doesn't mean anyone *must* take FW options, or that their counters are radically different from anything a player should already be set up to face, and in general, even where allowed, the overwhelming evidence is that it has no major impact and there's certainly no routine flooding of FW stuff taking over everything.
Very much needed... as in Mandatory? Again, since we're not looking to separate the good from the bad, it's just all prohibited. Like saying Lords of War are prohibited even if mine is an 888 pt tracked behemoth and yours is a 200 pt special character.
Which is a rather silly reason to ban all Lords of War, particularly when many used to be just normal HQ unit and were simply moved to make use of the slot (e.g. Ghazkuul).
That's nice for those tournaments??? But we've been discussing my local meta here for two pages and Allies are indeed banned with multiple detachments/formations occasionally so.
I believe that's the first time you've mentioned that directly unless I'm misreading something. Even then, if you're allowing formations, with free units, free wargear, free special rules, and especially ones that aren't coming from a codex, it sounds like a pretty thin doulbe-standard.
Right, and I totally agree with you that it's not some huge advantage or that it will be taken in every army ever made. But the fact that it would taken at all, that it adds a new way to play CSM, that it can potentially encourage players to purchase it and bring it to the table means it has value.
Right...but since when is that bad? Yes it exists. Someone might bring it. "OH NOES!". It's hard to take that line of thinking seriously when it's not adding something that someone shouldn't be prepared to face anyway. If we were talking a Titan, sure. But this is a capability many similar armies already have, and have better versions of, and are far better able to take advantage of. The fact that someone might not realize that CSM's have a drop pod, and would have to radically alter a playstyle and army list to counter it, and that it would cause any sort of upset, much less be some sort of mandatory inclusion, is absurd.
Forgeworld was banned to eliminate its value so players would not feel the need to pick up something like a Dreadclaw under any circumstances.
Why would they *need* to?
Likewise, what if they just *wanted* to?
Playing with Forgeworld is like playing a video game with all the expansions when some of the players you're up against only went and bought the base game.
This concept is both flawed and outdated. There is no "base" game. It doesn't exist, and GW will be the first to tell you that. With campaign books, supplements, BL dataslates, Web-Store-Excvlusive formations, etc, that concept simply doesn't exist. You're simply discriminating against a single sales channel out of three or four.
You have more options available to you... that's all it takes to make some people not want expansions at all. It may not even provide you with a tactical advantage if you never use the units or features given by the expansions. Yet people who haven't purchased the expansions will always feel like they are at disadvantage. That's the element we're attempting to avoid by evening the playing field (or spending field, in this case).
Then they're viewing the situation rather stiltedly, as above.
Additionally, you run into other situations like with the poor Griffon artillery tank, where it was a Codex unit in 2E and 3E, an FW unit in 3.5E, a codex unit again in 5E, and back to being an FW unit again with the 6E book.
Actually, allies are very much considered a problem, especially in my meta where most of the players play a single faction. Even here on Dakka it's addressed, check out the general discussion boards once in a while.
Aye, but they're typically not banned or restricted.
We do have a problem with Allies and they are banned.
Yours would be the only group I know of that does this. Not that it's a bad thing, it's probably the single best thing you can do for balance, but it's also surprising, as it would be the only playgroup I've heard of that does so.
Formations/detachments are still permitted though often restricted in number. They have actually been instrumental in focusing armies and providing the necessary buffs to field lists of units players actually want to paint instead of the ones that are most effective standalone. They have even succeeded in turning some worthless units into solid picks, which made the veterans and inexperienced newbies who bought those models quite happy.
I take it nobody has brought a War Convocation, Canoptek Harvest, or Skyhammer Annihilation force then?
As for FW pricing, think of it this way... playing 40k with just GW means you spent $100 Chaos Dollars. Playing with GW -and- FW means you've probably spent $150 Chaos Dollars.
Why? There's the *option* to spend more, but hardly any hard demand to do so. It's existence and availability to not automatically demand investment. Just because FW exists doesn't mean you have to out and buy FW stuff. Even if it did, with the way GW's prices are, I don't see why you'd need to spend more unless you just have a need to collect everything, in which case FW being banned or not won't matter.
The fact that it exists doesn't mean people have to pay more money simply out of the fact that it does in fact exist.
It's still more money to play the same game
Again though, why? Why does just it's mere existence demand additional investment, and why must that investment be so much more than in core GW stuff? Why aren't newly released GW kits treated them same way when they have the exact same effect and typically cost just as much?
which is bad for the new players and bad for the business being a barrier to entry and all.
When basic infantry for many armies are now $7/model, it's hard to see how.
It doesn't matter if you think FW is similar in price to GW (and I really disagree on that, some models are over $300)
Yes, some models are, but most people aren't going to try and hamfist a Revenant Titan into the game, I can't think of a single non-LoW that fits into that category. As I noted earlier, Character models are on par, or increasingly, more expensive, and. Some of their kits are very expensive yes. Not all, and many can be relatively easily, effectivley, and convincingly proxied for far less.
What matters is it's a greater expense for the community. Even if you don't buy FW yourself, you're up against folks who do, and I've already illustrated why that would be a problem. A huge chunk of the meta is players new to the game and limiting the rules is the best way to ease them into the hobby. These aren't the ancient times of 40k where we could buy a squad and a captain and be done collecting.
Which is kind of exactly my point. When we used to be talking about $400 for an army and books 8 years ago, $800 for an FW army was a big deal. When we're talking $800-1300 for an army now, $1000-1500 for an army with FW inclusion should no longer really be an issue.
Hell, my DKoK army would actually be slighter cheaper to re-biuy than my "codex" army as I've got both set up to run right now.
There is a ban on loads of things, actually.
No Allies
No Lords of War
No Super Heavies
No Gargantuan Creatures
No Fortifications other than Aegis Defense Line
No ForgeWorld rules
No Apocalypse formations
No more than two CAD/detachments/formations/auxiliary
Yours is the only playgroup I've ever heard with *that* many outright bans in that case.
Arkaine - From what I'm reading, one of the main reasons that the baning of Forgeworld in your player community is some kind of attempt at "protecting" newer players. Eh? From what? Spending too much money? None of anyone else's business. From trashing your games? How so (specifics please, not hearsay or generalities)?
Hypothetical scenario for you; You've got a new player who's just started playing and they've been playing about 6-9 months. They've got a reasonable Space Marine force done up quite nicely. Whilst browsing forums and so on, they stumble upon the Forgeworld site and see this little beauty:
And decides "I must have it!" and buys it along with the relevant rule book (Imperial Armour Volume 2 in this case). Receives it a week or so later, paints it up, does a nice job. Later that week, they turn up to play a few games and proudly announces that he's got this, here's the rules and would anyone mind a game or two so they can run it. What would your playerbase really do: Play a game or two and let him run it? Insist he remove the tank? Shun him? Denounce him and berate him for being a WAAC/powergamer/TFG?
Assume you let him run it and he starts to include it in more games, would that cause problems considering that although it's pretty nifty tank its in no way overpowered?
My only issue with FW is that it should be treated like a superheavy or Gargantuan creature. Before fielding it you should have the decency to tell your opponent "I am going to be fielding X from ForgeWorld" and then give your opponent either the chance to change his list a bit or accept the fact that some people don't want to play against FW because some of the units are overly broken compared to some armies.
For instance, I played a SM player who knew he was going to be facing my orks so he brought two sicarian tanks to the table, knowing that most orks only survive with use of cover.
I played the game and lost spectacularly and then asked him if he would be ok with another game where he didn't use FW units.
And the reverse of your situation happened. he freaked out that I would dare ask him to not bring forgeworld units to the game.
Overall its just a matter of being a good/polite gamer. If your going to inform them and give them a chance to change a few things then good to go, if your going to be TFG who list tailors then you might have a hard time finding a game.
I play the DKoK Siege Regiment and have personally never had a problem, if anything people seem keen to have a look at the army or play it as it's out of the ordinary. Still, I consider that there are certain reasons why some people dislike Forgeworld, and take steps in my game to counteract it.
1. Always have physical copies of all rules, preferably including a spare to give to the opponent. People who dislike FW can do so on the basis that they don't know the rules because they're less common.
2. Always explain the most important units or special rules in particular detail before the game.
3. Give a run down of the particular strengths and weaknesses of your army. Players know, for example, to target the Spyder in a Canoptek Formation; introduce a FW army to them and they can get angry for not knowing which units are the linchpins. For example, I always point out how much damage my artillery is capable of doing, how its Toughness works, and how it has a minimum range so that being inside that the minimum range a good plan.
4. Point out the weaknesses of your army so that the opponent doesn't just think it's all good. With DKoK, that means the normal infantry tends to be overpriced in points and offer no bang for the points buck.
The biggest reason that I think players dislike FW is because of the fact you can use FW units either as flavour to add to a Codex army, or as a full army from an IA book. I think using specific FW units is more common, and this is a cause of suspicion because players naturally choose to add only the best and OP units. OP units exist in both FW and GW, but if you play games where only one FW unit is added to a Codex army, it's going to be the powerful unit isn't it? Therefore, players get the impression that FW is all OP, because they're more likely to see OP units in action than a full IA book army including the weak units! Point being: compare adding Thudd Guns to Guard army as opposed to playing a full DKoK army, which has weakness of poor movement, overcosted infantry, poor anti-air, and no psychics.
Honestly, I really don't care about FW. Much more broken stuff comes from regular GW. As long as you let me read the rules ahead of time, I'll play against you. But if we're in the middle of a game and you just say "Oh, it's S8 AP3 Ignores Cover Large Blast" I'm gonna be pretty pissed. (Had a buddy do this to me, Turn 1 annihilated my newly painted Assault Marines)
HoundsofDemos wrote: I recently played a game with my space marine army accompanied by solomon lok. He was the only forge world unit in my army, i had his stats with me and he doesn't exactly do anything that is out there. one opponent was totally on board and we had a great game.
my second guy of the night started off being a bit weird about it, making comments that forgeworld is outside the game. When i produced the pages that word for word say that most forge world units are meant for standard games he stopped for a while. Latter when he had some bad shooting due to Lok's warlord trait giving my marines fnp while they sat on the deciding objective, he had a mini freakout claiming that Lok's warlord trait is grossly over powered. the game was not fun from there on.
Has anyone else had people react negatively to a forge world unit, even ones that don't seem particularly cheesy (unless someone wants to argue that Lok is OP)
The first reason is because many still confuse the original USA based "forge world" (now gone) that got GW all upset with the current Forgeworld in the UK that actually is part of games workshop. Go to fw site and it clearly states fw is part of gw.
God In Action wrote: I play the DKoK Siege Regiment and have personally never had a problem, if anything people seem keen to have a look at the army or play it as it's out of the ordinary. Still, I consider that there are certain reasons why some people dislike Forgeworld, and take steps in my game to counteract it.
1. Always have physical copies of all rules, preferably including a spare to give to the opponent. People who dislike FW can do so on the basis that they don't know the rules because they're less common.
2. Always explain the most important units or special rules in particular detail before the game.
3. Give a run down of the particular strengths and weaknesses of your army. Players know, for example, to target the Spyder in a Canoptek Formation; introduce a FW army to them and they can get angry for not knowing which units are the linchpins. For example, I always point out how much damage my artillery is capable of doing, how its Toughness works, and how it has a minimum range so that being inside that the minimum range a good plan.
4. Point out the weaknesses of your army so that the opponent doesn't just think it's all good. With DKoK, that means the normal infantry tends to be overpriced in points and offer no bang for the points buck.
The biggest reason that I think players dislike FW is because of the fact you can use FW units either as flavour to add to a Codex army, or as a full army from an IA book. I think using specific FW units is more common, and this is a cause of suspicion because players naturally choose to add only the best and OP units. OP units exist in both FW and GW, but if you play games where only one FW unit is added to a Codex army, it's going to be the powerful unit isn't it? Therefore, players get the impression that FW is all OP, because they're more likely to see OP units in action than a full IA book army including the weak units! Point being: compare adding Thudd Guns to Guard army as opposed to playing a full DKoK army, which has weakness of poor movement, overcosted infantry, poor anti-air, and no psychics.
I think that sums it up best. Its always been my experience that when I see someone bringing FW they are bringing the most OP gak they can come by to further break the game . Your post is amazing so have an exalt
HoundsofDemos wrote: I recently played a game with my space marine army accompanied by solomon lok. He was the only forge world unit in my army, i had his stats with me and he doesn't exactly do anything that is out there. one opponent was totally on board and we had a great game.
my second guy of the night started off being a bit weird about it, making comments that forgeworld is outside the game. When i produced the pages that word for word say that most forge world units are meant for standard games he stopped for a while. Latter when he had some bad shooting due to Lok's warlord trait giving my marines fnp while they sat on the deciding objective, he had a mini freakout claiming that Lok's warlord trait is grossly over powered. the game was not fun from there on.
Has anyone else had people react negatively to a forge world unit, even ones that don't seem particularly cheesy (unless someone wants to argue that Lok is OP)
But Eldar...
Seriously though, It's almost a Pavlovian response in some people.
AlsoTHOSE people find things to freak out about FW or not.
I love FW models and would have no issue playing against what you describe considering how "broken" some official 40K units/rules/formations are...
Vaktathi wrote: Right...but since when is that bad? Yes it exists. Someone might bring it. "OH NOES!". It's hard to take that line of thinking seriously when it's not adding something that someone shouldn't be prepared to face anyway. If we were talking a Titan, sure. But this is a capability many similar armies already have, and have better versions of, and are far better able to take advantage of. The fact that someone might not realize that CSM's have a drop pod, and would have to radically alter a playstyle and army list to counter it, and that it would cause any sort of upset, much less be some sort of mandatory inclusion, is absurd. Why would they *need* to? Likewise, what if they just *wanted* to?
Remember that allowing FW doesn't just let Dreadclaws into the mix. It'd have to all be included and we've already seen FW hit the table before and this is the result. The simplest solution was to say no more FW. There are plenty of models that are fair and allowable but we'd have to keep a comprehensive list of what those are. Like before LoWs and Gargantuan Creatures were banned, someone decided to bring a Wraithknight and Windrider Host to a 1000 pt tourney. The community agreed not to let that happen in the future as most of them were unable to deal with it with so few points without list tailoring. The Imperial Knights are kind of a catch all of LoWs for the armies that don't have their own yet that also means buying models the players don't have or want to keep up with the power creep. It's totally possible to take these guys down with normal units, just not using the average list that gets brought to the table. Rather than picking what's allowed and what's not, it's easier to say it's all banned.
Vaktathi wrote: Additionally, you run into other situations like with the poor Griffon artillery tank, where it was a Codex unit in 2E and 3E, an FW unit in 3.5E, a codex unit again in 5E, and back to being an FW unit again with the 6E book.
I had no idea that was even a thing they did. Still, for simplicity sake, if it's FW right now it's prohibited because it's a whole lot easier than keeping track of which FW models are banned and which are allowed.
Vaktathi wrote: Yours is the only playgroup I've ever heard with *that* many outright bans in that case.
Thank you! Glad to hear it, makes the games much more friendly to all comers. Typically people who own FW stuff have already invested in Core stuff and can still play at the venue.
zedmeister wrote: Arkaine - From what I'm reading, one of the main reasons that the baning of Forgeworld in your player community is some kind of attempt at "protecting" newer players. Eh? From what? Spending too much money? None of anyone else's business. From trashing your games? How so (specifics please, not hearsay or generalities)?
It prevents the "arms race" syndrome that competitive players often face. Like with Magic the Gathering, new sets are usually balanced with the previous one, yet the options and possibilities the new cards allow result in the players outspending each other for the perfect decks. As the 40k community is desired to be more friendly and open to all types than that, restricting certain elements like FW or LoWs or Allies keeps everyone from feeling the pressure to upgrade their collection every time some new gamechanger hits the shelves. It happens plenty often enough with just Core GW material so it's strange to see a few people argue that it wouldn't happen with Forgeworld (which again was only banned after everyone saw models from it played in several events).
zedmeister wrote: Hypothetical scenario for you;
What would your playerbase really do: Play a game or two and let him run it? Insist he remove the tank? Shun him? Denounce him and berate him for being a WAAC/powergamer/TFG?
Assume you let him run it and he starts to include it in more games, would that cause problems considering that although it's pretty nifty tank its in no way overpowered?
We would let him know that FW wasn't allowed for the events. If he wanted to use in casual games with the permission of his opponent, he's more than welcome to as whether or not the tank is OP never comes into question. It's just that permitting the use of the tank would mean permitting the use of everything from FW as no one wants to be burdened with arbitrarily deciding what FW items are allowable and which are banned. I mean what kind of arbitrary guidelines would be used? Personal gut feeling? Nay, the players made the right call. Ban it all and let them sort it out on their own in private games.
Thank you! Glad to hear it, makes the games much more friendly to all comers. Typically people who own FW stuff have already invested in Core stuff and can still play at the venue.
Really? I would see this as an arbitrary imposition. Had I just moved to your area and showed up and been told you had all these arbitrary house rules that I had no say in, rules that would take away some of my more interesting and fun units like hazard suits (that are underpowered if anything) which I've spent a lot of time and effort to paint and model, I would feel incredibly alienated and marginalized. Probably wouldn't show up to organized events actually.
It is simple just to ban all forgeworld models, it's also lazy and unfair. It punishes some armies more than others. What you are doing is throwing away an entire bushel of apples because of a small few rotten ones.
Furthermore comparing warhammer to mtg is a major false equivalency. For one models are not randomized and given varying degrees of rarity. Two, there is no equivalent to something like mox's or black lotus, some ultra-rare ancient, mega-overpowered card. 3 when a codex gets released it updates 1 army, and rarely (if at all) makes any models illegal. In MTG whenever a new set is released an old one is retired, obsoleting (virtually) every competitive deck which forces player to buy the new set (and as much as they can as fast as they can to get those needed rares) to create a new playable deck... the exact model of pay to win. And every new set effects everyone. They come at such a fast pace that to allow every set that ever existed would add 3000%+ more cards to chose from, as opposed to allowing forgeworld which adds roughly 40% more models. I can't even say this is an apples to oranges comparison, that would be an understatement, it's more like an apples to nuclear power plant comparison.
You see at my FLG we are mostly adults and use what some may call an honour system, where we discuss the game before hand with players and try to play lists of roughly equal power to ensure a good game for everyone. Or you can just make sweeping, polarizing, arbitrary, unbalanced carpet banning house rules. I'll leave the folks on dakka to decide which is more welcoming.
Thank you! Glad to hear it, makes the games much more friendly to all comers. Typically people who own FW stuff have already invested in Core stuff and can still play at the venue.
Really? I would see this as an arbitrary imposition. Had I just moved to your area and showed up and been told you had all these arbitrary house rules that I had no say in, rules that would take away some of my more interesting and fun units like hazard suits (that are underpowered if anything) which I've spent a lot of time and effort to paint and model, I would feel incredibly alienated and marginalized. Probably wouldn't show up to organized events actually.
It is simple just to ban all forgeworld models, it's also lazy and unfair. It punishes some armies more than others. What you are doing is throwing away an entire bushel of apples because of a small few rotten ones.
Furthermore comparing warhammer to mtg is a major false equivalency. For one models are not randomized and given varying degrees of rarity. Two, there is no equivalent to something like mox's or black lotus, some ultra-rare ancient, mega-overpowered card. 3 when a codex gets released it updates 1 army, and rarely (if at all) makes any models illegal. In MTG whenever a new set is released an old one is retired, obsoleting (virtually) every competitive deck which forces player to buy the new set (and as much as they can as fast as they can to get those needed rares) to create a new playable deck... the exact model of pay to win. And every new set effects everyone. They come at such a fast pace that to allow every set that ever existed would add 3000%+ more cards to chose from, as opposed to allowing forgeworld which adds roughly 40% more models. I can't even say this is an apples to oranges comparison, that would be an understatement, it's more like an apples to nuclear power plant comparison.
You see at my FLG we are mostly adults and use what some may call an honour system, where we discuss the game before hand with players and try to play lists of roughly equal power to ensure a good game for everyone. Or you can just make sweeping, polarizing, arbitrary, unbalanced carpet banning house rules. I'll leave the folks on dakka to decide which is more welcoming.
chalkobob wrote: Really? I would see this as an arbitrary imposition. Had I just moved to your area and showed up and been told you had all these arbitrary house rules that I had no say in, rules that would take away some of my more interesting and fun units like hazard suits (that are underpowered if anything) which I've spent a lot of time and effort to paint and model, I would feel incredibly alienated and marginalized. Probably wouldn't show up to organized events actually.
Likewise, our EXISTING playerbase was feeling alienated and marginalized by Forgeworld and collectively decided to stick with just the GW stuff. The chance that you might not show up versus the guarantee that some would quit the hobby... not that hard a call when you think about it.
chalkobob wrote: It is simple just to ban all forgeworld models, it's also lazy and unfair. It punishes some armies more than others. What you are doing is throwing away an entire bushel of apples because of a small few rotten ones.
Ah but it's not about apples being rotten. Think of it as some people are getting their apples from Pathmark and others are shopping at Whole Foods. To be fair to those unwilling to shop at Whole Foods, you're now only allowed to bring apples from Pathmark. The reverse just doesn't happen as often... (people unwilling to play GW rules who are 100% invested in Forgeworld)
chalkobob wrote: Furthermore comparing warhammer to mtg is a major false equivalency.
But the games are not being compared, the business models and competitive scenes are. The games themselves can be quite different but the manner in which players react to an OP card is quite similar to the way they react to a Wraithknight.
chalkobob wrote: For one models are not randomized and given varying degrees of rarity.
Rarity doesn't really exist in MtG either, competitive players normally buy singles off the secondary market which the store provides as well as trade with other players. Every card in the game is accessible on Ebay, it's just about how much it costs.
chalkobob wrote: Two, there is no equivalent to something like mox's or black lotus, some ultra-rare ancient, mega-overpowered card.
Yes there is, as mentioned above, every card in the game is accessible to you for the right price. Likewise, there are expensive Forgeworld and Limited Edition models available to players for the right price.
chalkobob wrote: 3 when a codex gets released it updates 1 army, and rarely (if at all) makes any models illegal. In MTG whenever a new set is released an old one is retired, obsoleting (virtually) every competitive deck which forces player to buy the new set (and as much as they can as fast as they can to get those needed rares) to create a new playable deck... the exact model of pay to win.
It was felt that Forgeworld was doing the same. While GW releases new codexes that reuse the same models, Forgeworld continually outputs new models and new rules to go with them. There's a finite cap on GW stuff, we have players using 2nd edition Space Marines because they are still viable. The same cannot be said for FW stuff which are more of a Flavor of the Month approach to design that promotes larger collections.
chalkobob wrote: You see at my FLG we are mostly adults and use what some may call an honour system, where we discuss the game before hand with players and try to play lists of roughly equal power to ensure a good game for everyone. Or you can just make sweeping, polarizing, arbitrary, unbalanced carpet banning house rules. I'll leave the folks on dakka to decide which is more welcoming.
Whereas at mine we have already experienced players bringing what they felt honorable to the table and it was disliked. The bans are the result of months of discussion on each subject. House rules are present at every major tournament, they're not a new thing, what with how poorly described many of GW's rules are. Have you visited You Da Make Call lately?
It is truly of no concern what Dakka thinks is welcoming to anyone. Dakka also thinks that Storm Bolters need to be S5 AP4 Assault 3 without a cost increase. Opinions vary and yours are unnecessary for us to continue to enjoy ourselves with the rules decided upon by majority decision.
Frankly, it seems to be you're more interested in forcing players to allow the use of Forgeworld when they don't want to play with or against those models. As the decision was reached by our community, one you're not part of currently, it's selfish to demand we play by your rules. But as the saying goes... "Our House, OUR rules".
You're welcome to join the community and deliberate with its subjects on the merits of reinstating Forgeworld. Just remember you'll be but a single vote when it comes down to the decision.
God In Action wrote: I play the DKoK Siege Regiment and have personally never had a problem, if anything people seem keen to have a look at the army or play it as it's out of the ordinary. Still, I consider that there are certain reasons why some people dislike Forgeworld, and take steps in my game to counteract it.
1. Always have physical copies of all rules, preferably including a spare to give to the opponent. People who dislike FW can do so on the basis that they don't know the rules because they're less common.
2. Always explain the most important units or special rules in particular detail before the game.
3. Give a run down of the particular strengths and weaknesses of your army. Players know, for example, to target the Spyder in a Canoptek Formation; introduce a FW army to them and they can get angry for not knowing which units are the linchpins. For example, I always point out how much damage my artillery is capable of doing, how its Toughness works, and how it has a minimum range so that being inside that the minimum range a good plan.
4. Point out the weaknesses of your army so that the opponent doesn't just think it's all good. With DKoK, that means the normal infantry tends to be overpriced in points and offer no bang for the points buck.
The biggest reason that I think players dislike FW is because of the fact you can use FW units either as flavour to add to a Codex army, or as a full army from an IA book. I think using specific FW units is more common, and this is a cause of suspicion because players naturally choose to add only the best and OP units. OP units exist in both FW and GW, but if you play games where only one FW unit is added to a Codex army, it's going to be the powerful unit isn't it? Therefore, players get the impression that FW is all OP, because they're more likely to see OP units in action than a full IA book army including the weak units! Point being: compare adding Thudd Guns to Guard army as opposed to playing a full DKoK army, which has weakness of poor movement, overcosted infantry, poor anti-air, and no psychics.
I think that sums it up best. Its always been my experience that when I see someone bringing FW they are bringing the most OP gak they can come by to further break the game . Your post is amazing so have an exalt
Eh, It depends. I have a barracuda and a unit of remoras. Although both good, they are in no way overpowered.
Likewise, our EXISTING playerbase was feeling alienated and marginalized by Forgeworld and collectively decided to stick with just the GW stuff. The chance that you might not show up versus the guarantee that some would quit the hobby... not that hard a call when you think about it.
Fair enough, you're community can play however it wants, though being marginalized because someone uses forgeworld, is as strange to me as being marginalized by yellow T-shirts. Being marginalized because an entire gaming community are telling you can't use a large portion of you're collection or they won't play just makes more sense to me, but you're community can do what it wants.
Ah but it's not about apples being rotten. Think of it as some people are getting their apples from Pathmark and others are shopping at Whole Foods. To be fair to those unwilling to shop at Whole Foods, you're now only allowed to bring apples from Pathmark. The reverse just doesn't happen as often... (people unwilling to play GW rules who are 100% invested in Forgeworld)
This analogy doesn't make sense. Because some people are unwilling to shop at whole foods NO ONE should be allowed to shop at whole foods?! That is an even more arbitrary analogy than my comparison.
But the games are not being compared, the business models and competitive scenes are. The games themselves can be quite different but the manner in which players react to an OP card is quite similar to the way they react to a Wraithknight.
I understand that. My point is the games are sufficiently different in how they are collected, updated and played, that the business models and competitive scenes between GW and mtg are not congruous at all and can not be compared in a relevant way.
Rarity doesn't really exist in MtG either, competitive players normally buy singles off the secondary market which the store provides as well as trade with other players. Every card in the game is accessible on Ebay, it's just about how much it costs.
Fair point. I'll concede that one.
Yes there is, as mentioned above, every card in the game is accessible to you for the right price. Likewise, there are expensive Forgeworld and Limited Edition models available to players for the right price.
This one I will not concede, the difference in power and price of forgeworld models are far closer to basic GW equivalents, than Black lotuses are to modern OP cards by huge margins.
It was felt that Forgeworld was doing the same. While GW releases new codexes that reuse the same models, Forgeworld continually outputs new models and new rules to go with them. There's a finite cap on GW stuff, we have players using 2nd edition Space Marines because they are still viable. The same cannot be said for FW stuff which are more of a Flavor of the Month approach to design that promotes larger collections.
The rate at which forgeworld introduces new models is no where near as quick as MtG, not even close. Makes it really easy to keep up with. Just enough to give a little more variety, and unless you're FLG is full of TFG's that only ever take most OP stuff, I fail to see how it's pay to win when 95% of the forgeworld models are reasonable or underpowered. That's pay to lose and look cool doing it.
Whereas at mine we have already experienced players bringing what they felt honorable to the table and it was disliked.
If it was honourable, why would it be disliked? if it was something like a revenant titan, why not just explain why it's not cool to use it in small points games?
House rules are present at every major tournament, they're not a new thing, what with how poorly described many of GW's rules are. Have you visited You Da Make Call lately?
True, but take ITC for instance, they don't just blanket ban forgeworld and allies, which punishes many for no reason, they carefully consider each unit and rule, and it's overall impact on balance. It's far more considered and specific (IE not simple and lazy), which is why it is as commonly used as it is.
It is truly of no concern what Dakka thinks is welcoming to anyone. Dakka also thinks that Storm Bolters need to be S5 AP4 Assault 3 without a cost increase. Opinions vary and yours are unnecessary for us to continue to enjoy ourselves with the rules decided upon by majority decision.
It's of no concern to you and that's fine. This is dakka dakka, a public forum, when you post something people read it and form opinions. What members of dakka dakka think is relevant to people on dakka dakka, otherwise why come to this forum at all? If you and you're friends enjoy playing a certain way no one here is stopping you, just don't expect everyone on an internet forum to blindly agree with you're reasoning.
P.S. For the record dakka dakka isn't a hive mind, some people don't think storm bolters should be S5 AP4 Assault 3 (though they definitely do need buffing).
I gotta say, I'm pretty shocked at how strong peoples opinions are on the subject of FW. I thought this would be a quick "one-pager" thread; boy was I wrong.
Arkaine wrote: There is a ban on loads of things, actually.
No Allies
No Lords of War
No Super Heavies
No Gargantuan Creatures
No Fortifications other than Aegis Defense Line
No ForgeWorld rules
No Apocalypse formations
No more than two CAD/detachments/formations/auxiliary
This sounds like an absolutely terrible place to play.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Arkaine wrote: I mean what kind of arbitrary guidelines would be used? Personal gut feeling?
How is that any different from what you're already doing? You're already banning a long list of things based on personal gut feelings, so please stop pretending that your bans have more legitimacy behind them than me saying "no tactical squads allowed".
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Arkaine wrote: While GW releases new codexes that reuse the same models, Forgeworld continually outputs new models and new rules to go with them.
...
Have you seen the latest GW releases? Tau just got a new LoW, a new stealth suit MC, a new troops unit, a new FMC suit, and a new fortification. The new codex will probably contain blatantly overpowered formations that require most players to buy more copies of current-codex models to complete their formations and unlock the overpowered bonuses. And this is happening after the current codex introduced the blatantly overpowered Riptide (which every Tau player had to buy), nerfed railgun Broadsides and tanks (which every Tau player already had) to the point where you can't use them anymore, and replaced them with missile Broadsides that require you to buy a new model. It was pretty fortunate that the codex flyers sucked so Tau players could keep using their FW Barracudas...
Oh wait, you banned the Barracuda so Tau players were forced to buy the new codex flyers if they wanted to have a flyer in their army. So much for your idea of protecting everyone's wallets.
chalkobob wrote: This analogy doesn't make sense. Because some people are unwilling to shop at whole foods NO ONE should be allowed to shop at whole foods?! That is an even more arbitrary analogy than my comparison.
I disagree, it accurately describes our stance. No one may shop at Whole Foods, or if they do, please leave the apples you purchased there at home. I must stress this is how the majority of our players wish it to be done, else they would have elected to retain Forgeworld in the legal pool of resources. It's truly no different from playing something like Dominion and forbidding the use of the Prosperity expansion by popular vote. We're merely removing a certain pool of resources from the table wholesale rather than going through the expansion and picking which cards will never be used. You may argue that it's more prudent to use the latter method, but it also comes with more prejudice and management of ban lists and checking to see if someone's model is on the list any time it comes into question. Wide bans are easier to manage for the community than specific bans.
chalkobob wrote: This one I will not concede, the difference in power and price of forgeworld models are far closer to basic GW equivalents, than Black lotuses are to modern OP cards by huge margins.
I humbly disagree. A Black Lotus on its own is useless. It's what you can do in tandem with it that makes it desirable. Just as while individually a Forgeworld model may appear balanced or even useless, the tactics that can be pulled off with them warranted their removal to keep the playing field level.
chalkobob wrote: If it was honourable, why would it be disliked? if it was something like a revenant titan, why not just explain why it's not cool to use it in small points games?
For the same reason that what was originally an explanation on my group's decision to disallow Forgeworld has bloomed into a multi-page discussion. People get quite defensive when they feel like their models are being restricted, especially if it's at a specific level ("You shouldn't be bringing THAT to a game!"). Blanket bans like "No Forgeworld" or "No LoWs" are easier to swallow and don't leave anyone feeling singled out. Heck, we even ban unique characters at low point values, but as long as everyone's are banned it remains "fair". I use quotations because Tyranids love when we do that.
chalkobob wrote: True, but take ITC for instance, they don't just blanket ban forgeworld and allies, which punishes many for no reason, they carefully consider each unit and rule, and it's overall impact on balance. It's far more considered and specific (IE not simple and lazy), which is why it is as commonly used as it is.
That would require the community putting a great deal of faith in one person or a group of people or even the community's understanding of each model if we put it to a vote. It's okay when you're running the tournament and want to establish rules for it. It's not okay if you're democratically deciding house rules and aren't keen on establishing a special committee for the review and oversight of Forgeworld model allowance.
This sounds like an absolutely terrible place to play.
Considering you've been adamantly campaigning for Forgeworld usage for over two years, it doesn't surprise me that you feel that way. Nevertheless, you are welcome to join the community and persuade it to reinstate Forgeworld. Your single vote and points of view may convince others. But until then, realize we are running democratically and these decisions were made after months of deliberation and voting.
Arkaine wrote: I humbly disagree. A Black Lotus on its own is useless. It's what you can do in tandem with it that makes it desirable.
You can humbly disagree, but you're just plain wrong. A black lotus is so ridiculously overpowered that it makes GW's balance problems look trivial. It's a card from the old days when WOTC didn't really understand the fine points of balancing their game yet, and was willing to make overpowered cards because they thought nobody would spend more than $20 on the game and the internet didn't exist yet to turn "this is a rare and legendary card you may never even see" into "this card is common and you can buy it with one click, if you have enough cash". No equivalent to that exists in 40k.
Blanket bans like "No Forgeworld" or "No LoWs" are easier to swallow and don't leave anyone feeling singled out.
I see, so I'm not going to feel singled out if I show up at your store and I'm told that I need to spend hundreds or even thousands of dollars to buy a new army if I want to play there?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Arkaine wrote: Considering you've been adamantly campaigning for Forgeworld usage for over two years, it doesn't surprise me that you feel that way.
I'm not just talking about your FW ban. All of those rules are terrible.
Nevertheless, you are welcome to join the community and persuade it to reinstate Forgeworld. Your single vote and points of view may convince others. But until then, realize we are running democratically and these decisions were made after months of deliberation and voting.
Why would I want to join your community? From the outside it looks like a thoroughly unpleasant group of people to play with, and I have no more interest in fighting people just to be allowed to play with my army. I'll just take my money elsewhere if a group insists on terrible rules like yours, and warn new players to avoid you.
HoundsofDemos wrote: I recently played a game with my space marine army accompanied by solomon lok. He was the only forge world unit in my army, i had his stats with me and he doesn't exactly do anything that is out there. one opponent was totally on board and we had a great game.
my second guy of the night started off being a bit weird about it, making comments that forgeworld is outside the game. When i produced the pages that word for word say that most forge world units are meant for standard games he stopped for a while. Latter when he had some bad shooting due to Lok's warlord trait giving my marines fnp while they sat on the deciding objective, he had a mini freakout claiming that Lok's warlord trait is grossly over powered. the game was not fun from there on.
Has anyone else had people react negatively to a forge world unit, even ones that don't seem particularly cheesy (unless someone wants to argue that Lok is OP)
You might have played that wrong, actually. The rules for his warlord trait say Lok and his retinue get FNP, not Lok and any unit he has joined. So it should only work for Lok and any Inquisitorial Retinue purchased for him.
Even then, how is that any more powerful than some tooled up command squad or equivalent with an apothecary in it?
Peregrine wrote: Have you seen the latest GW releases? Tau just got a new LoW, a new stealth suit MC, a new troops unit, a new FMC suit, and a new fortification. The new codex will probably contain blatantly overpowered formations that require most players to buy more copies of current-codex models to complete their formations and unlock the overpowered bonuses. And this is happening after the current codex introduced the blatantly overpowered Riptide (which every Tau player had to buy), nerfed railgun Broadsides and tanks (which every Tau player already had) to the point where you can't use them anymore, and replaced them with missile Broadsides that require you to buy a new model. It was pretty fortunate that the codex flyers sucked so Tau players could keep using their FW Barracudas... Oh wait, you banned the Barracuda so Tau players were forced to buy the new codex flyers if they wanted to have a flyer in their army. So much for your idea of protecting everyone's wallets.
It's not like the group is sold on all the new models that are being added to the main codices these past few years, but as mentioned we don't pick and choose. The entire Tau codex is allowed which means even these new monstrous eyesores are permitted as well. Until decided upon differently. The great thing about being in a community is that decisions can be made or overturned whenever the group decides it and that everyone has the right to speak their mind or put in a vote. Heck, we might see a request to completely BAN TAU ALTOGETHER come along and if the group wills it, it would pass and Tau would be banned too. You as an individual do not have the right to say people must allow your models simply because they exist. The community on the other hand does have the right to police itself and collectively vote upon what models they wish to allow or disallow.
Peregrine wrote: I see, so I'm not going to feel singled out if I show up at your store and I'm told that I need to spend hundreds or even thousands of dollars to buy a new army if I want to play there?
Why would I want to join your community? From the outside it looks like you're a bunch of TFGs, and I have no more interest in fighting people just to be allowed to play with my army. I'll just take my money elsewhere if a group insists on terrible rules like yours, and warn new players to avoid you.
In short, you only play Dkok and refuse to play a standard GW army. Then yes, you're a TFG and need not apply. You might as well complain when the supermarket has a "No Outside Food or Drink" sign that they are oppressing your right to eat McDonalds inside their store.
Gotta love how a lack of options is somehow a good thing. Especially when CSM are brought up. As one of the weakest codexes, I tend to bring forgeworld models to cover weaknesses and, more importantly, get things I find fun. So in this case if I came to your group, played along and used GW only, got smashed by whatever lost my oponent played and was told it was fair, and decided to leave...that would be a fair system for new players to be excited to join? I'm veeeery glad to know that isn't my group, because I might not have gotten back into the game if that was my only option
Because 40k is about Supporting Your Local GW Store, not playing a game. If you aren't buying all of your stuff in the store then you're the worst kind of TFG, even if you make up for not buying 40k stuff by buying all of your MTG/X-Wing/whatever stuff there.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Arkaine wrote: It's not like the group is sold on all the new models that are being added to the main codices these past few years, but as mentioned we don't pick and choose.
Of course you pick and choose. You just throw a flimsy pretense of "fairness" on your picking and choosing. If you're banning LoW/fortifications/etc out of a codex then you aren't allowing that codex, you're just allowing the units you personally want to allow from that codex.
..because he wants to play an army the group voted to ban. Sure, that's not exactly TFG behavior, but if the majority of the club voted to exclude Eldar, then guess what? Don't play there. Don't stand outside the doors clamoring about the unfair treatment when it was a democratic vote.
Peregrine wrote: Have you seen the latest GW releases? Tau just got a new LoW, a new stealth suit MC, a new troops unit, a new FMC suit, and a new fortification. The new codex will probably contain blatantly overpowered formations that require most players to buy more copies of current-codex models to complete their formations and unlock the overpowered bonuses. And this is happening after the current codex introduced the blatantly overpowered Riptide (which every Tau player had to buy), nerfed railgun Broadsides and tanks (which every Tau player already had) to the point where you can't use them anymore, and replaced them with missile Broadsides that require you to buy a new model. It was pretty fortunate that the codex flyers sucked so Tau players could keep using their FW Barracudas... Oh wait, you banned the Barracuda so Tau players were forced to buy the new codex flyers if they wanted to have a flyer in their army. So much for your idea of protecting everyone's wallets.
It's not like the group is sold on all the new models that are being added to the main codices these past few years, but as mentioned we don't pick and choose. The entire Tau codex is allowed which means even these new monstrous eyesores are permitted as well. Until decided upon differently. The great thing about being in a community is that decisions can be made or overturned whenever the group decides it and that everyone has the right to speak their mind or put in a vote. Heck, we might see a request to completely BAN TAU ALTOGETHER come along and if the group wills it, it would pass and Tau would be banned too. You as an individual do not have the right to say people must allow your models simply because they exist. The community on the other hand does have the right to police itself and collectively vote upon what models they wish to allow or disallow.
Peregrine wrote: I see, so I'm not going to feel singled out if I show up at your store and I'm told that I need to spend hundreds or even thousands of dollars to buy a new army if I want to play there?
Why would I want to join your community? From the outside it looks like you're a bunch of TFGs, and I have no more interest in fighting people just to be allowed to play with my army. I'll just take my money elsewhere if a group insists on terrible rules like yours, and warn new players to avoid you.
In short, you only play Dkok and refuse to play a standard GW army. Then yes, you're a TFG and need not apply. You might as well complain when the supermarket has a "No Outside Food or Drink" sign that they are oppressing your right to eat McDonalds inside their store.
Arkaine, I gotta say, you're getting a lot of gak for your rules. I for one would love to play at your place, not because of everything you banned, but because I like the idea of a democratic voting on what power levels should be allowed in play. Props to you.
Arkaine wrote: It's not like the group is sold on all the new models that are being added to the main codices these past few years, but as mentioned we don't pick and choose.
Of course you pick and choose. You just throw a flimsy pretense of "fairness" on your picking and choosing. If you're banning LoW/fortifications/etc out of a codex then you aren't allowing that codex, you're just allowing the units you personally want to allow from that codex.
That's a lot of singling him out when he said it's a community decided ban. But hey, words are hard.
I disagree, it accurately describes our stance. No one may shop at Whole Foods, or if they do, please leave the apples you purchased there at home. I must stress this is how the majority of our players wish it to be done, else they would have elected to retain Forgeworld in the legal pool of resources. It's truly no different from playing something like Dominion and forbidding the use of the Prosperity expansion by popular vote. We're merely removing a certain pool of resources from the table wholesale rather than going through the expansion and picking which cards will never be used. You may argue that it's more prudent to use the latter method, but it also comes with more prejudice and management of ban lists and checking to see if someone's model is on the list any time it comes into question. Wide bans are easier to manage for the community than specific bans.
Your missing the point. I get that's how you've done it, I don't agree with the why of it. Or a the very least I find your explanation limited enough to not understand it.
I humbly disagree. A Black Lotus on its own is useless. It's what you can do in tandem with it that makes it desirable. Just as while individually a Forgeworld model may appear balanced or even useless, the tactics that can be pulled off with them warranted their removal to keep the playing field level.
You are being pedantic, I know that the black lotus has to be combined. It only generates mana after all. It allows for 1st turn kill combinations. Theres is nothing in 40k, be it forgeworld or regular 40k, that comes anywhere in the same league of broken as that, nor is there any model as difficult to obtain. The comparison was absurd in my humble opinion.
For the same reason that what was originally an explanation on my group's decision to disallow Forgeworld has bloomed into a multi-page discussion. People get quite defensive when they feel like their models are being restricted, especially if it's at a specific level ("You shouldn't be bringing THAT to a game!"). Blanket bans like "No Forgeworld" or "No LoWs" are easier to swallow and don't leave anyone feeling singled out.
If you are having problem with one or several specific people playing abusively you should single them out (In a mature and non-vitriolic way). Limiting a majority for the transgressions of a minority because you feel you can't discuss the problem with the individuals at fault is cowardly and unfair. Of course if indeed every single person is happy with the way the community has voted then great. Keep it up.
That would require the community putting a great deal of faith in one person or a group of people or even the community's understanding of each model if we put it to a vote.
Since you've voted out allies, LoW, forgeworld and most fortifications doesn't that mean the community is already putting a great deal of faith in the community's understanding of the game and the models in it? Or are you saying you made these in votes in ignorance and don't wish to put the time and effort to become more informed? I'm not trying to be patronizing here, I'm honestly curious. I assumed since your club has a voting committee and people abide by it's ruling that faith was already there no? In any case if your club is having fun great! I just think your voted bans makes it less inclusive, and not more.
Peregrine wrote: Of course you pick and choose. You just throw a flimsy pretense of "fairness" on your picking and choosing. If you're banning LoW/fortifications/etc out of a codex then you aren't allowing that codex, you're just allowing the units you personally want to allow from that codex.
In what way is the election of options a pretense of fairness? You keep saying what I personally want... LOL! Clearly you've been glazing over the fact that these issues are discussed and voted upon by every member of the community. I personally have Plasma Obliterators, CSMFW models, a codex that desperately needs the help, and a Lord of Skulls sitting on the desk. Please don't tell me what I want, it makes you seem like a troll.
Read the sentence again -- "refuse to play a standard GW army". Like the guy who insists on playing his 3.5 edition CSM codex instead of the latest version. Also, Peregrine is a verifiable TFG just from reading this thread...
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/530411.page#top ...and from his insistence that players succumb to allowing his FW army when the majority of the players have indicated they'd prefer not to. We do not abide tyrants unless they are of the Hive variety.
Probably because he invested in said army and doesn't want to spend more money? Heck the only reason I have a 1k Stormtrooper army alongside my DKoK army is because I randomly bought Stormtroopers models to paint and I realised that I suddendly had a 1k army.
Your missing the point. I get that's how you've done it, I don't agree with the why of it. Or a the very least I find your explanation limited enough to not understand it.
Then forgive me but I can think of no better way to explain it that hasn't already been stated earlier in the thread. Perhaps it's simply not meant to be agreed upon. It is after all the result of a majority vote of peers. Some will agree, some will disagree, but all will play by the same rules.
chalkobob wrote: You are being pedantic, I know that the black lotus has to be combined. It only generates mana after all. It allows for 1st turn kill combinations. Theres is nothing in 40k, be it forgeworld or regular 40k, that comes anywhere in the same league of broken as that, nor is there any model as difficult to obtain. The comparison was absurd in my humble opinion.
I'm sorry you feel that way. I'm also sorry you're having trouble locating a Black Lotus for purchase. There are four pages of them available on Ebay currently. If we're looking at the Black Lotus as a tool that leads to a 1st turn kill, perhaps you can review the humble Drop Pod and its ability to achieve the same for Space Marines. Sure, drop pods aren't as expensive, but that's because they're still being printed/created while the Lotus is out of print. There are plenty of stupidly overpowered cards in Magic printed in NEW sets that become staples for use but they won't achieve the price ranges of the Power Nine because they are still easily available. If GW ever decided to stop making Drop Pods, watch the price skyrocket.
chalkobob wrote: Since you've voted out allies, LoW, forgeworld and most fortifications doesn't that mean the community is already putting a great deal of faith in the community's understanding of the game and the models in it?
I cannot claim to understand the reasons for everyone who voted or their understanding of the game and its models, but voting to ban Lords of War or Forgeworld only requires knowing a subset of the available options. Banning units on an individual basis requires understanding the full breadth of the game and that is certainly not that same level of understanding required.
Then forgive me but I can think of no better way to explain it that hasn't already been stated earlier in the thread. Perhaps it's simply not meant to be agreed upon. It is after all the result of a majority vote of peers. Some will agree, some will disagree, but all will play by the same rules.
Nothing to forgive, we'll agree to disagree.
I'm sorry you feel that way. I'm also sorry you're having trouble locating a Black Lotus for purchase. There are four pages of them available on Ebay currently. If we're looking at the Black Lotus as a tool that leads to a 1st turn kill, perhaps you can review the humble Drop Pod and its ability to achieve the same for Space Marines.
Now you're putting words in my mouth. I never said that a black lotus was impossible to find, but it is a very rare and very expensive card, and nothing that forge world produces or has ever produced combines that level of power with that level of exclusiveness. You've seriously been tabled 1st turn by a drop pod army?! Or ever heard of someone being completely tabled by drop pods on the very first turn?! Seriously?!
I cannot claim to understand the reasons for everyone who voted or their understanding of the game and its models, but voting to ban Lords of War or Forgeworld only requires knowing a subset of the available options. Banning units on an individual basis requires understanding the full breadth of the game and that is certainly not that same level of understanding required.
In short, you only play Dkok and refuse to play a standard GW army. Then yes, you're a TFG and need not apply. You might as well complain when the supermarket has a "No Outside Food or Drink" sign that they are oppressing your right to eat McDonalds inside their store.
Sorry, but this is simply a daft statement, full stop.
'
First off, in GW's own words, there is no such thing as a "standard army". Second, a DKoK army is GW army, with rules written by GW employees working at GWHQ, in books published by GW with GW copyrights.Finally, the idea that just playing a DKoK army (as opposed to another army) makes someone a TFG is probably the most TFG statement I've ever seen, there's no rational thought in that, it's an army like any other, it's just sold through Sales Channel X instead of Sales Channel Y, and has nothing to do with a person being a TFG. Just because they liked the DKoK models and wants to run an actual DKoK army, as opposed to a standard IG codex army, has zero bearing on them being a "TFG".
chalkobob wrote: Now you're putting words in my mouth. I never said that a black lotus was impossible to find, but it is a very rare and very expensive card, and nothing that forge world produces or has ever produced combines that level of power with that level of exclusiveness. You've seriously been tabled 1st turn by a drop pod army?! Or ever heard of someone being completely tabled by drop pods on the very first turn?! Seriously?!
Well now, I do believe there's a bit of an uproar going on regarding the Plasma Obliterator and its Limited Edition status. It sold out in the blink of an eye and is even now a desirable item with a strong weapon for any faction. Sure, it'll never reach the cost of a Black Lotus... but then 40k will never reach the popularity of Magic... Having millions of players fighting over a shrinking supply tends to jack up the price. In my high school days, it was only a $400 card and could easily compete with Forgeworld.
Haha, not me no, I play CSM and can't be tabled by Space Marines. Our Ultramarines player has tabled the Daemonkin, Dark Eldar, and Tau players though on turn 1 with a Skyhammer Annihilation formation in addition to his CAD.
Funny as I see the statements arguing that Forgeworld must be accepted everywhere regardless of what democratic decision decrees to be arguably more absurd.
Incredible! My Tau have been hammered pretty hard by skyhammer, but have never come close to being tabled 1st, or even 2nd turn. I will say this, you have a very strange and selective voting panel when you have a meta where taking a skyhammer army against something as underpowered as a DE army is acceptable, but that same DE player would be barred from taking a tantalus in his list.
In short, you only play Dkok and refuse to play a standard GW army. Then yes, you're a TFG and need not apply. You might as well complain when the supermarket has a "No Outside Food or Drink" sign that they are oppressing your right to eat McDonalds inside their store.
Sorry, but this is simply a daft statement, full stop.
'
First off, in GW's own words, there is no such thing as a "standard army". Second, a DKoK army is GW army, with rules written by GW employees working at GWHQ, in books published by GW with GW copyrights.Finally, the idea that just playing a DKoK army (as opposed to another army) makes someone a TFG is probably the most TFG statement I've ever seen, there's no rational thought in that, it's an army like any other, it's just sold through Sales Channel X instead of Sales Channel Y, and has nothing to do with a person being a TFG. Just because they liked the DKoK models and wants to run an actual DKoK army, as opposed to a standard IG codex army, has zero bearing on them being a "TFG".
Sorry, but that entire statement is absurd.
Exalted. Thats about the dumbest thing he could say, I am not a fan of FW but I would never flat out tell people GTFO, I would simply ask to be given a chance to modify my list if its an OP unit or if it was just DKOK I would say lets go!.
And before someone mentions, its extremely hard to switch to an IG army and have the same amount of points as DKoK army if you went with DKoK exclusive units.
Peregrine wrote: Have you seen the latest GW releases? Tau just got a new LoW, a new stealth suit MC, a new troops unit, a new FMC suit, and a new fortification. The new codex will probably contain blatantly overpowered formations that require most players to buy more copies of current-codex models to complete their formations and unlock the overpowered bonuses. And this is happening after the current codex introduced the blatantly overpowered Riptide (which every Tau player had to buy), nerfed railgun Broadsides and tanks (which every Tau player already had) to the point where you can't use them anymore, and replaced them with missile Broadsides that require you to buy a new model. It was pretty fortunate that the codex flyers sucked so Tau players could keep using their FW Barracudas... Oh wait, you banned the Barracuda so Tau players were forced to buy the new codex flyers if they wanted to have a flyer in their army. So much for your idea of protecting everyone's wallets.
It's not like the group is sold on all the new models that are being added to the main codices these past few years, but as mentioned we don't pick and choose. The entire Tau codex is allowed which means even these new monstrous eyesores are permitted as well. Until decided upon differently. The great thing about being in a community is that decisions can be made or overturned whenever the group decides it and that everyone has the right to speak their mind or put in a vote. Heck, we might see a request to completely BAN TAU ALTOGETHER come along and if the group wills it, it would pass and Tau would be banned too. You as an individual do not have the right to say people must allow your models simply because they exist. The community on the other hand does have the right to police itself and collectively vote upon what models they wish to allow or disallow.
Your community sounds like a bunch of wacko CAAC players. Your discrimination against collectors who like FW or whatever codices you deem "too strong" is wrong. Games should be decided on an individual basis between two people unless your at an organized event.
Peregrine wrote: I see, so I'm not going to feel singled out if I show up at your store and I'm told that I need to spend hundreds or even thousands of dollars to buy a new army if I want to play there?
Why would I want to join your community? From the outside it looks like you're a bunch of TFGs, and I have no more interest in fighting people just to be allowed to play with my army. I'll just take my money elsewhere if a group insists on terrible rules like yours, and warn new players to avoid you.
In short, you only play Dkok and refuse to play a standard GW army. Then yes, you're a TFG and need not apply. You might as well complain when the supermarket has a "No Outside Food or Drink" sign that they are oppressing your right to eat McDonalds inside their store. This is a ridiculous assumption. Wanting to play DKoK (which btw is one of the coolest ideas for an IG army ever) does NOT make you TFG any more than wanting to play space marines or necrons or sisters of battle etc.
chalkobob wrote: Incredible! My Tau have been hammered pretty hard by skyhammer, but have never come close to being tabled 1st, or even 2nd turn. I will say this, you have a very strange and selective voting panel when you have a meta where taking a skyhammer army against something as underpowered as a DE army is acceptable, but that same DE player would be barred from taking a tantalus in his list.
There isn't a panel actually. Everyone is given a vote, the process usually takes a few weeks. Formations are new and interesting enough that there have been benefits and pitfalls seen both ways with them. They were banned for a few events while people grew accustomed to their rules but are now seen as a positive addition to the rules. Especially by that Ultramarines player who owns all of three tanks and relies almost entirely on his infantry. The subject has come up to permanently ban them twice now but both times it was outvoted.
As I mentioned several times, a lot of our members are new to 40k and fine the idea of formations fascinating because they don't have to buy a huge balanced army of robots and tanks. They can pretty much only buy what they want. One of the Dark Angels players owns nothing but bikes and speeders and plays Ravenwing exclusively. If you're in a meta where Forgeworld acceptance is the norm, you're likely surrounded by long-term players. We only have a few of those, I'm one of them myself, and so we are hand tied to keep it interesting for the newbies. Despite how awful the CSM codex is without Forgeworld, I am still considered one of the best players at the site. The lists we see tend to be very friendly and modest with almost no deathstars or janky combos. I personally own two Heldrakes yet I almost never bring them to the table, even against Space Marines. I actually field Thousand Sons as often as possible... we're not interested in crushing people with Lords of War, we're interested in community, fun, and friendship.
You may now proceed to puke rainbows and insinuate the presence of bronies.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
jreilly89 wrote: ITT: Man, feth that guy for what his club voted on!
Pretty much, but some people only value their own opinion and crap on a group that does things differently. Exalted!
Exalted. Thats about the dumbest thing he could say, I am not a fan of FW but I would never flat out tell people GTFO, I would simply ask to be given a chance to modify my list if its an OP unit or if it was just DKOK I would say lets go!.
What makes him a TFG is his refusal to conform to the rules of the venue and an insistence on his God-given RIGHT to bring his FW army. Not the fact that he buys models from Forgeworld. Sheesh...
chalkobob wrote: Incredible! My Tau have been hammered pretty hard by skyhammer, but have never come close to being tabled 1st, or even 2nd turn. I will say this, you have a very strange and selective voting panel when you have a meta where taking a skyhammer army against something as underpowered as a DE army is acceptable, but that same DE player would be barred from taking a tantalus in his list.
There isn't a panel actually. Everyone is given a vote, the process usually takes a few weeks. Formations are new and interesting enough that there have been benefits and pitfalls seen both ways with them. They were banned for a few events while people grew accustomed to their rules but are now seen as a positive addition to the rules. Especially by that Ultramarines player who owns all of three tanks and relies almost entirely on his infantry. The subject has come up to permanently ban them twice now but both times it was outvoted.
As I mentioned several times, a lot of our members are new to 40k and fine the idea of formations fascinating because they don't have to buy a huge balanced army of robots and tanks. They can pretty much only buy what they want. One of the Dark Angels players owns nothing but bikes and speeders and plays Ravenwing exclusively. If you're in a meta where Forgeworld acceptance is the norm, you're likely surrounded by long-term players. We only have a few of those, I'm one of them myself, and so we are hand tied to keep it interesting for the newbies. Despite how awful the CSM codex is without Forgeworld, I am still considered one of the best players at the site. The lists we see tend to be very friendly and modest with almost no deathstars or janky combos. I personally own two Heldrakes yet I almost never bring them to the table, even against Space Marines. I actually field Thousand Sons as often as possible... we're not interested in crushing people with Lords of War, we're interested in community, fun, and friendship.
You may now proceed to puke rainbows and insinuate the presence of bronies.
I'm sure if there were any at your club you'd tell them they had to leave too. Popular vote and all. Automatically Appended Next Post:
jreilly89 wrote: ITT: Man, feth that guy for what his club voted on!
Pretty much, but some people only value their own opinion and crap on a group that does things differently. Exalted!
No its the fact that you apparently support this stupid decision wholeheartedly.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Exalted. Thats about the dumbest thing he could say, I am not a fan of FW but I would never flat out tell people GTFO, I would simply ask to be given a chance to modify my list if its an OP unit or if it was just DKOK I would say lets go!.
What makes him a TFG is his refusal to conform to the rules of the venue and an insistence on his God-given RIGHT to bring his FW army. Not the fact that he buys models from Forgeworld. Sheesh...
No that doesn't make him a TFG. That makes him a player who actually wants to play with his toy soldiers he spent thousands of dollars on, and then understandably being upset when he's told to feth off and play with something else.
Arkaine wrote: If you're in a meta where Forgeworld acceptance is the norm, you're likely surrounded by long-term players.
We have a pretty good mixture of both, us older gents, generally play rather weak lists. We are usually fairly casual. Sometimes we may play test the newest OP unit/combo/formation just to see it, but this is always arranged well in advanced and against a tournament competitive list, but this is unusual. In my experience, the newer players seem fascinated by a lot of the forgeworld units, and we are more than happy to take time and show them the rules of everything. Different strokes for different FLG's I guess.
Arkaine wrote: If you're in a meta where Forgeworld acceptance is the norm, you're likely surrounded by long-term players.
We have a pretty good mixture of both, us older gents, generally play rather weak lists. We are usually fairly casual. Sometimes we may play test the newest OP unit/combo/formation just to see it, but this is always arranged well in advanced and against a tournament competitive list, but this is unusual. In my experience, the newer players seem fascinated by a lot of the forgeworld units, and we are more than happy to take time and show them the rules of everything. Different strokes for different FLG's I guess.
I'm glad your FLG is a fan of your meta. Ours will likely reinstate Forgeworld at some point in the future when the newbies are caught up in model count and variety, itching for more and looking towards the Forbidden Zone for it. Democracy being what it is... it'll happen. Eventually.
It's been a pleasure discussing this with you! I'm glad to know there's other veterans playing weak lists for the benefit of the casual players. The concept seems almost foreign judging by some of the responses I've seen.
Arkaine wrote: In what way is the election of options a pretense of fairness?
Because you're trying to pretend that your bans are somehow different from banning tactical squads or Eldar because you said "all FW is banned". You're just picking and choosing like anyone else who bans random stuff.
Read the sentence again -- "refuse to play a standard GW army".
I play a standard GW army. I just don't play an army that complies with your personal house-ruled version of 40k.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Arkaine wrote: The concept seems almost foreign judging by some of the responses I've seen.
Maybe this wouldn't be the case if you'd pay attention to what people are saying. Most people who want to use FW armies aren't bringing some horrible newbie-crushing abomination. For example, my FW-heavy army is weaker than most competitive codex-only armies, and I'd win a lot more games if I stopped playing with the models I love and just bought the latest codex army.
Peregrine wrote: Because you're trying to pretend that your bans are somehow different from banning tactical squads or Eldar because you said "all FW is banned". You're just picking and choosing like anyone else who bans random stuff.
Actually, if you were to read my posts (hah... like you would...), you'll see I state that even Tau (or similarly Eldar) is bannable... it all depends on what the community votes for. Saying all FW is banned is different from banning tactical squads because we're not willing to go through all of Forgeworld and ban individual units for the reasons I described to chalkobob.
Peregrine wrote: Maybe this wouldn't be the case if you'd pay attention to what people are saying. Most people who want to use FW armies aren't bringing some horrible newbie-crushing abomination. For example, my FW-heavy army is weaker than most competitive codex-only armies, and I'd win a lot more games if I stopped playing with the models I love and just bought the latest codex army.
And maybe if you were paying to attention to what is being said you'd understand that we're already aware of that. The ability to bring cheese is not what's banned, but the ability to bring models and resources outside what is considered by popular vote to be acceptable in the pool of resources. It's understandable when you realize we're sporting a large number of new players who don't want others to bring models from a source they are unfamiliar with or cannot afford as they haven't even completed their basic core collections yet (read about the Ultramarine guy who only owns three vehicles). Whether you enjoy your army or not, by popular decision FW is not permitted at the local events. If you can't respect that and insist on being right or doing what you want when it's against the wishes of the rest of the community, then you're being an overbearing despot.
Funny as I see the statements arguing that Forgeworld must be accepted everywhere regardless of what democratic decision decrees to be arguably more absurd.
That's a nice strawman, but not really addressing my point. People are attacking the logic of your reasoning and statements. If you're going to claim someone is a TFG just because of the army they play, most people aren't going to buy that, and is, in itself, rather classic TFG behavior.
Your group is free to do what it likes, nobody here can force you to do anything, but if you're going to have a discussion on a board like this, and if you're going to advocate for your group's policies, then people are going point out holes in your reasoning for such (and such are a big purpose of boards like this) and call out absurdities in statements like "if you play a DKoK army then you're a TFG".
At this stage, after all the overpowered formations that have showed up in several codices, and the holy triad of Necrons - Eldar - Space Marines standing so so much above than most other codices, refusing to play against FW units or army lists can only be argumented by plain old ignorance. Something everyone can be guilty of at some point in their lives, as much as people should feel self-pressured to cure that ignorance. Nothing from FW is going to be any more overpowered or game-breaking than the current (and freshly new) Eldar codex. Nothing. In fact, many many FW things still have rules and points costs that were written for 5th edition, and have only been slightly adjusted lately.
Yeah, I mean seriously, why on earth would you ban DKoK? You should thank your opponent for selecting a rather weak army but one that is aesthetically beautiful.
They are like CSM. They have a few strong things, but overall your average DKoK army is going to be eaten whole by Eldar or Necrons.
In fact, I'd place DKoK and CSM about on par with one another. DKoK come out ahead because they are a shooting army and shooting is better, but they pay points for things like WS4 on guardsmen (why would you want that?).
Also, nobody cares if you're one of the better players at your LGS. I'm probably the best one at mine now, and I can tell you CSM's are literally junk without Forge World.
That isn't even an issue of FW being overpowered. It's the matter of the basic Codex options being junk. Take the standard Land Raider patterns for example. They're easy to blow up for the price and are lacking in firepower to boot. So why not take the Spartan Assault Tank with Ceramite instead so that my assault troops actually make it to combat for once?
It's not an excuse saying FW is overpowered or not everyone knows the rules or that everyone is required to buy from there. I play Space Marines and buy my models from there merely for aesthetic purposes along with the occasional rules (Spartan for example).
Also people used to sacrifice virgins to volcanoes on a democratic vote. We have to acknowledge what the group does. We don't have to respect it. They're one of the problems with 40k if anything.
Bobthehero wrote: 'cuz then you can fling in SM player that your puny guardsman, is in fact, as good as that marine in CC.
And then he gets promptly squished because he's not as fast, whomp whomp.
But seriously, from a gameplay POV, how often has that WS4 been useful?
Generally, if your guardsmen are in CC, something has gone wrong and you want them to die ASAP so that your other guys can shoot whatever charged them.
The WS4 is useful when you get to use the Krak grenades in CC (which DKoK guardsmen come with, so its not even a matter of thinking wether or not you want them), because at this point instead of flatout die in CC vs MC and Vehicles, you'll be able to attack with a few grenades, and possibly inflict damage before dieing.
-Forge World is part of 40k.-
Simple as that. The 7E core set not only shows off FW models in pictures throughout the books, but has rules for them as part of the basic rule set. (Rules for Gargantuan creatures, with all those GW plastic sets for them...)
-Cost of Entry?-
Between the player who had a full FW army or the guy with the second hand marines with their styrofoam cup drop pods. Its a game. Enjoy it how ever you can and want to. Don't discriminate against those who have more or less money.
-Balance-
40k is not a perfectly balanced game even at its core. Fair enough.
-Don't know the rules / availability-
In the age of the internet. The information is out there. Plus, I highly doubt any gamer out there has all current codexes memorized or readily available. So, ask to see rules, learn from each other. Playing against the unknown is a great learning experience. You don't always have to win, and some times the struggles can be more fun.
-Buts its different and scares me!-
GW likes selling new kits and books. Things will change and be updated. If you want a perfectly static rule set look elsewhere.
I played a tournament two weeks back. ITC rule set. I had 3 knights, one of them a FW knight. Many were quick to call me TFG. I didn't even place in the top 10 out of 22 players. Played a game using a Warhound vs Dark Angels a week ago. I lost by turn 5 with no chance of victory. FW is not a scary instant win button by any stretch of the imagination.
With 7th, double FOC became moot and we dropped it. Last week I talked with my group and everyone relaxed towards void shields. D-weapons and Super-heavies are still disputed, but we're mostly waiting for every codex to have both inside. As we have a Dark Eldar player, looks like both will take a while to show up in our games.
There's a city 3h from here, where we go play with veteran players once a year. Those guys value models and cool stuff on the table way more than simple plain rules, so they allow everything. Only then one of our players use the IK we have around, and my future Ta'unar
I personally play Renegades & Heretics, and have done so since I got back into 40k in 6th edition, when IG and CSM were Allies of Convenience. When 7th edition hit and they became CtA, it suddenly became a lot more difficult to play those two armies together, due to the 12" deployment distance.
Luckily, ForgeWorld released two great books for me: IA:13 and Siege of Vraks (2nd edition). Through these two books I've stayed active in the hobby, because to be fair, the standard CSM book is so crap that I don't enjoy playing it at all. If I play CSM now I'll take Sorcerors, Cultists, Heldrakes and Spawn, the rest will be IA:13 units.
My local tournament organizers had a vote a little while back, where banning ForgeWorld was brought up. Luckily it didn't pass, because I would simply stop attending those tournaments and would get into another game. Could I have played my army without ForgeWorld units? Sure, but I wouldn't enjoy it so I'd be out.
Renegades are able to build some rather "cheesy" lists, this is because some things are admittedly undercosted (plague zombie mobs and Rapier Laser Destroyers), but imo their strenght comes from being a meta-breaker. Single-shot D-weapons? Not scared. Grav? I laugh it off. Is it more powerful than what you find in standard GW codexes? No, Renegades aren't near Decurion Necrons, Eldar, Battle Companies etc. I understand that some people are skeptical of suddenly facing "new" units they've never encountered before, but c'mon... This is 7th edition, you get new formations every week. ForgeWorld's release schedule is very slow in comparison and mostly everything you need to know is easy to read up on online, through review blogs and whatnot.
I promise you that the first time you face a War Convocation or a Skyhammer (or both in one army!) will hurt a lot more than the first time you face my FW units. The only time I've had people complain about my army has been when I bring 3 void shield generators. Partly because of how annoying they are to deal with for some armies, and partly because my conversions were sketchy, which I'll admit. But guess what? That's a GW model which GW decided to release in a limited format.
While the topic of heavily comped 40k is a wider topic than just FW I personally feel that it's more damaging to the hobby than anything. I'm okay with banning FW super-heavies because facing a Revenant Titan is just not fun. But when I read some of the restrictions in this thread and on other forums I just get shocked. No Death Korps?! No Imperial Bastions? No flyers? No Allies? What's next, I can't paint my Bloodletters white or wear my glasses while I play? No thank you, I'll avoid those clubs like I avoid North Korea, and they can have fun with themselves in their respective bubbles.
How do these restrictive places tend to stand on White Dwarf rules?
Bobthehero wrote: 'cuz then you can fling in SM player that your puny guardsman, is in fact, as good as that marine in CC.
And then he gets promptly squished because he's not as fast, whomp whomp.
But seriously, from a gameplay POV, how often has that WS4 been useful?
Generally, if your guardsmen are in CC, something has gone wrong and you want them to die ASAP so that your other guys can shoot whatever charged them.
It is a surprising help actually, mainly for being hit on 4s rather than 3s most of the time and therefore reducing the number of incoming wounds. The extra WS tends to be the biggest help with Characters, who are more likely armed with a melta bomb or power weapon. It's much more useful to Engineers, who are the alternative Troops choice to Infantry squads, because the Engineers are BS4, 4+ armour and armed with shotguns, so you can do surprisingly well with a round of shooting backed up by an assault.
We have one guy at the FLGS who is rabidly anti FW. If he sees the models, he will start interrupting games to tell players they are cheating. That's the sum of my anti-FW experience.
Arkaine wrote: It's understandable when you realize we're sporting a large number of new players who don't want others to bring models from a source they are unfamiliar with or cannot afford as they haven't even completed their basic core collections yet (read about the Ultramarine guy who only owns three vehicles).
And this idea of a "basic core collection" is just absurd. People can buy FW models at any time, not just after they've got a bunch of plastic codex-only stuff. My first purchases as a new 40k player were a Tau battleforce, a Hammerhead, and a FW Barracuda. If I'd started playing in a group like yours I probably would have just given up the game and put everything on ebay. But thankfully I started playing with a friend whose entire policy on what is legal is "is it a cool model?" and I didn't encounter people like you until I was already heavily invested in the game.
If you can't respect that and insist on being right or doing what you want when it's against the wishes of the rest of the community, then you're being an overbearing despot.
Getting a lot of votes for a terrible idea doesn't make it any less terrible. And your community's wishes are wrong. You've established the kind of "our way or GTFO" clique that can absolutely kill a community and is incredibly hostile to new players. You know, the same new players that you're supposedly trying to protect.
My problem with firgeworld are the strictly better options. For exame the IA8 custom stompa. Superior in every way to the bland codex one that is very overcosted.
Arkaine wrote: It's understandable when you realize we're sporting a large number of new players who don't want others to bring models from a source they are unfamiliar with or cannot afford as they haven't even completed their basic core collections yet (read about the Ultramarine guy who only owns three vehicles).
And this idea of a "basic core collection" is just absurd. People can buy FW models at any time, not just after they've got a bunch of plastic codex-only stuff. My first purchases as a new 40k player were a Tau battleforce, a Hammerhead, and a FW Barracuda. If I'd started playing in a group like yours I probably would have just given up the game and put everything on ebay. But thankfully I started playing with a friend whose entire policy on what is legal is "is it a cool model?" and I didn't encounter people like you until I was already heavily invested in the game.
If you can't respect that and insist on being right or doing what you want when it's against the wishes of the rest of the community, then you're being an overbearing despot.
Getting a lot of votes for a terrible idea doesn't make it any less terrible. And your community's wishes are wrong. You've established the kind of "our way or GTFO" clique that can absolutely kill a community and is incredibly hostile to new players. You know, the same new players that you're supposedly trying to protect.
You know your wrong when Per and I agree on something.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Orock wrote: My problem with firgeworld are the strictly better options. For exame the IA8 custom stompa. Superior in every way to the bland codex one that is very overcosted.
Well the Stompa in general just sucks. Its about the only Titan I know of that doesn't come with some kind of Invul save.
Orock wrote: My problem with firgeworld are the strictly better options. For exame the IA8 custom stompa. Superior in every way to the bland codex one that is very overcosted.
That's a typo, and when FW was still allowed to have a facebook page they addressed it there where it should be 700something points. Unfortunately for whatever reason GW withdrew from all social media presence and has seemingly abandoned FAQ's entirely.
GrafWattenburg wrote: I personally play Renegades & Heretics, and have done so since I got back into 40k in 6th edition, when IG and CSM were Allies of Convenience.
With 7th, double FOC became moot and we dropped it. Last week I talked with my group and everyone relaxed towards void shields. D-weapons and Super-heavies are still disputed, but we're mostly waiting for every codex to have both inside. As we have a Dark Eldar player, looks like both will take a while to show up in our games.
There's a city 3h from here, where we go play with veteran players once a year. Those guys value models and cool stuff on the table way more than simple plain rules, so they allow everything. Only then one of our players use the IK we have around, and my future Ta'unar
FW? Allowed since first day
I think this is something that needs to just change. As in people should move away from "This is banned/allowed here." to "This format allows this, but that format doesn't."
One thing I love about Magic: the Gathering is that I can go to so many different events, ones that feature their version of the base codex only, and the ones that feature everything under the sun with as little restriction as possible. One of my favourites is actually Vintage, where I can play cards that are worth over a thousand dollars and will never be printed again because they're just that absurd. Though I also understand fully the value of Standard, which is basically the latest few sets to be released.
I don't know, maybe I'm just weird but I like variety.
All the talk about banning FW for the sake of newer players smacks of an elaborate justification for something no more complicated than, "we don't like FW units and we don't want to play against them so we banned them."
Makes no difference to me, really. Play how you want. What I am curious about is the setting of your meta. How many players participate? How many voted? Where do you guys play? Just sounds weird to me, that such a thing would even take place.
Peregrine wrote: You know, the same new players that you're supposedly trying to protect.
Ah, so the new players that voted on the option in the first place. Right.
Vaktathi wrote: If you're going to claim someone is a TFG just because of the army they play, most people aren't going to buy that, and is, in itself, rather classic TFG behavior.
Which by your own definition in this statement makes Peregrine a TFG. If you go back to my quote of his in the original statement you're arguing against, he stated "From the outside it looks like you're a bunch of TFGs, and I have no more interest in fighting people just to be allowed to play with my army." He then edited his post afterwards to say "unpleasant people" so that the bandwagon verbal assaults would be against me. Typical TFG behavior, as you just said.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Wolf_in_Human_Shape wrote: @Arkaine:
All the talk about banning FW for the sake of newer players smacks of an elaborate justification for something no more complicated than, "we don't like FW units and we don't want to play against them so we banned them."
Makes no difference to me, really. Play how you want. What I am curious about is the setting of your meta. How many players participate? How many voted? Where do you guys play? Just sounds weird to me, that such a thing would even take place.
Well if you can't trust someone's statements on the internet and have to invent what you think they said without knowing anything about them, then it can "smack" of just about anything your imagination can come up with. The meta features over 30 regulars with a few people showing up that I've never seen before once in a while and is hosted in New Jersey. How many voted? All of them. In fact, no one even raised any objections to them once the vote was made. I have yet to hear the words "I wish we allowed Forgeworld here" or anything similar for the other bans. It's a friendly community, we've visited each others' homes for private games, and we're all on a familiar basis with each other. Outsiders are treated with the warmest regard but if you go to ITC and accept their list of rules then it's sensible to do the same anywhere else you happen to go. What smacks of folly here is the amount of judgement against a group that voted this way in the first place, as though any of you would actually show up to our meta or that anyone did would be such an donkey-cave as to find the rules unbearable. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. The many have spoken and may continue to do so in the future, possibly even reinstating Forgeworld if it's collectively agreed upon. Until then, rules are rules.
Arkaine wrote: Ah, so the new players that voted on the option in the first place. Right.
No, the new players that you might encounter in the future. You've set up your little clique with rules to protect you from ever having to face anything outside of your personal version of 40k, but anyone who doesn't share your house rules isn't welcome. And if you tell that new player "no, you can't use your army here" they're almost certainly not coming back to your group, and there's a pretty good chance that they'll just say " this", put their models on ebay, and find a different game that doesn't have absurd house rules about what is legal.
I said it before, but I'll say it again: if I'd started playing 40k in your group I would never have made it past my first game. I'd heard about how 40k was full of people who whine endlessly if you don't follow their personal rules about what you should use in your army, but I decided to give it a chance because my friend told me how awesome it was and how that wasn't a problem in his experience. If I'd showed up to your group with my shiny new Barracuda and been told "sorry, we don't allow that here" I would never have come back. And your "newbie protection" rules would have resulted in a newbie quitting the game in disgust with your behavior.
So, don't tell me that your rules protect newbies. They don't. They protect your clique from having to risk losing games.
Which by your own definition in this statement makes Peregrine a TFG. If you go back to my quote of his in the original statement you're arguing against, he stated "From the outside it looks like you're a bunch of TFGs, and I have no more interest in fighting people just to be allowed to play with my army." He then edited his post afterwards to say "unpleasant people" so that the bandwagon verbal assaults would be against me. Typical TFG behavior, as you just said.
First of all, my edit had nothing to do with this bizarre plot you seem to think you've discovered. It's very simple: calling other forum members TFG has been known to result in moderator punishments, so I reconsidered and changed my post to something in line with forum rules. Feel free to be paranoid about it though.
That said, your reply doesn't even make sense. I have no objections to your choice of rules/models/whatever for your own army. What I'm objecting to is your stubborn insistence that you get to decide what other people are allowed to use.
Outsiders are treated with the warmest regard
As long as they obey your rules about army construction and play your special version of 40k. If they dare to play a (perfectly legal, according to the printed rules of the game) army that doesn't follow your rules then you aren't nearly as welcoming.
as though any of you would actually show up to our meta
You're right, I wouldn't, because I think you're terrible people and I would have no interest in playing with you. You should take this as a hint that your behavior is inappropriate.
Arkaine wrote: Ah, so the new players that voted on the option in the first place. Right.
No, the new players that you might encounter in the future. You've set up your little clique with rules to protect you from ever having to face anything outside of your personal version of 40k, but anyone who doesn't share your house rules isn't welcome. And if you tell that new player "no, you can't use your army here" they're almost certainly not coming back to your group, and there's a pretty good chance that they'll just say " this", put their models on ebay, and find a different game that doesn't have absurd house rules about what is legal.
You may want to write to every major tournament and describe to them how their own house rules are destroying their ability to obtain new players.
Peregrine wrote: I said it before, but I'll say it again: if I'd started playing 40k in your group I would never have made it past my first game. I'd heard about how 40k was full of people who whine endlessly if you don't follow their personal rules about what you should use in your army, but I decided to give it a chance because my friend told me how awesome it was and how that wasn't a problem in his experience. If I'd showed up to your group with my shiny new Barracuda and been told "sorry, we don't allow that here" I would never have come back. And your "newbie protection" rules would have resulted in a newbie quitting the game in disgust with your behavior.
Remember, the venue is a majority of newbies to Warhammer. They decided upon this rule themselves. I'm perfectly okay with people like you quitting the game forever. See at our FLG, we're adults about all of this.
Peregrine wrote: So, don't tell me that your rules protect newbies. They don't. They protect your clique from having to risk losing games.
Scroll way back a page or two to where it was stated I field Thousand Sons often. We couldn't care less about losing games. Clearly that's something on your mind though or you wouldn't be projecting your beliefs.
That said, your reply doesn't even make sense. I have no objections to your choice of rules/models/whatever for your own army. What I'm objecting to is your stubborn insistence that you get to decide what other people are allowed to use.
Your objections to the venue's Forgeworld-free army lists has been noted for the past three pages, along with your stubborn insistence that you get to decide what 32 other people are allowed to use. Because those people have already decided for themselves what they're allowed to use.
Peregrine wrote: As long as they obey your rules about army construction and play your special version of 40k. If they dare to play a (perfectly legal, according to the printed rules of the game) army that doesn't follow your rules then you aren't nearly as welcoming.
When you join a Magic the Gathering Standard tournament, you aren't permitted to complain that sets outside the newest two blocks are banned. If you have a problem with that, go play Vintage. Formats have rules associated with them; these are the ones our format runs.
Peregrine wrote: You're right, I wouldn't, because I think you're terrible people and I would have no interest in playing with you. You should take this as a hint that your behavior is inappropriate.
You may wish to take your own behavior into consideration. You're literally placing yourself as judge over the choices agreed upon by a game store's entire consumer base. Your opinion surpasses all of theirs. Yours carries more weight than that of over 30 people. Thank god you hold no power over the lives of others, what with your obvious superiority complex.
At least we finally agree on something as I would have no interest in playing with someone like you who would literally argue against every person he met insisting he's always right and his opinions are the only ones that matter.
Arkaine wrote: You may want to write to every major tournament and describe to them how their own house rules are destroying their ability to obtain new players.
I guess you're new here? I have strongly criticized TOs in charge of major tournaments over this exact issue.
Remember, the venue is a majority of newbies to Warhammer. They decided upon this rule themselves. I'm perfectly okay with people like you quitting the game forever. See at our FLG, we're adults about all of this.
Did you even read what I wrote? I was talking about myself when I was a new player. Now I'm invested in the game and if I encounter people like you I'll just go elsewhere. Back then, when I didn't have enough experience to know that people like you are (thankfully) not normal, I would have just given up on the game. You would have driven away newbie-me forever.
Scroll way back a page or two to where it was stated I field Thousand Sons often. We couldn't care less about losing games. Clearly that's something on your mind though or you wouldn't be projecting your beliefs.
Then why do you keep complaining about how having more options available makes an army more powerful? If you don't care if you lose then why does it matter if another player has powerful options that you don't have access to?
Your objections to the venue's Forgeworld-free army lists has been noted for the past three pages, along with your stubborn insistence that you get to decide what 32 other people are allowed to use. Because those people have already decided for themselves what they're allowed to use.
Sigh. This is not complicated. I have no objection to 32 other people deciding not to use FW units in their own lists. I have a problem with those 32 people telling the 33rd person that FW units are not allowed. I have a problem with groups treating a store as their personal clique and inventing mandatory rules that are hostile to new players.
If only... sigh... well, we have plenty of newbies that chose these rules themselves so thank god your impulsive response isn't the norm!
Peregrine wrote: Then why do you keep complaining about how having more options available makes an army more powerful? If you don't care if you lose then why does it matter if another player has powerful options that you don't have access to?
I haven't complained even once LOL! I own Forgeworld models myself as was explained earlier in this thread. I play CSM which sorely needs Forgeworld to be a reasonable codex. Only thing I've done from the start was answer the topic creator's question -- by explaining the reason behind the weirdness about Forgeworld, at least at my locale.
Peregrine wrote: Sigh. This is not complicated. I have no objection to 32 other people deciding not to use FW units in their own lists. I have a problem with those 32 people telling the 33rd person that FW units are not allowed. I have a problem with groups treating a store as their personal clique and inventing mandatory rules that are hostile to new players.
I think you'd do better to hold an objection against a 33rd person showing up and demanding everyone change the rules they are comfortable with for their benefit.
There are many games that have different formats and allow various mixes of acceptable resources. Card games are just the most popular example to showcase. You're against having different formats or houserules and want everyone to adhere to a single uniform ruleset that is unanimously accepted and undisputed. That'd be great! ... Write us when GW finally gets around to actually writing one. Till then, houserules are required for the game to even function without arguments unless you judge every situation using the 4+ method and have the rules themselves as random as the dice.
I have to say Arkaine, I have to agree with peregrine, but don't dismiss what I have to say immediately because of it. FW is not the pay to win it once was, the citadel range has caught up in terms of firepower. It's a great way to get better at the game, to challenge yourself against unknown units and find new uses for your existing units. Plus, they make some beautiful models. Saying no titans I understand in a casual gaming environment, but I don't understand refusing a player a game because of their choice of army or units. Like per said, the 33rd player might walk. The 16th and 23rd player might quit the hobby. You run the risk of trying to lock the hobby in a bubble that you are all comfortable with, which might work for you now, but it will cause stagnation in the long run, and might well see the group shrink rather than grow.
JamesY wrote: The 33rd player might walk. The 16th and 23rd player might quit the hobby.
I'm still wondering why people are addressing me like I'm the lynchpin holding this entire format together. I truly have no ability to decide the rules here or they'd be a little different than they are currently. The rules as always are done by majority vote. You're worried about losing some fictional 33rd person while our community is more concerned about losing players that actually exist. All of the bans exist to prevent that from happening. It's also important to restate that power levels have little to do with it and that the decisions were primarily centered around COST. If someone starts to feel like things are stagnating, the topic is reintroduced and possibly overturned. Heck, we had a "No Flyers" rule a while back and that was overturned. Risks exist within the hobby regardless of what you choose to do and you are only fooling yourself into thinking that doing nothing absolves yourself of personal responsibility when someone quits for any number of reasons. We could have sat around and done nothing about all of these points of contention. A more proactive stance was selected instead. That's really all there is to it. Only time will tell whether it's the right decision or not, yet judging from the dwindling numbers of the nearby competitor and the surge of popularity at my regular location... people seem to think we're doing it better.
People are addressing the group through you as you are representing them in the discussion, I don't think anyone is targeting you as an individual, rather as a spokesman. If it's working for you all then fair enough. Out of interest, how rigid is the group? Say for example a new guy turns up and he's got a dkok army, and that's his only army. Would you guys welcome him in and make an exception, or would he have to look elsewhere?
-Forge World is part of 40k.-
Simple as that. The 7E core set not only shows off FW models in pictures throughout the books, but has rules for them as part of the basic rule set. (Rules for Gargantuan creatures, with all those GW plastic sets for them...)
Awesome the unbalanced stuff from w40k and the stuff that makes some factions much better then other is the argument for accepting FW
-Cost of Entry?-
Between the player who had a full FW army or the guy with the second hand marines with their styrofoam cup drop pods. Its a game. Enjoy it how ever you can and want to. Don't discriminate against those who have more or less money.
The problem is that some armies play without FW and do great, while other can't and in the case of something like my army the only way to play artilery carriges and ton of ally.
-Balance-
40k is not a perfectly balanced game even at its core. Fair enough.
It actualy buffs the already top tier army higher. Eldar are bad enough, they don't need the corsair stuff to get even better.
-Don't know the rules / availability-
In the age of the internet. The information is out there. Plus, I highly doubt any gamer out there has all current codexes memorized or readily available. So, ask to see rules, learn from each other. Playing against the unknown is a great learning experience. You don't always have to win, and some times the struggles can be more fun.
Show what? Even if he does have a IA rule book, which I doubt he has with most FW stuff being recasts, how do I know if it is the proper one. I can check if a codex is new or old just by looking at the cover. I can't do that with a FW book.
-Buts its different and scares me!-
GW likes selling new kits and books. Things will change and be updated. If you want a perfectly static rule set look elsewhere.
It has nothing to do with scaring people, but everything with making the game less fun for people who can't or don't want to buy FW. Have you ever see people say they won't play against the new codex of any army? No, even if they are like eldar people still play against them and their new kits for OP models.
I played a tournament two weeks back. ITC rule set. I had 3 knights, one of them a FW knight. Many were quick to call me TFG. I didn't even place in the top 10 out of 22 players. Played a game using a Warhound vs Dark Angels a week ago. I lost by turn 5 with no chance of victory. FW is not a scary instant win button by any stretch of the imagination.
Just because your a bad player it doesnt automaticly make FW ok.
JamesY wrote: People are addressing the group through you as you are representing them in the discussion, I don't think anyone is targeting you as an individual, rather as a spokesman. If it's working for you all then fair enough. Out of interest, how rigid is the group? Say for example a new guy turns up and he's got a dkok army, and that's his only army. Would you guys welcome him in and make an exception, or would he have to look elsewhere?
I believe I addressed that well enough earlier so I'll use the exact quote to keep from rephrasing things. VVV
zedmeister wrote: Hypothetical scenario for you;
What would your playerbase really do: Play a game or two and let him run it? Insist he remove the tank? Shun him? Denounce him and berate him for being a WAAC/powergamer/TFG?
Assume you let him run it and he starts to include it in more games, would that cause problems considering that although it's pretty nifty tank its in no way overpowered?
We would let him know that FW wasn't allowed for the events. If he wanted to use in casual games with the permission of his opponent, he's more than welcome to as whether or not the tank is OP never comes into question. It's just that permitting the use of the tank would mean permitting the use of everything from FW as no one wants to be burdened with arbitrarily deciding what FW items are allowable and which are banned. I mean what kind of arbitrary guidelines would be used? Personal gut feeling? Nay, the players made the right call. Ban it all and let them sort it out on their own in private games.
Peregrine wrote: Because you keep defending it. Don't want to be addressed as a representative of the group? Stop defending it and admit that it's bad behavior.
Oh there's bad behavior going on alright, but it's not on my part or the group's.
I think this is something that needs to just change. As in people should move away from "This is banned/allowed here." to "This format allows this, but that format doesn't."
One thing I love about Magic: the Gathering is that I can go to so many different events, ones that feature their version of the base codex only, and the ones that feature everything under the sun with as little restriction as possible. One of my favourites is actually Vintage, where I can play cards that are worth over a thousand dollars and will never be printed again because they're just that absurd. Though I also understand fully the value of Standard, which is basically the latest few sets to be released.
I don't know, maybe I'm just weird but I like variety.
I agree with you, but not everyone in my group does.
Ah, and we're holding off on using Eldar as either main army (noone played that anyway) or allies, until the last 4 codexes get updated (both chaos, IG, tyranids)
You can tell if an IA is the correct one by looking at the cover, at the top, if it got an update, it will say 'SECOND EDITION' right at there.
You ALSO realise that that guy was PROBABLY playing Ravenwing shenanigans so that's why he lost.
If you're such an awesome player, I'd like you to try to beat my Space Marines, Chapter or Legion, as a 40k player since early 4th. It's also possible that the DA player focussed his fire on Warhound, ever consider that?
Forge World IS Games Workshop. Saying that their stuff is unbalanced is like saying that a schizophrenic mental patient has more balance than a theoretical physicist; False and stupid.
-Balance- 40k is not a perfectly balanced game even at its core. Fair enough.
It actualy buffs the already top tier army higher. Eldar are bad enough, they don't need the corsair stuff to get even better.
.. why do you hate Corsairs so much? Craftworld Eldar and Corsairs are different factions. Do the existence of Dark Eldar and Harlequins also unfairly buff CW Eldar? Does the existence of Admech and Vanilla Space Marines unfairly buff Imperial Guard/AM?
Why do you hate Corsairs so much? Indeed, why do you seem to have a chip on your shoulder when it comes to FW in general?
Did you lose to a FW army one time? Just because your a bad player it doesn't automatically make FWOP?
@arkaine thanks for that, I didn't see that post. That's fair enough for me, no one is being excluded from regular gaming. It might suck a bit for that individual when events come along, but big picture they aren't being excluded from the group. Happy gaming bud
Remember, the venue is a majority of newbies to Warhammer. They decided upon this rule themselves.
This is rather interesting. In my experience, most newbies have little to no experience with forgeworld (some haven't even heard of it), this can lead to curiosity but seems really peculiar that a majority of new players (which would obviously limit their exposure to forgeworld) would form such strong opinions about it one way or another. Especially such unanimously strong negative opinions that a majority of new players would ban it all together. Is someone more experienced fear mongering about forgeworld at you're venue and influencing their opinions? I mean I understand if a new player goes up against a titan in a lower points game why it would leave a bad taste in their mouth... But your gaming group has already banned LoW and superheavies, which prevents and addresses this problem already. As you mentioned earlier, access to forgeworld can change the way an army is played but in a TAC environment why would this matter? For instance chaos marines now have access to dreadclaw drop pods, this changes the way their lists can be played, but in a TAC environment, more powerful and efficient drop lists already exist in the form of space marines (and to a lesser extent tyranids), so general TAC lists should already be prepared for this. Or for another example, with forgeworld Tau has access to more flyers, which people may not be used to from Tau, but in a TAC environment won't lists already be made to handle flyers from armies with better codex flyers already? Does your gaming group always list tailor or something? I'm really curious to know what experience your gaming group has had with forgeworld that turned off so many new players? What happened at your store? Specifically I mean. You mentioned earlier that people at your store felt marginalized by lists with forgeworld. What lists were people seeing that got them so riled up?
Wolf_in_Human_Shape wrote: @Arkaine:
All the talk about banning FW for the sake of newer players smacks of an elaborate justification for something no more complicated than, "we don't like FW units and we don't want to play against them so we banned them."
Makes no difference to me, really. Play how you want. What I am curious about is the setting of your meta. How many players participate? How many voted? Where do you guys play? Just sounds weird to me, that such a thing would even take place.
Well if you can't trust someone's statements on the internet and have to invent what you think they said without knowing anything about them, then it can "smack" of just about anything your imagination can come up with.
The meta features over 30 regulars with a few people showing up that I've never seen before once in a while and is hosted in New Jersey. How many voted? All of them. In fact, no one even raised any objections to them once the vote was made. I have yet to hear the words "I wish we allowed Forgeworld here" or anything similar for the other bans. It's a friendly community, we've visited each others' homes for private games, and we're all on a familiar basis with each other. Outsiders are treated with the warmest regard but if you go to ITC and accept their list of rules then it's sensible to do the same anywhere else you happen to go. What smacks of folly here is the amount of judgement against a group that voted this way in the first place, as though any of you would actually show up to our meta or that anyone did would be such an donkey-cave as to find the rules unbearable. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. The many have spoken and may continue to do so in the future, possibly even reinstating Forgeworld if it's collectively agreed upon. Until then, rules are rules.
Hey fair enough, I'm obviously only seeing this as some outsider on the internet reading what some guy wrote about a thing. I truly don't have a clue what did/didn't happen. That being said, this whole thing could be a charade and you're making all of it up . Whether or not I believe you is totally irrelevant of course, but it still just sounds very weird to me for the reasons you've given. You and your 29 other weirdos are weird!
I do applaud your level-headedness in responding to all the flaming against you, for what it's worth.
And also thank you for answering the other questions.
-Forge World is part of 40k.-
Simple as that. The 7E core set not only shows off FW models in pictures throughout the books, but has rules for them as part of the basic rule set. (Rules for Gargantuan creatures, with all those GW plastic sets for them...)
Awesome the unbalanced stuff from w40k and the stuff that makes some factions much better then other is the argument for accepting FW
-Cost of Entry?-
Between the player who had a full FW army or the guy with the second hand marines with their styrofoam cup drop pods. Its a game. Enjoy it how ever you can and want to. Don't discriminate against those who have more or less money.
The problem is that some armies play without FW and do great, while other can't and in the case of something like my army the only way to play artilery carriges and ton of ally.
-Balance-
40k is not a perfectly balanced game even at its core. Fair enough.
It actualy buffs the already top tier army higher. Eldar are bad enough, they don't need the corsair stuff to get even better.
-Don't know the rules / availability-
In the age of the internet. The information is out there. Plus, I highly doubt any gamer out there has all current codexes memorized or readily available. So, ask to see rules, learn from each other. Playing against the unknown is a great learning experience. You don't always have to win, and some times the struggles can be more fun.
Show what? Even if he does have a IA rule book, which I doubt he has with most FW stuff being recasts, how do I know if it is the proper one. I can check if a codex is new or old just by looking at the cover. I can't do that with a FW book.
-Buts its different and scares me!-
GW likes selling new kits and books. Things will change and be updated. If you want a perfectly static rule set look elsewhere.
It has nothing to do with scaring people, but everything with making the game less fun for people who can't or don't want to buy FW. Have you ever see people say they won't play against the new codex of any army? No, even if they are like eldar people still play against them and their new kits for OP models.
I played a tournament two weeks back. ITC rule set. I had 3 knights, one of them a FW knight. Many were quick to call me TFG. I didn't even place in the top 10 out of 22 players. Played a game using a Warhound vs Dark Angels a week ago. I lost by turn 5 with no chance of victory. FW is not a scary instant win button by any stretch of the imagination.
Just because your a bad player it doesnt automaticly make FW ok.
wall of text.
It has nothing to do with scaring people, but everything with making the game less fun for people who can't or don't want to buy FW. Have you ever see people say they won't play against the new codex of any army? No, even if they are like eldar people still play against them and their new kits for OP models.
Why yes, we see it all the time here. people refusing to play tau, or eldar, or necrons, or even space marine super friends. People have refused to play these armies, even when these armies are using stock options out of GW codexes. Allowing FW gives the weaker armies a chance to fight back. And if your store has the win at all cost guy who min maxes with his army using every rule ever written, you don't have to play him. OR, you could play him, and just become a better player than he is. It is possible to out play an opponent using a weaker force.
The argument that it should be banned because people can't afford to buy FW? GW plastic kits prices are already a prohibitive cost of entry. Please see, and try to understand, the point I made in the cost of entry statement.
-Cost of Entry?-
Between the player who had a full FW army or the guy with the second hand marines with their styrofoam cup drop pods. Its a game. Enjoy it how ever you can and want to. Don't discriminate against those who have more or less money.
I you really want to play the game, play it. Play with proxies, cut outs / papercraft, styrofoam cups, or post it notes for all I care, while using photos from the codex you took with the camera on your phone. Their are guides online for making half your army out of cereal boxes. People have made amazing armies with a low to no budget.
chalkobob wrote: Is someone more experienced fear mongering about forgeworld at you're venue and influencing their opinions?
I strongly suspect that is the case. As well, after seeing Forgeworld and realizing there is this great big world of models untouched out there, they started researching themselves. We had a few weeks of shop talk of all the crazy Forgeworld stuff available, the players were clearly impressed with the stats and almost coveting the models but restrained by the prices (40k itself is expensive too so it's not necessarily a FW thing). After being "awed" by the stuff they heard, saw, and experienced, it was decided that FW wouldn't be played because it would just add more costs to their army. No one wanted to feel pressured into buying Forgeworld stuff and it was already VERY tempting, if you could afford it. Only we veterans could really do so though since we already had all the stuff we needed for normal battles. As for what lists specifically, some Tyranid stuff, an Eldar titan, a lot of Imperial Guard artillery, all kinds of Flyers (with a group that was really skeptical about flyers at first), and a Contemptor Dreadnought.
Allowing FW gives the weaker armies a chance to fight back.
that would only be true if FW made models only for the weak factions. It is the same thing as we have with ally in w40k. Just because a bad army can take ally, it does not make the ally system good. Because a good army with good ally will always be the better then a bad one trying to run good ally..
There was one shop that accepted FW in my city. It ended bad for them when escalation came out and everyone started to buy recast FW stuff. Their sells droped and the shops closed, and now the FW people have no where to play.
techsoldaten wrote: We have one guy at the FLGS who is rabidly anti FW. If he sees the models, he will start interrupting games to tell players they are cheating. That's the sum of my anti-FW experience.
Them fighting words. The guy sounds like a little *self censored* of a TFG. Anyone ever slapped him to bring him to his senses?
You can hate FW if you want, it's your right but calling other people cheater for using something within the rules. That's asking for it.
Allowing FW gives the weaker armies a chance to fight back.
that would only be true if FW made models only for the weak factions. It is the same thing as we have with ally in w40k. Just because a bad army can take ally, it does not make the ally system good. Because a good army with good ally will always be the better then a bad one trying to run good ally..
There was one shop that accepted FW in my city. It ended bad for them when escalation came out and everyone started to buy recast FW stuff. Their sells droped and the shops closed, and now the FW people have no where to play.
Until Land Raiders are worth a damn, though, how do you suggest getting Assault units ANYWHERE without a Spartan?
Space Marines are a strong army, but they still have gakky options. Your argument is bad and you should feel bad.
Also your exaggerated story was hilarious. "FW helped put the store out of business, even when GW sales are plummeting anyway!"
Until Land Raiders are worth a damn, though, how do you suggest getting Assault units ANYWHERE without a Spartan?
why should assault be viable in the first place. Even excluding the fact that may army doesn't assault at all, this is game based around shoting. From what I know assaults armies last time viable in 4th ed and even then through cheap tricks like charging out of unkillable falcons or having 24"charge range from 12-18" away.
Space Marines are a strong army, but they still have gakky options. Your argument is bad and you should feel bad.
My army doesn't have enough strong options to build a 1500 army. It probably doesn't have strong options at all, but am not a high end tournament player so am not going say that. Although it does seem to be that way as non one runs it as ally or main army at any event, and it has not won a single event in 7th, where armies that are told to be bad like chaos, orcs or nids at least place high sometimes.
Also your exaggerated story was hilarious.
But I didn't people stoped buying stuff from them, because recasts FW models were more efficient and cheaper. In other stores they couldn't use FW rules or FW models, and the sells droped instantly.
why should assault be viable in the first place. Even excluding the fact that may army doesn't assault at all, this is game based around shoting. From what I know assaults armies last time viable in 4th ed and even then through cheap tricks like charging out of unkillable falcons or having 24"charge range from 12-18" away.
Wait...so your argument is that the assault based army shouldn't be viable, because you think a huge chunk of the games combat shouldn't viable in general? That's a heavy bias if I have ever heard one
The game is about shoting. It has been about shoting for 4 editions. Why should it suddenly be about assault?
Just because your faction sucks at it doesn't mean that cc-oriented armies shouldn't be able to have a fair chance at beating you.
The only time assault was viable, was when it had nothing to do with fairness. There was nothing fair about rhino rush, or charging out of falcons. Also aren't the TWC armies and biker armies perfectly viable, and those can assault and shot at the same time. Marines already have grav, bikers, drop pods and skyhammer. They don't need more stuff to get even more builds.
Given that there is a forge world article in every white dwarf I think that speaks to how GW views it. And from a balance argument forgeworld is honestly better than the core codexes.
Why do you have to ban it? Why can't you just see the cheese and not play said cheese? You know there's nothing wrong with IG or CSM trying to pump up their total ass lists.
If its FW, and you're scared of the unknown, then ask to see the rules for the model/models.
If they can't provide the rules, they're sketchy anyways, and you shouldn't play them.
These same rules apply to TOs. If the Tournament Organizers look at the lists, they should be able to detect the varying levels of FW cheese and stop that.
Unless they're running 64-man brackets, which I would like to find out what magic Warhammer warehouse you're running the tournament out of then, so I can particpate.
Hell, make the participants write out their lists and point values prior to the tournament and submit them to the TO.
You can even put in a block for FW models.
MTG does it and it works, why can't 40K.
FW is only just being accepted into standard games (much like SHV/GC).
Had a game in store yesterday with my mate against two other people (who were more regular than both of us). One person was playing Ravenwing, my mate had a Relic Whirlwind Scorpius w/ Battle of Keylek for his SW. Staff knew what it did and could provide the rules from the back of the store yet still produced a Lemun Russ for my friend to use instead of the Whirwind (taking time to flick throgh the rules for it) and in the process, make his army unbound so couldn't benefit from the WS5 TWC...my friend wasn't impressed. After the battle my friend told me they refused to fire it out of principle and that the RW player was smug about making their covers. One thing I do remember is that the RW player came over to my game with my mate to watch (I was running Zhadsnark Da Rippa, who was well known within the community so less of an issue). The RW player said to my opponent that real men don't use FW in a 'superiority complex' manner.
I guess when you can't produced rules as easily as you can the GW Codex/BRB rules, people are going to be a little wary over new things. Still, I felt like their attitude stunk.
My view is simple, rock up with whatever you have and let's have fun. The only caveat being give me a fairly high level appraisal of what your army can do if I am not familiar with it, I don't need to turn every page of the rulebook just "bob and co are really stabby and these guys have D weapons..." Great, let's get it on!
Until Land Raiders are worth a damn, though, how do you suggest getting Assault units ANYWHERE without a Spartan?
why should assault be viable in the first place. Even excluding the fact that may army doesn't assault at all, this is game based around shoting. From what I know assaults armies last time viable in 4th ed and even then through cheap tricks like charging out of unkillable falcons or having 24"charge range from 12-18" away.
Space Marines are a strong army, but they still have gakky options. Your argument is bad and you should feel bad.
My army doesn't have enough strong options to build a 1500 army. It probably doesn't have strong options at all, but am not a high end tournament player so am not going say that. Although it does seem to be that way as non one runs it as ally or main army at any event, and it has not won a single event in 7th, where armies that are told to be bad like chaos, orcs or nids at least place high sometimes.
Also your exaggerated story was hilarious.
But I didn't people stoped buying stuff from them, because recasts FW models were more efficient and cheaper. In other stores they couldn't use FW rules or FW models, and the sells droped instantly.
If you're saying specific options should be bad, you're completely irrational.
For old gamers, there's still a bias of pay to win brokeness. Whether true or not is irrelevant. It used to be viewed that if you wanted to win, just buy super OP Forgeworld stuff. So now when some people hear FW, they still have that PTSD of olden times.
Young bloods are wary of it because it's not familiar and doesn't "appear" to be a part of the game, more like a Mod for Skyrim done by some guy in Russia. Less than official.
But it seems to me that FW stuff is just fine. No more and no less bonkers than GW stuff.
Back on topic. To the OP, as someone mentioned, somewhere in the thread, the problem with Forgeworld otiginates in the late 80's with the various resin casting companies such as ArmorCast who created products that were talked about by GW but had no models. These were licensed models under the GW brand name. Originally they were tanks and titans and only the big, expensive, bad ass stuff was created.
Fast forward to the present day and time and we find Forgeworld is now fully integrated into GW proper. They now make full armies (or conversion parts for their rules) meant specifically for use in everyday games of 40k. Some people can't get over the past though. Instead of Line Item Vetoing specific pieces (such as the Hornet which invalidates 2 items in the Eldar army and surpasses them both for a lesser cost) they ban the entire range and make spurious claims of cost prohibition or "legality" in the everyday games they are specifically meant for.
Things have changed over the years and most of the old arguements are clung to regardless of their validity. The best way to approach FW is the same as any GW product: make sure you have the rules in hand and be cordial towards your opponent by explaining anything out of the ordinary. Forthright and sporting behavior will nip most of these problems in the bud.
Frozocrone wrote: FW is only just being accepted into standard games (much like SHV/GC).
Had a game in store yesterday with my mate against two other people (who were more regular than both of us). One person was playing Ravenwing, my mate had a Relic Whirlwind Scorpius w/ Battle of Keylek for his SW. Staff knew what it did and could provide the rules from the back of the store yet still produced a Lemun Russ for my friend to use instead of the Whirwind (taking time to flick throgh the rules for it) and in the process, make his army unbound so couldn't benefit from the WS5 TWC...my friend wasn't impressed. After the battle my friend told me they refused to fire it out of principle and that the RW player was smug about making their covers. One thing I do remember is that the RW player came over to my game with my mate to watch (I was running Zhadsnark Da Rippa, who was well known within the community so less of an issue). The RW player said to my opponent that real men don't use FW in a 'superiority complex' manner.
I guess when you can't produced rules as easily as you can the GW Codex/BRB rules, people are going to be a little wary over new things. Still, I felt like their attitude stunk.
"Real men don't use FW".
Heh.
Real men obviously use Eldar, Decurion Necrons and Spesss Mehreeens with their latest cheesy formations.
The more I think about it, the more it seems there're quite a bunch of TFG/WAAC players that have become used to be always one step ahead of most opponents thanks to the unbalanced codex system, and so FW crashes the party for them as it allows non-top tier armies extra options they actually need in order to, at least, compete against the top tier.
Real men obviously use Eldar, Decurion Necrons and Spesss Mehreeens with their latest cheesy formations.
The more I think about it, the more it seems there're quite a bunch of TFG/WAAC players that have become used to be always one step ahead of most opponents thanks to the unbalanced codex system, and so FW crashes the party for them as it allows non-top tier armies extra options they actually need in order to, at least, compete against the top tier.
I think it was just that guy to be honest - other people happily accept FW in my meta. On the same day as this incident we had a killbursta, malanthrope and I think there was a FW knight.
Fast forward to the present day and time and we find Forgeworld is now fully integrated into GW proper. They now make full armies (or conversion parts for their rules) meant specifically for use in everyday games of 40k. Some people can't get over the past though. Instead of Line Item Vetoing specific pieces (such as the Hornet which invalidates 2 items in the Eldar army and surpasses them both for a lesser cost) they ban the entire range and make spurious claims of cost prohibition or "legality" in the everyday games they are specifically meant for.
Things have changed over the years and most of the old arguements are clung to regardless of their validity. The best way to approach FW is the same as any GW product: make sure you have the rules in hand and be cordial towards your opponent by explaining anything out of the ordinary. Forthright and sporting behavior will nip most of these problems in the bud.
That is so true. What shop is going to sell normal preds, if FW are better. Why buy anything IG, when the better way to go is to buy recast FW and supplement it with some ally. Normal tacticals, devastors? FW recasts are cheaper and some even look better. And have better rules too.
If you're saying specific options should be bad, you're completely irrational.
No what I ment was that when they allowed FW, people stoped buying models at the store. In other stores they couldn't use FW. So after the FW "supporting" shop closed, they stoped having a place to play. They also almost killed the community as a whole, because before escalation was baned here, titan eldar list were in top 7 out of 16. They were worse to play against then eldar are right now, as much as it is hard to believe.
That is so true. What shop is going to sell normal preds, if FW are better. Why buy anything IG, when the better way to go is to buy recast FW and supplement it with some ally. Normal tacticals, devastors? FW recasts are cheaper and some even look better. And have better rules too.
If we're talking about Recasts, well, that's a problem for a shop that doesn't just apply to FW by any means. Why would anyone bother with a Knight kit when they can buy 3 recasts for the same price? FW really doesn't have anything to do with this issue.
Likewise, finding relaibly and trustworthy recasters is not the easiest thing in the world, and varies wildly depending on where you are. If you're playing in Russia, I'm sure recasts are far more convenient than actual store-bought retail product. If you're living in the UK, this is probably not the case.
Show what? Even if he does have a IA rule book, which I doubt he has with most FW stuff being recasts,
People not having rules for their army/models/formations is a problem full stop, not a FW problem. If you're allowing people to play without having the rules that's a big problem generally in my opinion.
Makumba wrote: how do I know if it is the proper one. I can check if a codex is new or old just by looking at the cover. I can't do that with a FW book.
I would say that this is the only legitimate complaint with FW stuff - how do you check that the specific version of the rules that the player has is the current and correct one? There desperately needs to be a master list of which books contain the current rules for every unit on their website.
I've got loads of FW stuff and own many of the books and I find it very difficult to be sure that I'm using the current version of the rules for everything.
Scott-S6 wrote: I would say that this is the only legitimate complaint with FW stuff - how do you check that the specific version of the rules that the player has is the current and correct one?
The same way you do for codex rules. GW doesn't have a list of what rules are current or any way to verify that a digital codex hasn't been altered. In fact, GW doesn't even say that new codices replace the previous one, it's just an assumption that we have made as players.
That is so true. What shop is going to sell normal preds, if FW are better. Why buy anything IG, when the better way to go is to buy recast FW and supplement it with some ally. Normal tacticals, devastors? FW recasts are cheaper and some even look better. And have better rules too.
No what I ment was that when they allowed FW, people stoped buying models at the store. In other stores they couldn't use FW. So after the FW "supporting" shop closed, they stoped having a place to play. They also almost killed the community as a whole, because before escalation was baned here, titan eldar list were in top 7 out of 16. They were worse to play against then eldar are right now, as much as it is hard to believe.
I'm not sure where to start here as so very much of this is wrong.
1. If GW is making gak product then that's their problem. Stop making gak product. This rolls right into number 2 with:
2. GW needs to stop deceiving and deluding people by keeping up the appearance of seperation between FW and GW proper.
3. They are deliberately creating a problem because they are either too lazy to merge their departments, too lazy to write good rules, too lazy to keep their product lines up to snuff or too incompetent to do any and possibly all of the above. Either way, they deserve to be supplanted at this point.
4. Players using 'recasts' knowingly, deserve whatever happens next. If they're not supporting the store and product lines then those things will no longer be readily available to them.
Aside from the odd army such as DKOK or EDT most of FW is meant to be a supplement to the main GW armies. Even if you allowed FW in games it's not as if you're going to see whole roll outs of every army available.
Rules should always be present. If someone rolled up to my table with Grey Knights and no book I'd send him on his way. This doesn't just apply to FW.
All around, people just don't seem to able to use their brains and basic common sense, but this is the internet. If you have no store but have some players then simply get some terrain together and play at someone's house. And please don't come around whining that amongst 6-10 players absolutely no one has space and/or no one has terrain. Many of us started out with kleenex boxes and potted plants for terrain; stacked books and soda cans are no less legitimate.
Regardless, as has been said before, talk to your opponents and hammer out what works best for you individually and as a group. If you want to game together you'll figure out what works to make that happen, otherwise you just need to find other players. In this day and age it's not that tough.
purplkrush wrote: 3. They are deliberately creating a problem because they are either too lazy to merge their departments, too lazy to write good rules, too lazy to keep their product lines up to snuff or too incompetent to do any and possibly all of the above. Either way, they deserve to be supplanted at this point.
Doubt it's even that, you'll see power creep, overpowered combos, and faction superiority in any competitive game that continually releases new content for people to buy. MMOs get people to keep chasing the latest OP epic gear to keep them spending, card games like Magic release new sets with higher efficiency and better keywords that have strong fan favorite decks that rise to the top, Hearthstone throws out the latest OP cards to keep the meta interesting and changing, and a game like League of Legends puts out new and broken characters that invalidate older ones to get people spending. Even games that are years old and re-released are usually unable to maintain balance (like the new VS system with Hulk/Thanos/Starlord dominating the meta). Even a game like Dominion can be unbalanced despite all players using the same card pool. Certain interactions are mathematically superior to others and those are the way you win.
Even when you completely WIPE the board, balance is rarely a given. Fighting games continually output their latest sequel for people to buy and it always devolves into Tier List discussions. Some characters are great, some are awful, some are actually balanced and some are banned from competitive play. Heck, even in REAL life, some football teams are simply better than others, with more money to spend on drafting the best players in the league and creating an overpowered "deck" of juggernauts. In Fantasy life, some Bloodbowl teams are flat out superior to others, another Warhammer travesty of balance. Same with the game of Monopoly and the obsession over certain spaces of prime real estate.
Balance is hard. Games Workshop may not even try, but there are plenty of companies that do and still can't get it right. If anything, GW might be the smart ones from a business by not even bothering to try, but I doubt it given how ticked off it makes their customers.
Scott-S6 wrote: I would say that this is the only legitimate complaint with FW stuff - how do you check that the specific version of the rules that the player has is the current and correct one?
The same way you do for codex rules. GW doesn't have a list of what rules are current or any way to verify that a digital codex hasn't been altered. In fact, GW doesn't even say that new codices replace the previous one, it's just an assumption that we have made as players.
But you can go onto GW's website and see what the current codex looks like so you can tell if that's the current marine codex (for example) or a previous version.
With some FW units having multiple versions of their rules in books that are still available to buy it's highly confusing.
You can go and buy a book from FW today and yet some of the rules it contains will have been replaced by versions in subsequent books. They acknowledge this problem because the IA:Apoc books contained an index of every unit (GW and FW) noting which book(s) had the current rules. (we also clearly see that FW, at least, does intend that newer versions of the rules replace older versions) That was great except it was immediately out of date. A living document on their website would be a relatively small investment of effort but would make using FW models much easier.
All I'm going to say is;
You guys do realise that GW don't sell the Chaos Space Marine codex anymore, so the only 'legal' way to play them would be to use the Legiones Astartes list OR use KDK. Not alot of options, eh?
There are ways to get around 'limited to 2' (ie, multiple accounts, which is how people make money off limited edition stuff).
I don't know what is happening to be honest. I thought they were phasing out CSM in favour of 'God' Daemonkin and in the process enrage all the Chaos Undivided players (nothing new there, GW has a habit of this).
Scott-S6 wrote: I would say that this is the only legitimate complaint with FW stuff - how do you check that the specific version of the rules that the player has is the current and correct one?
The same way you do for codex rules. GW doesn't have a list of what rules are current or any way to verify that a digital codex hasn't been altered. In fact, GW doesn't even say that new codices replace the previous one, it's just an assumption that we have made as players.
But you can go onto GW's website and see what the current codex looks like so you can tell if that's the current marine codex (for example) or a previous version.
With some FW units having multiple versions of their rules in books that are still available to buy it's highly confusing.
You can go and buy a book from FW today and yet some of the rules it contains will have been replaced by versions in subsequent books. They acknowledge this problem because the IA:Apoc books contained an index of every unit (GW and FW) noting which book(s) had the current rules. (we also clearly see that FW, at least, does intend that newer versions of the rules replace older versions) That was great except it was immediately out of date. A living document on their website would be a relatively small investment of effort but would make using FW models much easier.
At the very least FW need to put on each models webpage where the current rules for that model are located. What would be even better is if they allowed you to download the current rules from the models webpage, in the same manner they do for the experimental units.
This is one of the reasons I'd like to do away with Codices and instead include stat cards with the models a la Warmahordes. Would allow updating rules and introducing new units so much more simple. But I guess that way they couldn't hock £30 Codices (or £50 IA books...)
One thing that'll be entertaining is when the Horus Heresy plastic starter is available for general release. The realistion that you will have to buy and use Forgeworld for the games. Lots of it. I can imagine those rabid anti-FW individuals will be a bit conflicted when people start playing 30k a lot more...
nudibranch wrote: This is one of the reasons I'd like to do away with Codices and instead include stat cards with the models a la Warmahordes. Would allow updating rules and introducing new units so much more simple. But I guess that way they couldn't hock £30 Codices (or £50 IA books...)
But it would fit really well with the idea if Campaign books replacing codices.
nudibranch wrote: This is one of the reasons I'd like to do away with Codices and instead include stat cards with the models a la Warmahordes. Would allow updating rules and introducing new units so much more simple. But I guess that way they couldn't hock £30 Codices (or £50 IA books...)
That's fine until you need to buy a model you've already got just to get the updated rules for it...
If you're saying specific options should be bad, you're completely irrational.
No what I ment was that when they allowed FW, people stoped buying models at the store. In other stores they couldn't use FW. So after the FW "supporting" shop closed, they stoped having a place to play. They also almost killed the community as a whole, because before escalation was baned here, titan eldar list were in top 7 out of 16. They were worse to play against then eldar are right now, as much as it is hard to believe.
NO that is not what you meant. And I quote, "why should Assault be viable in the first place".
Since Land Raiders still suck and Forge World actually offers something that gets the job done, I shouldn't take it because either you're too lazy to learn the rules for less than a minute (it doesn't take that long to read a unit entry) or because something shouldn't be viable in the first place?
zedmeister wrote: One thing that'll be entertaining is when the Horus Heresy plastic starter is available for general release. The realistion that you will have to buy and use Forgeworld for the games. Lots of it. I can imagine those rapid anti-FW individuals will be a bit conflicted when people start playing 30k a lot more...
Just announced today! Preorder Nov 7th, release Nov 14th!
HoundsofDemos wrote: I recently played a game with my space marine army accompanied by solomon lok. He was the only forge world unit in my army, i had his stats with me and he doesn't exactly do anything that is out there. one opponent was totally on board and we had a great game.
my second guy of the night started off being a bit weird about it, making comments that forgeworld is outside the game. When i produced the pages that word for word say that most forge world units are meant for standard games he stopped for a while. Latter when he had some bad shooting due to Lok's warlord trait giving my marines fnp while they sat on the deciding objective, he had a mini freakout claiming that Lok's warlord trait is grossly over powered. the game was not fun from there on.
Has anyone else had people react negatively to a forge world unit, even ones that don't seem particularly cheesy (unless someone wants to argue that Lok is OP)
I myself get "Weird" about it. I ban it in my tournaments which solves much of my angst.
It is grossly unfair to ask the already heavily taxed gaming community who want to participate in this game to go out and get all the extra rule books and units it takes to compete and keep up with a guy whose got these units and books.
If you want new players to enter this hobby, the LAST thing you need is to add $1,000 to the cost of even competing. If people like it in casual play, that's a whole other thing. BUT in tournaments, I'm totally unsupportive.
HoundsofDemos wrote: I recently played a game with my space marine army accompanied by solomon lok. He was the only forge world unit in my army, i had his stats with me and he doesn't exactly do anything that is out there. one opponent was totally on board and we had a great game.
my second guy of the night started off being a bit weird about it, making comments that forgeworld is outside the game. When i produced the pages that word for word say that most forge world units are meant for standard games he stopped for a while. Latter when he had some bad shooting due to Lok's warlord trait giving my marines fnp while they sat on the deciding objective, he had a mini freakout claiming that Lok's warlord trait is grossly over powered. the game was not fun from there on.
Has anyone else had people react negatively to a forge world unit, even ones that don't seem particularly cheesy (unless someone wants to argue that Lok is OP)
I myself get "Weird" about it. I ban it in my tournaments which solves much of my angst.
It is grossly unfair to ask the already heavily taxed gaming community who want to participate in this game to go out and get all the extra rule books and units it takes to compete and keep up with a guy whose got these units and books.
If you want new players to enter this hobby, the LAST thing you need is to add $1,000 to the cost of even competing. If people like it in casual play, that's a whole other thing. BUT in tournaments, I'm totally unsupportive.
I fail to see how banning Forge World will help with that. People will need to buy a ton of expensive books and models if they want to memorize all current rules and remain competitive regardless of you banning Forge World. Seems like an arbitrary, shallow fix to a massive problem built in to the game by the studio.
HoundsofDemos wrote: I recently played a game with my space marine army accompanied by solomon lok. He was the only forge world unit in my army, i had his stats with me and he doesn't exactly do anything that is out there. one opponent was totally on board and we had a great game.
my second guy of the night started off being a bit weird about it, making comments that forgeworld is outside the game. When i produced the pages that word for word say that most forge world units are meant for standard games he stopped for a while. Latter when he had some bad shooting due to Lok's warlord trait giving my marines fnp while they sat on the deciding objective, he had a mini freakout claiming that Lok's warlord trait is grossly over powered. the game was not fun from there on.
Has anyone else had people react negatively to a forge world unit, even ones that don't seem particularly cheesy (unless someone wants to argue that Lok is OP)
I myself get "Weird" about it. I ban it in my tournaments which solves much of my angst.
It is grossly unfair to ask the already heavily taxed gaming community who want to participate in this game to go out and get all the extra rule books and units it takes to compete and keep up with a guy whose got these units and books.
If you want new players to enter this hobby, the LAST thing you need is to add $1,000 to the cost of even competing. If people like it in casual play, that's a whole other thing. BUT in tournaments, I'm totally unsupportive.
The problem with this is that nothing FW puts out afaik can compete with the new Eldar and Crons, put out by GW. If you want new players who want to join the hobby and want to play CSM, why are you limiting their ability to compete by saying, nope, you can't use official rules published by GW in order to make your armies even remotely on par?
You know what I think would be great? If GW stuck to what they want to by only publishing the "good" armies (SM, Eldar, Tau) and left FW to do the "evil" armies entirely. At least there would be some reason to keep the company's banner and website split.
I don't mind at all because I'm just happy to play. But where I came from nobody uses forgeworld because they say its overpowered. I've never even played against it before but that's sad when someone uses the rules as a crutch for why they are failing.
HoundsofDemos wrote: I recently played a game with my space marine army accompanied by solomon lok. He was the only forge world unit in my army, i had his stats with me and he doesn't exactly do anything that is out there. one opponent was totally on board and we had a great game.
my second guy of the night started off being a bit weird about it, making comments that forgeworld is outside the game. When i produced the pages that word for word say that most forge world units are meant for standard games he stopped for a while. Latter when he had some bad shooting due to Lok's warlord trait giving my marines fnp while they sat on the deciding objective, he had a mini freakout claiming that Lok's warlord trait is grossly over powered. the game was not fun from there on.
Has anyone else had people react negatively to a forge world unit, even ones that don't seem particularly cheesy (unless someone wants to argue that Lok is OP)
I myself get "Weird" about it. I ban it in my tournaments which solves much of my angst.
It is grossly unfair to ask the already heavily taxed gaming community who want to participate in this game to go out and get all the extra rule books and units it takes to compete and keep up with a guy whose got these units and books.
If you want new players to enter this hobby, the LAST thing you need is to add $1,000 to the cost of even competing. If people like it in casual play, that's a whole other thing. BUT in tournaments, I'm totally unsupportive.
I fail to see how banning Forge World will help with that. People will need to buy a ton of expensive books and models if they want to memorize all current rules and remain competitive regardless of you banning Forge World. Seems like an arbitrary, shallow fix to a massive problem built in to the game by the studio.
The math is simple. The baseline of knowledge you eventually need is whats in your codex and then whats in theirs. those change so that baseline is always moving. And thats is QUITE enough to keep up on for anyone with a normal life and who doesn't live in mom's basement.
So your fauilure to see how adding an ENTIRE second games worth of material, models and fluff to the equation is fine. But it isnt complicated. If people start showing up with things you dont recognized and have not PLANNED for in your list, its a good bet there will be a problem, RIGHT? Right! And it's really that simple.
The problem with this is that nothing FW puts out afaik can compete with the new Eldar and Crons, put out by GW. If you want new players who want to join the hobby and want to play CSM, why are you limiting their ability to compete by saying, nope, you can't use official rules published by GW in order to make your armies even remotely on par?
A false premise. You absolutely can compete with the aforementioned. Proof has been amply offered up many times by many generals. WILL you is another story but CAN you? yup. And without Forgeworld even! GASP!
Its absolutely false that you need FORGE WORLD to do this.
Exalbaru wrote: I don't mind at all because I'm just happy to play. But where I came from nobody uses forgeworld because they say its overpowered. I've never even played against it before but that's sad when someone uses the rules as a crutch for why they are failing.
It is a crutch. What happens is, codex's shift around and people don't WANT to change their lists. Or the codex changes and they say to themselves "Well this bad ass FW thing wont be worrying about chamnge any time soon..." and you get it in your head that tactics don't matter.
VERY recent example: I faced a list i was supremely outclassed by. I played smart. I killed, in total, one Tactical marine in Close combat... and none outside of close combat. One model. I tied the game, almost won it. I was a Hull point away from winning, and the worst part was, ALL THREE of my Obliterators fired all five turns! never lost an Obliterator, couldn't kill that last Hull point. What can ya' do?
But the point is, i TIED a game i sghould have won after killing only ONE enemy model.
Yeah, yet more elaborate justification for "I don't like Forge World, so I don't want other people to be able to use it."
It's not wrong, just don't pretend you're doing anyone any favors by banning it. It's fairly obvious you've got a chip on your shoulder about it.
Its fairly obvious you didn't understand a word I said then. And that's okay too. My point stands on its own merits whether you THINK I have a chip on my shoulder OR NOT.
Play it in casual games. Don't bring that stuff to tournaments. That's my take.
Cookie cutter? Lol. You really should read my blog. I'm pretty sure no one calls my lists cookie cutter. So I assume this wasn't directed at me. If it was you REALLY don't know me.
Jancoran wrote: Cookie cutter? Lol. You really should read my blog. I'm pretty sure no one calls my lists cookie cutter. So I assume this wasn't directed at me. If it was you REALLY don't know me.
You're teaching us all about you right now, reading your blog is totally unnecessary. Clearly you're your own biggest fan. And that's okay, too.
1: I don't care about your blog or who you are.
2: FW is 40k expansions with GW logo printed on them.
3: FW does put out FAQS and will answer questions about rules clarifications.
4: It seems you do have a rather large Chip on your shoulder about it.
HoundsofDemos wrote: I recently played a game with my space marine army accompanied by solomon lok. He was the only forge world unit in my army, i had his stats with me and he doesn't exactly do anything that is out there. one opponent was totally on board and we had a great game.
my second guy of the night started off being a bit weird about it, making comments that forgeworld is outside the game. When i produced the pages that word for word say that most forge world units are meant for standard games he stopped for a while. Latter when he had some bad shooting due to Lok's warlord trait giving my marines fnp while they sat on the deciding objective, he had a mini freakout claiming that Lok's warlord trait is grossly over powered. the game was not fun from there on.
Has anyone else had people react negatively to a forge world unit, even ones that don't seem particularly cheesy (unless someone wants to argue that Lok is OP)
I myself get "Weird" about it. I ban it in my tournaments which solves much of my angst.
It is grossly unfair to ask the already heavily taxed gaming community who want to participate in this game to go out and get all the extra rule books and units it takes to compete and keep up with a guy whose got these units and books.
If you want new players to enter this hobby, the LAST thing you need is to add $1,000 to the cost of even competing. If people like it in casual play, that's a whole other thing. BUT in tournaments, I'm totally unsupportive.
I fail to see how banning Forge World will help with that. People will need to buy a ton of expensive books and models if they want to memorize all current rules and remain competitive regardless of you banning Forge World. Seems like an arbitrary, shallow fix to a massive problem built in to the game by the studio.
The math is simple. The baseline of knowledge you eventually need is whats in your codex and then whats in theirs. those change so that baseline is always moving. And thats is QUITE enough to keep up on for anyone with a normal life and who doesn't live in mom's basement.
And yet you think it's too hard for people to keep track of FW stuff? C'mon, it's not like they're publishing revolutionary stuff. Just require that people bring a copy of the rules and hand it to the opponent beforehand. Learning what a Sicarian or a Fire Raptor Gunship does isn't hard at all and if you have a competitive list you can deal with most FW stuff.
So your fauilure to see how adding an ENTIRE second games worth of material, models and fluff to the equation is fine. But it isnt complicated. If people start showing up with things you dont recognized and have not PLANNED for in your list, its a good bet there will be a problem, RIGHT? Right! And it's really that simple.
This is the internet age. People can look up what these units do and plan for them. Besides, if you seriously can not handle a DKoK list or a Rapier laser destroyer then you have a lot more problems than just not knowing what the FW stuff does in a tournament. Decurion and Eldar are far and away worse than anything you'll find in an Imperial Armor book.
5: Forgeworld IS legal in 40K and in 30K and is, in fact, the only way for some armies (CSM, IG, etc) to actually stand a chance against many of the power armies,
4: It seems you do have a rather large Chip on your shoulder about it.
My point stands on its own. So again: chip or not, I'm not going to make people learn and earn all that adfditional stuff. If they want it in the game, put it in the codex.
This is the internet age. People can look up what these units do and plan for them. Besides, if you seriously can not handle a DKoK list or a Rapier laser destroyer then you have a lot more problems than just not knowing what the FW stuff does in a tournament. Decurion and Eldar are far and away worse than anything you'll find in an Imperial Armor book.
You're pretending that my argument was that all Forge World is broken. It isn't. Some of it sucks. Using low grade units as examples might SOUND like a good argument in your head but the reality is, it wasn't once you actually typed it out. And I wasn't even suggesting its all broken so you're arguing against a phantom argument I'm not really making.
My argument had very little to do with how UBER or not UBER it is (though the Lynx and similar things are uh...yeah...) It has to do with making the hobby ACCESSIBLE. It already diminishes in that regard daily, on its own, without Forge World. It needs no help. We need new blood in this hobby. we need the old blood to come back. We're not going to do that by subjecting them to an entire other game they have to learn.
So you can pretend like Forge World creates no barriers and so on. But you are pretending.
This is the internet age. People can look up what these units do and plan for them. Besides, if you seriously can not handle a DKoK list or a Rapier laser destroyer then you have a lot more problems than just not knowing what the FW stuff does in a tournament. Decurion and Eldar are far and away worse than anything you'll find in an Imperial Armor book.
You're pretending that my argument was that all Forge World is broken. It isn't. Some of it sucks. Using low grade units as examples might SOUND like a good argument in your head but the reality is, it wasn't once you actually typed it out. And I wasn't even suggesting its all broken so you're arguing against a phantom argument I'm not really making.
My argument had very little to do with how UBER or not UBER it is (though the Lynx and similar things are uh...yeah...) It has to do with making the hobby ACCESSIBLE. It already diminishes in that regard daily, on its own, without Forge World. It needs no help. We need new blood in this hobby. we need the old blood to come back. We're not going to do that by subjecting them to an entire other game they have to learn.
So you can pretend like Forge World creates no barriers and so on. But you are pretending.
My point was to counter this:
But it isnt complicated. If people start showing up with things you dont recognized and have not PLANNED for in your list, its a good bet there will be a problem, RIGHT? Right! And it's really that simple.
Your statement implies that people adding FW stuff to their army would mess up someone's strategy. If it's a tournament setting I fail to see how adding a Fire Raptor gunship will ruin an Eldar player's strategy if he has contingency plans for aircraft in general. And before you say it, the Fire Raptor Gunship IS a good unit.
And FW creates no more barriers than GW does. You think Decurion, dataslates, short codex cycles, constant power creep and formations are somehow less culpable for making the game impenetrable than a Razorback with a multi-melta on it? Or a Predator with a souped up Autocannon? Or a Leman Russ with a twin-linked Lascannon on it?
In fact, I would argue that you excluding players who love FW units and models does more to harm the accessibility of the hobby to newcomers and old timers than benefits it.
4: It seems you do have a rather large Chip on your shoulder about it.
My point stands on its own. So again: chip or not, I'm not going to make people learn and earn all that adfditional stuff. If they want it in the game, put it in the codex.
You should go over everything in your army anyway before you play for the most part, it takes like what, 5 seconds to explain a Sicaran tank is?
With the huge number of books, supplements, and dataslates, FW books are going to be the least of your worries. The days when everyone had all the books are long gone, and the extra cost is nothing near what it used to be proportionally, particularly with the vastly increased price of codex books and array of mini-DLC books.
Likewise, with regards to cost, GW's core mainstream prices have caught up with FW book and model pricing in most instances, in some cases even exceeded it. Many current FW books don't really cost any more than a standard Codex does, and those that do usually give you two army lists and stuff for a third faction as well.
With regards to added complexity, again, with the sheer number of codex books, supplements, formations, "campaigns", DLC dataslates, etc, FW is the least of one's worries.
And when GW plastic models are now coming out at prices exceeding that of their FW counterparts (looking at you AdMech Magos Dominus), the pricing issue is dead.
More to the point, quite simply, when core GW stuff is far and away more powerful than anything FW offers, the balance issue is out the window.
Plenty of events run FW stuff without issue, FW stuff hardly dominates anything at them, and all this talk of banning FW because it's unfair to ask people to be familiar with the rules is nothing but lame holdover hate from the mindset of older editions where there was a meaningful gap in cost.
Jancoran wrote: My point stands on its own. So again: chip or not, I'm not going to make people learn and earn all that adfditional stuff. If they want it in the game, put it in the codex.
If you don't think people should have to learn my FW rules then why should I have to learn your codex rules? You can't use the "it's a complicated game" excuse and then selectively allow the stuff that you personally want to use and benefit from. If FW rules are banned then a lot of codex rules should also be banned, for the sake of simplifying the game. In fact, if you have a tournament where anything besides a single naked captain and two naked 5-man tactical squads is allowed then you are already accepting that the game will be complicated and have no excuse for banning FW rules.
Not that "it's so complicated" is a good argument in the first place, of course. Any sensible community/tournament/whatever requires each player to bring all of the rules for their army. There's no barrier to entry for the opponent because they can just read your rules at the beginning of the game.
Your statement implies that people adding FW stuff to their army would mess up someone's strategy. If it's a tournament setting I fail to see how adding a Fire Raptor gunship will ruin an Eldar player's strategy if he has contingency plans for aircraft in general. And before you say it, the Fire Raptor Gunship IS a good unit.
And FW creates no more barriers than GW does. You think Decurion, dataslates, short codex cycles, constant power creep and formations are somehow less culpable for making the game impenetrable than a Razorback with a multi-melta on it? Or a Predator with a souped up Autocannon? Or a Leman Russ with a twin-linked Lascannon on it?
In fact, I would argue that you excluding players who love FW units and models does more to harm the accessibility of the hobby to newcomers and old timers than benefits it.
Here again you argue against a point I did not make. And my statement doesn't IN FACT imply anything. I flat out said what I meant which is that you shouldn't have to plan for an ENTIRE NEW LAYER of the game nor afford it when AS HAS BEEN SAID AND AGREED the game is going fast as it is. And yes, obviously, Fire Raptors are good. Duh.
Comparing what GW and Forge World do to create barriers is a fools errand and ALSO distracts from the point. Who said this was a comparison? Who said this was PURELY about power levels (lynx)? My central point wasn't that. You act like my central point is that, when Ive told you it isn't. Maybe there's a third person here and I cant see their posts?
The base game is the base game. So anything in a codex or the main rulebook is that game. Forge World is entirely unnecessary because as has been said, there's this thing called a codex. So if you want this in your games, put it in the codex. It's not that hard to add a couple pages. If they arent willing to do that, then its not core to the game, even IF they say you can use those units in the game. They're a model company. They sell stuff. Thats what they do. In the case of Forge World they want to charge you the moon to have it. So of COURSE they are going to whore out any semblance of economic balance amongst players for the greater profits it will bring; and the munchkins who have the money will all indulge.
That isn't to say no one buys it for its aesthetic. So don't start in on that. Clearly many do collect for both Warhammer 40K and the Forge World add ons. Some people just love the model and for them, the model is the issue. Good. That is why I don't feel anything about casual games... as has been said. Play casual games with all the expensive tricked out toys you and your friends will actually enjoy playing with. Do it. You can call me bad names all you like for not joining you I guess but itsnot like Im telling people they are bd people for liking them. This isn't about that either (though there definitely is a brand of player so addicted to winning and so filled with loathing for losing that they would do anything and pay anything to buy those wins).
And to be clear... I am NOT a person who cannot make these purchases. Rest assured that I can afford whatever model I choose. I can afford every book and every model, at will. So this isn't about ME or my unwillingnss to pay. This isnt sour grapes that I cant keep up. I can keep up better than most. I'm not some salty bastard who hates GW, so this isnt about some crusade against GW. I love their toys and I love playing it. Three times a week or so! So this is strictly about my feelings on growing the hobby and the grateful praise and feedback I get from returning players and the new ones for not allowing this stuff in tournaments.
As a T.O. (I've run four events, three of them ITC in the last 3 months) I'm in charge of the overall experience for the majority, not pandering to a vocal minority who have gone out and spent $1,000 to buy wins or indulge their inner munchkin. Once you're rolling for Night Fight, you're going to have fun (if that's the type of person you are) even if i made you leave your Fire Raptor behind. You'll get on forums and lobby and so on but the bottom line is, you'll have fun with or without the Titan unless you're just unpleasant. The guy across from you might NOT have as much fun WITH that Lynx (or whatever example you want). and that's why I oppose it in tournaments.
Whil I can't stop you from bringing broken things from within the codex, I can reduce the number of available broken things. THAT I can do. I can say 0-1 Supr Heavies too, as the ITC does. Why do we do that? You know why.
Jancoran wrote: The base game is the base game. So anything in a codex or the main rulebook is that game.
This is a house rule that you have invented. Please do not pretend that your house rules have anything to do with the game as published by GW.
Forge World is entirely unnecessary because as has been said, there's this thing called a codex.
Codex rules are entirely unnecessary because as has been said, there's this thing called a Forge World book.
As a T.O. (I've run four events, three of them ITC in the last 3 months) I'm in charge of the overall experience for the majority, not pandering to a vocal minority who have gone out and spent $1,000 to buy wins or indulge their inner munchkin.
So why do you allow codex rules? After all, it's not like "spend $1000 to buy wins" is something that only happens with FW rules.
The guy across from you might NOT have as much fun WITH that Lynx (or whatever example you want). and that's why I oppose it in tournaments.
And the guy across from you might NOT have as much fun WITH that tactical squad (or whatever example you want). Therefore ban codex rules.
The base game is the base game. So anything in a codex or the main rulebook is that game.
There is no base game. This is a mental construct of a select part of the playerbase, and GW will be the first ones to tell you this.
As far as the rules of 7th edition are concerned, 40K does not have a "base game".
Forge World is entirely unnecessary because as has been said, there's this thing called a codex.
Which doesn't cover the entire breadth of the 40k universe or GW's product line, and is not intended to, hence why we also have dataslates, supplements, etc.
So if you want this in your games, put it in the codex. It's not that hard to add a couple pages. If they arent willing to do that, then its not core to the game, even IF they say you can use those units in the game. They're a model company. They sell stuff. Thats what they do. In the case of Forge World they want to charge you the moon to have it.
I'm not sure if you've been paying attention recently, but have you looked at GW's prices of late?
GW's plastic characters cost as much or more than FW's equivalents. Basic codex books are now in the same price range as many Imperial Armour books (and the expensive ones give you two armies typically and usually stuff for a third). Those relatively new plastic Tempestus Scions or the relatively old plastic Dire Avengers? Same price per model as a squad of Death Korps Grenadiers.
This is to say nothing of $5.99 dataslates for model rules & formations, $74 "war zone" books. $150 mega-models, etc. Hell, the new Bloodthirster costs twice what the old one did.
Price, quite simply, is no longer a leg to stand on.
So of COURSE they are going to whore out any semblance of economic balance amongst players for the greater profits it will bring; and the munchkins who have the money will all indulge.
We already have massively different costs to build different armies even without FW, and again, FW costs are increasingly no higher than GW's offerings.
As a T.O. (I've run four events, three of them ITC in the last 3 months) I'm in charge of the overall experience for the majority, not pandering to a vocal minority who have gone out and spent $1,000 to buy wins or indulge their inner munchkin. Once you're rolling for Night Fight, you're going to have fun (if that's the type of person you are) even if i made you leave your Fire Raptor behind. You'll get on forums and lobby and so on but the bottom line is, you'll have fun with or without the Titan unless you're just unpleasant. The guy across from you might NOT have as much fun WITH that Lynx (or whatever example you want). and that's why I oppose it in tournaments.
Have you looked at tournament results where FW was allowed? If you look at the Nova Open, out of the top 16 armies, IIRC only 4 had any FW units at all, a Malanthrope, Loth, a Fire Raptor, and a Remora Drone Fighter, none of which are outrageously broken, particularly relative to Codex alternatives.
Nobody has problems wing *some* restrictions for the most part. Most people aren't terribly butthurt about the ITC's superheavy restrictions for example. If you want to say "No Lynxes", most people won't be terribly offended. It's when you lump things like Decimators, DKoK armies, Leman Russ Annihilators, Hazard Suits, Barracuda fighters, Grot Tanks, Mega Dreds, Sonic Dreads, Nightwing Fighters, etc into the same pot in the same way, that's what irks people.
Do you also ban dataslates, supplements, campaign books, etc? They're not "codex" books either, and are additional costs as well.
Wait he thinks the Leman Russ Annihilator is OP? The Leman Russ with a single twin linked Lascannon which struggles to do diddly squat against anything except the occasional IC whom just happened to be stupid enough to stand alone in front of it?
Your statement implies that people adding FW stuff to their army would mess up someone's strategy. If it's a tournament setting I fail to see how adding a Fire Raptor gunship will ruin an Eldar player's strategy if he has contingency plans for aircraft in general. And before you say it, the Fire Raptor Gunship IS a good unit.
And FW creates no more barriers than GW does. You think Decurion, dataslates, short codex cycles, constant power creep and formations are somehow less culpable for making the game impenetrable than a Razorback with a multi-melta on it? Or a Predator with a souped up Autocannon? Or a Leman Russ with a twin-linked Lascannon on it?
In fact, I would argue that you excluding players who love FW units and models does more to harm the accessibility of the hobby to newcomers and old timers than benefits it.
Here again you argue against a point I did not make. And my statement doesn't IN FACT imply anything. I flat out said what I meant which is that you shouldn't have to plan for an ENTIRE NEW LAYER of the game nor afford it when AS HAS BEEN SAID AND AGREED the game is going fast as it is. And yes, obviously, Fire Raptors are good. Duh.
And I responded to that. There is little in a IA book that you can't deal with if you are prepared to face the respective army it belongs to.
Comparing what GW and Forge World do to create barriers is a fools errand and ALSO distracts from the point. Who said this was a comparison? Who said this was PURELY about power levels (lynx)? My central point wasn't that. You act like my central point is that, when Ive told you it isn't. Maybe there's a third person here and I cant see their posts?
I'm not allowed to argue against all of your points if they aren't what you think is the main one? Okay.
The base game is the base game. So anything in a codex or the main rulebook is that game. Forge World is entirely unnecessary because as has been said, there's this thing called a codex. So if you want this in your games, put it in the codex. It's not that hard to add a couple pages. If they arent willing to do that, then its not core to the game, even IF they say you can use those units in the game. They're a model company. They sell stuff. Thats what they do. In the case of Forge World they want to charge you the moon to have it. So of COURSE they are going to whore out any semblance of economic balance amongst players for the greater profits it will bring; and the munchkins who have the money will all indulge.
What is so superior about the codex? Do you just like the font better or something? Both books are equally valid sources of rules and have been for years. Besides, if your argument is that "Not in the Codex, not a part of the 'main game' (Whatever the hell that means)" then I presume fortifications, dataslates, and supplements are also banned. After all, it's not hard to add a couple of pages. If they aren't willing to do that, then it's not core to the game.
That isn't to say no one buys it for its aesthetic. So don't start in on that. Clearly many do collect for both Warhammer 40K and the Forge World add ons. Some people just love the model and for them, the model is the issue. Good. That is why I don't feel anything about casual games... as has been said. Play casual games with all the expensive tricked out toys you and your friends will actually enjoy playing with. Do it. You can call me bad names all you like for not joining you I guess but itsnot like Im telling people they are bd people for liking them. This isn't about that either (though there definitely is a brand of player so addicted to winning and so filled with loathing for losing that they would do anything and pay anything to buy those wins).
I never called you anything. And you can make that argument for things like Riptides and Wraithknights too.
And to be clear... I am NOT a person who cannot make these purchases. Rest assured that I can afford whatever model I choose. I can afford every book and every model, at will. So this isn't about ME or my unwillingnss to pay. This isnt sour grapes that I cant keep up. I can keep up better than most. I'm not some salty bastard who hates GW, so this isnt about some crusade against GW. I love their toys and I love playing it. Three times a week or so! So this is strictly about my feelings on growing the hobby and the grateful praise and feedback I get from returning players and the new ones for not allowing this stuff in tournaments.
You're just perpetrating misinformation. I would hardly call that admirable.
As a T.O. (I've run four events, three of them ITC in the last 3 months) I'm in charge of the overall experience for the majority, not pandering to a vocal minority who have gone out and spent $1,000 to buy wins or indulge their inner munchkin. Once you're rolling for Night Fight, you're going to have fun (if that's the type of person you are) even if i made you leave your Fire Raptor behind. You'll get on forums and lobby and so on but the bottom line is, you'll have fun with or without the Titan unless you're just unpleasant. The guy across from you might NOT have as much fun WITH that Lynx (or whatever example you want). and that's why I oppose it in tournaments.
Now wait a cotton picking moment. ITC isn't in a Codex! It's not part of the main game! It should be banned! How could people keep up with those rules? If they wanted to add tournament rules they could've added two pages to the BRB but they didn't so it's not a part of the core game.
Also, just ban non-Codex LoW in general. That'll solve your problems right there.
Whil I can't stop you from bringing broken things from within the codex, I can reduce the number of available broken things. THAT I can do. I can say 0-1 Supr Heavies too, as the ITC does. Why do we do that? You know why.
What, from like 100 to 99? Banning FW is like burning down a house to deal with a mold problem.
But you know what Janc? I don't think I can convince you that FW isn't broken and that you are chasing after ghosts. I think the problems you have with the British resin crack dealers go deeper than just balance or availability issues. So, ban away Mr. J. But you're missing out on some really cool models and rules.
When I run my private events, to make things simpler on my friends, I insist we all only play Chaos Space Marines with no supplements or anything outside of the main codex.
nareik wrote: When I run my private events, to make things simpler on my friends, I insist we all only play Chaos Space Marines with no supplements or anything outside of the main codex.
Its one way to make them competitive .
Good call. After all, if this thread has taught us anything, it's that the more arbitrary restrictions you impose on a gaming community the more inclusive it is.
nareik wrote: When I run my private events, to make things simpler on my friends, I insist we all only play Chaos Space Marines with no supplements or anything outside of the main codex.
Its one way to make them competitive .
Good call. After all, if this thread has taught us anything, it's that the more arbitrary restrictions you impose on a gaming community the more inclusive it is.
It makes me appreciative that I don't play in Arkaine's or Janc's meta. I love my HH Ultras too much.
To keep the "base game" argument flowing, let's ban all codeci. After all, the 3rd edition rulebook included army lists for all armies that had models at the time. So feth codices and feth pay-to-win Tau.
Also this is not arbitrary at all. Because I say so, and I have a blog*.
As a T.O. (I've run four events, three of them ITC in the last 3 months) I'm in charge of the overall experience for the majority, not pandering to a vocal minority who have gone out and spent $1,000 to buy wins or indulge their inner munchkin. Once you're rolling for Night Fight, you're going to have fun (if that's the type of person you are) even if i made you leave your Fire Raptor behind. You'll get on forums and lobby and so on but the bottom line is, you'll have fun with or without the Titan unless you're just unpleasant. The guy across from you might NOT have as much fun WITH that Lynx (or whatever example you want). and that's why I oppose it in tournaments.
Whil I can't stop you from bringing broken things from within the codex, I can reduce the number of available broken things. THAT I can do. I can say 0-1 Supr Heavies too, as the ITC does. Why do we do that? You know why.
Because taking a Forgeworld unit or army makes you a WAAC munchkin... seriously?
Going by all logic... why not just ban all the Codexes that other people haven't read into... I mean... People can just ask to see the rules of these units, it's not like people don't have the FW books with them when they play...
Aside from maybe the new Phantom Titan rules, I can't think of any forge world units/army lists that are at all OP. Deredeo and Contemptor-Mortis Dreads are strong but not game breaking in the slightest. Most FWIG tanks are mediocre at best. Elysians used to be borderline OP in 5/6th ed. due to Vendetta spam but are nowhere near as powerful as they used to be. Oh, and like I said in the other thread, there's also Tyrant's Legion which was always weak but is now possibly the worst army in the entire game (definitely sub-CSM.) IMHO, most of what FW produces is only mediocre at best. It's mainly for enthusiasts who are after cool and highly detailed models at a premium price.
nudibranch wrote: Aside from maybe the new Phantom Titan rules, I can't think of any forge world units/army lists that are at all OP. Deredeo and Contemptor-Mortis Dreads are strong but not game breaking in the slightest. Most FWIG tanks are mediocre at best. Elysians used to be borderline OP in 5/6th ed. due to Vendetta spam but are nowhere near as powerful as they used to be. Oh, and like I said in the other thread, there's also Tyrant's Legion which was always weak but is now possibly the worst army in the entire game (definitely sub-CSM.) IMHO, most of what FW produces is only mediocre at best. It's mainly for enthusiasts who are after cool and highly detailed models at a premium price.
Mediocre compared to the arms race of 7th.
Legion rules trounce anything GW comes up with and I now use them over my codex.
As a T.O. (I've run four events, three of them ITC in the last 3 months) I'm in charge of the overall experience for the majority, not pandering to a vocal minority who have gone out and spent $1,000 to buy wins or indulge their inner munchkin. Once you're rolling for Night Fight, you're going to have fun (if that's the type of person you are) even if i made you leave your Fire Raptor behind. You'll get on forums and lobby and so on but the bottom line is, you'll have fun with or without the Titan unless you're just unpleasant. The guy across from you might NOT have as much fun WITH that Lynx (or whatever example you want). and that's why I oppose it in tournaments.
Whil I can't stop you from bringing broken things from within the codex, I can reduce the number of available broken things. THAT I can do. I can say 0-1 Supr Heavies too, as the ITC does. Why do we do that? You know why.
Because taking a Forgeworld unit or army makes you a WAAC munchkin... seriously?
Going by all logic... why not just ban all the Codexes that other people haven't read into... I mean... People can just ask to see the rules of these units, it's not like people don't have the FW books with them when they play...
Don't forget those pesky data slates! They aren't a part of the codex's either!
Jancoran wrote: Whil I can't stop you from bringing broken things from within the codex,
I can say 0-1 Supr Heavies too, as the ITC does.
That second statement directly contradicts the first. Clearly you are comfortable with restricting individual choices from specific codexes, but in the one instance for Forge World publications, you choose not to.
As a T.O. (I've run four events, three of them ITC in the last 3 months) I'm in charge of the overall experience for the majority, not pandering to a vocal minority who have gone out and spent $1,000 to buy wins or indulge their inner munchkin.
Using FW to buy Wins? HAHAHAHAHA!
Want me to make a list of FW models that are cheaper than a Wraithknight or Riptide or Stormsurge?
Yeah god forbids someone likes Elysians or Death Korps.
The Eldar are kind of an issue unto themselves. That codex is okay if you're only allowed 0-1 Super heavies. Its mean but its not indestructible at that point.
And so no.
Tau Empire has always had a simple answer: smash them in melee. Even just three Marines can end an entire Fire Warrior unit, so even with overwatch its worth skipping your shooting phase and GETTING there.
I cannot solve every ill. What I can do is ELIMINATE a huge chunk of burden from players, while recognizing that there will never be a perfect game. If you live in the fantasy land of "theres a perfect game out there somewhere" that's fine. I don't.
But we can stop players from making it ever more expensive and in some cases less broken. thats a goal we CAN acheive.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Don't even bother replying to Jancoran. Peregrine already ripped him a new one and I'm still awaiting his reply.
I wouldnt know. I put Peregrine on ignore like five years ago.
As a T.O. (I've run four events, three of them ITC in the last 3 months) I'm in charge of the overall experience for the majority, not pandering to a vocal minority who have gone out and spent $1,000 to buy wins or indulge their inner munchkin.
Using FW to buy Wins? HAHAHAHAHA!
Want me to make a list of FW models that are cheaper than a Wraithknight or Riptide or Stormsurge?
Yeah god forbids someone likes Elysians or Death Korps.
Both those examples are, as YOU know, on the low end of offenders and they get used for normal games all the time. Elysians are not insane. Most would say under powered. But that isn't actually the point, which you, and others, are missing. So play Elysians. I don't care if you do. As I said. Just not in tournaments.
The Eldar are kind of an issue unto themselves. That codex is okay if you're only allowed 0-1 Super heavies. Its mean but its not indestructible at that point.
And so no.
Tau Empire has always had a simple answer: smash them in melee. Even just three Marines can end an entire Fire Warrior unit, so even with overwatch its worth skipping your shooting phase and GETTING there.
I cannot solve every ill. What I can do is ELIMINATE a huge chunk of burden from players, while recognizing that there will never be a perfect game. If you live in the fantasy land of "theres a perfect game out there somewhere" that's fine. I don't.
But we can stop players from making it ever more expensive and in some cases less broken. thats a goal we CAN acheive.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Don't even bother replying to Jancoran. Peregrine already ripped him a new one and I'm still awaiting his reply.
I wouldnt know. I put Peregrine on ignore like five years ago.
As a T.O. (I've run four events, three of them ITC in the last 3 months) I'm in charge of the overall experience for the majority, not pandering to a vocal minority who have gone out and spent $1,000 to buy wins or indulge their inner munchkin.
Using FW to buy Wins? HAHAHAHAHA!
Want me to make a list of FW models that are cheaper than a Wraithknight or Riptide or Stormsurge?
Yeah god forbids someone likes Elysians or Death Korps.
Both those examples are, as YOU know, on the low end of offenders and they get used for normal games all the time. Elysians are not insane. Most would say under powered. But that isn't actually the point, which you, and others, are missing. So play Elysians. I don't care if you do. As I said. Just not in tournaments.
The Eldar are kind of an issue unto themselves. That codex is okay if you're only allowed 0-1 Super heavies. Its mean but its not indestructible at that point.
And so no.
Tau Empire has always had a simple answer: smash them in melee. Even just three Marines can end an entire Fire Warrior unit, so even with overwatch its worth skipping your shooting phase and GETTING there.
I cannot solve every ill. What I can do is ELIMINATE a huge chunk of burden from players, while recognizing that there will never be a perfect game. If you live in the fantasy land of "theres a perfect game out there somewhere" that's fine. I don't.
But we can stop players from making it ever more expensive and in some cases less broken. thats a goal we CAN acheive.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Don't even bother replying to Jancoran. Peregrine already ripped him a new one and I'm still awaiting his reply.
I wouldnt know. I put Peregrine on ignore like five years ago.
Scatbikes. Tau overwatch and shooting (remind me again HOW your getting there?) Forgeworld is nothing when compared to these monsters and it can actually help many of us weaker armies in dealing with them.
But we can stop players from making it ever more expensive and in some cases less broken. thats a goal we CAN acheive.
This is where your theory fundamentally collapses.
Codex books are coming out at Imperial Armour book prices the DA and SM codex books are the same price as Imperial Armour 4, Imperial Armour Apocalypse, or Imperial Armour Aeronautica or IA 9 & 10 together. Infantry and Character kits are coming out at FW prices, that new Cult Mechanicus Magos Dominus is actually *MORE* than FW's Magos Dominus. GW is hamfisting ever bigger things into the game, and GW is taking over many of those more insanely big units.
In fact, for things like Titans, the rules for such are entirely GW written at this point. GW's core studio writs the rules for Reveneant, Phantom, Warhound, and Reaver TItans, as well as the rules that allow them to be taken in non-Apoc games. Banning Forgeworld rules does nothing to prevent these from being used in a normal game. FW just casts the resin.
The Eldar are kind of an issue unto themselves. That codex is okay if you're only allowed 0-1 Super heavies. Its mean but its not indestructible at that point.
And so no.
Tau Empire has always had a simple answer: smash them in melee. Even just three Marines can end an entire Fire Warrior unit, so even with overwatch its worth skipping your shooting phase and GETTING there.
I cannot solve every ill. What I can do is ELIMINATE a huge chunk of burden from players, while recognizing that there will never be a perfect game. If you live in the fantasy land of "theres a perfect game out there somewhere" that's fine. I don't.
But we can stop players from making it ever more expensive and in some cases less broken. thats a goal we CAN acheive.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Don't even bother replying to Jancoran. Peregrine already ripped him a new one and I'm still awaiting his reply.
I wouldnt know. I put Peregrine on ignore like five years ago.
Scatbikes. Tau overwatch and shooting (remind me again HOW your getting there?) Forgeworld is nothing when compared to these monsters and it can actually help many of us weaker armies in dealing with them.
Indeed. Forge World doesn't present any more broken options then the rest of the game does, and I still haven't seen any FW thing as broken as a Wraith Knight.
Only thing that FW does is provide different options for you to take, most of which are just variants of stuff that you already had anyways.
Martel732 wrote: What's the real point of banning FW when scatterbikes exist?
Because reading rules before a game is too confusing for new players.
I hope someone gets that reference.
By the time i'm "reading your rules" Ive had no time to adjust my list for the possibility of facing it, nor given any thought to what strategy I might need to adopt or change. Minimize that all you like.
But let me turn the tables: since you're so convinced that it "doesnt matter" then why bring it? If you can play just as well without it then why are you DEMANDING it be allowed? If what you SAY is true then you can certainly afford NOT to bring it. Its a tournament so you clearly brought your army to win. CLEARLY you thought this combination gave you the best chance... Yet you want me to accept that it makes no difference? Lol. Is that the least honest thing you've ever heard of or what?
I know a couple guys who go to tournaments because they just like getting three games in in a day. they know they are going to be donors and they play whatever they own. Other than those rare birds who dont mind being donors, everyone else who brought that stuff did it to win. TO WIN.
So suggesting that I can just read up on it on the spot is just tripe. It really is. Even if I (by which I mean your opponent) do, and even if I understand it, it clearly advantages you and disadvantages him as he did not know to prepare for it.
"what... Drop pods you can charge from... wait... i thought... huh... What the.... So do i deploy nothing? Do i...". That's an advantage.
And then theres the FAQ's. There is a huge amount of information and FAQ's that you now need to worry about because if you dont, there are PLENTY of dicks who will take advantage of you not knowing them. Those that deal with the Forge World specifically, that is.
So there are numerous good reasons to simply not inflict that on the opponent. I showed up at a tournament last Saturday and faced... an almost entire army of Forge World Tyranids. I had NO idea what they could do. We had to spend a good fifteen minutes going through all the units and part of that was "okay now wait that was this unit, so what was this one again?" Its a TIMED event! And we just shot fifteen minutes out the door so that I could readjust my thinking on ALL of it.
I did win. handily. but that wasnt the point. the entire game was a miasma of confusion because he explained AFTER the fact that this "entry that i read" included some obscure reference to a rule he forget to mention which was that their Hammer of Wrath was AP 2!!! D3 hammer of Wrath at AP 2. He obliterated half a unit with it before we even swung, and I could have avoided that had i realized it just by multicharging on my turn. I didn't. So i didnt.
I won the game so I should now be okay with that kind of EXPERIENCE as a player? No. the game sucked. It was not fun. My opponent was fine but the experience sucked. I took almost everything off the board but it wasn't a fun game. I left grumbling, and my opponent was one of the nicest guys ever.
Sorry if you cannot understand the hate towards Forge World but like i say: as a TO, i have a job to do and I worked hard to resurrect the hobby in my area from 6-8 players showing up at tournies to the 28 we have now. That took serious work and lobbying and I am not going to blow it all up and END enthusiasm for tournaments by allowing everything.
Not even ITC is blind to the need for balance. They ban and limit all kinds of stuff. they dont draw the line where I do, but they draw a line. So this isnt foreign thinking.
Scatbikes. Tau overwatch and shooting (remind me again HOW your getting there?) Forgeworld is nothing when compared to these monsters and it can actually help many of us weaker armies in dealing with them.
Wait. Your entire argument comes down to Scatterbikes being in the game? Lol. Come on. And again... AGAIN... I have to tell you that my issue isnt entirely the power issue. Scatter bikes are not magical. They cant dodge my dominion squads and those aren't an army thats well regarded. So if i can nuclear strike the hell outta Eldar using Sisters of Battle, you're going to tell me you need Forge World. Is that what you're trying to tell me?
Jancoran wrote: By the time i'm "reading your rules" Ive had no time to adjust my list for the possibility of facing it, nor given any thought to what strategy I might need to adopt or change. Minimize that all you like.
The same thing applies to codex rules. I'm not familiar with Codex: Tyranids, so Tyranids should be banned.
At least now you admit the real point of your argument: it's about being afraid of losing. You don't want to allow the metagame to change and risk having your perfect list and strategy become useless.
But let me turn the tables: since you're so convinced that it "doesnt matter" then why bring it?
Because it's MY ARMY? Why should I have to spend hundreds or even thousands of dollars to buy a new army, which I won't enjoy as much for fluff/model reasons, to comply with your ridiculous house rules?
"what... Drop pods you can charge from... wait... i thought... huh... What the.... So do i deploy nothing? Do i...". That's an advantage.
Those don't exist anymore.
And then theres the FAQ's. There is a huge amount of information and FAQ's that you now need to worry about because if you dont, there are PLENTY of dicks who will take advantage of you not knowing them. Those that deal with the Forge World specifically, that is.
IOW, ban codex rules. You do realize that YMDC is full of codex and core-rule arguments, right?
So there are numerous good reasons to simply not inflict that on the opponent. I showed up at a tournament last Saturday and faced... an almost entire army of Forge World Tyranids. I had NO idea what they could do. We had to spend a good fifteen minutes going through all the units and part of that was "okay now wait that was this unit, so what was this one again?" Its a TIMED event! And we just shot fifteen minutes out the door so that I could readjust my thinking on ALL of it.
How is this any different from me playing against a pure codex Tyranids list? I would only have myself to blame for not learning about the Tyranid codex, so why should it be any different when it comes to FW rules? Why do we suddenly assume that anything a player doesn't feel like learning about should be banned?
Martel732 wrote: What's the real point of banning FW when scatterbikes exist?
Because reading rules before a game is too confusing for new players.
I hope someone gets that reference.
By the time i'm "reading your rules" Ive had no time to adjust my list for the possibility of facing it, nor given any thought to what strategy I might need to adopt or change. Minimize that all you like.
But let me turn the tables: since you're so convinced that it "doesnt matter" then why bring it? If you can play just as well without it then why are you DEMANDING it be allowed? If what you SAY is true then you can certainly afford NOT to bring it. Its a tournament so you clearly brought your army to win. CLEARLY you thought this combination gave you the best chance... Yet you want me to accept that it makes no difference? Lol. Is that the least honest thing you've ever heard of or what?
I know a couple guys who go to tournaments because they just like getting three games in in a day. they know they are going to be donors and they play whatever they own. Other than those rare birds who dont mind being donors, everyone else who brought that stuff did it to win. TO WIN.
So suggesting that I can just read up on it on the spot is just tripe. It really is. Even if I (by which I mean your opponent) do, and even if I understand it, it clearly advantages you and disadvantages him as he did not know to prepare for it.
"what... Drop pods you can charge from... wait... i thought... huh... What the.... So do i deploy nothing? Do i...". That's an advantage.
And then theres the FAQ's. There is a huge amount of information and FAQ's that you now need to worry about because if you dont, there are PLENTY of dicks who will take advantage of you not knowing them. Those that deal with the Forge World specifically, that is.
So there are numerous good reasons to simply not inflict that on the opponent. I showed up at a tournament last Saturday and faced... an almost entire army of Forge World Tyranids. I had NO idea what they could do. We had to spend a good fifteen minutes going through all the units and part of that was "okay now wait that was this unit, so what was this one again?" Its a TIMED event! And we just shot fifteen minutes out the door so that I could readjust my thinking on ALL of it.
I did win. handily. but that wasnt the point. the entire game was a miasma of confusion because he explained AFTER the fact that this "entry that i read" included some obscure reference to a rule he forget to mention which was that their Hammer of Wrath was AP 2!!! D3 hammer of Wrath at AP 2. He obliterated half a unit with it before we even swung, and I could have avoided that had i realized it just by multicharging on my turn. I didn't. So i didnt.
I won the game so I should now be okay with that kind of EXPERIENCE as a player? No. the game sucked. It was not fun. My opponent was fine but the experience sucked. I took almost everything off the board but it wasn't a fun game. I left grumbling, and my opponent was one of the nicest guys ever.
Sorry if you cannot understand the hate towards Forge World but like i say: as a TO, i have a job to do and I worked hard to resurrect the hobby in my area from 6-8 players showing up at tournies to the 28 we have now. That took serious work and lobbying and I am not going to blow it all up and END enthusiasm for tournaments by allowing everything.
Not even ITC is blind to the need for balance. They ban and limit all kinds of stuff. they dont draw the line where I do, but they draw a line. So this isnt foreign thinking.
In a casual game. I want you to allow it because its the rules for the models that I bought and decided I wanted to play. They made the rules for me to play it, and you are telling me I can't just because you don't like it.
A suggestion: If you have any hard core gamers in your group that want a competitive tournament you should have a tourney set up for them with no restraints on FW, formations, etc. IN ADDITION to your highly regulated tournament with house rules cutting out all of those things you think will make new players turn away.
Some people (like us peeps on the internet) like all that stuff, and think its fun. There's a chance people in your group do too.
i don't understand treating forge world different than any other codex. you have the internet, if you want to get a good idea of how a unit works it takes seconds to search it. banning forgeworld cause it requires you to read more seems as sensible as banning dark eldar cause they are rare and weird and different.
It seems that the main reasons for not taking forgeworld boil down to it means changes how armies will play, it adds a barrier of entry for new players, and/or they are not familiar with the rules and do not want to spend the time and money to learn.
The fact that forgeworld changes how armies play only really matters if you are list tailoring against these armies. Forgeworld does not introduce any shocking, new mechanics in their lists that you do not have to plan on fighting with your regular TAC army. The example of the Dreadclaw providing deep strike for CSM does change the tactics for their army, but you should still have whatever anti-deepstrike weapons that you normally have to fight SM or GK. Another example would be the forgeworld ork HQ allowing them to run an almost all biker army, which would be difficult for the opponent if they were tailoring for boy spam, but would be countered by whatever the opponent brought to take care of SM or DA biker lists. Forgeworld's rules do not introduce any entirely new mechanics to the game and any TAC army's list and tactics should not be able to deal with (but if you are tailoring, then you deserve the beating that you are about to receive).
Forgeworld does not add any more barriers of entry to new players than the existence of any other army. New players are already entering into a hobby that they know will have large amounts of backstory behind each of the armies. The models are not much different than those encountered in the codices, which new players would be equally clueless about. Unless you are starting new players with forgeworld super heavies, then there really isn't that much change from teaching them using only codices except for the opportunity to expand their collections. Forgeworld's units also have the assurance that their rules will probably remain fairly stable, meaning that new players aren't risking GW announcing their expensive codex is now invalid while handing out nerfs to all of their new purchases. If anything, forgeworld offers more ways to get into the hobby by offering armies that are not represented in the codices like elfish pirates IN SPACE (corsairs) and awesome gas mask soldiers (DKoK).
I do not own a copy of every rule book, and instead insist on people bringing their own rules, whether its codex, dataslate, or forgeworld, to the gaming table. If you are unsure of what any unit does, you are free to ask before the game, during the game, and come and talk to me after the game and I will do my best to explain it clearly while allowing you to read its rules. If you want after the game is over, I can even discuss tactics. This is the digital age, I have several codexes in scanned pdf form that I used to check out rules. Arguing about the price of an imperial army book is pointless when they do not cost much more than a codex and contain more content than a codex.
[sarcasm] I second the proposal that we should do away with all of these pointless supplements. We don't need forgeworld, escalation, fortifications, or codices when we have the main rule book! In the book I was able to find the stats for the following:
Spoiler:
Troops:
Space Marine, Ork Boy, Artillery unit gun model, Exalted Alluress on a Seeker Chariot, Leman Russ, and Scout Sentinel
Weapons:
Bolt pistol, Laspistol, Hot-shot laspistol, Autopistol, Stub fun, Hand flamer, Plasma pistol, Inferno pistol, Grav-pistol, Boltgun, Boltgun combi-weapon with Flamer, Shotgun, Space Marine shotgun, Lasgun, Hot-shot lasgun, Boltgun combi-weapon with Grav-gun, Sniper rifle, Autogun, Heavy stubber, Storm bolter, Sonic blaster, Flamer, Grav-gun, Multi-laser, Punisher gatling cannon, Dragon's breath flamer, Flamespurt, Heavy flamer, Heat ray (dispersed beam), Assault cannon, Heavy bolter, Grav-cannon, Autocannon, Inferno cannon, Flamestorm cannon, Vulcan mega-bolter, Quad-gun, Plasma-gun, Plasma cannon, Meltagun, Multi-melta, Melta cannon, Lascannon, Icarus lascannon, pulse bomb, Hunter-killer missile, Frag missile, Flakk missile, Krak missile, Battle cannon, Baneblade cannon, Close combat weapon, Power sword, Power axe, Power maul, Power lance, Unusual power weapons, Chainfist, Chainsword, Eviscerator, Heavy chainsword, Dreadnought close combat weapon, Force sword, Force axe, Force stave, Unique force weapon, Lightning claw, Powerfist, Thunderhammer, Whitchblade, Assault grenade, Plasma grenade, Defensive grenade, Haywire grenade, Krak grenade, and Melta bomb
The book does not give what each model's wargear is or how many points they have, so just take however many seems fair AoS style and equip them with whatever you model onto the figures (WYSIWYG is a main rule book rule). This will ensure that we don't need to deal with the silliness of all those complicated factions.
New players won't feel intimidated by a game consisting of six different base models (really five because you are supposed to remove an artillery gun model when there are no crew models, which are not present in these rules), there are no different factions which can surprise you with their tactics, and it is really easy to learn all of the rules. [/sarcasm]
Jancoran wrote: as a TO, i have a job to do and I worked hard to resurrect the hobby in my area from 6-8 players showing up at tournies to the 28 we have now.
Sounds like our scene too! Weird how popular the anti-Forgeworld metas are, huh? Like the big old sign of No Forgeworld is listed on the event and Tourney ads, yet people still come. Mind-boggling.
This is where your theory fundamentally collapses.
Codex books are coming out at Imperial Armour book prices the DA and SM codex books are the same price as Imperial Armour 4, Imperial Armour Apocalypse, or Imperial Armour Aeronautica or IA 9 & 10 together. Infantry and Character kits are coming out at FW prices, that new Cult Mechanicus Magos Dominus is actually *MORE* than FW's Magos Dominus. GW is hamfisting ever bigger things into the game, and GW is taking over many of those more insanely big units.
In fact, for things like Titans, the rules for such are entirely GW written at this point. GW's core studio writs the rules for Reveneant, Phantom, Warhound, and Reaver TItans, as well as the rules that allow them to be taken in non-Apoc games. Banning Forgeworld rules does nothing to prevent these from being used in a normal game. FW just casts the resin.
IS that where it "fundamentally " collapses? hehehe.
It's not. What you just argued here is that the book costs are similar now sometimes. You're arguing that CERTAIN models are near as expensive as Forge World models (though if you were any kind of fair minded, you'd concede that most are still NOT at that level). This apparently is an attempt to battle my argument over money? I think? And if it is, then the response is obvious and has already been stated: it is a whole other layer to the game financially to keep up with it in addition to the base layer we already need to accept. So if they want us to accept them, then they need to be in the codex... which means... they need to be playtested as much as GW normally does and GW needs to dare to make them a true part of the baseline which is an iffy proposition. They would then need to be produced for the same prices, and the codex cost has to be whatever that means it is. The reason GW wont is that they like money. So do you so its not like they are evil for it. But its a fact. Forge World gives them a cost leverage.
I do not intend to inflict another level of cost and time expenditure on my players. Not going to happen. I'm also not going to sour their tournament experiences with "GOtcha!" moments from obscure units when they have their HANDS FULL just learning how their normal opponents rules work!
You should take a longer term view of the hobby. It would help. The short term Me, me, me, me me, I wanna play with my toys attitude is fine when you're in casual games with friends who want to endure it. Tournaments though are what drive sales and keep the hobby going, and bring oldies back as well as expose the hobby to the newbs who seea tournament and their mind is blown. And as Fantasy saw, once you stop getting people willing to go to those, the sales dry up big time. Putting out more stuff works for a bit too. They floated Fantasy for a while on that. But the diminishing interest in the tournament experience was what put the nail in the coffin.
40K isnt immune to the same thing. It can fail. when people don't go to tournies, or stop caring about the arms race, you'd quickly find that out. Change causes sales, but only if the people who like your game find a motivation for changing and tournaments are the biggest reasons to care. they stopped caring in Fantasy. Dead as a door nail.
In a casual game. I want you to allow it because its the rules for the models that I bought and decided I wanted to play. They made the rules for me to play it, and you are telling me I can't just because you don't like it.
A suggestion: If you have any hard core gamers in your group that want a competitive tournament you should have a tourney set up for them with no restraints on FW, formations, etc. IN ADDITION to your highly regulated tournament with house rules cutting out all of those things you think will make new players turn away.
Some people (like us peeps on the internet) like all that stuff, and think its fun. There's a chance people in your group do too.
I have repeatedly said in this thread how UN-opposed I am in a casual game to having people play it. Why would I have an opinion about what two people want to do to one another.
I'm talking tournaments. And we turn no one away. We just tell them to access their vast collections and bring the other stuff. and not shockingly, they have fun doing that also.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ashiraya wrote: I haven't read the new Tau codex, and I don't want to buy it or bother with asking someone who has.
So banning it seems like the most rational decision.
If it wasnt core to the game, you'd have a point. But anyone who doesnt want to do that much is probably not going to tournaments anyways. So there's that.
Jancoran wrote: as a TO, i have a job to do and I worked hard to resurrect the hobby in my area from 6-8 players showing up at tournies to the 28 we have now.
Sounds like our scene too! Weird how popular the anti-Forgeworld metas are, huh? Like the big old sign of No Forgeworld is listed on the event and Tourney ads, yet people still come. Mind-boggling.
It has improved attendance greatly in our area. theres a few people who want to "make a point" by not going BECAUSE we don't do the FW thing. They are not affecting me. They're just costing themselves a good time and costing me nothing. So in the end...
And my tournaments have huge prize support. so they are REALLY missing out on the biggest tournaments they could compete in, missing out on ITC points... Hey it's their call man.
Scatbikes. Tau overwatch and shooting (remind me again HOW your getting there?) Forgeworld is nothing when compared to these monsters and it can actually help many of us weaker armies in dealing with them.
Wait. Your entire argument comes down to Scatterbikes being in the game? Lol. Come on. And again... AGAIN... I have to tell you that my issue isnt entirely the power issue. Scatter bikes are not magical. They cant dodge my dominion squads and those aren't an army thats well regarded. So if i can nuclear strike the hell outta Eldar using Sisters of Battle, you're going to tell me you need Forge World. Is that what you're trying to tell me?
Welcome to the Imperial Guard. In our codex we have 6 ignores cover weapons. Of these the Flamer and Heavy Flamer will never get close enough to work and even if they did the Scatbikes still get a 3+ armour save. The slightly longer ranged but still too short ranged Hellhound suffers from the same issue, it being only AP4 and the Chemcannon is mounted on a flimsy chassis that is miles slower than the scatbikes anyway and also requires itself to be within template range to work. The Nova Cannon suffers from also being AP4 though at 36" of range it might actually manage to crack a few shots off and the Wyvern that everyone complains about is AP5. And open topped.
So, we could try ignoring their armour save.... Except that then they get their just as good Jink save.
Now, bring FW into the mix and suddenly we have Quad Mortars and their ilk. Powerful ignores cover weaponry which can deal with Scatbikes effectively and is actually able to resist some of the shooting. I mean, its not like there is really anthing really scary there anyway. The Leman Russ Annihilator with its TW Lascannon. Oooohh, nasty. Artillery Platforms which are pretty much what the regular SP artillery should have been. So terrifying. Leman Russ conqueror. Im quaking in my boots. Sabre Defence Platforms. Utter cheese filth I take it? Rapier Laser Destroyer. Ugh! A 36" ranged BS3 Ordnance Lascannon. How dare those filthy Guard players ask for such blatantly OP stuff!
You know, if you are finding the FW stuff scary then the problem might be a little closer to home than you like to think.
As for the Scatbikes, well they where just an example. We also have such niceties as: The Decurion Necrons of unkillableness, the Tank Spank Tau formation, the Bring as many free Transports as you like smurf convoy, the Librarius Conclave, the damned Eldar formations, hell the Eldar BOOK!
When you really look at it most FW stuff is actually slightly underpowered.
Well you apparently completely skipped the part where I suggested that you should have tourneys where FW and all the "extra" stuff is allowed, but also keep having your house-ruled tournaments for the people that like them.
That is if your meta has people that like FW (I'm sure there are at least a couple).
I have to agree with Master of Ordinance. Banning Forgeworld stuff is just plain silly, when we need that stuff to be competitive. I understand that it's not in the codex, but it's no different from not knowing all of the rules of your opponent's army. When I go to play against my friend's Sisters of Battle do I know what everything in the book necessarily does? No, but I can just ask real quick before the game real quick, or have him explain what it does when he's going to use it. Not that difficult or time consuming. Forgeworld is little different.
Jancoran wrote: "what... Drop pods you can charge from... wait... i thought... huh... What the.... So do i deploy nothing? Do i...". That's an advantage.
Do you mean the Kharybdis Assault Claw? That's the one I use for my CSM at other venues.
IS that where it "fundamentally " collapses? hehehe.
It's not. What you just argued here is that the book costs are similar now sometimes You're arguing that CERTAIN models are near as expensive as Forge World models (though if you were any kind of fair minded, you'd concede that most are still NOT at that level).
It's not just that "certain" models are "near" as expensive as FW models, they are *AS* expensive or *moreso*, and this rate of parity is increasing with every release. If you look at just about any "Character" model, they're all just as expensive as their FW equivalents. Sure, there's lots of FW stuff that is still more expensive, I'm not saying it isn't, but that gap shrinks every years, and a lot of those more-expensive kits are just alternative models anyway (e.g. Mk2 Space Marine armor sets and the like).
Even looking at the books, in cases where FW books are more expensive, they usually give you a whole lot more than a codex book as well. Lets take Siege of Vraks for example. It's basically two codex books, as you get full army lists for both DKoK Siege Regiments, & a Renegades and Heretics army list, and for significantly less money than what two Codex books would cost you.
This apparently is an attempt to battle my argument over money? I think? And if it is, then the response is obvious and has already been stated: it is a whole other layer to the game financially to keep up with it in addition to the base layer we already need to accept. So if they want us to accept them, then they need to be in the codex
Why? What in partiuclar makes the "codex" so special. It is not, and is not intended to be, the complete whole representation of a faction, and GW will be the first to tell you this.
Do you ban Dataslates, web-bundle formations, campaign supplements, etc too? They're not in the Codex any more than Imperial Armour is.
... which means... they need to be playtested as much as GW normally does and GW needs to dare to make them a true part of the baseline which is an iffy proposition.
Do...do you have any idea of how GW operates these days? I ask this seriously.
You have this fixation on codex books...GW does squat all for playtesting. FW does significantly more and publicly posts playtest rules and adjusts final rules in light of player feedback for many units. GW does no such thing.
And again, There is no "base" game This is a mental construct of your own making. It just doesn't exist.
They would then need to be produced for the same prices, and the codex cost has to be whatever that means it is.
What are "codex" prices? How are we defining that? E-book prices? Softcover prices? Hardcover prices? Collectors editions?
Codex books range from $33-180 depending on faction and style, most are $50-60. FW booksrange from $45-90. There's a pretty large range of overlap there, and, as noted above, the more expensive books give you stuff for two or three armies. The idea that the cost differential there is overly burdensome relative to normal GW pricing is absurd.
You'd have had a case in say, 4E, when Codex Books were all $20, and FW books were $40-80, but now? When their ranges overlap as much as they do and with books like the DA, Eldar, and SM codexes being nearly $60, that just doesn't fly.
The reason GW wont is that they like money. So do you so its not like they are evil for it. But its a fact. Forge World gives them a cost leverage.
You act like FW being more expensive is just a money-grab. That's hard to swallow, particularly when their books offer more content with larger page counts and better quality covers for often the same price or give you two army lists for less than the price of two codex books.
I do not intend to inflict another level of cost and time expenditure on my players. Not going to happen.
So, new codex releases, dataslates, web-bundle formations, campaign books, etc are all out too?
And, lets be real, it's not like half the people aren't pirating their books anyway, FW or no...
I'm also not going to sour their tournament experiences with "GOtcha!" moments from obscure units when they have their HANDS FULL just learning how their normal opponents rules work!
So...why can't they just do what they do in every other instance when they face a new codex or army they have never faced before, or a new dataslate or the like, and ask to see the rules ahead of time?
Seriously...I'm not getting what's so hard about that. There's nothing special about FW in that regard.
You should take a longer term view of the hobby. It would help. The short term Me, me, me, me me, I wanna play with my toys attitude is fine when you're in casual games with friends who want to endure it.
yes...my shortsighted view of the hobby when I want to play an army I've built over many years and multiple editions.
'kay...
Tournaments though are what drive sales and keep the hobby going, and bring oldies back as well as expose the hobby to the newbs who seea tournament and their mind is blown. And as Fantasy saw, once you stop getting people willing to go to those, the sales dry up big time. Putting out more stuff works for a bit too. They floated Fantasy for a while on that. But the diminishing interest in the tournament experience was what put the nail in the coffin.
40K isnt immune to the same thing. It can fail. when people don't go to tournies, or stop caring about the arms race, you'd quickly find that out. Change causes sales, but only if the people who like your game find a motivation for changing and tournaments are the biggest reasons to care. they stopped caring in Fantasy. Dead as a door nail.
And the fact that just about every major big-name 40k tournament allows FW, and that FW hardly dominates winners tables or causes people to drop out, would seem to prove that pretty much all of your points are baseless.
Jancoran wrote: "what... Drop pods you can charge from... wait... i thought... huh... What the.... So do i deploy nothing? Do i...". That's an advantage.
Do you mean the Kharybdis Assault Claw? That's the one I use for my CSM at other venues.
He's referring to a unit ability two editions out of date.
Jancoran wrote: as a TO, i have a job to do and I worked hard to resurrect the hobby in my area from 6-8 players showing up at tournies to the 28 we have now.
Sounds like our scene too! Weird how popular the anti-Forgeworld metas are, huh? Like the big old sign of No Forgeworld is listed on the event and Tourney ads, yet people still come. Mind-boggling.
It's all a pack of lies, fw books are no more expensive than standard codexs these days, both my hh legion books are 30 quid, same price as my dark angel codex, the cost of forge world is entirely subjective in regards to the models, so them being cheap or expensive is irrelevant, and as such calling them too expensive to the majority is just a lie, as to the fw power level, name one fw unit that is broken these days.
Titans?
Any of the infantry?
Flyers?
Tank?
Walkers?
Jancoran wrote: as a TO, i have a job to do and I worked hard to resurrect the hobby in my area from 6-8 players showing up at tournies to the 28 we have now.
Sounds like our scene too! Weird how popular the anti-Forgeworld metas are, huh? Like the big old sign of No Forgeworld is listed on the event and Tourney ads, yet people still come. Mind-boggling.
Correlation does not equal causation.
It does when they've stated their reasons for attending and voted on the subject in question. Catch up on the other 9 pages.
And likewise, claiming your meta will suck and no one will ever want to attend your events (as has already been stated) has no foundation in reality.
Martel732 wrote: What's the real point of banning FW when scatterbikes exist?
Because reading rules before a game is too confusing for new players.
I hope someone gets that reference.
By the time i'm "reading your rules" Ive had no time to adjust my list for the possibility of facing it, nor given any thought to what strategy I might need to adopt or change. Minimize that all you like.
So we should ban all codices that any of the attendees haven't read? Or should people buy all the codices? But that wouldn't be saving people money.
But let me turn the tables: since you're so convinced that it "doesnt matter" then why bring it? If you can play just as well without it then why are you DEMANDING it be allowed? If what you SAY is true then you can certainly afford NOT to bring it. Its a tournament so you clearly brought your army to win. CLEARLY you thought this combination gave you the best chance... Yet you want me to accept that it makes no difference? Lol. Is that the least honest thing you've ever heard of or what?
I'm demanding that it be allowed because it's unfair discrimination based on faulty logic. I bring it because I like the way the unit works and it's my army. And yeah I could make a broken, OP Space Marine army without FW. Quite easily actually. Double Demi-SM company with min Tacs in Razorbacks with a Cent-star including a librarius conclave. Free tanks, invisibility and grav spam. Not a smell of Resin anywhere. In fact, I would be gimping myself by including FW as Gladius doesn't have allowances for IA units.
I know a couple guys who go to tournaments because they just like getting three games in in a day. they know they are going to be donors and they play whatever they own. Other than those rare birds who dont mind being donors, everyone else who brought that stuff did it to win. TO WIN.
So?
So suggesting that I can just read up on it on the spot is just tripe. It really is. Even if I (by which I mean your opponent) do, and even if I understand it, it clearly advantages you and disadvantages him as he did not know to prepare for it.
"what... Drop pods you can charge from... wait... i thought... huh... What the.... So do i deploy nothing? Do i...". That's an advantage.
"So, that formation allows you too take free transports? I thought you had to pay.. huh... how do I... what about". If your argument is that people may have a hard time adjusting to new rules then you really don't have a leg to stand on. wwww
And then theres the FAQ's. There is a huge amount of information and FAQ's that you now need to worry about because if you dont, there are PLENTY of dicks who will take advantage of you not knowing them. Those that deal with the Forge World specifically, that is.
Because no one who plays with Codices will try to pull one over on the opponent. Everyone who plays with Codices will play fair. No one has easy access to the internet. FAQs are bad because people may not remember them so FAQs should be banned everywhere.
So there are numerous good reasons to simply not inflict that on the opponent. I showed up at a tournament last Saturday and faced... an almost entire army of Forge World Tyranids. I had NO idea what they could do. We had to spend a good fifteen minutes going through all the units and part of that was "okay now wait that was this unit, so what was this one again?" Its a TIMED event! And we just shot fifteen minutes out the door so that I could readjust my thinking on ALL of it.
I did win. handily. but that wasnt the point. the entire game was a miasma of confusion because he explained AFTER the fact that this "entry that i read" included some obscure reference to a rule he forget to mention which was that their Hammer of Wrath was AP 2!!! D3 hammer of Wrath at AP 2. He obliterated half a unit with it before we even swung, and I could have avoided that had i realized it just by multicharging on my turn. I didn't. So i didnt.
I won the game so I should now be okay with that kind of EXPERIENCE as a player? No. the game sucked. It was not fun. My opponent was fine but the experience sucked. I took almost everything off the board but it wasn't a fun game. I left grumbling, and my opponent was one of the nicest guys ever.
I'd hate to see what happens with you when a new Codex drops. I bet Decurion must've made you rage even if you tabled them because it was different. And different is bad.
Sorry if you cannot understand the hate towards Forge World but like i say: as a TO, i have a job to do and I worked hard to resurrect the hobby in my area from 6-8 players showing up at tournies to the 28 we have now. That took serious work and lobbying and I am not going to blow it all up and END enthusiasm for tournaments by allowing everything.
That's great that you managed to resurrect your meta. Your ideas are still strange and self contradictory. And allowing FW is not the same as allowing everything.
Not even ITC is blind to the need for balance. They ban and limit all kinds of stuff. they dont draw the line where I do, but they draw a line. So this isnt foreign thinking.
Yeah because the ITC doesn't have a personal vendetta against the British resin makers. You hate FW for doing the same things that GW does. You hate it for being confusing and expensive but so are the GW codices. You hate it for it's balance issues but GW Codices are far and away worse than anything in a IA book.
Jancoran wrote: as a TO, i have a job to do and I worked hard to resurrect the hobby in my area from 6-8 players showing up at tournies to the 28 we have now.
Sounds like our scene too! Weird how popular the anti-Forgeworld metas are, huh? Like the big old sign of No Forgeworld is listed on the event and Tourney ads, yet people still come. Mind-boggling.
Correlation does not equal causation.
It does when they've stated their reasons for attending and voted on the subject in question. Catch up on the other 9 pages.
And likewise, claiming your meta will suck and no one will ever want to attend your events (as has already been stated) has no foundation in reality.
Did all of them say that reason they started playing again was because FW was banned? Did the majority? Did the majority of the people who came to vote on the matter vote on the ban?
But if all of that is true that doesn't mean that banning FW is a good thing. It just means that the people who play where in your meta are misinformed.
TheCustomLime wrote: Did all of them say that reason they started playing again was because FW was banned? Did the majority? Did the majority of the people who came to vote on the matter vote on the ban?
Yes.
TheCustomLime wrote: But if all of that is true that doesn't mean that banning FW is a good thing. It just means that the people who play where in your meta are misinformed.
Assuming the meta is misinformed because otherwise it invalidates your opinionated platform. Gotcha. God forbid anyone makes an informed decision to ban Forgeworld. That's like... unheard of.
. Your post is amazing so have an exalt
this", put their models on ebay, and find a different game that doesn't have absurd house rules about what is legal.
