why was it originally created? just to unofficially expand the GW library of miniatures?
how often are FW minis turned into official GW minis?

FW minis are official GW minis.

Vulpes89 wrote:why was it originally created? just to unofficially expand the GW library of miniatures?
how often are FW minis turned into official GW minis?

Forge World, as Nerivant said, is "official" GW models. Forge World is a subbranch of Games Workshop itself that do more eclectic/weird stuff. They have a stiffy for the Imperial Guard and all forms of armored vehicles, being big WWII tank nutters by and large.

Recently they've begun making more and more infantry.

Ok, i see. i thought they wernt since theyre not packaged like normal GW models

Kanluwen wrote:

Vulpes89 wrote:why was it originally created? just to unofficially expand the GW library of miniatures?
how often are FW minis turned into official GW minis?

Forge World, as Nerivant said, is "official" GW models. Forge World is a subbranch of Games Workshop itself that do more eclectic/weird stuff. They have a stiffy for the Imperial Guard and all forms of armored vehicles, being big WWII tank nutters by and large.

Recently they've begun making more and more infantry.

Kan' said 'Stiffy', snigger.

Like Kan stated, it allowed members of GWs family to work on what they wanted whilst keeping them under the aegis of GW. It made sense to keep the more esoteric items FW and resin only without having to incur the production costs for plastic for what ammounts to bespoke purchasing.

Historically, GW produced almost no vehicle kits. Indpendent manufacturers like Armorcast and Forge World USA (not related to the current Forge World) aquired the licence to do these, mostly consisting of enlarged copies of epic GW models. They were quite successful at that, so when the time came to renew the licence, GW declined and formed their own department for small run resin vehicles and named it after one of the licensees. Of course at that time, GW also produced plastic vehicles in their main range.

Forge World is an independent subdivision of Games Workshop. Their models usually have no rules in official GW Codices (or army books), but in FW publications. So using them in games is subject to opponent's permit, as they can be quite overpowered (less playtesting at FW). But then again, an opponent can also refuse to play a Codex army when he feels like it.

To offer miniatures to Australia and Canada more cheaply than GW stores do.

frozenwastes wrote:To offer miniatures to Australia and Canada more cheaply than GW stores do.

Kroothawk wrote:
Their models usually have no rules in official GW Codices (or army books), but in FW publications. So using them in games is subject to opponent's permit, as they can be quite overpowered (less playtesting at FW).

No, it's not. More often than not FW stuff is overpriced. 200pt Hydra anyone? Compared to the 75pt version in the IG dex, don't tell me an AA ability is worth 125pts.

I can count on one hand the FW units I would consider overpowered (Chemical Mortars, Lucius pattern Drop Pods, Lucius Pattern Dreadnought pods.)

The purpose of Forge World? To see how much people will pay for a lower quality product. Then tell us the prices are to out of proportion as an excuse to raise costs for their basic plastics. It's like Finecost: Classic edition

TrollPie wrote:The purpose of Forge World? To see how much people will pay for a lower quality product. Then tell us the prices are to out of proportion as an excuse to raise costs for their basic plastics. It's like Finecost: Classic edition

Lower class?! Good one.

Forge World is of a lower class.

They are indeed. While the work that goes into production of the master model is far superior to the Citadel line, what the customer receives is usually an inferior quality product with heavy miscasts, mold lines, flashing, etc.

Isn't it just to make the Aocalypse stuff that Gw don't make like Thunderhawk Gunships and Titans

Forge World was created in 1998, the Brainchild of John Stallard and headed by Paul Robins, the man responsible for the original Thunderhawk Gunship. It was announced to the public in the same edition of White Dwarf as the 3rd Edition of Warhammer 40,000. Forge World was originally created to design Warhammer Terrain (hence the name) and limited edition, large scale collectors edition models. Since then Forge World has expanded to create variant vehicles, large scale titans, accessory sets for various armies and even their own small forces, notably the Elysian Drop Troops Imperial Guard released in 2005. Forge World has become one of the most loved assets of Games Workshop among veteran gamers and has recently been drawn closer to the core company to better allow for cross-pollination of ideas.

They were not originally allowed in tournies and frowned upon in bunkers...

GW finally took FW under their wing, and now they are one & the same....

Now that GW is doing FC, will FW still exist in the future? That is the question....

Also, FW rules in games once needed opponents permission, now FW is semi-allowed in stores & tournies (to a point). GWs stance is FW lists are legal. Players will always debate this.

(over a dozen FW kits are now less $ then GW FC!!!!!!)

Kroothawk wrote:Their models usually have no rules in official GW Codices (or army books), but in FW publications. So using them in games is subject to opponent's permit, as they can be quite overpowered (less playtesting at FW). But then again, an opponent can also refuse to play a Codex army when he feels like it.

Actually, since either IA3 or 4, FW items haven't been opponent's permission, though it is considered in good taste to warn your opponent if you're fetching flyers. It was specifically mentioned in the intro to one of those two books that you didn't have to ask.

Unfortunately, tournament organisers seem to be a bit slow to catch on to this fact.....

chaos0xomega wrote:They are indeed. While the work that goes into production of the master model is far superior to the Citadel line, what the customer receives is usually an inferior quality product with heavy miscasts, mold lines, flashing, etc.

I strongly disagree with that statement. I have only once had a bad miscast, which was replaced for free.

Dysartes wrote:

Kroothawk wrote:Their models usually have no rules in official GW Codices (or army books), but in FW publications. So using them in games is subject to opponent's permit, as they can be quite overpowered (less playtesting at FW). But then again, an opponent can also refuse to play a Codex army when he feels like it.

Actually, since either IA3 or 4, FW items haven't been opponent's permission, though it is considered in good taste to warn your opponent if you're fetching flyers. It was specifically mentioned in the intro to one of those two books that you didn't have to ask.

Unfortunately, tournament organisers seem to be a bit slow to catch on to this fact.....

Like I said.....Players will always debate this.


I play 100% Krieg army & here crys from opponent all the time.............

Grimtuff wrote: I can count on one hand the FW units I would consider overpowered (Chemical Mortars, Lucius pattern Drop Pods, Lucius Pattern Dreadnought pods.)

Land Raider Achilles?

Hello,
You know, honestly if you paid your hard earned money for it and their are comparable rules I say yes, why, because it is a GW model, the rules are built the same, same point costing method. That said there are some "intersting" combinations, but if your not over 2k points and not using apoc models I could care less. I should note the LR Achilies is not well recieved by opponentss, however fun it may be.

Regards,
Carl

The handful of FW things that are overpowered are generally VERY overpowered.

The general rule of thumb for tournaments around me for FW is that you can use the models to represent codex units, but the rules can only be used when explicitly allowed.

GW accepts FW models & rules. That simple.

krazynadechukr wrote:GW accepts FW models & rules. That simple.

If you play at a GW shop, it might be.

If not, it's at least a bit more complicated.

krazynadechukr wrote:GW accepts FW models & rules. That simple.

And there are so many GW run GT's now.) It's not simple in any way.

The problem is not the FW models and lists that are underpowered or balance, it's the ones that are substantially overpowered. Guess which ones are going to be bought and show up in tournaments the most?

I've been allowing FW lists in a lot of our tournaments, with the assumption that the player is using the list to use his corresponding FW models. You can use a list for Vrak's Renegades or DKoK if you own Vraks or DKok models. You can't use Cadians to proxy for DkoK.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dysartes wrote:

Kroothawk wrote:Their models usually have no rules in official GW Codices (or army books), but in FW publications. So using them in games is subject to opponent's permit, as they can be quite overpowered (less playtesting at FW). But then again, an opponent can also refuse to play a Codex army when he feels like it.

Actually, since either IA3 or 4, FW items haven't been opponent's permission, though it is considered in good taste to warn your opponent if you're fetching flyers. It was specifically mentioned in the intro to one of those two books that you didn't have to ask.

Unfortunately, tournament organisers seem to be a bit slow to catch on to this fact.....

Not slow. The stance by some players that FW should always be allowed is widely known, and argued on a regular basis. Most TO's just disagree with you on it.

I use DKOK models in my DKOK army. I pay extra points for each mini. I get a little extra stuff as far as stats and rules (+1WS & regroups even if under 1/2 strength, etc...)....

Have never had a problem playing at my local BB or playing in any of there sponsored tournies...

Only time I hear crys of unfair are on Dakka or a newbie shows up at the BB....

I do know that when the FW rules say "experimental" they are NOT allowed in any tournies....


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Like I said.....Players will always debate this.

The issue is there are a few Forgeworld units that are over the top unfair and should not be allowed in competitive play. (or friendly play as how fun is deathwind dropppodding a noob or unsuspecting opponent?) The only way to keep them out is to keep all FW out.

Events explicitly warn participates FW allowed, which makes the 'default' for almost all events to be 'FW rules not allowed.' Most allow the models to PROXY for other core codex units so you can use the models.

Nice thing about DKoK is they can play using regular I guard rules without much problem.

I agree with the opinion that Foreworld rules and models are official GW products and thus can be used in GW games (although not tournaments) without prior notice. Forgeworld rules are only experimental when they release experimental rules PDFs on their website web. Theoretically, the rules published in IA should be the real deal.

I suspect issues with the quality of Forgeworld rules is a result of the declining quality in rules design within GW as a whole rather than the purpose of FW in its entirety within the hobby.

Forgeworld caters to a niche market of GW's niche market so
that it can price, promote and produce independently of
the "standard" 40k and Fantasy lines.

FW models and rules are no more legal ( in a GW codice game ) than custom home made rules. They both fall under ( anything is fine aslong as the other players agrees )
Because as far as i know, thats why they are stated as experimental rules , instead of ( xxxxx units can be fully ran in the xxxx Codex )
And thats why some TO dont allow FW units with FW rules to be used. Because their rules were originally designed to play against other FW units.
Did i get that right?

LunaHound wrote:FW models and rules are no more legal (in a GW codice game) than custom home made rules.

Wrong. There's no such thing as a "GW codex game". That's simply a pick-up game.

In many of those cases, you'll find that there's no actual issue with playing Forge World rules--provided you have the rules on hand and have no qualms with letting your opponent read through the rules if he asks. It also doesn't hurt to say "Well, I usually field X, but I have the Y list from Forge World and the book in my car. Want to change things up a bit and use that?" to introduce the idea.


Putting it bluntly: if you're doing a pick-up game with someone and it wasn't arranged ahead of time--don't expect to be able to use FW rules.
There's kind of a 'gentleman's agreement' that if you're going to use FW lists or units, that it's best to warn your opponent ahead of time.

They both fall under ( anything is fine aslong as the other players agrees )
Because as far as i know, thats why they are stated as experimental rules , instead of ( xxxxx units can be fully ran in the xxxx Codex )

Only certain units' rules are actually listed as 'experimental'. Those rules are always available as a free, printable .PDF from Forge World's website.

The standard units that FW releases now have a notation in there that "This is a <Slot Here> choice for a <Army Here> force."

And thats why some TO dont allow FW units with FW rules to be used. Because their rules were originally designed to play against other FW units.
Did i get that right?

Not even remotely, Luna.
Forge World units with Forge World rules aren't "originally designed to play against other FW units". They're balanced with the "normal GW codices" in mind--the problem is that some things, just like in the normal codices, are balanced improperly.

The reason why tournament organisers don't allow FW units and FW rules is simply because there's a stigma amongst the community at large that FW units are "imbalanced".

There's, of course, some that are. But you don't see them disallowing parts of the Space Wolf Codex for that same reason. FW units require an outlay of money to get the knowledge of which is OP and which are not. It's easier to put a blanket ban in place than spend the time and money to do the research.

Experimental rules are that, experimental. Placeholder rules used until the model is properly tested.

You'll find the official FW rules in the Imperial Armor books.

Wrong. There's no such thing as a "GW codex game". That's simply a pick-up game.

I dont understand , if play with random people in a battle bunker for example, all GW codice units and army books , and we have same point cost, all legal force organization ,
no count as models , all wysiwyg , there is no reason why i wouldnt be able to play right? the only reason possible would be if someone "didnt feel like it" ?

Putting it bluntly: if you're doing a pick-up game with someone and it wasn't arranged ahead of time--don't expect to be able to use FW rules.
There's kind of a 'gentleman's agreement' that if you're going to use FW lists or units, that it's best to warn your opponent ahead of time.

Why?

LunaHound wrote:

Wrong. There's no such thing as a "GW codex game". That's simply a pick-up game.

I dont understand , if play with random people in a battle bunker for example, all GW codice units and army books , and we have same point cost, all legal force organization ,
no count as models , all wysiwyg , there is no reason why i wouldnt be able to play right? the only reason possible would be if someone "didnt feel like it" ?

If you play with random people in a battle bunker, with all GW codex units and army books, same points costs, etc--it's still what is termed as a "pick-up game".

If it's not an organized tournament setting or part of an overarching "league" with organizational methods in place: it's a pick-up game.

Putting it bluntly: if you're doing a pick-up game with someone and it wasn't arranged ahead of time--don't expect to be able to use FW rules.
There's kind of a 'gentleman's agreement' that if you're going to use FW lists or units, that it's best to warn your opponent ahead of time.

Why?

Because. That's just kind of the way things have evolved.

1/3 of the entries in my FW IA book for Krieg tell me to consult and/or use my GW Imp Guard codex in conjunction with my IA list....so FW list is legal because MANY units use reg guard entries.....

Anyway, when I run into folks that are oppossed to (or anal) FW, I have a GW Imp Guard Codex list for my DKOK ready....

funny thing is, the ONLY unit I can not use is my hades drill....2k list either way, 102 minis, 6 vehicles, 6 heavy weapons....Just GW list I run 'em as veterans with grenadier option...The engineers become ratling snipers....etc....

Kanluwen wrote:

LunaHound wrote:

Wrong. There's no such thing as a "GW codex game". That's simply a pick-up game.

I dont understand , if play with random people in a battle bunker for example, all GW codice units and army books , and we have same point cost, all legal force organization ,
no count as models , all wysiwyg , there is no reason why i wouldnt be able to play right? the only reason possible would be if someone "didnt feel like it" ?

If you play with random people in a battle bunker, with all GW codex units and army books, same points costs, etc--it's still what is termed as a "pick-up game".

If it's not an organized tournament setting or part of an overarching "league" with organizational methods in place: it's a pick-up game.

Putting it bluntly: if you're doing a pick-up game with someone and it wasn't arranged ahead of time--don't expect to be able to use FW rules.
There's kind of a 'gentleman's agreement' that if you're going to use FW lists or units, that it's best to warn your opponent ahead of time.

Why?

Because. That's just kind of the way things have evolved.

I was really looking for a definite answer to those 2 questions i asked.
Its why people still keep asking these questions.

And I gave you a 'definitive answer'.

If you want to use FW stuff, the best way to do it is not just to show up and drop down FW stuff and demand to get to play it.

Kanluwen wrote:And I gave you a 'definitive answer'.

If you want to use FW stuff, the best way to do it is not just to show up and drop down FW stuff and demand to get to play it.

Would you use the same statement if its GW stuff?

LunaHound wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:And I gave you a 'definitive answer'.

If you want to use FW stuff, the best way to do it is not just to show up and drop down FW stuff and demand to get to play it.

Would you use the same statement if its GW stuff?

In many cases?

Yeah, I would.

If you want to play a game: you're not going to get games by showing up and dropping down your army and demand a game.

Kanluwen wrote:

LunaHound wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:And I gave you a 'definitive answer'.

If you want to use FW stuff, the best way to do it is not just to show up and drop down FW stuff and demand to get to play it.

Would you use the same statement if its GW stuff?

In many cases?

Yeah, I would.

If you want to play a game: you're not going to get games by showing up and dropping down your army and demand a game.

Thanks anyways , as of now im positive we are discussing 2 completely different things.

To put you in awe of their awesome example of their models online, Roll 2D6 and unless they roll snake eyes, they send you a disheartening chunk of resin from which you have to carve the character out yourself.

Kanluwen wrote:The reason why tournament organisers don't allow FW units and FW rules is simply because there's a stigmata amongst the community at large that FW units are "imbalanced".

There's, of course, some that are. But you don't see them disallowing parts of the Space Wolf Codex for that same reason. FW units require an outlay of money to get the knowledge of which is OP and which are not. It's easier to put a blanket ban in place than spend the time and money to do the research.

I personally only own about 1/2 the IA books. Average guy walking into a tournament owns none. This is a big hurdle for allowing FW rules and units indiscriminatly in tournaments. Grot battle tanks are fairly balanced. But when you get 30 seconds to read their rules in game 3 of a tournament, it's going to throw you off your game, trying to figure out what I can do with them, and how to fight them. Not fair to my opponent if I spring it on him. Still disconcerting if you know that some FW might show up at a tournament, and you don't own the books.

If we allow any FW in a tourament, one requirement is that you own and bring the book along.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

LunaHound wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:And I gave you a 'definitive answer'.

If you want to use FW stuff, the best way to do it is not just to show up and drop down FW stuff and demand to get to play it.

Would you use the same statement if its GW stuff?

If I understand the question correctly, then No, it's not the same statement if it's GW stuff. Showing up with a legal codex army is fundamentally different from an IA army, or FW units in a codex army.

Thank you Mikhaila

There have been no notes that Forgeworld units require opponents permission since the first book, and the Apocalypse books. But that's only reasonable since Apocalypse itself is opponents permission, being an expansion to the standard rules.

The issue with Forgeworld units is they have the 'superheavy stigma'. Too many people are still under the assumption that when you say you'll bring a Forgeworld unit, you're going to try to sneak a Thunderhawk into a standard game or something.

What people need to realize is that Forgeworlds 'standard' units are not only mostly (with a few exceptions - Land Raider Achilles, Lucias Patter drop pods, Cestus Assault Ram) okay to use, but balanced in favor of the opponent. They're generally overpriced or extremely situational that they're better off in fluff missions in campaigns.

Also, the whole sneaking superheavies into normal games could never have happened anyway. Superheavy vehicles required a separate detachment, which mean the game had to be over 2000 points. Those superheavies were still overpriced for what they did as well.

Forgeworld units on a whole are not unbalanced, at least not in favor of the person using them. They're mostly fluffy, situational units that add a bit of flavour to pick up games. A few units push it, but they're never totally broken. As said earlier, look at some vehicles that started as Forgeworld and went to the standard codex, their points values and what they did. The Hydra? The Leman Russ Executioner? Gw make far more broken rules than Forgeworld in the normal codices.

-Loki- wrote:. The Hydra? The Leman Russ Executioner? Gw make far more broken rules than Forgeworld in the normal codices.

you mean putting an AA tank in a Codex and not giving it ANY AA-based rules (an no skimmers don't count). Frankly the Lucius Dreadnought Drop Pod is fine, it's just the hideous rules in the Blood Angels Codex that make it broken.

I just think FW is here to give us REALLY good quality models for the same price as gw. Yes. GW really costs a little too much now. Sad.... BUT Happy for me since i am only interested in FW anyways.

Ghiest1 wrote:You know, honestly if you paid your hard earned money for it

I'm not obligated to let you use your expensive toys. Spending more money than I do on the hobby doesn't give you special rights.

We allow FW stuff as long as you clear it with the TO BEFORE the tournament and own the book

The main isssue is crap like dreadnought drop pods or deathwind drop pods (basically any of their drop pods) which are horribly untested

Most of the other stuff is usually fairly underpowered. Also, statistically speaking very few play tournaments and if you wanna use FW stuff in normal games then all you need are opponents who dont flip out

johnnyrumour wrote:

-Loki- wrote:. The Hydra? The Leman Russ Executioner? Gw make far more broken rules than Forgeworld in the normal codices.

you mean putting an AA tank in a Codex and not giving it ANY AA-based rules (an no skimmers don't count). Frankly the Lucius Dreadnought Drop Pod is fine, it's just the hideous rules in the Blood Angels Codex that make it broken.

Well, did we really need AA rules in a game that has no flyers? Nothing in normal 40k needs or has the AA rule.

Necroagogo wrote:

Grimtuff wrote: I can count on one hand the FW units I would consider overpowered (Chemical Mortars, Lucius pattern Drop Pods, Lucius Pattern Dreadnought pods.)

Land Raider Achilles?

Is that in a published book yet? I thought it was still in the playtesting stage so *can* be toned down before it hits the books. So i'm still only on 1 hand's worth of stuff.

I find the long-running debate over whether FW rules are allowable without your opponent's permission very interesting and entertaining. In general, most (most) people's opinions seem to depend on what side of the pond you're on. Most folks from the UK seem to be of the opinion that they do not need permission, most (most) folks from the US would argue otherwise.

I guess I've never viewed FW casting as being sub-standard, and I own a number of them. Certainly they seem far better the the fine cast crap that GW is pushing at the moment.

*Looks at watch*

Yep, about time for this discussion again.

*Looks for pictures of Jennifer Lopez in a thong while singing "I like big butts"*

Grimtuff wrote:

Necroagogo wrote:

Grimtuff wrote: I can count on one hand the FW units I would consider overpowered (Chemical Mortars, Lucius pattern Drop Pods, Lucius Pattern Dreadnought pods.)

Land Raider Achilles?

Is that in a published book yet?

Badab Wars Vol. 2 iirc. Disgustingly cheap too.

A good portion of FW models are super heavies and flyers. Normal armies can't deal with those, so it is unfair to use them.
That's why those are considered now Apocalypse units and IA books now labelled "40k supplement" IIRC, to distinguish them from rules for normal games.

I agree that anything with structure points should only be used in games over 2k....

That being said, if I were to play someone in a 2500 pt game, and he did NOT have any super heavies, I would say to him "In order for me to play a 2,500 pt game I'll be using my stormlord, ok?"

As far as a 2k game, my Krieg army doesn't have anything super scary in it, and I tell people all about the army I am playing. 99% of the time they say "Cool, let's play!"

So I for one don't use FW to have a super cheesy or hard army to fight. They are cool models, better detailed models, cool background, and a bit different to play than normal guard....

The whole "FW Legality" topic is interesting. I've argued it before and plan on avoiding doing so again, but it's another topic that could be settled with a simple statement, but it isn't.

The core contention seems to be that there's no unified opinion of how 'GW' FW is. It's a wholly owned subsidiary, apparently works out of the same building, and states in FW publications that stuff is generally 'legal' in 40k games. That's reasonable, but is FW 'allowed' to say that? Do they have authority outside their own realm?

If 'No' then they are no more 'official' than fan works, really.

if 'Yes', then where do we draw the line? is Bob the Redshirt an official arbiter of the rules? Most would say he is in his store but can be overruled by GW corporate and others.

Do the regional offices have any authority to make official statements on rules? I believe they do at times... FAQs on websites may be out of synch, especially when there's translation issues. Still, if GW Germany changes the Land Raider's armor to 13, is anyone going to accept that?

Personally, I feel that GW would improve quality-of-life for their fan base by adopting some sort of 'tiers' for this kind of thing, It doesn't have to be hard-and-fast for tournament organizers, but it gives the community a common base line:

Tier 1: All current rules from normal Codexes (Ideally, with the way GW releases codexes, a list should be included to make it even clearer). In general, if using this material you should be able to play at the vast majority of events. Ideally, stuff like the DKoK should be reviewed and included on this list.

Tier 2: Add-ons like Apocalypse, Planet Strike, etc. Most FW rules would probably be here. This material has been reviewed and is probably good, but is either too unusual and game-changing (Flyers or anything else where specific counters may be required) or too fidgety (Anything with lots of extra rules that may just be too slow for tournament-style play) goes here.

Events should certainly be allowed to cherry-pick from this Tier if the want. For example, an event might say "This event follows Tier 1 Guidelines but super-heavies are allowed."

Tier 3: 'Experimental' or trial rules.

As for models, if it's just an alternate model it should certainly be legal.

Again, this is just my opinion.

Balance: in general, the contention is for specific units.

I'd likely agree that they should be 'tier 2' but in many cases, they're really just 'alternative units' for the Codices.

The XV-9 'Hazard' suits for example fit into that.

The overall army lists like Krieg, Elysian, Tyrant's Legion, etc are all pretty well balanced barring a few ridiculous outliers.

Right from their mouths-

THE FORGE WORLD COMPANY



Q1. Is Forge World part of Games Workshop.

A1. Yes, but we operate as a small (but perfectly formed) separate division from the company that makes and sells the main Games Workshop range of products. We are not connected with the US company that used the same name many years back for production of resin Warhammer 40,000 vehicles under licence.

From GW -
Games Workshop Group PLC

Games Workshop has expanded into several divisions/companies producing products related to the Warhammer universe.
Games Workshop now produce the tabletop wargames, Citadel miniatures, and the Specialist Games range.
Forge World make complementary specialist resin miniatures and conversion kits. Forge World is also responsible for the Warhammer Historical line of historical wargames rules, including Warhammer Ancient Battles, all of which were previously published by as a component of Black Library.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
I think that is where many get confused. The current FW IS now part of GW. It used to be an independent company that had permission by GW, but that is gone & the current FW IS a division of GW (in the very same building as GW HQ!)....GW website sells FW items & FW website sells GW items!

In European gaming circuit & tournies, FW lists are commonly used & allowed....


Automatically Appended Next Post:
BUT.....GW 2011/12 tournie (Throne of Skulls) in US (UK makes no mention of FW either way) does NOT allow FW lists, IA, or WD lists.....

:(

So if the Games Wokshop in Potomac Mills Mall started writing and releasing their own Codex: Chaos Squats that would be 100% legal? I'm sure they'd put a note inside saying it is...

I think the []iintent[/i] is that FW is pretty much elgal, but the reality is not so clear.

I personally, if I was actively playing 40k, wouldn't bat an eye at playing almost any FW stuff at least once. If it made the game not-fun I'd say to to a second time.

But then again, I'm weird.

The purpose of Forgeworld is to give me cool stuff to play with. E. g. make my Landraider look even more awesome as it already does with this nifty extraarmour kits and doors, not to mention the Razorback Multimelta turret.

Regarding the usability of models, it is very much ask beforehand here. Which has not been a problem so far. We even allow FW at tournaments, yet reserve the right to say no to things that affect balance too much. That said there is a Bloodangels list in the tourny coming weekend that has 4 Lucius droppods. We´ll see how this will work out. My LS storm might come in handy there.

I am a huge fan of the Black Templar bits.

Forgeworld rules are 100% official in the same way that Planetstrike, Apocalypse, Spearhead and Cities of Death are.

You cannot expect to use any of the above without prior arrangement with your opponent. Saying that bringing a Forgeworld unit without your opponents consent, is like saying that bringing a Spearhead or Apocalypse formation is ok too.

All newer Forgeworld books carry the "Warhammer 40.000 Expansion" logo on the front, and the last time Forgeworld addressed their own legality, they equated themselves to an expansion like Cities of Death.

And THAT is the bottom line, gentlemen.

Steelmage99 wrote:
And THAT is the bottom line, gentlemen.

YMMV, IMHO, To each their own, etc.

No, what I said is a complete 100% carved-in-stone irrefutable certainty.

All newer Forgeworld books carry the expansion logo, and the last time Forgeworld addressed their own legality, they equated themselves to an expansion like Cities of Death.

Kanluwen wrote:... there's a stigmata amongst the community at large that FW units are "imbalanced"...

Kanluwen, I like what you wrote, but this made me LOL a little bit. 'Stigmata'? I'm pretty sure you meant stigma, unless you think the gaming community is showing the wounds of Jesus because of forgeworld somehow?

That was kind of a funny typo there.

Stigma: a mark of disgrace or infamy; a stain or reproach, as on one's reputation.

Stigmata: bodily marks, sores, or sensations of pain in locations corresponding to the crucifixion wounds of Jesus.

Sorry to be pedantic here, just funny.

Augustus wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:... there's a stigmata amongst the community at large that FW units are "imbalanced"...

Kanluwen, I like what you wrote, but this made me LOL a little bit. 'Stigmata'? I'm pretty sure you meant stigma, unless you think the gaming community is showing the wounds of Jesus because of forgeworld somehow?

That was kind of a funny typo there.

Stigma: a mark of disgrace or infamy; a stain or reproach, as on one's reputation.

Stigmata: bodily marks, sores, or sensations of pain in locations corresponding to the crucifixion wounds of Jesus.

Sorry to be pedantic here, just funny.

Yeah, that's why I need to stop speed typing I think.

But yes. Clearly it's because of the wounds of Jesus!

Oh I do it all the time! I think you're on the spot with the forgeworld stuff.

The fact that you are even having the conversation and splitting hair on the issue of FW should be enough to make you say "???"



As to the issue of the haves and have nots? I want to know what kind of crack one smokes to think that if I buy a $2,000.00 army that I won't be able to play it in ANY setting? That crap about even having that discussion should be enough to make the scales fall from your eyes, and HAVE the stigmata to begin with.

Short of someone telling you that you can or can't play with a 40K army in of all things... a 40K game? Uh...

FW has more lickies and chewies then the average run of the mill plastic troops. They have conversion kits, resin models, and extensive additional equipment and addentums to the 40K universe. They came about partially because GW finally figured out that THEY wanted control of there resin products, partially to fill the void of not having the additional units that were being cranked out in the hayday of the IG, with the balls out summer campaigns and added vehicle varient mods that were prevelent in all of the cool kid Black Library novels.

As with the same issues of GW's old decrepid business models, they are now the hamstring that keeps people buying 1-500.00 models that OTHER clowns will actually tell that they can't play with in the game that they are made for.

Loves me some 40K vehicles, too bad you can't play a real game with them, though....



Hookers and conversation comes to mind here, gents. (Best to look, but never touch.)



Muh ha ha ha ha!!!!

To make cool Manticore turrets.

Balance wrote:So if the Games Wokshop in Potomac Mills Mall started writing and releasing their own Codex: Chaos Squats that would be 100% legal? .

NOT in the least. Didn't come from the design team at GW HQ it ain't worth SQUAT!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And if the folks there wrote it, printed it, released it, they'd lose their jobs and be sued by GW for copyright & trademark infringement....Just because you work for GW, doesn't give you the right to do what you want! Geez!

Grot 6 wrote: I want to know what kind of crack one smokes to think that if I buy a $2,000.00 army that I won't be able to play it in ANY setting?

I want to know what kind of crack one smokes to think that...the price of ones army have ANY relevance in determining the rules/legality of the Imperial Armour Expansion.


Also keep in mind that you are not prevented from using the Imperial Armour Expansion. You are simply required to plan it out with your opponent beforehand, just as you would with Spearhead, Planetstrike, Cities of Death and Apocalypse.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

krazynadechukr wrote:


NOT in the least. Didn't come from the design team at GW HQ it ain't worth SQUAT!

PS. We might be in agreement here. I just couldn't tell which side of the fence you are on.

You do of course realize that Imperial Armour does not come from the design team at GW HQ, right?

I want to know what kind of crack one smokes that makes them take toy soldiers, model tanks and little resin men from mars this bloody seriously

In general, if you use FW models as "counts as" for GW units, you're not going to run into any problems. If you start using rules that aren't in the main codex and only in IA books, you're going to get some sour grapes from opponents.

However, they do allow you to have models and units that stand apart from normal GW minis, either by decoration or simply the model itself. As for FW quality, I've bought several products and have never had a bad casting or excessive flash of any kind. The one issue I had was a bent sword that was easily fixed with hot and cold water.

Grot 6 wrote:I want to know what kind of crack one smokes to think that if I buy a $2,000.00 army that I won't be able to play it in ANY setting?

Well, let's see.

So you buy a Forge World army. That is, to say, an army consisting almost entirely of Forge World components for base troops, etc.

So, looking at what's available in kits.

Eldar, 2 Imperial Guard armies, Death Guard, World Eaters, Space Marines.

All of which have Codices compatable with the current edition of 40k.

So....really? What is the issue? You can't use your Elysians or DK as normal IG? Why not? They have all the weapon options and set up. Here's a codex. Be surprised.

But it's not the same! They're not Krieg unless the rules were written specifically for Krieg! I don't care if Imperial Guard are already one of the best (if not THE best) codices in the game, I'm not fielding "counts-as" Cadians!



Anyway, in my opinion:

So you buy a Forge World army. That is, to say, an army consisting almost entirely of Forge World components for base troops, etc.

Then you do so knowing full well that no one is obligated to let you use the IA rules for that army. Spending $2000 compared to my $800-1000 on an army doesn't give you the right to browbeat me into playing with rules developed outside the core game that could potentially skew the balance in your favor (or mine).

I'm not saying I would turn down a game with a guy using DKoK...if I knew beforehand that he was using them and it was a friendly game. But if you show up with a full DKoK army just expecting me to play with you because you spent a lot of money on them, then that's a dick move if you ask me.

Grot 6 wrote:As to the issue of the haves and have nots? I want to know what kind of crack one smokes to think that if I buy a $2,000.00 army that I won't be able to play it in ANY setting?

What kind of crack are you smoking to think you spending 2000.00 gives you a right to anything? Since when does the amount you spend mean anything? Does spending 10,000$ let you have automatic re-rolls on missed hits? If you paid 20,000$ should we just get the hell out of your way and let you pick up the first place trophy without playing a game? Does it work in reverse? If you buy from neal at 20% discount, is your army 20% crappier? Is this a justification for Australians paying 50% more for models, because they get perks for spending more?

Your choice to spend the 2k. You get what you paid for: a bunch of little resin toy soldiers that you get to paint up.

And... Your all missing the point here.

I think my conversation point was probiblty worded wrong, but lets regroup it to the conversation gents.


WE are collectivly talking about a run of the mill no !@#$, no frills Warhammer 40K army. I'll take IG here for the sake of argument, but ifd you want to take Orks, Tau, or whatever, thats prefectly fine.

Stay with the thought here.


Forgeworld doesn't make any other army for, say Nepoleonics, or WW2, ONLY Warhammer Fantasy and 40K.

The games for GW. That your splitting hairs as to use or not use, based on some sort of idea that those particular armies for 40K made by forgeworld are anything different then any other IG army out there. We can split other hairs about rules composition, unit make up or whatever, but the main point of my post here is that we're talking about an IG army that for all intensive purposes only difference here is a pricetag. An IG army is an IG army- There are millions of regiments in the galaxy, but you can't use so and so, because they are made from Forge World? As for supplimental? Supplimental to what? Is there another game or use for these particular resin soldiers that is different then the main game?

There is no different way to play 40K, if you use these guys? or is there?

They may have some bells and whistles, but look over at the Catachens, the Elesians Drop Troops, or even the Rough riders, ( Who I may add HAD straight leg horse and rider cav back in the days of the Necromundan 8th plastic and metal, with YMMV paint )
Penal legions? Human Bombs? Even if you so chose you could take your squats, give them the IG rules and run them As is.

The idea that your going to sell an army for expensive prices, then tell your customers that they have or have no obligation to play in accordance with the game that the product was designed for should make you physically Ill.

Your telling me then that GW is presenting you with a defective product, and that people who buy the said product to PLAY the 40K game are under false representation that they can play the game as is with the forgeworld guys.

Am I the only one that sees the genuine hypocracy in that thought process?


Once again, I didn't imply that price had anything to do with or without, only that the price should give one pause to even buy these guys if there is that much contention as to thier use. And to see more then one other poster say something to the effect tells me that I misconstrued the point at hand-

That we're talking about Forgeworld product made, specificly for 40K, that are left in a grey area as to thier purpose.


sorry for the mispost of the point.

The problem is, no matter how much people say "It's all one company." , FW is actually still very separate from the rest of GW. The organization splits them off from the corporate tree right at the top. They don't answer to a lot of people. FW was not organized to produce models for 40k, just the opposite. In the beginning they were not supposed to be making any models for use with the regular game. They made cool garage kits. It was retired or soon to retire GW guys. No one else would have been given that type of freedom.

They produce things now that work much better with regular 40k, and the GW studio has stolen a lot of things from them for various codices. But they still have a ways to go before FW will be totally compatable with 40k.

The idea that your going to sell an army for expensive prices, then tell your customers that they have or have no obligation to play in accordance with the game that the product was designed for should make you physically Ill.

Why? Your choice to buy them or not. And as many, many people have stated, they don't have trouble finding games. You're just upset because it's not some ironclad guarantee.

It's not a defective product, you know the rules going in. If you choose to buy the stuff anyway, that's up to you. People buy titans all the time and hardly ever get to use them. Reavers can be horribly overpowered even in Apocalypse games. We still buy them, because we want them, want to model them, want to paint them.

Grot 6 wrote:


WE are collectivly talking about a run of the mill no !@#$, no frills Warhammer 40K army.

Are we really? An armylist presented in an expansion is not a run of the mill no !@#$, no frills Warhammer 40K army. An armylist/unit presented in an expansion is intended for use in that expansion and not in "regular" games of 40K.

Forgeworld doesn't make any other army for, say Nepoleonics, or WW2, ONLY Warhammer Fantasy and 40K. The games for GW. That your splitting hairs as to use or not use, based on some sort of idea that those particular armies for 40K made by forgeworld are anything different then any other IG army out there.

Apocalypse units, Spearhead formations and Planetstrike rules are also made specifically for use with the 40K rules-set. That does not make them usable without prior agreement with your opponent. So it is with the Imperial Armour Expansion.

We can split other hairs about rules composition, unit make up or whatever, but the main point of my post here is that we're talking about an IG army that for all intensive purposes only difference here is a pricetag.

Aside from the fact that these particular IG armies are made for use with the Imperial Armour Expansion, you mean?

An IG army is an IG army-

It most certainly is not.

There are millions of regiments in the galaxy,

Fluff justifications only make you look silly.

but you can't use so and so, because they are made from Forge World?

No, you cannot use them without player consent because they are part of an expansion like Cities of Death, Apocalypse, Planetstrike and Spearhead.

As for supplimental? Supplimental to what?

Are you being deliberately obtuse? They are a supplement (read: expansion) to Warhammer 40k, of course.

Is there another game or use for these particular resin soldiers that is different then the main game?

Yes. That would be games played with expansions. A totally different kind of game than a regular game of 40K.

There is no different way to play 40K, if you use these guys? or is there?

I don't know what you are saying here.

They may have some bells and whistles, but look over at the Catachens, the Elesians Drop Troops, or even the Rough riders, ( Who I may add HAD straight leg horse and rider cav back in the days of the Necromundan 8th plastic and metal, with YMMV paint )
Penal legions? Human Bombs? Even if you so chose you could take your squats, give them the IG rules and run them As is.

What is the point of what you are saying here?

The idea that your going to sell an army for expensive prices, then tell your customers that they have or have no obligation to play in accordance with the game that the product was designed for should make you physically Ill.

Unless of course they introduce the concept of expansion which......what do you know....they have.

Your telling me then that GW is presenting you with a defective product, and that people who buy the said product to PLAY the 40K game are under false representation that they can play the game as is with the forgeworld guys.

The concept that the product is defective and that people are being lied to is simply laughable. Some people just deliberately misunderstand and misrepresent.....much like you just did.

Am I the only one that sees the genuine hypocracy in that thought process?

Am I the only one that see the failure in that thought process?

Once again, I didn't imply that price had anything to do with or without, only that the price should give one pause to even buy these guys if there is that much contention as to thier use.

Steelmage99 wrote: A whole bunch of stuff

Take it down a notch there chief. One thing is to quote something, its quite another to be a jackass and spout off at the hole on every little tid.

If you going to say something, just say it. You didn't make any kind of serious points of discussion there, all you ended up doing is pretty much saying the same thing you just did in the other post.


As to the full thought process that you are going with there? I don't get your whole "Well... Forgeworld made it, but you can't use it in the game." stance.


I must have missed the Forgeworld WW2 stuff, somewhere. You know, the stuff they made for the 3d hand market that you can use in other games? Oh.. wait. They make GW stuff. FOR 40K and Fantasy.


And if your going to cut and paste? Please do the curtesy of at least posting out the full no BS thought that I originally posted. It would then give you something to discuss instead of just a wall of text.

you get an A for effort, though. Thanks.... really.

You want a serious point of discussion, Grot 6?

How about this; Imperial Armour is an expansion just like Planetstrike, Cities of Death, Spearhead and Apocalypse.

Do you wish to refute this?

mikhaila wrote:The problem is, no matter how much people say "It's all one company." , FW is actually still very separate from the rest of GW. The organization splits them off from the corporate tree right at the top. They don't answer to a lot of people. FW was not organized to produce models for 40k, just the opposite. In the beginning they were not supposed to be making any models for use with the regular game. They made cool garage kits. It was retired or soon to retire GW guys. No one else would have been given that type of freedom.

They produce things now that work much better with regular 40k, and the GW studio has stolen a lot of things from them for various codices. But they still have a ways to go before FW will be totally compatable with 40k.

The idea that your going to sell an army for expensive prices, then tell your customers that they have or have no obligation to play in accordance with the game that the product was designed for should make you physically Ill.

Why? Your choice to buy them or not. And as many, many people have stated, they don't have trouble finding games. You're just upset because it's not some ironclad guarantee.

It's not a defective product, you know the rules going in. If you choose to buy the stuff anyway, that's up to you. People buy titans all the time and hardly ever get to use them. Reavers can be horribly overpowered even in Apocalypse games. We still buy them, because we want them, want to model them, want to paint them.

I think I'm just upset that they want to lie and tell you that your buying something that you can play a game with, and then try to justify the flim flam with a 200% markup. Then to hear tell people actually want to split hairs over (I/E rules lawyer) thier interpritation of decision making process of use or non use. I'm already !@#$ed off about the whole thing of all of the other crazyness, why not add another cherry on the top?

Too bad too, would have loved to buy me a few of those Grot tanks, and some of those variant Ork truck and tanks.

I say the products defective, because you can buy it- but you can't play it. People are out there that would actually give you static to bring your regiment to the table, and tell you, "Oh, you can't play that unit here. Thats not a real IG unit..." I'd like to see that happen, LOL. Especially when we're being mass marketed the lie and that "The Hobby" is all about fun... How exactly does that work when the products made for THAT particular game again? As for Ironclad, you have a point, seeing as I keep forgetting that everything comes down to a D6 roll.

As a IG player, I see it as a matter of self interest to actually WANT to buy something, not just have some cat come across as a total Rules Joke and try to finangle a win out of not letting you play your army.
That GW would put themselves out on a limb like that, and then start sawing it off while sitting on it is almost as equally laughable. For the price of this stuff? I WANT an iron clad guarantee. I buy this stuff, I am not only owed a clear cut explination, I'm owed it as a matter of courtesy. If not, I might as well throw a bunch of rocks down on the table and make up my own rules.

*oops

I think I'm just upset that they want to lie and tell you that your buying something that you can play a game with, and then try to justify the flim flam with a 200% markup. Then to hear tell people actually want to split hairs over (I/E rules lawyer) thier interpritation of decision making process of use or non use.

I'm not sure why you think this. It's not the case that FW claims to be completely legal and always useable. I don't see the basis for where you claim that they lie about it. The stuff has always been very limited in production, and not readily available. I'ts not like you can just buy it in a store.

Do you actually own any FW? Or is this just 'finding another reason to be angry'

Too bad too, would have loved to buy me a few of those Grot tanks, and some of those variant Ork truck and tanks.

Great models. I ran two big tracks, a megadread, and a killkrusha at the Colonial GT. Used them as trucks, deffdread, and battlewagon. I use my grot tanks a lot as buggies.
In non tournament games I run them using the IA rules, and I've never had a problem using them, but always ask first.

For the price of this stuff? I WANT an iron clad guarantee. I buy this stuff, I am not only owed a clear cut explination, I'm owed it as a matter of courtesy.

Well, then you have an answer. I suggest you don't buy FW. Because you're not getting a guarantee on getting to play with Toy Soldiers.)

So once I was talking to a GW Store manager about how cool DKoK are and he said GW USA even asked them for the molds so they could make them over here but they refused. What's up with that? Forge World acts like the actual Adpetus Mechanicus: jealously guarding their technology?

KamikazeCanuck wrote:So once I was talking to a GW Store manager about how cool DKoK are and he said GW USA even asked them for the molds so they could make them over here but they refused. What's up with that? Forge World acts like the actual Adpetus Mechanicus: jealously guarding their technology?

Probably because of the big Made in China sticker that slapped on the FW zip bags that I've been seeing on all my recent orders....

Snarky wrote:

KamikazeCanuck wrote:So once I was talking to a GW Store manager about how cool DKoK are and he said GW USA even asked them for the molds so they could make them over here but they refused. What's up with that? Forge World acts like the actual Adpetus Mechanicus: jealously guarding their technology?

Probably because of the big Made in China sticker that slapped on the FW zip bags that I've been seeing on all my recent orders....

Seriously?

Not joking here, my Elysian Drop troops special weapons and Krieg heavy mortar team both had Made in China under the item code on the zip bag.

mikhaila wrote:
Great models. I ran two big tracks, a megadread, and a killkrusha at the Colonial GT. Used them as trucks, deffdread, and battlewagon. I use my grot tanks a lot as buggies.
In non tournament games I run them using the IA rules, and I've never had a problem using them, but always ask first.
[i]

I am unsure why people are so unwilling to accept this. Ask permission!!!! Almost every forgeworld model can be used as a core codex unit even if the weapon options don't match. Sometimes that squiggoth is a squiggoth, sometime he is a battlewagon!

Some people seem unwilling to ask permission. Someone unwilling to ask permission seems like the problem, not the rules that require you to ask.

WTH? I thought all GW stuff was made in UK. That's why it costs a bazillion dollars.

some of it is, I honestly haven't seen a difference between the Made in China casts and the UK casts, except maybe a little less loose flash in the Chinese casts and better quality control than the UK casts.

I think they had moved some casting of the more popular ranges over to China (the ones that sell more and are smaller are more likely, as I've noticed that most of my Krieg infantry squads are casted in China, while things like my Vulture and Tank kits are still cast in the UK). They certainly still do cast things in the UK however.

Snarky wrote:some of it is, I honestly haven't seen a difference between the Made in China casts and the UK casts, except maybe a little less loose flash in the Chinese casts and better quality control than the UK casts.

I think they had moved some casting of the more popular ranges over to China (the ones that sell more and are smaller are more likely, as I've noticed that most of my Krieg infantry squads are casted in China, while things like my Vulture and Tank kits are still cast in the UK). They certainly still do cast things in the UK however.

Yeah, but shouldn't it be cheaper? Isn't that the whole point of China?

The purpose of Forgeworld?

Well, this summer it'll be helping me get my Epic Space Marine force some Warhound titans, Thunderbolts, and a Thunderhawk!

KamikazeCanuck wrote:

Snarky wrote:some of it is, I honestly haven't seen a difference between the Made in China casts and the UK casts, except maybe a little less loose flash in the Chinese casts and better quality control than the UK casts.

I think they had moved some casting of the more popular ranges over to China (the ones that sell more and are smaller are more likely, as I've noticed that most of my Krieg infantry squads are casted in China, while things like my Vulture and Tank kits are still cast in the UK). They certainly still do cast things in the UK however.

Yeah, but shouldn't it be cheaper? Isn't that the whole point of China?

The problem with China is that they occasionally have "Quality Control" issues because they at times just plain don't care and they're running their dissident slave labor on a death march.
They also have a lot of issues with IP that "falls out the back door". It's entirely possible that GW/FW decided the hold the bigger items in England to cut down on things like "black market warhounds"

Too my knowledge, the Chinese facility isn't owned by GW, it's a "partner". Which means that they need to be watched like a hawk.

nkelsch wrote: Someone unwilling to ask permission seems like the problem, not the rules that require you to ask.

Except for the fact that there IS no rule requiring you to ask.

Worglock wrote:

KamikazeCanuck wrote:

Snarky wrote:some of it is, I honestly haven't seen a difference between the Made in China casts and the UK casts, except maybe a little less loose flash in the Chinese casts and better quality control than the UK casts.

I think they had moved some casting of the more popular ranges over to China (the ones that sell more and are smaller are more likely, as I've noticed that most of my Krieg infantry squads are casted in China, while things like my Vulture and Tank kits are still cast in the UK). They certainly still do cast things in the UK however.

Yeah, but shouldn't it be cheaper? Isn't that the whole point of China?

The problem with China is that they occasionally have "Quality Control" issues because they at times just plain don't care and they're running their dissident slave labor on a death march.
They also have a lot of issues with IP that "falls out the back door". It's entirely possible that GW/FW decided the hold the bigger items in England to cut down on things like "black market warhounds"

Too my knowledge, the Chinese facility isn't owned by GW, it's a "partner". Which means that they need to be watched like a hawk.

Now I don't get this anti-Chinese sentiment. While I do think that there are fewer labour rights in China, I highly doubt that it's slave labour... Anyway, the casts I've received from Chinese casters have been actually better in quality than the UK casts, so quality control in China is actually probably better than the UK one. And I've bought a lot of forgeworld, (I have 3 pure FW armies at 2000 points)

As for costs still being high? No idea. Maybe GW are trying to milk more money off us, or perhaps there are shipment fees/taxes etc. I have no idea. The fact that they still cast from the UK (in fact, the majority of the casts you get are from the UK) makes it unlikely that they'll lower prices. I mean, if they offered a cheaper option from Chinese casts and a more expensive UK cast option, I'm certain that the UK casters would be soon out of a job, as pretty much everyone would just buy the cheaper option regardless of where it's from.

Platuan4th wrote:

nkelsch wrote: Someone unwilling to ask permission seems like the problem, not the rules that require you to ask.

Except for the fact that there IS no rule requiring you to ask.

It is an expansion. All expansions require mutual consent. Besides, almost all friendly games are based upon mutual consent.

If you want to use a ruleset not in the core rulebook or codexes, then you need to agree with your opponent.

KamikazeCanuck wrote:

Snarky wrote:some of it is, I honestly haven't seen a difference between the Made in China casts and the UK casts, except maybe a little less loose flash in the Chinese casts and better quality control than the UK casts.

I think they had moved some casting of the more popular ranges over to China (the ones that sell more and are smaller are more likely, as I've noticed that most of my Krieg infantry squads are casted in China, while things like my Vulture and Tank kits are still cast in the UK). They certainly still do cast things in the UK however.

Yeah, but shouldn't it be cheaper? Isn't that the whole point of China?

Thats assuming GW will pass the savings to their customers.

No, they dont, they keep it as profit which looks good for the investors.

Steelmage99 wrote:You want a serious point of discussion, Grot 6?

How about this; Imperial Armour is an expansion just like Planetstrike, Cities of Death, Spearhead and Apocalypse.

Do you wish to refute this?

Grot 6, you there?

Steelmage99 wrote:

Steelmage99 wrote:You want a serious point of discussion, Grot 6?

How about this; Imperial Armour is an expansion just like Planetstrike, Cities of Death, Spearhead and Apocalypse.

Do you wish to refute this?

Grot 6, you there?

Whats the point? Your set in your idea that the expansion stuff is not even 40K, why bother saying anything anymore? An expansion? Why should I bang my head against the wall with a tool that continues to parrot the same misguided thought process about of all things.... minis, and more minis?

I refute it, but WTF. I'm done with you. Anything I have to say is going to be dazzled with diamonds and baffled by bullgak and a screenfull of alphabet.

Your not even discussing anything.

You say that it is an expansion, but.... What exactly is the purpose of Forgeworld, and what exactly is this... "expansion" used for, if not to play the game? Once again, your pretzil logic escapes me, and YOU being wrapped around the misguided thought process and not even seeing the real issue.

I posted the exact historics of "Forge World" in the other thread, and continue to say the same thing I've been saying the whole time...and what they are for. NOW that we have all the minis and more, we have a loophole for tools to call others out and poo poo that they are not "Official" 40K mini's. ( whatever the hell that means.) Heck why stop at forgeworld? We can now go on and call out each and every third party product and part as not "Officially official".

You want to use one of those high speed 3d party parts kits for a so and so tank? !@#$ you! its not "official".

You want to use Reaper, Ral Partha, or Vallejo paint? it's not "official!"

As wrapped around the axle as you are over one point, you have lost the discussion by default. and ergo- you have proven that you have no discussion.


<portions redacted; do NOT use obfuscated profanity>

Grot 6 wrote:
Whats the point? Your set in your idea that the expansion stuff is not even 40K, why bother saying anything anymore? An expansion? Why should I bang my head against the wall with a tool that continues to parrot the same misguided thought process about of all things.... minis, and more minis?

No, I am not saying that the "expansion stuff is not even 40K". Where have you gotten that idea from?
No, I am not talking about "minis, and more minis". I am talking about the rules. In the interest of intelligent discussion, that is a distinction that need to be made.

I refute it, but WTF. I'm !@$ing done with you. Anything I have to say is going to be dazzled with diamonds and baffled by bullgak and a screenfull of alphabet.

So, any argument that you don't like or can't refute is classed as "dazzled with diamonds and baffled by bullgak and a screenfull of alphabet". I see.

My question is very simple; "Do you see Imperial Armour as being something other than an expansion for Warhammer 40K, and if so, what?"

Your not even discussing anything.

I am very much prepared to, but so far I haven't had the need with you. All you present is a series of insults, spiced up with a handful of swearwords, while you avoid the simple questions posed to you.

You say that it is an expansion, but.... What exactly is the purpose of Forgeworld, and what exactly is this... "expansion" used for, if not to play the game? Once again, your pretzil logic escapes me, and YOU being wrapped around the misguided thought process and not even seeing the real issue.

I am not saying you can't play the game. I am saying; "use Imperial Armour as the expansion it is".

Please help me see the "real issue" that I am missing.

I posted the exact historics of "Forge World" in the other thread, and continue to say the same thing I've been saying the whole time...and what they are for. NOW that we have all the minis and more, we have a loophole for tools to call others out and poo poo that they are not "Official" 40K mini's. ( whatever the hell that means.) !@$#ing things. Heck why stop at forgeworld? We can now go on and call out each and every third party product and part as not "Officially official".

You want to use one of those high speed 3d party parts kits for a so and so tank? !@#$ you! its not "official".

You want to use that Battlefoam @#$%? @#$% you! it's not "official."

You want to use Reaper, Ral Partha, or Vallejo paint? !@#$ you! it's not "official!"

What are you saying here? I really cannot make heads or tails of it.
I have all through this thread, and the other, said that Imperial Armour is a 100% official Expansion for Warhammer 40K.
It is official and is meant to be played with Warhammer 40K.

But...

Like any other expansion, it requires that you agree with your opponent beforehand.

As wrapped around the axle as you are over one point, you have lost the discussion by default. and ergo- you have proven that you have no discussion.

Other then that I'm !@#^ing done with you.

I continuously bring up that single point because it answers ALL questions about how and when to use Imperial Armour units.

And so far it seems to have been irrefutable as well.

Steelmage99 wrote: Same song... different verse. Being just as petty, but a whole lot worse.

What exactly are you trying to do here?

Do you even have a point anymore?

There will be no more discussion with you on anything. Welcome to ignore.

Ive always viewed forge world as a pre-curso to what will be released, and a provider of apoc products, and a way to customize your army. Ive never viewed their rules as serious or something to be used in actual play....

Lets say you want Apoc Super Heavies....Forgeworld is where you go.
Lets say you want customized rhino doors/units/squads, forgeworld is where you go.

If you look at the forgeworld eldar models. Shadow Specteres/Hornets/Lynx's/Wraithseer will probably be in the new eldar codex when it is released.

As far as Forgeworld units being used with forgeworld rules in non apoc games.....no that doesnt work and itsnt done and shouldnt be done....unless your opponent is a friend and just wants to have a fun game.

Here's something I've been wondering - and that's the order of the books. Apocalypse and Apocalypse II - are these IA: Book One? most of the units appear later in other books, do these later books supercede the earlier ones?

Tek wrote:Here's something I've been wondering - and that's the order of the books. Apocalypse and Apocalypse II - are these IA: Book One? most of the units appear later in other books, do these later books supercede the earlier ones?

a lot of the earlier books are disappearing from sale because they're preparing updates and reprints. IA1 was 'Imperial Guard and Imperial Navy' - a lot of what's in it is updated in IAA, IAA2 and the current IG Codex but they have said they're planning to fully update the rules and army lists that IA1 contains to bring it into line with the current rules, because all the technical data and treadhead detail is still valid... personally I hope they make it look like IA9 and 10!!

with regard to 'the point' as the OP asks, it is this:
Forge World exists to expand and explore the 40k (and now WFB) background in a way that the main range of Codices and Army Books cannot, by necessity. A Forge World release will always seek to provide a very specific, incredibly deep and detailed slice of the background (Badab War for example) accompanied by highly detailed, unique miniatures and vehicles that again expand the background of 40k.
To a certain extent they are a testing ground for the popularity of certain kits (Sky Ray, Pirahna, Drop Pod, Baneblade, Valkyrie etc) but this isn;t their sole reason for being.

with regard to the 'officiallity' of the models and rules, Grot6 and Steelmage99 are both correct - the models are totally official 40k models but the rules are an expansion like any other 'Studio' release.
So to clarify, Grot6, you wouldn't rock up to the table for a pick-up game and insist on using a Planetstrike force (for example) without discussing it with your opponent beforehand, because while Planetstrike IS 40k, it is not 40k becuase it alters the basic game rules quite a lot.

The same is true of a Forge World ruleset, be it the DKK list or the Siege Assault Vanguard list, or even the inclusion of a Land Raider Achilles (which, by the way, I love deeply). However, i love playing with and against FW rules, I don;t play tourneys and I've never had an opponent complain.

Grot 6 wrote:

Steelmage99 wrote: Same song... different verse. Being just as petty, but a whole lot worse.

What exactly are you trying to do here?

Do you even have a point anymore?

There will be no more discussion with you on anything. Welcome to ignore.

I'll see if I can survive without your unique brand of intelligent discussion.

.

Grot 6 wrote:Then to hear tell people actually want to split hairs over (I/E rules lawyer) thier interpritation of decision making process of use or non use.

I guess it must be an unwritten law that everyone posting on the internet must have no idea what the feth a "rules lawyer" actually is.

Grot 6 wrote:Too bad too, would have loved to buy me a few of those Grot tanks, and some of those variant Ork truck and tanks.

If you want them, buy them. If you only want them because you want to use them in every single 40k game as if they were a codex-legal unit then no, don't bother, because they're not.

Grot 6 wrote:As a IG player, I see it as a matter of self interest to actually WANT to buy something, not just have some cat come across as a total Rules Joke and try to finangle a win out of not letting you play your army.

Yeah, I'm sure that's what's going on here...I just want to tell everyone I beat you even though we didn't even play a fething game.

wat

mikhaila wrote:Great models. I ran two big tracks, a megadread, and a killkrusha at the Colonial GT. Used them as trucks, deffdread, and battlewagon. I use my grot tanks a lot as buggies.
In non tournament games I run them using the IA rules, and I've never had a problem using them, but always ask first.

Not a bad point, actually. You can't claim that FW is a "defective" product because you can generally use FW models as representations of codex entries easily enough without much contention. And as it's been said time and again, if you just tell people you're bringing FW before hand I bet you 9 times out of 10 people would be okay with it. And despite what you seem to believe, telling people before hand is just a common courtesy and not some bs "rules lawyering" because FW items do change the game up quite a bit, and you can't just spring it on somebody as a surprise, shrug your shoulders and say "What? We're just playing 40k, what are you upset about?" like everything is normal.

nkelsch wrote:Sometimes that squiggoth is a squiggoth, sometime he is a battlewagon!

lol, now I'm imagining a picture like the "I'm a Porsche!" razorgore, but with a squiggoth saying "I'm a battlewagon!"...

And the squiggoth is more trukk-sized, really. Although I guess the battlewagon wouldn't be much of a stretch considering how small GW made it.

Snarky wrote:except maybe a little less loose flash in the Chinese casts and better quality control than the UK casts.

So there isn't much of a difference...except for the part where the models are actually of good quality?

Platuan4th wrote:Except for the fact that there IS no rule requiring you to ask.

I don't recall Planetstrike (does anyone even play that?) or Apocalypse requiring permission either.

Grot 6 wrote:Whats the point? Your set in your idea that the expansion stuff is not even 40K, why bother saying anything anymore? An expansion? Why should I bang my head against the wall with a tool that continues to parrot the same misguided thought process about of all things.... minis, and more minis?

Pot calling the kettle black if you ask me.

Grot 6 wrote:You say that it is an expansion, but.... What exactly is the purpose of Forgeworld, and what exactly is this... "expansion" used for, if not to play the game? Once again, your pretzil logic escapes me, and YOU being wrapped around the misguided thought process and not even seeing the real issue.

Oh FFS.

If it helps you, think of Imperial Armour as "40k +". It's pretty much the same game, except you have rules for fliers, AA, superheavies, and special army lists not covered by GW which are designed by people outside the regular studio. The whole reason why everyone is saying it is, and should be, kept separate and be permission-based like every single other 40k supplement is because none of that stuff is covered in any of the "main" 40k material, IE the 5th edition rulebook and codices.

Grot 6 wrote:I posted the exact historics of "Forge World" in the other thread, and continue to say the same thing I've been saying the whole time...and what they are for. NOW that we have all the minis and more, we have a loophole for tools to call others out and poo poo that they are not "Official" 40K mini's. ( whatever the hell that means.) Heck why stop at forgeworld? We can now go on and call out each and every third party product and part as not "Officially official".

Doesn't it get old slinging childish insults at people simply because they have a different point of view than you?

lol, why am I asking this question, of course it doesn't. But still, getting a little annoyed by how I keep being indirectly labelled a tool because I might have a slight problem with someone who showed up with a 2000 point FW army with fliers and superheavies without saying a fething word about it beforehand, and just expecting me to play a game with him like it's no big deal.



I don't know why the hell this is such a big deal to you. Is it that hard to use Krieg as regular Imperial Guard in case someone actually said "No, I don't want to play with FW units today."? Considering how you made a point out of saying the Death Korps, Elysians, etc. are "just another regiment" I'm curious to hear an explanation as to why playing with their FW rules is so god-damned important, because surely they're not THAT different that they can't be represented just fine with the IG codex as it is? Hell, with the valkyrie/vendetta it's hard to argue that Elysians can't be represented "properly", and I'm not sure what DKoK has that makes them unique other than gas masks, so...

Steelmage99 wrote:

Steelmage99 wrote:You want a serious point of discussion, Grot 6?

How about this; Imperial Armour is an expansion just like Planetstrike, Cities of Death, Spearhead and Apocalypse.

Do you wish to refute this?

Grot 6, you there?

Boy, talk about blatantly looking for a fight...
I see why you didn't go with 'Subtlemage66'.



Ghidorah

Smitty0305 wrote:

As far as Forgeworld units being used with forgeworld rules in non apoc games.....no that doesnt work and itsnt done and shouldnt be done....unless your opponent is a friend and just wants to have a fun game.

it never ceases to amaze me how many people use "fun" as a descriptor that implies "out of the ordinary" when it comes to Warhams.

Really guys, get your heads checked. If you're only playing Warhams to kick someone in the jeans and make them quit Warhams, do us all a favor and go play Warmachine.

Why do you take winning or losing so personally? Losing sucks, I do it all the time, but I'll never be a fan of this hand-holding, ass-coddling "everyone's a winner!" attitude that seems so popular in the 40k community. The quicker people realize that getting your toy soldiers asses handed to them isn't a slight against your manhood the better off we'll all be.

I say if losing one game is so damaging to your ego that you quit Warhams forever then please do so.

Sidstyler wrote: A whole bunch of random.

It would be better to sit back there and see what we as a whole, were actually discussing from the beginning, instead of coming in out of left field in a point per point verbage fest to intetionally try to bait me. YET AGAIN.

Sidstyler.


Seriously dude...


Your starting to go in on a tangent of biblical proportions when your cutting and pasting to suit your misconvincing argumentative that you are actually bringing something to the table here.

Knock it off and address the discussion, STOP with the attacks when your not even AT the A and B point of the cross talk of the heated discussion.

I've already posted that I'm not playing symantic nut roll with one guy, withdrawn from the conversation, and AM NOW NOT EVEN IN this conversation anymore. My points are there, but I'm just .... done with the conversation.


You want to dog pile me too? What is that all about, and WHY would I possibly want to continue?

Your not even discussing, you just spouted off a bunch of random.



Other then that, I've already discussed my point of order in conversation, and I've been reminded that this is just a conversation and to tame it down with the newborn mod on this subject.

You should do the same and try discussing the subject with something new to bring to the table.

run on along now and play nice with the other posters....

Sidstyler wrote:lol, why am I asking this question, of course it doesn't. But still, getting a little annoyed by how I keep being indirectly labelled a tool because I might have a slight problem with someone who showed up with a 2000 point FW army with fliers and superheavies without saying a fething word about it beforehand, and just expecting me to play a game with him like it's no big deal.

Out of interest, Sid, where has anyone defending the use of FW units in general play defended the idea of fielding SHTs or flyers in their lists? You can't fit a SHT in a standard FOC (and I believe the threashold for two FOCs is 2500 points - or it least it used to be - which is encroaching on Apocalypse territory), though I do need to check where the non-SH flyers fit these days.

Stripping out those elements from your slightly hyperbolic example, would you have issues with someone turning up with a 2k DKoK list? Or Elysians? I could see an Armoured Company being a shock, but given that Mech IG seems to be the standard form of that list at the moment, it doesn't seem a huge leap further on.....

nkelsch wrote:

Platuan4th wrote:

nkelsch wrote: Someone unwilling to ask permission seems like the problem, not the rules that require you to ask.

Except for the fact that there IS no rule requiring you to ask.

It is an expansion. All expansions require mutual consent. Besides, almost all friendly games are based upon mutual consent.

If you want to use a ruleset not in the core rulebook or codexes, then you need to agree with your opponent.

They're supplements, NOT expansions(please note the lack of the word expansion on the covers of the non-Apoc books like Apoc, Planetfall, et al. bear proudly). Incidentally, the Codecii all used to say Supplement on them as well.

We're going to just have to agree to disagree, especially since a good number of Imperial Armour books specifically have a sentence in the front about NOT needing permission to use them.

Platuan4th wrote: especially since a good number of Imperial Armour books specifically have a sentence in the front about NOT needing permission to use them.

None of them have such a line.

For the people in the UK who sell Forgeworld on every streetcorner and the datasheets rain from the sky everywhere... The US position on forgeworld pretty much is that of 'ard boyz' for most groups of people.

Only the main army lists may be used for the army in
question. No appendix lists are permitted.

Only armies listed in the Approved Army Lists section
may be taken.

Forge World models are permitted in the tournament,
but they can only be used to represent models from
existing Codex list. No Forge World rules are allowed.

nkelsch wrote:

Platuan4th wrote: especially since a good number of Imperial Armour books specifically have a sentence in the front about NOT needing permission to use them.

None of them have such a line.

Not in explicit terms, but try actually reading the intros, where they DO say(paraphrased) "we used to tell you to ask permission, but that's unnecessary now, because you basically do that every time you ask someone for a game of 40K".

Platuan4th wrote:

nkelsch wrote:

Platuan4th wrote: especially since a good number of Imperial Armour books specifically have a sentence in the front about NOT needing permission to use them.

None of them have such a line.

Not in explicit terms, but try actually reading the intros, where they DO say(paraphrased) "we used to tell you to ask permission, but that's unnecessary now, because you basically do that every time you ask someone for a game of 40K".

So the stance is nothing is official and they don't do official modification to the core rules anymore. Which means BRB and codexes only unlike the days of 'chapter approved' being official modifications to the core rules and Imperial Armorer was an unofficial segmented set of rules and never reached officially legal status.

Boils down to IA is not core rules and is not legal...

nkelsch wrote:

Platuan4th wrote:

nkelsch wrote:

Platuan4th wrote: especially since a good number of Imperial Armour books specifically have a sentence in the front about NOT needing permission to use them.

None of them have such a line.

Not in explicit terms, but try actually reading the intros, where they DO say(paraphrased) "we used to tell you to ask permission, but that's unnecessary now, because you basically do that every time you ask someone for a game of 40K".

So the stance is nothing is official and they don't do official modification to the core rules anymore. Which means BRB and codexes only unlike the days of 'chapter approved' being official modifications to the core rules and Imperial Armorer was an unofficial segmented set of rules and never reached officially legal status.

Boils down to IA is not core rules and is not legal...

This is the completly wrong way to look at this situation, this whole conception of legallity and official rules is total crap. IA material is supplementary, it adds on to the core rules and is completly opptional and in no way vital to the integrity of the BRB. The whole FW models are not official is complete and total bullgak and forever will be. Now on the topic of permission/opponent consent, many people don't like this myself included however this does not entitle anybody to be rude to each other, if I was going to use a FW vehicle/unit in a game I would tell my opponent and supply them with the printed rules in case they had any questions or concerns. If it really became a problem, I would just find someone else to play with.

It is true that FW things are a supplement but they are more of a minor tweak, and add variety to the game unlike planetstrike/apoc/cities of death which totally change the way the game is played.

My local GW does not let us use forgeworld models because they say they put the newbies of. Yet they still have a huge titan (bigger than me) in the front window and one about half its size at the back.

haloreach4ever wrote:My local GW does not let us use forgeworld models because they say they put the newbies of.

I'm sure most of these so-called newbies wouldn't even know they were facing some FW things. AC Chimera turrets and the like don't exactly scream "I'M FORGE WORLD".

Dysartes wrote:Stripping out those elements from your slightly hyperbolic example, would you have issues with someone turning up with a 2k DKoK list? Or Elysians? I could see an Armoured Company being a shock, but given that Mech IG seems to be the standard form of that list at the moment, it doesn't seem a huge leap further on.....

I've stated this before. Don't remember if it was this or the other FW thread (it feels like we have two of the same discussion going on doesn't it?), but anyway...

If someone wanted to play with a FW army and told me about it ahead of time (I would say like you would for an expansion game, but really any game I play is planned ahead of time) then I'd be up for it. If someone asked for a pick-up game and plopped that stuff out on the table just expecting me to be okay with it, like you would if you were fielding a regular GW codex you can grab off the shelf, then I'd have an issue with it. And even then I'd probably still play, it just depends on how big of a dick they were being about it. Can't say I'd really be in the mood to play toy soldiers anymore when someone starts going off on a rant about how people like me are ruining 40k.

Grot 6 wrote:Your starting to go in on a tangent of biblical proportions when your cutting and pasting to suit your misconvincing argumentative that you are actually bringing something to the table here.

Knock it off and address the discussion, STOP with the attacks when your not even AT the A and B point of the cross talk of the heated discussion.

...this is kind of embarrassing, but I'm honestly having a hard time understanding what you're trying to say. I'm not joking, other than the complete dismissal of everything I said as a "pile of random", which I consider to be an insult no matter how true, and obviously being talked down to, your post literally had me scratching my head thinking "...what?"

Anyway, I did read the whole thread before I posted what you replied to, so I'm not sure exactly what I missed that was so critical to the point you were making, or how anything I said could be construed as an "attack" when you are the one calling people tools and clowns for having a different opinion, which is what I would call "baiting", personally.

Also, I have kind of a messed-up work schedule, so I usually am a little late to the party in threads like this. Most of the heated discussion took place while I was gone so I apologize if it seemed like I was trying to drag you back into a debate that you had stepped out of.

Anyway, as for the discussion (you're free to ignore this part if you're not talking about it anymore), personally I just get the feeling that you're willfully ignoring points brought up by the other side, and being too defensive and using the "attacks" and "dog-piling" as an excuse to dismiss people entirely, which in my opinion makes you look a little hypocritical by calling people "tools" or "clowns" for having contentions with FW product, and then when said clowns explain their reasoning, you put them on Ignore. It makes you look like the one who's baiting people.

Like this for example:

Grot 6 wrote:If you going to say something, just say it. You didn't make any kind of serious points of discussion there, all you ended up doing is pretty much saying the same thing you just did in the other post.

I disagree, I thought Steelmage99's post was pretty good and that he did quite a bit to explain why he thought the way he did, without being too insulting. In fact I'd say one of the "serious points of discussion" he made was that Imperial Armour has "Warhammer 40k Expansion" stamped on it, which is pretty damning proof that IA is not intended to be "no frills 40k" as you described, which lends credence to the idea that FW rules should remain permission-based like other expansions, and that letting your opponent know of them ahead of time is just common courtesy.

You're saying a lot of things, that his "thought process is misguided", that he's "not even discussing anything" (wut?)...you're doing everything in your power to make him look like he's speaking in riddles and doublespeak and not really providing any proof of that whatsoever. I can't go looking for it myself because I've been reading the guy's posts and he's making sense...whereas I'm giving myself a headache constantly watching you post things like "dazzled with diamonds and baffled by bullgak and a screenfull of alphabet", and I don't even know what the feth.

I've tried very hard to see what your point is, and here's all I've really gathered after a second look, which isn't much more than what I understood from the first read through. "GW sells FW models. FW models are obviously designed for 40k. Hence FW models are official and can be used in every 40k game, despite the fact that the rules for FW models are sold in books that are labelled as expansions, and if that's not true then GW are crooks for selling models that I'm not guaranteed to be able to use whenever I damn well please." A couple of things though:

1. GW isn't forcing you to buy these models, nor are they attempting to be deceptive in any way from what I can tell. The Imperial Armour books have "Warhammer 40k Expansion" printed on the corner (we have a screenshot from this very thread proving that so I think it's safe to say that's not an arguable point anymore), so they're not being marketed as a "core" product like the 5th edition rulebook or codices. When buying Forge World models, like buying plastic baneblades or stompas, there's no guarantee you'll be able to use them in every single game. Hell, if you want to you could argue that buying an official codex doesn't even guarantee that you can always play the game, because people can still decline games with you for any reason. 40k itself is a permission-based game, if I don't feel like playing at all then we're not playing.

2. The fact that it's obvious which systems FW's models are intended for doesn't really mean anything. It's obvious which system the baneblade and stompa are designed for, but that doesn't mean they're kosher in a "regular" game of 40k. In some people's eyes, FW is the same, it's not designed for a normal game and so showing up to a normal game with it is comparable to bringing a stompa to a regular 2000 point game. I understand that it might sound odd that there are models that are obviously designed for 40k armies, that can't always be used with those 40k armies (yet, anyway), but that's why they're called expansions. Like I said before, there's 40k, and then there's 40k+ which is stuff like Imperial Armour, Apocalypse, etc., which is like 40k but with extras.

3. You can still use the models. A lot of stuff FW makes can be used to represent regular codex units just fine, so you're not really "wasting" money buying a "defective" product, the product still works just fine. You just can't always use the rules that FW developed for them, which bothers some people because, apparently, they can't play with a model without using it's "official" rules...they bought a megadread, not a deffdread, and if they can't use the special megadread rules then there's no point in using the model at all ever! Yeah, "counts-as" is a little more difficult with the special FW tanks and stuff like fliers and titans, but that's something you should keep in mind before buying that product anyway. In my opinion, buying a titan and then whining because it's not "legal" in regular 40k games, is like buying a special racing mod for your car which is not road legal, and then complaining because you can't drive the car anymore. You kinda knew what you were getting into in the first place.

4. This whole "problem" is being grossly exaggerated. Odds are if you just treat people like human beings and act reasonable, few people will decline a game with FW units, and if they do then you can just find someone else to play with, no big deal. Personally I don't think it should be held against someone if they ever do decline to play with FW rules, because I know I'm not always in the mood for stuff like that either (I'll probably never play an Apoc game simply because the idea of dedicating an entire weekend to one game of 40k whose outcome no one will really give a gak about once the game is finally over appealing). I think accusing those people of being against the idea of "having fun" is wrong, but then again I'm pretty sure Worglock is just a big fat troll anyway so I'm not too concerned about what he/she thinks.

Platuan4th wrote:
They're supplements, NOT expansions(please note the lack of the word expansion on the covers of the non-Apoc books like Apoc, Planetfall, et al. bear proudly).

Every Imperial Armour volume, from 5 and onwards, carry the "Warhammer 40.000 Expansion" logo on the front. I know this because I just need to turn my head slightly to the left and look at my book shelf in order to verify it.

Incidentally, the Codecii all used to say Supplement on them as well.

When was this and how is it relevant? You seem to try to draw an imaginary similarity between the GW Codecii and the Forgeworld publications based on names. This fails on two accounts. One being the fact that Imperial Armour books DO carry the "Expansion" logo and not a Supplement logo. The other being that fact that the GW Codecii doesn't either.
The codecii doesn't say Supplement on them. They say "Warhammer 40.000 Codex".

One is an Expansion and the other is a Codex, and those two are clearly different.

We're going to just have to agree to disagree, especially since a good number of Imperial Armour books specifically have a sentence in the front about NOT needing permission to use them.

Last time Forgeworld addressed their own "legality" and how do use them, was in Imperial Armour Apocalypse.

This is what they said;



Notice how they address Imperial Armour rules as a whole, and not just this specific book.

Would you be so kind as to point out exactly where, and in which book, Forgeworld "specifically have a sentence in the front about NOT needing permission to use them", please.

Steelmage99 wrote:This is what they said;



Notice how they address Imperial Armour rules as a whole, and not just this specific book.

Would you be so kind as to point out exactly where, and in which book, Forgeworld "specifically have a sentence in the front about NOT needing permission to use them", please.

It would appear that that settles the argument. Pretty cut and dry to me. Of course, I'm waiting for this sentence about not needing permission. That could be a game changer.




Ghidorah

I also noticed the typo, "What to play"...

Proofreading!

Forge World wrote:Ultimately, however you want to play the game, make sure everyone is having fun!

And nothing quite says 'fun' like stopping someone from using his Autocannon Chimera Turret, or Cadian Long-Ranged Scanner!

Indeed, because Autocannon Chimera turrets are the epitome of "fun" and not unbalanced as a 5 point upgrade at all.

Also there is quite a difference between playing the Armoured Battlegroup and simply insisting that ALL Chimeras everywhere should be able to upgrade their Multilasers to Autocannons (not that I am saying you just did that, mind).

Imperial Armours volume 1-4 do not say "Expansion" on them. Imperial Armours volumes 1-3 have nothing at all on their cover, outside of the authors' names.

Imperial Armour volume 4 simply says 'Warhammer 40,000' on it.

So by your logic, since they don't say "expansion" they're perfectly legal!

However, the real reason they say "Expansion" is that Vraks, Badab, Kastorel-Novem, etc all contain alternative missions that can be utilized.

Sidstyler wrote:In my opinion, buying a titan and then whining because it's not "legal" in regular 40k games, is like buying a special racing mod for your car which is not road legal, and then complaining because you can't drive the car anymore. You kinda knew what you were getting into in the first place.

Given you didn't respond to the point the first time, Sid - has there been a post in this or the other current FW thread saying anything about supporting using a titan in a standard game? Ignoring the fact that the FOC would prevent you from doing so, of course.....

Kanluwen wrote:
So by your logic, since they don't say "expansion" they're perfectly legal!

Except during that time, we had 'chapter approved' which was official and everything else not chapter approved was not official.

IA was never chapter approved during the printing of those books and never legal.

nkelsch wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:
So by your logic, since they don't say "expansion" they're perfectly legal!

Except during that time, we had 'chapter approved' which was official and everything else not chapter approved was not official.

IA was never chapter approved during the printing of those books and never legal.

Except during that time, we also had several of the vehicles in Imperial Armour in the codices.

Griffon says 'sup'.

Kroothawk wrote:as they can be quite overpowered (less playtesting at FW).

I beg your pardon?, overpowered?, less playtested?...rubbish.

Kroothawk wrote:A good portion of FW models are super heavies and flyers. Normal armies can't deal with those, so it is unfair to use them.

again rubbish, a FW rule baneblade is no better than 3 leman russ battle tanks, and more expensive, so if they can't handle a baneblade they can't handle 3 standard codex tanks, and thats the players or codex fault

Kanluwen wrote:

nkelsch wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:
So by your logic, since they don't say "expansion" they're perfectly legal!

Except during that time, we had 'chapter approved' which was official and everything else not chapter approved was not official.

IA was never chapter approved during the printing of those books and never legal.

Except during that time, we also had several of the vehicles in Imperial Armour in the codices.

Griffon says 'sup'.

When it got added to the core rulebook, those units became legal... until they did, they were not. It was not uncommon that a unit in IA became something they wanted to add to the core ruleset so they REPUBLISHED the rules in a chapter approved article if they wanted to make it official and codex legal. The rest of the IA stuff got to rot.

Nothing has made all IA always legal, they have always been unbalanced and narrative rules for cool looking models, never core ruleset play.

nkelsch wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

nkelsch wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:
So by your logic, since they don't say "expansion" they're perfectly legal!

Except during that time, we had 'chapter approved' which was official and everything else not chapter approved was not official.

IA was never chapter approved during the printing of those books and never legal.

Except during that time, we also had several of the vehicles in Imperial Armour in the codices.

Griffon says 'sup'.

When it got added to the core rulebook, those units became legal... until they did, they were not.

Nothing has made all IA always legal, they have always been unbalanced and narrative rules for cool looking models, never core ruleset play.

This is a garbage post and you know it.

The original 'Imperial Armour' was a series of softback books, roughly the size of Codices, that had the early production pieces like the Baneblade and other pieces of that nature in them.

It wasn't until IA3 that you started seeing "unbalanced and narrative rules for cool looking models". IA1+2, for the most part, consists of the primary vehicles within the Codices and variants based off of them.

By the by, if 'Chapter Approved' was necessary for something to be legal and we're nitpicking off terminology?
GW's codices aren't 'Chapter Approved'. So they're not legal for play.

Kanluwen wrote:
This is a garbage post and you know it.

The original 'Imperial Armour' was a series of softback books, roughly the size of Codices, that had the early production pieces like the Baneblade and other pieces of that nature in them.

It wasn't until IA3 that you started seeing "unbalanced and narrative rules for cool looking models". IA1+2, for the most part, consists of the primary vehicles within the Codices and variants based off of them.

By the by, if 'Chapter Approved' was necessary for something to be legal and we're nitpicking off terminology?
GW's codices aren't 'Chapter Approved'. So they're not legal for play.

Now your post is garbage and YOU know it. And the variensts of codex vehicles became 'non-codex legal variants which needed opponents permission and were not accepted in competitive play'

If you were really feet on the ground from 1998 to 2005 you know EXACTLY what chapter approved was and how it was 'the' source for official modifications to the core ruleset. IA was never a codex or deemed to be equivalent of a codex.

Trying to say codexes are not legal because they were not chapter approved is a garbage statement and you know it. GW said officially in print that the core rulebook and codexes are LEGAL. Chapter approved was the only other way rules could become 'legal' without being in a codex. Hell, the whole necron codex was a chapter approved. IA *NEVER* rose to the level and was never fully included int he core ruleset. It never happened. It was around, but it was always outside the core ruleset. The few things they did want added, they republished as CA articles in WD.

IA has never been game legal the way a codex was and to this day still isn't. It is an optional expansion that requires opponent consent and evens ays so within the book. The only rules ever to have been given the status equivalent to core ruleboox and codexes was 'chapter approved'. Refusing to accept this distinction existed doesn't make it not true. Today they don't do chapter approved because they simply publish more codexes. It doesn't open the floodgates to make the garbage in IA codex legal all of a sudden, it basically means they are all NOT codex legal and is why people treat them as such.

nkelsch wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:
This is a garbage post and you know it.

The original 'Imperial Armour' was a series of softback books, roughly the size of Codices, that had the early production pieces like the Baneblade and other pieces of that nature in them.

It wasn't until IA3 that you started seeing "unbalanced and narrative rules for cool looking models". IA1+2, for the most part, consists of the primary vehicles within the Codices and variants based off of them.

By the by, if 'Chapter Approved' was necessary for something to be legal and we're nitpicking off terminology?
GW's codices aren't 'Chapter Approved'. So they're not legal for play.

Now your post is garbage and YOU know it. And the variensts of codex vehicles became 'non-codex legal variants which needed opponents permission and were not accepted in competitive play'

If you were really feet on the ground from 1998 to 2005 you know EXACTLY what chapter approved was and how it was 'the' source for official modifications to the core ruleset. IA was never a codex or deemed to be equivalent of a codex.

Did I ever say that I didn't know what Chapter Approved was? Or that it was somehow "not official"?

Nope, pretty sure I didn't.

And by the by: not everything in Codex Approved was 'official'. Quite a few things were experimental or 'intended for friendly play', such as the Vehicle Design Rules.

Trying to say codexes are not legal because they were not chapter approved is a garbage statement and you know it. GW said officially in print that the core rulebook and codexes are LEGAL. Chapter approved was the only other way rules could become 'legal' without being in a codex. Hell, the whole necron codex was a chapter approved. IA *NEVER* rose to the level and was never fully included int he core ruleset. It never happened. It was around, but it was always outside the core ruleset. The few things they did want added, they republished as CA articles in WD.

Garbage.

The Griffon, and many of the Leman Russ variants were published in the codices or Epic before they were in Imperial Armour.

IA has never been game legal the way a codex was and to this day still isn't. It is an optional expansion that requires opponent consent and evens ays so within the book. The only rules ever to have been given the status equivalent to core ruleboox and codexes was 'chapter approved'. Refusing to accept this distinction existed doesn't make it not true. Today they don't do chapter approved because they simply publish more codexes. It doesn't open the floodgates to make the garbage in IA codex legal all of a sudden, it basically means they are all NOT codex legal and is why people treat them as such.

The lists given in Imperial Armour are perfectly 'legal' for play. As long as you're not fielding superheavies, you're fine.

The problem that always seems to crop up is that people don't recognize that nobody is forcing you to play 40k, period. The reasoning behind 'requiring opponent consent' has never been about balance. It's always been about knowledge. Not everyone has a bookshelf full of IA books. It's considered a bit douchey to just show up at a pick-up day for gaming at the shop/club. I've yet to ever see anyone say "NO! YOU CAN'T DO THAT!" whenever I post on my LGS' forums that "Oh, I'm going to bring X from Forge World. Tell me if you'd rather me not show up with it".

Kanluwen wrote:
Did I ever say that I didn't know what Chapter Approved was? Or that it was somehow "not official"?

Nope, pretty sure I didn't.

And by the by: not everything in Codex Approved was 'official'. Quite a few things were experimental or 'intended for friendly play', such as the Vehicle Design Rules.

And they explicitly said there were two types of rules... Trial rules were trial and the rest was deemed official. Says so right in WD and the chapter approved books. IA never had any of that and was never treated as such and was out at the exact same time. There was cross-pollination as some IA units got upgraded to CA.

Garbage.

The Griffon, and many of the Leman Russ variants were published in the codices or Epic before they were in Imperial Armour.

Epic =/=40k. If a dataset was in the codex, it was legal. If it gor republished in IA, it didn't remove it from the core codex so it was legal. If it was a variant that was IA only, it was not legal. If it was a variant that made its way to Chapter approved, it was legal.

The lists given in Imperial Armour are perfectly 'legal' for play. As long as you're not fielding superheavies, you're fine.

The problem that always seems to crop up is that people don't recognize that nobody is forcing you to play 40k, period. The reasoning behind 'requiring opponent consent' has never been about balance. It's always been about knowledge. Not everyone has a bookshelf full of IA books. It's considered a bit douchey to just show up at a pick-up day for gaming at the shop/club. I've yet to ever see anyone say "NO! YOU CAN'T DO THAT!" whenever I post on my LGS' forums that "Oh, I'm going to bring X from Forge World. Tell me if you'd rather me not show up with it".

Except they are not, and many of the units are broken, undercosted and overpowered. In a realm of 'FRIENDLY' play combined with Rampant proxies, you get people not using IA because they are neat models, you get people boiling down IA to the few statistically superior units and then proxying regular stuff for them. All it takes is one or two really bad units to make the entire ruleset be turned off for a gaming group.

GW doesn't even see them as official and they do admit FW is less playtested and less designed around balance than core armies. variants exist with weapon options 'because it is cool' not because it is balanced.

I totally disagree that 'opponents consent' isn't about balance. CODEX LEGAL game play has an expectation that it is reasonably fair for anyone involved. It is assumed all the armies and units mesh in a big pot called the core rules and that is 'fair'. of course it isn't perfect but it has gotten tighter in 5th edition over previous editions and we can at least see the edges of that playing field. because the game has become better playtested over the years so the game is fairer and more balanced, people now expect that they can play balanced games. IA doesn't fit. it extends the core rules back to that state of unbalance where you had to turn your mind off and just go through the motions because the game was fundamentally unfair. This is like Apocalypse. No one takes apocalypse seriously... even the creators say it is unfair, unbalanced and a beer and pretzels game. Not everyone wants to play 40k like that. There is a time and a place for that, but not all 'friendly' play deserves to be degraded to a big pile of imbalance.

Many of the IA lists are not balanced, many of the IA units are drastically underpowered or overpowered. They extend the game back to a level where it loses its integrity of fairness. Which is FINE when both players agree and there is a time and place for that style of play... THe issue is when someone who spends a pile of money wants to stomp around 100% of the time with an IA codex list and then demands to be accepted everywhere. I have a TON of forgeworld and IA models... and they get to be used sometimes, but I always expect that I should field them as core codex options unless explicitly specified that this is a time and a place for IA rules.

It is optional, it is opponents consent, and it is in no way as official as the old Chapter approved was and how some people are claiming it is. Being a GW book doesn't make it codex legal and never did as there has always been a distinction promoted by and supported by GW themselves.

Forgeworld couldn't have said it better themselves... oh wait, they did:

The crux of the debate appears to revolve around tournament play, and actually several of our lists (such as the Siege Assault Vanguard from IA10 or the Dred Mob from IA8) are designed with narrative play in mind rather than competitive game balance; certainly in the case of the Siege Assault Vanguard list the additional objective rules and specific victory conditions deliberately make it more difficult to win.

The downside to this thematic and narrative approach is that the balance of the game is altered so that it is not a level playing field. Some of the options included in other lists, such as the Artillery Strikes, provide one player with something that their opponent cannot counter, and again in competitive play this is less balanced.

This is awesome bickering people but lets talk a bit of reality.

If a TO says there are in, there are in. If TO says out they are out. No arguments there right?

In a friendly game it is a joint decision - nothing is "legal" as each player will decide if they want to play against a list. Remember 3rd ed when some Eldar player would bring out a star-cannon heavy ranger list (plus disruption) that still included at least 2 wraithlords. All totally legal but if I wasn't in the mood for it I would pass - having most of your MC and warriors wiped by turn 2 made the game a tad unfun.

So in a fun game I will decide if I want to play against a FW piece not my opponent fielding it. You can scream until you are blue in the face that it is legal and I have no choice but, guess what, I do and I am not afraid to exercise it.

And that's all there is to it really.

I'll only use my Grot Battle Tanks if you're going to have a fun game.

If you're having fun, they must be balanced and legal.

Any Game with Grot Battle Tans is a Fun Game

Therefore, Grot Battle Tanks are always legal.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

Disclaimer: Not being serious. Didn't use to put disclaimers, but some people take things really serious if they see them in print on the intrawebz.

Why would people object to Grot tanks for Pete's sake? They're Grots! In wee tanks!

Steelmage99 wrote:Indeed, because Autocannon Chimera turrets are the epitome of "fun" and not unbalanced as a 5 point upgrade at all.

Yeah, the AC turret is a bad example and one of the things that makes me laugh when people say "FW is balanced and GW is overpowered!"

Dysartes wrote:

Sidstyler wrote:In my opinion, buying a titan and then whining because it's not "legal" in regular 40k games, is like buying a special racing mod for your car which is not road legal, and then complaining because you can't drive the car anymore. You kinda knew what you were getting into in the first place.

Given you didn't respond to the point the first time, Sid - has there been a post in this or the other current FW thread saying anything about supporting using a titan in a standard game? Ignoring the fact that the FOC would prevent you from doing so, of course.....

What point didn't I respond to? I answered your question back on page 4.

Also, no, I haven't seen anyone advocating for the use of titans in standard games specifically, and I don't think I ever implied as much. Titans were just an example I used for the comparison, one of the first things that comes to mind when I think FW (and one of the most expensive). Would you feel better if I went back and edited that to say "malcador tank" instead of titan then?

nkelsch wrote:
Many of the IA lists are not balanced, many of the IA units are drastically underpowered or overpowered.

Wait, so you're saying they're both, and that the entire ruleset isn't perfectly balanced or stupidly broken? Nooooo, that can't be! Everything has to be absolute and anything else is "rubbish"!

fullheadofhair wrote:If a TO says there are in, there are in. If TO says out they are out. No arguments there right?

Of course. I think it's pretty much accepted that TO's can do any kind of game-tinkering they want for their own events, including banning codex entries or just entire codices if they feel like it. But that doesn't make it right, or fair, or balanced, either, that's literally just one guy rewriting the game to suit himself, and I don't have to accept that if I don't want to and can choose not to attend that guys bs events as a result.

mikhaila wrote:Disclaimer: Not being serious. Didn't use to put disclaimers, but some people take things really serious if they see them in print on the intrawebz.

I know you're joking but sometimes I wonder if that isn't exactly how people are thinking sometimes.

BrookM wrote:Why would people object to Grot tanks for Pete's sake? They're Grots! In wee tanks!

Because people are afraid of losing.

It has nothing to do with winning and losing, it's about fairness. But whatever, it wouldn't be a forum if there wasn't a constant accusation of WAAC play.

Just for the record I don't mind losing when I lose fair and square, but I don't go into every game telling myself "I'm going to play like absolute gak and lose horribly on purpose!", and for some reason this is viewed as a bad fething thing in the 40k community. If any ounce of your being craves victory, even a little bit, you're human garbage.

Because No One expects it...

CRASSUUUUUUS!

It's.... so beautiful.

I wanna blow it up.

Sidstyler wrote:It has nothing to do with winning and losing, it's about fairness. But whatever, it wouldn't be a forum if there wasn't a constant accusation of WAAC play.

Just for the record I don't mind losing when I lose fair and square, but I don't go into every game telling myself "I'm going to play like absolute gak and lose horribly on purpose!", and for some reason this is viewed as a bad fething thing in the 40k community. If any ounce of your being craves victory, even a little bit, you're human garbage.

I'm sorry, but how is showing you the rules for the unit, and lettnig you have access to them the entire game not "fair"?

What good does having access to the rules do if they're unbalanced? So I can check up mid-game and confirm that they're still broken?

Sidstyler wrote:What good does having access to the rules do if they're unbalanced? So I can check up mid-game and confirm that they're still broken?

You mean other than ensuring that if the rules are unbalanced(I can think of maybe one unit off the top of my head that's so unbalanced to be called "broken" and that's the Lucius pattern Drop Pod with Blood Angels), that you in fact don't want to play against them?

Rather than being a funkiller or a jerk, you don't say "I don't trust Forge World because their only job is to sell models that look good!"--you can say "I'd rather not play against this specific piece because it's imbalanced."

Sidstyler: despoiler of virgin sprues, funkiller, and all-around pain in everyone's ass!

Admittedly I assumed in this scenario that I was being forced to play against the offending FW items just because, not sure why.

You can't be 'forced' to play 40k, period.

Unless you have like a really mean bunch of gamers who play russian roulette, 40k edition.

Hello,
I will go at thisform a different perspective, many of you have played D&D, IF I am a GM and tell you we are playing in DarkSun and you bring out your dragin riding whatzit from Forgotten Realms or god help us your Drizt clone, guess what I get to say no, why, they are both "realms" however they were not made to meet, as the rules were not set up for that. The imprtant thing here is "Optional Expasion/Supplement" what ever you want to use, it is optional, the guy running the game gets to decide (TOs) or your opponent, unless you like playing with yourself.

Regards,
Carl

Sidstyler wrote:

Steelmage99 wrote:Indeed, because Autocannon Chimera turrets are the epitome of "fun" and not unbalanced as a 5 point upgrade at all.

Yeah, the AC turret is a bad example and one of the things that makes me laugh when people say "FW is balanced and GW is overpowered!"

yeah because for every autocannon turret GW codex's don't have another dozen or more completely unbalanced options, because as we know the codex writers are perfect examples of humanity...you know that stuff that comes out a bulls butt?, you just spoke allot of it.

Sidstyler wrote:

Dysartes wrote:

Sidstyler wrote:In my opinion, buying a titan and then whining because it's not "legal" in regular 40k games, is like buying a special racing mod for your car which is not road legal, and then complaining because you can't drive the car anymore. You kinda knew what you were getting into in the first place.

Given you didn't respond to the point the first time, Sid - has there been a post in this or the other current FW thread saying anything about supporting using a titan in a standard game? Ignoring the fact that the FOC would prevent you from doing so, of course.....

What point didn't I respond to? I answered your question back on page 4.

Also, no, I haven't seen anyone advocating for the use of titans in standard games specifically, and I don't think I ever implied as much. Titans were just an example I used for the comparison, one of the first things that comes to mind when I think FW (and one of the most expensive). Would you feel better if I went back and edited that to say "malcador tank" instead of titan then?

The point you missed/ignored was the first half of the post you answered, Sid:

Dysartes wrote:Out of interest, Sid, where has anyone defending the use of FW units in general play defended the idea of fielding SHTs or flyers in their lists? You can't fit a SHT in a standard FOC (and I believe the threashold for two FOCs is 2500 points - or it least it used to be - which is encroaching on Apocalypse territory), though I do need to check where the non-SH flyers fit these days.

You continue to use the example of someone forcing you to face a SHT in a standard game - something which, in 12+ pages of discussion across two threads I haven't seen a single supporter of Forge World advocate. As I noted, non-SHT flyers may be a bit tricker in that regard, but I can't remember if they fit in the FOC or not.

Stella Cadente wrote:

Sidstyler wrote:

Steelmage99 wrote:Indeed, because Autocannon Chimera turrets are the epitome of "fun" and not unbalanced as a 5 point upgrade at all.

Yeah, the AC turret is a bad example and one of the things that makes me laugh when people say "FW is balanced and GW is overpowered!"

yeah because for every autocannon turret GW codex's don't have another dozen or more completely unbalanced options, because as we know the codex writers are perfect examples of humanity...you know that stuff that comes out a bulls butt?, you just spoke allot of it.

Do you have any examples of these 12+ unbalanced options in every GW codex? Because while I don't own every single codex, I don't think I've seen anything that stood out in any of the new 5th edition books as being completely "broken": just a lot of gak that people freaked out over that never sees play because, big fething surprise, they're not that good in hindsight. How many Tyranid players still use the Doom in their lists? How many Blood Angels players build armies around the idea of deep-striking land raiders? Dark Eldar in particular are one of the most interesting army books because nothing really seems to be over or underpowered, you can almost literally use every unit in the codex without handicapping yourself (well, as long as your army is still competent in design and not a battleforce/WD-style "Take one of everything!" approach...).

No one ever said the GW studio was perfect, the studio has made some decisions that I really don't get myself, but they're not idiots either, and I think, as typical of the internet, you're greatly exaggerating how "unbalanced" 5th edition codices really are.

In any case, maybe it's not correct to imply that all FW rules are unbalanced. Certainly not everything FW makes is overpowered (or underpowered), I realize that, and I've tried to make it clear time and again that I'm not the type who would just refuse flat-out to play with it at all. But if you're trying to argue that GW rules are utter garbage and FW rules are the pinnacle of gaming perfection then someone needs to start proving it. Codex rules may not be perfectly balanced or even make sense 100% of the time, but that's hardly a good excuse to introduce something from a separate studio that has the potential to be even more disruptive, rules that by FW's own admission are not meant for regular balanced play.

Dysartes wrote:You continue to use the example of someone forcing you to face a SHT in a standard game - something which, in 12+ pages of discussion across two threads I haven't seen a single supporter of Forge World advocate. As I noted, non-SHT flyers may be a bit tricker in that regard, but I can't remember if they fit in the FOC or not.

Oh for Christ's sake, can we just admit I was wrong and move on then? I get the feeling like you're nitpicking this thing to death and I can't for the life of me understand why. Does the fact that superheavy tanks won't fit in regular games with a standard FOC make every single thing I've said completely irrelevant somehow? There are plenty of other FW models that aren't superheavies or fliers that could very well be used in regular games.

I'm surprised at some of the people on this topic, Mostly in contrast to what war is... it isn't fair and it isn't kind so if my opponent that is new brings something outlandish and exotic I'm not going to freak out. Yeah, normal reaction is <Unknown> figure alien like must fear... But yeah in war you'll get surprises now and then and it isn't fair. So complaining that rules this rules that are kind of on the out. In my mind I suck it up and I put my tactical brain to work, sure I could request the rules for the <Unknown> unit to see classifications and variants just like you can do that with normal 40k codex's if you think something is a miss you can ask to see there Codex and see the rules for the said unit or object in question. You can do the same with FW units as well.

Playing the game out reading the rules heck I could even ask my opponent hey, how do I shoot a flier with my army? maybe he knows better... maybe he would give his best opinion this is sportsmanship... Sure learning new tactic's is good and its good to get jumped once and awhile with a ha! I got you! If we all played the same 'Competitive lists' day in and day out it gets dull as hell so fast. I myself get tired of seeing groomed lists with only 3 different unit types in the whole list cause its a 'competitive list' well theirs a few sayings... All is far in love and war and over specialize and you breed in weakness.

I think FW is treated just like new codex's, "Oh Crap! The unknown lets cry and pout cause I don't know anything of the new dex!" FW is just on another scale cause not many people pull those units out. So what if you don't know what a unit does maybe figure it out adjust try and pull out a win on something you had no idea was coming. Give an opponent a chance to show hey yeah cause your letting me use this thing when most people cry foil I'll help you the best way I can with your thoughts on the unit I'm using. Now any a$$hole that dosen't want to help you obviously dosen't really want to play his FW model that bad. I think it comes down to most people considering there opponent and what they're army looks like is it a competitive list with a crazy tweek then worry. If its a guy that looks like he has some kinda thing going on to pull off RW or DW or any other specialist army then maybe you should give it a chance get jumped see what happens cause good commanders are ready for the 'Oh gak Button' adjustment and for all the 'Honor Bound' I am mightiness running around in this game I would think most would pull up a lip and ride it out in good faith cause they got a big set of brass ones.

Lastly the universe of 40k is vast and different in many ways, we all love it for various reasons and thoughts. When one of us wanders off to go yeah I'm going to write me a DYI or I'm going to make me a list cause I want something fluffy or unique. Then I respect that, now when a guy is trying to roll up and throw down a unit I can't even harm in anyway and not help me figure out what I can do to take it out that's a chump that wants a win and fine I'll let him have a win but after that I probably wont be looking to play him again tell I read out fully on the unit / object in question from FW and prepare to fight it only this time I know its coming but I rather not know honestly cause adjustments are the best way to learn how to deal with situations that evolve. Everything that people cry about in this game is a learning curve weather its a new codex or FW same damn thing, its new to you and its new to the galaxy you run around in and yeah war is never fair and its not fun at times but its war so suck it up and fight threw it you'll be surprised what happens.

-Sincerely Viri

Comparison to real life war, green text, bad grammar, run-on sentences and a signature at the end.

You might have made some very good points, but I really couldn't be bothered to read that.

Viridian wrote:I'm surprised at some of the people on this topic, Mostly in contrast to what war is... it isn't fair

Except we're talking about a game, not war.

I think FW is treated just like new codex's, "Oh Crap! The unknown lets cry and pout cause I don't know anything of the new dex!"

The new codex is a lot easier to obtain than FW rules, though. $33 (god damn...) compared to $50-90 for your average IA, which isn't normally sold in shops. While buying every single codex that comes out isn't really all that realistic anymore, buying every IA book as well just so you won't be surprised is even less so. That's money most people just can't/won't part with for something they'll never get much use out of. I'd rather buy more models, personally.

Sidstyler wrote:It has nothing to do with winning and losing, it's about fairness.

A nebulous concept that is so subjective that it's hardly worth discussing.

Sidstyler wrote:But whatever, it wouldn't be a forum if there wasn't a constant accusation of WAAC play.

I said nothing of the sort. Don't put words in my mouth.

Sidstyler wrote:

Viridian wrote:I'm surprised at some of the people on this topic, Mostly in contrast to what war is... it isn't fair

Except we're talking about a game, not war.

I think FW is treated just like new codex's, "Oh Crap! The unknown lets cry and pout cause I don't know anything of the new dex!"

The new codex is a lot easier to obtain than FW rules, though. $33 (god damn...) compared to $50-90 for your average IA, which isn't normally sold in shops. While buying every single codex that comes out isn't really all that realistic anymore, buying every IA book as well just so you won't be surprised is even less so. That's money most people just can't/won't part with for something they'll never get much use out of. I'd rather buy more models, personally.

QFT - Most people don't buy every codex, but you can borrow a friends, or look through one at your local store. It's not hard to keep up with regular 40k.

IA books aren't usually availabe at stores, and if they are, they aren't something you can pick up and thumb through. If a store does carry them, they want to keep them in the shrinkwrap, and in saleable condition. Most stores don't carry them at all. With 10 AI books, there's a lot of information that the average person simply doesn't have access to.

Can I use a FW rhino? - NP
It's a Damacles Rhino. - Go for it dude, it's a nice looking rhino.
BTW, it lets me drop this big ordanance template - uh? Really? How many points did you pay for that rhino again?
And I brought 6 of them! You said it was ok! - ........screw you, you win, I'm off for a beer.

mikhaila wrote:
Can I use a FW rhino? - NP
It's a Damacles Rhino. - Go for it dude, it's a nice looking rhino.
BTW, it lets me drop this big ordanance template - uh? Really? How many points did you pay for that rhino again?
And I brought 6 of them! You said it was ok! - ........screw you, you win, I'm off for a beer.

Except that the Damocles Command Rhino is a 0-1 HQ choice....

Snarky wrote:

mikhaila wrote:
Can I use a FW rhino? - NP
It's a Damacles Rhino. - Go for it dude, it's a nice looking rhino.
BTW, it lets me drop this big ordanance template - uh? Really? How many points did you pay for that rhino again?
And I brought 6 of them! You said it was ok! - ........screw you, you win, I'm off for a beer.

Except that the Damocles Command Rhino is a 0-1 HQ choice....

Shhh. They're bashing FW. Don't antagonize them.

Snarky wrote:

mikhaila wrote:
Can I use a FW rhino? - NP
It's a Damacles Rhino. - Go for it dude, it's a nice looking rhino.
BTW, it lets me drop this big ordanance template - uh? Really? How many points did you pay for that rhino again?
And I brought 6 of them! You said it was ok! - ........screw you, you win, I'm off for a beer.

Except that the Damocles Command Rhino is a 0-1 HQ choice....

Ha. ironic. I don't own that IA, so I've only seen it used in apocalypse with people taking 10 of them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Worglock wrote:Shhh. They're bashing FW. Don't antagonize them.

Hardly bashing. I've got nothing against FW at all, and own several thousand dollars of model kits from them.

Just don't agree with the "it's legal for everything all the time" veiwpoint.

mikhaila wrote:

Snarky wrote:

mikhaila wrote:
Can I use a FW rhino? - NP
It's a Damacles Rhino. - Go for it dude, it's a nice looking rhino.
BTW, it lets me drop this big ordanance template - uh? Really? How many points did you pay for that rhino again?
And I brought 6 of them! You said it was ok! - ........screw you, you win, I'm off for a beer.

Except that the Damocles Command Rhino is a 0-1 HQ choice....

Ha. ironic. I don't own that IA, so I've only seen it used in apocalypse with people taking 10 of them.

They're doing it wrong then.

Plus, the Damocles' rules are available as a download or from IA: Volume 2.

Worglock wrote:Shhh. They're bashing FW. Don't antagonize them.

Hardly bashing. I've got nothing against FW at all, and own several thousand dollars of model kits from them.

Just don't agree with the "it's legal for everything all the time" viewpoint.

As long as you ask/confront someone who says "Oh it's Forge World" when they have a magically overpowered item...you'll do fine.

Worglock wrote:Shhh. They're bashing FW. Don't antagonize them.

You're either one of the worst trolls or one of the best, I don't really know.