Greetings Dakka!

An interesting rumour has started doing the rounds around my area, and I was wondering if anyone on here had heard likewise.

Currently, FW and IA supplements require the express permission of your opponent for use, and are 100% forbidden fro GTs. Now i've heard that with the next IA book, items from these books can be selected as if they belonged to your codex (e.g. a Wraithseer, or a Warp Hunter). I also heard that within the next year, they are looking to print IA in multiple languages - and that this would make these items legal for tournament play.

That's all i've heard, just wondering if anyone else had? I'd be quite excited if this was true. It'd certainly shake things up a bit.

I have never heard this rumor before, but it would be cool.

Can't say it matters to me either way.

Oh it'll be a way to make more $$$ ;D

This would be an amazing way to equalize a lot of the older codexes that have an immense points problem with their transport costs while they're waiting for a new codex. For me, back before Sisters were remade, I used FW rules to be able to fire 2 models out of the hatch in my games. Just a small thing that most every other codex had, that helped to bring the army a bit up to speed at least as far as that one rule goes. I'm really hoping they bring forgeworld into codexes and streamline the rules to fit.

I have a feeling they're going to sneak this in by simply adding Forge-World Models into the regular GW codex and the model will only be available from Forge-World.

I don't really see the point- surely it's better to get your opponent's permission anyway?

You need opponents permission for pretty much everything (including regular games of 40k) so I don't really see much difference there. There's no clause in any IA right now saying that you can't use it in regular games of 40k and I don't really see them introducing one forcing people to play against IA units if they don't want to (same thing with playing against a regular codex, if your opponent doesn't want to play Space Wolves and you've brought em along then the game isn't going to happen)

As for GTs? I guess it's up to the TO to decide what's allowed and what isn't. I'm guessing IA won't be allowed in most tournaments still due to the obscure ruleset and delays it'll cause from confusion over certain rules as not everyone can just pick up an IA book an look over the rules while you can always pick up a codex and flick through in a GW.

I hope so lot of cool stuff in IA but too many clowns still think FWis broken or only know of crap like the Dread Pod Pod and think all the units are like that.

when true, wud be much appreciated imo. plenty people use FW conversion stuff, having new tasty units is what keeps it interesting.
The FW rules seem solid balanced from what i saw with few glances, and those which arent will be hopefully subject to modification.

models are awesomecake - specially Races with older codices could benefit from bigger diversity.

so, makin fw legal in general = win.

I could see some issues with this (some FW rules are a bit wonky) as then they'd have to actually balance new units from FW rather than just throw down a crapload of cool rules. I mean, seriously, I HATE the prospect of facing Land Raider Achilles in games hahaha....

They can't make 100% of FW legal while models like their special drop pods exist. Those *do* break normal point games

I love the concept that only FW have unbalanced broken rules when nothing about 'regular' 40K is balanced to begin with.

I've said it before and I'll say it again - those that are vehemently against allowing FW rules in 'regular' games only do so because they are afraid of losing. The only other plausible explanation is that they've never read a FW book in their lives and base all their opinions on the experimental Achilles rules and what they've read of the Dreadnought Drop Pod rules.

Kirasu wrote:They can't make 100% of FW legal while models like their special drop pods exist. Those *do* break normal point games

But really think about it. Do they break the game more than nob bikerz did, or psyflemen, or lash princes? I don't think so. Plenty of game breaking things get printed all the time, and people adapt.

LUcius patterns have an update in IA:Apoc 2nd edition. They re more expensive and not quite so broken....

The forward to IA:Apoc 2nd ed states, categorically, that FW stuff is "official" (where it has the 40,000 stamp on it) - but that you should talk to opponents about it.

Unlikely that TOs in the UK will start using them for normal tournaments - its mainly one of access to the material rather than any inherent broken-ness


Also: Psyrifles dont break the game - they help to mitigate the light vehicle spam of recent dexes. What breaks them is the fact you can still take light vehicles AND the psyriflemen

There's a rumour that Cities of Death, Planetstrike, Spearhead and Apoc all going to be made 40K legal at the same time as the FW stuff.

Sounds good to me

I don't think most Forgeworld stuff is any more broken than some things in codexes and it may even be more liekly to be revised if its played more?

Wonder if it will be the same with Warhammer Forge and the new Chaos Dwarf army list............

Kilkrazy wrote:There's a rumour that Cities of Death, Planetstrike, Spearhead and Apoc all going to be made 40K legal at the same time as the FW stuff.

I didnt realize peopled actually played those, aside from apoc

Would be nice to use fw rules with a bit more legit weight to it. Theres no other way to field chaos dwarves without the approved fan army book

Doubt this will happen as Forgeworld stuff isn't tested enough, especially tested enough with standard 40k in mind

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:Doubt this will happen as Forgeworld stuff isn't tested enough, especially tested enough with standard 40k in mind

Funny though that quite a lot of army books/codecies seem like they lack a lot of play testing themselves

No No please do not give my army more choices,I like plain Vanillia.
Sheeesh some people would complain about finding $100 because the bill had a stain on it.

Sheeesh some people would complain about finding $100 because the bill had a stain on it.

"God damn it, I don't care if someone did wipe their ass with it, it's still $100!"

kenshin620 wrote:Funny though that quite a lot of army books/codecies seem like they lack a lot of play testing themselves

Which is exactly why we should just say "feth it!" and throw anything and everything into the pot. A couple of things in one or two of the new books aren't perfectly balanced, so let's just throw all semblance of balance out the fething window and do whatever the hell we want! Perfectly logical.

Kilkrazy wrote:There's a rumour that Cities of Death, Planetstrike, Spearhead and Apoc all going to be made 40K legal at the same time as the FW stuff.

You forgot Battle Missions and that if you send them $20, you can make your own custom Space Marine chapter and get to use it whenever you want, even without your opponent's permission.

Sidstyler wrote:Which is exactly why we should just say "feth it!" and throw anything and everything into the pot. A couple of things in one or two of the new books aren't perfectly balanced, so let's just throw all semblance of balance out the fething window and do whatever the hell we want! Perfectly logical.

Are the Imperial Armour books really that bad?

Are they not more likely to be faqed if played with more?

Yeah, nothing like facing a horde of blight drones dropping battlecannon pieplates from a fast mover....I think they cost less than blood angel vindicators too. But it would be a way for chaos to get drop pods.

No sir, don't see it happening.

if it is not in the main army book, it will not be tournament legal. Forgeworld is always legal in pick up games.

Mr Morden wrote:Are the Imperial Armour books really that bad?

No. They're not.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Mr Morden wrote:Are the Imperial Armour books really that bad?

No. They're not.

They're not terrible but they all depend on what faction FW wants to give the love to in the form of models and rules. Some armies get left out in the cold. As a Tau player, if this were to become official which I don't see happening, I could choose from a selection of overpriced fliers or a few different battlesuits that are still largely dependant upon wargear in an outdated codex.

On the other side of the table I'd be facing Caestus Assault Rams and that god awful thing that people love to meme about these days, chaos drop pods and whatever other OP goodies are out there.

Yeah, I'll pass. I don't mind facing the occasional blight drone in a friendly but a group of them? Nope.

Surely what's 'legal' is whatever you and a mate decide is legal. Or, what someone holding an event deems to be so.

Do we really need GW to tell people what they should and should not use in games?

Seems stupid to me. Make models and rules, let the customer decide what to use. Going out of your way to tell people that some products are less valid than others seems a way to reduce sales, it never makes any sense.

Technically there's nothing disallowing FW from normal games currently. With respect to GT's, tournaments !=normal play, they are their own thing and it's not so much "banned" as "not included", there's a key difference (one is "there's something wrong with it", the other is "we just don't want to include it").

chaos drop pods and whatever other OP goodies are out there.

How on earth are the Chaos drop pods OP?

I'm sitting here with my copy of IA8. (the only one I have handy)
I can't find anything about "opponents permission" in there.

I was under the impression that that phrase had been removed from the IA books some time ago.

They are just as valid as any of the other codecies in my opinion.

Completely agree with Mr. Treesong - I think even if this passes, it will only effect a minimum number of people. I think for the most part people have been using things as long as they are reasonably balanced, and play in the kind of community where "go on then" is the response to a new model placed on the tabletop, rather than "actually no, the new model which you have spent many $ on and carefully painted may give you a 0.2% advantage in this game of toy soldiers" To be honest I suppose it depends what kind of environment you play in, how cut-throat the games are.

For the most part the FW is pretty well balanced, and I think if you look at many vehicle options they are probably overcosted if anything. There are a few exceptions (the Lucius pattern drop-pod that lets dreadnoughts charge out of it on the turn it arrives springs to mind) but I think those are a minority. Again, you could use it in a game, and if it ruins it through imbalance, the next time you don't include it in the game. Simple.

To be honest though I thought Apocalypse was a massive con for the same reason - "What do you mean Games Workshop, we can now use all of our models on the tabletop for one massive battle?! I can't believe that no-one thought of doing that before!!!!"

marv335 wrote:I'm sitting here with my copy of IA8. (the only one I have handy)
I can't find anything about "opponents permission" in there.

I was under the impression that that phrase had been removed from the IA books some time ago.

They are just as valid as any of the other codecies in my opinion.

Long and ugly argument, but then if GW Store #XX's made a flyer with the manager's house rules those are 100% legal as well? They're effectively the same: a non-studio branch of the company releasing rules. (admittedly, Store #XX probably wouldn't try to get their rules used outside the store and it's events, but...

If I was playing 40k I probably wouldn't be bothered by most FW stuff, but I think it's interesting how arbitrary 'official' is in this case.

Vaktathi wrote:Technically there's nothing disallowing FW from normal games currently. With respect to GT's, tournaments !=normal play, they are their own thing and it's not so much "banned" as "not included", there's a key difference (one is "there's something wrong with it", the other is "we just don't want to include it").

chaos drop pods and whatever other OP goodies are out there.

How on earth are the Chaos drop pods OP?

Plague Marines dropping behind my lines instead of having to slog it across the field and be whittled down by fire on the way; the blighters are just fantastic tarpits. Not sure if they can do this, but drop pods would actually make chaos dreads a viable option.

The reason the Dreadclaws seem OP is dependant on where in the book you get the rules from. In one section they are listed as acting like (overpriced) normal Drop Pods. In another they state the the Claws had special landing jets that allow models to move AFTER deploying. Really the problem with the IA books is shoddy editing!

(On another note.. the Blight Drones arethe 5 inch blast plate???? I thought they were the regular ML template! The 2 I have in my Purge Army look even better now... )

The Dreadclaw, while it got an update in IA:Apoc 2nd ed (it lost the rule whereby it had to be a flyer for a turn before landing) is still fairly terrible. It doesnt have drop pod assault, but you now cant assault the turn you land.

nosferatu1001 wrote:The Dreadclaw, while it got an update in IA:Apoc 2nd ed (it lost the rule whereby it had to be a flyer for a turn before landing) is still fairly terrible. It doesnt have drop pod assault, but you now cant assault the turn you land.

Wait.. what.. you can now??? hmmm.. can I add a few in my army....

Well, you could in IA5 onwards, but not now - they ahve altered the rules. Previously when you landed (earliest turn 3) you did not deepstrike - you scattered, but it wasnt deepstrike - and you counted as open topped when disembarking, meaning you have disembarked from a moving, open topped vehicle which allows you to assault after.

Rules are never broken. Any rule can be fair if the points reflect the value and impact on the metagame.

Forgeworld has lots of units that are overcosted (IE: suck) and undercosted (IE: Spam them for gamebreaking fun!)

If they make a book and only the stuff in that book becomes codex official and they have new balanced and point values, then so be it. We have already been seeing rumors in the ork forums that 'liftdroppas' are no longer autohit anymore and hit on a 4+ in the new book. Of course people see it as a NERF but it is probably more balanced if people are going to be taking them in regular games.

I reserve judgement until we see which units actually make it to the 'approved' book and the change in rules and points are seen. I doubt there is a be a blanket retroactive approval of old books.

Even if they become 'fair' and 'codex legal' no independent tourney has to allow them anyways. So realistically nothing actually changes.

Doh.. serves me right for posting before my coffee...

marv335 wrote:I'm sitting here with my copy of IA8. (the only one I have handy)
I can't find anything about "opponents permission" in there.

I was under the impression that that phrase had been removed from the IA books some time ago.

They are just as valid as any of the other codecies in my opinion.

The lack of a rule doesn't mean much in 40k as you generally need the opposite (express permission to do something). Either way, there are plenty of threads in YMDC that should explain both sides of the argument. Probably best to check them out so this thread stays news/rumors instead of devolving into an argument about that.

I'd love to see the FW stuff become legal. It'd give me an excuse to purchase some thudd guns and immobile artillery from them to really Krieg-out my Krieg.

agnosto wrote:
Plague Marines dropping behind my lines instead of having to slog it across the field and be whittled down by fire on the way; the blighters are just fantastic tarpits.

Certainly no worse than FNP BA's doing so for significantly fewer points or 2+/3++ TH/SS termi's, etc.

Not sure if they can do this, but drop pods would actually make chaos dreads a viable option.

indeed, one might actually see one then!

My thoughts... More objective than just trivial whining.

Anyway... Awhile back we had heard rumors that 6th edition 40K was going to have "one book to rule them all"... An excellent idea IMO. Also rumored to be included within this book is a way to incorporate Apocalypse models into regular games of 40K. While not all FW models are Apocalypse models, that's primarily where they're used because Apocalypse is pretty much an 'anything goes' kind of game.

So... I'm thinking that it's not merely a mater of everyone will suddenly be able to use all of their FW stuff in regular games of 40K, but more along the lines of once 6th edition lands it will be more accessible and therefore 'legal' to use in regular games of 40K.

I firmly believe that GW will somehow keep separation of Codex rules and Imperial Armour rules, but allow them to coexist better with the new edition; "one book to rule them all". That being said, their use (FW/non-Codex models) will still need to be mutually agreed upon by the players before the game.

I honestly see both good and bad coming from this. In a sense it's a little like opening Pandora's Box because no one really knows what to expect or how it will pan out. It's funny as a friend and I were talking last week about how we wish we could use the FW Deathstorm Drop Pods.

GalaxyGames wrote:Oh it'll be a way to make more $$$ ;D

So? It is a model company.

ShatteredBlade wrote: I have a feeling they're going to sneak this in by simply adding Forge-World Models into the regular GW codex and the model will only be available from Forge-World.

So? It is the parent company.

Vampirate of Sartosa wrote:I don't really see the point- surely it's better to get your opponent's permission anyway?

Always, and with everything but the basics. I'd even get my opponents permission before running 1250 points of land raider.

Zid wrote:I could see some issues with this (some FW rules are a bit wonky) as then they'd have to actually balance new units from FW rather than just throw down a crapload of cool rules. I mean, seriously, I HATE the prospect of facing Land Raider Achilles in games hahaha....

I agree. it should be a case-by-case thing. or they should just be added to the codex.

H.B.M.C. wrote:I love the concept that only FW have unbalanced broken rules when nothing about 'regular' 40K is balanced to begin with.

I've said it before and I'll say it again - those that are vehemently against allowing FW rules in 'regular' games only do so because they are afraid of losing. The only other plausible explanation is that they've never read a FW book in their lives and base all their opinions on the experimental Achilles rules and what they've read of the Dreadnought Drop Pod rules.

This.

Vaktathi wrote: Certainly no worse than FNP BA's doing so for significantly fewer points or 2+/3++ TH/SS termi's, etc.

Not a whole lot of BA players around here so haven't really run into that but there's a fair number of chaos and a friend that I regularly play against has a veritable horde of plague marines. Which leads me to, why would anyone play with defilers when they could have plague hulks? And I absolutely hate blight drones.

Overall I don't have a problem with the occasional whatsit from FW on the table but when you make it standard it just makes the game into MtG; whoever spends the most, wins.

agnosto wrote:

Vaktathi wrote: Certainly no worse than FNP BA's doing so for significantly fewer points or 2+/3++ TH/SS termi's, etc.

Not a whole lot of BA players around here so haven't really run into that but there's a fair number of chaos and a friend that I regularly play against has a veritable horde of plague marines. Which leads me to, why would anyone play with defilers when they could have plague hulks? And I absolutely hate blight drones.

Overall I don't have a problem with the occasional whatsit from FW on the table but when you make it standard it just makes the game into MtG; whoever spends the most, wins.

You could say that about normal 40k as well. To get all the bits for the best builds and huge numbers of tanks for the mechanized edition requires a huge chunk of change. If you want to play IG or Orks at all be prepared to spend at least half as much again as you would on a Space Marine army.

Hell, I could make an SM army out of entirely FW models (using codex rules) and still come out on part with my entirely mainstream line plastic mech IG.

I honestly don't believe this rumor. As everything else, 40k is a social game played between two or more people. You'll agree to play a game of x points from x codex using the BRB, Planet Strike, or some other rule set. If you can't agree, you won't play. No change there.

Further, tournaments have always gone by what the TO says in legal in that tournament. Whether certain or all FW is allowed, if the FOC is altered for a themed tournament, or if the latest codex needs to be out for a month to be allowed. No change there either.

If you want to debate Forge World being overpowered, see one of the Monthly threads that pops up in the 40k discussion area. It's been talked to death.

If you want to debate if you can force your opponent to let you play Forge World, go see one of the Monthly threads that pops up in the 40k discussion area. It's also been talked to death.

For the record, I'm all for Forge World rules and models, except fliers and super heavies outside of Apoc Games. Bring it on.

But I'm not sure this thread belongs in the News and Rumors section as I'm pretty sure this is bull gak.

My favorite analogy is always how people have little issue with 'broken' things in official codexes but hate FW for havign the same issue. I recall some podcast saying that if TH/SS termies were a FW invention people would have flipped.

Theduke07 wrote:My favorite analogy is always how people have little issue with 'broken' things in official codexes but hate FW for havign the same issue. I recall some podcast saying that if TH/SS termies were a FW invention people would have flipped.

It's not that people have little issue with broken things in codex but more that they can do NOTHING about it other than not playing anyone who uses a clearly legal (albeit broken) unit/rule. With FW stuff, there is a choice and people frequently exercise it.

There's always a choice out side of say a tournament. As stated always its always a gentlemen agreements for any game. its just that some things are taken for granted(I'm allowed to play any legal unit in my codex). People will always turn down games if they don't want to face GK or some kid's necrons, etc. It's a just a choice of what people want to fight. They rarely understand any concepts of 'balance'. These are often the same people whining about IG shooting up their foot SM and wonder how they lost

It's up to individual tournaments to decide this, methinks. Regardless, I doubt things like superheavies and fliers will be allowed in standard games, although there are hints of fliers for 6th ed considering how many aircraft are in the game now.

I think the books would require a bit more playtesting for this to be a really good thing, but considering Forgeworld has folks out there (for instance, The Independent Characters podcast) reviewing their product, checking pre-release rules, and so on, I think it's possible. The rumor of them being generally, all-round legal sounds a bit wishlisty for me to put any credibility to it though.

If it becomes so, I wouldn't let anyone proxy FW units. Your not using them spiffy rules if you aint forking over the $$ for the model

Nice idea in general. There are some FW units i'd like to try out.

The points values are seriously out of whack on some units though, and there are some just plain silly LR variants..

Also not all factions get the same FW love. Eldar, Tau, orks and the IOM get some awesome FW stuff, and tons of different units to boot. Necrons have 2 models

I would like to have an excuse to pick up a mega dredd or so and some gunwagons though

You are facing my Manta and you shall like it!

Ascalam wrote: Necrons have 2 models

Hell i would settle for one if the rules for it were made within the past 2 editions!
If the one was a Tomb Stalkers (T7/s6/5w SM/MC poison wounds only on 6+, fleet, move through cover, DS, Hit and Run, night vision and An extra attack when charging for 6)

As it sounds now the Necron Codex is going to be made for 6th edition (if we listen to rumors ... and you are reading this so you probably do.)

And if GW put a 10 Structure Point flyer into a Codex of theirs, would it be any less of a balance-wrecker for the game? What about it being FW rules makes it somehow 'different'?

H.B.M.C. wrote:And if GW put a 10 Structure Point flyer into a Codex of theirs, would it be any less of a balance-wrecker for the game? What about it being FW rules makes it somehow 'different'?

I think it's pretty safe to assume that if this did go through, superheavies wouldn't be included. Nobody wants to be surprised by a game of OGRE when they want to play 40k.

Not really the point I was making Brother SRM...

Having constant update would help out Xenos condexs in between the ten years it takes to update each one since its almost impossible to take your blue army and just call it Red because they have better rules. .Imagine if necrons had a dozen new unit options due to regular content updates. People would be able to play old codexes and not just get rolled by the new hottness netlist.

October 2007. Imperial Armor Apocalypse states this. Mr. Kinkade even explains what it is meant by it.

*sigh*

I know, it's the internet.

I'd love that! Most forgeworld stuff is overcosted. There are only a few things in the forgeworld books that are not balanced. On the whole that would add a lot more variety to the game which I think is great.

Astro allows FW (not superheavy) in its tournament and I can't say it made any difference to the games. If you are going to play against people who are going to abuse the rules and max out on Blight Drones, they will max out whatever broken units they can anyway. Personally I think they bring balance to the game as they open up a greater range which can often help counter a broken codex list.

Easy to say use FW rules when SM keep getting updated all the time. What about other races that haven't been updated, like Tau, or Tyranids. I am not sure if Necrons have even been in IA.

I say, use with opponents permission since it is mostly for Space Marine players.

If true, I can see everyone getting FW to just to get even. Also how are you going to use 4th edition rules say Tyranids for 5th edition Tyranids and rules?

Again easy for SM players but not for other races.

hsojvvad wrote:Easy to say use FW rules when SM keep getting updated all the time. What about other races that haven't been updated, like Tau, or Tyranids. I am not sure if Necrons have even been in IA.

I say, use with opponents permission since it is mostly for Space Marine players.

If true, I can see everyone getting FW to just to get even. Also how are you going to use 4th edition rules say Tyranids for 5th edition Tyranids and rules?

Again easy for SM players but not for other races.

Necrons haven't yet but I've high hopes for future. We get another dying craftworld, something with Tzeentch then... Necrons!!! (I hope)

hsojvvad wrote:Easy to say use FW rules when SM keep getting updated all the time. What about other races that haven't been updated, like Tau, or Tyranids. I am not sure if Necrons have even been in IA.

I say, use with opponents permission since it is mostly for Space Marine players.

If true, I can see everyone getting FW to just to get even. Also how are you going to use 4th edition rules say Tyranids for 5th edition Tyranids and rules?

Again easy for SM players but not for other races.

in short "Stupid Spheess Mareens always get all the toys". Got to love the race basis. Before Badab its was pretty even with IG stuff and SM stuff. Hell most of the stuff was made for IG at first. And these rules issues can be solved with errata which FW is actually good at.

As I have just started putting together a 2000pt Elysian army using the IA8 army list, this news is relevant to my interests.

None of my close friends mind me using them, but it'd be nice to be able to enter a few tournaments with them.

LavuranGuard wrote:Astro allows FW (not superheavy) in its tournament and I can't say it made any difference to the games. If you are going to play against people who are going to abuse the rules and max out on Blight Drones, they will max out whatever broken units they can anyway. Personally I think they bring balance to the game as they open up a greater range which can often help counter a broken codex list.

Forge World accessories, such as bits I'm fine with that. Forge world models that essentially forces you to purchase another set of rules/codex in order to make sure that those people who are abusive in their game play do not pull the rug over your head? I'm not fine with that. If the rumor is true, then this is another way GW is trying to increase their monetary resources due to the decline of normal sales that was shown in their past fiscal report.

Adam LongWalker wrote:Forge world models that essentially forces you to purchase another set of rules/codex in order to make sure that those people who are abusive in their game play do not pull the rug over your head?

I'm sorry but if you're getting the rug pulled over your head then it's your own damned fault. People who use these extra units should be showing up with their rules, and if they don't, then you shouldn't play them. If you allow them to play without having the rules in front of you, then you deserve everything you get.

Besides, it's difficult to pull the rug over people's heads with most FW units as most FW units are terrible.

Cost prohibits most from having a large assembley of FW gear anyway, but if supplementry codex info was incorporated it woulds surely encourage more to buy no matter the cost, my introduction to forgeworld was through a gamesday and before that and the fact no reference is made to mods in the GW codex I hadnt given much thought to it except occassional discussions at the gaming club I go to, 40k is a relatively expensive hobby(not for a working person like myself)but the average Fw product , Fantastic as they are, is the prolly 3 times more expensive than GW stuff, even if this is a mute point really FW product needs to be codexed!even if it where a supplementry sheet, I only find out points/playability scanning forums.

Moot point! Moot! You're from England for crying out loud - speak the Queen's English!

And for some of us Forge World is the same if not cheaper than local prices.

Yep, HBMC is correct on that point, My all FW Elysian army was cheaper than if I had purchased a similar sized cadian army. Go figure.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Adam LongWalker wrote:Forge world models that essentially forces you to purchase another set of rules/codex in order to make sure that those people who are abusive in their game play do not pull the rug over your head?

I'm sorry but if you're getting the rug pulled over your head then it's your own damned fault. People who use these extra units should be showing up with their rules, and if they don't, then you shouldn't play them. If you allow them to play without having the rules in front of you, then you deserve everything you get.

Besides, it's difficult to pull the rug over people's heads with most FW units as most FW units are terrible.

Of course I would not play them. My comment is made because on what I can perceive what would happen in my region at a the local GW stores. It would be controlled chaos over there. It is stuff like this that is I'm now making the switch to FOW and looking at Dusk Tactics.

black-rabbit wrote:Yep, HBMC is correct on that point, My all FW Elysian army was cheaper than if I had purchased a similar sized cadian army. Go figure.

That is utterly insane. Buy FW now before GW cottons on and increases FW prices in line with the GW ones?

I sent FW an email the other day asking them to consider issuing some statement on facebook giving guidance to tournie organisers on the 'official' status of the WF CD list and whether it should always be seen to replace the ravening hordes list. That being the last list officially endorsed.

Or, alternatively, to state that it should be considered equally alongside the RH list, and any other fan lists and does not superceed it, if that is not the intention.

So keep an eye on their facebook page, those who check from time to time.

Here at my store we allow fore world army lists (ie lists in complete like Krieg or Tyrants Legion) and not just IA units mixed in (obviously no fliers/superheavies) in our tournaments...people complained until they read the kicker..."if it is not a GW produced model you must have the FW model or a suitable conversion" This prevented people from showing up to our tourneys with "this Crusader is a Helios type stuff"....it has worked very well so far, with the advent of IAA2 we are even looking at reviewing it and adding those units as legal choices. (our store keeper keeps a copy of any rulebook we are allowing people to use behind the counter, so if someone is being weird or doesnt have their book...just ask)

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Adam LongWalker wrote:Forge world models that essentially forces you to purchase another set of rules/codex in order to make sure that those people who are abusive in their game play do not pull the rug over your head?

I'm sorry but if you're getting the rug pulled over your head then it's your own damned fault. People who use these extra units should be showing up with their rules, and if they don't, then you shouldn't play them. If you allow them to play without having the rules in front of you, then you deserve everything you get.

Besides, it's difficult to pull the rug over people's heads with most FW units as most FW units are terrible.

No offense, but I am not going to look up every single thing during a game. If my opponent tells me a unit is toughness 4, Ballistic skill 4 is it really my fault if I don't check every single units stat line and special rule during a game?

Not to mention, for any competitive gamer, the need to buy the Forgeworld books in order to plan for and understand how the armies work.

Timmah wrote:No offense, but I am not going to look up every single thing during a game.

Kinda missing the point.

Someone shows up with a Guard army. He has a Bombard in his army. He brings his copy of IA3. You look at IA3 and see the stats. You move on and play the game. That's a big difference to looking up 'every single thing'.

I fail to understand why people are asking about the legality of lists. You are supposed to play it the way you want. As far as tournament legality goes, that's up to the organisers not FW or GW. The only way this could matter would be a tournament organised by GW and even then it still comes down to the TO's decision. It's not up to FW to declare the 'legality' of their books. Anyone who says you cant use the list from a published book isn't someone you should want to play against.

You know I've been saying that for years but all I ever hear in response is "They're opponent's permission only!!!!" which may have been true back in the days of Imperial Armour 1 and Imperial Armour 2 (not to be confused with Imperial Armour Volume 1 and Imperial Armour Volume 2), but we're long since past those days.

Timmah wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Adam LongWalker wrote:Forge world models that essentially forces you to purchase another set of rules/codex in order to make sure that those people who are abusive in their game play do not pull the rug over your head?

I'm sorry but if you're getting the rug pulled over your head then it's your own damned fault. People who use these extra units should be showing up with their rules, and if they don't, then you shouldn't play them. If you allow them to play without having the rules in front of you, then you deserve everything you get.

Besides, it's difficult to pull the rug over people's heads with most FW units as most FW units are terrible.

No offense, but I am not going to look up every single thing during a game. If my opponent tells me a unit is toughness 4, Ballistic skill 4 is it really my fault if I don't check every single units stat line and special rule during a game?

Not to mention, for any competitive gamer, the need to buy the Forgeworld books in order to plan for and understand how the armies work.

So because you wish to be ignorant, the opponent should limit his pool of units. Makes sense.

Or, to look at it from another perspective: D and D

I wish to play according to the rules released by the actual manufacturers.

Someone else want to bring a class and feats written by a third party company under license to the original game creator (there are a lot of these companies for D and D).

These books are prone to power and points imbalances, and have rules and abilities that don't alwys gel well with the existing system.

Am i obligated to allow the third party class and feats into my game?

No. I would want to at least review them, and have the power of veto.

our pool of units is the official codex ones. The others are bonus addons that your opponent has every right not to play against if they don't want to.

Before you get flamy on me for this, i don't mind playing FW units, IF i am allowed the right of refusal on any i think are OP or fethed up. I use FW units myself sometimes, and offer the same right.

You aren't entitled to bring FW units on, no matter what, just because you blew more disposable income on resin models and a new book (unless the tournament allows them, in which case they are fair game to bring, and anyone attending will know this already).

If they DO pass a game-law saying that the FW books are actual extensions of the codex it would be different. Right now, they're not.

I fail to understand why people are asking about the legality of lists. You are supposed to play it the way you want.

Not entirely correct. You play the way you and your opponent want. That's the crux of the discussion.

If someone wants to use a Forge World unit and I look at the stats and it's not overpowered, sure I might let them use it.

If they want to use something with a complete garbage broken auto-win rules-set that only forge world can release because GW wouldn't allow it to break game-balance and ruin tournaments... No way Jose.

CSM are already competitive with Lash Princes, CSM troops and Obliterators. They are balanced Without owning 125 point Nurgle airplanes which have a 36" S8 AP3 Large-blast MEQ-destroyer gun.

Heavy Support is limited for a reason. If you want to bring Defilers to kill marines, you can't bring 9 obliterators. With Forge World rules, Chaos gets heavy support guns as underpriced Fast Attack choices. I play chaos but even I would not resort to demanding someone allow me broken rules that forge world writes badly to increase demand for the product.

The Option to use rules GW itself doesn't believe are up to par is fine. Mandatory adherence to sub-par rules at tournaments and store events is not fine.

At the end of the day isn't it up to the tournament organizer whether or not to allow IA units? If I decide to run a tournament with prize support and I decide there's not going to be any IA allowed (regardless of what GW says in the future) I would be operating under the assumption that people militantly opposed to playing in a no-IA tournament can just stay home on that day.

Under the current ruleset I could, for example, run a 750 point tournament with combat patrol-style rules on 4x4 tables. It's not 40k "by the book" but it would still be a fun tournament for people who don't mind playing without their Terminators, Daemon Princes, etc.

kenshin620 wrote:

I didnt realize peopled actually played those, aside from apoc

People that aren't focused on the drudgery of tournament play sometimes add these to the rotation.

Granted we are in the minority these days...

In general . . . I find that Imperial Armour just plain suck, same with Apoc. Those massive tanks and titans with their shields do no good if I get in range of my meltaguns . . .


FIRE DRAGONS FTW!

Timmah wrote:

Not to mention, for any competitive gamer, the need to buy the Forgeworld books in order to plan for and understand how the armies work.

So your argument is that the game should be kept as narrow of variety as possible to facilitate sportshammer?

So game after game of GK vs. SW is really that fun?

I really hope this rumor is true simply because it will annoy the very people you describe to be honest...

CT GAMER wrote:

Timmah wrote:

Not to mention, for any competitive gamer, the need to buy the Forgeworld books in order to plan for and understand how the armies work.

So your argument is that the game should be kept as narrow of variety as possible to facilitate sportshammer?

So game after game of GK vs. SW is really that fun?

I really hope this rumor is true simply because it will annoy the very people you describe to be honest...

*looks at his shelf of Imperial Armour books he uses for fluff*

Oh man. The tears from the "sportshammer" crowd would be delicious.

More delicious would be the fact that I could fund three Infinity armies by renting out my IA books to them!

Ascalam wrote:Or, to look at it from another perspective: D and D

I wish to play according to the rules released by the actual manufacturers.

Someone else want to bring a class and feats written by a third party company under license to the original game creator (there are a lot of these companies for D and D).

False comparison.

FW = GW.

The 40K setting is owned and operated by GW. The FW books are operated by Forgeworld, which is a subsiduary company owned and controlled BY GW. There is a difference, even if they are owned by the same company.

In essence it would be something like asking if you could bring a Terrorgeist into a game of 40K, because they are both GW. Or asking if you can play a Solar Exalted in a game of Vampire, because they are both White Wolf. The rulesets are similar enough to allow for the fusion, but there is no reason for the other person to have to say yes

The forgeworld models and rules are a seperate entity to the main 40K rules and models for a reason. If they were intended to be used, no questions asked, in any game of 40K the models would be in the same section as GW's normal ones (perhaps with a FW sticker, like they do with Finecast) and the rules for the models would be in a codex, or the codex would have a line in it saying something like 'for extra choices please see our Forgeworld units, all of whom are acceptable for use with the units in htis book'

Ascalam wrote:


The forgeworld models and rules are a seperate entity to the main 40K rules and models for a reason. If they were intended to be used, no questions asked, in any game of 40K the models would be in the same section as GW's normal ones (perhaps with a FW sticker, like they do with Finecast) and the rules for the models would be in a codex, or the codex would have a line in it saying something like 'for extra choices please see our Forgeworld units, all of whom are acceptable for use with the units in htis book'

Your argument assumes that because something was initially one way it can't be changed.

IF GW sates that they are suddenly legal then they will be.

And you have no idea what the long term goals for inclusion have been all along. Maybe FW/GW WILL merge IA rules into the main line. Who knows.

IF the rumor happens, I don't think it will catch GW by surprise. GW is FW and vice vera...

And when they change them to be codex-legal, and say so, i'm cool with that.

I just don't deal well with someone feeling entitled to use them just because he has them, regardless of what i think.

Right now nothing FW is 'official' for most tournaments, and is 'discuss with your opponent'.

If they all become official then they're official

I don't get why the 'never play in tourneys' are so eager to kick in the sandcastle of the 'sportshammer' people?

If you play in friendly play, most people already use your forgeworld. If you don't like tourneys and don't play in them why do you care if they use forgeworld or not?

Balance is a legitimate concern for people who play tourneys. The only reason why tourneys are working as well as they are right now is because there is actually some balance out there. Arbitrarily widening the codex field that adds more imbalance may not be the best thing because when the game reaches a point of imbalance where the game is unfair and you can make I.W.I.N. lists, you then have to have comp... 3rd edition was broken due to wild imbalance and too many poorly tested chapter approved codexes and loose rules.

I suspect from seeing the new IA book and the changes in rumors that *ONLY* the units int he new book will be codex legal. All the existing units and books will still be expansions and not codex legal. If they address balance and invalidate the old datasheets (which it sounds like they are) the I will be fine with the shift in the META. They might actually be using this as a way to balance the lower tier codexes.

If they release something that is crap, I have no worries because smart TOs will simply disallow the book... because GW can't tell independent tourneys what to do.

nkelsch wrote:I don't get why the 'never play in tourneys' are so eager to kick in the sandcastle of the 'sportshammer' people?

Maybe becasue without fail any time any subject about a change/new addition/new codex/new unit etc. to the game comes up we get a post within seconds saying "not gonna happen it would ruin tournament play" or "this is going to ruin tournaments" or "one more thing to have to rememebr/learn for tournament play" as if all decisions have to be made in consideration of tourney play.

The tourney crowd seems to always want to assume that their way of playing is the most important consideration for any chnge/addition to the game.

Why?

As far as I am concerned tourney play is the Alt format. Rather then build the game around the artifical controls of "tournament balance", why not just assume that the tourney players/Tos are free to disallow material or set artifical limits as they feel the need and have a more open approach tot he default game?

CT GAMER wrote:
As far as I am concerned tourney play is the Alt format. Rathe rthen build the game around the artifical controls of "balance", why not just assume that the tourney players/Tos are free to disallow material or set artifical limits as they feel the need?

Even casual play deserves balance. Unbalanced games are less fun even in friendly play. No one wants to play monopoly where one player starts with all the railroads. And in casual play I don't know why you need a book to tell you what rules you can use. You could have been using IA all along.

What is wrong to have a core set of rules and allow casual people to allow/disallow expansions as they see fit? If GW isn't going to put the effort in to playtesting and making balanced or fair rules then those rules should not be in the core rule set and be 'expansion' or 'narrative' rules. Even friendly play benefits from having balanced and fair rulesets, balance is not just something wanted by sportshammer people.

nkelsch wrote:


What is wrong to have a core set of rules and allow casual people to allow/disallow expansions as they see fit? If GW isn't going to put the effort in to playtesting and making balanced or fair rules then those rules should not be in the core rule set and be 'expansion' or 'narrative' rules. Even friendly play benefits from having balanced and fair rulesets, balance is not just something wanted by sportshammer people.

Yes but one side is often far more concerned with the impact of a given unit, etc.

More often then not the average casual player isn't looking to break the game, min/max the best units or spam the power combos, so even if a FW unit is open to abuse or imbalance, most casual players aren't going to bother to exploit it to it's maximum potential, so it isn't really as big of a deal as it might be in the tournament setting...

Go take a look at the army lists posted int he tournament section or in the batreps that feature sportshammer games: they often have key power units spammed multiple times in the exact same configurations. I rarely encounter these sorts of builds or degree of spamming in my casual games.

What I do see are people fielding models that look cool, and fielding FW stuff simply for the variety or excuse to put the model on the table. So if makiing FW stuff fully legal opens up the game as far as variety of army builds and cooler models on the table in greater numbers, then that is a win win in my book.

Why it is important is becasue you often have that one guy that shows up at game night who rants and raves about how you shouldnt use FW, that it is unbalanced, etc., etc. causing a big stink. IF it is all made legal this guy gets silenced and we can get on to gaming...

Then tournaments and TOs can impose whatever artifical restrictions they want on what can be used in their events if they see fit, and as they are already doing...

CT GAMER wrote:

What I do see are people fielding models that look cool, and fielding FW stuff simply for the variety or excuse to put the model on the table. So if makiing FW stuff fully legal opens up the game as far as variety of army builds and cooler models on the table in greater numbers, then that is a win win in my book.

Why it is important is because you often have that one guy that shows up at game night who rants and raves about how you shouldn't use FW, that it is unbalanced, etc., etc. causing a big stink. IF it is all made legal this guy gets silenced and we can get on to gaming...

Then tournaments and TOs can impose whatever artificial restrictions they want on what can be used in their events if they see fit, and as they are already doing...

Actually this is the exact opposite of what I see when FW is allowed. Basically there are a handful of gamebreaking and unbalanced units which get spammed to holy hell (usually as proxies) as soon as forgeworld is allowed in any event, casual or tourneys. Larger imbalance doesn't build variety. The more things are balanced and fair, the more people can 'take what they want' because they won't be punished in-game by taking inferior units that will hand opponents a win. And don't pretend casual people don't care about balance and don't benefit from it. Many casual players are TFG and care more about crushing skulls than tourney people and don't think that somehow the casual gameplay arena will not suffer at the hands of gross imbalance.

I don't mind adding more units and armies to the game, as long as they are done in a thoughtful way with balance in mind. Releasing a new book with explicit units in it which have been re-tooled and re-pointed with balance in mind is a good thing. Blanket allowing years of unplaytested garbage rules into the scene is sloppy, lazy and does no one any good. (and everyone who is reasonable knows this... which is why even if 'game law' is passed, if the rules are unfair, no one will allow them as tourneys can disavow them and casuals can refuse to play you.)

nkelsch wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:

What I do see are people fielding models that look cool, and fielding FW stuff simply for the variety or excuse to put the model on the table. So if makiing FW stuff fully legal opens up the game as far as variety of army builds and cooler models on the table in greater numbers, then that is a win win in my book.

Why it is important is because you often have that one guy that shows up at game night who rants and raves about how you shouldn't use FW, that it is unbalanced, etc., etc. causing a big stink. IF it is all made legal this guy gets silenced and we can get on to gaming...

Then tournaments and TOs can impose whatever artificial restrictions they want on what can be used in their events if they see fit, and as they are already doing...

Actually this is the exact opposite of what I see when FW is allowed. Basically there are a handful of gamebreaking and unbalanced units which get spammed to holy hell (usually as proxies) as soon as forgeworld is allowed in any event, casual or tourneys. Larger imbalance doesn't build variety. The more things are balanced and fair, the more people can 'take what they want' because they won't be punished in-game by taking inferior units that will hand opponents a win. And don't pretend casual people don't care about balance and don't benefit from it. Many casual players are TFG and care more about crushing skulls than tourney people and don't think that somehow the casual gameplay arena will not suffer at the hands of gross imbalance.

I don't mind adding more units and armies to the game, as long as they are done in a thoughtful way with balance in mind. Releasing a new book with explicit units in it which have been re-tooled and re-pointed with balance in mind is a good thing. Blanket allowing years of unplaytested garbage rules into the scene is sloppy, lazy and does no one any good. (and everyone who is reasonable knows this... which is why even if 'game law' is passed, if the rules are unfair, no one will allow them as tourneys can disavow them and casuals can refuse to play you.)

I guess my point is that the casual players I meet and play with police our own. We don't spam broken units and we don't netdeck, so the concerns you describe are not our issues. Of course tournaments will impose restrictions on what they see as damaging their alt format, but they are already doing that anyway at times.

What this change would do is allow casual players a little more freedom to play what they want in public games (non-tournament) without someoen being a dick and refusing you the right to play a model that might in no way be broken simply becasue it happens to be FW...

CT GAMER wrote:
I guess my point is that the casual players I meet and play with police our own. We don't spam broken units and we don't netdeck, so the concerns you describe are not our issues. Of course tournaments will impose restrictions on what they see as damaging their alt format, but they are alrady doign that anyway.

What this change would do is allow casual players a little more freedom to play what they want in public games (non-tournament) without someoen being a dick and refusing you the right to play a model that might in no way be broken simply becasue it happens to be FW...

I don't get it... if you police your own and already force comp on friendly games, then how are you having issues with so-called 'dicks' refusing to let you use forgeworld. If you have already convinced people from spamming units then how are you unable to convince them to let you use FW? These 'dicks' are going to be the first ones proxying deathwind drop pods or nurgle blight drones in spammy numbers and killing your now legal spanna boyz... How has the so-called variety increased and made the game better? Because people have lost the ability to deny you games?

Social issues and politics in your group doesn't seem like a valid reason to throw the game back to 3rd edition levels of imbalance. I don't mind adding to the core codexes with game legal units if they are done with balance in mind. It is actually a good way to refresh some of the older codexes who are neglected. A new book of limited approved units is good. Allowing all of the retro garbage just run free is a bad thing.

Has everyone seen this?:
http://apocalypse40k.blogspot.com/2011/09/imperial-armor-apocalypse-second.html

For orks there isn't a single new unit. Not a single one. So if they planned on just making all the current books 'codex legal' why the need to reprint any of these? The only reason I can see for a reprint is if they are changing point values and rules for all these units and declaring these 'core' now. Pretty sure the only units which would fit a normal force org are the grot tanks, lifta wagon, mekadred and grot bomb launchas. With 6th edition on the horizon, and them designing codexes for 6th, this may be the list of 'codex legal' units which we will get from FW and for 6th edition.

We will have to see.

And there's the flaw in what you're saying:

"force comp on friendly games"

They're not 'forcing' anything, because they're not in the tournament mindset.

H.B.M.C. wrote:And there's the flaw in what you're saying:

"force comp on friendly games"

They're not 'forcing' anything, because they're not in the tournament mindset.

The person who claims they are in 'friendly' game mindset are the ones who are 'policing' gameplay. That sounds like 'forcing' to me.

It is possble that GW might put out a "reinforcements" book that writes up certain FW units to be used as fully legal choices in the codexes.

It could be the size of a book like Planetstrike or COD, and give x units to each codex. i could also see this happenign as a WD feature...

This could be more controlled as opposed to a blanket lifting of restriction, though i think a blanket lifting would be fine if they plan to update unit's rules/points in a future IA book release.

CT GAMER wrote:The tourney crowd seems to always want to assume that their way of playing is the most important consideration for any chnge/addition to the game.

Why?

Because balanced gameplay benefits all people who play the game? And I'd say judging from all the whining and crying on this forum about how unbalanced 40k is because their army hasn't gotten updated yet, that balance is something that most people do crave whether they play in tournaments or not, despite the fact that you personally don't care for it.

Its a highlighted part of GW's idiocy that Forgeworld never was 'Chapter Approved' for regular play.

It makes 0% business sense not to include it.

Sidstyler wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:The tourney crowd seems to always want to assume that their way of playing is the most important consideration for any chnge/addition to the game.

Why?

Because balanced gameplay benefits all people who play the game? And I'd say judging from all the whining and crying on this forum about how unbalanced 40k is because their army hasn't gotten updated yet, that balance is something that most people do crave whether they play in tournaments or not, despite the fact that you personally don't care for it.

An attempt at ballpark balance on some level is surely important, but I think many cases of supposed imbalance and the DOOM that accompanies many interwebz discusssions are largely overblown and irrelevant...

Making FW available to casual play will not break the game. Not to mention that if it happens it seems to be GW hoping that just maybe people will tone back the sportshammer mentality and simply have some fun pushing some cool models around a table with friends. That shift in mentality would be welcome as far as I'm concerned. If it drives the hardcore sportshamemr players to other games? Not gonna lose sleep over it tbh...

Not to mention that what you read on this forum or the internets in general ISN'T representative of the whole of the 40k comunity. What it represents are the most vocal and opinionated of those players that also happen to haunt such places...

Ascalam wrote:
The 40K setting is owned and operated by GW. The FW books are operated by Forgeworld, which is a subsiduary company owned and controlled BY GW. There is a difference, even if they are owned by the same company.

In essence it would be something like asking if you could bring a Terrorgeist into a game of 40K, because they are both GW. Or asking if you can play a Solar Exalted in a game of Vampire, because they are both White Wolf. The rulesets are similar enough to allow for the fusion, but there is no reason for the other person to have to say yes

Analogy does not work. The Terrorgeist does not say anywhere in its profile something to the effect of 'May be taken as a Troops choice in a Space Marine army'. At least the newer IA books say in the bottom corner 'Warhammer 40,000 Expansion', just like Cities of Death and Planetstrike (and very unlike the Terrorgeist), which are 'opponents consent' in that you agree to use those rules. IA books should really be treated no differently. They're branded as 40k expansions. Use them as such. If someone wants to use something from the book which is legal in the points level you're playing (ie If they want to use a superheavy in a normal game, tell them to stand in the traffic), ask to see the entry in the book. If they refuse or don't have the book, then refuse, if they have it, have a read of the rules before you say anything.

After people get over that feeling they're going to lose because someone whipped out a super heavy in a 1000 point game, they might start having fun with Forgeworld units. Which is kind of the point.

After people get over that feeling they're going to lose because someone whipped out a [insert FW model name here], they might start having fun with Forgeworld units. Which is kind of the point.

This.

CT GAMER wrote:

After people get over that feeling they're going to lose because someone whipped out a [insert FW model name here], they might start having fun with Forgeworld units. Which is kind of the point.

This.

But see, that's the thing. I see hear more people whine about Forgeworld because super heavy units are too powerful than because that Sentinal Powerlifter wiped out half of their army. The majority of the Forgeworld hate revolves around people thinking theyre going to have a surprise Macharius thrown down on the table.

But, again. If someone has a FW model, ask to see the rules before dismissing them. You might even catch the bug and order a FW model yourself.

Forge world is already available for casual play... That's the point.

People who won't give opponents permission in 'casual play' now won't give it even if they are made codex legal. 'casual play' already has people who won't play against net lists, grey knights and spammers...

Sounds like people with issues want GW to step in and say "stop being mean to Billie and let him play with you other kids with his little tank thing..." because they can't seem to handle it themselves. If people don't want to play against your forge world in casual play, a note from mommy GW won't change that.

Forge world is already available and legal for casual play.

Edit: don't assume people who want balance and are not wanting forge world forced on everyone somehow hate forge world. I own thousands of dollars of forge world models and I have no problem using them in casual play and apoc games. I also realize FW is a 'sometimes' thing and not for all the time due to imbalance.

-Loki- wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:

After people get over that feeling they're going to lose because someone whipped out a [insert FW model name here], they might start having fun with Forgeworld units. Which is kind of the point.

This.

But see, that's the thing. I see hear more people whine about Forgeworld because super heavy units are too powerful than because that Sentinal Powerlifter wiped out half of their army. The majority of the Forgeworld hate revolves around people thinking theyre going to have a surprise Macharius thrown down on the table.

But, again. If someone has a FW model, ask to see the rules before dismissing them. You might even catch the bug and order a FW model yourself.

It is impossible to Surprise someone with a super heavy unit. IF you are playing Apoc. you expect they will be present.

Otherwise they can only be included via a special scenario that allows them ( A few exist, but in these cases the players would have had to agree to play one of said scenarios).

Allowing FW units in games does not mean dissolving force org restrictions nor format restrictions. A default format restriction for standard 40K is a non-allowance of Super heavies.

I still don't see the issue...




Automatically Appended Next Post:

nkelsch wrote:Forge world is already available for casual play... That's the point.

People who won't give opponents permission in 'casual play' now won't give it even if they are made codex legal. 'casual play' already has people who won't play against net lists, grey knights and spammers...

Sounds like people with issues want GW to step in and say "stop being mean to Billie and let him play with you other kids with his little tank thing..." because they can't seem to handle it themselves. If people don't want to play against your forge world in casual play, a note from mommy GW won't change that.

Forge world is already available and legal for casual play.

Edit: don't assume people who want balance and are not wanting forge world forced on everyone somehow hate forge world. I own thousands of dollars of forge world models and I have no problem using them in casual play and apoc games. I also realize FW is a 'sometimes' thing and not for all the time due to imbalance.

making it legal in all casual play lessons the instances of/justification for resistance one will encounter when one goes to play in say a store or other public place you might not normally frequent.

It might also lead to more casual gamers coming out and bringing their FW goodies when they might have stayed away before.

The guys that will still refuse to play me because I have some FW in my list are probably guys I don't want to waste my time playing to begin with...

CT GAMER wrote:

-Loki- wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:

After people get over that feeling they're going to lose because someone whipped out a [insert FW model name here], they might start having fun with Forgeworld units. Which is kind of the point.

This.

But see, that's the thing. I see hear more people whine about Forgeworld because super heavy units are too powerful than because that Sentinal Powerlifter wiped out half of their army. The majority of the Forgeworld hate revolves around people thinking theyre going to have a surprise Macharius thrown down on the table.

But, again. If someone has a FW model, ask to see the rules before dismissing them. You might even catch the bug and order a FW model yourself.

It is impossible to Surprise someone with a super heavy unit. IF you are playing Apoc. you expect they will be present.

Otherwise they can only be included via a special scenario that allows them ( A few exist, but in these cases the players would have had to agree to play one of said scenarios).

Allowing FW units in games does not mean dissolving force org restrictions nor format restrictions. A default format restriction for standard 40K is a non-allowance of Super heavies.

I still don't see the issue...

Except that's the problem. People don't know the specific rules around the Forgeworld units, don't know if something is actually superheavy or not until the game starts and the take takes a hit and is told it has structure points. If they don't know the units, surprising someong with a unit not legal in non-Apocalypse games isn't difficult. This is why you always offer th book to them and let them read the entry.

-Loki- wrote:But see, that's the thing. I see hear more people whine about Forgeworld because super heavy units are too powerful than because that Sentinal Powerlifter wiped out half of their army. The majority of the Forgeworld hate revolves around people thinking theyre going to have a surprise Macharius thrown down on the table.

People always pick on the few examples where the FW writers have lost their minds and created something either powerful, or just plain overpowered (the Dreadnought Drop Pod and the Achilles Land Raider always get brought up) and, yes, super heavies get brought up as well as people seem to forget that super heavies have their own built-in limitations (must be a games 2000 points or above, which means most 1550-1850 tournament style games are safe). That and most people completely over-estimate super heavies. Aside from things like the Baneblade and the Stompa, most super heavies have exactly one big gun, and a couple of little ones as backup.

The Macharius is actually a wonderful example because it's not a very dangerous super heavy and is in a lot of ways worse than most regular tanks in the game (Land Raider v Macharius - guess who wins? Hint: It's not the Macharius!). Once the Macharius loses its main gun what does it become? An ultra-slow Twin-Linked Heavy Stubber and a pair of Heavy Bolters. That's about as much fire power as a Russ without its turret. It only gets worse with vehicles like the Valdor and even larger things like the Shadowsword (who might as well go home once the Volcano Cannon's been blown off).

That and people freak out at the idea of structure points. I've seen super heavies vanish one after another as a group of Chainfist Terminators ran from one tank to the next ripping them apart in HTH. Meltas have much the same effect. Again, the Macharius exists as a great example here because it's only slightly tougher than a Russ, but has comparable fire power to a single Russ (two Russes would be a better choice).

As I said earlier in the thread, those that refuse to play against FW units are just doing so because they are afraid of losing. The only other explanation is that they've never used/read FW rules outside of the few tired old examples that always get trotted out (the aforementioned Dreadnought Drop Pod and Achilles Land Raider) and then use them as the basis for their entire opinion on why bringing a Power Loader Sentinel or an Malanthrope would suddenly break the game.

As far as I'm concerned FW stuff is already "legal" for casual play. There are quite a few people in my FLGS that bring some FW models to the table. I think that the problem with some kind of GW announcement concerning FW models being "legal" is that we will begin seeing more tournaments allowing them, and we won't be seeing lists that spam Atlases or Spanner Boys, but we'll see a lot of lists spamming the dready assault pods. I think it might turn into a bad thing for tournaments in the short run, which could turn some people off to the game.

This is pure bs. FW is technically not by opponents permission, not any more than a codex unit by any chance. The entire game is really by opponents permission, I have a right to refuse to play you, as your opponent, by any metric I so choose. Using a Dark Angels codex? Its too old, I don't know it that well, Deathwing are OP, etc. I refuse to play you. Grey Knights? I'm using Daemons, you make it to hard for me to win, refused, etc.

Besides that, GW can't mandate that individual TO's allow Forgeworld items. A TO can allow and disallow whatever they see fit, including entire codecies/armies...

H.B.M.C. wrote:

-Loki- wrote:But see, that's the thing. I see hear more people whine about Forgeworld because super heavy units are too powerful than because that Sentinal Powerlifter wiped out half of their army. The majority of the Forgeworld hate revolves around people thinking theyre going to have a surprise Macharius thrown down on the table.

People always pick on the few examples where the FW writers have lost their minds and created something either powerful, or just plain overpowered (the Dreadnought Drop Pod and the Achilles Land Raider always get brought up) and, yes, super heavies get brought up as well as people seem to forget that super heavies have their own built-in limitations (must be a games 2000 points or above, which means most 1550-1850 tournament style games are safe). That and most people completely over-estimate super heavies. Aside from things like the Baneblade and the Stompa, most super heavies have exactly one big gun, and a couple of little ones as backup.

The Macharius is actually a wonderful example because it's not a very dangerous super heavy and is in a lot of ways worse than most regular tanks in the game (Land Raider v Macharius - guess who wins? Hint: It's not the Macharius!). Once the Macharius loses its main gun what does it become? An ultra-slow Twin-Linked Heavy Stubber and a pair of Heavy Bolters. That's about as much fire power as a Russ without its turret. It only gets worse with vehicles like the Valdor and even larger things like the Shadowsword (who might as well go home once the Volcano Cannon's been blown off).

That and people freak out at the idea of structure points. I've seen super heavies vanish one after another as a group of Chainfist Terminators ran from one tank to the next ripping them apart in HTH. Meltas have much the same effect. Again, the Macharius exists as a great example here because it's only slightly tougher than a Russ, but has comparable fire power to a single Russ (two Russes would be a better choice).

As I said earlier in the thread, those that refuse to play against FW units are just doing so because they are afraid of losing. The only other explanation is that they've never used/read FW rules outside of the few tired old examples that always get trotted out (the aforementioned Dreadnought Drop Pod and Achilles Land Raider) and then use them as the basis for their entire opinion on why bringing a Power Loader Sentinel or an Malanthrope would suddenly break the game.

QFT.

Nobody wants to lose a game because their opponent surprised them with a unit that requires special tactics or weapons to beat. The problem is that most FW rules are NOT those kind of rules. Barring a couple glaring examples, the vast majority of FW stuff are just like regular codex units. It's only when you get into super-heavies, titans, flyers, etc, that you start to mess with the fairness of the game. (And as HBMC stated, you can't use 2/3 of those in under 2k point games).

But that's to be expected. There is a reason those types of units appear prominently in Apocalypse - that's what those rules were designed for. If FW stuff becomes equitable with GW codices, people need to realize that they aren't going to suddenly start seeing Imperator Titans dropping from the sky to ruin their fun. 90% of games will be exactly the same as they are now. Sure, there's gonna be that 10% of people who really want to spam flying Nurgle battlecannons, or fill Dreadnought drop pods full of blood talon furiosos, but everyone is still going to have the right to deny those people a game - just like they can today.

chaos0xomega wrote:This is pure bs. FW is technically not by opponents permission, not any more than a codex unit by any chance.

They are, actually. Codices are not labelled as 'expansions'. They're core rules, just like the rulebook. IA books are 'expansions', just like Apocalypse, Cities of Death and Planetstrike, and those expansions aren't used without both people agreeing. That said, they're just as legal for casual play as those books. You just agree to use those optional rules. They're not, however, 'illegal' rules. They're just expansion rules.

I mean, I'm just seeing it from both points of view. Personally, I'd be all for folding IA rules into being 'core'. If my friend brought a few of the new Eldar units, like the Warp Hunter, to a game, I'd agree in an instant.

Xca|iber wrote:Sure, there's gonna be that 10% of people who really want to spam flying Nurgle battlecannons, or fill Dreadnought drop pods full of blood talon furiosos, but everyone is still going to have the right to deny those people a game - just like they can today.

But apparently, refusing to play those people would make you a dick and result in a flinstone-esque situation where people scream, "You can't refuse to play me, I quit!"

Why not only make the 90% of good units legal for play... or even fix the 10%?

Oh... and for every tough guy who wants to play FW that says "You are just afraid of losing." The people on the other side can say "You just want to spam broken units and play to win at all costs." Hyperbole abound.

nkelsch wrote:Oh... and for every tough guy who wants to play FW that says "You are just afraid of losing." The people on the other side can say "You just want to spam broken units and play to win at all costs." Hyperbole abound.

That doesn't work though, because the spammable Forgeworld stuff isn't broken outside of the Dreadnought drop pod, and even that requires a very counterable variant list form a single codex.

Clearly you missed the "just like they can today" part of Xca|iber's post nkelsch.

And it's not a 'tough guy' comment to say that people who don't want to use FW are afraid of losing, especially when it's coming from someone like me who couldn't give two gaks about tournament play.

Hell we even use flyers in normal games from time to time and they're no big issue.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Clearly you missed the "just like they can today" part of Xca|iber's post nkelsch.

And it's not a 'tough guy' comment to say that people who don't want to use FW are afraid of losing, especially when it's coming from someone like me who couldn't give two gaks about tournament play.

Hell we even use flyers in normal games from time to time and they're no big issue.

if they can still refuse to play... Then why need a change except to try to shift moral high ground with a note from mommy making the mean people play with your toys? You can see where CT has already said if some refuses to play against "codex legal" FW then they are a bad person... If people can continue to deny games after a change then why the change in attempting to villanize people who don't want to play with or against FW? It is all people trying to claim the moral high ground and the current policy of opponents consent means if you try to force FW on someone and they decline, then you are seen as the stooge. All I see is WAAC people demanding people line up to get spammed by drop pod proxies with " you can't refuse to play me GEEDUBBYAH said so!"

It is already legal for casual play... Nothing needs to change. Your whines of "you don't want to lose" are just "I want to win at all costs."

H.B.M.C. wrote:People always pick on the few examples where the FW writers have lost their minds and created something either powerful, or just plain overpowered

You mean like how people pick TH/SS termies or long fang spam and use that as proof that regular 40k is horribly unbalanced?

Not so much Sid (but nice try). It's more a case of saying that FW has unbalanced rules just like 40K has unbalanced rules. Neither is above one or the other when it comes to unbalanced... ness.

nkelsch wrote:Your whines of "you don't want to lose" are just "I want to win at all costs."

Except that they're not. Try re-reading a lot of what we're saying. Me wanting to bring a Sentinel Power Loader can hardly be misconstrued as wanting to win and all costs. Plus hasn't what CT and I've been saying about non-tournament (or sportshammer, as he calls it) gamers gotten through to you yet? You seem to be stuck in that mindset, and assume anyone wanting FW rules just wants an advantage. That's bs.

What the hell does the power loader even do?

Sidstyler wrote:What the hell does the power loader even do?

You can use it to fight Hive Tyrants.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Not so much Sid (but nice try). It's more a case of saying that FW has unbalanced rules just like 40K has unbalanced rules. Neither is above one or the other when it comes to unbalanced... ness.

nkelsch wrote:Your whines of "you don't want to lose" are just "I want to win at all costs."

Except that they're not. Try re-reading a lot of what we're saying. Me wanting to bring a Sentinel Power Loader can hardly be misconstrued as wanting to win and all costs. Plus hasn't what CT and I've been saying about non-tournament (or sportshammer, as he calls it) gamers gotten through to you yet? You seem to be stuck in that mindset, and assume anyone wanting FW rules just wants an advantage. That's bs.

Casual play or non sportshammer is already legal... You are just pouting because people don't want to play with your toys. All a change in codex legal will domis give you the moral high grounds to browbeat your rules over casual opponents heads.

Casual players already can use forge world if they wish... Working as intended. Balance is important to both friendly play and the dreaded evil sportshammer. 10% poison with 90% good is still poison.

Sidstyler wrote:What the hell does the power loader even do?

That's one of the free ones:

http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Downloads/Product/PDF/i/IA1update28AUG.pdf

A S7 A2 Sentinel - no guns, no power weapons. Absolutely worthless, competitively.

MasterSlowPoke wrote:

Sidstyler wrote:What the hell does the power loader even do?

That's one of the free ones:

http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Downloads/Product/PDF/i/IA1update28AUG.pdf

A S7 A2 Sentinel - no guns, no power weapons. Absolutely worthless, competitively.

The cost is only 25 points a model, and actually they would scare the snot out of dark eldar.
S7 instant kills/ignores FNP on DE.
At 25 points a pop they can really tarpit wyches, wracks, and incubi. For that matter a single 25 point model can tarpit just about any standard assault unit that doesn't have a power fist.

3 attacks at S7 on the charge against the rear armor of vehicles is also really good for IG, and an absolute steal at 25 points.

The thing can't outflank or scout, is AV10 opentopped. If its such a threat just shot it. Thank your opponent for burning a FA slot.

Theduke07 wrote:The thing can't outflank or scout, is AV10 opentopped. If its such a threat just shot it. Thank your opponent for burning a FA slot.

There are no force org slots in an apoc game.

In a regular game keep them in reserve as a counter attack element.

If they get blown up fine, it's a 25 point model or 75 for a squad of 3. The only real issue is KP, but once again that would not matter in an apoc game.

nkelsch wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:Not so much Sid (but nice try). It's more a case of saying that FW has unbalanced rules just like 40K has unbalanced rules. Neither is above one or the other when it comes to unbalanced... ness.

nkelsch wrote:Your whines of "you don't want to lose" are just "I want to win at all costs."

Except that they're not. Try re-reading a lot of what we're saying. Me wanting to bring a Sentinel Power Loader can hardly be misconstrued as wanting to win and all costs. Plus hasn't what CT and I've been saying about non-tournament (or sportshammer, as he calls it) gamers gotten through to you yet? You seem to be stuck in that mindset, and assume anyone wanting FW rules just wants an advantage. That's bs.

Casual play or non sportshammer is already legal... You are just pouting because people don't want to play with your toys. All a change in codex legal will domis give you the moral high grounds to browbeat your rules over casual opponents heads.

Casual players already can use forge world if they wish... Working as intended. Balance is important to both friendly play and the dreaded evil sportshammer. 10% poison with 90% good is still poison.

And sure, it lets you bring all your undepowered stuff that no one cares about you taking now anyway. But the other side effect is a sudden increase of all the cheesey overpowered units showing up. And proxies of those units because people won't want to actually buy FW. And the sheer hell of suddenly needing to own a set of IA books to have all the rules. Especially if you run tournaments.

mikhaila wrote:And sure, it lets you bring all your undepowered stuff that no one cares about you taking now anyway. But the other side effect is a sudden increase of all the cheesey overpowered units showing up. And proxies of those units because people won't want to actually buy FW. And the sheer hell of suddenly needing to own a set of IA books to have all the rules. Especially if you run tournaments.

Oooh! A whole pack of false dilemmas there mikhaila. Excellent job.


1. Increase in cheesy overpowered units - This isn't a real problem much of a problem as you think it is because there really aren't that many of them and the FOC tends to limit their use in the first place. It's not as if someone can take any army of Achilles Land Raiders now is it? Moreover, there are 'cheesy overpowered units' in every existing Codex as it is, so how would this be any different?
2. Proxies - Someone already presented a pretty obvious solution to this. If you don't have the FW model, you can't use the FW rules.
3. Needing to own the books - That's not your responsibility, that's your opponent's responsibility. If they don't have the rules with them, then you don't use the unit. Really simple, and again, already discussed within this thread.
4. Needing to own the books if you run a tournament - Tournament Organisers have the final say in anything that shows up in a tournament, so they wouldn't need to have the IA books if they simply disallowed their use (which is and has always been the prerogative of a TO). And even if they did allow them without personally owning the books, it would be up to the players to bring their copies with them would it not?

Indeed. The idea of disallowing something because you don't have the book the rules are in is laughable - the majority of players wouldn't own every codex, and don't disallow armies they don't have the codex for. Make sure your opponent has the book, and lets you see the unit entry before playing. Simple.

And, as HBMC says, don't allow proxies of Forgeworld units. Again, simple.

Well I think a good way to look at this is by examples, take your own personal standard tournament army, you are against a Necron player, now they produce a pair of tomb stalkers, is that over powering their army, or perhaps pushing them slightly towards the current power curve?

Now consider a SM army your playing next and face an Achilles, does your army have to drastically change to deal with it? Is it so game breaking in a tournament it's going to change the way the army plays or how you play an SM army?

Now consider you're against the ork mek army from kastorel novem, again is that an unfair list? Or do you just need more skill to adapt?

If all lists were 'legal' it's just like new codices getting ready to play them

And? So? But? Therefore?

If this is a tournament, and the TO has allowed the use of FW units, then people shouldn't be surprised when they show up. They needn't own the rules - as has been stated by several people - but they went in there knowing FW would be there, so what's the big deal?

Furthermore, a TO can allow/disallow anything. They could say 'No Marines' or 'No Orks' or 'No armies starting with D' if they wanted to. None of this changes the legality of FW models.

Just on the Achilles - it's not the powerhouse it was in the experimental rules. It lost some of it's absurd defense and got more expensive in the Badab Wars books.

I still don't get why GW or FW have to declare IA books 'legal'. As GW have always encouraged house rules and making it 'your own game'. TOs have the final say in tournaments. Given that regular WHFB and WH40k are already comped then the IA books could also be comped. The only hassle with that is that it's already hard enough to comp the core game let alone another range of books.

As for balance issues with FW books, WH40k is already unbalanced and I don't see GW making any such statements until the next edition if WH40k.

H.B.M.C. wrote:1. Increase in cheesy overpowered units - This isn't a real problem much of a problem as you think it is because there really aren't that many of them and the FOC tends to limit their use in the first place. It's not as if someone can take any army of Achilles Land Raiders now is it? Moreover, there are 'cheesy overpowered units' in every existing Codex as it is, so how would this be any different?
2. Proxies - Someone already presented a pretty obvious solution to this. If you don't have the FW model, you can't use the FW rules.
3. Needing to own the books - That's not your responsibility, that's your opponent's responsibility. If they don't have the rules with them, then you don't use the unit. Really simple, and again, already discussed within this thread.
4. Needing to own the books if you run a tournament - Tournament Organisers have the final say in anything that shows up in a tournament, so they wouldn't need to have the IA books if they simply disallowed their use (which is and has always been the prerogative of a TO). And even if they did allow them without personally owning the books, it would be up to the players to bring their copies with them would it not?

1. Hahahahaha you are kidding yourself if you think even 1 or 2 LRAs does not completely imbalance the game for anyone who isn't Tau.
2. You know it would happen. You know it would be a problem. Saying "well just deal with it jeez" does not make the problem go away.
3. FW has some obscure and weird rules. This combined with the extreme cost of the FW books and the sheer number of them, along with the fact that you need many $90 books to get all of the FW rules for one race, make it much harder for anyone to know all the FW rules well. Slap on the fact that most stores don't stock all the IA books and you have a big problem.
4. "TOs have the final say" is just as much an argument against your stance as it is for your stance. You can't use that to defend yourself.

1. The argument that FW has unbalanced rules and therefore should not be legal is fallacious because it implies that FW unbalanced rules are some how different or more unbalanced than rules from standard 40K Codices. The fact of the matter is that unbalanced rules exist equally in both/all publications, and their existence (or even frequency) is not a good enough reason to ban them.

2. Yes, it would happen in places. But there are solutions, as have already been stated. And, once again, just because it might happen somewhere is no reason to ban them all.

3. You're going to need to quote some of those obscure and weird rules. Most of their more recent rules just use existing examples. In fact, FW has a history of 'copypasta', much to the detriment of their books. And, as has been stated (ad nauseam) the person bringing the units should bring the books, and if they don't have the books (or the models) they shouldn't be using the rules. It's really not that difficult to fathom. And, if someone did, somewhere, in the world, proxy a FW unit without the rules for it then the person playing them is an idiot, and it's STILL no reason to ban them.

4. How? My argument is that FW should always be legal and should not require opponent's permission (or, to be more accurate, any more permission than anything else in the game). At no point does that contradict the notion that TO's are essentially God within their own space and can allow and ban whatever they want regardless of reason and, if they want to, in a completely arbitrary manner. This viewpoint on TO's does not contradict my viewpoint on FW rules.

H.B.M.C. wrote:1. The argument that FW has unbalanced rules and therefore should not be legal is fallacious because it implies that FW unbalanced rules are some how different or more unbalanced than rules from standard 40K Codices. The fact of the matter is that unbalanced rules exist equally in both/all publications, and their existence (or even frequency) is not a good enough reason to ban them.

2. Yes, it would happen in places. But there are solutions, as have already been stated. And, once again, just because it might happen somewhere is no reason to ban them all.

3. You're going to need to quote some of those obscure and weird rules. Most of their more recent rules just use existing examples. In fact, FW has a history of 'copypasta', much to the detriment of their books. And, as has been stated (ad nauseam) the person bringing the units should bring the books, and if they don't have the books (or the models) they shouldn't be using the rules. It's really not that difficult to fathom. And, if someone did, somewhere, in the world, proxy a FW unit without the rules for it then the person playing them is an idiot, and it's STILL no reason to ban them.

4. How? My argument is that FW should always be legal and should not require opponent's permission (or, to be more accurate, any more permission than anything else in the game). At no point does that contradict the notion that TO's are essentially God within their own space and can allow and ban whatever they want regardless of reason and, if they want to, in a completely arbitrary manner. This viewpoint on TO's does not contradict my viewpoint on FW rules.

1. Letting all FW units into 40k as is would wreck the game, by virtue of a few extra imbalanced units. GW should continue to transition units from FW to mainstream as they have been doing. Faster would be good, 95% of FW units are good and cool and should be in normal 40k. Opening the flood gates would ruin the game. We can thank deathstorms and LRAs for that.

2. There are also solutions to FW being quasi-illegal right now.

3. I don't need to quote gak. I'm not going to go trawl through IA books to quote the most obscure and random rules just to prove you wrong.

4. If FW was always legal TOs could just ban it, just like right now they could allow it. Nothing would change.

Well HBMC has the best point here, FW units are not usually OP as they look, people read the experimental rules, go and think all FW stuff is like that.
On the other hand, I would not want to be facing down a Tank Company, walls of AV14 are not nice things.
I would also rather like to have the diversity that FW gives.
Ban the stupid units like the Dreadpod and play away!
If you want a perfectly balanced game, go play chess!

Support your point rather than just flaming, people will listen to evidence

ph34r wrote:4. If FW was always legal TOs could just ban it, just like right now they could allow it. Nothing would change.

But this isn't about tournaments (well, ok, it kinda is, but it's a separate point), but is more about the general (wrongly held) opinion that all FW units require opponent's permission* and the stigma that goes with them that make people think that they are all unbalanced and therefore shouldn't be allowed in regular games (and, of course, tournaments). Really, after 5 pages of this ph34r this isn't clear to you yet what we're actually talking about?

GW (or FW) coming out and saying "All FW units are as legal as everything in all of our Codices** so they can now be used freely in any and all games, keeping in mind the existing restrictions on Super-Heavy units present within those books." would change things. So far we've got two sides in this:

1. The side that thinks this would be a bad idea because of unbalanced units like the LRA and the Dreadnought Drop Pod.
2. Those that don't see how unbalanced FW units would make any difference because 40K already has unbalanced units and there's nothing particularly special about FW unbalanced units in comparison to Codex 40K units.







*ie. any more permission than anything else currently in the game, etc. etc. etc.

**Of course they wouldn't say 'Codices', they'd say 'Codexes' because they're idiots...


Oh, and while I'm here...

ph34r wrote:3. I don't need to quote gak. I'm not going to go trawl through IA books to quote the most obscure and random rules just to prove you wrong

Putting aside the fact that I'm not wrong, I have one thing to say this comment:

Nor should you.

You shouldn't have to go through and find obscure rules for my units because it would be my responsibility to bring the rules for the FW units, and if I did not bring those rules you would be quite within your rights to go "No dice!" and not play me because I have failed to bring printed legal rules for the units I am attempting to use.

What on earth is the problem here?

If you don't want to play against FW there will NEVER be anything forcing you to play against something you don't want to play against.

It's the exact same analogy as playing against a codex army like Dark Eldar, just because GW has published it as a codex does not mean you are obliged to play against Dark Eldar.

Opponent's Permission is applicable to EVERY game and always will be. Nobody will ever point a gun to your head and say "You MUST play against my FW army" (unless if you're in a weird hostage situation).

In tournaments, it will always be up to the TO to allow what they want in their tournament. A TO wants to ban the Space Marine codex and all their models? Their choice. Exactly the same with IA books and lists and always will be. GW can never put a clause in forcing people to play against something that they don't want to.

The way I see it, announcing it as 'offical' is only going to change perception. TO's will feel pressured to allow FW models and rules into there tourneys much as they would be to allow a codex that had been just released. It's all fine and well to state that this wouldn't affect casual play but it's wrong. In my area about 3/4 of the players that actually play at the game store play in the monthly tourney. When there isn't a tourney they are usually testing out and tweaking thier lists. They PREFER to play against army configurations that are possible to face in the tourneys. Currently the TO only allows codex. If the local tourneys allow codex and FW then it would change the tournament gamers attitudes toward FW in casual play. I have found this to be true especially around Adepticon when people encourage each other to bring thier FW units.

Also, saying that allowing 'broken' FW units would not effect things any more than the 'broken' rules for some of the codexes is just plain false. The most 'broken' codexes have access to the most 'broken' FW rules.

nkelsch wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:Clearly you missed the "just like they can today" part of Xca|iber's post nkelsch.

And it's not a 'tough guy' comment to say that people who don't want to use FW are afraid of losing, especially when it's coming from someone like me who couldn't give two gaks about tournament play.

Hell we even use flyers in normal games from time to time and they're no big issue.

if they can still refuse to play... Then why need a change except to try to shift moral high ground with a note from mommy making the mean people play with your toys? You can see where CT has already said if some refuses to play against "codex legal" FW then they are a bad person... If people can continue to deny games after a change then why the change in attempting to villanize people who don't want to play with or against FW? It is all people trying to claim the moral high ground and the current policy of opponents consent means if you try to force FW on someone and they decline, then you are seen as the stooge. All I see is WAAC people demanding people line up to get spammed by drop pod proxies with " you can't refuse to play me GEEDUBBYAH said so!"

It is already legal for casual play... Nothing needs to change. Your whines of "you don't want to lose" are just "I want to win at all costs."

Just wow...


Care to offer a quote showing I said those are "bad people"? This is toy soldiers. I can certainly choose those opponents I have a common worldview with in regards to gaming to spend my time playing. I may not want to play you nkelsch for any number of reasons, but at the end of the day it doesn't make you a "bad" person, even if I don't enjoy 40k for the same reasons you do, or want to play it the way you do.

Try to maintain some perspective...

CT GAMER wrote:

Just wow...


Care to offer a quote showing I said those are "bad people"? This is toy soldiers. I can certainly choose those opponents I have a common worldview with in regards to gaming to spend my time playing. I may not want to play you nkelsch for any number of reasons, but at the end of the day it doesn't make you a "bad" person, even if I don't enjoy 40k for the same reasons you do, or want to play it the way you do.

Try to maintain some perspective...

"What this change would do is allow casual players a little more freedom to play what they want in public games (non-tournament) without someoen being a dick and refusing you the right to play a model that might in no way be broken simply becasue it happens to be FW... "

What did you mean when you called someone who wouldn't play against FW a dick? maybe I misunderstood what calling someone a dick means, maybe you were paying the person a compliment? If changing from permission to codex legal meant people could still refrain from playing against unbalanced models or simply models they don't want to play against why are they now a dick? Oh, because people want to force others to play with thier toys and throw more imbalance into the game. Poison is poison and FW has enough poison to taint the whole water supply.

It is all about claiming the moral highground... Shifting the rules makes one side 'right' and the other 'a dick'. People already consent to playing against fair FW units in casual play. But you have to have the social skills to ask permission not demand compliance. Shifting the legality of the rules is basically and attempt to steamroll people and anyone who refuses the 'new world order' is now a dick or afraid of losing or whatever schoolyard bullying insult you can come up with once you claim the moral highground.

Well it sounds like if the FW stuff becomes properly official than much more will be bought by some of the more competative tournament goers - so if it means more product will be shifted guess that makes the offical thing more likely!

From what I understand of the varied posts on this thread - pretty much nothing would really change except the FW stuff will get played a bit more with in non tourney games. Tournaments will ban some (or even all)FW stuff and they will pretty carry on as before.

So if this is true, apart from making some people happy what harm does it do?

nkelsch wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:

Just wow...


Care to offer a quote showing I said those are "bad people"? This is toy soldiers. I can certainly choose those opponents I have a common worldview with in regards to gaming to spend my time playing. I may not want to play you nkelsch for any number of reasons, but at the end of the day it doesn't make you a "bad" person, even if I don't enjoy 40k for the same reasons you do, or want to play it the way you do.

Try to maintain some perspective...

"What this change would do is allow casual players a little more freedom to play what they want in public games (non-tournament) without someoen being a dick and refusing you the right to play a model that might in no way be broken simply becasue it happens to be FW... "

What did you mean when you called someone who wouldn't play against FW a dick? maybe I misunderstood what calling someone a dick means, maybe you were paying the person a compliment? If changing from permission to codex legal meant people could still refrain from playing against unbalanced models or simply models they don't want to play against why are they now a dick? Oh, because people want to force others to play with thier toys and throw more imbalance into the game. Poison is poison and FW has enough poison to taint the whole water supply.

It is all about claiming the moral highground... Shifting the rules makes one side 'right' and the other 'a dick'. People already consent to playing against fair FW units in casual play. But you have to have the social skills to ask permission not demand compliance. Shifting the legality of the rules is basically and attempt to steamroll people and anyone who refuses the 'new world order' is now a dick or afraid of losing or whatever schoolyard bullying insult you can come up with once you claim the moral highground.

Lots of perfectly decent people are dicks at various times in their lives and in regards to various things. Acting like a dick oversomething and being a bad person are not one and the same.

Refusing to let someone use their toy soldiers can definitely be a dick move, especially when the concerns are largely overblown. Doesn't mean they are a "bad person", just means it is probably someone I'd rather not spend my limited amount of gaming time playing.

I'm sure we can both find another opponent that has a similar playstyle and view of the game to play instead.

Life goes on...

CT GAMER wrote:

Lots of perfectly decent people are dicks at various times in their lives and in regards to various things. Acting like a dick oversomething and being a bad person are not one and the same.

Refusing to let someone use their toy soldiers can definitely be a dick move, especially when the concerns are largely overblown. Doesn't mean they are a "bad person", just means it is probably someone I'd rather not spend my limited amount of gaming time playing.

I'm sure we can both find another opponent that has a similar playstyle and view of the game to play instead.

Life goes on...

Do your legs cramp up with all that backpeddling? There is plenty of schoolyard insults in this thread to anyone who doesn't play where 'FW is always legal'.

If the unit is not overpowered or is even balanced, most people have no problem playing against it in casual play so the current sytem works fine due to the poor quality of the current FW rules.

And you know what? saying 'Oh they are underpowered, so it is ok...' Not everyone wants to play games where they have an advantage because the person is handicapping themselves with really bad FW units either. I want all the units added to the core ruleset to be balanced, not overpowered or underpowered. Wanting balance is a good thing and helps everyone. Introducing broken units into the game and calling people Dicks and afraid to lose is a bad thing.

backpeddling?

It's called agreeing to disagree and attempting to move on as we are not going to agree.

Take a deep breathe...

Better?

schadenfreude wrote:

Theduke07 wrote:The thing can't outflank or scout, is AV10 opentopped. If its such a threat just shot it. Thank your opponent for burning a FA slot.

There are no force org slots in an apoc game.

In a regular game keep them in reserve as a counter attack element.

If they get blown up fine, it's a 25 point model or 75 for a squad of 3. The only real issue is KP, but once again that would not matter in an apoc game.

But who cares about Apoc games? "Legalizing" Forgeworld rules is not the same as saying "Use Apoc rules in all your games."

Xca|iber wrote:

But who cares about Apoc games? "Legalizing" Forgeworld rules is not the same as saying "Use Apoc rules in all your games."

Not really. Forge World units are as much a game expansion as are rules sets like Apocalypse, Planet Strike, or Cities of Death. I do not assume that Apocalypse rules are available for a regular game without talking about it with an opponent first, any more than I expect FW units or army lists to be.

I don't think there are any problems with the way things are right now. I know people who use certain FW units and most of the people they play at my FLGS don't really care. The problem I see with the idea of GW coming out and "legitiatizing" FW units/army lists for casual play, is that it will lead people to seek out and utilize the most broken units from those books. As it stands, usually people asking to introduce FW models into games are not trying to spam the OP stuff, but rather using stuff that fits into the theme of their army. I would hate to see tournaments around me start allowing FW stuff regularly.

augustus5 wrote:

Xca|iber wrote:

But who cares about Apoc games? "Legalizing" Forgeworld rules is not the same as saying "Use Apoc rules in all your games."

Not really. Forge World units are as much a game expansion as are rules sets like Apocalypse, Planet Strike, or Cities of Death. I do not assume that Apocalypse rules are available for a regular game without talking about it with an opponent first, any more than I expect FW units or army lists to be.

I don't think there are any problems with the way things are right now. I know people who use certain FW units and most of the people they play at my FLGS don't really care. The problem I see with the idea of GW coming out and "legitiatizing" FW units/army lists for casual play, is that it will lead people to seek out and utilize the most broken units from those books. As it stands, usually people asking to introduce FW models into games are not trying to spam the OP stuff, but rather using stuff that fits into the theme of their army. I would hate to see tournaments around me start allowing FW stuff regularly.

My point was that his argument against power-lifters was entirely based on the Apocalypse ruleset. In a regular game, I find it very hard to believe that any but the most broken FW units would change the game as dramatically as "removing the Force Org chart" (as in Apoc) or "allowing DS units to assault on the turn they arrive" (as in Planet Strike).

As far as I'm concerned, unless someone is dropping units on the table that no vanilla 40k army can handle (e.g. titans, superheavies, some flyers), and as long as they bring the relevant rules themselves, I've got no problem facing off against their army.

Xca|iber wrote:the Force Org chart" (as in Apoc) or "allowing DS units to assault on the turn they arrive" (as in Planet Strike).

As far as I'm concerned, unless someone is dropping units on the table that no vanilla 40k army can handle (e.g. titans, superheavies, some flyers), and as long as they bring the relevant rules themselves, I've got no problem facing off against their army.

Then you can choose to gove your consent and play them? The same way it works right now?

Unsure why you need to harm the game as a whole and ruin everyone else's way of playing both casual and sportshammer when people can simply continue to ask permission/give consent as they do now. The only people who don't work under the current system are people who are looking to abuse forgeworld and people who lack the social skills to ask permission in a reasonable way.

Except I can't take my krieg list to my local GW and play a pick-up game.

Adding in FW stuff, assuming they're cleaning up the various lists like they did with the Krieg list (bringing it in line with the current IG dex), does no more harm than showing up with a draigo list with 3 psyriflespam dreads, or any of the other spam lists from any of the codexes.

Players ruin people's way of playing the game, not the lists or what's available in them.

Cruentus wrote:Except I can't take my krieg list to my local GW and play a pick-up game.

Sure you can. You just have to ask permission and since all pick-up games require permission, nothing has changed.

I have played IA dredbash in GW stores before. I show up. I take out my models and I say "Would you play against the IA Dredbash list?" they either say yes or no.

If you have your models and ask permission, most people will be fine with it. If they decline, play someone else. I am unsure why people seem to be so socially inept they can't seem to ask permission and need mommy GW to force people to play with them. I think it is perfectly valid for someone who had no idea what a meka dred is and has no counter for it to decline a game since he was planning for the core ruleset. What is the point of playing a game unfairly stacked before a dice is rolled? except if your goal is to win games against unprepared opponents. Expanding the core ruleset and adding the horribly unfair units to it ruins the game for everyone.

Drop the 10% broken and everyone will be fine, until then opponents consent which works fine for people who have social skills.

Also all the Iguard codexes and Ork Codexes can be fielded with core codex rules. You can always play your Krieg as regular iguard the same way my Dredbash can be a regular ork army.

So after 6 pages we have:

1. All pickup games require opponent permission
2. Tournament organizers control what army lists are available for tournament play.

I do not see how anything GW could say/do would change those two facts. At my FLGS we have allowed forgeworld army lists (in complete, so Kreig, Elysians, Seige, etc) but not just random units from IAA or the earlier IAs. This has worked out well so far, especially since we enforce ether having the FW model or a wysiwyg conversion thereof if you are using something GW does not make. It has worked out pretty well so far. We are even looking at allowing the standalone 40k approved units from IAA2nd to be entered into our tournaments in the appropriate codex...but this is TBD at the moment. As for casual games, were pretty chill about it...but then again we also do not have anyone trying to break the game for casual play.

Oh and if you build your army for the Krieg list it is really hard to play regular IG...because it means that you probalby own several gun emplacements, for both your elite and HS slots...these have no equivalent in the IG codex...unless you want me to pretend my Bassilisk emplacement is a tank

augustus5 wrote:

I don't think there are any problems with the way things are right now. I know people who use certain FW units and most of the people they play at my FLGS don't really care. The problem I see with the idea of GW coming out and "legitiatizing" FW units/army lists for casual play, is that it will lead people to seek out and utilize the most broken units from those books.

Of which there are, at most, maybe 5 or 6, probably fewer? And how is that different than the situation with normal codex books?

As it stands, usually people asking to introduce FW models into games are not trying to spam the OP stuff, but rather using stuff that fits into the theme of their army. I would hate to see tournaments around me start allowing FW stuff regularly.

If you think tournaments will be any more unbalanced than they already are, I hate to break it to you, but it'll just be a different flavor of unbalanced, nothing more. You pretty much have 6 or so armies that will routinely do well at tournaments and the other 10 will generally be there for fodder, occaisionally making surprising results but primarily only about 1/3rd of the armies routinely place well. Adding FW to that won't change much there.

I've seen more productive arguments on politics and religion. This is going nowhere.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

ph34r wrote:4. If FW was always legal TOs could just ban it, just like right now they could allow it. Nothing would change.

But this isn't about tournaments (well, ok, it kinda is, but it's a separate point), but is more about the general (wrongly held) opinion that all FW units require opponent's permission* and the stigma that goes with them that make people think that they are all unbalanced and therefore shouldn't be allowed in regular games (and, of course, tournaments). Really, after 5 pages of this ph34r this isn't clear to you yet what we're actually talking about?

GW (or FW) coming out and saying "All FW units are as legal as everything in all of our Codices** so they can now be used freely in any and all games, keeping in mind the existing restrictions on Super-Heavy units present within those books." would change things. So far we've got two sides in this:

1. The side that thinks this would be a bad idea because of unbalanced units like the LRA and the Dreadnought Drop Pod.
2. Those that don't see how unbalanced FW units would make any difference because 40K already has unbalanced units and there's nothing particularly special about FW unbalanced units in comparison to Codex 40K units.

I'm just responding to one of your 4 points. How did you get all of that gak from a response to something YOU said? Even just the LRA being included would wreck the game. IG Tank companies would be impossible for certain codexes** to beat.

**GW says codexes, and half the words in 40k are bastardized, but you don't go around correcting everything else do you? therefore it is in fact incorrect to say codices

H.B.M.C. wrote:Oh, and while I'm here...

ph34r wrote:3. I don't need to quote gak. I'm not going to go trawl through IA books to quote the most obscure and random rules just to prove you wrong

Putting aside the fact that I'm not wrong, I have one thing to say this comment:

Nor should you.

You shouldn't have to go through and find obscure rules for my units because it would be my responsibility to bring the rules for the FW units, and if I did not bring those rules you would be quite within your rights to go "No dice!" and not play me because I have failed to bring printed legal rules for the units I am attempting to use.

Of course you are still wrong if you believe that there are not FW rules that are completely convoluted and complicated, anyone could realize that upon inspection of an IA or two, but the point that you missed entirely is that IA has some wacky ass rules and you are the one that literally just said "You're going to need to quote some of those obscure and weird rules."

Or had you forgotten? I mean, you did write that a whole several hours ago, and I only quoted it once in my response.

But hey, making a grand point against something I didn't even almost say is way way easier than responding to things I do say.

The TO in a tournament can do whatever they feel like.
People at a FLGS can refuse to play any army they don't feel like playing.
Fully legal in all games=GW saying it's fully legal in Ard Boys.
I don't think FW will ever be fully legal in all games.

There are too many models in FW to do so, and not enough playtesting.

What I can see GW doing is printing more FW models in white dwarf and endorsing specific models as being fully legal (like the nightspinner), but let's face 1 simple fact. GW is not going to green light every single unit from nearly a dozen imperial armor books.

Let's take this 1 link for example.



Forget power lifters, FW would green light the following.

Cyclops demo charges at 25 points a pop.
Manticores would have 2 missiles to choose from. The familiar storm eagle the Manticore missile S9 AP2 Heavy 1 with a 7" blast radius
100 point immobile manticore platforms can also be purchased.
Full flyer rules would be in place.

Armored battle groups would be in effect. Every vehicle could take 1 ace skill. Just imagine a standard IG army with the following.
Night fighting +5 points on a unit with a spotlight
Ace Gunner +10 points: +1 to pen so Hydras would be S7 +1 +1D6, Vendettas would be S9 +1 +1D6, and Manticores would be S10 +1 +best of 2D6
Hardened crew 10 points to ignore shaken on a 4+ Not as good as fortitude, but this would be on an IG vehicle probably a Vendetta with built in extra armor that reduces all stunned down to shaken anyways.
Slight loader +20 points: A stationary ordinance weapon fires twice. Start the game turn 1 with 3 manticores firing off 6 of their 12 missiles, or Basiliks get to shoot twice each turn.

Add in HQ command tanks: Any tank (which includes ordinance platforms as they are a tank) within 6" ignores all shaken results

Being too poor to afford the splurge onto FW stuff after paying out my normal bills and putting cash aside for my kids I can honestly say that as long as I could see the rules beforehand and got to agree or say nope beforehand wouldn't bother me. Too many people seem to "misread" rules for stuff their opponents don't know anything about these days.
However pickup games, I'd prefer to have it base 40K, no additions.

Being I personally use extended codexes / fan units etc, and am happy to so long as it's balanced on paper and a relevent model is on the table (be it scratchbuilt or converted) it would be a little hypocrytical of me to have any other attitude to any other aspect of the game.

Lightcavalier wrote:
1. All pickup games require opponent permission

Er, of course they do. It's not as if you have a gun to your opponent's head and are forcing them to play against you.

Are you?

schadenfreude wrote:Let's take this 1 link for example.

http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Downloads/Product/PDF/i/IA1update28AUG.pdf

Link fixed for the unwary. This gentleman is referring to IA1, by the way.

schadenfreude wrote:Cyclops demo charges at 25 points a pop.
Manticores would have 2 missiles to choose from. The familiar storm eagle the Manticore missile S9 AP2 Heavy 1 with a 7" blast radius
100 point immobile manticore platforms can also be purchased.

1, 25 pts for a 10/10/10 one-shot demo charge, which is destroyed on a glancing or penetrating hit, and can even explode amongst the enemy if hit correctly? Or you could just gun down the lone IG controler, at which point it just sits there...
2, 3 choices, actually - Manticore (really big boom, 1 template per missile), Storm Eagle (see IG dex) and Sky Eagle (AA missile). You can't mix & match during a game, and the Manticore missile costs additional points. Oh, and the Manticore missile has a 36" min range rendering it useless in most games on a 6'x4' table.
3, 100 points for an immobile, 11/11/11 platform that needs LOS to shoot at things? Also, see point 2 re missile types.

schadenfreude wrote:Full flyer rules would be in place.

There's already been talk about full flyer rules being in 6th edition anyway.

schadenfreude wrote:Armored battle groups would be in effect. Every vehicle could take 1 ace skill. Just imagine a standard IG army with the following.
Night fighting +5 points on a unit with a spotlight
Ace Gunner +10 points: +1 to pen so Hydras would be S7 +1 +1D6, Vendettas would be S9 +1 +1D6, and Manticores would be S10 +1 +best of 2D6
Hardened crew 10 points to ignore shaken on a 4+ Not as good as fortitude, but this would be on an IG vehicle probably a Vendetta with built in extra armor that reduces all stunned down to shaken anyways.
Slight loader +20 points: A stationary ordinance weapon fires twice. Start the game turn 1 with 3 manticores firing off 6 of their 12 missiles, or Basiliks get to shoot twice each turn.

Add in HQ command tanks: Any tank (which includes ordinance platforms as they are a tank) within 6" ignores all shaken results

Except that the Armoured Battlegroup is its own army list, so your standard IG army isn't going to get those Ace Skills. And if you actually read through the list, you'll note the many units missing that an IG army would normally have access to, with tank squadrons in their place.

Also, the Armoured Battlegroup can't take the Hydra/Earthshaker/Manticore platforms, and can't field the Manticore as a HS choice, either. Basilisks getting to double tap isn't unheard of, either - they used to in Epic, and *might* have been able to do something along those lines in 2nd Edition, though I'd need to find the rules for them then. I thought the current net opinion was that Basilisks were rubbish, anyway...

Dysartes wrote:

schadenfreude wrote:Let's take this 1 link for example.

http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Downloads/Product/PDF/i/IA1update28AUG.pdf

Link fixed for the unwary. This gentleman is referring to IA1, by the way.

schadenfreude wrote:Cyclops demo charges at 25 points a pop.
Manticores would have 2 missiles to choose from. The familiar storm eagle the Manticore missile S9 AP2 Heavy 1 with a 7" blast radius
100 point immobile manticore platforms can also be purchased.

1, 25 pts for a 10/10/10 one-shot demo charge, which is destroyed on a glancing or penetrating hit, and can even explode amongst the enemy if hit correctly? Or you could just gun down the lone IG controler, at which point it just sits there...
2, 3 choices, actually - Manticore (really big boom, 1 template per missile), Storm Eagle (see IG dex) and Sky Eagle (AA missile). You can't mix & match during a game, and the Manticore missile costs additional points. Oh, and the Manticore missile has a 36" min range rendering it useless in most games on a 6'x4' table.
3, 100 points for an immobile, 11/11/11 platform that needs LOS to shoot at things? Also, see point 2 re missile types.

schadenfreude wrote:Full flyer rules would be in place.

There's already been talk about full flyer rules being in 6th edition anyway.

schadenfreude wrote:Armored battle groups would be in effect. Every vehicle could take 1 ace skill. Just imagine a standard IG army with the following.
Night fighting +5 points on a unit with a spotlight
Ace Gunner +10 points: +1 to pen so Hydras would be S7 +1 +1D6, Vendettas would be S9 +1 +1D6, and Manticores would be S10 +1 +best of 2D6
Hardened crew 10 points to ignore shaken on a 4+ Not as good as fortitude, but this would be on an IG vehicle probably a Vendetta with built in extra armor that reduces all stunned down to shaken anyways.
Slight loader +20 points: A stationary ordinance weapon fires twice. Start the game turn 1 with 3 manticores firing off 6 of their 12 missiles, or Basiliks get to shoot twice each turn.

Add in HQ command tanks: Any tank (which includes ordinance platforms as they are a tank) within 6" ignores all shaken results

Except that the Armoured Battlegroup is its own army list, so your standard IG army isn't going to get those Ace Skills. And if you actually read through the list, you'll note the many units missing that an IG army would normally have access to, with tank squadrons in their place.

Also, the Armoured Battlegroup can't take the Hydra/Earthshaker/Manticore platforms, and can't field the Manticore as a HS choice, either. Basilisks getting to double tap isn't unheard of, either - they used to in Epic, and *might* have been able to do something along those lines in 2nd Edition, though I'd need to find the rules for them then. I thought the current net opinion was that Basilisks were rubbish, anyway...

Oh Dysartes, facts are meaningless. You can use facts to prove anything that is even remotely true...

What ever happened to Use your codex and no more than one codex? So in essence, youi are using 2 books now instead of one.

Again, easy to say if you are a SM or IG player not so easy when you are not and you don't have anything updated in years or not even in a FW book.

I don't see it happening.

hsojvvad wrote:What ever happened to Use your codex and no more than one codex? So in essence, youi are using 2 books now instead of one.

Again, easy to say if you are a SM or IG player not so easy when you are not and you don't have anything updated in years or not even in a FW book.

I can only think of two armies that don't, to my knowledge, have units in an IA volume, and they're DE and Necrons - and I'm not certain that the Necron Pylon hasn't turned up in books previously. On the other hand, both races are getting stuff in Imperial Armour: Apocalypse Second Edition, when it comes out.

Having said that, I'd be interested in seeing what FW might do if they did a campaign book featuring either of the above (though I would hope that Necrons have a new 'dex before that happens).

I see this happening for 1 reason, the white dwarf stuff, sisters of battle codex is fully legal and is written inside white dwarf, it would be very easy to include forge world rules into white dwarf pages and call it legal, so GW can pick a choose which forge world rules they like and include those legally.

Think about the potential for profit making if they do include FW rules - so many expensive units to sell.

If GW is going to release more LEGAL rules (like the chaos legion rumors) in the white dwarf pages its surely possible to see FW stuff legalized and hopefully they will be as this will allow people to play with more variation.

I remember someone at FW saying that they want to make AdMech codex (something about being Vampire counts of 40k i.e Powerful leaders and lots of cannon fodder).
Would you not want to have such rules legalised? same as chaos dwarfs, surely you would want them tourny legal? I know I do.

yevix wrote:I see this happening for 1 reason, the white dwarf stuff, sisters of battle codex is fully legal and is written inside white dwarf, it would be very easy to include forge world rules into white dwarf pages and call it legal, so GW can pick a choose which forge world rules they like and include those legally.

We had this. it was called Chapter approved. Imperial Armorer was released side-by-side with Chapter approved. Chapter approved was in two categories: Codex Legal or test rules. Imperial Armorer never made chapter approved. Having WD return the Codex legal rules in WD means nothing for Forgeworld.

schadenfreude wrote:
Fully legal in all games=GW saying it's fully legal in Ard Boys.

QFT

If it's legal in 'ard boyz a lot of other tourneys will follow suit. Then the tourney players will be more than willing to face them in 'casual' practice games.

hsojvvad wrote:What ever happened to Use your codex and no more than one codex? So in essence, youi are using 2 books now instead of one.

Again, easy to say if you are a SM or IG player not so easy when you are not and you don't have anything updated in years or not even in a FW book.

This is a pretty recent thing. Talk to people who ran Salamanders, Black Templars, Speed Freeks, Seeding Swarms, Lost and the Damned, or even Daemon Hunter and Witch Hunter allies.

Lightcavalier wrote:So after 6 pages we have:

1. All pickup games require opponent permission
2. Tournament organizers control what army lists are available for tournament play.

I do not see how anything GW could say/do would change those two facts. At my FLGS we have allowed forgeworld army lists (in complete, so Kreig, Elysians, Seige, etc) but not just random units from IAA or the earlier IAs. This has worked out well so far, especially since we enforce ether having the FW model or a wysiwyg conversion thereof if you are using something GW does not make. It has worked out pretty well so far. We are even looking at allowing the standalone 40k approved units from IAA2nd to be entered into our tournaments in the appropriate codex...but this is TBD at the moment. As for casual games, were pretty chill about it...but then again we also do not have anyone trying to break the game for casual play.

Oh and if you build your army for the Krieg list it is really hard to play regular IG...because it means that you probalby own several gun emplacements, for both your elite and HS slots...these have no equivalent in the IG codex...unless you want me to pretend my Bassilisk emplacement is a tank

Yes this is it I think, but the discussion has devolved into people trying to score points off one another.

As has been said, all the 'issues' with Forgeworld stemmed from the early books, and the fear that your opponent was going to plonk a baneblade on the table in front of you - and so 'opponents permission' was born.

To be fair, I have never ever refused to play against an FW army, nor has anyone refused to play against the small FW elements in my own armies. I have also never ever seen anyone refuse, across a multitude of gaming stores and clubs.

The key is having a level of politeness with your opponent - the whole shared experience thing. If anything is out of the ordinary with my force, and I don't know my opponent well, I always make sure that they know exactly what my army is and the various bits and pieces are. In this kind of situation, "are you OK with me using this?" will sit far better than having an abrasive attitude and "it's my right to use this model, GW says it's ok SO THERE ".

Given this approach, outside of a tournament game I can't imagine anyone who would react badly to it and refuse.

nkelsch wrote:

yevix wrote:I see this happening for 1 reason, the white dwarf stuff, sisters of battle codex is fully legal and is written inside white dwarf, it would be very easy to include forge world rules into white dwarf pages and call it legal, so GW can pick a choose which forge world rules they like and include those legally.

We had this. it was called Chapter approved. Imperial Armorer was released side-by-side with Chapter approved. Chapter approved was in two categories: Codex Legal or test rules. Imperial Armorer never made chapter approved. Having WD return the Codex legal rules in WD means nothing for Forgeworld.

Agreed. CA = fail. I hope it never comes back.

Consider first that Forge World makes primarily Super-Heavy, Gargantuan Creature, and Flyer models that are explicitly legal in Apocalypse and are explicitly illegal in non-Apocalypse games. Most Forge World stuff that isn't Apocalypse-scale is either useless (come on, would you really give up your Hammerhead's railgun to take a longer-ranged plasma rifle?) or overpriced (Lord Zhufor has +1 S, +1 WS, and a technically illegal weapon configuration over a normal Khorne-marked Terminator Lord for +50pts); a good percentage of the rest is only relevant in Apocalypse (what's the point of having a Firestorm with AA scatter lasers if there are no flyers?).

The tiny little bit of stuff that's left (Tau Tetras, Eldar Hornets, that sort of thing) is mostly pretty well-balanced, but if you're polite you'll still ask if your opponent will let you use it (heck, casually it's generally a good idea to ask if Special Characters are allowed if you're not facing a regular opponent under a set of established house rules).

AnomanderRake wrote:Consider first that Forge World makes primarily Super-Heavy, Gargantuan Creature, and Flyer models that are explicitly legal in Apocalypse and are explicitly illegal in non-Apocalypse games.

This hasn't been true for a long, long time. While yes, they have a large amount of superheavy/gargantuan/flier units, it usually amounts for only a handful for each race, and some have none. The vast majoirty of their inventory now is alternate models that use exisiting rules (older/alternate pattern tanks and vehicles, infantry that can use existing rules, conversion bits with existing rules).

AnomanderRake wrote:Consider first that Forge World makes primarily Super-Heavy, Gargantuan Creature, and Flyer models that are explicitly legal in Apocalypse and are explicitly illegal in non-Apocalypse games.

Except they don't. And they aren't. Super heavies are legal in non-Apoc games, as long as the rules for super heavies are obeyed (must be a game of 2000+ points, must use second detachments). And FW makes far, far, far more non-super heavy units than they make super heavy.

AnomanderRake wrote:(heck, casually it's generally a good idea to ask if Special Characters are allowed if you're not facing a regular opponent under a set of established house rules).

That's an interesting one - I thought Special Characters had lost the "opponent's consent" stigma they have in 3rd/4th.

To be honest anyone who can read should understand that FW material has to go threw GW editors before they hit the prints becasue of the copy right laws with GW on FW....if it got the 40k/GW seals its fair game by me and legallly passed by GW also if it was there seal on it plus ....its nice to see something different in armys besides these cookie cutters ive been reading and having to play.....plus I dont think anyone at GW would mind FW doing all the work while stuffing the wallets of GW

SCs havent been opponents consent for a long time now. I would *expect* to be able to use any and all SCs in my codex that i wish, of course obeying restrictions if they exist - e.g. only in use in games of 2000 points or more, for example.

Anon - erm, why does Zhufor have an illegal weapon combo? Nothing i've seen strikes me as "this is illegal" - -he also gets to take a retinue of terminators, which can help

I think a lot of the problem in the US vs Forgeworld was that the IA books were not readily available. IIRC the books only came to the US within the last few years (maybe as far back as 2005) so a lot of people were not familiar with anything other than shadowy rumors. And let's face it sometimes the IA books supplied "cutting edge" rules/figures that were later used in normal 40K games. So the people who could afford to pay the price for the books and find someplace to have them shipped from had an advantage over the normal Joe how may never have even heard of Forgeworld. This led (IMHO) to resentment which led to the current distaste for Forgeworld.

I just wanted to throw this in here: saying that the only people who dont want to play with FW stuff either dont want to lose or havent seen the books is just not true. IA is an expansion. Some people just like to play the normal game. Look at games like Warcraft 3 and Diablo 2. Plenty of people continued to play the original game even when the expansions came out. Who knows why, but they did. Maybe they were purists, maybe they just honestly did not like the expansion content. The same can be said for IA stuff.

There are also people who are 'casual competetive.'. These people may never play in a big tournament or even a small one, but they want to play the game with the rules tournaments usually use, just so they feel like at least theyre playing something similar. I know plenty of people like this.

SOME people do just hear Forgeworld and jump to silly conclusions, but to say that there is no valid reason to not want to allow those rules even in casual games is just ignorant. Lots of people dislike FW type stuff for reasons other than not wanting to lose.

I am sure if you say IA is an expansion, then alot of people will be saying playing non expansion games only then.

All this making Forge World Legal stuff will be just keeping up with the Jones.

First in a fight you bring your fists. If your oppoent brings a knife, next time you bring a knife. Then it's a gun he brings so you bring a gun. Then it's a rocket launcher then you need to bring a rocket launcher to compete.

What is next nukes? Alot of codicies cannot compete with Forge World stuff. It's simple as that. Use your codex when playing random games with strangers. It's no fun when you can't compete when someone brings something that can't be taken down.

So if you are playing with FW stuff you will have to expect most people don't and your opponent will not be able to counter it. There is no way to come up with an all comers list espically when Forge World is considered.

Unless it's in your codex, then it should be used. Again, not everyone buys White Dwarf either so I don't like how the rumours are starting to be use units that are not in your codex.

Well I'm not the one saying IA is an expansion. It says 40k expansion on the book.

Like I was saying I really dont think it has anything to do with power. As has been stated many times, much of the FW stuff isnt overpowered at all, and sometimes even underpowered. Some people just like playing the core game without addons. Whatever your opinion is of FW stuff, it is NOT part of the core game (unless they change it in 6th, which is what this discussion was really about.) It is an expansion, said so by FW themselves. There is nothing crazy about not wanting to use expansions, it happens all of the time. Even when expansions are widely regarded as improvements over the original, there are people who just want to stick to basics.

In some areas, use of IA lists and such is common, and thats fine, no problem. If it isnt common in your area, you are not all of a sudden an ignorant, stubborn jerk if you dont want to use those supplemental rules. Some people act like they are defending the poor IA users from rude people who just dont get it, but they are ending up being rude and ignorant themselves.

You're right.

A lot of Codices can't "keep up" with Forge World.

They exceed Forge World, by and large.

There's a few units which are outliers and stupidly powerful but that's the exception not the rule for Forge World.

lledwey wrote:I just wanted to throw this in here: saying that the only people who dont want to play with FW stuff either dont want to lose or havent seen the books is just not true. IA is an expansion. Some people just like to play the normal game. Look at games like Warcraft 3 and Diablo 2. Plenty of people continued to play the original game even when the expansions came out. Who knows why, but they did. Maybe they were purists, maybe they just honestly did not like the expansion content. The same can be said for IA stuff.

There are also people who are 'casual competetive.'. These people may never play in a big tournament or even a small one, but they want to play the game with the rules tournaments usually use, just so they feel like at least theyre playing something similar. I know plenty of people like this.

SOME people do just hear Forgeworld and jump to silly conclusions, but to say that there is no valid reason to not want to allow those rules even in casual games is just ignorant. Lots of people dislike FW type stuff for reasons other than not wanting to lose.

Agreed. Its easier to refute an argument when you demonize the other side rather than addressing the common underlying concerns. If asked, most of the time I do allow FW rules and even occasionally use them but sometimes I just don't feel like putting up with the added hassle. I buy new codicies so I can get the hang of the rules in them when facing them instead of getting some nasty surprises in the middle of a tabletop game turn (which can lead to arguments and unpleasant experiences... I've seen it happen). FW books are double to triple the price of a codex so there's no way I'd be buying them on a whim just to get familiar with the 25% of the pages that are actual rules. If someone wants to try using the rules for a unit that I haven't faced before, I'll usually let them as long as they have the rules physically present (sorry, no priated PDFs on your droid or iphone) as well as a suitably converted or legitimate model. If they're wanting to use rules outside of the norm (which is rulebook + codex) and I do them the favor of allowing it, they need to do me the favor of putting down some eye candy and having the rules nearby to avoid confusion. No using that regular terminator captain with a storm bolter and powersword as Huron Blackheart or that that regular drop pod as the bigger assault ramp dreadnought FW version.

Saw this over on Warseer.

Rolsheen wrote:I was talking to the manager in charge of the Forgeworld stand at the Australian Games-Day and he said that Imperial Armour 1,2 and 3 were being re-written for the release of 6th edition 40k next year.

http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=319447

This would explain pretty much everything as the original 3 book IIRC specifically state in them that the rules and models can be used in regular games of 40K.

I'm surprised they are still 2 different companies. One would think a merger can't be that far off in the future

DIDM wrote:I'm surprised they are still 2 different companies. One would think a merger can't be that far off in the future

They aren't two different companies, Forgeworld is a sub-department of GW like Distribution or Marketing.

Hear that? It's the sound of every Eldar player praying for this to happen.

Hear that other sound? It's Forge World mass-producing Wasp Walkers.

Vaktathi wrote:

DIDM wrote:I'm surprised they are still 2 different companies. One would think a merger can't be that far off in the future

They aren't two different companies, Forgeworld is a sub-department of GW like Distribution or Marketing.

well then what is the point of having 2 separate entities then? It is clear that their main goal is money, as is every business, so why not just sell their FW stuff on GW and charge a bit more like they do already? I mean Diet Coke is canned, shipped, and sold right next to regular Coke.


I know the FW stuff isn't massed produced, but that really isn't an excuse.


I'm new to all this, but from a business point of view it doesn't really make any sense. Branding is one of the biggest things a company can achieve, and separating your 2 brands isn't that sound of an idea. They have a link at the bottom of the GW page, but that to me looks like a sponsor link, not a link to "Our Special Items."

DIDM wrote:

Vaktathi wrote:

DIDM wrote:I'm surprised they are still 2 different companies. One would think a merger can't be that far off in the future

They aren't two different companies, Forgeworld is a sub-department of GW like Distribution or Marketing.

well then what is the point of having 2 separate entities then? It is clear that their main goal is money, as is every business, so why not just sell their FW stuff on GW and charge a bit more like they do already? I mean Diet Coke is canned, shipped, and sold right next to regular Coke.


I know the FW stuff isn't massed produced, but that really isn't an excuse.


I'm new to all this, but from a business point of view it doesn't really make any sense. Branding is one of the biggest things a company can achieve, and separating your 2 brands isn't that sound of an idea. They have a link at the bottom of the GW page, but that to me looks like a sponsor link, not a link to "Our Special Items."

Forgeworld is low production, high cost product. It's the niche of a niche. Like Warhammer, Warhammer 40,000 etc being seperately marketed product all under the GW name, forgeworld is simply another sub-section.