As still a new player that has bought a lot of bad units for my 5 armies . Why do the even sell such units and not jus the good units also that would help stearm line codesxs . so i guess my ?is why are ther so many crapy units that you shouldnt play
Because of options? Unless you're all about winning, and nothing else, then I can understand your perspective. If you're more concerned with the narrative, or just about having fun, then I would imagine that you would want as many options as possible, despite their effectiveness. Thus, I guess that answers your questions...GW is catering to a wide range of gamers...not just the power gamers.
Werewalrus wrote: Because of options? Unless you're all about winning, and nothing else, then I can understand your perspective. If you're more concerned with the narrative, or just about having fun, then I would imagine that you would want as many options as possible, despite their effectiveness. Thus, I guess that answers your questions...GW is catering to a wide range of games...not just the power gamers.
Well said Remember zilka86, GW doesn't even consider their product as a competitive game. It's a "hobby" for collectors. You have a wide variety of units because some people (I think many of us) play both for competitions and for fun. Not only that, some of us just like to paint stuff.
The Dark Eldar Mandrakes for example. It's a horrible unit for gameplay but it's a model made of awesome and win that looks great painted.
Just ever trouny i go to all have same list pnly been playing a yr and i only go to trounys and get butt kicked hard ever time so i switch armies use internet to find best list and still get lose been to 10trounys
How you use a unit is key and what you need to use it for is key as well.
For example, I love to use vespid, even though people think they suck, because the look on my opponents face when I gun down a monsterous creature or squad of marines with them is well worth it.
A good player will make much better use out of units than a new one. Some units are far better for new players, as are some armies. Just because you can't find a use for some units doesn't mean there's no way to make them work.
Warp talons were considered crap until the daemons update, when you could use the book on them to grant them a 2+ invul.
zilka86 wrote: Just ever trouny i go to all have same list pnly been playing a yr and i only go to trounys and get butt kicked hard ever time so i switch armies use internet to find best list and still get lose been to 10trounys
If you're using a net-list, then everyone at the Tourney knows how to beat that list, because it's a cookie-cutter template army. It's a "book example" army that everyone and their mother has had practice fighting. There's also the chance that they've been playing a lot longer than you have been, and have a greater understanding of the intricacies of the game, and know how to counter Net-lists with their own armies (as they've seen them a lot).
It's all about diversity and the art of creating and painting different and exciting things. (Agreeing w/ TheDraconicLord's comment).
Example, Vangaurd Veterans. TERRIBLE unit for what you must put down point wise and for what they bring to the battlefield. However, the combination of Artificer armor (looks wise) and the amount of "cool looking" weapons they have are a selling point for some people. Plus, you can paint them up nicely for more of a visual aesthetic, rather than a functional, fielded unit.
zilka86 wrote: Just ever trouny i go to all have same list pnly been playing a yr and i only go to trounys and get butt kicked hard ever time so i switch armies use internet to find best list and still get lose been to 10trounys
Doesn't matter how many netlists you use. A list will not win your a tournament unless you have the experience and skill to go with it. And jumping from army to army every time you lose means you are reset every single time, so rather than develop your skill, you learn nothing and will keep losing.
OminusMarine wrote: It's all about diversity and the art of creating and painting different and exciting things. (Agreeing w/ TheDraconicLord's comment).
Example, Vangaurd Veterans. TERRIBLE unit for what you must put down point wise and for what they bring to the battlefield. However, the combination of Artificer armor (looks wise) and the amount of "cool looking" weapons they have are a selling point for some people. Plus, you can paint them up nicely for more of a visual aesthetic, rather than a functional, fielded unit.
Aye, I put down Honour Guard and Vanguard Veterans almost every time I play marines, and people go, "Damn, that's a great looking unit," and then they promptly murder them with a fraction of the points.
No one unit is completely worthless though, even Vanguard who are often held up as an example of over-costed units. Everything has a niche, it's just sometimes you pay more points than that niche is worth. Vanguard, as an example, are really great in extended combats against certain armies. Green Tide orks like to hide power claws away from the frontline of combat in the first round, to avoid them being killed by higher initiative enemies. Vanguard can drop down on a flank of the ork tide, and kills most of those klaws. Units like devastators, heavy weapon squads, long-fangs and so on are also good targets for them, but that's a very specific niche other things can do for cheaper.
Besides, the updated codexes have had much better internal balance than most of 5th ed. There are very few units I would say are genuinely not worth taking in some capacity. Khorne Berserkers and Thousand Sons aren't amazing, but they have very real uses, Kroot can provide masses of sniper fire for the lowest cost in the game, and I think the Falcon is the only mediocre unit still in the Eldar codex; even Guardians got a lot better. Things are looking up for the unpopular or underpowered units in each dex.
Hmmm i don't like clubs because ther full of kids i rather play at trunys no kids and it can't be that hard to master a army. also i thought net list are the way to go the best way to make a army so it should do good in a game not get beat in 3truns so easy
Automatically Appended Next Post: Am not a power gamer also the reason i have so many armies is so i can play i also have ever codex so i can no all the rules and build a 2000pt army for ever one and really be abel to play the game
Werewalrus wrote: Because of options? Unless you're all about winning, and nothing else, then I can understand your perspective. If you're more concerned with the narrative, or just about having fun, then I would imagine that you would want as many options as possible, despite their effectiveness. Thus, I guess that answers your questions...GW is catering to a wide range of games...not just the power gamers.
Well said Remember zilka86, GW doesn't even consider their product as a competitive game. It's a "hobby" for collectors. You have a wide variety of units because some people (I think many of us) play both for competitions and for fun. Not only that, some of us just like to paint stuff.
The Dark Eldar Mandrakes for example. It's a horrible unit for gameplay but it's a model made of awesome and win that looks great painted.
I agree, Def Dreads and dreadnots are not worth the points but I still have them because they fun to paint and collect.
zilka86 wrote: Hmmm i don't like clubs because ther full of kids i rather play at trunys no kids and it can't be that hard to master a army. also i thought net list are the way to go the best way to make a army so it should do good in a game not get beat in 3truns so easy
If you have the fastest car in the world, you don't win a race unless you know how to drive it.
Am not a power gamer also the reason i have so many armies is so i can play i also have ever codex so i can no all the rules and build a 2000pt army for ever one and really be abel to play the game
Not a power gamer and only using netlists...does not compute.
zilka86 wrote: Hmmm i don't like clubs because ther full of kids i rather play at trunys no kids and it can't be that hard to master a army. also i thought net list are the way to go the best way to make a army so it should do good in a game not get beat in 3truns so easy
If you have the fastest car in the world, you don't win a race unless you know how to drive it.
Am not a power gamer also the reason i have so many armies is so i can play i also have ever codex so i can no all the rules and build a 2000pt army for ever one and really be abel to play the game
Not a power gamer and only using netlists...does not compute.
And really? You have 2000 points of ever army?
The last isn't all that implausible, all that's needed is time and/or money. And if you have enough of one, the other can slide a bit.
zilka86 wrote: Hmmm i don't like clubs because ther full of kids i rather play at trunys no kids and it can't be that hard to master a army. also i thought net list are the way to go the best way to make a army so it should do good in a game not get beat in 3truns so easy
Automatically Appended Next Post: Am not a power gamer also the reason i have so many armies is so i can play i also have ever codex so i can no all the rules and build a 2000pt army for ever one and really be abel to play the game
This is a game that requires a really, really long time invested to master an army. It also involves building your own lists and testing them, changing them, testing them again, so on and so forth, over and over and over again. Using net-lists? You're not learning anything about the army, you're just trusting someone else's list to perform for you.
And, heh... well... a Tourney is where you are likely to find the sort of player who *is* a power-player. Their armies are often optimized to the nth degree to fill the role they are designed to fill (usually Take All Comers, but as often not, being more specialized anti-Flyer, anti-psyker, anti-armor, anti-horde or whatever armies). These tend to be the sorts of players for whom winning is not everything, but the only thing.
To answer the OP: bad units exist because GW's game designers are lazy and incompetent, so their "cool" ideas often have terrible balance. They aren't deliberately making bad units, they just don't know what professional playtesting is. That's why you get Vendettas and rough riders in the same FOC slot, because when you just guess at what a unit's point cost should be and send it off to the publisher you often guess wrong.
(They still have a job because GW's target market doesn't actually play the game, they just like the idea of a game existing. The kid buying $500 worth of space marines that will end up forgotten in the closet in a couple weeks doesn't care about the fine points of game balance, so why pay extra to make better rules?)
DarknessEternal wrote: Units that are bad now weren't necessarily always bad. Sometimes the rules change.
The game's been out awhile.
Great point that I didn't think of. This is my philosophy (can remember who said this). The goal of a game is to win, but it not the win that is sweet, but the completion of the goal. Just change your goal to have fun (gayyyyyyyyyyy).
So maybe i really am at a lose with this game haveing to buy so many books and armies to play is w lot of money. but if that what takes so be it and i never understood how to make a list that's any good so i run per made list
zilka86 wrote: Hmmm i don't like clubs because ther full of kids i rather play at trunys no kids and it can't be that hard to master a army. also i thought net list are the way to go the best way to make a army so it should do good in a game not get beat in 3truns so easy
Automatically Appended Next Post: Am not a power gamer also the reason i have so many armies is so i can play i also have ever codex so i can no all the rules and build a 2000pt army for ever one and really be abel to play the game
Sorry i was useing my phone. just very frustrated with this game after spending so much time and money. seems like ever thing i use in my armies is a bad unit. even my new eldar army is no good it should be the power house army as its the newest army.
Werewalrus wrote: Because of options? Unless you're all about winning, and nothing else, then I can understand your perspective. If you're more concerned with the narrative, or just about having fun, then I would imagine that you would want as many options as possible, despite their effectiveness. Thus, I guess that answers your questions...GW is catering to a wide range of gamers...not just the power gamers.
I actually don't know about that. I think that the writers of the codices literally think every unit they write will be effective. I mean, Matt Ward has been on record saying as much.
I think more likely it's that GW doesn't necessarily know what will and will not be effective four or five years down the road or however long it is until a new draft of a codex comes out.
That's one of the misconceptions that haunt 40K, partially due to one writer's run of OP codexes
The newest codex isn't necessarily the most powerful, and even if you are running a top-tier dex/list it does not guarantee an easy win. Chance and opponent skill matter.
GW has actually been seeming to tone back the codexes a bit in 6th. Tau are a little above the curve, but DA, Daemons and CSM weren't the uber-powerhouse books that broke the game one after another.
Each has some punch, but there are codees before them that heft a lot more win-button weight, such as Necrons
The thing about Eldar, especially, is that it takes a measure of skill to make the army work (though not as much as DE ) and to really wreck face it also needs your units to all be in the right place at the right time. This takes a heap of practice to make work effectively, and picking an off-the-rack list without this practice won't win you games.
There are very few out and out stinkers in the game. Some units are better than others, but almost any unit can be deadly in the hands of a player who understands it's best use, and can get it to where he needs it to be.
What 'stinker' units are you using, and how are you using them? Could be that they are a spanner being used in a hammer's task, when they would be more effective used differently?
zilka86 wrote:Just ever trouny i go to all have same list pnly been playing a yr and i only go to trounys and get butt kicked hard ever time so i switch armies use internet to find best list and still get lose been to 10trounys
Here's your problem.
40k isn't REALLY a strategy game - it's a dice game. If you want to take a game seriously as a competitive exercise, then you will always be disappointed by 40k. Hanging around a bunch of people playing the game on easy mode while pretending that they win games by force of will won't help your attitude.
As for why there are crappy units, I agree with the idea that there are a lot fewer than you think. Once again, being around uncreative people who only play one kind of list doesn't actually mean that the other options are bad - they're just outside of the myopic focus the people around you are capable of producing. There are, I will admit, bad units, but GW's generally getting better at this over time (for example, CSM came out recently, and only have two genuinely awful units, and DA also came out recently, and really only has one, and that's out of entire codices). The other times that units are bad is because the codex is old and the game has changed out from underneath them. For example, rough riders, ogryn, and priests didn't used to be that bad for a guard army, but then 6th ed came out and made them bad. As guard hasn't had a 6th ed codex yet, they're sort of just stuck, wallowing in the wrong rules set.
That or there's a switch in meta. Hydras were better in the beginning of 6th ed when everybody needed to bring a flier or three. Now that the mania is (slightly) beginning to dissipate, it just makes them less useful.
I encourage the use of "bad units." Why? It challenges us all to become better generals. We can all write lists to win, but it there are different forms of enjoyment that come from the game. I mean, how many people have imagined making an ENTIRE chapter of Space Marines, 6 Tactical Squads, 2 Devastator and 2 Assault Squads, along with a Command Squad, Captain, Chaplain, 2 Dreadnoughts, etc. Would it be the best army ever? No, but man that army would be the boss of any scene it was on, because it's concept is awesome. Name every character, number the squads ... make it original, and amazing.
The ways Warhammer 40k can be personalized ... along with the "in the spirit of the game" suggestions in the 6th ed. rulebook, point in the direction of "play the game for yourself." You want a crazy non competitive themed army? Go ahead. You want an Min/Mazed power gamer list? Go ahead. Somewhere in the middle?
zilka86 wrote: Sorry i was useing my phone. just very frustrated with this game after spending so much time and money. seems like ever thing i use in my armies is a bad unit. even my new eldar army is no good it should be the power house army as its the newest army.
Yet you claim you are using netlists. What you are describing is not knowing how to play the game well, not an army problem. If you won't accept that, fine, but that's the best advice we can give you. Stick to one or two armies, and really learn them and how they interact with other armies. You can have the most overpowered list in the game and lose miserably if you don't have a grasp of HOW to play. I routinely lose games because I play horrifically. I don't place and capture objectives effectively, I have poor targeting choices, my units simply don't perform how I expect them too, I don't build balanced lists, etc. Part of my problem are my army lists. I don't run through how they will work and interact, I just go "hey, that looks cool, let's do it" without really thinking about it. Another problem is that I don't think far enough ahead in games. I don't suck because I play Blood Angels, I could have stalemated or won many games that I lost simply by playing smarter. I suck because I am lacking at the skills needed for this game or making VERY dumb choices at times. You are not seeing results because you aren't learning the game thoroughly and getting the experiences you need to win. How else would I learn that I should not let a terminator sergeant in a squad of 5 termis plus libby take a challenge 5 inches from my board edge? I learn from thinking through what happens if I fail a morale check if he does manage to die which I learned to do after that sad sad incident, or by really thinking forward to every possibility at every step, or by having him die, the squad fail a morale test, and 300+ points of units walking off the board in a 1k point game.
PS: You are the DEFINITION of a power gamer with the whole "my new Eldar army should be the power house army since it's newest". You can't buy wins, you have to earn them. If you don't get that, no one here can help you at all, sorry bud.
zilka86 wrote: Hmmm i don't like clubs because ther full of kids i rather play at trunys no kids and it can't be that hard to master a army.
So you only play at tournaments? You're giving yourself an ENORMOUS handicap.
I know several international-level players. They typically play 4-5 games a week against other plays of a similar level and generally don't change army more than twice a year.
evildrspock wrote: I encourage the use of "bad units." Why? It challenges us all to become better generals.
Say that to Dark Eldar Mandrakes and Necron's Flayed Ones. *shudder* The first one at least looks cool, the other is a piece of gak in every sense. There are genuine BAD units in the game that you don't want to touch. I agree that there are units that aren't that good but you can still use them, try something new, like my Lychguard or Triarch Praetorian or the Monoliths. They aren't ultra competitive units, but they look cool and allow us different tactics. But certain units? Not even while playing for fun
Many models have conversion potential or simply look great if you were to paint them for display purposes.
Also keep in mind that some people like certain units for fluff / army themes. Your army won't "suck" if you squeeze in one of these units. You won't win tournaments but you can definitely put up a fight and win games.
I have been playing ayear and a half and only own 5 armies of 2000pts each. the only thing i own ever thing of is ever codex. yes i have lots of extra money and free time. And i have only played maybe 40games all at the tourneys i go to
Who wins? The guy who never practices, never works on any aspect of his game and buys the newest shoes or the guy with the old snkeaers but who is fit and practices and understands the game?
Like we've told you before in this thread, you are not going to be able to buy a tournament win. If you don't understand your army, don't understand the game and don't understand how to put what you have to work, you're never going to find success. Especially since it seems that you do nothing to prepare or practice. Right now, you're the out of shape kid who never plays basketball who rolls in with the most expensive sneakers thinking that they will make him good. Hint, it never works that way,
Remove the word 40K from your issue and replace it with chess. This is what you are saying...
I only play chess at tournaments. I keep getting beat by chess masters and no matter how many new chess sets I buy I keep getting beat. I won't play chess at chess clubs because I don't like the younger players. Please tell me what chess set to buy so I will be a great chess player.
Like many people you believe there is a way to buy the skill that others have achieved from of years of practice.
zilka86 wrote: I have been playing ayear and a half and only own 5 armies of 2000pts each. the only thing i own ever thing of is ever codex. yes i have lots of extra money and free time. And i have only played maybe 40games all at the tourneys i go to
So you've played 40K less than once a month and each army has been used 2-3 times?
You're barely getting started.
Not to mention, a tournament is not a good learning environment. You need to find players that are roughly your level (ideally slightly higher) and take the time during and after the game to figure out what you're doing right and what you're doing wrong.
Like many people you believe there is a way to buy the skill that others have achieved from of years of practice.
Were 40k like chess, I'd agree. As it turns out, the only way chess and 40k are similar is that they're both games, and they both involve players moving pieces around.
Really, what the OP should be saying is...
I only play go fish at tournaments. I keep getting beat by go fish masters and no matter how many new decks of cards I buy I keep getting beat. I won't play go fish at local stores because I don't like the younger players. Please tell me what deck of cards to buy so I will be a great go fish player.
Like many people you believe there is a way to buy the skill that others have achieved from of years of practice.
Were 40k like chess, I'd agree. As it turns out, the only way chess and 40k are similar is that they're both games, and they both involve players moving pieces around.
Really, what the OP should be saying is...
I only play go fish at tournaments. I keep getting beat by go fish masters and no matter how many new decks of cards I buy I keep getting beat. I won't play go fish at local stores because I don't like the younger players. Please tell me what deck of cards to buy so I will be a great go fish player.
Hmm, I think your analogy doesn't work either Ailaros. It would only work if there was only 1 army we all played. Then the fact that 40k is not a deeply tactical game would make the outcome based on the luck of your dice.
However, different decks exist and some have more winning cards than others. So it's not really like go-fish at all.
Also, I think that there is a good amount of skill involved in 40k and experience is important. The skill does not lie in tactical complexity. None of us can spring a trap from an unsuspecting direction or outflank an opponent. The nature of placing and moving game pieces on the same board takes a lot of military complexity out of the equation. The skill in 40k is not only knowing the basics of shoot the choppy, chop the shooty, but knowing all the damn USRs and how different codexes behave. The people who can remember all the little rules tend to do the best. Keeping all those fresh in your mind takes practice and a good memory. That's why the same people tend to do well in different tournaments. I think being good at 40k is a lot less about being like Napoleon and a lot more like being a rich man's Lionel Hutz.
I only play pogs at tournaments. I keep getting beat by pog masters and no matter how many pogs I buy I keep getting beat. I won't play pogs at local stores because I don't like the younger players. Please tell me what pogs to buy so I will be a great pog player.
haha, practice makes perfect, and really it pays off a lot to practice with your army, learn their ins and outs for yourself, and stick with it through thick and thin. That is how you figure out what you are doing, and develop the target priority, objective placement and other skills needed to win.
OP -> i have money and time, wont play game to learn skill.
Believes warhammer is skill less -> uses internet lists.
OP -> why doesn't internet list win me game?
Because of conditions you don't understand.
Table setup, deployment, unit to unit combat.
Their is skill in placing your models and moving your models to the right spot to win a game. A cannon in the perfect spot is a win button. But put cannons in bad places you lose.
Play another 40 games with in two months like the rest of and become a skilled player.
Game is chance - you want to say you lost only because of dice, not because you made mistakes.
Both are usually true, but the greatest players lose because the dice gods had said screw you.
EDIT: i am saying this as an Ork player with a 4ed codex, I win most of my matches. I lose, but it is because of skill over actually anything else. With Orks their is no buy units to win games. Their is the no brainers like Lootas, and Boyz but their is a lot to choose from for Orks to win a game. Even when our waghh broke, we still fight hard.
Ailaros & bogalubov, you both miss the point, the comparison is not about the game, it's about the attitude of what it takes to win.
True, chess is all strategy and 40k is strategy combined with a good amount of randomness, this does not change the fact that even if you put the same armies with the same list on the board the player with greater experience is going to beat the less experienced one almost all of the time. The played who better understands how his pieces (units) interact with each other, and plays several moves ahead in strategy has a major advantage in both games.
You have 5 armies of 2,000. You most likely have a table of some sort in your home. Get a friend, lend him an army, teach him, and now you have a person you can play against without having to go to a club.
Solis Luna Astrum wrote: Ailaros & bogalubov, you both miss the point, the comparison is not about the game, it's about the attitude of what it takes to win.
True, chess is all strategy and 40k is strategy combined with a good amount of randomness, this does not change the fact that even if you put the same armies with the same list on the board the player with greater experience is going to beat the less experienced one almost all of the time. The played who better understands how his pieces (units) interact with each other, and plays several moves ahead in strategy has a major advantage in both games.
bogalubov wrote: Also, I think that there is a good amount of skill involved in 40k and experience is important.
bogalubov wrote: The people who can remember all the little rules tend to do the best. Keeping all those fresh in your mind takes practice and a good memory.
I agreed with your sentiment. However, there is no reason to bring up chess if your only point is that practice and experience are useful. When you liken 40k to chess you set off an argument about the tactical complexity of 40k.
It's the nature of a game where events are determined by random elements that the entirety of the jurisdiction of player skill is summed up as the ability to play the odds.
40k is like blackjack. In this case, playing with a stronger list allows you to play the odds more exactingly, and, of course, some amount of experience or education is required to understand which odds are "better" to play, but that doesn't mean that there are "best" odds, and that you need a "certain" list to play them and that everything else will "only" help you lose games because they're "stinky" units.
So besides spending thousands of dollars to play this game i need thousands of playing hrs witb each army to be any good. then ever5yrs you have to buy the books all ove again and new models.
I've spent maybe a thousand or so dollars on my Imperial Guard army. That's it, because I bought what I needed for my army and that was it (well, besides rules and stuff). I sat down, and I dedicated myself to mastering that army before moving on to anything else. I played nothing but IG weekly for a good two years, and you can bet I got much better. I went from just barely not getting tabled, to being able to pull first place at tourneys.
All the money in the world doesn't matter if you don't put the time in to dedicate to an army and PRACTICE PRACTICE PRACTICE with it. Switching armies constantly is a very, very bad thing to do as you can't learn the consistency each army has. Your brain just can't do that. Focus on at most 3 armies at a time at most (once you get really good and you've been playing for years, feel free to take up every single army in the game...)
And I don't see how you are concerned about buying a new book every 5 years (you don't need new models really), when you have 2,000 points of every army supposedly...
zilka86 wrote: So besides spending thousands of dollars to play this game i need thousands of playing hrs witb each army to be any good. then ever5yrs you have to buy the books all ove again and new models.
Zilka, you need to stop and listen instead of becoming emotionally reactive. You are not listening at all, and it makes you posting here absolutely pointless for you, and everyone trying to help you.
Money doesn't win for you, nor do canned lists you find on the internet; you need to practice and learn. Don't just go play in tournaments. Go play at your local store, and deal with the "immaturity". There is not ANY game in existence where you can play only at tournaments and expect to be good. PERIOD. Spending thousands of dollars was YOUR choice, and it was you who shotgunned instead of actually figuring the game out. That was YOUR fault that you chose to spend lots of money on 5 armies, instead of focusing on one or two until you had a really good grasp. No one else's. You don't need to spend thousands of hours, you need to not be dramatic about it. Nor do you have to buy all new models every 5 years. A new codex every few years which results in a very few new models, sure, but not entire replacement of an army or anywhere near. If you are going to be that pissy about it, do realize it is your choice to play this game, no one is forcing you to do it.
Now, please, actually read the advice given here. If that is not possible, we cannot help you and the thread should simply be closed.
I had some Ork Grots for Christmas, and I wanted them becaus they looked cool and I can honestly say I would love to play a small game with them!
Sure, their weapons are cack but thoes little buggers have the best aim out of all my Orks!
I played a little "mock" game the other night and I put a small group of Grots against a group of Kroot, obviously the Kroot won but the Grots took one of them down.
The thing is, I suppose, 40K should be more about playing with models you enjoy rather than playing to win, but winning always helps!
I play ice hockey in a set of blades that are 5 years old now, yet i still outskate a good 80% of the other players with brand new blades.
Does not matter how good something looks.
If you have no idea how it works or how to make it work, then your shot down before you even start.
If your really set on winning, pick a good solid list.
DE, Tau, or SW is a nice start.
Stick to that army for atleast a year and get in as many games as possible.
Try different units, even if people dont rate them that highly as they may fit into your play style alot better than someone elses.
A bad unit is only a bad unit if it does not match your play style and other units in the army.
Just keep playing, and by that i mean any and all games.
Tournies are nice, but if you dont have a good grasp on how an army works, then you wont get anywhere, and you wont learn anything from it.
zilka86 wrote:So besides spending thousands of dollars to play this game i need thousands of playing hrs witb each army to be any good. then ever5yrs you have to buy the books all ove again and new models.
Thankfully, none of this is true. You don't need to spend thousands of dollars to play the game, you need to spend a couple hundred for a balanced army, and you will be good. You also don't need to spend thousands of playing hours. 40k isn't THAT complex of a game. You do need to get a new codex every five years or so, but the models are a durable good, which means you DON'T need to buy anything new. You can, of course, but you don't have to.
troa wrote:Zilka, you need to stop and listen instead of becoming emotionally reactive. You are not listening at all, and it makes you posting here absolutely pointless for you, and everyone trying to help you.
Right, I don't even know why I bothered saying the above. If I've learned anything in life it's not to speak to those who don't listen. Silence, in this case, is better than vanity.
That said, other people are reading this and might have vaguely similar concerns. Said people should be told not to worry.
evildrspock wrote: I encourage the use of "bad units." Why? It challenges us all to become better generals.
Say that to Dark Eldar Mandrakes and Necron's Flayed Ones. *shudder* The first one at least looks cool, the other is a piece of gak in every sense. There are genuine BAD units in the game that you don't want to touch. I agree that there are units that aren't that good but you can still use them, try something new, like my Lychguard or Triarch Praetorian or the Monoliths. They aren't ultra competitive units, but they look cool and allow us different tactics. But certain units? Not even while playing for fun
I used to play the Star Trek TCG, and mostly played against 2 people. None of us where very good, and, typically, our games lasted 3-4 hours. Due to the fact that none of us where very good, we didn't really improve, because we had no one really pushing us to improve. We all had great collections of cards (I had EVERY single ultra rare available at that time), and kinda understood how to play, but that made no difference.
Then one day, I met the UK champion in my local comic shop, and ended up playing against him. I got UTTERLY beaten in under 15 minutes. Then we played another game, and the exact same thing happened again. However, as this was a social game, rather than at a tournament, he was more than happy to tell me how to improve and what he was doing that made him so good. I went back to my mates, and beat them fairly easily after that, with our games lasting nearer to an hour, but I also told them what to do to help them play better. A few games later, and its back to a fairly even match up between us. When I next played the champ, I put up a much better fight, but still lost, but it was much closer this time. This back and forth between me playing him and my mates continued a few times more, until I was putting up a really good fight against him, which in turn helped him get better, because I threw out really random moves that 'proper' players generally wouldn't.
If I'd met him in a tournament, he would have just destroyed me and moved on, but because he wanted someone to play socially, he helped me improve, and then in turn, I could provide him a better opponent.
So, in conclusion, find someone to play regularly, and keep practicing. Realise you WILL get beaten badly by someone who has put a lot of time and effort into the game, but try to learn something from the game. If you don't, you will never improve, and that is entirely your fault. If you do want to play in tournaments, go to a few more for fun rather than wanting to win, and try to make a few friends, because then you can play against them, and they can drag your skill level up, so long as you're fun to play against, they won't mind helping you out, because in the long run, it'll help them
Madcat87 wrote: I want to say there geuinely are bad units in the game, no amount of practice or list synergy will ever make them better.
I want someone to try and convince me the SoB Celestians are in anyway useful.
We kinda got past that point, at this point the thread is about trying to get the point across that "Skill doesn't equal money" and you can't just buy victories (okay, maybe you can bribe people, but that's not the point!)
But yes, there are some genuinely bad units. Either through age, overcost, or just bad writing. Which is unfortunate...
As important as it is to actually learn to play the game and your army, its equally important to find out what your play style is and find an army that compliments that.
Are you an aggressive player that can't stand to keep units in one place for long and wants to get stuck in quickly? Are you the tricky manuever type player that likes to realign units all over the board? Are you a defensive minded player that feels a good defense is the best offense? Each army tends to lean one way or the other towards a specific playstyle, and learning what suits you takes time, and is certainly not something you are going to figure out sticking to tournaments.
You have five decent sized armies, slow down, figure out which one works best for you, sell the others (keep one as a change of pace army), and build up your chosen 1-2 armies so you have plenty of options. I've played this game for 25 years, and have played exactly 3 armies, and currently still own 2 of them. The idea that this game shouldn't take that long to master is laughable.
The thing about limiting when and where you play keeps you from seeing (and learning) how the game is really played. I spend as much time watching friends play than playing myself, and I tend to learn more about opposing armies this way.
Ailaros wrote: It's the nature of a game where events are determined by random elements that the entirety of the jurisdiction of player skill is summed up as the ability to play the odds.
This is completely and laughably wrong. The mere fact that a random number generator exists does not remove all skill from a game. For example, MTG has a strong random element in what cards you draw but you'd be absolutely insane (or just ignorant) if you tried to claim that player skill in MTG is nothing more than playing the odds better than your opponent.
I have a SOB army that is hardly competitive. But its fluffy and I like it. I'm slowly building it to be more competitive for when I feel like it, but that's far down the road. Basically, I'm stuck with what I have for a long time.
Repentia. Not the best unit in the game. In face, they kinda suck. But, they do have their uses and are paper to someone's rock. I'm making them work and its quite challenging. But its also fun.
In the gun nuts world, you'll get a guy with a dozen high end rifles and doesn't know how to use any of them. There's a saying. "Don't fear the man with a dozen guns, fear the man with one gun that knows how to use it."
Believe it or not, there are some people who like to play for the sake of fun! However, unless GW returns to something remotely similar to the original sculpt, I will definitely NOT be touching Flayed Ones (who really aren't THAT gakky, just everything else is better).
Who wins? The guy who never practices, never works on any aspect of his game and buys the newest shoes or the guy with the old snkeaers but who is fit and practices and understands the game?
Like we've told you before in this thread, you are not going to be able to buy a tournament win. If you don't understand your army, don't understand the game and don't understand how to put what you have to work, you're never going to find success. Especially since it seems that you do nothing to prepare or practice. Right now, you're the out of shape kid who never plays basketball who rolls in with the most expensive sneakers thinking that they will make him good. Hint, it never works that way,
Its interesting, There is this family, it is obvious the father has alot of money, none of his kids are of working age, yet they all have 1-2 armies each.
These kids regularly get stomped by me and friends, people who put tons of soul into this game. There answer? Buy forge world. Guess who is still dieing and getting poor sportsman for whining?
King Pariah wrote: Believe it or not, there are some people who like to play for the sake of fun! However, unless GW returns to something remotely similar to the original sculpt, I will definitely NOT be touching Flayed Ones (who really aren't THAT gakky, just everything else is better).
Just did a Google search for "flayed one" to see what the new sculpts look like. I really shouldn't be surprised that the top row of the image search contains a "female" flayed one someone drew posing for the camera. But somehow that one still managed to make me shake my head.
zilka86 wrote: So besides spending thousands of dollars to play this game i need thousands of playing hrs witb each army to be any good. then ever5yrs you have to buy the books all ove again and new models.
Really? If all that was required for a win was to purchase an army (which everyone that enters has done) then every tournament would end with ~100% of the players tied for first place.
You need to learn the game properly before you'll be able to design a good army list. You then need to further refine that list and learn how to use it. You then need to practice against common list archetypes, focusing especially on the ones that will be the most difficult. Etc. Etc.
At the very minimum, you need a rough plan of what you want to do in the first two turns of the game in each mission/deployment combination (18 combos).
The players that are taking home wins are doing this.
A couple of honest questions:
What games have you played at tournament level previously?
How old are you?
zilka86 wrote: Thought it was like gw ware you need ever codex to play and ever army.
Who told you this? It's certainly not true. It helps if you have access to all of the army books but lots of players only ever play one army (with variations on the army over time).
zilka86 wrote: Thought it was like gw ware you need ever codex to play and ever army.
Who told you this? It's certainly not true. It helps if you have access to all of the army books but lots of players only ever play one army (with variations on the army over time).
I think the OP's statement right there proves that he was just trolling.
I play lots of board games that come withe ever thing you need to play. i thought this was like that but instead of ever thing in one box. they want you to buy ever thing separate to be albe to play. Also why don't the just seal models permade and not all units and wargear from the codex and tac can onlt have ms because the don't come with other heavy weapons options
His posts in other areas are the same sort as here. He bought a few armies for some reason, and is complaining because he can't win, or use them together, or whatever reason. I don't know if he's trolling, he may have honestly just wasted that much money. One way or another, the common factor is he doesn't actually listen to anyone, he only picks what he wants to hear(which for some reason is usually negative).
Mandrakes, mandrakes suck & are total garbage. But the models are gorgeous.
Me and my friends house rule it so they start the game with a pain token & holy hell they're actually amazing. But for balance sake just make kheradruakh an IC and let him join mandrakes if he chooses not to use his special deployment rule.
zilka86 wrote: So besides spending thousands of dollars to play this game i need thousands of playing hrs witb each army to be any good. then ever5yrs you have to buy the books all ove again and new models.
zilka86 wrote: I play lots of board games that come withe ever thing you need to play. i thought this was like that but instead of ever thing in one box. they want you to buy ever thing separate to be albe to play. Also why don't the just seal models permade and not all units and wargear from the codex and tac can onlt have ms because the don't come with other heavy weapons options
Well, if it was all premade, then it'd be a whole lot harder for people to make an army their own which I think is a big attracting feature of 40k. With all the random bits, you can kit bash, convert, and just have fun making units that at the end of the day you can go, "This, this is me, this is what I like, this is boss and all other opinions on the matter are moot."
I'm trying to understand this thread. Are we talking about certain units that don't preform well and are expensive to take. because no one is talking about any specific units. so the title is a little misleading.
With that said
playing 40 games and fielding 5 different armies (I assume the average of 8 times with each of them) which is about 1 tournie with each army (so they would all be the same list). Does not in any way define what a force can actually do. Owning all the codexes, still doesn't replace experience.
After over 25 years and 6 editions of rules and suppliments, add-ons, house rules, and the FAQ pages of GW. Clear is never something I would say these rules were.
So on to what stinks - one players garbage unit is anothers saving grace. There are Army List, Placement, Tactics, Following the Rules, and of course the roll of the dice. All of these things will determine if you will win or lose.
I play Orks, my only gripe is that using the 4th Edition Codex has become very outdated with 6th Edition rules. Does that make Orks stink? Not in the slightest, but I don't play in GW events with Orks, because it would be a waste of money. But I do play friendly games and for the past 5 years, I haven't once heard anyone complain that my Orks were too powerful.
You also have to understand units ebb & flow in cost and effectiveness. I had the Tau army in fourth edition and they were pretty much the equivalent of hot garbage. Now, they are the new hawtness! It depends on the edition we are in and the codex for them.
Automatically Appended Next Post: You also have to understand units ebb & flow in cost and effectiveness. I had the Tau army in fourth edition and they were pretty much the equivalent of hot garbage. Now, they are the new hawtness! It depends on the edition we are in and the codex for them.
Sleg wrote: I'm trying to understand this thread. Are we talking about certain units that don't preform well and are expensive to take. because no one is talking about any specific units. so the title is a little misleading.
With that said
Basically the thread started with questioning why some units were just bad, because he wasn't winning with them. After a couple more posts, it became quite apparent that the issue is not that some units are bad(though some are), but that he is expecting to buy an army and auto-win because he spent money on it. We tried to explain why that wasn't the case, and he has since stopped coming to the thread after refusing to listen to our advice. He has made threads on FoW forums with similar questions/complaints, however.
Oh... I agree with you Troa and Psienesis. He is certainly the definition of insanity, doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result.
So basically everyone's saying "Money doesn't buy you wins, but painted figures always do better than unpainted ones"
Sleg wrote: "Money doesn't buy you wins, but painted figures always do better than unpainted ones"
I don't get it, are you using painted figures there to mean figures that you've had for a long time and gotten used to? Or are you actually saying paint makes them better. I know you play orks, but belief in something doesn't make it so in this universe
there are many ways to suggest that a units 'stinks'
since we seem to be talking about units that are 'sub-par' then there are many... Space marine tactical squads are my stinker, whenever i used them or have faced then they never seem to do very much, whereas Gery Hunters/ Chaos marine squads seem to do far more. Mostly due to the fact they can take 2 special weapons that allows for more tactical flexibility- 2 plasmaguns/2 meltaguns are popular loadouts for a reason you know.
However practice makes perfect in nearly all cases, for tourneys practice the same list for weeks on end to make sure you are competent with it/make tweaks as you see fit. Even in random weekly gaming practice makes perfect, i'm gulity of taking different armies every now and then to let my brain crunch over different tactics and strategies, but you can always learn something
Sleg wrote: "Money doesn't buy you wins, but painted figures always do better than unpainted ones"
I don't get it, are you using painted figures there to mean figures that you've had for a long time and gotten used to? Or are you actually saying paint makes them better. I know you play orks, but belief in something doesn't make it so in this universe
That's just what they want you to think, like people who say you have to obey gravity. Well I say it's just a theory!
b-man wrote: Zilka86 is froggy27, I know this for a fact. Read froggys posts every one is the same. He asks for help then rebukes everyone who tries to help.
That was EXACTLY what I was thinking. Asking for advice, and then ignoring it. The impenetrable block of bad grammar/ spelling/ no punctuation.
The thing I love about this game is that it can cater to a wide range of people. For the person that doesn't have alot of money or time, they can form a small army and learn how to play it through tons of trial and error. For the person with a disposable income and all the time in the world, they can form an epic looking army but may never truly learn how to play it. They may actually just love the hobby aspect of it. I've been playing for a year and half now and have accumulated over 7k points of space marines. Most of em I bought because I love the way they look. I have kit bashed Vanguard Vets that got played with for 2 games and then shelved because they didn't fit my play style. I have LotD that have never been played before but man they look sweet in my display case. I have a $600 Thunderhawk that's never seen a single Apoc game. I have units that suck for my playing style but I keep em because they look amazing when you put the entire army together. I've seen people suggest whirlwinds and I admittedly have a couple of em. I've tested em and now I wouldn't dream of adding them to my lists. But I'm winning more and more through tons of trial and error. I got into this game with a group of guys that have been playing for 15+ years so I had a hell of a lot of catching up to do. They kept asking me why my army changed up every 2nd or 3rd game and I told em I was testing out units to see how they worked or didn't work. I have collected 3 other armies besides my space marines and have yet to even come close to fielding em. We have an unbeaten Ork player in the group and only when I can beat him with my vanilla marines will I move on to another one of my armies. That's my personal goal but until that happens I'll continue to play my marines and keep learning. I played our cron player a couple of weekends ago with 2k points. We rolled big guns never tire and he parked his monolith on the center objective, let he flyer wreak havoc, and parked his barge on another objective and shot, and shot, and shot some more. I fielded nothing but foot troops and won 12-1...his one point coming from line breaker. I have learned to capitalize on mistakes when/if the opponent makes one and have been successful with units that some other players wouldn't dream of taking. Take your favorite of the 5 armies you have, and if you're not attached to the other armies, sell em as previously stated. I have all the codexes as well but I have em to just read the fluff and to know what some of the options are. Having a disposable income didn't help me to start getting wins. It was testing my units and finally coming up with my personal list that works for me. If I gave you the all troop list that I used last game which included 2 dev squads and an assault squad (which I've seen people on here refuse to take) and put you up against the same army I played against, I'm sure the outcome would be completely different. As would be with any game anyone on here has played. You absolutely can't use someone else's list to play your game. Build a list and go to the army list page, post it, and ask for feedback. People can tell you their experiences in which units function well or not so much. But until you actually test that list in a few games (not just one and move on) you'll never know how it works. Your question of "what units stink" is actually kind of pointless as one man's garbage is another man's gold.
1. They can be very pretty models for those who just like to paint and/or display.
2. Bad is subjective
3 More options the better
4. A lot of the "Bad" unit's, might not seem bad when they write and playtest the codex. They only seem bad once people figure out what to spam.
5. Sometimes, a bad unit, can be fantastic if someone figures out a clever way to use them.
I'd also say that you may need to ditch the tournament stuff for now. Get into a friendly group where you can discuss the game after its over. You seem to lose alot so ask your opponent where you messed up and how to fix it if you can't see that for yourself. It sounds like you're trying to win tournaments right out of the gate and you don't even know how to play. If you keep that up, you'll never win one. Step back, and start having fun. Then ramp up to the tournament scene and then be competitive.
b-man wrote: Zilka86 is froggy27, I know this for a fact. Read froggys posts every one is the same. He asks for help then rebukes everyone who tries to help.
We don't like to mention that name around here. Brings shudders to even me, I have never seen someone who was so defensive as he was...(well, maybe Peregrine or Ailaros but at least they do it in good heart)
But anyway, what was the original point of this thread again? I actually forget ...
Ailaros wrote: It's the nature of a game where events are determined by random elements that the entirety of the jurisdiction of player skill is summed up as the ability to play the odds.
This is completely and laughably wrong. The mere fact that a random number generator exists does not remove all skill from a game. For example, MTG has a strong random element in what cards you draw but you'd be absolutely insane (or just ignorant) if you tried to claim that player skill in MTG is nothing more than playing the odds better than your opponent.
Although there are approx. 60 cards in a MTG deck. A die only has six sides. That means you can rely on luck more in 40k than inMTG.
RavenGuard55 wrote: The thing I love about this game is that it can cater to a wide range of people. For the person that doesn't have alot of money or time, they can form a small army and learn how to play it through tons of trial and error. For the person with a disposable income and all the time in the world, they can form an epic looking army but may never truly learn how to play it. They may actually just love the hobby aspect of it. I've been playing for a year and half now and have accumulated over 7k points of space marines. Most of em I bought because I love the way they look. I have kit bashed Vanguard Vets that got played with for 2 games and then shelved because they didn't fit my play style.
I have LotD that have never been played before but man they look sweet in my display case. I have a $600 Thunderhawk that's never seen a single Apoc game. I have units that suck for my playing style but I keep em because they look amazing when you put the entire army together. I've seen people suggest whirlwinds and I admittedly have a couple of em. I've tested em and now I wouldn't dream of adding them to my lists. But I'm winning more and more through tons of trial and error. I got into this game with a group of guys that have been playing for 15+ years so I had a hell of a lot of catching up to do.
They kept asking me why my army changed up every 2nd or 3rd game and I told em I was testing out units to see how they worked or didn't work. I have collected 3 other armies besides my space marines and have yet to even come close to fielding em. We have an unbeaten Ork player in the group and only when I can beat him with my vanilla marines will I move on to another one of my armies. That's my personal goal but until that happens I'll continue to play my marines and keep learning.
I played our cron player a couple of weekends ago with 2k points. We rolled big guns never tire and he parked his monolith on the center objective, let he flyer wreak havoc, and parked his barge on another objective and shot, and shot, and shot some more. I fielded nothing but foot troops and won 12-1...his one point coming from line breaker. I have learned to capitalize on mistakes when/if the opponent makes one and have been successful with units that some other players wouldn't dream of taking.
Take your favorite of the 5 armies you have, and if you're not attached to the other armies, sell em as previously stated. I have all the codexes as well but I have em to just read the fluff and to know what some of the options are. Having a disposable income didn't help me to start getting wins. It was testing my units and finally coming up with my personal list that works for me. If I gave you the all troop list that I used last game which included 2 dev squads and an assault squad (which I've seen people on here refuse to take) and put you up against the same army I played against, I'm sure the outcome would be completely different. As would be with any game anyone on here has played.
You absolutely can't use someone else's list to play your game. Build a list and go to the army list page, post it, and ask for feedback. People can tell you their experiences in which units function well or not so much. But until you actually test that list in a few games (not just one and move on) you'll never know how it works. Your question of "what units stink" is actually kind of pointless as one man's garbage is another man's gold.
I broke up your post into paragraphs so others can read it.
Who wins? The guy who never practices, never works on any aspect of his game and buys the newest shoes or the guy with the old snkeaers but who is fit and practices and understands the game?
Like we've told you before in this thread, you are not going to be able to buy a tournament win. If you don't understand your army, don't understand the game and don't understand how to put what you have to work, you're never going to find success. Especially since it seems that you do nothing to prepare or practice. Right now, you're the out of shape kid who never plays basketball who rolls in with the most expensive sneakers thinking that they will make him good. Hint, it never works that way,
Its interesting, There is this family, it is obvious the father has alot of money, none of his kids are of working age, yet they all have 1-2 armies each.
These kids regularly get stomped by me and friends, people who put tons of soul into this game. There answer? Buy forge world. Guess who is still dieing and getting poor sportsman for whining?
Maybe you could teach them? Most of my friends got real mad when they were new, Me and a few other vets started teaching em. It helped a lot.
DarknessEternal wrote: Units that are bad now weren't necessarily always bad. Sometimes the rules change.
The game's been out awhile.
I agree and as i been playing game awhile... I often look at this to purchase additional units for my armies prior to new release... (2nd hand)they often cheaper to buy... example... recently started Eldar at end of 5th... picked up wave serpents and guardians as an example on the cheap .
I also enjoy playing units that are not normally found in armies to throw off the other player and or just to have fun... to me I enjoy the game when i can play it and does not matter if i win or loose... although i will try hard to win
zilka86 wrote: So besides spending thousands of dollars to play this game i need thousands of playing hrs witb each army to be any good. then ever5yrs you have to buy the books all ove again and new models.
Welcome to the hobby.
I've been playing since about 1997.
That's 16 years... man I'm getting old. In that time I've collected (in order, kinda iirc) Chaos Marines (3.0), Space Marines, Eldar, Orks (very briefly), Chaos Marines (3.5), Necrons(old, oldcrons), Space Marines (4th),
Dark Eldar, Orks (4th), Eldar. I think I may have had some Tau for a bit. And all that is just 40k. Until 4th Ed Space Marines I rarely ever won a game.
Once I figured out my skill I rarely lost. (Massive amounts of infantry... usually 93 models at 1850pts and only because the joke at the time was "if you want to beat marines... you have to outnumber them 2-3 to 1")
But... you don't NEED to buy anything. You either want to or don't want to. Practice makes perfect. And if you don't want to play against kids...
Then maybe you should find a hobby that isn't based around Saturday morning cartoon heroes in space.
Remember zilka86, 
) and to really wreck face it also needs your units to all be in the right place at the right time. This takes a heap of practice to make work effectively, and picking an off-the-rack list without this practice won't win you games.
that allows for more tactical flexibility- 2 plasmaguns/2 meltaguns are popular loadouts for a reason you know. 
