Requizen wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

Requizen wrote:
not spent time bitching that I can spend thinking about strategems and modeling.

...and make it clear to people that you will not be bitching.

Just as you're making it clear to people that you think bitching is the best and in fact only course of action in your mind.

Dat butt hurt though.

After this thread, and another on this forum, I'm starting to think the supporters of GW don't play in competitive meta's.

Yeah the butt hurt over Eldar is above 9000. It's hysterical imagining the agitation these people are putting themselves through though.

Akiasura wrote:

Requizen wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

Requizen wrote:
not spent time bitching that I can spend thinking about strategems and modeling.

...and make it clear to people that you will not be bitching.

Just as you're making it clear to people that you think bitching is the best and in fact only course of action in your mind.

Dat butt hurt though.

After this thread, and another on this forum, I'm starting to think the supporters of GW don't play in competitive meta's.

There's no butthurt. I don't play Eldar. I said frankly that the release is too powerful and that it shouldn't happen, and honestly I think GW did a stupid with this.

But the answer isn't turning to someone and telling them you won't play with their little plastic men because you're upset about it. And that's what this whole thread is.

Purifier has had a smartass reply to nearly every post on this page of the thread. Bitching and complaining isn't going to fix anything about this, GW is not concerned with your whining. Refusing to play against Eldar players isn't going to fix anything, it's just going to make you look like an elitist donkey-cave who acts like a child when confronted with something he/she doesn't like. I hope you don't attend tournaments, because your "I hate Eldar and refuse to play them" agenda is going to cause you to be wasting your entry fee. Eldar aren't going to be banned from tournaments, you're going to whine, waste $10 entering, you're going to get put up against an Eldar player and refuse to play them? I doubt that.

People that think like this are, and always have been, a cancer on the gaming community. gak is not going to be as bad as you're making it out to be, especially since you've not played against it or with it yet.

(P.S.: I do NOT like my expletives being changed into words like "donkey-cave", and "gak", these words aren't nearly as appealing as the expletives I've used.)

Akiasura wrote:

After this thread, and another on this forum, I'm starting to think the supporters of GW don't play in competitive meta's.

Maybe they don't? Not too farfetched to think a lot of people enjoy playing less competitive games, or avoiding LGS's all together. One group I play with meets at each others houses, has a few beers and rolls with some questionably effective lists.

It's possible to enjoy the hobby and never see a competitive list. I think that's what the "GW supporters" (really? are we not all talking about playing the same game, thus supporting GW?) might be enjoying.

There is a difference between refusing to play an Eldar player and refusing to play an Eldar player that is running 5 squads of 10x Scatter Laser jet bikes + 2 farseers on jet bikes. Just like there is a difference between refusing a game against an IG player that brought 1 Knight versus a player that brought 5 knights. In both cases, I'll gladly play the former, and will politely refuse the latter. I'll shake the man's hand and wish him good luck in his next game, but I won't play him.

I get to play once per month to once per two months. At most. I'm not going to throw away what could be my only chance to play for 6 weeks on some power gamer bologna.

I frequent a certain FB group that has one guy that thinks that same way, Clamclaw. He is ultra competitive and feels that all Warhammer players should see things this way. People have attempted explaining to him that competitive players are the minority of GWs customer base, which is why they don't take the worries of competitive players into account when designing things. People like this just won't accept this way of thinking, so this is really all pointless and I vote the thread be locked for troll.

 clamclaw wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

After this thread, and another on this forum, I'm starting to think the supporters of GW don't play in competitive meta's.

Maybe they don't? Not too farfetched to think a lot of people enjoy playing less competitive games, or avoiding LGS's all together. One group I play with meets at each others houses, has a few beers and rolls with some questionably effective lists.

It's possible to enjoy the hobby and never see a competitive list. I think that's what the "GW supporters" (really? are we not all talking about playing the same game, thus supporting GW?) might be enjoying.

If you play that way, it's fine. It just makes it very difficult to comment on why someone is upset about a very competitive book coming out in a very competitive meta.
So you get people who play casually commenting on people who have competitive metas, and getting very angry about it, when they don't understand the difference in the meta at all.

In this very thread, I had someone who said Eldar have never been a great army.
It turns out his/her meta has never run ANY competitive list from any edition, so they really don't know what they are talking about.

My meta is very competitive. A lot of us have played a video game competitively at some point in our lives, and a few of us used to play 40k competitively in the earlier editions. WMH is taking off here because of that. We only have a few people who are modelers (though one of them, the best one, is also the most competitive player out of all of us).
It makes getting into 40k difficult.


By GW supporter, I meant the people who feel to post angry insults at people who have anything negative to say about the game. I haven't supported GW in years, though I own over 20k worth of models. Most of my friends own over 10k and haven't bought anything in a while.

Edit,
And right after you clamclaw, we have someone who makes an assumption about my way of thinking and vaguely insults me. Case in point.

 Chosen of Malal wrote:
I frequent a certain FB group that has one guy that thinks that same way, Clamclaw. He is ultra competitive and feels that all Warhammer players should see things this way. People have attempted explaining to him that competitive players are the minority of GWs customer base, which is why they don't take the worries of competitive players into account when designing things. People like this just won't accept this way of thinking, so this is really all pointless and I vote the thread be locked for troll.

It's difficult to demonstrate that competitive players are a minority or not, since there's absolute no data on this issue.

It can however be demonstrated whether GW take the worries of an players into account: AFAIK there's no budget for any market research in their reports. As such, the only way they could be aware of what players think is if their emloyees lurk around 3rd party forums in their free time.

Requizen wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

Requizen wrote:
not spent time bitching that I can spend thinking about strategems and modeling.

...and make it clear to people that you will not be bitching.

Just as you're making it clear to people that you think bitching is the best and in fact only course of action in your mind.

I have nowhere said that my time is too good for it. You have. I'm just pointing out the irony of making out like my side must be doing nothing with our lives to have time to reply here, but you for some reason manage to both post on a forum *and* have a life.

 Chosen of Malal wrote:
GW is not concerned with your whining

And I'm not concerned with yours, yet you do it anyway. How are you any different?

 Chosen of Malal wrote:
I do NOT like my expletives being changed into words like "donkey-cave", and "gak", these words aren't nearly as appealing as the expletives I've used.

Not surprised in the least that you feel that.

If GW were concerned with competitive play they wouldn't have stepped away from hosting their own. That's all the data you need. They are simply unconcerned with the complains of competitive players.

Which is crazy. With their financials in decline they should be reaching out to anyone willing to give them money to turn things around.

 Chosen of Malal wrote:
If GW were concerned with competitive play they wouldn't have stepped away from hosting their own. That's all the data you need. They are simply unconcerned with the complains of competitive players.

I was under the impression that they stepped away from hosting their own because they weren't making a direct profit off of them any longer. Not a lot of people showed up the last few before they started to shut them down.

That's more of a chick or egg? argument though.



It's not really data. If GW gave a reason, we could say that it's most likely how they feel. They haven't.
However, their lack of playtesting and rule quality does suggest that they don't care about the competitive scene at all.
But one could make the argument that this is hurting their revenue. It'd be an inference rather then something that's right there in black and white, but you could certainly argue it.

 Purifier wrote:

Requizen wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

Requizen wrote:
not spent time bitching that I can spend thinking about strategems and modeling.

...and make it clear to people that you will not be bitching.

Just as you're making it clear to people that you think bitching is the best and in fact only course of action in your mind.

I have nowhere said that my time is too good for it. You have. I'm just pointing out the irony of making out like my side must be doing nothing with our lives to have time to reply here, but you for some reason manage to both post on a forum *and* have a life.

Where did I say you don't have a life? Don't put words into another person's mouth to try and play the victim card. We're both posting on a forum about a miniatures game and (presumably) spend a similar amount of time playing and doing the hobby. We have an equal amount of life/no life.

I'm just saying that you're choosing to use your time to be vitriolic and talk about how the only way to play the game is to remove all the things you don't like. I choose not to use my posting time like that. I've already posted for both my Daemon and Necron armies on what I think I can do to fight against Scatterbikes and Wraithknights, rather than using those posts to just say "ban it because I think it's too good".

 Chosen of Malal wrote:
GW is not concerned with your whining

And I'm not concerned with yours, yet you do it anyway. How are you any different?

This is the vitriol I'm talking about. This is a forum, everyone is allowed to post their opinions.

BUT, the truth of the matter is, posting online and saying that you won't play against Eldar because imba isn't going to make GW change anything. They don't care. They literally do not read your posts or this thread. And even if they did, they wouldn't care about it.

You can not care about Chosen's post. That doesn't make it any less true.

 Chosen of Malal wrote:
If GW were concerned with competitive play they wouldn't have stepped away from hosting their own. That's all the data you need. They are simply unconcerned with the complains of competitive players.

they just want profit, if this means to overpower eldar so every 1 buy em? fine by them and congratz on goal, next gonna be random Tau (for example) and same ordeal will happen and they just win win, for those who rage and cry and quit game there will be several more to fill their spot, its like killing tyranids, you take 1 out 10 are ready to fill the spot.

Requizen wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

Requizen wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

Requizen wrote:
not spent time bitching that I can spend thinking about strategems and modeling.

...and make it clear to people that you will not be bitching.

Just as you're making it clear to people that you think bitching is the best and in fact only course of action in your mind.

I have nowhere said that my time is too good for it. You have. I'm just pointing out the irony of making out like my side must be doing nothing with our lives to have time to reply here, but you for some reason manage to both post on a forum *and* have a life.

Where did I say you don't have a life? Don't put words into another person's mouth to try and play the victim card. We're both posting on a forum about a miniatures game and (presumably) spend a similar amount of time playing and doing the hobby. We have an equal amount of life/no life.

I'm just saying that you're choosing to use your time to be vitriolic and talk about how the only way to play the game is to remove all the things you don't like. I choose not to use my posting time like that. I've already posted for both my Daemon and Necron armies on what I think I can do to fight against Scatterbikes and Wraithknights, rather than using those posts to just say "ban it because I think it's too good".

 Chosen of Malal wrote:
GW is not concerned with your whining

And I'm not concerned with yours, yet you do it anyway. How are you any different?

This is the vitriol I'm talking about. This is a forum, everyone is allowed to post their opinions.

BUT, the truth of the matter is, posting online and saying that you won't play against Eldar because imba isn't going to make GW change anything. They don't care. They literally do not read your posts or this thread. And even if they did, they wouldn't care about it.

You can not care about Chosen's post. That doesn't make it any less true.

Oh the irony.

Nowhere have I said that I won't play against Eldar for any reason.
Nowhere have I said that I "think bitching is the best and in fact only course of action"
You said I was "spending time bitching that I could use thinking up strategems" while you quoted a post defending Galanur's stance, who said "simply they dont have nothing else in life to keep em busy enough and have to sign these pathetic topic subjects."

I don't think it's completely unreasonable to assume that when defending his post you agree with it?

I don't think I'm being vitriolic in the least. The first comment from Chosen atleast in the past few pages is a direct attack on me. And I'm vitriolic in responding to it? Get off me.

My statement was not in a whining context, it was informative. GW doesn't care about you whining. You can not care about my 'whining' all you like. It won't change the fact that that GW still doesn't care.

 Purifier wrote:

Requizen wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

Requizen wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

Requizen wrote:
not spent time bitching that I can spend thinking about strategems and modeling.

...and make it clear to people that you will not be bitching.

Just as you're making it clear to people that you think bitching is the best and in fact only course of action in your mind.

I have nowhere said that my time is too good for it. You have. I'm just pointing out the irony of making out like my side must be doing nothing with our lives to have time to reply here, but you for some reason manage to both post on a forum *and* have a life.

Where did I say you don't have a life? Don't put words into another person's mouth to try and play the victim card. We're both posting on a forum about a miniatures game and (presumably) spend a similar amount of time playing and doing the hobby. We have an equal amount of life/no life.

I'm just saying that you're choosing to use your time to be vitriolic and talk about how the only way to play the game is to remove all the things you don't like. I choose not to use my posting time like that. I've already posted for both my Daemon and Necron armies on what I think I can do to fight against Scatterbikes and Wraithknights, rather than using those posts to just say "ban it because I think it's too good".

 Chosen of Malal wrote:
GW is not concerned with your whining

And I'm not concerned with yours, yet you do it anyway. How are you any different?

This is the vitriol I'm talking about. This is a forum, everyone is allowed to post their opinions.

BUT, the truth of the matter is, posting online and saying that you won't play against Eldar because imba isn't going to make GW change anything. They don't care. They literally do not read your posts or this thread. And even if they did, they wouldn't care about it.

You can not care about Chosen's post. That doesn't make it any less true.

Oh the irony.

Nowhere have I said that I won't play against Eldar for any reason.
Nowhere have I said that I "think bitching is the best and in fact only course of action"
You said I was "spending time bitching that I could use thinking up strategems" while you quoted a post defending Galanur's stance, who said "simply they dont have nothing else in life to keep em busy enough and have to sign these pathetic topic subjects."

I don't think it's completely unreasonable to assume that when defending his post you agree with it?

I don't think I'm being vitriolic in the least. The first comment from Chosen atleast in the past few pages is a direct attack on me. And I'm vitriolic in responding to it? Get off me.

I don't think it's completely unreasonable to assume that when defending a thread named "Ban Eldar from All Competitive Play" that you agree with it? Your posts in this thread have only been lambasting people who aren't complaining about Eldar/GW and painting yourself a victim for doing so. I don't know how else to see you other than what your posts have been..

Requizen wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

Requizen wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

Requizen wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

Requizen wrote:
not spent time bitching that I can spend thinking about strategems and modeling.

...and make it clear to people that you will not be bitching.

Just as you're making it clear to people that you think bitching is the best and in fact only course of action in your mind.

I have nowhere said that my time is too good for it. You have. I'm just pointing out the irony of making out like my side must be doing nothing with our lives to have time to reply here, but you for some reason manage to both post on a forum *and* have a life.

Where did I say you don't have a life? Don't put words into another person's mouth to try and play the victim card. We're both posting on a forum about a miniatures game and (presumably) spend a similar amount of time playing and doing the hobby. We have an equal amount of life/no life.

I'm just saying that you're choosing to use your time to be vitriolic and talk about how the only way to play the game is to remove all the things you don't like. I choose not to use my posting time like that. I've already posted for both my Daemon and Necron armies on what I think I can do to fight against Scatterbikes and Wraithknights, rather than using those posts to just say "ban it because I think it's too good".

 Chosen of Malal wrote:
GW is not concerned with your whining

And I'm not concerned with yours, yet you do it anyway. How are you any different?

This is the vitriol I'm talking about. This is a forum, everyone is allowed to post their opinions.

BUT, the truth of the matter is, posting online and saying that you won't play against Eldar because imba isn't going to make GW change anything. They don't care. They literally do not read your posts or this thread. And even if they did, they wouldn't care about it.

You can not care about Chosen's post. That doesn't make it any less true.

Oh the irony.

Nowhere have I said that I won't play against Eldar for any reason.
Nowhere have I said that I "think bitching is the best and in fact only course of action"
You said I was "spending time bitching that I could use thinking up strategems" while you quoted a post defending Galanur's stance, who said "simply they dont have nothing else in life to keep em busy enough and have to sign these pathetic topic subjects."

I don't think it's completely unreasonable to assume that when defending his post you agree with it?

I don't think I'm being vitriolic in the least. The first comment from Chosen atleast in the past few pages is a direct attack on me. And I'm vitriolic in responding to it? Get off me.

I don't think it's completely unreasonable to assume that when defending a thread named "Ban Eldar from All Competitive Play" that you agree with it? Your posts in this thread have only been lambasting people who aren't complaining about Eldar/GW and painting yourself a victim for doing so. I don't know how else to see you other than what your posts have been..

Just ignore the troll, we got plenty of em out even on our gaming lists and this 1 tries to come out as a victim " as always"
I for one despite I dont like some eldar entry I did enjoyed alot that special touch they gave to those banshees. last edition and current one I´ve used them regardless and now they gonna get even better, im fine with it as finally they gonna get something usefull...
Scatterbikes and such...all I care is that I know my oponent got enough weapons ap3 ignore cover or powers to do so that will blow these ones fast if they want to.
Wraith D weapons... handle it, D weapons on these have limited use, or its shoots without blasts like the big creep wraithknight, or very short range on the guard.

Im quite surprised on this as we´ve been eating our fill up with shadowswords, imperial knights, revenant titans and void grenades and people are just handling them fine.

Has anyone made a hitler downfall video talking about the new elder codex? I know he was depressed about the tyranid codex a few years back.

Requizen wrote:

I don't think it's completely unreasonable to assume that when defending a thread named "Ban Eldar from All Competitive Play" that you agree with it? Your posts in this thread have only been lambasting people who aren't complaining about Eldar/GW and painting yourself a victim for doing so. I don't know how else to see you other than what your posts have been..

No, you're right. If that had been the case then that wouldn't have been unreasonable. Except I haven't. I responded to a post saying the BRB being only half written or poorly written is fine even if the rules aren't any good.

So again your assumptions are simply wrong and you're putting words in my mouth. You yourself claimed that to be a great sin. And it's that irony I have been arguing since. The irony of everything you've been shouting.

Someone tells me I should "stop whining" and I tell him the same. You then argue I need to let him talk because it's a free forum. But what, his telling me to shut up is different... How?

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 koooaei wrote:

 Robisagg wrote:

 chazz huggins wrote:
I don't want Eldar gone I just want them all wimpy and soft like their supposed to be.

Except they're not. They have ancient, super powerful weaponry. They're a T3 army at its base, but their strength is in their mobility and weaponry.

I can't believe the kneejerk reactions to this codex. I for one am excited for the challenge.

On tabletop, they're t4, t6 and t8 army, however. With just a handful of t3 guyz in serpents.

Blame the game. So is everyone. When was the last time you saw non-vehicle models deployed on the table that weren't Artillery, Bikes, or Necrons?

I played against Tyranids and Jump BA recently. Does that count?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Akiasura wrote:
When people enter warmachine, we tell them it'll take 40-50 games before they start winning against anyone but a completely new player.

Yeah, because Warmachine has varying Objectives besides Caster Kill...

I don't think I'm being vitriolic in the least. The first comment from Chosen atleast in the past few pages is a direct attack on me. And I'm vitriolic in responding to it? Get off me.

Actually, my post was in response to the thread at large, you just made the assumption I was speaking directly to you. The only thing I said that made mention to you was that you had managed to come up with a smartass reply to nearly every post on said page.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 koooaei wrote:

 Robisagg wrote:

 chazz huggins wrote:
I don't want Eldar gone I just want them all wimpy and soft like their supposed to be.

Except they're not. They have ancient, super powerful weaponry. They're a T3 army at its base, but their strength is in their mobility and weaponry.

I can't believe the kneejerk reactions to this codex. I for one am excited for the challenge.

On tabletop, they're t4, t6 and t8 army, however. With just a handful of t3 guyz in serpents.

Blame the game. So is everyone. When was the last time you saw non-vehicle models deployed on the table that weren't Artillery, Bikes, or Necrons?

I played against Tyranids and Jump BA recently. Does that count?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Akiasura wrote:
When people enter warmachine, we tell them it'll take 40-50 games before they start winning against anyone but a completely new player.

Yeah, because Warmachine has varying Objectives besides Caster Kill...

They do, it is called scenario

In said scenario does killing the caster still result in instant victory?

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

Akiasura wrote:
When people enter warmachine, we tell them it'll take 40-50 games before they start winning against anyone but a completely new player.

Yeah, because Warmachine has varying Objectives besides Caster Kill...

What are you saying here? i love the different objectives and mission design in Warmachine.

 Chosen of Malal wrote:
In said scenario does killing the caster still result in instant victory?

Yes?
In maelstorm missions, does tabling your opponent result in victory?

I don't see your point here.

 Chosen of Malal wrote:

I don't think I'm being vitriolic in the least. The first comment from Chosen atleast in the past few pages is a direct attack on me. And I'm vitriolic in responding to it? Get off me.

Actually, my post was in response to the thread at large, you just made the assumption I was speaking directly to you. The only thing I said that made mention to you was that you had managed to come up with a smartass reply to nearly every post on said page.

Uh, yeah, that's what I was talking about. You called me out by name. You can't then say it's not for me. Stop being ridiculous.

Akiasura wrote:

 Chosen of Malal wrote:
In said scenario does killing the caster still result in instant victory?

Yes?
In maelstorm missions, does tabling your opponent result in victory?

I don't see your point here.

A better analogy would be Slay the Warlord resulting in victory.

 Morachi wrote:
To be fair, we've seen a number of armies have their few years in the past as well. At the current rate armies are getting new codex books released, others should come up to par in the near future - or at least the duration of power should cycle more frequently at the very least.

Maybe you missed it, but we already have several armies brought to "up to par" for 7th edition. Only Necrons and Eldar went over the top. But hey, let's wait for two years, then they will surely fix those armies! In the meanwhile we can just adapt and learn to play because it's all about skill.

Akiasura wrote:

 Chosen of Malal wrote:
In said scenario does killing the caster still result in instant victory?

Yes?
In maelstorm missions, does tabling your opponent result in victory?

I don't see your point here.

Indeed it does, the point is that it's a Hell of alot easier to kill a single model than the table an entire army. Now, if you were able to kill my warlord in a game and instantly win, that would be different. Scenarios are moot in a game that only requires you to take out a single model.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Purifier wrote:

 Chosen of Malal wrote:

I don't think I'm being vitriolic in the least. The first comment from Chosen atleast in the past few pages is a direct attack on me. And I'm vitriolic in responding to it? Get off me.

Actually, my post was in response to the thread at large, you just made the assumption I was speaking directly to you. The only thing I said that made mention to you was that you had managed to come up with a smartass reply to nearly every post on said page.

Uh, yeah, that's what I was talking about. You called me out by name. You can't then say it's not for me. Stop being ridiculous.

I called you out specifically for your smartass remarks to every post made on a page. To that, yes I was speaking solely to you. The rest is very generalized, perhaps you should go read it again? Everything I've seen thus far puts you being rather ridiculous as well.

Why not ban any army that has any sort of cheese? I've personally played and lost to many army's set up to defeat my Ulthwe Eldar, or my Ultramarines , I've also faced and beaten them. I didn't throw my toys out of the pram and start crying not fair, I found a way to beat what had beaten me. Oddly exactly what an army has to do I real life, eg Col. Colin Mitchell or Lt Gen Harold G Moore.

Akiasura wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

Akiasura wrote:
When people enter warmachine, we tell them it'll take 40-50 games before they start winning against anyone but a completely new player.

Yeah, because Warmachine has varying Objectives besides Caster Kill...

They do, it is called scenario

So much fail there.

The difference being that winning by Caster Kill is a lot easier than actually playing the scenario and its objectives, whereas 40k only gives a VP for killing the General. And tabling is not that easy - if WMH changed Caster Kill win to tabling, then it would be comparable.

If WMH is at a point whereby at least 80% of all tournament games are won on scenario objectives in lieu of caster kill, I'd accept WMH as something of a strategic game. Otherwise, it's just a glorified, yet mindless "kill Foozle".

 Chosen of Malal wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

 Chosen of Malal wrote:
In said scenario does killing the caster still result in instant victory?

Yes?
In maelstorm missions, does tabling your opponent result in victory?

I don't see your point here.

Indeed it does, the point is that it's a Hell of alot easier to kill a single model than the table an entire army. Now, if you were able to kill my warlord in a game and instantly win, that would be different. Scenarios are moot in a game that only requires you to take out a single model.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Purifier wrote:

 Chosen of Malal wrote:

I don't think I'm being vitriolic in the least. The first comment from Chosen atleast in the past few pages is a direct attack on me. And I'm vitriolic in responding to it? Get off me.

Actually, my post was in response to the thread at large, you just made the assumption I was speaking directly to you. The only thing I said that made mention to you was that you had managed to come up with a smartass reply to nearly every post on said page.

Uh, yeah, that's what I was talking about. You called me out by name. You can't then say it's not for me. Stop being ridiculous.

I called you out specifically for your smartass remarks to every post made on a page. To that, yes I was speaking solely to you. The rest is very generalized, perhaps you should go read it again? Everything I've seen thus far puts you being rather ridiculous as well.

I'm guessing you don't play warmachine.
Edenny and Haley 2 are regarded as the strongest casters in the game because they win on objectives, not caster kills.
You may want to learn the game before you make sweeping generalizations that even a glance at the competitive armies in that game would show is false.

 Chosen of Malal wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

 Chosen of Malal wrote:
In said scenario does killing the caster still result in instant victory?

Yes?
In maelstorm missions, does tabling your opponent result in victory?

I don't see your point here.

Indeed it does, the point is that it's a Hell of alot easier to kill a single model than the table an entire army. Now, if you were able to kill my warlord in a game and instantly win, that would be different. Scenarios are moot in a game that only requires you to take out a single model.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Purifier wrote:

 Chosen of Malal wrote:

I don't think I'm being vitriolic in the least. The first comment from Chosen atleast in the past few pages is a direct attack on me. And I'm vitriolic in responding to it? Get off me.

Actually, my post was in response to the thread at large, you just made the assumption I was speaking directly to you. The only thing I said that made mention to you was that you had managed to come up with a smartass reply to nearly every post on said page.

Uh, yeah, that's what I was talking about. You called me out by name. You can't then say it's not for me. Stop being ridiculous.

I called you out specifically for your smartass remarks to every post made on a page. To that, yes I was speaking solely to you. The rest is very generalized, perhaps you should go read it again? Everything I've seen thus far puts you being rather ridiculous as well.

What is your point exactly? That you only insulted me directly a little and that the other is lesser because I get to share it?

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

Akiasura wrote:
When people enter warmachine, we tell them it'll take 40-50 games before they start winning against anyone but a completely new player.

Yeah, because Warmachine has varying Objectives besides Caster Kill...

They do, it is called scenario

So much fail there.

The difference being that winning by Caster Kill is a lot easier than actually playing the scenario and its objectives, whereas 40k only gives a VP for killing the General. And tabling is not that easy - if WMH changed Caster Kill win to tabling, then it would be comparable.

If WMH is at a point whereby at least 80% of all tournament games are won on scenario objectives in lieu of caster kill, I'd accept WMH as something of a strategic game. Otherwise, it's just a glorified, yet mindless "kill Foozle".

Your ignorance of warmachine is astounding.

 MWHistorian wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

Akiasura wrote:
When people enter warmachine, we tell them it'll take 40-50 games before they start winning against anyone but a completely new player.

Yeah, because Warmachine has varying Objectives besides Caster Kill...

They do, it is called scenario

So much fail there.

The difference being that winning by Caster Kill is a lot easier than actually playing the scenario and its objectives, whereas 40k only gives a VP for killing the General. And tabling is not that easy - if WMH changed Caster Kill win to tabling, then it would be comparable.

If WMH is at a point whereby at least 80% of all tournament games are won on scenario objectives in lieu of caster kill, I'd accept WMH as something of a strategic game. Otherwise, it's just a glorified, yet mindless "kill Foozle".

Your ignorance of warmachine is astounding.

It's not at 80%, no, but the 2 strongest casters do play that way. Many, in fact, play that way.

Considering your extremely limited knowledge of competitive 40k, I am not surprised you are unable to look at a much deeper more complicated game and see it for what it is.
40k does not give VP for killing the general btw. It's all random missions all the time now.

It's not all Maelstrom all the time - only 1/6 of the time.

My point, Purifier, is that it's not all about you, and there are other people involved in the thread.

yellowfever wrote:
The only thing I've always disliked is any army that can expand itself past the agreed point limit. Say we playing 2000 points. Daemons go first and spawn 200 extra points worth.

Now it's my turn and I got my 2000 points against your 2200 points. It may get worse or maybe I'll kill more/ you won't spawn as much. But the point is the army can break the agreed point limit. Or stick around better.

Except that army has essentially forfeited first turn advantage and invested a significant chunk of points into units that will do nothing but summon. You could instead complain that Tau going first essentially reduces your point limit by 200 so you're forced to play 1800 against 2000 points but that's not really important.

Also, is Slay the Warlord not always a secondary objective?

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
It's not all Maelstrom all the time - only 1/6 of the time.

My mistake, you are right.

The fact remains, that the objectives for this game are determined randomly at the start of the game. The missions in maelstorm, are generated randomly. Sometimes you can not achieve the objective outlined. You can not plan for them in advance since they are unknown. You generally want fast tough units to take and hold, and them having objective secured is nice but not a requirement.

Just like saying Caster kills is all it is, is wrong. Very wrong. Without scenario someone can sit in the back and just gunline for days. This is not currently the case in WMH.
Killing a caster, unless the opponent is brand new, is very hard to do (unless it's edenny...who is one of the strongest casters in the game, but dies to a stiff breeze).

Tabling someone in 40k isn't as hard as tabling is in WMH. Some armies are attrition based, where they whittle an enemy down heavily before killing the caster.

I seriously can not believe anyone thinks 40k is a more complex game then WMH. Or harder to play. Tabling in 40k is quite common if both players are fielding good armies...the casualties are just immense since firepower is so long ranged and strong.

I wish Warmachine players would just go play Warmachine and stop continually comparing it to 40k. If Warmachine is so much better, go play it and stop complaining about 40k.

 Chosen of Malal wrote:
I wish Warmachine players would just go play Warmachine and stop continually comparing it to 40k. If Warmachine is so much better, go play it and stop complaining about 40k.

People play both, and it's an apt comparison. So long as they're not trying to convince people to quit 40k or being aggressively antagonistic about it, I don't see the problem with comparing them.

They aren't comparing them, they exalt Warmachine and complain about 40k.

 Chosen of Malal wrote:
I wish Warmachine players would just go play Warmachine and stop continually comparing it to 40k. If Warmachine is so much better, go play it and stop complaining about 40k.

So what do we get to compare 40k as a wargame to? Or do we not compare it to anything and stick our fingers in our ears while we happily throw our money at whatever GW drops on us?

 Chosen of Malal wrote:
They aren't comparing them, they exalt Warmachine and complain about 40k.

For very valid reasons.

Requizen wrote:

 Chosen of Malal wrote:
I wish Warmachine players would just go play Warmachine and stop continually comparing it to 40k. If Warmachine is so much better, go play it and stop complaining about 40k.

People play both, and it's an apt comparison. So long as they're not trying to convince people to quit 40k or being aggressively antagonistic about it, I don't see the problem with comparing them.

I think this is a pretty small group. Most people who complain about 40k here make a point of saying that they haven't been playing 40k for quite a while. You get a lot of "I quit 40k a year ago and I haven't looked back... [insert game here] is so much better." Which is fantastic for them; I'm happy they have a new game, but they can't seem to let go of GW, and feel obliged to come back and tell everyone who actually enjoys 40k how they must be mindless sheep because [insert game here] is just so much better in every way, models, company, rules and all

There are occasionally people who post saying they're quitting because they're fed up of playing against a faction, or fed up with playing against a particular sort of player. But those are a tiny percentage of posts, and if they really quit, they rarely come back.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mozzyfuzzy wrote:

 Chosen of Malal wrote:
I wish Warmachine players would just go play Warmachine and stop continually comparing it to 40k. If Warmachine is so much better, go play it and stop complaining about 40k.

So what do we get to compare 40k as a wargame to? Or do we not compare it to anything and stick our fingers in our ears while we happily throw our money at whatever GW drops on us?

I don't like Warmachines because the nicest tables look like this:


and most tables look a lot more like this -- or worse:


I haven't played a 40k table that looked like that for 20+ years. I just could never do it.

This is what I want to see!!!


Even your average 40k table looks much more impressive (and my average games look way, way, way better than this):

 Chosen of Malal wrote:
They aren't comparing them, they exalt Warmachine and complain about 40k.

I still play all the GW specialist games, and own over 20k in 40k models.
I like to think owning that many models in 40k alone, never mind my 3 fantasy armies, allows me to comment in whatever way I want.
I've also been playing for 20 years.
I can say that I don't like it when people make false assumptions about warmachine when it's obvious they don't know a thing about the game. Like not knowing scenarios are a thing or how important they are.



Talys (sp?),
I'm not going to quote your post because it's massive, but I'll be the first to admit that if you love modelling and conversions 40k beats the hell out of warmachine. I also like the RPGs better in 40k then in warmachine (though 40k itself is not a rpg). FFG makes some great games that have been a pleasure to play, especially since I am not the biggest DnD fan.
I also freely admit I'm not much of a painter or converter (a friend paints most of my stuff outside of specialist games), I'm more of a gamer. So I like Warmachine. It has flaws, certain armies have hard match ups though nothing like 40k, but overall I enjoy it.

Codex 100% confirmed more pics.

Sky has been confirmed to have made contact with the ground.

Well, the issue with comparing Warmachine to any sort of wargame is that it plays more like Magic: The Gathering, than an actual wargame. It's just about comboing abilities off of each of your models. That was even stated in an earlier reply in this thread by a Warmachine player. "I ask my opponent what combos his units do before each game." I believe is how it went. My point in all this is if you have nothing but complaints about 40k, but you like Warmachine, stop playing 40k.

They're both miniature tabletop battle games. They're absolutely comparable.

Akiasura wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
It's not all Maelstrom all the time - only 1/6 of the time.

My mistake, you are right.

The fact remains, that the objectives for this game are determined randomly at the start of the game. The missions in maelstorm, are generated randomly. Sometimes you can not achieve the objective outlined. You can not plan for them in advance since they are unknown. You generally want fast tough units to take and hold, and them having objective secured is nice but not a requirement.

Just like saying Caster kills is all it is, is wrong. Very wrong. Without scenario someone can sit in the back and just gunline for days. This is not currently the case in WMH.
Killing a caster, unless the opponent is brand new, is very hard to do (unless it's edenny...who is one of the strongest casters in the game, but dies to a stiff breeze).

Tabling someone in 40k isn't as hard as tabling is in WMH. Some armies are attrition based, where they whittle an enemy down heavily before killing the caster.

I seriously can not believe anyone thinks 40k is a more complex game then WMH. Or harder to play. Tabling in 40k is quite common if both players are fielding good armies...the casualties are just immense since firepower is so long ranged and strong.

Maelstrom necessarily exists as a balancing counterpoint to pure Kill Points, and neither "scenario" makes for a particuarly good game. Kill Points lack dimension, while Maelstrom is overly reactive. Both can be planned for, to some extent, and represent good examples of what happens when an army overly sacrifices mobility & holding for pure combat power.

Caster Kill is always present, but should it be? Same thing with Tabling in 40k? Is that really how either game should be?

I'm not sure that either game is necessarily "better", but I do believe 40k is more complex, based on the total current volume of rules printed. IMO, 40k is now over-complicated with too much rules detail.

Funny how that one picture of a Warmachine table has GW terrain on it.

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

 Chosen of Malal wrote:
In said scenario does killing the caster still result in instant victory?

Yes?
In maelstorm missions, does tabling your opponent result in victory?

I don't see your point here.

A better analogy would be Slay the Warlord resulting in victory.

Well back when I played WHFB if you lost your general every unit had to take a morale check or flee...

Am I doing this right?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Chosen of Malal wrote:
Funny how that one picture of a Warmachine table has GW terrain on it.

What does this have to do with anything?

Also, yes the terrain has been brought up as a concern but that's also because the gameplay is more important than visuals and too much terrain reduces tactical viability. 40k terrain is basically just to block LOS due to the huge range on guns (keep in mind a standard Warmachine table is 4x4, so most guns in 40k could shoot halfway across the table and heavy weapons can shoot the entire table). The longest range in Warmachine, discounting one's movement, is IIRC 20" and that tends to be on artillery that can't move and fire (equivalent to heavy weapon in 40k)

I'm a sucker for how good 40k looks too. I was drawn to the minis when a friend first showed me a few years ago, and how great they look on the table top.

Talys, I love that diroamma. What I would do to have terrain like that!

 Talys wrote:
[

Even your average 40k table looks much more impressive (and my average games look way, way, way better than this):

]

Do they really? Can you state for a fact that that what you display is an 'average' game of 40k? As hugely impressive as it is, it doesn't match my own experiences of the game. With respect talys - you are an outlier in the hobby. By your own admissions in the past, You spend vastly more time and money and effort on the hobby than most gamers (not a criticism by the way). Your 'average' isn't everyone else's 'average'. Not everyone has the time, interest, money, space and desire to invest in a games terrain. This is as true for 40k as WMH.

Ymmv. If seen more than my share of unpainted 40k armies (you know, the grey legions), and I've seen more than my share of games if 40k taking place either on planet bowling ball, or with minimal terrain (two hills, a ruin and som walls). I've seen some fantastic customised WMH boards, especially in no quarter.

Ironically, the terrain density of the WMH board you dismiss seems quite similar to that of the last 40k board - it's just that the game of 40k is on a 12 by 6 rather than 4 by 4.

 Chosen of Malal wrote:
Well, the issue with comparing Warmachine to any sort of wargame is that it plays more like Magic: The Gathering, than an actual wargame. It's just about comboing abilities off of each of your models. That was even stated in an earlier reply in this thread by a Warmachine player. "I ask my opponent what combos his units do before each game." I believe is how it went. My point in all this is if you have nothing but complaints about 40k, but you like Warmachine, stop playing 40k.

My first game was Warmachines. I got talked out of Warhammer 40,000 because I really didn't have that much time to build an army. But now that I'm playing Warhammer, I'm sure that I enjoy it a lot more. Maybe some of it has to do with just the players -- I sort of get along with the Warhammer guys better at my local store.

The two games have some things in common, and comparisons between the two aren't horrible, but they are just different games that just both have miniatures.

I get rules wrong all the time and I lose all the time. A lot more than I win. But still, I really love Warhammer, and my Orks are just awesome... even though they seem to die to everything hahahaha.

Deadnight wrote:

 Talys wrote:
[

Even your average 40k table looks much more impressive (and my average games look way, way, way better than this):

]

Do they really? Can you state for a fact that that what you display is an 'average' game of 40k? As hugely impressive as it is, it doesn't match my own experiences of the game.

Ymmv. If seen more than my share of unpainted 40k armies (you know, the grey legions), and I've seen more than my share of games if 40k taking place either on planet bowling ball, or with minimal terrain (two hills, a ruin and som walls). I've seen some fantastic customised WMH boards, especially in no quarter.

Ironically, the terrain density of the WMH board you dismiss seems quite similar to that of the last 40k board - it's just that the game of 40k is on a 12 by 6 rather than 4 by 4.

You misunderstand me: *MY* average game looks a lot better than the last photo I linked. I would post a pic of one of my tables, but I value my privacy, and doing so would share who I am and what my home looks like to the world

You actually made my point for me: the 40k game on a 12x6 just looks better than the WMH board on 4x4, even though there's nothing special about the 40k game. Why? More stuff. More models. Bigger models. It doesn't take any extra effort to make 40k look great, even for casual players.

 Chosen of Malal wrote:
Well, the issue with comparing Warmachine to any sort of wargame is that it plays more like Magic: The Gathering, than an actual wargame. It's just about comboing abilities off of each of your models. That was even stated in an earlier reply in this thread by a Warmachine player. "I ask my opponent what combos his units do before each game." I believe is how it went. My point in all this is if you have nothing but complaints about 40k, but you like Warmachine, stop playing 40k.

That's a pretty gross simplification of how it works.
In Magic, as long as I have the cards in my hand/on the field I can combo. Unless you have an interrupt it always works.

Let's take the Molik missile. It's a classic combo, and something a veteran can see coming.

First, I must activate my caster before Molik. Both Molik and my caster must not have anything blocking their walking distance, because models can't move through friendlies like in 40k without a special rule.

My caster must then cast leash, a ctrl spell, and pop her feat. Before that, she must walk forward and be in front of Molik. She must have enough fury to do so, so my beasts better not be dead or I'm cutting myself, and she had better be safe in case this fails. She must also be within a set distance from the enemy warcaster, because Molik can't use a lot of his abilities if he's too far away from her. Spacing is key in WMH when compared to 40k.

My gladiator activates, and hopefully shields my caster, while casting rush on Molik. Molik must still be free to walk at this point.

My beast handlers activate and give molik enrage. They must be within 3" of him to do so. They need to not get killed since they are critical to my army and this doesn't always work.

Molik then charges a target. The target must be within 6" of the enemy warcaster and have an exposed flank. I have probably used ranged abilities or drag to create this exposed flank.

Molik hits somebody. He side steps 2" and is ignoring freestrikes, so he dances around the model and pushes away. He has reach but must be within 2" of another model.

Molik does it again. At this point he must be within 2" of the enemy warcaster or Molik is most likely going to die. He must also be within 12" of my caster, or he is done and is now dead.

Molik then swings at the enemy, buying attacks for 1 fury. He is strength 15+3d6 with Mat 7. He has foresight, so can see die rolls before deciding to boost.
3 fury later, I must decide if I am going to commit or fatewalker out and try to save him. To save him, I move infantry in such a way that molik can walk between them (his base must fit) while still being covered by reach (I use nilhators for this most of the time).


This is vastly more complicated then anything I have done in 40k and is a relatively simple move. Compared to Goreshade 3 or Body and Soul tier for denny, it's a very simple combo. Hardly like magic at all. You should see an ecaine caster kill run, it's pretty nuts. Or a bradigus 3 teleport caster kill (which is illegal now, but wow was it complicated).
Even the guy who was talking about CoC vastly oversimplified things. CoC generates focus in a weird way. He didn't mention what his jacks Mat/Rat is, or how it changes based on the caster he brings. He didn't mention how his order of activation is critical and that screwing with it hurts that faction badly, like menoth.

Who plays on 12x6 boards? Who plays with dioramas?

 Vaktathi wrote:
Who plays on 12x6 boards? Who plays with dioramas?

I have an apocalypse game next month where we play on a 18 x 6 board. Cant wait to bring out my 20,500 points of eldar as the apocalypse games where I am at are "Bring everything you own and we will sort teams based on points".


Automatically Appended Next Post:
although with point boost to certain units on the board (my 4 wraithknights and all 30 of my bikes getting scatter lasers) it might be closer to 21000

Anyone want to hazard a guess as to what percent of Xerics posts don't mention he has over 20,000 points of Eldar?

 Xerics wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
Who plays on 12x6 boards? Who plays with dioramas?

I have an apocalypse game next month where we play on a 18 x 6 board. Cant wait to bring out my 20,500 points of eldar as the apocalypse games where I am at are "Bring everything you own and we will sort teams based on points".


Automatically Appended Next Post:
although with point boost to certain units on the board (my 4 wraithknights and all 30 of my bikes getting scatter lasers) it might be closer to 21000

I've done this too, to be fair. The most competitive player at our area, who is a good friend, has a 3D printer and does some amazing works. The battles look amazing.
The gameplay is dull, since turns end up taking forever, but it's really cool to see everything placed down and take pictures. I usually play Necromunda while it's going on.

My Alpha legion is about 20k in points. I think I can put out that many Eldar though I haven't checked the 6th edition codex. My SW army is all lone wolves to make them the 13th company and can easily breach 50k.
It's a good looking hobby.

Seeing as how it is in my signature block? 0

@Aki: That's great, all those combos sure sound alot like Magic to me.

 Xerics wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
Who plays on 12x6 boards? Who plays with dioramas?

I have an apocalypse game next month where we play on a 18 x 6 board. Cant wait to bring out my 20,500 points of eldar as the apocalypse games where I am at are "Bring everything you own and we will sort teams based on points".


Automatically Appended Next Post:
although with point boost to certain units on the board (my 4 wraithknights and all 30 of my bikes getting scatter lasers) it might be closer to 21000

Yeah, I mean, I've played on similarly sized boards for apoc games in the past, but it's like a once or twice a year thing, not a routine game

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Xerics wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
Who plays on 12x6 boards? Who plays with dioramas?

I have an apocalypse game next month where we play on a 18 x 6 board. Cant wait to bring out my 20,500 points of eldar as the apocalypse games where I am at are "Bring everything you own and we will sort teams based on points".


Automatically Appended Next Post:
although with point boost to certain units on the board (my 4 wraithknights and all 30 of my bikes getting scatter lasers) it might be closer to 21000

Yeah, I mean, I've played on similarly sized boards for apoc games in the past, but it's like a once or twice a year thing, not a routine game

I wish i could get more larger games like this though. Single biggest 1v1 game I ever had was 6500 points on an 8x4 table


Automatically Appended Next Post:
My local area only has it once a year. makes me sad.

 Vaktathi wrote:
Who plays on 12x6 boards? Who plays with dioramas?

I'll be honest... I wish I did. I mean, I really WANT to start 40k again. But threads like this, seeing how little GW care about the game, the constant price hikes make me just go feth it, why bother. And I play Warmachine, and it still feels "off" to me. Could be nostalgia, I mean i still remember most of the oldschool 40k history and have very fond memories reading White Dwarf and thinking of what to buy. Just the state of the game now is beyond broken IMHO that I can't in good conscious convince myself to spend that kind of money.

I'm the kind of customer GW should want: I get really involved in the lore and the game and I used to love seeing what's new. I know I would have opponents (i'm on a FB group that people are alwys talking about getting together for 40k). But I won't spend a dime because GW has shown they don't care about having a good game.

 Xerics wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Xerics wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
Who plays on 12x6 boards? Who plays with dioramas?

I have an apocalypse game next month where we play on a 18 x 6 board. Cant wait to bring out my 20,500 points of eldar as the apocalypse games where I am at are "Bring everything you own and we will sort teams based on points".


Automatically Appended Next Post:
although with point boost to certain units on the board (my 4 wraithknights and all 30 of my bikes getting scatter lasers) it might be closer to 21000

Yeah, I mean, I've played on similarly sized boards for apoc games in the past, but it's like a once or twice a year thing, not a routine game

I wish i could get more larger games like this though. Single biggest 1v1 game I ever had was 6500 points on an 8x4 table


Automatically Appended Next Post:
My local area only has it once a year. makes me sad.

You forge the gak out of that narrative!

 Chosen of Malal wrote:
That's great, all those combos sure sound alot like Magic to me.

That's...one combo.
It involves careful positioning, risk assessment, and work being done prior successfully just to launch. I can die from it. At any point, dice can fail me.
No combo in Magic works that way.

That's like saying 40k is like tower defense because the ranges are so large I can just sit still and shoot across a table. It's a very dishonest picture that doesn't do the true game justice.

 Chosen of Malal wrote:

 Xerics wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Xerics wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
Who plays on 12x6 boards? Who plays with dioramas?

I have an apocalypse game next month where we play on a 18 x 6 board. Cant wait to bring out my 20,500 points of eldar as the apocalypse games where I am at are "Bring everything you own and we will sort teams based on points".


Automatically Appended Next Post:
although with point boost to certain units on the board (my 4 wraithknights and all 30 of my bikes getting scatter lasers) it might be closer to 21000

Yeah, I mean, I've played on similarly sized boards for apoc games in the past, but it's like a once or twice a year thing, not a routine game

I wish i could get more larger games like this though. Single biggest 1v1 game I ever had was 6500 points on an 8x4 table


Automatically Appended Next Post:
My local area only has it once a year. makes me sad.

You forge the gak out of that narrative!

Lol I didnt have to forge a narrative. We used 2 CAD each and put out 6500 Eldar vs 6500 Orks.

 Gamgee wrote:
The only way to get a message through to the big GW that this is completely unacceptable way to make a codex is to throw up a gak storm. The biggest way to do that? Well show them we won't even play with them. I know I intend to. Many of my players in my local FLGS intend to. Though I need to convince them to ban them from tournaments all together. The more the Eldar players complain and bitch about us complaining and bitching about their so obviously broken and favoritism codex the faster we can wrap this up. It's going to get messy before the end though. These half measures and trying to be "reasonable" with GW and even a certain subset of Eldar players is clearly not working. So it's time to kick things up a notch.

Can I at least get people who will agree to no games with them?

If there are any Eldar players out there with any remorse or guilt for the entire health of the game and 40k scene I implore you to do one of two things. Cheese the ever loving gak out of your codex and get yourself loathed and banned. Or don't play at all. Thanks.

As always the bigger we make this the quicker we'll get an answer.

Thanks. Remember cause mayhem. This Eldar Codex can't be allowed to stand.

I Gamgee swear to throw up a gak storm and use any method possible to get GW attention.

Edit
Since I started this thread and including myself there are four people who will no longer play against Eldar players. All it takes is a little team work. I'll continue to update this.
If I missed your name send me a PM or let me know in the thread and I'll add it.

Operation Members:
Gamgee
Orock
Torga_DW
Rippy

I just wanted to point out that after all of this, four people in total have agreed to this. Way to hit GW in the pocket, boys.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Akiasura wrote:

 Chosen of Malal wrote:
That's great, all those combos sure sound alot like Magic to me.

That's...one combo.
It involves careful positioning, risk assessment, and work being done prior successfully just to launch. I can die from it. At any point, dice can fail me.
No combo in Magic works that way.

That's like saying 40k is like tower defense because the ranges are so large I can just sit still and shoot across a table. It's a very dishonest picture that doesn't do the true game justice.

Not true at all, you stated several combos in all that, not just one.

 Chosen of Malal wrote:

 Gamgee wrote:
The only way to get a message through to the big GW that this is completely unacceptable way to make a codex is to throw up a gak storm. The biggest way to do that? Well show them we won't even play with them. I know I intend to. Many of my players in my local FLGS intend to. Though I need to convince them to ban them from tournaments all together. The more the Eldar players complain and bitch about us complaining and bitching about their so obviously broken and favoritism codex the faster we can wrap this up. It's going to get messy before the end though. These half measures and trying to be "reasonable" with GW and even a certain subset of Eldar players is clearly not working. So it's time to kick things up a notch.

Can I at least get people who will agree to no games with them?

If there are any Eldar players out there with any remorse or guilt for the entire health of the game and 40k scene I implore you to do one of two things. Cheese the ever loving gak out of your codex and get yourself loathed and banned. Or don't play at all. Thanks.

As always the bigger we make this the quicker we'll get an answer.

Thanks. Remember cause mayhem. This Eldar Codex can't be allowed to stand.

I Gamgee swear to throw up a gak storm and use any method possible to get GW attention.

Edit
Since I started this thread and including myself there are four people who will no longer play against Eldar players. All it takes is a little team work. I'll continue to update this.
If I missed your name send me a PM or let me know in the thread and I'll add it.

Operation Members:
Gamgee
Orock
Torga_DW
Rippy

I just wanted to point out that after all of this, four people in total have agreed to this. Way to hit GW in the pocket, boys.

I like how the thread is about banning Eldar from tournaments and stuff. When Imperial Knights came out I was glad someone in the store would bring 5 to a 2000 point battle... I played against that army all the time and learned how to beat it. Instead of crying about Eldar be glad there is an Eldar player near you so you will get lots of practice

 Gamgee wrote:

 raiden wrote:
No need for this. Just stop buying the OP models. GW isn't going to listen until we cause them a LOT of monetary loss. Boycott would-be a better course

Statistically speaking boycotts almost never work. Only throwing a gak storm causes people to pay attention. There's been a few studies showing this. Although if we throw a gak storm AND boycott even better. Why bring a knife to a fight when you can bring a knife and a gun.

I think the odds of changing past behavior (a codex) are much less than changing future behavior if your idea were 100% successful. What will most likely change is the codex on the drawing board right now in the case of a complete success of your advocated plan.

Akiasura wrote:

 Chosen of Malal wrote:
That's great, all those combos sure sound alot like Magic to me.

That's...one combo.
It involves careful positioning, risk assessment, and work being done prior successfully just to launch. I can die from it. At any point, dice can fail me.
No combo in Magic works that way.

That's like saying 40k is like tower defense because the ranges are so large I can just sit still and shoot across a table. It's a very dishonest picture that doesn't do the true game justice.

Magic DCI judge and tourney player here. You apparently haven't seen some of the more intense magic combos like mind's desire and enduring ideal/zur's weirding.

There are all kinds of complications and decision trees even while the combo is going off. That's why people playing hard combo decks practice them a ton. One of the times I made finalist in a PTQ, the guy I beat to get in top 8 ran mind's desire, got messed up by a draw he couldn't string into the combo, mana burned for 2 (back when that was a thing) which brought his life down to the exact total of direct damage I had in hand:

 Chosen of Malal wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Akiasura wrote:

 Chosen of Malal wrote:
That's great, all those combos sure sound alot like Magic to me.

That's...one combo.
It involves careful positioning, risk assessment, and work being done prior successfully just to launch. I can die from it. At any point, dice can fail me.
No combo in Magic works that way.

That's like saying 40k is like tower defense because the ranges are so large I can just sit still and shoot across a table. It's a very dishonest picture that doesn't do the true game justice.

Not true at all, you stated several combos in all that, not just one.

Very true, this is one combo called the Molik Missile. If any part of the combo fails, the whole thing falls apart and you lose a very expensive warbeast and are down on attrition. I don't know how you could call it multiple combos.
If I play multiple cards in magic, it is one combo even though I did multiple actions. Same in any fighting game. But the difficultly and input required to pull off a combo in each of those games is dramatically different. 40k has combos too, they are just a lot easier then this to pull off.

You also failed to comment on the fact that it requires dice rolls, can fail, I can die from it, I need risk assessment, and my enemy can do a lot to stop it. This isn't even a competitive combo, most good opponents can counter it.


Edit;
niv-mizzet, so the player got screwed by a draw? So risk assessment is a thing, I haven't played magic since it first released.
Please tell me all the careful positioning he did and how his enemy managed to stop him by carefully positioning his cards.
Oh and the die rolls. I missed those too in your description.

Akiasura wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:

You make it sound so easy for someone to pick up and army and master the rules. I don't know if this is true for everyone.

It should take around 10 games. This is a pretty small learning curve compared to shooting games, fighting games, MOBAs, and other table tops.

Really? People need that many games to just master rules and a single army? Either that is a hyperbole or everyone I play with is incredibly smart. And personally I found Warmachine, FoW and Dystopian Wars all easier to learn than 40k. 40k takes more time to master due to the sheer amount of rules.

You are the first person I have ever heard to claim that.

No, you heard that from me previously in this thread.

Akiasura wrote:
I don't think you can claim that 10 games is a long time to master 40k's rules, then say it's a complex game, and then say WMH should take even less times. Those statements contradict each other.

I think WMH takes a lot less time to learn, it's a much simpler game. There are fewer things you can do as a player.

Akiasura wrote:

In WMH, just knowing how to mitigate different feats, what pathfinder and eyeless sight can do, how weird CoC is, how annoying Menoth's Choir can be, and the crazyness of the teleport circle has can take a while to master. Learning how to utilize focus and mitigate fury and how each caster plays takes a very very long time.

This is a much shorter list than the one I laid out previously about core concepts for playing 40k. Are you reading what you are writing?

Anyways, the new Eldar Codex doesn't worry me because it does take an experienced player to handle an OP list in 40k. It's never been a game where you can just buy and army and win consistently.

People who claim otherwise tend to engage in specious arguments and use a lot of words without saying much.

 techsoldaten wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:

You make it sound so easy for someone to pick up and army and master the rules. I don't know if this is true for everyone.

It should take around 10 games. This is a pretty small learning curve compared to shooting games, fighting games, MOBAs, and other table tops.

Really? People need that many games to just master rules and a single army? Either that is a hyperbole or everyone I play with is incredibly smart. And personally I found Warmachine, FoW and Dystopian Wars all easier to learn than 40k. 40k takes more time to master due to the sheer amount of rules.

You are the first person I have ever heard to claim that.

No, you heard that from me previously in this thread.

Akiasura wrote:
I don't think you can claim that 10 games is a long time to master 40k's rules, then say it's a complex game, and then say WMH should take even less times. Those statements contradict each other.

I think WMH takes a lot less time to learn, it's a much simpler game. There are fewer things you can do as a player.

Akiasura wrote:

In WMH, just knowing how to mitigate different feats, what pathfinder and eyeless sight can do, how weird CoC is, how annoying Menoth's Choir can be, and the crazyness of the teleport circle has can take a while to master. Learning how to utilize focus and mitigate fury and how each caster plays takes a very very long time.

This is a much shorter list than the one I laid out previously about core concepts for playing 40k. Are you reading what you are writing?

Well, I didn't want to lay them all out, but if list size is a thing;
Weapon lock
Throw
Headbutt
Crippling cortex
Combo Strike
Rough Terrain
Walls
Generate terrain via tiers
Upkeeps
Ctrl spells
Purification
Pass out focus or hold
Leech fury from beasts
Heal beasts
Trample
Feat
Mini-feat
Run
Charge
Aim
CMA
CRA
Measure ctrl area
Promote grunts to leaders
Covering fire
Summon storm pods
Teleport
Revive troopers, who may get to activate again
Go incorp or not
Cast animi
Arc node
Boost
Buy attacks
And just for fun, deployment and terrain utilization.
Also, walk through walls or units, because some guys can do that.
Oh, some units can cast spells. Not just the caster as well.

I'm not going to list everything everyone can do, because it's a huge list. Units in WMH do a lot more then 40k.

 techsoldaten wrote:

Anyways, the new Eldar Codex doesn't worry me because it does take an experienced player to handle an OP list in 40k. It's never been a game where you can just buy and army and win consistently.

People who claim otherwise tend to engage in specious arguments and use a lot of words without saying much.

In coming personal attack because you can't back up your point....

Editions are defined by lists. Lists that are OP and have swept tables. Most experienced players are well aware of them, and they are given names. While a completely new player will struggle to win, it doesn't take long to become a veteran.

 Talys wrote:

You misunderstand me: *MY* average game looks a lot better than the last photo I linked. I would post a pic of one of my tables, but I value my privacy, and doing so would share who I am and what my home looks like to the world

You actually made my point for me: the 40k game on a 12x6 just looks better than the WMH board on 4x4, even though there's nothing special about the 40k game. Why? More stuff. More models. Bigger models. It doesn't take any extra effort to make 40k look great, even for casual players.

Like I said, that's not an 'average' game. Most average games if 40k I've seen are with a bare minimum of terrain as well, typically on a 4 by 4 or 6 by 4, and not on an epic 12 by 6 board. Remember - you are not a good indicator of whatt constitutes 'average'.

It doesn't take any extra afford to make 40k look great? True. Except for the part where it does take a lot of extra effort. Time. Money. Physical work. Epic boards don't just happen by themselves. I prefer painting models; my friend loves making terrain - and he's really good at it. All his boards age terrain pieces involve a huge amount of time and work on his part. And like I said, not everyone has the time, resources or space to to that.

The Ability for 40k look good on an average board (6 by 4, or 4 by 4) applies equally to WMH. 40k is not unique.

Akiasura wrote:

 Chosen of Malal wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Akiasura wrote:

 Chosen of Malal wrote:
That's great, all those combos sure sound alot like Magic to me.

That's...one combo.
It involves careful positioning, risk assessment, and work being done prior successfully just to launch. I can die from it. At any point, dice can fail me.
No combo in Magic works that way.

That's like saying 40k is like tower defense because the ranges are so large I can just sit still and shoot across a table. It's a very dishonest picture that doesn't do the true game justice.

Not true at all, you stated several combos in all that, not just one.

Very true, this is one combo called the Molik Missile. If any part of the combo fails, the whole thing falls apart and you lose a very expensive warbeast and are down on attrition. I don't know how you could call it multiple combos.
If I play multiple cards in magic, it is one combo even though I did multiple actions. Same in any fighting game. But the difficultly and input required to pull off a combo in each of those games is dramatically different. 40k has combos too, they are just a lot easier then this to pull off.

You also failed to comment on the fact that it requires dice rolls, can fail, I can die from it, I need risk assessment, and my enemy can do a lot to stop it. This isn't even a competitive combo, most good opponents can counter it.


Edit;
niv-mizzet, so the player got screwed by a draw? So risk assessment is a thing, I haven't played magic since it first released.
Please tell me all the careful positioning he did and how his enemy managed to stop him by carefully positioning his cards.
Oh and the die rolls. I missed those too in your description.

Well, ignoring the snark, card draws are functionally the same as dice rolls. His combo involves getting random cards off his deck after a shuffle, and of course he has many copies of all the cards that can keep the combo going. The issue is how many cards he gets to draw on the first combo starter. So it's a combination of risk assessment, he needs to figure out if I'm killing him next turn or not, which includes unknown information about what's in my hand to figure out if he can wait a turn or not, or if he needs to expend some resources to defend himself rather than take some damage or go off early on the combo. True that in game-ender combos like this, the opponent's best strategy is "send everything in ASAP!"

But there are plenty of "lesser" combos like the WMH one you describe that aren't the entire focal point of the match. They just enable other tactics or tie the hands of the opponent somewhat.

If you ever want to overload your brain, go play against a pro with a gifts ungiven mirror match. The game can literally turn into a Xanatos gambit pileup. (see tv tropes about that.)

 Eldarain wrote:
Anyone want to hazard a guess as to what percent of Xerics posts don't mention he has over 20,000 points of Eldar?

At 20,000+ points, he's twice as invested into Eldar as I am (9,500 points at last count - likely higher now). Not that points count matters that much. I'd be pissed at the OP if I only had 5,000 pts of Eldar. Or even a mere 2,000 points. I bought it, I want the option to play it.

Telling me that my army is now banned because some scrubs can't man up? No.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vaktathi wrote:
Who plays on 12x6 boards? Who plays with dioramas?

They look nice in pictures, but the games get a bit unwieldy. I prefer to play smaller on a 4x6, or maybe 3k per side on 4x8. Keep things moving!

You can always find a sucke- er, I mean another Eldar player to fight.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Eldarain wrote:
Anyone want to hazard a guess as to what percent of Xerics posts don't mention he has over 20,000 points of Eldar?

At 20,000+ points, he's twice as invested into Eldar as I am (9,500 points at last count - likely higher now). Not that points count matters that much. I'd be pissed at the OP if I only had 5,000 pts of Eldar. Or even a mere 2,000 points. I bought it, I want the option to play it.

Telling me that my army is now banned because some scrubs can't man up? No.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vaktathi wrote:
Who plays on 12x6 boards? Who plays with dioramas?

They look nice in pictures, but the games get a bit unwieldy. I prefer to play smaller on a 4x6, or maybe 3k per side on 4x8. Keep things moving!

I wonder why such outrage and energy is not directed at the way say, most FW army lists are banned at tournaments.

Deadnight wrote:

 Talys wrote:

You misunderstand me: *MY* average game looks a lot better than the last photo I linked. I would post a pic of one of my tables, but I value my privacy, and doing so would share who I am and what my home looks like to the world

You actually made my point for me: the 40k game on a 12x6 just looks better than the WMH board on 4x4, even though there's nothing special about the 40k game. Why? More stuff. More models. Bigger models. It doesn't take any extra effort to make 40k look great, even for casual players.

Like I said, that's not an 'average' game. Most average games if 40k I've seen are with a bare minimum of terrain as well, typically on a 4 by 4 or 6 by 4, and not on an epic 12 by 6 board. Remember - you are not a good indicator of west constitutes 'average'.

It doesn't take any extra afford to make 40k look great? True. Except for the part where it does take a lot of extra effort. Time. Money. Physical work. Epic boards don't just happen by themselves. I prefer painting models; my friend loves making terrain - and he's really good at it. All his boards age terrain pieces involve a huge amount of time and work on his part. And like I said, not everyone has the time, resources or space to to that.

The Ability for 40k look good on an average board (6 by 4, or 4 by 4) applies equally to WMH. 40k is not unique.

The average game if 40k is not 4x4. The average game is 1850 on 6x4, and at this ratio, the table looks great.

If you want to commit to beautiful play environment, there is a community to do so for 40k. Such s thing does nit exist for WMH, anywhere that I've seen. Even if you just play with basic terrain pieces 1850 points of most armies can look great.

I am not your average 40k player, but I started out that way, and over many years accumulated stuff. My aspiration, however, was always to play with awe-inspiring miniatures, even when I couldn't afford it.

I would further assert that anyone who isn't into miniatures I going to have more fun with another game -- one that doesn't require you to spend tons of time to model a nice looking battleforce. Just go buy xwing, for example, and save yourself the trouble of modeling.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Eldarain wrote:
Anyone want to hazard a guess as to what percent of Xerics posts don't mention he has over 20,000 points of Eldar?

At 20,000+ points, he's twice as invested into Eldar as I am (9,500 points at last count - likely higher now). Not that points count matters that much. I'd be pissed at the OP if I only had 5,000 pts of Eldar. Or even a mere 2,000 points. I bought it, I want the option to play it.

Telling me that my army is now banned because some scrubs can't man up? No.

What if you did have the option to play it, just toned down to reasonable levels. Like say the 6e version that already wins more 1st place spots in the ITC than any other book? Or are you just interested in playing the most OP thing in the game to beat people with so you can convince yourself that that makes you "good" in any way?

 Chosen of Malal wrote:

 Gamgee wrote:


Operation Members:
Gamgee
Orock
Torga_DW
Rippy

I just wanted to point out that after all of this, four people in total have agreed to this. Way to hit GW in the pocket, boys.

Lol calm down friend. I "signed" the agreement as any codex that is miles above the rest should be house ruled AT LEAST if they go in competitions. Doesn't mean I still won't play Eldar (unless they bring spammy cheesebeard lists, in which case I wouldn't be interested in playing that kind of person in a social fun game anyway. Challenging, yes, boring cheesespam, no.) Source: bored of playing cheesebeards.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xerics wrote:

 Chosen of Malal wrote:

 Gamgee wrote:
The only way to get a message through to the big GW that this is completely unacceptable way to make a codex is to throw up a gak storm. The biggest way to do that? Well show them we won't even play with them. I know I intend to. Many of my players in my local FLGS intend to. Though I need to convince them to ban them from tournaments all together. The more the Eldar players complain and bitch about us complaining and bitching about their so obviously broken and favoritism codex the faster we can wrap this up. It's going to get messy before the end though. These half measures and trying to be "reasonable" with GW and even a certain subset of Eldar players is clearly not working. So it's time to kick things up a notch.

Can I at least get people who will agree to no games with them?

If there are any Eldar players out there with any remorse or guilt for the entire health of the game and 40k scene I implore you to do one of two things. Cheese the ever loving gak out of your codex and get yourself loathed and banned. Or don't play at all. Thanks.

As always the bigger we make this the quicker we'll get an answer.

Thanks. Remember cause mayhem. This Eldar Codex can't be allowed to stand.

I Gamgee swear to throw up a gak storm and use any method possible to get GW attention.

Edit
Since I started this thread and including myself there are four people who will no longer play against Eldar players. All it takes is a little team work. I'll continue to update this.
If I missed your name send me a PM or let me know in the thread and I'll add it.

Operation Members:
Gamgee
Orock
Torga_DW
Rippy

I just wanted to point out that after all of this, four people in total have agreed to this. Way to hit GW in the pocket, boys.

I like how the thread is about banning Eldar from tournaments and stuff. When Imperial Knights came out I was glad someone in the store would bring 5 to a 2000 point battle... I played against that army all the time and learned how to beat it. Instead of crying about Eldar be glad there is an Eldar player near you so you will get lots of practice

You are truely a god incarnate and we are all so amazed by your heroic skill.

Akiasura wrote:

 Chosen of Malal wrote:
That's great, all those combos sure sound alot like Magic to me.

That's...one combo.
It involves careful positioning, risk assessment, and work being done prior successfully just to launch. I can die from it. At any point, dice can fail me.
No combo in Magic works that way.

That's not a combo, it's a Rube Goldberg contraption!

Magic doesn't do combos like that, because combos intend to win once they go off. Magic prefers cluster combos with largely interchangeable parts to improve stability and speed, reducing dependence upon having a stall or surprise counter.

That said, there are a number of equally long chains possible in Magic tied to things like Storm or decking, or bulk synergy effects. If I'm going to Tendrils you to death in TPS, I might need to generate a chain of 10+ spells - that's going to take a lot of draw and mana to pull off, so making that happen is non-trivial. If you count continuous activity in which the opponent does basically nothing, the time from when I drop a Stasis to the time my opponent dies/concedes is a similarly long chain of activity.

niv-mizzet wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Eldarain wrote:
Anyone want to hazard a guess as to what percent of Xerics posts don't mention he has over 20,000 points of Eldar?

At 20,000+ points, he's twice as invested into Eldar as I am (9,500 points at last count - likely higher now). Not that points count matters that much. I'd be pissed at the OP if I only had 5,000 pts of Eldar. Or even a mere 2,000 points. I bought it, I want the option to play it.

Telling me that my army is now banned because some scrubs can't man up? No.

What if you did have the option to play it, just toned down to reasonable levels. Like say the 6e version that already wins more 1st place spots in the ITC than any other book? Or are you just interested in playing the most OP thing in the game to beat people with so you can convince yourself that that makes you "good" in any way?

I actually plan on running Vypers for once, the majority of my army has always consisted of Guardians, and I have quite a few Falcons and Aspect Warriors. The subject of this entire thread is refusing to play against someone with an Eldar army, not refusing to play against a cheesy Eldar player. He wants you to ban the Eldar army from competitive tournaments period, not limit units or toning anything down to reasonable levels. Taudar was never banned, Leafblower was never banned, White Scars isn't banned, Drop Pod spam isn't banned, Screamerstar was never banned, Beaststar was never banned, do I need to keep going? All you whiners need to grow a pair.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Eldarain wrote:
Anyone want to hazard a guess as to what percent of Xerics posts don't mention he has over 20,000 points of Eldar?

At 20,000+ points, he's twice as invested into Eldar as I am (9,500 points at last count - likely higher now). Not that points count matters that much. I'd be pissed at the OP if I only had 5,000 pts of Eldar. Or even a mere 2,000 points. I bought it, I want the option to play it.

Telling me that my army is now banned because some scrubs can't man up? No.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vaktathi wrote:
Who plays on 12x6 boards? Who plays with dioramas?

They look nice in pictures, but the games get a bit unwieldy. I prefer to play smaller on a 4x6, or maybe 3k per side on 4x8. Keep things moving!

I wonder why such outrage and energy is not directed at the way say, most FW army lists are banned at tournaments.

I have no issue with FW lists or stuff. It's amusing how tournaments have moved to this Kabuki thing of narrowed selection versus GW telling everybody to let their toys come off the shelf!

 Rippy wrote:

 Chosen of Malal wrote:

 Gamgee wrote:


Operation Members:
Gamgee
Orock
Torga_DW
Rippy

I just wanted to point out that after all of this, four people in total have agreed to this. Way to hit GW in the pocket, boys.

Lol calm down friend. I "signed" the agreement as any codex that is miles above the rest should be house ruled AT LEAST if they go in competitions. Doesn't mean I still won't play Eldar (unless they bring spammy cheesebeard lists, in which case I wouldn't be interested in playing that kind of person in a social fun game anyway. Challenging, yes, boring cheesespam, no.) Source: bored of playing cheesebeards.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xerics wrote:

 Chosen of Malal wrote:

 Gamgee wrote:
The only way to get a message through to the big GW that this is completely unacceptable way to make a codex is to throw up a gak storm. The biggest way to do that? Well show them we won't even play with them. I know I intend to. Many of my players in my local FLGS intend to. Though I need to convince them to ban them from tournaments all together. The more the Eldar players complain and bitch about us complaining and bitching about their so obviously broken and favoritism codex the faster we can wrap this up. It's going to get messy before the end though. These half measures and trying to be "reasonable" with GW and even a certain subset of Eldar players is clearly not working. So it's time to kick things up a notch.

Can I at least get people who will agree to no games with them?

If there are any Eldar players out there with any remorse or guilt for the entire health of the game and 40k scene I implore you to do one of two things. Cheese the ever loving gak out of your codex and get yourself loathed and banned. Or don't play at all. Thanks.

As always the bigger we make this the quicker we'll get an answer.

Thanks. Remember cause mayhem. This Eldar Codex can't be allowed to stand.

I Gamgee swear to throw up a gak storm and use any method possible to get GW attention.

Edit
Since I started this thread and including myself there are four people who will no longer play against Eldar players. All it takes is a little team work. I'll continue to update this.
If I missed your name send me a PM or let me know in the thread and I'll add it.

Operation Members:
Gamgee
Orock
Torga_DW
Rippy

I just wanted to point out that after all of this, four people in total have agreed to this. Way to hit GW in the pocket, boys.

I like how the thread is about banning Eldar from tournaments and stuff. When Imperial Knights came out I was glad someone in the store would bring 5 to a 2000 point battle... I played against that army all the time and learned how to beat it. Instead of crying about Eldar be glad there is an Eldar player near you so you will get lots of practice

You are truely a god incarnate and we are all so amazed by your heroic skill.

But that isn't what you agreed to, Rippy. You agreed to refuse to play Eldar player.

 Chosen of Malal wrote:

niv-mizzet wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Eldarain wrote:
Anyone want to hazard a guess as to what percent of Xerics posts don't mention he has over 20,000 points of Eldar?

At 20,000+ points, he's twice as invested into Eldar as I am (9,500 points at last count - likely higher now). Not that points count matters that much. I'd be pissed at the OP if I only had 5,000 pts of Eldar. Or even a mere 2,000 points. I bought it, I want the option to play it.

Telling me that my army is now banned because some scrubs can't man up? No.

What if you did have the option to play it, just toned down to reasonable levels. Like say the 6e version that already wins more 1st place spots in the ITC than any other book? Or are you just interested in playing the most OP thing in the game to beat people with so you can convince yourself that that makes you "good" in any way?

I actually plan on running Vypers for once, the majority of my army has always consisted of Guardians, and I have quite a few Falcons and Aspect Warriors. The subject of this entire thread is refusing to play against someone with an Eldar army, not refusing to play against a cheesy Eldar player. He wants you to ban the Eldar army from competitive tournaments period, not limit units or toning anything down to reasonable levels. Taudar was never banned, Leafblower was never banned, White Scars isn't banned, Drop Pod spam isn't banned, Screamerstar was never banned, Beaststar was never banned, do I need to keep going? All you whiners need to grow a pair.

No it is for banning Eldar lists in competitions, not just refusing to play them. Read the thread topic, silly billy.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Chosen of Malal wrote:

 Rippy wrote:

 Chosen of Malal wrote:

 Gamgee wrote:


Operation Members:
Gamgee
Orock
Torga_DW
Rippy

I just wanted to point out that after all of this, four people in total have agreed to this. Way to hit GW in the pocket, boys.

Lol calm down friend. I "signed" the agreement as any codex that is miles above the rest should be house ruled AT LEAST if they go in competitions. Doesn't mean I still won't play Eldar (unless they bring spammy cheesebeard lists, in which case I wouldn't be interested in playing that kind of person in a social fun game anyway. Challenging, yes, boring cheesespam, no.) Source: bored of playing cheesebeards.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xerics wrote:

 Chosen of Malal wrote:

 Gamgee wrote:
The only way to get a message through to the big GW that this is completely unacceptable way to make a codex is to throw up a gak storm. The biggest way to do that? Well show them we won't even play with them. I know I intend to. Many of my players in my local FLGS intend to. Though I need to convince them to ban them from tournaments all together. The more the Eldar players complain and bitch about us complaining and bitching about their so obviously broken and favoritism codex the faster we can wrap this up. It's going to get messy before the end though. These half measures and trying to be "reasonable" with GW and even a certain subset of Eldar players is clearly not working. So it's time to kick things up a notch.

Can I at least get people who will agree to no games with them?

If there are any Eldar players out there with any remorse or guilt for the entire health of the game and 40k scene I implore you to do one of two things. Cheese the ever loving gak out of your codex and get yourself loathed and banned. Or don't play at all. Thanks.

As always the bigger we make this the quicker we'll get an answer.

Thanks. Remember cause mayhem. This Eldar Codex can't be allowed to stand.

I Gamgee swear to throw up a gak storm and use any method possible to get GW attention.

Edit
Since I started this thread and including myself there are four people who will no longer play against Eldar players. All it takes is a little team work. I'll continue to update this.
If I missed your name send me a PM or let me know in the thread and I'll add it.

Operation Members:
Gamgee
Orock
Torga_DW
Rippy

I just wanted to point out that after all of this, four people in total have agreed to this. Way to hit GW in the pocket, boys.

I like how the thread is about banning Eldar from tournaments and stuff. When Imperial Knights came out I was glad someone in the store would bring 5 to a 2000 point battle... I played against that army all the time and learned how to beat it. Instead of crying about Eldar be glad there is an Eldar player near you so you will get lots of practice

You are truely a god incarnate and we are all so amazed by your heroic skill.

But that isn't what you agreed to, Rippy. You agreed to refuse to play Eldar player.

Lol no I didn't, and no I won't. My brother in law plays Eldar.

niv-mizzet wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Eldarain wrote:
Anyone want to hazard a guess as to what percent of Xerics posts don't mention he has over 20,000 points of Eldar?

At 20,000+ points, he's twice as invested into Eldar as I am (9,500 points at last count - likely higher now). Not that points count matters that much. I'd be pissed at the OP if I only had 5,000 pts of Eldar. Or even a mere 2,000 points. I bought it, I want the option to play it.

Telling me that my army is now banned because some scrubs can't man up? No.

What if you did have the option to play it, just toned down to reasonable levels.

Like say the 6e version that already wins more 1st place spots in the ITC than any other book? Or are you just interested in playing the most OP thing in the game to beat people with so you can convince yourself that that makes you "good" in any way?

That's not what the OP is asking for. He's demanding a blanket ban, not something "reasonable" (whatever the feth that means).

As of today, I own ZERO Wraithknights, ZERO Jetbikes and ZERO hardback Eldar Codices - I still play the 5E Eldar Codex, so I'm pretty sure I'm not "the most OP thing in the game to beat people with so you can convince yourself that that makes you "good"," as you seem to insinuate.

In fact, I'm mostly playing 5E Imperial Guard and 6E Chaos Marines, so you can tell me how OP my armies are. However, I am interested in having the option to play those things if I should choose to play the current Eldar Codex. If I want to bring spend my hard-earned money on the new Codex, a WK and some Jetbikes, I should have the option to play with my new toys. Whether I choose to do so for any given game or event is an entirely different thing. And even when they do hit the tabletop, they aren't an auto-win Easy Button.

I apologize for posting a 12x6. It was simply a random averageish density table on Bing images because I didn't want to post a photo of my home. That table wad really not that spectacular; my point was that 40k looks good with a basic paint job and basic terrain. WMH looks bare except in extraordinary examples. There is nothing on that 12x6 that is beyond the modeling capability of an everyday gamer.

I usually play on 6x4 or 8x4 (by putting 2 4x4 together).

My other point, perhaps lost, is that if the look of miniatures doesn't matter to you, getting a 40k army ready for play seems like a colossal waste if time and money to me.

 Talys wrote:
I apologize for posting a 12x6. It was simply a random averageish density table on Bing images because I didn't want to post a photo of my home. That table wad really not that spectacular; my point was that 40k looks good with a basic paint job and basic terrain. WMH looks bare except in extraordinary examples.

I usually play on 6x4 or 8x4 (by putting 2 4x4 together).

This and the theme and how the models look turn me off WM/H also.

 Rippy wrote:

This and the theme and how the models look turn me off WM/H also.

I get that a lot of people are into the pseudo-steampunk... But the guns have always bugged me. I love the 40k weaponry.

And by the way, sorry to totally get off topic. Yes, the Eldar codex is too good (just like the old Eldar codex was too good)!

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

 Chosen of Malal wrote:
That's great, all those combos sure sound alot like Magic to me.

That's...one combo.
It involves careful positioning, risk assessment, and work being done prior successfully just to launch. I can die from it. At any point, dice can fail me.
No combo in Magic works that way.

That's not a combo, it's a Rube Goldberg contraption!

Magic doesn't do combos like that, because combos intend to win once they go off. Magic prefers cluster combos with largely interchangeable parts to improve stability and speed, reducing dependence upon having a stall or surprise counter.

That said, there are a number of equally long chains possible in Magic tied to things like Storm or decking, or bulk synergy effects. If I'm going to Tendrils you to death in TPS, I might need to generate a chain of 10+ spells - that's going to take a lot of draw and mana to pull off, so making that happen is non-trivial. If you count continuous activity in which the opponent does basically nothing, the time from when I drop a Stasis to the time my opponent dies/concedes is a similarly long chain of activity.

This is actually a very easy combo relatively speaking. When I first started playing, I was a skorne player. Everyone told me to play makeda 2 and use this combo to start
I imagine combos in magic are quite complicated, I didn't know mana burn or hurting yourself is a thing. I stopped playing after the first expansion and never played at tournaments. I really didn't like the concept of boosters, and it turned me off from card games for a while. There wasn't an online community where I could pick the cards I wanted at a time.
Now it's become like LoL, where the meta seems to have too much information and I don't have the time to learn it.

To be fair, 40k has combos too. Deathstars are essentially combos nowadays. You take units and powers from a few different sources and combine them to make them unbeatable practically. It doesn't autowin the game, but it usually makes your opponent have to stop it or you will win.


When we get new players, we usually tell them the following;
WMH is the better game. It's tactically deep and requires a lot of thinking, and thinking quickly. If you aren't competitive, don't play it.
40k is the better hobby. The models are great, and if you love painting, converting, and look at amazing battles, play it. The game itself isn't nearly as much fun.
Infinity is crazy. Don't play infinity
Specialist games are cheap. If you're on a budget, join a league. If you like RPGs but want to compete, play a specialist game.

I like to think that is an honest statement.

 Talys wrote:

 Rippy wrote:

This and the theme and how the models look turn me off WM/H also.

I get that a lot of people are into the pseudo-steampunk... But the guns have always bugged me. I love the 40k weaponry.

And by the way, sorry to totally get off topic. Yes, the Eldar codex is too good (just like the old Eldar codex was too good)!

Eh, I'd have to agree with someone who mentioned that this codex is more of a lateral move, then a straight buff. Yes, it is still on the same potential power level, but in completely different areas.

I consider any "combo" with more than 4 pieces to be an unstable contraption. For something to work reliably, 3 parts should be the max.

But that's in the card world, where you need to draw into the combination in order to go off.

On the tabletop, where you simply buy your pieces and place them at the start, it's a lot easier to assemble - you just need to protect what's important.

Gaming-wise, I'm trying to finish what I own, while shifting to miniatures board games.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
I consider any "combo" with more than 4 pieces to be an unstable contraption. For something to work reliably, 3 parts should be the max.

But that's in the card world, where you need to draw into the combination in order to go off.

On the tabletop, where you simply buy your pieces and place them at the start, it's a lot easier to assemble - you just need to protect what's important.

Gaming-wise, I'm trying to finish what I own, while shifting to miniatures board games.

Fair enough. I just got into deck building games again and am finding the combos work very differently. Two different worlds.
Not many combos in WMH are as simple as 4 pieces. It's more like a fighting game and a turn based strategy game had a baby.

Have you seen Krosmaster Arena? I have played it recently and am hooked, you may enjoy it if you like tactical rpgs.

Ha! I used to play Krosmaster Arena back when it was a MMORPG called Dofus. I worked my up to join and become an Officer in one of the premier Guilds, just had a ton of fun with them.

My group is hooked into Super Dungeon Explore, which scratches a very similar itch.

If you're doing deckbuilding, I would concentrate on Magic - it's the granddaddy of cardgames, with 20 years of cards and development behind it. Great stuff!

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Ha! I used to play Krosmaster Arena back when it was a MMORPG called Dofus. I worked my up to join and become an Officer in one of the premier Guilds, just had a ton of fun with them.

My group is hooked into Super Dungeon Explore, which scratches a very similar itch.

If you're doing deckbuilding, I would concentrate on Magic - it's the granddaddy of cardgames, with 20 years of cards and development behind it. Great stuff!

Hey! I was thinking about getting into SDE. It looks like a chibi Descent. Plus angry bear.

 Talys wrote:

The average game if 40k is not 4x4. The average game is 1850 on 6x4, and at this ratio, the table looks great.

p

True, but arguably, only to an extent. We always played on a 6 by 4 for example. Then again, In gw stores, it's ususlly on a 4 by 4. Where space is an issue, a 4 by 4 is far from unusual. And Not everyone has the luxury of space. Similarly, points sizes vary wildly. Not every one plays 1850.

 Talys wrote:

If you want to commit to beautiful play environment, there is a community to do so for 40k. Such s thing does nit exist for WMH, anywhere that I've seen.

And you've seen every WMH board, and played against every WMH player I take it? Sweeping generalisations aren't nice. You want to play in a 'beautiful play environment'? Cool, and fair play. But I'd argue it's harder to find that community within the 40k community than you realise. Like I said, in my experience planet bowling ball and grey legions are far more common than not. Regarding WMH - the guy who taught me how to play back in ireland (literally, my first opponent) was one if those apparently mythical WMH players that writes custom scenarios, writes custom rules, enjoys campsigns, and awesome terrain filled boards. My. First. Opponent. They exist talys.

 Talys wrote:

I am not your average 40k player, but I started out that way, and over many years accumulated stuff. My aspiration, however, was always to play with awe-inspiring miniatures, even when I couldn't afford it. .

Don't get me wrong - I'm not criticising. Fact is, I'd love to play a game with you. You seem to be the kind of guy/opponent people hope to meet across the table.

 Talys wrote:

I would further assert that anyone who isn't into miniatures I going to have more fun with another game -- one that doesn't require you to spend tons of time to model a nice looking battleforce. Just go buy xwing, for example, and save yourself the trouble of modeling.

Hey now, I have far more fun and enjoyment painting, modelling and converting my infinity, historical and WMH stuff than I ever did with 40k. Infinity especislly - for me it's an absolute joy to paint up each and every model- they each end up being a separate project for me. Equating having more fun with other games and not being into miniatures as one and the same is a bit short sighted IMO.

Agree. Talys would make a great opponent even though I disagree with him a lot.

In case anyone was still in doubt about anything, there's a compilation PDF of the book now up on /tg/

At this rate, I think the proper thing would be to just aim operation pitchfork at getting Kelly sacked. Kelly either writes a stupidly overpowered codex, or a terribly weak codex. He either needs to shape up and stop this lulzy power creep, or simply not write codices anymore. Hell I'd take Matt Ward back over him.

 Wyzilla wrote:
At this rate, I think the proper thing would be to just aim operation pitchfork at getting Kelly sacked. Kelly either writes a stupidly overpowered codex, or a terribly weak codex. He either needs to shape up and stop this lulzy power creep, or simply not write codices anymore. Hell I'd take Matt Ward back over him.

I dont know if he worked on this, but he has stopped doing rules anyway.
Doesnt help fix whats already done though.

Szeras wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
My group is hooked into Super Dungeon Explore, which scratches a very similar itch.

Hey! I was thinking about getting into SDE. It looks like a chibi Descent. Plus angry bear.

Now is a good time - the 1E game is on discount as they transition to 2E "Forgotten King".

Go for it - it's a great tactical alternative to 40k or other such games..

 Vaktathi wrote:
In case anyone was still in doubt about anything, there's a compilation PDF of the book now up on /tg/

whats /tg/ ?

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
In case anyone was still in doubt about anything, there's a compilation PDF of the book now up on /tg/

whats /tg/ ?

Traditional games section on websites like 4chan and reddit to the best of my knowledge.

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
In case anyone was still in doubt about anything, there's a compilation PDF of the book now up on /tg/

whats /tg/ ?

4chan's "Traditional Games" board.

Deadnight wrote:

True, but arguably, only to an extent. We always played on a 6 by 4 for example. Then again, In gw stores, it's ususlly on a 4 by 4. Where space is an issue, a 4 by 4 is far from unusual. And Not everyone has the luxury of space. Similarly, points sizes vary wildly. Not every one plays 1850.

Of course. 8x4 happens when you put two 4x4 together. Almost every competition is 1850 or 2000. 40k is a lousy game at 500 points. I mean, it's fine to learn the mechanics of, or if you desperately want a quickie game -- but if you want to play with a couple of squads worth of models and a vehicle... IMO WMH just gives you a thousand times more options as to what to do with those models. 40k with a couple of squads is just move shoot move hide move shoot move assault done.

Deadnight wrote:

And you've seen every WMH board, and played against every WMH player I take it? Sweeping generalisations aren't nice. You want to play in a 'beautiful play environment'? Cool, and fair play. But I'd argue it's harder to find that community within the 40k community than you realise. Like I said, in my experience planet bowling ball and grey legions are far more common than not. Regarding WMH - the guy who taught me how to play back in ireland (literally, my first opponent) was one if those apparently mythical WMH players that writes custom scenarios, writes custom rules, enjoys campsigns, and awesome terrain filled boards. My. First. Opponent. They exist talys.

I'm not saying WMH can't have great scenarios, great rules, fantastic campaigns. I'm saying that I've never seen a really beautiful play board by anyone who plays WMH, and in my local area (in which wargaming is quite strong), though there are many (tons of!) WMH players, there is no community or group of players that enjoy playing on elaborate setups. And that's my thing. I'm sure they exist. I just haven't found one or seen one at a store, and I do chat up a lot of folks, including anyone who's playing who is chatty

Mostly, they want to play the game.

Certainly, you can't argue that 40k is a more modelling intensive hobby than WMH.

Deadnight wrote:

Don't get me wrong - I'm not criticising. Fact is, I'd love to play a game with you. You seem to be the kind of guy/opponent people hope to meet across the table.

Thanks! I take that as a real compliment.

Deadnight wrote:

Hey now, I have far more fun and enjoyment painting, modelling and converting my infinity, historical and WMH stuff than I ever did with 40k. Infinity especislly - for me it's an absolute joy to paint up each and every model- they each end up being a separate project for me. Equating having more fun with other games and not being into miniatures as one and the same is a bit short sighted IMO.

Yes, Infinity has beautiful models! Not enough of the, but they are very well crafted. I have a thing for posable plastic, simply because "size counts" for me. I know not everyone wants to model an army of PanOceana Crusader Bretheren, but if I had my way, I'd have a game where I could play 50 -- unique -- Crusader Bretheren (plus the rest of the army).

Maybe Infinity will "grow" that way, or a new derivative larger-scale game created, in which case I'd be very interested.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
In case anyone was still in doubt about anything, there's a compilation PDF of the book now up on /tg/

whats /tg/ ?

4chan's "Traditional Games" board.

ah right thanks

 Talys wrote:

Of course. 8x4 happens when you put two 4x4 together. Almost every competition is 1850 or 2000. 40k is a lousy game at 500 points. I mean, it's fine to learn the mechanics of, or if you desperately want a quickie game -- but if you want to play with a couple of squads worth of models and a vehicle... IMO WMH just gives you a thousand times more options as to what to do with those models. 40k with a couple of squads is just move shoot move hide move shoot move assault done.

Agreed.

Competitions (aka steamroller etc) might be defining of WMH, but it's not true of 40k. I'm not disagreeing with you here, judt disagreeing with the previous assertion that the average game is on a 6 by 4, 1850pts. It might be the preferred game, but it might not be the reality for folks.

 Talys wrote:

I'm not saying WMH can't have great scenarios, great rules, fantastic campaigns. I'm saying that I've never seen a really beautiful play board by anyone who plays WMH, and in my local area (in which wargaming is quite strong), though there are many (tons of!) WMH players, there is no community or group of players that enjoy playing on elaborate setups. And that's my thing. I'm sure they exist. I just haven't found one or seen one at a store, and I do chat up a lot of folks, including anyone who's playing who is chatty
Mostly, they want to play the game.

Like I said, they're there. My first opponent was one. And he had some awesome ideas - the clockwork/gear board he wanted to do still fires my imagination.

 Talys wrote:

Certainly, you can't argue that 40k is a more modelling intensive hobby than WMH.

Hmm, I dunno. It's certainly 'easier' to model in 40k (I do a lot of WMH modelling, and tend to use gw bits for it for tgr most part), but I'd argue that it is also very easy to be very lazy with your modelling in 40k, if you do any at all. It used to be that you had to model/convert half your stuff, because not everything had a kit - now, not so much. I'm personally proud of a lot of my conversions (you should see my kroot and Fire warriors) for example, but a lot of what's out there ends up being quite basic. Regarding WMH conversions and modelling - you'd be surprised. It is a thing. I do quite a few conversions for my own army. Some of them ended up being extremely labour intensive (tournament legal female fenris conversion, I'm looking at you!) I often joke that modelling in WMH is like being a warcaster, if you're gonna do it, you'd better go epic. Here are some examples.

As to a few examples (steamroller tournament legal too).
HMS griffon gun carriage to airship conversion:
http://privateerpressforums.com/showthread.php?192274-HMS-Griffon-Gun-Carraige-to-Airship-Conversion

Legion of Mechablight:
http://privateerpressforums.com/showthread.php?198539-And-now-for-something-completely-different

The Crimson Harvest (A proxy Orgoth army):
http://privateerpressforums.com/showthread.php?194308-Crimson-Harvest-the-Revenge-of-the-Orgoth

Stormhammer: the assault on Sul:
http://privateerpressforums.com/showthread.php?98-Stormhammer-the-Assault-on-Sul

RECO stormwall:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqA6nbk2zos

Baby Titan 'skorne mammoth' conversion
http://www.captainspud.com/?p=176

General customised figures:
http://privateerpressforums.com/showthread.php?144918-Show-me-your-most-heavily-customized-figures!

Now I consider each of those to be quite 'modelling intensive' if you ask me- the Crimson harvest 'orgoth' army, the legion of mechablight and stormhammer in particular. The airship conversion of a gun carriage, and baby Titans playing as a skorne mammoth are genuine genius though. Creative people will be creative. It's that simple.

 Talys wrote:

Thanks! I take that as a real compliment.

Genuine compliment is genuine. Beers are on you though!

 Talys wrote:

Yes, Infinity has beautiful models! Not enough of the, but they are very well crafted. I have a thing for posable plastic, simply because "size counts" for me. I know not everyone wants to model an army of PanOceana Crusader Bretheren, but if I had my way, I'd have a game where I could play 50 -- unique -- Crusader Bretheren (plus the rest of the army).

Maybe Infinity will "grow" that way, or a new derivative larger-scale game created, in which case I'd be very interested.

And fair play. I'm from the alternative 'less is more' school of thought. Neither of us is wrong though (what's this? Agreement on the Internet?! Sky must be falling!)

Galanur wrote:
you play with those models cause you want to, no 1 force you to do it.

The rules cost you much cause well, go to a printer company and print a codex with exactly same number of pages, paper quality, hardcover, UV varnish and all that stuff and tell me how that ´s gonna cost you, I can guarantee its gonna cost you almost twice of what you payed for that book.



About all these eldar stuff around, read this post, it can be quite fun reading and the all out so much drama for nothing people do these days anyway...



http://www.spikeybitsblog.com/2015/04/40k-meta-how-to-beat-the-new-eldar.html

That's because you're printing ONE. When you have a printer run off 20,000 of them, it doesn't cost much. From GW employees and people who have worked in the printing industry, a codex costs $3-5 to print per copy. Then they're sold for $33-50. How is it that other, smaller companies can make hardcover books of the same quality with more pages for $20-30 if they cost so much to produce? Model kits cost about 25% of their total price to produce. I know this because every year at the training in Memphis, someone asks how GW can give 50% off to employees without losing money. The answer is that even at 50% off, GW is still doubling their money on the cost of a kit. This is why the fact that they don't have sales is mind boggling. If you're a grocery store with a 3% margin, you can't afford to have sales. If your production cost on a kit is $25 and MSRP is $100, you can most definitely afford to have sales once in awhile.

WayneTheGame wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
"40k is not a competitive game and is not designed as such "

There's no such thing as a narrative game with "victory conditions". 40K IS competitive because there is a winner and loser.

And 40K is VERY easy to learn. There's not that many rules compared to actual war games.

There is no winner or loser, just people having fun. If both players have fun, than they will both have won.

There isn't much fun to getting stomped over and over and over. And yes, the rules describe a victor and loser.

If one player gets stomped all the time, you are doing something wrong. You have to work together to make sure everyone has a fun experience. Of course the rules have a winner and loser, because otherwise there would never be an end to the game and conclusion to the story.

Don't you think rules that are $85 for the basics and $50+ for army lists should do a good job of making sure everybody has a fun experience without requiring this gentleman's agreement nonsense beforehand? I don't get how people are quick to defend the idea of charging the most out of everybody else for rules for a game which they claim is secondary to figures, and on top of that still requiring player intervention to fix any problems that can cause unfun games. It's a flaw of game design to have rules and then say "Well, you shouldn't use these expensive rules verbatim, you need to work things out with your opponent to determine what rules make for the most fun"

If you're smart, rules and army lists are free.
In any case, I think you should view the 40k rulebook more as a kind of dungeonmaster's handbook from an RPG. It is a set of guidelines to give a framework that you can fill in yourself. At least, that is the direction GW seems to be going.

Akiasura wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

With the absurd range on the guns, destructive ability of the guns, and overall power level of the guns, the codex will be dangerous in anyone's hands. More than any other dex, considering the lack of bad units in the dex that a bad player would take.
The necron codex with the new formation is very strong, but is good in anyone's hand. You pretty much push the wraiths forward and hide the spyder.

Army lists tend to come in 2 varieties in most table top games. They either ask questions or answer questions. The ones that ask questions don't require nearly as much tactical work as the ones that answer questions. This is true in 40k, WMH, infinity, and most of the games I have seen.
The necron codex asks "Can you kill all my absurdly tough guys before they reach your lines?"
The SM codex asks "Can you stop my deathstar from destroying your army?"
The new Eldar codex asks "Can you withstand my shooting?"
It's easy to build this question from the army book compared to say, daemons, who are a strong army that requires a bit more work.

You make it sound so easy for someone to pick up and army and master the rules. I don't know if this is true for everyone.

It should take around 10 games. This is a pretty small learning curve compared to shooting games, fighting games, MOBAs, and other table tops.

Really? People need that many games to just master rules and a single army? Either that is a hyperbole or everyone I play with is incredibly smart. And personally I found Warmachine, FoW and Dystopian Wars all easier to learn than 40k. 40k takes more time to master due to the sheer amount of rules.

You are the first person I have ever heard to claim that.
I don't think you can claim that 10 games is a long time to master 40k's rules, then say it's a complex game, and then say WMH should take even less times. Those statements contradict each other.
In WMH, just knowing how to mitigate different feats, what pathfinder and eyeless sight can do, how weird CoC is, how annoying Menoth's Choir can be, and the crazyness of the teleport circle has can take a while to master. Learning how to utilize focus and mitigate fury and how each caster plays takes a very very long time.
You'll have a hard time asserting WMH is an easier game to master. The rules are clearer, but jacks alone can take more actions then most units do in 40k throughout the entire game.
Granted the 40k rules are written terribly. Flyers, FMC, and psykers are all confusing. But once you see it a few times it's easy to learn.

You will note that I made a difference between 'learn' and 'master'. Warmachine is far easier to learn than 40k, but harder to master.

Akiasura wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:

If that requires some kind of evidence, assume I am just a boastful jerk, consider your own experiences and go from there. I would say it's only about 3 out of every 10 players I meet really know how to use the rules to their advantage, which would correspond with the upper end of a bell curve (it's actually being a little generous.)

I think you'd have to define using the rules to their advantage. 40k isn't an indepth system, and the majority of decisions are made in the list building stages. Anyone with an ability to work the most basic of statistics can see what units are good, make sure they have threat saturation, and go from there. I would say 3 in 10 don't have the ability to do this, and depending on your meta more or less may opt not to.
Figuring out how a deathstar operates, for example, is using the rules to help you, but anyone can do that given google and a short amount of time. There is little the enemy can stop it.

It takes more than good shooting to win games.

Akiasura wrote:
Making proper use of cover, target priority, choosing the right psychic powers, knowing the AV for enemy tanks, placing fortifications, making use of buildings, understanding terrain, knowing how to take and hold strategic points, making full use of cards in Maelstrom games, good deployments, knowing your opponent's armies and special rules, making effective use of psychic dice, etc. These are some of the the fundamentals I see too many people lacking in when the bring competitive lists. They count on some tricks working with their lists and don't know what to do when something doesn't go right.

Proper use of cover requires you to just be in cover. And don't bunch up if the enemy has blast templates.
Target priority is knowing what the weapons in the enemy list do and which units can hurt which model. There are few stats in this game and they are on a small scale, this doesn't take long to master either. The spammy nature of 40k means generally there are 1-3 main threats in an enemy army and you need to destroy it. With death stars it's even easier, just difficult to do anything. You have won or list in list building.
You don't get to chose psychic powers, they are randomly generated. If you mean disciplines, there are a few good ones (about 2-3) that are always amazing for any army and the rest are pretty bad.
The next 3 points are terrain which, again, mostly just require you to be in it.
Maelstrom cards are completely random and can not be planned for. Sometimes your enemy doesn't even have fliers for example. If your army is fast, and the best ones are, it's easier to grab them. This isn't infinity.
Good deployments are somewhat difficult to master and take a few games. Maybe 5-6. People who complain against drop pod armies usually are bad at deployments.
Psychic dice are also easy and requires a basic understanding of probability. If you only need 1-2 powers it becomes even easier. How the phase works is complicated but the system itself is easy. Defense is almost completely random and you usually have one spell you must stop, so you save it for that.

I somewhat agree with this, list building is the most important aspect of winning the game. It does take more than just a good list to win though, especially with more challenging armies such as DE or Orks. Good positioning and deployment are almost as important as a good list if you want to win, and having a good understanding of your opponent's army and setting target priorities (which goes far beyond 1-3 main threats) are also important. And of course a bit of luck.

Luck isn't really a skill, it's in every dice based game. Though you think it was the way some people roll...
Deployment is an issue for some armies, which I admitted. It's not terribly hard to master, and takes about 3-4 games before you are good at it. Maybe 1-2 more if drop pods are common in your area. I am speaking from an entirely new players perspective of course. 40k doesn't attract people who play other table tops in my experience.
Nothing is as important as a good list in 40k. Nothing. Just picking DE and Orks in this meta means you picked poorly. Which sucks, but that's the game we are playing now.

No, picking DE or Orks means you made the right choice. 40k is not about winning or losing a simple game. It is about your nicely modelled and painted miniatures. It is a modelling hobby with a roleplaying game attached to it.

Akiasura wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

Akiasura wrote:
This is nothing complicated, like order of activation, when do I feat, how do I spread out my orders, memorizing an entire map, knowing how to jungle, or any other game I've played. 40k is a very tactically shallow game.

It is not the most tactical of games no, and it is also not designed to be. Yet it goes beyond just list building. If that were the case, we could just stick to mathhammer and produce results that are actually somewhat reliable.

Akiasura wrote:

The fact a good player doesn't know what a match up means is really just a statement of how tactically shallow 40k is. Any other competitive game, nearly every player would know what that term refers to.

This is where you stop making sense. 40k is not a competitive game and is not designed as such (The first pages of the rulebook clearly state it is a 'narrative game') 40k is a modelling hobby with attached tabletop RPG, not a video game MOBA with rankings, achievements etc.

The book can state what it wants. The game has been a tactical game from 3rd to 5th, and recently 40k has switched its tune in name only.
I challenge you to find a single roleplaying element in the game. Necromunda and other games have them, 40k does not.

The rulebook states flat out that your warlord represents you on the battlefield. It also has numerous hints and bits about forging a narrative and getting in character etc. The rulebook is full of roleplaying elements.

Akiasura wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

Akiasura wrote:
40k has worked that way across it's entire existence. Editions are defined by what was the most competitive list at the time, not who were the best players like you see in other games.
Again, you don't understand what a matchup is, so it's hard to have a discussion about how competitive something is when you don't have the jargon down.
Leaf blower, rhino rush, 5e grey knights, falcon spam, Siren bomb. The names of the lists have nicknames. In other games the players have nicknames, like JVM, M2K, Boss.
It shows you what players focus on when they talk about the game.

In Warmachine and FoW lists have names too. (Winter Guard deathstar anyone?)

Which is not the name of a list, it is the name of a unit. A unit that operates differently depending on if it is taken with butcher, Vlad, or another caster.
It takes about 15 points to make one, out of the 55+ points you get. So no, not a list.
That's like me saying Molik Missle is a list. It isn't, it's about 12 points in a unit taken with Makeda 2. I still have 40 points of list to make, and it will impact how I play heavily.
Tiers are an exception, but that's how they work.

5e Grey Knights is the name of a codex, not a list. The others, like the WGDS, refer to certain tactics, not to certain lists. Lists do not have names in 40k, unless they are formations.

Deadnight wrote:
Hmm, I dunno. It's certainly 'easier' to model in 40k (I do a lot of WMH modelling, and tend to use gw bits for it for tgr most part), but I'd argue that it is also very easy to be very lazy with your modelling in 40k, if you do any at all. It used to be that you had to model/convert half your stuff, because not everything had a kit - now, not so much. I'm personally proud of a lot of my conversions (you should see my kroot and Fire warriors) for example, but a lot of what's out there ends up being quite basic. Regarding WMH conversions and modelling - you'd be surprised. It is a thing. I do quite a few conversions for my own army. Some of them ended up being extremely labour intensive (tournament legal female fenris conversion, I'm looking at you!) I often joke that modelling in WMH is like being a warcaster, if you're gonna do it, you'd better go epic. Here are some examples.

Yeah, I meant modelling intensive from the perspective of, "you must make a lot of modelling to play the game", rather than, "you can do a lot of modelling with what's made".

Most 40k armies will require that you make many modelling choices (scatter cannon, or shuriken catapult?), whereas essentially all PP models only come one way. If you like to "build" your army (point the head left, or look forward? Equip jump pack or backpack?), 40k "forces" you to do it, while with PP, it's mostly arms, torso, base, assembled.

I think people who want to just get down and play without tinkering endlessly with finicky parts will prefer WM/H. Or Infinity! It certainly doesn't mean that someone who loves Warmachines fluff can't spend lots of time making cool models.

Deadnight wrote:

Genuine compliment is genuine. Beers are on you though!

Pizza too. Always on the house

Though there is a kitty that nobody ever puts coins in for chips and chocolate bars and stuff.

Deadnight wrote:

And fair play. I'm from the alternative 'less is more' school of thought. Neither of us is wrong though (what's this? Agreement on the Internet?! Sky must be falling!)

Pffftt. Liez. There cannot be consensus on the Internet. HERESY!

 Iron_Captain wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

With the absurd range on the guns, destructive ability of the guns, and overall power level of the guns, the codex will be dangerous in anyone's hands. More than any other dex, considering the lack of bad units in the dex that a bad player would take.
The necron codex with the new formation is very strong, but is good in anyone's hand. You pretty much push the wraiths forward and hide the spyder.

Army lists tend to come in 2 varieties in most table top games. They either ask questions or answer questions. The ones that ask questions don't require nearly as much tactical work as the ones that answer questions. This is true in 40k, WMH, infinity, and most of the games I have seen.
The necron codex asks "Can you kill all my absurdly tough guys before they reach your lines?"
The SM codex asks "Can you stop my deathstar from destroying your army?"
The new Eldar codex asks "Can you withstand my shooting?"
It's easy to build this question from the army book compared to say, daemons, who are a strong army that requires a bit more work.

You make it sound so easy for someone to pick up and army and master the rules. I don't know if this is true for everyone.

It should take around 10 games. This is a pretty small learning curve compared to shooting games, fighting games, MOBAs, and other table tops.

Really? People need that many games to just master rules and a single army? Either that is a hyperbole or everyone I play with is incredibly smart. And personally I found Warmachine, FoW and Dystopian Wars all easier to learn than 40k. 40k takes more time to master due to the sheer amount of rules.

You are the first person I have ever heard to claim that.
I don't think you can claim that 10 games is a long time to master 40k's rules, then say it's a complex game, and then say WMH should take even less times. Those statements contradict each other.
In WMH, just knowing how to mitigate different feats, what pathfinder and eyeless sight can do, how weird CoC is, how annoying Menoth's Choir can be, and the crazyness of the teleport circle has can take a while to master. Learning how to utilize focus and mitigate fury and how each caster plays takes a very very long time.
You'll have a hard time asserting WMH is an easier game to master. The rules are clearer, but jacks alone can take more actions then most units do in 40k throughout the entire game.
Granted the 40k rules are written terribly. Flyers, FMC, and psykers are all confusing. But once you see it a few times it's easy to learn.

You will note that I made a difference between 'learn' and 'master'. Warmachine is far easier to learn than 40k, but harder to master.

You actually did not say that. I bolded it to help you.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:

If that requires some kind of evidence, assume I am just a boastful jerk, consider your own experiences and go from there. I would say it's only about 3 out of every 10 players I meet really know how to use the rules to their advantage, which would correspond with the upper end of a bell curve (it's actually being a little generous.)

I think you'd have to define using the rules to their advantage. 40k isn't an indepth system, and the majority of decisions are made in the list building stages. Anyone with an ability to work the most basic of statistics can see what units are good, make sure they have threat saturation, and go from there. I would say 3 in 10 don't have the ability to do this, and depending on your meta more or less may opt not to.
Figuring out how a deathstar operates, for example, is using the rules to help you, but anyone can do that given google and a short amount of time. There is little the enemy can stop it.

It takes more than good shooting to win games.

Akiasura wrote:
Making proper use of cover, target priority, choosing the right psychic powers, knowing the AV for enemy tanks, placing fortifications, making use of buildings, understanding terrain, knowing how to take and hold strategic points, making full use of cards in Maelstrom games, good deployments, knowing your opponent's armies and special rules, making effective use of psychic dice, etc. These are some of the the fundamentals I see too many people lacking in when the bring competitive lists. They count on some tricks working with their lists and don't know what to do when something doesn't go right.

Proper use of cover requires you to just be in cover. And don't bunch up if the enemy has blast templates.
Target priority is knowing what the weapons in the enemy list do and which units can hurt which model. There are few stats in this game and they are on a small scale, this doesn't take long to master either. The spammy nature of 40k means generally there are 1-3 main threats in an enemy army and you need to destroy it. With death stars it's even easier, just difficult to do anything. You have won or list in list building.
You don't get to chose psychic powers, they are randomly generated. If you mean disciplines, there are a few good ones (about 2-3) that are always amazing for any army and the rest are pretty bad.
The next 3 points are terrain which, again, mostly just require you to be in it.
Maelstrom cards are completely random and can not be planned for. Sometimes your enemy doesn't even have fliers for example. If your army is fast, and the best ones are, it's easier to grab them. This isn't infinity.
Good deployments are somewhat difficult to master and take a few games. Maybe 5-6. People who complain against drop pod armies usually are bad at deployments.
Psychic dice are also easy and requires a basic understanding of probability. If you only need 1-2 powers it becomes even easier. How the phase works is complicated but the system itself is easy. Defense is almost completely random and you usually have one spell you must stop, so you save it for that.

I somewhat agree with this, list building is the most important aspect of winning the game. It does take more than just a good list to win though, especially with more challenging armies such as DE or Orks. Good positioning and deployment are almost as important as a good list if you want to win, and having a good understanding of your opponent's army and setting target priorities (which goes far beyond 1-3 main threats) are also important. And of course a bit of luck.

Luck isn't really a skill, it's in every dice based game. Though you think it was the way some people roll...
Deployment is an issue for some armies, which I admitted. It's not terribly hard to master, and takes about 3-4 games before you are good at it. Maybe 1-2 more if drop pods are common in your area. I am speaking from an entirely new players perspective of course. 40k doesn't attract people who play other table tops in my experience.
Nothing is as important as a good list in 40k. Nothing. Just picking DE and Orks in this meta means you picked poorly. Which sucks, but that's the game we are playing now.

No, picking DE or Orks means you made the right choice. 40k is not about winning or losing a simple game. It is about your nicely modelled and painted miniatures. It is a modelling hobby with a roleplaying game attached to it.

If you're into modeling, 40k is fine. It has zero roleplaying elements in it.
As I said before, I challenge someone to find a roleplaying aspect to the game in the rules.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

Akiasura wrote:
This is nothing complicated, like order of activation, when do I feat, how do I spread out my orders, memorizing an entire map, knowing how to jungle, or any other game I've played. 40k is a very tactically shallow game.

It is not the most tactical of games no, and it is also not designed to be. Yet it goes beyond just list building. If that were the case, we could just stick to mathhammer and produce results that are actually somewhat reliable.

Akiasura wrote:

The fact a good player doesn't know what a match up means is really just a statement of how tactically shallow 40k is. Any other competitive game, nearly every player would know what that term refers to.

This is where you stop making sense. 40k is not a competitive game and is not designed as such (The first pages of the rulebook clearly state it is a 'narrative game') 40k is a modelling hobby with attached tabletop RPG, not a video game MOBA with rankings, achievements etc.

The book can state what it wants. The game has been a tactical game from 3rd to 5th, and recently 40k has switched its tune in name only.
I challenge you to find a single roleplaying element in the game. Necromunda and other games have them, 40k does not.

The rulebook states flat out that your warlord represents you on the battlefield. It also has numerous hints and bits about forging a narrative and getting in character etc. The rulebook is full of roleplaying elements.

My warlord represents me? Funny, I don't wake up everyday with a new set of abilities that I previously forgot
If the rulebook is full of roleplaying elements, it should be easy for someone to mention some. I see nothing about your characters growing with you, leveling up, working with a dungeon master/Gm/St or any other roleplaying elements. 40k used to have this too, but dropped it.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

Akiasura wrote:
40k has worked that way across it's entire existence. Editions are defined by what was the most competitive list at the time, not who were the best players like you see in other games.
Again, you don't understand what a matchup is, so it's hard to have a discussion about how competitive something is when you don't have the jargon down.
Leaf blower, rhino rush, 5e grey knights, falcon spam, Siren bomb. The names of the lists have nicknames. In other games the players have nicknames, like JVM, M2K, Boss.
It shows you what players focus on when they talk about the game.

In Warmachine and FoW lists have names too. (Winter Guard deathstar anyone?)

Which is not the name of a list, it is the name of a unit. A unit that operates differently depending on if it is taken with butcher, Vlad, or another caster.
It takes about 15 points to make one, out of the 55+ points you get. So no, not a list.
That's like me saying Molik Missle is a list. It isn't, it's about 12 points in a unit taken with Makeda 2. I still have 40 points of list to make, and it will impact how I play heavily.
Tiers are an exception, but that's how they work.

5e Grey Knights is the name of a codex, not a list. The others, like the WGDS, refer to certain tactics, not to certain lists. Lists do not have names in 40k, unless they are formations.

I'm not the one who said that WGDS was the name of a list, someone else did. It's not really a tactic set so much as a combo of units + solo, which a majority of casters in Khador can run.
5e grey knights had a few lists that were op, the craziest being the henchmen spam build.
But just to give a list of special names attributed to lists in 40k;
Rhino Rush
Leaf blower
The Bakery
The Flying Circus

There are a few more. Lists in 40k have names

Chad Warden wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:
At this rate, I think the proper thing would be to just aim operation pitchfork at getting Kelly sacked. Kelly either writes a stupidly overpowered codex, or a terribly weak codex. He either needs to shape up and stop this lulzy power creep, or simply not write codices anymore. Hell I'd take Matt Ward back over him.

I dont know if he worked on this, but he has stopped doing rules anyway.
Doesnt help fix whats already done though.

Oh, well that's good. Kelly is good at writing fluff, but terrible for rules. Whoever wrote this however does need to be sacked or at least slapped on the wrist and given a warning.

Also, even FAQ won't fix this debacle, The entire codex needs to be scrapped and re-done. 6th edition Codex is perfectly alright, I see no reason why Eldar players who aren't WAACers can't just use that and save themselves some money and not buy the 7th.

No Quarter magazine always has articles on modeling, minis and scenery.
Here's a great WMH table.



And I do a lot of conversions for WMH. Here's my favorite one.


But to be fair, I think Infinity has the best scenery. (the 40k scenery was thrown in because that's all the organizers had on hand.
Here's me and Larry Correia playing at a convention. Small game, but a great looking one.


I'm not saying you should like one more than the other, I'm just saying that sweeping generalizations don't really help the conversation.

I have a box o' Eldar gathering dust in my garage. This thread TOTALLY made me want to bust it out, learn it, and come find you to play....

I believe anyone who supports this ban should be banned when any codex you play gets release again....

IMO, especially with the current Codex creep (or in this case, a gigantic leap in power), is all the more evidence that somebody needs to come along and just tear down the TT. It's morphing into some horrible, stupid monster of a game that requires a ridiculous amount of exceptions and agreements to be truly enjoyable.

It'll never happen, but I'd love if for the 8th Edition GW tears everything down and hits a massive restart button.

 Wyzilla wrote:
It'll never happen, but I'd love if for the 8th Edition GW tears everything down and hits a massive restart button.

What? Like WFB 9E? Nah.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:
It'll never happen, but I'd love if for the 8th Edition GW tears everything down and hits a massive restart button.

What? Like WFB 9E? Nah.

Well, balance it out so it's like WFB 8e, which to my understanding was more or less perfect.

 Wyzilla wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:
It'll never happen, but I'd love if for the 8th Edition GW tears everything down and hits a massive restart button.

What? Like WFB 9E? Nah.

Well, balance it out so it's like WFB 8e, which to my understanding was more or less perfect.

It wasn't.
Look up Purple Sun, IF, and what it does to certain armies. Slow armies are not allowed to play in 8th edition.

@MWHistorian - Please don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that it's impossible to have nice WMH sets. I'm saying that it's hard to find groups into this sort of thing, as the vast majority seem to just want to get to the gaming part.

Also, that the average 40k table looks pretty impressive, even with average paint job and just common terrain. Because there are fewer models, much fewer large models, and lower model density, to achieve a table that doesn't look bare, you need to work a lot harder.

No disrespect to the PP studio, and as I said, there are extraordinary situations (like what you see in No Quarter) which buck this.

One thing you learn very quickly in 40k armies is that volume matters: Even a sub par modeling job looks impressive when your Imperial Gaurd has rows and rows of grunts. In the same way, historical look awesome because there are lines and lines of soldiers standing shoulder to shoulder, and terrain or ground cover on every available square inch.

Akiasura wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:
It'll never happen, but I'd love if for the 8th Edition GW tears everything down and hits a massive restart button.

What? Like WFB 9E? Nah.

Well, balance it out so it's like WFB 8e, which to my understanding was more or less perfect.

It wasn't.
Look up Purple Sun, IF, and what it does to certain armies. Slow armies are not allowed to play in 8th edition.

Meh, still not as bad as what the 'I-Win' banner + Alariel does to DoC...

40k is not a particularly tactical game, but the remaining criticisms are valid. "Your local meta is bad"/" players are crap" suggests you're dealing with munchkins and otherwise unpleasant people; if you're dealing with people who play tournament lists in pickup games you do, in fact, have a very unfriendly playgroup and you should find a better one or find something better to do with your time. If you're playing with a more friendly/laid-back group you have the capacity to ask "could you run a softer list?" and get results other than ridicule.

 AnomanderRake wrote:
40k is not a particularly tactical game, but the remaining criticisms are valid. "Your local meta is bad"/" players are crap" suggests you're dealing with munchkins and otherwise unpleasant people; if you're dealing with people who play tournament lists in pickup games you do, in fact, have a very unfriendly playgroup and you should find a better one or find something better to do with your time. If you're playing with a more friendly/laid-back group you have the capacity to ask "could you run a softer list?" and get results other than ridicule.

I take issue with that asserion. If 40k is not that tactical a game, why do great players consistently perform well in tournaments? Are they just exceptionally lucky?

The thing with playing with jerks is that it really doesn't matter what game you're playing. You might have a little better chance of winning and there might be less cheese, but it's still a lot less fun than playing with normal folk who are considerate of their opponents (which I would actually describe as most 40k players I meet).

 Talys wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
40k is not a particularly tactical game, but the remaining criticisms are valid. "Your local meta is bad"/" players are crap" suggests you're dealing with munchkins and otherwise unpleasant people; if you're dealing with people who play tournament lists in pickup games you do, in fact, have a very unfriendly playgroup and you should find a better one or find something better to do with your time. If you're playing with a more friendly/laid-back group you have the capacity to ask "could you run a softer list?" and get results other than ridicule.

I take issue with that asserion. If 40k is not that tactical a game, why do great players consistently perform well in tournaments? Are they just exceptionally lucky?

They hop to one of the better codexes in each edition. Recently TOs changing the game has helped, but that's been the trend since 3rd edition.

I can't name many great players in 40k, not ones that consistently win major tournaments.
Competitive games usually have these great players that you can name, and that most of the veterans know.



Jerks have nothing to do with it. I play all my table top games with the same group, including role playing games, and rarely, outside of one player, have issues. 40k just requires a certain level of handicapping depending on the power level of certain dexes/formations/allied combinations that leaves something to be desired in our group.

 Toofast wrote:
That's because you're printing ONE. When you have a printer run off 20,000 of them, it doesn't cost much. From GW employees and people who have worked in the printing industry, a codex costs $3-5 to print per copy. Then they're sold for $33-50. How is it that other, smaller companies can make hardcover books of the same quality with more pages for $20-30 if they cost so much to produce? Model kits cost about 25% of their total price to produce. I know this because every year at the training in Memphis, someone asks how GW can give 50% off to employees without losing money. The answer is that even at 50% off, GW is still doubling their money on the cost of a kit. This is why the fact that they don't have sales is mind boggling. If you're a grocery store with a 3% margin, you can't afford to have sales. If your production cost on a kit is $25 and MSRP is $100, you can most definitely afford to have sales once in awhile.

I work in the printing industry here in Australia and I manage 10 stores so I can talk on this specifically in regards to production and management. I am not the oracle by any means but I think based on the assumptions I have made along with the accurate info I have I thinks this is a fair estimate...

Yes, the traditional size codex (like the necrons) would cost on average $5-$10 AUS to produce, trim, bind and then additional to ship. Printing is cheaper the more you do but the finishing (the hard back binding and the spot UV - or the selected high gloss sections on the cover - are labour intensive and difficult to get right) and thus can be a cost that is consistent regardless of 1 copy or 1000. Spot UV can easily DOUBLE the cost of a product.

The main issue with what you presented is that unlike EVERY OTHER model company (PP, Wyrd etc), GW has bricks and mortar stores. This is a massive cost to them and they have to recover it somehow.

Using AUS as the example...

GW sell a box set in store for $100 AUS.
The store will buy it in for (my best guess having seen the stockist price list) about $40.

WOW! $60 profit right? Nope... its $60 gross profit or GP.

You then have to take out your operating expenses (like staff, rent and so on) which will typically be (in this example) $35 or so. Based on the estimates I have I would expect a NET profit in store after all costs of around 25%... pending actual operating costs for the area (number of staff etc).

So the company makes (my guess) about 25% in profit from the consumer at store. This is what keeps the production cycle up and investors interested in the company to support it.

The $40 they 'sell' it for to the GW store is used to cover shipping to the centre, management overheads, advertising, WD, the website maintenance and so on. Would they make money from staff selling at 50% - not sure... it depends on how its calculated. If you just look at the COGS (cost of goods) and deduct that number from what you sell the product for then yep - they will have a GP that is a positive number. Net though - not sure...

Reducing the retail price or running loss leader sales wont work as the product is a luxury item - and people will buy what they want rather than because its on special. When was the last time you saw Rolex or Ferrari do a sale? Same thing but on a much smaller scale. Also, as you can see above - selling that same $100 for a sale price of $80 means the company makes no money and being publicly listed it MUST make money or risk investor back lash. This is especially important right now with the end of financial year in the UK being end of May...

Akiasura wrote:

 Talys wrote:

I take issue with that asserion. If 40k is not that tactical a game, why do great players consistently perform well in tournaments? Are they just exceptionally lucky?

They hop to one of the better codexes in each edition. Recently TOs changing the game has helped, but that's been the trend since 3rd edition.

Except that no particular faction sweeps the tournaments. You'd think it'd be all Decurion all the time from what you read in Dakka, but if you check the ITC tournament results, the tournament winner love is pretty spread out. Space Marines usually do pretty well, often taking the top spot, very often being in top 3.

Even Blood Angels placed second on a recent tournament. Surely, that's not because they have an OP codex.

Akiasura wrote:

I can't name many great players in 40k, not ones that consistently win major tournaments.
Competitive games usually have these great players that you can name, and that most of the veterans know.

At local tournaments, there are some vets that compete all the time that might not win, but always do quite well. I don't follow the larger competitive scene enough to name anyone either. Certainly, experience matters.

 Talys wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

 Talys wrote:

I take issue with that asserion. If 40k is not that tactical a game, why do great players consistently perform well in tournaments? Are they just exceptionally lucky?

They hop to one of the better codexes in each edition. Recently TOs changing the game has helped, but that's been the trend since 3rd edition.

Except that no particular faction sweeps the tournaments. You'd think it'd be all Decurion all the time from what you read in Dakka, but if you check the ITC tournament results, the tournament winner love is pretty spread out. Space Marines usually do pretty well, often taking the top spot, very often being in top 3.

Even Blood Angels placed second on a recent tournament. Surely, that's not because they have an OP codex.

Do you have a link for this? I'd be very curious to see what tournament a Blood Angel player did well in.
As I stated above, TO's are comping the game heavily to make it more fair. This is the first time this has been done to this extent in 40k. Before it was a soft score, if it was done at all, not flat out banning things.
Doing so makes the game more balanced.
Decurion hasn't been out very long either, I'd be surprised if they are winning the tournaments yet. People said the same thing about Bradigus in WMH, it took a while before it started doing well. Once it did, it was incredibly overpowered and PP was forced to issue a huge nerf to the faction to compensate.
SM are one of the strongest faction in the game, due to the deathstar. Of course, most deathstars aren't allowed in tournaments, so it depends on which tournament we are talking about. Still, they have a lot of strong options and aren't one of the weaker dexes.

DE, DA, BA (hence why I'm curious), CSM, and Orks are some of the weaker dexes.

 Talys wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

I can't name many great players in 40k, not ones that consistently win major tournaments.
Competitive games usually have these great players that you can name, and that most of the veterans know.

At local tournaments, there are some vets that compete all the time that might not win, but always do quite well. I don't follow the larger competitive scene enough to name anyone either. Certainly, experience matters.

Akiasura wrote:
Do you have a link for this? I'd be very curious to see what tournament a Blood Angel player did well in.

https://www.frontlinegaming.org/community/frontline-gamings-independent-tournament-circuit/2015-itc-event-results/

First event (Edmonton Onslaught). The BA player placed third. Top spot went to Imperial Guard, again, hardly a power codex. The best Eldar placed 5th, the best Taut 7th.

Akiasura wrote:


SM are one of the strongest faction in the game, due to the deathstar. Of course, most deathstars aren't allowed in tournaments, so it depends on which tournament we are talking about. Still, they have a lot of strong options and aren't one of the weaker dexes.

DE, DA, BA (hence why I'm curious), CSM, and Orks are some of the weaker dexes.

Invisibility is nerfed at ITC, IIRC. There are actually some tournaments where DE and DA fared ok too. But your point is well taken. Also, some of the codices are less "weak" as they are unforgiving (DE).

Your point about modified rules is absolutely right; they make the game better.

 Talys wrote:

Akiasura wrote:
Do you have a link for this? I'd be very curious to see what tournament a Blood Angel player did well in.

https://www.frontlinegaming.org/community/frontline-gamings-independent-tournament-circuit/2015-itc-event-results/

First event (Edmonton Onslaught). The BA player placed third. Top spot went to Imperial Guard, again, hardly a power codex. The best Eldar placed 5th, the best Taut 7th.

In the TO created environment, which is very different from the raw game, certain dexes move up and some move down.
If you look at the next 4 tournaments, you see results you would expect. The event you name seems to be mostly one club, so I imagine it is a somewhat local event.

 Talys wrote:

Akiasura wrote:


SM are one of the strongest faction in the game, due to the deathstar. Of course, most deathstars aren't allowed in tournaments, so it depends on which tournament we are talking about. Still, they have a lot of strong options and aren't one of the weaker dexes.

DE, DA, BA (hence why I'm curious), CSM, and Orks are some of the weaker dexes.

Invisibility is nerfed at ITC, IIRC. There are actually some tournaments where DE and DA fared ok too. But your point is well taken. Also, some of the codices are less "weak" as they are unforgiving (DE).

Your point about modified rules is absolutely right; they make the game better.

Yes, with invisibility nerfed, certain factions going from amazing to merely good (Looking at you Daemons).
Armies that lack invis also get a huge buff, so this helps curb the power levels both ways. This isn't the raw game though, considering the power changes it's practically a new game with a completely different meta.
I notice that when I flip through the tourney results, the top couple of players tend to be similar armies. Not the power dexes in the raw game, since it is a different meta, but it is a trend.

This is no different from SSBB. Metaknight was easily the best character in the entire game. There really is no arguing this. Look up tournaments won by MK, and you will find very few, since he was banned relatively quickly in competitive play, leading people to make false conclusions.

De used to be an unforgiving but strong codex. My competitive friend who is the best player has mained De more than any other army, but hasn't played them in a long time.
Now it's just weak. Going second can cripple the army.

Akiasura wrote:
De used to be an unforgiving but strong codex. My competitive friend who is the best player has mained De more than any other army, but hasn't played them in a long time.
Now it's just weak. Going second can cripple the army.

Anecdotal evidence. I played DE at the ETC in 2012, won the masters event here in WA 2012 and numerous RT events since then with them - so they must be excellent - see how silly that sounds? I would not say they are weak - just very limited in builds and reliant on good match ups for them to do well consistently.

Back on topic though - in regards to the D weapons - what if every distort weapon in the elder codex suffered the -1 to the table? Would that fix concerns?

I means you never have the whole "Oh look a 6 - I win" and as such will always get cover and ++ saves. The WK in particular is easier to stomach points wise with this penalty.

Hmmm the limited book is sold out, I don't think your tactics are working...

 Kelly502 wrote:
Hmmm the limited book is sold out, I don't think your tactics are working...

When you've got a print run of 500-1000, it's easy to sell out in a single day. Don't take things like that as any sort of telling indicators of anything. There are thousands of people that buy literally everything GW comes out with just because.

 Kelly502 wrote:
Hmmm the limited book is sold out, I don't think your tactics are working...

They sold a whopping 800 copies out of 1-2 million customers. That isn't an indication of success, just further proof that their lack of market research makes them unable to correctly predict demand on this type of product.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Kelly502 wrote:
Hmmm the limited book is sold out, I don't think your tactics are working...

When you've got a print run of 500-1000, it's easy to sell out in a single day. Don't take things like that as any sort of telling indicators of anything. There are thousands of people that buy literally everything GW comes out with just because.

I dunno man. I buy a crap ton of stuff, and I came close on the Eldar LE book, but I have never been able to bring myself to pull the trigger on the limited edition book. It's just SO much more.... not really a factor of, "can I afford it" as ... "WTF... $200...?!?!?!"

You have to REALLY love a faction (or I guess, GW/40k) to blow that kind of money to get a nicer cover, and uh.. free cards and 6 tactical objective markers


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Toofast wrote:

 Kelly502 wrote:
Hmmm the limited book is sold out, I don't think your tactics are working...

They sold a whopping 800 copies out of 1-2 million customers. That isn't an indication of success, just further proof that their lack of market research makes them unable to correctly predict demand on this type of product.

If it is 800.... That's about 800 copies more than I thought rational people would buy. About 700 more copies than I thought there would be people in the world that would purchase. But I think that with every LE book, and can never understand how it sells out.

I was looking at the LE Skitarii book. It was absolutely beautiful, but there is no way I could defend that purchase to myself. And I'm the guy that payed ~$350 for 4 lightbulbs because I can change their colour from my phone.

 Purifier wrote:
I was looking at the LE Skitarii book. It was absolutely beautiful, but there is no way I could defend that purchase to myself. And I'm the guy that payed ~$350 for 4 lightbulbs because I can change their colour from my phone.

LOL. Hey, totally off topic. Do those lightbulbs consume much energy when they are turned off? Because, they use WiFi and are always listening, right?

One reason I don't buy an LE book is that once I cross the line, it will be easier to justify the next time (if you do something stupid, and you're ok, it MUST be ok to do it again... right????). And the last thing I want to do is buy Eldar, Space Marine, Tau LE books...

By the way: if you have a good relationship with your FLGS, they CAN order these, and they receive their discounts on it (and therefore, may pass some discount on to you). However, there may be shipping involved, raising their cost.

 Massaen wrote:

Akiasura wrote:
De used to be an unforgiving but strong codex. My competitive friend who is the best player has mained De more than any other army, but hasn't played them in a long time.
Now it's just weak. Going second can cripple the army.

Anecdotal evidence. I played DE at the ETC in 2012, won the masters event here in WA 2012 and numerous RT events since then with them - so they must be excellent - see how silly that sounds? I would not say they are weak - just very limited in builds and reliant on good match ups for them to do well consistently.

Back on topic though - in regards to the D weapons - what if every distort weapon in the elder codex suffered the -1 to the table? Would that fix concerns?

I means you never have the whole "Oh look a 6 - I win" and as such will always get cover and ++ saves. The WK in particular is easier to stomach points wise with this penalty.

In a discussion like this, anecdotal evidence is mostly what everyone is using.
I can say that the dex is terribly internally imbalanced.
I can say that their special characters are now a step down from the exarchs from the eldar book.
I can say that poison seems to be getting worse each codex that releases. Units that were afraid of it becoming GMC, Necrons becoming much tougher against it.
I can say that their transports are weak versus several options and fails to protect the troops well enough.

Really, you can always go to the DE tactics thread. It's one of the larger ones, and it's not what I would call a positive thread.
And winning three years ago doesn't mean much...from 2012 to now we've had a new edition and a lot of new codexes. So yeah, that does sound incredibly silly
Saying someone is reliant on good match ups is really the definition of a bottom tier option. Eldar, Necrons, and SM in the raw game do not need comp or a good match up, they can play against anyone and expect to do alright. Daemons too.



People say DE is an army that requires skill and is weak otherwise because, for most of the game, that is how it was. It's no longer the case. I'd need to see options in it that are competitive in today's meta, but difficult to utilize correctly.
To be fair, the tournament rankings Talys just showed me didn't have De doing that well.

 Talys wrote:

 Purifier wrote:
I was looking at the LE Skitarii book. It was absolutely beautiful, but there is no way I could defend that purchase to myself. And I'm the guy that payed ~$350 for 4 lightbulbs because I can change their colour from my phone.

LOL. Hey, totally off topic. Do those lightbulbs consume much energy when they are turned off? Because, they use WiFi and are always listening, right?

One reason I don't buy an LE book is that once I cross the line, it will be easier to justify the next time (if you do something stupid, and you're ok, it MUST be ok to do it again... right????). And the last thing I want to do is buy Eldar, Space Marine, Tau LE books...

By the way: if you have a good relationship with your FLGS, they CAN order these, and they receive their discounts on it (and therefore, may pass some discount on to you). However, there may be shipping involved, raising their cost.

Dunno how much power, never measured it, but yeah, they're always listening on the wifi. Can't imagine it's any meaningful amount of power though. My phone is always listening on the wifi and doing a whole lot of other things too, and it's still managing on just a slim battery.

My (F)LGS sells at the exact same price as GW website, and they wouldn't even give me a 10% discount when I said I wanted 7 skitarii chickenwalkers and 3 dunecrabs.
So I took my business to Element Games instead.

Are you really that butt hurt about some new rules for models yh they are powerful but its just a game your life doesn't depend on it have fun and stop whining you sound like a bunch of 5 year olds who don't get what they want it seriously mature the game is about adapting to what your fighting against you can just ban a race from tournaments, think about it all the eldar players who have spent thousands on getting there armies and then boom they can't use them if it were the other way round and your army got banned cause some butt hurt power gamers hated them you would be pretty pissed you had spent all that money and now its out the window. so stop being butt hurt go play the game have fun and enjoy your self its not all about winning so please grow a pair and stop acting like prepubescent 5 year olds....

dale_house wrote:
Are you really that butt hurt about some new rules for models yh they are powerful but its just a game your life doesn't depend on it have fun and stop whining you sound like a bunch of 5 year olds who don't get what they want it seriously mature the game is about adapting to what your fighting against you can just ban a race from tournaments, think about it all the eldar players who have spent thousands on getting there armies and then boom they can't use them if it were the other way round and your army got banned cause some butt hurt power gamers hated them you would be pretty pissed you had spent all that money and now its out the window. so stop being butt hurt go play the game have fun and enjoy your self its not all about winning so please grow a pair and stop acting like prepubescent 5 year olds....

There are no words, only orkmoticons

Rule One is Be Polite. Please don't make a discussion about toy soldiers personal. Thanks!

The ellipsis suggests that his keyboard does have the period.

Akiasura wrote:
DE, DA, BA (hence why I'm curious), CSM, and Orks are some of the weaker dexes.

Where do Grey Knights fit into that paradigm?

Lsjreadingpa wrote:

Akiasura wrote:
DE, DA, BA (hence why I'm curious), CSM, and Orks are some of the weaker dexes.

Where do Grey Knights fit into that paradigm?

Grey Knight, while not top tier, are still a top mid-tier codex.....because DreadKnights.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

The fact a good player doesn't know what a match up means is really just a statement of how tactically shallow 40k is. Any other competitive game, nearly every player would know what that term refers to.

This is where you stop making sense. 40k is not a competitive game and is not designed as such (The first pages of the rulebook clearly state it is a 'narrative game') 40k is a modelling hobby with attached tabletop RPG, not a video game MOBA with rankings, achievements etc.

Well it's actualy you who doesn't make sense. Rick Priestley said that 3rd edition was a competitive, tourney oriented game. Someone else from the studio, I think Kelly (not sure) when commenting on 6th said that they went into direction of craziness because Allessio made 5th too competitive therefore a bit bland or sth like that. So in typical GW manner they created a tourney oriented player base only to be dicks later and crap on it, 3 - 5 edition were tourney rulesets (badly designed tourney rulesets but thats a different topic) and it's still the same game just with more random crap and narrative excuses to help cover up the atrocious balance. Adding a few forge narrative boxes doesnt change 2 player wargame with points and victory objectives into rpg, complete nonsense. Rogue Trader is long gone and it's the only edition that had anything to do with role playing and even then it was lite rpgish.

Not to mention forge the narrative is not an rpg thing at all, it's supposed to provide mood and context to battles. In WW2 wargames it's better to play a part of Kursk than random tank battle #15. Even if you played a 40k campaign where your general and units gain experience or skills, it still wouldnt be an rpg, every pc wargame does that ie Total War.

40k is a competitive game by nature. You can ignore that fact and mindlessly roll dice to see something awesome but you cant change it. It's also not casual, beer and ptetzels or whatever excuse people spew here on daily basis to justify what in reality is GW urinating on their faces while pretending it's rain.

Also congratulations on swallowing GWs hhhhhobby bs, Im sure without the game everybody would still buy minis in multiples to make dioramas. Few % at best.

I like GW btw, just am tired of the casual gentelman handicaping special snowflake game bs.

 Galef wrote:

Lsjreadingpa wrote:

Akiasura wrote:
DE, DA, BA (hence why I'm curious), CSM, and Orks are some of the weaker dexes.

Where do Grey Knights fit into that paradigm?

Grey Knight, while not top tier, are still a top mid-tier codex.....because DreadKnights.

I usually run 2 dreads in my list and as much as they are alot to deal with i find that people still deal with them very easily with alot of ap2. Take the Dreadknights away and what are the Grey Knights?

Here's a tournament system Im going to do later on this year. I pretty much knocks all the stupid stuff out of 40k

25% min points on troops
up to 25% points spent on HQ, ELITES, FAST, HEAVY, ALLIES, FORMATIONS, LORDS OF WAR.

1 force org as presented in the Combined arms, no special detachments.

0-2 limit on everything outside of troops, 0-3 limit on dedicated transports

2 source limit

No fortification networks

If Anything is being abused you restrict it further, eventually can go book to book. If something is not fitting right then make exceptions.

I'm fairly infamous for being extremely salty regarding GW's ideas of balance and game design, and yet I still think this is remarkably silly. Dakkadakka does host a large 40k player poplation relative to its competition online community wise, but you're almost certainly not reaching enough people to really affect GW's practices by shouting from this particular podium.

Rav - that does nothing to limit the Eldar book at all, as it majors on highly effective troops and not really needing anything other than the CAD at all.

Like most blanket comps like this it also knocks anyone out from even considering running assassins, etc.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Rav - that does nothing to limit the Eldar book at all, as it majors on highly effective troops and not really needing anything other than the CAD at all.

Like most blanket comps like this it also knocks anyone out from even considering running assassins, etc.

Like I said, make changes. That's the base line. I'll have to see what jetbikes are like but if they are too crazy drop them to 1 per 3 models. Done.

Assassins can be a ally source, you just have to dial back the insane detachment shenanigans

Yes they can be an ally source, but is it worthwhile taking up your 1 other "source" allowance on a lone assassin?

What about detahcments composed of formations? (Decurion, Slaught cult, etc)

While I have no issue in general with trying to comp, blanket systems such as this really struggle. You still cannt cut the compleexity down sufficiently I dont think, while still working within the very loose system GW has gone with. FOr example Be'lakor IS a HQ choice for a chaos marine army, but as he coems from a slate is that another "source"? He technically isnt (the slate is subsumed within the codex RAW)

Swedish Comp is pretty great, but it's not keeping up with the times, now that GW is releasing something every time you turn around.

dale_house wrote:
Are you really that butt hurt about some new rules for models yh they are powerful but its just a game your life doesn't depend on it have fun and stop whining you sound like a bunch of 5 year olds who don't get what they want it seriously mature the game is about adapting to what your fighting against you can just ban a race from tournaments, think about it all the eldar players who have spent thousands on getting there armies and then boom they can't use them if it were the other way round and your army got banned cause some butt hurt power gamers hated them you would be pretty pissed you had spent all that money and now its out the window. so stop being butt hurt go play the game have fun and enjoy your self its not all about winning so please grow a pair and stop acting like prepubescent 5 year olds....

Finally, someone had to say it

 clamclaw wrote:

dale_house wrote:
Are you really that butt hurt about some new rules for models yh they are powerful but its just a game your life doesn't depend on it have fun and stop whining you sound like a bunch of 5 year olds who don't get what they want it seriously mature the game is about adapting to what your fighting against you can just ban a race from tournaments, think about it all the eldar players who have spent thousands on getting there armies and then boom they can't use them if it were the other way round and your army got banned cause some butt hurt power gamers hated them you would be pretty pissed you had spent all that money and now its out the window. so stop being butt hurt go play the game have fun and enjoy your self its not all about winning so please grow a pair and stop acting like prepubescent 5 year olds....

Finally, someone had to say it

...using the longest run-on sentence I've ever read in my entire life.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Yes they can be an ally source, but is it worthwhile taking up your 1 other "source" allowance on a lone assassin?

What about detahcments composed of formations? (Decurion, Slaught cult, etc)

While I have no issue in general with trying to comp, blanket systems such as this really struggle. You still cannt cut the compleexity down sufficiently I dont think, while still working within the very loose system GW has gone with. FOr example Be'lakor IS a HQ choice for a chaos marine army, but as he coems from a slate is that another "source"? He technically isnt (the slate is subsumed within the codex RAW)

Flat out ban on the combined formation detachments, they have shown to be too abusable. Plus half of them don't work with the 0-2 limits. Works just fine and makes for better 40k Da Boyz GT does it and its actually a good time.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Purifier wrote:
Swedish Comp is pretty great, but it's not keeping up with the times, now that GW is releasing something every time you turn around.

That's the thing, GW seems to be actively trying to counter tournament systems.

If the new Eldar do end up playing too much like lol Wut the result will be lots of house rules pretty much everywhere to compensate, any group I have ever played with has been the same, identify something that is just broken and mess around with it until it works.

Lsjreadingpa wrote:

 Galef wrote:

Lsjreadingpa wrote:

Akiasura wrote:
DE, DA, BA (hence why I'm curious), CSM, and Orks are some of the weaker dexes.

Where do Grey Knights fit into that paradigm?

Grey Knight, while not top tier, are still a top mid-tier codex.....because DreadKnights.

I usually run 2 dreads in my list and as much as they are alot to deal with i find that people still deal with them very easily with alot of ap2. Take the Dreadknights away and what are the Grey Knights?

You could say the same about Tyranids; what do they have other than the Flyrant?

Same for Tau and the Riptide.

SGTPozy wrote:

Lsjreadingpa wrote:

 Galef wrote:

Lsjreadingpa wrote:

Akiasura wrote:
DE, DA, BA (hence why I'm curious), CSM, and Orks are some of the weaker dexes.

Where do Grey Knights fit into that paradigm?

Grey Knight, while not top tier, are still a top mid-tier codex.....because DreadKnights.

I usually run 2 dreads in my list and as much as they are alot to deal with i find that people still deal with them very easily with alot of ap2. Take the Dreadknights away and what are the Grey Knights?

You could say the same about Tyranids; what do they have other than the Flyrant?

Same for Tau and the Riptide.

I agree. You can say that for most every army, there is one or two lynch pin units that "make" the entire faction. When there isn't it means that they are either terribly, woefully, outclassed or top tier (Daemons, Eldar).

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

 clamclaw wrote:

dale_house wrote:
Are you really that butt hurt about some new rules for models yh they are powerful but its just a game your life doesn't depend on it have fun and stop whining you sound like a bunch of 5 year olds who don't get what they want it seriously mature the game is about adapting to what your fighting against you can just ban a race from tournaments, think about it all the eldar players who have spent thousands on getting there armies and then boom they can't use them if it were the other way round and your army got banned cause some butt hurt power gamers hated them you would be pretty pissed you had spent all that money and now its out the window. so stop being butt hurt go play the game have fun and enjoy your self its not all about winning so please grow a pair and stop acting like prepubescent 5 year olds....

Finally, someone had to say it

...using the longest run-on sentence I've ever read in my entire life.

You say run-on, I say seeping with raw emotion. Who has time for punctuation in the heat of the moment?!

 clamclaw wrote:

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

 clamclaw wrote:

dale_house wrote:
Are you really that butt hurt about some new rules for models yh they are powerful but its just a game your life doesn't depend on it have fun and stop whining you sound like a bunch of 5 year olds who don't get what they want it seriously mature the game is about adapting to what your fighting against you can just ban a race from tournaments, think about it all the eldar players who have spent thousands on getting there armies and then boom they can't use them if it were the other way round and your army got banned cause some butt hurt power gamers hated them you would be pretty pissed you had spent all that money and now its out the window. so stop being butt hurt go play the game have fun and enjoy your self its not all about winning so please grow a pair and stop acting like prepubescent 5 year olds....

Finally, someone had to say it

...using the longest run-on sentence I've ever read in my entire life.

You say run-on, I say seeping with raw emotion. Who has time for punctuation in the heat of the moment?!

Patrick Rothfuss?

 clamclaw wrote:

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

 clamclaw wrote:

dale_house wrote:
Are you really that butt hurt about some new rules for models yh they are powerful but its just a game your life doesn't depend on it have fun and stop whining you sound like a bunch of 5 year olds who don't get what they want it seriously mature the game is about adapting to what your fighting against you can just ban a race from tournaments, think about it all the eldar players who have spent thousands on getting there armies and then boom they can't use them if it were the other way round and your army got banned cause some butt hurt power gamers hated them you would be pretty pissed you had spent all that money and now its out the window. so stop being butt hurt go play the game have fun and enjoy your self its not all about winning so please grow a pair and stop acting like prepubescent 5 year olds....

Finally, someone had to say it

...using the longest run-on sentence I've ever read in my entire life.

You say run-on, I say seeping with raw emotion. Who has time for punctuation in the heat of the moment?!

fething perfect.

 clamclaw wrote:

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:

 clamclaw wrote:

dale_house wrote:
Are you really that butt hurt about some new rules for models yh they are powerful but its just a game your life doesn't depend on it have fun and stop whining you sound like a bunch of 5 year olds who don't get what they want it seriously mature the game is about adapting to what your fighting against you can just ban a race from tournaments, think about it all the eldar players who have spent thousands on getting there armies and then boom they can't use them if it were the other way round and your army got banned cause some butt hurt power gamers hated them you would be pretty pissed you had spent all that money and now its out the window. so stop being butt hurt go play the game have fun and enjoy your self its not all about winning so please grow a pair and stop acting like prepubescent 5 year olds....

Finally, someone had to say it

...using the longest run-on sentence I've ever read in my entire life.

You say run-on, I say seeping with raw emotion. Who has time for punctuation in the heat of the moment?!

you can't expect politeness and respect when you're defending the company that makes your favorite game of toy soldiers. I mean, if you have a criticism of a product you've spent hundreds of dollars and hours pn you must be a terrible person.