With all the hassle people have with 40k, there´s always someone saying that Forgeworld did a great job with their HH stuff and there never is anyone argumenting against it.
What makes people view 30k as a better system?

Never played 30k, and I know nothing about it, so maybe

It's fairly well balanced and it's a hell of a lot of fun.

Well, it's marines against marines against marines against marines... So just from that I imagine it's a lot easier to balance.

Mechanicus list looks fun though.

I've played against a 30k list with my Necrons. They're REALLY good and it was a blast to face. I can only imagine the internal balance to be solid from what I've read.

They just seem to have put a bit more thought into balance than the GW studio seems to.

For starters you've got Lords of War. Forge World originated the slot with 30k, but with a point limit for any Lord of War of 25% of the army total to make sure they would only be fielded in games against forces large enough to have a decent chance of dealing with them. A rather sensible restriction that GW Central scrapped in order to sell plastic.

On a slightly less quantifiable level you've got the lack of a '40k legal' stamp. 30k is 'broadly compatible' with regular 40k (and in fact, the Word Bearer are allowed to include Codex: Daemons allies) but because the rules haven't been playtested with regular 40k FW have refrained from giving it the 40k legal stamp that the Imperial Armour books get, which shows that balance is something that FW cares about.

changemod wrote:
Well, it's marines against marines against marines against marines... So just from that I imagine it's a lot easier to balance.

Mechanicus list looks fun though.

O.o mechanicus aren't marines..

The books have better internal balance, the rules are based on the fluff instead of selling models, and FW actually seem to care about the player experience. It's not more balanced because it's all marines, there's tons of crazy stuff in the HH books. It's more balanced because the people writing the rules actually give a feth about balance instead of just pushing plastic crack.

No. The cost of the models and rules makes 40k look affordable by comparison.

He just asked if it was a better game system, not a cheaper one.

One thing that always made me scratch my head with 40k's LoW implementation was how simple, effective, and fair the 30k implementation is. The 25% rule is the easiest solution to permitting LoW in normal games, while ensuring the crazy super large powerful ones don't rear their head until 2500+pts.

Other than that, different FoCs and actually making you adhere to one stand out, but its still the same game, just with new units and wargear.

The campaigns are pretty solid too.

Internal balance is decent as well. There isn't much to say about external, seeing as most of it is just marine on marine action. Mechanicum and Solar being fleshed out will change that, but time will tell when we have complete army lists.

Basically, take their FoC and LoW implementation and apply it to 40k, and it would ease some of the issues.

 Jimsolo wrote:
No. The cost of the models and rules makes 40k look affordable by comparison.

Ways round that though, converting from 40k olastic marines, or just using them stock if you arent bothered about 'which armour did the Imperial Fists wear before the heresy' etc. I'm picky like that and I prefer the FW models and yes it's expensive but that just means my army will take longer to build.

I have two HH armies and both are about 50% FW marines, 50% regular marines with FW heads, because really, who notices more than the helmets anyway? The 50% FW is mostly either Raptors and Destroyers or models where there isn't a 40k analogue like Cataphractii. I find its cheaper than a 40k army just because 30k stuff is more expensive once you get away from Tacticals. A ten man jump pack destroyer squad is 400+ points.

As for better, I think so. I love the wide options available. There is no single competitive list for Legion when you have all the Rites or War and the individual legion abilities. My Night Lords look on paper 100% different than my Iron Warriors and play completely different as well. As opposed to 40k marines where there are small list changes but if you have seen one marine army, you have seen most(there are some broad exceptions) of them.

As for rules, all of the equipment makes sense for the most part, there are no "I win" or must take options. I field them only against 40k armies and find they do well simply because my opponents refuse to accept they cant be treated like normal marines. I never field them the same way and rarely use the same line up twice. That and I guess I play mine armies differently than they do and tend to take the offensive early and never let up. Its a small group so they get used to playing against each other but then I show up once a month and throw them for a loop.

Some of the larger disadvantages are lack of ATSKNF with only the tacticals getting something to mitigate it slightly with a reroll, and smaller point games tend to be kind of bland since we don't get our cool stuff realistically until 2k+. Some of the legion rules mitigate the leadership thing as well I might add.

Funny, isn't it? It used to be that GW wrote the good rules and FW wrote the bad rules, and now it's the other way around.

Simply put, 30K can't even come close to the shenanigans that 40K can do. Even a Primarch dies to a Knight or even massed fire from Tau or Eldar.

All i can tell i that i've seen a fight between infantry heavy night lords and big-gunz heavy iron hands. It was over turn 2 for night lords. While iron hands lost 1 bolter guy and 1 plazmacannon guy to overheat. Forgeworld really favors big gunz a lot. Those massed plazma cannons and s6 gunz with quadrillion shots that generate extra shots are brutal. And iron hands basically have +1 toughness across the board for no extra points.

The Iron Hands are the one slightly better legion in 30k. But it's nothing like 40k levels of unbalanced.

It's "balanced" because the game consists of primarily space marines, and it's still the 40k system. It is certainly not 'the better game system'.

I use the Mechanicus list exclusively against both 40k and 30 foes. So far it's been a blast for everyone involved.

 koooaei wrote:
And iron hands basically have +1 toughness across the board for no extra points.

Do 40K Space Marines pay extra points for their chapter tactics?

Didn't think so.

And, so nobody gets the wrong idea, it isn't +1 toughness. Shooting attacks suffer -1 strength against IH marines.

 Gunzhard wrote:
It's "balanced" because the game consists of primarily space marines, and it's still the 40k system. It is certainly not 'the better game system'.

Each legion does play significantly differently. They also have a Knights army list, a Mechanicum army list, and a Solar Auxilia army list, all of which are balanced and play very differently. It's balanced because they care about the game and took the time to balance everything.

Regarding those who say that 30k is only ballanced because it's largely marine on marine action - the Mechanicus and the Solar Aux armies are bound to be quite different from the usual Legion army. I've not played 30k so can't say if they implemented them right, but so far i heard no complaints along the lines of "Mechanicus OP, Solar aus have bad dex, halp!" so it's probably good.

Mechanicum play very differently to any other army too and they're still balanced.

To be fair, though, a Mechanicum list spamming Castellax can be very difficult for someone unprepared for it.

Yeah I guess so. No more than a lot of things in 40k though I guess.

 koooaei wrote:
All i can tell i that i've seen a fight between infantry heavy night lords and big-gunz heavy iron hands. It was over turn 2 for night lords. While iron hands lost 1 bolter guy and 1 plazmacannon guy to overheat. Forgeworld really favors big gunz a lot. Those massed plazma cannons and s6 gunz with quadrillion shots that generate extra shots are brutal. And iron hands basically have +1 toughness across the board for no extra points.

Its a useless rule against my world eaters who have almost no ranged shooting to speak of, and 60+ tac marines with apothecaries will get to his line and as he has spent all his points in guns, he will die to combat

IMO, 30k still suffers from a lot of the same problems as 40k (IGOUGO, questionable balance, rules that aren't always clear, etc) but it's a better game for three reasons:

1) The attitude behind it is better. "Main GW" stuff is all about milking the cash cow of young kids impulse buying the new releases with their birthday/christmas money. New model releases are thrown together as quickly as possible with no apparent desire to refine the initial concepts, and the rules barely get more effort than the games on the backs of cereal boxes. FW releases, on the other hand, are aimed at older collectors with money and high standards. Obviously the goal is still to sell models, but the starting point is "I have this awesome fluff idea, how do we put it on the table" instead of "kids like big airplane models, the new release needs one".

2) It removes many of the things I (and a lot of other people) hate about 7th. Maelstrom missions are gone, psykers are minimized (and psyker spam is nonexistent), LOW are scaled to the point level of the game, there are no special detachments/formations/etc to break the FOC, and FW openly says "unbound is stupid, don't use it". So even though the core rules aren't all that different it feels like more of a game and less "buy GW™ Products™ and play with them however you like!!!!".

3) Where "main GW" talks a lot about "forge the narrative" but only uses it as an excuse for why the rules suck FW actually puts a lot of work into making 30k a narrative game. The special missions and campaign systems make a cruel joke out of everything "main GW" has published in the past few years, and even things like including art and fluffy unit descriptions on each page of the army list help to put the emphasis on telling a story. And that puts the focus on the strengths of 40k instead of its crippling weaknesses.

for 30k the word bearers always interested me...though i cant afford shehit from forgeworld :\

You don't need shehit from FW aside from the rules which are conveniently in two books. If you can afford regular 40k, you can afford 30k. Head swaps, alternate company parts for some of the oddball weapons, most vehicles are analogues between the two systems and/or can be used in either system.

Col. Dash wrote:
You don't need shehit from FW aside from the rules which are conveniently in two books. If you can afford regular 40k, you can afford 30k. Head swaps, alternate company parts for some of the oddball weapons, most vehicles are analogues between the two systems and/or can be used in either system.

i hardly think anyone will refuse to play you because your marines have mk vi armor instead of mk i-iv

Exactly. I'm doing mine with the proper models but that's my preference, I wouldn't not play you if you had plastic marines or whatever. The plastic space marine vehicles are actually in the books, they're 'Mars pattern' I think, as opposed to the Deimos pattern FW ones.

The rules are a hell of a lot of fun, each legion plays differently, there is an absolute tonne of fun weapons/vehicle upgrades/equipment etc. I love it, price aside.

 ImAGeek wrote:
Exactly. I'm doing mine with the proper models but that's my preference, I wouldn't not play you if you had plastic marines or whatever. The plastic space marine vehicles are actually in the books, they're 'Mars pattern' I think, as opposed to the Deimos pattern FW ones.

The rules are a hell of a lot of fun, each legion plays differently, there is an absolute tonne of fun weapons/vehicle upgrades/equipment etc. I love it, price aside.

That's pretty elitist of you. They are on the same height and bases. Hell I would let someone run a lego army against me as long as it was the same dimensions.

 ImAGeek wrote:

 Jimsolo wrote:
No. The cost of the models and rules makes 40k look affordable by comparison.

Ways round that though, converting from 40k olastic marines, or just using them stock if you arent bothered about 'which armour did the Imperial Fists wear before the heresy' etc. I'm picky like that and I prefer the FW models and yes it's expensive but that just means my army will take longer to build.

Or just make a 30k Emperor's Children Army. About as cheap as you can get as you can simply buy MK VII armor in bulk.

 Orock wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:
Exactly. I'm doing mine with the proper models but that's my preference, I wouldn't not play you if you had plastic marines or whatever. The plastic space marine vehicles are actually in the books, they're 'Mars pattern' I think, as opposed to the Deimos pattern FW ones.

The rules are a hell of a lot of fun, each legion plays differently, there is an absolute tonne of fun weapons/vehicle upgrades/equipment etc. I love it, price aside.

That's pretty elitist of you. They are on the same height and bases. Hell I would let someone run a lego army against me as long as it was the same dimensions.

Ironically, Lego is probably the only hobby (or at least Christmas gift) pricier than 40k. I got a nephew the death star, which cost more than a lot of 1850 point armies lol (it was more than $600).

 Formosa wrote:

 koooaei wrote:
All i can tell i that i've seen a fight between infantry heavy night lords and big-gunz heavy iron hands. It was over turn 2 for night lords. While iron hands lost 1 bolter guy and 1 plazmacannon guy to overheat. Forgeworld really favors big gunz a lot. Those massed plazma cannons and s6 gunz with quadrillion shots that generate extra shots are brutal. And iron hands basically have +1 toughness across the board for no extra points.

Its a useless rule against my world eaters who have almost no ranged shooting to speak of, and 60+ tac marines with apothecaries will get to his line and as he has spent all his points in guns, he will die to combat

Night lords had 40 footslogging marines with apothecaries, 20 infiltrating marines, deepstriking termies and speeders. 40 marines got obliterated turn 1. others got finished off turn 2. Mind you, night lords had stealth. It's just not much you can do with footslogging marines vs a gunline of plasma cannons, heavy voltkits and basilisks.

If the missions were maelstorm, maybe you could sit behind blos and hope to get VP here and there, wait for termies to arrive and clear out the voltkits or basilisks at least. But the Night lord guy chose to move forward.

From reading this, 30k has quite a few "balance" advantages:
1. primarily Space Marine armies
2. no Xenos forces
3. restricted composition
4. Fluff bunny players
5. no Tournament scene

In many ways, it sounds like OOTB Mordheim, which was a beauty of a game designed around humans with minor differences, and one option for Skaven which was playtested right off the bat. By the time Town Cryer added Beastmen, it was all over.

Or consider OOTB BFG, which was also lovely, with essentially similar Imperial v Chaos ships and carefully-balanced Ork & Eldar forces. But add Necrons and Tyranids, and it all falls apart.

Mark my words, if 30k starts having tournaments with big prizes, people will work to break it. Add more and more kinds of armies, and it probably falls apart even faster.

 Orock wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:
Exactly. I'm doing mine with the proper models but that's my preference, I wouldn't not play you if you had plastic marines or whatever. The plastic space marine vehicles are actually in the books, they're 'Mars pattern' I think, as opposed to the Deimos pattern FW ones.

The rules are a hell of a lot of fun, each legion plays differently, there is an absolute tonne of fun weapons/vehicle upgrades/equipment etc. I love it, price aside.

That's pretty elitist of you. They are on the same height and bases. Hell I would let someone run a lego army against me as long as it was the same dimensions.

I think you need to re read my post...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
From reading this, 30k has quite a few "balance" advantages:
1. primarily Space Marine armies
2. no Xenos forces
3. restricted composition
4. Fluff bunny players
5. no Tournament scene

In many ways, it sounds like OOTB Mordheim, which was a beauty of a game designed around humans with minor differences, and one option for Skaven which was playtested right off the bat. By the time Town Cryer added Beastmen, it was all over.

Or consider OOTB BFG, which was also lovely, with essentially similar Imperial v Chaos ships and carefully-balanced Ork & Eldar forces. But add Necrons and Tyranids, and it all falls apart.

Mark my words, if 30k starts having tournaments with big prizes, people will work to break it. Add more and more kinds of armies, and it probably falls apart even faster.

Not sure where you got restricted composition, there's a hell of a lot more options than any army in 40k. And as said, there's Solar Auxilia and Mechanicum, which while not Xenos are very different to the Space Marines. And I'm pretty sure they're legal in 40k as per the last FAQ so TO's discretion obviously but I think they're allowed at tournaments now.

 koooaei wrote:

 Formosa wrote:

 koooaei wrote:
All i can tell i that i've seen a fight between infantry heavy night lords and big-gunz heavy iron hands. It was over turn 2 for night lords. While iron hands lost 1 bolter guy and 1 plazmacannon guy to overheat. Forgeworld really favors big gunz a lot. Those massed plazma cannons and s6 gunz with quadrillion shots that generate extra shots are brutal. And iron hands basically have +1 toughness across the board for no extra points.

Its a useless rule against my world eaters who have almost no ranged shooting to speak of, and 60+ tac marines with apothecaries will get to his line and as he has spent all his points in guns, he will die to combat

Night lords had 40 footslogging marines with apothecaries, 20 infiltrating marines, deepstriking termies and speeders. 40 marines got obliterated turn 1. others got finished off turn 2. Mind you, night lords had stealth. It's just not much you can do with footslogging marines vs a gunline of plasma cannons, heavy voltkits and basilisks.

If the missions were maelstorm, maybe you could sit behind blos and hope to get VP here and there, wait for termies to arrive and clear out the voltkits or basilisks at least. But the Night lord guy chose to move forward.

Well, if you want to play competent, you should always have a Command Squad with an Apothecary and Legion Praetor on Jetbikes with power weapons to bring in a LOT of hurt.

So, what's making it so much better than a 'regular 40k' if one themed army can't compete with another themed army without taking eldar comsquad on jetbikes?

 Orock wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:
Exactly. I'm doing mine with the proper models but that's my preference, I wouldn't not play you if you had plastic marines or whatever. The plastic space marine vehicles are actually in the books, they're 'Mars pattern' I think, as opposed to the Deimos pattern FW ones.

The rules are a hell of a lot of fun, each legion plays differently, there is an absolute tonne of fun weapons/vehicle upgrades/equipment etc. I love it, price aside.

That's pretty elitist of you. They are on the same height and bases. Hell I would let someone run a lego army against me as long as it was the same dimensions.

Uh. Reread. He wrote "wouldn't not." Wouldn't means "would not,". So he said Would not not, play you if you had plastic space marines." It is a double negative, I believe. He is agreeing with you, not elitist.

Edit: I got ninja'd.

30k appears so well balanced simply because the opposing army you're going up against is not much different from your own. Aside from individual special legion units. They're the same Army's.

40k has lost its balance I think due in part to the many factions that are playable. Each army doesn't necessarily counter the other army in 40k.

Some armies do well against one army and very poorly against another and vise versa.

For starters, I played my 30k EC up against my friends Tyrannid army and I got blown out of the water. At 2500 I still lacked the firepower to take down MC, not exactly what 30k is about.

40k Comes out with one creature or unit and a few months later something comes up to counter it but eventually breaks the game.

 tommse wrote:
With all the hassle people have with 40k, there´s always someone saying that Forgeworld did a great job with their HH stuff and there never is anyone argumenting against it.
What makes people view 30k as a better system?

As other's have said. 30K is exactly as balanced as 40K would be with only Space Marines.

Add more armies to 30K, it becomes closer to 40K.

Take away even more options from 30K, and it becomes "more" balanced".

Hell, if you reduce 40K to only 2 factions with only 5 or 6 different models/options aside, you'd have X-Wing
If you reduce 40K to only mirror matches of one army with identical miniatures each side, you're getting close to chess,

What people perceive as balance is simply lack of diversity and what people perceive as lack of balance is simply variety.

Wonderwolf wrote:

 tommse wrote:
With all the hassle people have with 40k, there´s always someone saying that Forgeworld did a great job with their HH stuff and there never is anyone argumenting against it.
What makes people view 30k as a better system?

As other's have said. 30K is exactly as balanced as 40K would be with only Space Marines.

Add more armies to 30K, it becomes closer to 40K.

Take away even more options from 30K, and it becomes "more" balanced".

Hell, if you reduce 40K to only 2 factions with only 5 or 6 different models/options aside, you'd have X-Wing
If you reduce 40K to only mirror matches of one army with identical miniatures each side, you're getting close to chess,

What people perceive as balance is simply lack of diversity and what people perceive as lack of balance is simply variety.

you have an Innacurate idea about balance.

 MWHistorian wrote:
you have an Innacurate idea about balance.

I don't.

Should you'll ever get over your denial, you'll realise I do not.

It's got nothing to do with the "only 2 armies", I play 30k vs 40k more than 30 on 30, so your analogy of adding more armies doesn't hold up, 30k is better simply as the designers have actually played the game and tested it, gw main doesn't even Olay it's own game and has no idea how to fix it

Nit even GW could screw up the balance of a game where armies are 90% identical.

That being said I'm not a 30k expert but I've heard the balance of Legion specific units isn't great, wuth some legions getting vastly better units than others. Is that the case?

Not really no, and yes.

Legion specific units are heavily fluff based and pay extra points it seems for rarity.

For example red butchers are 2 wound 4++ combat monsters, with terminator armour, then you have gorgan terminators, they tote around with grav guns, which are brutal, gal vorbak are multiwound rending with any kind of cc attack, the list goes on but all in all they are pretty solid.

The only unit that sticks out as distinctly meh are rampagers, but only due to caedre weapons being too pricey for bad ap

I love the Horus Heresy stuff. Once you get past the price I prefer it to 40k, better models, much better written and presented books, more fun rules/units. Of course it helps I love the setting of the Horus Heresy, and you are paying for all that...

If anyone is interested in the heresy, I would recommend the Age of Darkness section on the Bolter and Chainsword forum. The community there is excellent, very helpful and everyone is very creative, it's perfect for spitballing ideas. The setting of the heresy lends itself perfectly to beig creative as its a huge setting, you can have loyalist Night Lords, even traitor Ultramarines if you wanted!

Wonderwolf wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:
you have an Innacurate idea about balance.

I don't.

Should you'll ever get over your denial, you'll realise I do not.

its an old and untrue argument. Variety doesn't cause imbalance. GW's lack of playtesting does. Most of the problems and fixes are shockingly easy, but GW just can't be bothered to do it.

Wonderwolf wrote:

 tommse wrote:
With all the hassle people have with 40k, there´s always someone saying that Forgeworld did a great job with their HH stuff and there never is anyone argumenting against it.
What makes people view 30k as a better system?

As other's have said. 30K is exactly as balanced as 40K would be with only Space Marines.

Add more armies to 30K, it becomes closer to 40K.

Take away even more options from 30K, and it becomes "more" balanced".

Hell, if you reduce 40K to only 2 factions with only 5 or 6 different models/options aside, you'd have X-Wing
If you reduce 40K to only mirror matches of one army with identical miniatures each side, you're getting close to chess,

What people perceive as balance is simply lack of diversity and what people perceive as lack of balance is simply variety.

You've only ever played 40k I take it?

 MWHistorian wrote:

Wonderwolf wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:
you have an Innacurate idea about balance.

I don't.

Should you'll ever get over your denial, you'll realise I do not.

its an old and untrue argument. Variety doesn't cause imbalance. GW's lack of playtesting does. Most of the problems and fixes are shockingly easy, but GW just can't be bothered to do it.

Variety doesn't help. Uniqueness will be left out. One of the reasons 30k is popular is because from the onset, you knew what to expect. I'm a space marine, and I'm going to be fighting another space marine every time.

We'll have to see how they manage with two new Army's, 30k IG and the introduction of Imperial Knights. I don't know if they're allowing IKs as Army's or not but I know that introducing them will throw a huge wrench in the 30k gears.

Wonderwolf wrote:

 tommse wrote:
With all the hassle people have with 40k, there´s always someone saying that Forgeworld did a great job with their HH stuff and there never is anyone argumenting against it.
What makes people view 30k as a better system?

As other's have said. 30K is exactly as balanced as 40K would be with only Space Marines.

Add more armies to 30K, it becomes closer to 40K.

Take away even more options from 30K, and it becomes "more" balanced".

Hell, if you reduce 40K to only 2 factions with only 5 or 6 different models/options aside, you'd have X-Wing
If you reduce 40K to only mirror matches of one army with identical miniatures each side, you're getting close to chess,

What people perceive as balance is simply lack of diversity and what people perceive as lack of balance is simply variety.

Wow, the cluelessness is out of this world.

I know people will blast me but look at World of Warcraft. Video game MMO that has had a fair share of balance issues.

They respond to fix one issue but greatly break another. Make two classes seem somewhat alike or balanced and the players throw a fit about how they don't want to play a style similar to another class.

Or complain that the new ability is the same as another ability.

When you try to give everyone a little of their own flavor you end up with this problem.

What I like of 30k is like I'm going back to basic. You got 2 similar armies built around a lot of troops (SM) or a few (termi) and the way of winning go more with strategy and "game play" than deathstare or big stuff you can do nothing again it.

Angron, 10 red butchers, kharn

That's a hell of a deatjstar, but other legions can do the same

Talys wrote:

 Orock wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:
Exactly. I'm doing mine with the proper models but that's my preference, I wouldn't not play you if you had plastic marines or whatever. The plastic space marine vehicles are actually in the books, they're 'Mars pattern' I think, as opposed to the Deimos pattern FW ones.

The rules are a hell of a lot of fun, each legion plays differently, there is an absolute tonne of fun weapons/vehicle upgrades/equipment etc. I love it, price aside.

That's pretty elitist of you. They are on the same height and bases. Hell I would let someone run a lego army against me as long as it was the same dimensions.

Ironically, Lego is probably the only hobby (or at least Christmas gift) pricier than 40k. I got a nephew the death star, which cost more than a lot of 1850 point armies lol (it was more than $600).

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ImAGeek wrote:

 Orock wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:
Exactly. I'm doing mine with the proper models but that's my preference, I wouldn't not play you if you had plastic marines or whatever. The plastic space marine vehicles are actually in the books, they're 'Mars pattern' I think, as opposed to the Deimos pattern FW ones.

The rules are a hell of a lot of fun, each legion plays differently, there is an absolute tonne of fun weapons/vehicle upgrades/equipment etc. I love it, price aside.

That's pretty elitist of you. They are on the same height and bases. Hell I would let someone run a lego army against me as long as it was the same dimensions.

I think you need to re read my post...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
From reading this, 30k has quite a few "balance" advantages:
1. primarily Space Marine armies
2. no Xenos forces
3. restricted composition
4. Fluff bunny players
5. no Tournament scene

In many ways, it sounds like OOTB Mordheim, which was a beauty of a game designed around humans with minor differences, and one option for Skaven which was playtested right off the bat. By the time Town Cryer added Beastmen, it was all over.

Or consider OOTB BFG, which was also lovely, with essentially similar Imperial v Chaos ships and carefully-balanced Ork & Eldar forces. But add Necrons and Tyranids, and it all falls apart.

Mark my words, if 30k starts having tournaments with big prizes, people will work to break it. Add more and more kinds of armies, and it probably falls apart even faster.

Not sure where you got restricted composition, there's a hell of a lot more options than any army in 40k. And as said, there's Solar Auxilia and Mechanicum, which while not Xenos are very different to the Space Marines. And I'm pretty sure they're legal in 40k as per the last FAQ so TO's discretion obviously but I think they're allowed at tournaments now.

I apologize then, I thought you added not in accidentally.

What faq are you referring to

I had a look and I think I was slightly wrong, the FAQ updated some of their rules for 7th and Conquest has a bit about using the list in a normal 40k game.

Johnnytorrance wrote:
I know people will blast me but look at World of Warcraft. Video game MMO that has had a fair share of balance issues.

They respond to fix one issue but greatly break another. Make two classes seem somewhat alike or balanced and the players throw a fit about how they don't want to play a style similar to another class.

Or complain that the new ability is the same as another ability.

When you try to give everyone a little of their own flavor you end up with this problem.

Then how does let's say Warmahordes avoid it? 6 factions in Warmachine (plus mercenaries), 4(i think) in Hordes (+ minions), each woth their own distinctive flavor and yet pretty balanced.

Wonderwolf wrote:

As other's have said. 30K is exactly as balanced as 40K would be with only Space Marines.

It boggles my mind that people say things like this, considering that 40K marine armies match-up horribly with each other. Chaos Space Marines would like to have a word with you in regards to how evenly 40K marine armies are balanced against one another.

Hell, Black Templars and Raven Guard would like a word as well. Games Workshop can't even balance chapter tactics against one another properly, and they all exist within the same book.

 BlaxicanX wrote:

Wonderwolf wrote:

As other's have said. 30K is exactly as balanced as 40K would be with only Space Marines.

It boggles my mind that people say things like this, considering that 40K marine armies match-up horribly with each other. Chaos Space Marines would like to have a word with you in regards to how evenly 40K marine armies are balanced against one another.

Ha! That's a good point, I hadn't even thought of that.

 ImAGeek wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:

Wonderwolf wrote:

As other's have said. 30K is exactly as balanced as 40K would be with only Space Marines.

It boggles my mind that people say things like this, considering that 40K marine armies match-up horribly with each other. Chaos Space Marines would like to have a word with you in regards to how evenly 40K marine armies are balanced against one another.

Ha! That's a good point, I hadn't even thought of that.

I don't know why 40k should be balanced. Different worlds, different technologies and let the best win.

 hellpato wrote:


I don't know why 40k should be balanced.

Pfft, I know right?

Balance is overrated anyways.

LordBlades wrote:

Johnnytorrance wrote:
I know people will blast me but look at World of Warcraft. Video game MMO that has had a fair share of balance issues.

They respond to fix one issue but greatly break another. Make two classes seem somewhat alike or balanced and the players throw a fit about how they don't want to play a style similar to another class.

Or complain that the new ability is the same as another ability.

When you try to give everyone a little of their own flavor you end up with this problem.

Then how does let's say Warmahordes avoid it? 6 factions in Warmachine (plus mercenaries), 4(i think) in Hordes (+ minions), each woth their own distinctive flavor and yet pretty balanced.

They manage to balance the game because they actually give a feth about balance instead of just selling more colossals. Don't tell the apologists though, they'll just straw man and move goalposts saying things like "but perfect balance is impossible" when nobody on here has ever asked for perfect balance.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 hellpato wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:

Wonderwolf wrote:

As other's have said. 30K is exactly as balanced as 40K would be with only Space Marines.

It boggles my mind that people say things like this, considering that 40K marine armies match-up horribly with each other. Chaos Space Marines would like to have a word with you in regards to how evenly 40K marine armies are balanced against one another.

Ha! That's a good point, I hadn't even thought of that.

I don't know why 40k should be balanced. Different worlds, different technologies and let the best win.

It should be balanced because balance makes the game more fun for everyone and prevents you from hemorrhaging customers, causing revenue and profit to plummet. Who wants to play a game where you lose the minute you choose which army you want to play, but you only find out you lost after spending $1,000 and a year building and painting the army? Now your turn. Why the hell shouldn't the game be balanced? How does the enormous amount of imbalance in the current game benefit anyone other than those who already owned a bunch of wave serpents at the expense of the other 90% of players?

I think one reason 30k is better balanced than 40k is because 30k is devised in these fixed volumes. The majority of all the armies were written at the same time; even if they aren't released all at once they're released several at a time. This keeps 30k tighter with few things going too far from the norm. 40k on the other hand is released and revisited one army at a time so there is no way to account for balance. It is especially when you consider that sales of an individual codex perform better the less balanced it is.

 aka_mythos wrote:
I think one reason 30k is better balanced than 40k is because 30k is devised in these fixed volumes. The majority of all the armies were written at the same time; even if they aren't released all at once they're released several at a time. This keeps 30k tighter with few things going too far from the norm. 40k on the other hand is released and revisited one army at a time so there is no way to account for balance. It is especially when you consider that sales of an individual codex perform better the less balanced it is.

Once again, 30k is balanced because the people writing the rules actually give a feth about balance. 40k is not impossible to balance. It's only impossible to balance if you write rules solely to sell models without any regard for game balance, you're lazy or you're incompetent. GW checks all 3 of those boxes.

 Toofast wrote:

 aka_mythos wrote:
I think one reason 30k is better balanced than 40k is because 30k is devised in these fixed volumes. The majority of all the armies were written at the same time; even if they aren't released all at once they're released several at a time. This keeps 30k tighter with few things going too far from the norm. 40k on the other hand is released and revisited one army at a time so there is no way to account for balance. It is especially when you consider that sales of an individual codex perform better the less balanced it is.

Once again, 30k is balanced because the people writing the rules actually give a feth about balance. 40k is not impossible to balance. It's only impossible to balance if you write rules solely to sell models without any regard for game balance, you're lazy or you're incompetent. GW checks all 3 of those boxes.

your both correct and seem to be arguing the same point from different directions.

1: its true that as each army in 40k is written in a vacuum it seems, that no attempt at balance is made
2: these writers are told or motivated by the sales department to make good rules to sell the models, but because of number 1 above, they screw it up sometimes (my poor poor land speeder vengeance)

30k Is balanced (mostly, looking at you pre FAQ dual plasma toting moritat) because the rules team have A: sat down together with the fluff writers and hashed it all out, and B: done it all at the same time.

 Formosa wrote:

2: these writers are told or motivated by the sales department to make good rules to sell the models, but because of number 1 above, they screw it up sometimes (my poor poor land speeder vengeance)

I just can't believe this when the results are so over the place. Sure, some new kits get really strong rules; Heldrake springs to mind. Conversely, in the same release, the dragon things get awful rules, to the point I can't remember what silly name GW gave them.

The DA release was mostly mediocre. Then we got strong Knights. But then the Eldar release saw a new kit, the flyer, have mediocre rules while a staple of most armies got a huge boost with the Serpent.

The IG release had the middling Taurox, then a strong Wyvern but weak Hydra dual kit. Stormtroopers remain meh at best. All the while, basic Russes got huge boosts almost universally.

There is no rhyme or reason why some units get super strong rules, and others really weak rules. I can't for a second imagine that sales department are pushing for strong rules for new models, and if they are, it only shows the true depth of the incompetency of the rules team.

I used to believe GW made rules to push model sales. Then the new Nids came. All new models (so GW probably wanted to sell)'and yet all but one had pretty bad rules (not good by any standard).

what you have said isn't mutually exclusive, because codexs seem to be made in a vacuum the writers don't talk to each other, so for example you tell the writers to make the dark talon a good kit and give it kick ass rules, but because they don't know how to play the game they give it rules that they THINK are good but are infact... crap

As my girlfriend just said who is watching me write this over my shoulder, they are not "gamers" and haven't a clue how to do it properly.

Which is why I added at the end of my statement that if that were the case, it only shows the true depth of their ineptitude.

I still find it highly unlikely they're being directed by sales to make awesome rules for new units.

and I don't disagree sails, its monstrously incompetent, and its quite easy to see that they are directed (to an extent) by sails as every edition you get the staple books rather quickly.

Right, I just don't think sales micromanages them to ensure that model 'X' gets good enough rules. I'm sure there's some macro level direction.

Regardless, it reeks of incompetence either way you cut it.

Which makes me sad.

The good news for GW is that while they've lost much of my interest in the core game, I still regularly keep an eye on the HH stuff, and the new Solar release is shaping up quite nicely. I've always liked the FW Russ patterns better than the GW ones, and the Dracosan is a straight up pimp wagon. And the Russ arty looks so much better than the standard bassies.

Its a toss up where my vehicle budget will go to; FW or Vic Minis when the Matilda finishes up.

Dude I play with always goes on and on about the 30k goodness.

 Formosa wrote:

 Toofast wrote:

 aka_mythos wrote:
I think one reason 30k is better balanced than 40k is because 30k is devised in these fixed volumes. The majority of all the armies were written at the same time; even if they aren't released all at once they're released several at a time. This keeps 30k tighter with few things going too far from the norm. 40k on the other hand is released and revisited one army at a time so there is no way to account for balance. It is especially when you consider that sales of an individual codex perform better the less balanced it is.

Once again, 30k is balanced because the people writing the rules actually give a feth about balance. 40k is not impossible to balance. It's only impossible to balance if you write rules solely to sell models without any regard for game balance, you're lazy or you're incompetent. GW checks all 3 of those boxes.

your both correct and seem to be arguing the same point from different directions.

1: its true that as each army in 40k is written in a vacuum it seems, that no attempt at balance is made
2: these writers are told or motivated by the sales department to make good rules to sell the models, but because of number 1 above, they screw it up sometimes (my poor poor land speeder vengeance)

30k Is balanced (mostly, looking at you pre FAQ dual plasma toting moritat) because the rules team have A: sat down together with the fluff writers and hashed it all out, and B: done it all at the same time.

I agree with Toofast. I just don't think its laziness or incompetence, its more likely institutional/office culture as to whats important. GW tries to sell the "latest and greatest," so they aren't as fixated on the stuff they've previously done. FW is selling something more experiential and are looking are greater totality of their game.

Wonderwolf wrote:

 tommse wrote:
With all the hassle people have with 40k, there´s always someone saying that Forgeworld did a great job with their HH stuff and there never is anyone argumenting against it.
What makes people view 30k as a better system?

As other's have said. 30K is exactly as balanced as 40K would be with only Space Marines.

Add more armies to 30K, it becomes closer to 40K.

Take away even more options from 30K, and it becomes "more" balanced".

Hell, if you reduce 40K to only 2 factions with only 5 or 6 different models/options aside, you'd have X-Wing
If you reduce 40K to only mirror matches of one army with identical miniatures each side, you're getting close to chess,

What people perceive as balance is simply lack of diversity and what people perceive as lack of balance is simply variety.

There are games out there that feature completely different factions and are still ballanced. Diversity and variety makes ballancing difficult (if you don't have variety, ballancing becomes kind-of obsolete anyways) but it does not mean that asymetric factions are automatically ballanced or imballanced or whatever. GW does a horrible job at ballance while Forgewold tries to offer a decent game. For now i think it's fairly ballanced, even with the two oddjob factions. I don't know if FW will be adding more (Arbites? Xenos? Something entirely new?) but for now it's ok.

I want pre fall eldar. Instead of primarchs they could do the original phoenix lords (the current ones are just some guy stuck in a suit that has the spirit stone of the original).

They've said they definitely aren't doing Xenos though. Also, the Fall is way before the Heresy.

I think they're doing Custodes and Sisters of Silence. I don't know what other armies there is.

 ImAGeek wrote:
They've said they definitely aren't doing Xenos though. Also, the Fall is way before the Heresy.

Not that much actually.

Eldar Codex puts it slightly ahead of 30K, but not hugely so.

The list design for 30k is much better; you have a lot more flexibility in how you feel like playing your army thematically. You can't do an all-jump force, or an all-armour force, or an airborne force in 40k anywhere near as easily; the Consuls setup gives you a lot of options without taking up a lot of space; you can actually give your commander a bodyguard geared like he is. The internal balance is much better, since everyone's using very similar lists the external balance is also much better. The variety of units makes fights more visually interesting than Marines v. Marines in 40k, you don't have quite the same level of box-fights when armour is involved. You don't have to deal with some of the more inane extremes 40k's Codexes go to.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Wonderwolf wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:
They've said they definitely aren't doing Xenos though. Also, the Fall is way before the Heresy.

Not that much actually.

Eldar Codex puts it slightly ahead of 30K, but not hugely so.

They keep changing it around. Last I checked the current state of canon is that the Fall was the cause of the Warp storms that cut Earth off from the rest of the galaxy and cued the Emperor in that the time was ripe to unite the stars, the Great Crusade kicked off after the Warp calmed down.

 ImAGeek wrote:
They've said they definitely aren't doing Xenos though. Also, the Fall is way before the Heresy.

I think they're doing Custodes and Sisters of Silence. I don't know what other armies there is.

There is also the Imperial Army to do. The Solar Auxilia are just the elite elements of the Imperial Army.
We should also get Demons at some point, too.
And , of course, Dark Mechanicum, as well as just more Mechanicum in general.

Ah okay, sorry. I thought the fall was like millions of years ago. Still, was before the Heresy though

But yeah I remember them saying they're definitely not doing Xenos. I completely forgot about the Imperial Army.

Don't forget, 30k is about the Heresy and the battle between all SM until they went to Terra, not about xenos. All the gaming system is about a lot of SM again a lot of SM. If you dont like that, 30k is not for you. ....

I wouldn't rule out a u-turn on xenos.

Xenos were a part of the heresy back in Space Marine 1st edition, and Forge World is taking some inspiration from those days (Paramar for example).

Even if its something as simple as "Loyalists can take allies from Codex Eldar, Traitors from Codex Orks" (as Word Bearers can already do with Codex Daemons)

 Gashrog wrote:
I wouldn't rule out a u-turn on xenos.

Xenos were a part of the heresy back in Space Marine 1st edition, and Forge World is taking some inspiration from those days (Paramar for example).

Even if its something as simple as "Loyalists can take allies from Codex Eldar, Traitors from Codex Orks" (as Word Bearers can already do with Codex Daemons)

I don't see that happening, why would SM ally with Orks who they've been trying to wipe out for so long? Even traitors, they don't need orks, especially with their Daemon allies.

I don't see them doing a you turn on the Xenos because Xenos aren't a part of the heresy.

Truth be told, there is really little need for them to do a "u-turn" on Xenos. Orks are still Orks, no matter the millennium, so the current Ork Codex would work just fine. The Tau Codex can easily represent any of the technologically advanced races encountered during the Crusade. Even a Necron Tomb World or two might have been disturbed. And, would the Eldar of 40K really be that wildly different from the Eldar of 30K?

Johnnytorrance wrote:
I know people will blast me but look at World of Warcraft. Video game MMO that has had a fair share of balance issues.

They respond to fix one issue but greatly break another. Make two classes seem somewhat alike or balanced and the players throw a fit about how they don't want to play a style similar to another class.

Or complain that the new ability is the same as another ability.

When you try to give everyone a little of their own flavor you end up with this problem.

That's because Blizzard is busy listening to players, and every dev has a preferred class... rather than taking an objective look at the balance between classes.

 ImAGeek wrote:

I don't see that happening, why would SM ally with Orks who they've been trying to wipe out for so long? Even traitors, they don't need orks, especially with their Daemon allies.

Waste not want not. It takes time and blood to wipe out orks, why spend both when you can point them at your enemy instead and let them kill eachother? Certainly it goes against Imperial doctrine, but so does burning your own worlds and slaughtering innocents to summon daemons - which didn't become standard issue to all traitor units as soon as the heresy erupted, it took time for the corruption to spread.

 ImAGeek wrote:

I don't see them doing a you turn on the Xenos because Xenos aren't a part of the heresy.

No?

White Dwarf 110: Lugganath Craftworld and Imperial Cockatrices Titan Order ally against rebels during the Battle of Balthor Sigma (complete with an Eldar Phantom flying an Imperial banner - miniature painted by Forge World head honcho Tony Cotrell)

White Dwarf 110: Iyanden Craftworld vs Rebels during the Scouring of Arten's World.

White Dwarf 110: "Make no mistake human, We do not fight for your Emperor, we fight against Horus." ~ Lord-Phoenix Madaillath, Biel-Tan Craftworld

Codex Titanicus: Iyanden vs Emperor's Children on the Moon of Balthon.

Codex Titanicus: Lugganath vs rebels on Yarant I (One of the 'recent' Horus Heresy artbooks makes reference to the Space Wolves recieving aid from 'an unexpected quarter' on Yarant)

Orks had less specific examples but were also available to traitors as allies.

Now, you're thinking WD110? That's so utterly ancient as to be completely irrelevant, and I'd have agreed with you before Forge World decided to devote 13 pages of Book 3: Extermination to the First Battle of Paramar V, a throwaway Heresy era battle not mentioned in print since WD109.

The better question is why bother making HH-era units for xenos when they all fought and were organized in the exact same way as they are in 40K? There's no difference between 30K Eldar and 40K Eldar aesthetically, socially or in military doctrine/organization. Same with Orks and all the other 40K xenos they encountered during the crusade. Meanwhile, the entire Imperial hierarchy was flipped upside down. The Imperial Army looked completely different from the Guard of the 41st millenium, and used all kinds of technology that was lost during the Heresy- Space Marines looked different, fought different and also used all manners of technology no longer in service after the 31st millenium.

I wouldn't mind seeing some short-stories and maybe even some mission types centered around Xenos-Astartes interaction in the HH books, but I don't think an alternate model line and/or set of rules for xenos armies is justified.

 BlaxicanX wrote:
The better question is why bother making HH-era units for xenos when they all fought and were organized in the exact same way as they are in 40K? There's no difference between 30K Eldar and 40K Eldar aesthetically, socially or in military doctrine/organization. Same with Orks and all the other 40K xenos they encountered during the crusade. Meanwhile, the entire Imperial hierarchy was flipped upside down. The Imperial Army looked completely different from the Guard of the 41st millenium, and used all kinds of technology that was lost during the Heresy- Space Marines looked different, fought different and also used all manners of technology no longer in service after the 31st millenium.

I wouldn't mind seeing some short-stories and maybe even some mission types centered around Xenos-Astartes interaction in the HH books, but I don't think an alternate model line and/or set of rules for xenos armies is justified.

I can agree on a lot of this but that just means that 40k xenos are covered. The hrud, for example, would be a pretty badass addition IMO. Not to mention any number of now extinct xenos who could be wrote in as being caught in the cross fire.

I realize they aren't 40k xenos, but didn't the Chaos aligned Dark Angels have a xenos ally?

They had Chaos allies didn't they?

3dog wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:
The better question is why bother making HH-era units for xenos when they all fought and were organized in the exact same way as they are in 40K? There's no difference between 30K Eldar and 40K Eldar aesthetically, socially or in military doctrine/organization. Same with Orks and all the other 40K xenos they encountered during the crusade. Meanwhile, the entire Imperial hierarchy was flipped upside down. The Imperial Army looked completely different from the Guard of the 41st millenium, and used all kinds of technology that was lost during the Heresy- Space Marines looked different, fought different and also used all manners of technology no longer in service after the 31st millenium.

I wouldn't mind seeing some short-stories and maybe even some mission types centered around Xenos-Astartes interaction in the HH books, but I don't think an alternate model line and/or set of rules for xenos armies is justified.

I can agree on a lot of this but that just means that 40k xenos are covered. The hrud, for example, would be a pretty badass addition IMO. Not to mention any number of now extinct xenos who could be wrote in as being caught in the cross fire.

Hrud are too OP. Your army would consist of ten models for fighting an entire company of Legionnaires.

To answer the "why" if you check the Betrayal FAQ it says if you do use Orks and Eldar for Heresy battles you may want to house-rule to increase their maximum squad size, which shows FW thinks some tweaks may be necessary.

elder need no help at all against HH, orks defo would, when you get 40 shot culverin squads that can delete a mob a turn, admittedly for 400pts, but still its easy to do.

Tau do fine against HH and its actually a better matchup, Deldar again do ok ish, but lack in certain areas as most armies do, 40k marines eat 30k with the different grav and tacticals being better (generally), tyranids have a hell of a time against HH as they cannot deal with being out horded and HH SC beat TMC to death (I had kharn wipe a 3 man carnifex brood in 1 round), Chaos are oddly on par in certain areas due to FW, but that might as well be 30k on 30k, BA/DA/SW all do as you would expect, but im thinking new BA may edge out as better.

all in all, 30k is pretty balanced against 40k, with a few notable bad matchups

 BlaxicanX wrote:
The better question is why bother making HH-era units for xenos when they all fought and were organized in the exact same way as they are in 40K? There's no difference between 30K Eldar and 40K Eldar aesthetically, socially or in military doctrine/organization. Same with Orks and all the other 40K xenos they encountered during the crusade. Meanwhile, the entire Imperial hierarchy was flipped upside down. The Imperial Army looked completely different from the Guard of the 41st millenium, and used all kinds of technology that was lost during the Heresy- Space Marines looked different, fought different and also used all manners of technology no longer in service after the 31st millenium.

I wouldn't mind seeing some short-stories and maybe even some mission types centered around Xenos-Astartes interaction in the HH books, but I don't think an alternate model line and/or set of rules for xenos armies is justified.

I would generally agree. 30k should only apply to Imperial and Renegade forces. 40k Eldar, Dark Eldar, Orks, and Chaos Daemons would be appropriate against 30k forces.

However, 40k has additional Tyranid hive fleets / tendrils with different species / mutations not seen in 30k, so Tyranids should be limited to 3E units, not the wierd fancy stuff since then.

Tau and Grey Knights would be BANNED from 30k, or course. Had a Heresey-era force encountered the Tau, the Tau wouldn't exist in 40k. Kroot would be OK, but they're awfully limited...

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Tau and Grey Knights would be BANNED from 30k, or course. Had a Heresey-era force encountered the Tau, the Tau wouldn't exist in 40k. Kroot would be OK, but they're awfully limited...

Using the Tau codex as Tau would be wrong, yes. But, I think the Tau codex can easily be used to represent any of the technologically advanced alien races fought during the Crusade.

 Tannhauser42 wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Tau and Grey Knights would be BANNED from 30k, or course. Had a Heresey-era force encountered the Tau, the Tau wouldn't exist in 40k. Kroot would be OK, but they're awfully limited...

Using the Tau codex as Tau would be wrong, yes. But, I think the Tau codex can easily be used to represent any of the technologically advanced alien races fought during the Crusade.

Necrons too. They were all dormant during 30k, were they not?

And Tyranids had not arrived yet as well.

Sure, I'm OK with that from a count-as vs Fluff standoint!

It'd be cool if FW did some pre-heresy crusade era xenos... but thats not likely.

Tau cannot be in 30k :

- "The exact date of the founding of the Tau Empire in the Imperial Calendar is unclear, however the way in which the Tau were united as a species is a well-known tale. What is known is that only 6,000 standard years ago, in the 35th Millennium, an Adeptus Mechanicus Explorator fleet had discovered the Tau homeworld of T'au and determined that its population of sentient xenos were a primitive people at the Stone Age level of development who had only just mastered fire. They have developed very rapidly as a space-faring species."

the HH is a good system: you use it and whichever 40k rule book you like (i like 6th with apocalypse d-weapon rules)
i play Ordo Reductor from book one betrayal and i've found it to be quite balanced - i play against eldar, imperial guard, dark angels CSM [khorne], tau and 'nids.
i end up with quite a small force that's really well equipped! every time i've played another HH force i've been shot up pretty bad but that was largely because the people who had built the lists were power-playing so hard that they thought that they weren't power playing.

overall, if you build a HH list with the aim of making the next death-star it WILL seem op. and you'll be as guilty as sin., if you build a HH list with the intention of playing out a battle in the ashen wastes of isstvan3 then you'll have a battle you'll remember for the rest of your life.

i think that the HH series of models attracts a certain type of gamer who shudders at the mention of "forging the narrative..." but essentially does exactly that.

The warp is a strange place if things can emerge millennia after entering legionaries arriving too late to the battle would probably have occurred a couple of times since the heresy. Anyone ever use that as background for a Chapter?

Better or not, it's manlier than 40K. Duking out with LEGIONES Astartes gives people testosterone poisoning.

I still think its pretty even although my local group still begs to differ. I brought my Iron Warriors against a DE force this past weekend and he won by one VP. Had the game lasted another turn I likely would have killed him off as I had a five man missile havoc squad, a rhino with a havoc launcher, and a Spartan with one HP left on the board vs a lone archon and an archon warlord with two trueborn and he was going for the relic. We also each had aircraft in the wrong locations as well about to go off the board given another turn. We both were playing all comers lists as we didn't know we were playing each other until we showed up.

But it was a good example of how even the forces are, just different. My grrrr moment, five rounds of combat and my powerfists could not get through a shadowfield, even on the charge, meanwhile I rolled a one all but one combat phase. So if anything 40k is OP vs 30k

Holy crap jinking is powerful this edition. I never got through a jink save once the entire game outside my Sicarian who ignores them.

There is actually room for 'Crons on Legions: the Imperial Fists probably fought them on the world that would become known as Necromunda; once a prospering small human empire of about 5 systems linked through pre-human "gates" which traversed the warp in obviously artificial but stable routes. Upon encountering this civilization, the IFs asked for their Compliance, to which they countered with "why don't you join our Empire instead?"

You can imagine how that went.

In the end, once the human forces had been defeated, "Silver mechanical legions of no human design poured through the gates," or something to that effect, with the subsequent battle all but destroying what was left of the human civilzation, thus the chief world was rechristened Necromunda.

Certainly sounds like Necrons to me, or at least Canoptek constructs defending the Dolmen Gates, as introduced in the last codex. After all, after 65 million years of slumber, being off by 10,000 years in waking up is only a small variance.

 MajorStoffer wrote:
Certainly sounds like Necrons to me, or at least Canoptek constructs defending the Dolmen Gates, as introduced in the last codex. After all, after 65 million years of slumber, being off by 10,000 years in waking up is only a small variance.

Especially if there's a war on. It's like if you want to sleep 15 minutes more but there's nuclear bombardments and orbital strikes on the floor above yours.

"... honey, get the broom."

The scary part is that the bits that the IF fought could've been just the broom taps... as it were.

 Orock wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:
Exactly. I'm doing mine with the proper models but that's my preference, I wouldn't not play you if you had plastic marines or whatever. The plastic space marine vehicles are actually in the books, they're 'Mars pattern' I think, as opposed to the Deimos pattern FW ones.

The rules are a hell of a lot of fun, each legion plays differently, there is an absolute tonne of fun weapons/vehicle upgrades/equipment etc. I love it, price aside.

That's pretty elitist of you. They are on the same height and bases. Hell I would let someone run a lego army against me as long as it was the same dimensions.

I think you mis-read his post. He used a double negative, so WOULD play you if you had stand ins.