It was...special. Between them using an Altar of War Mission, having Grey Hunters charge from Rhinos, Magnus getting one-shotted by Helfrost and the 1k Sons being tabled by Turn 3...

...do we have a more insightful look into how the GW design team thinks? Or is this just a hilarious mess overall?

Sounds fluffy at least.

Haven't seen it. But it sounds messy.
TS tabled in round 3. Who were the players.
Absolute beginners or what?

Didn't see all of it, but I think the TSons list looked something like: two 10-man rubrics, ahriman, scarab occult and magnus at 1850. Not sure how many scarabs or if he had some more exalted sorcerers around.

GW doesn't follow their own rules, why should I? LOL

GW has game designers but they have no players. They actually never had.
They should have at least two or three.

Can someone explain how Magnus was 1 shot with 7 wounds?

 Marmatag wrote:
Can someone explain how Magnus was 1 shot with 7 wounds?

No, they can't.

Martel732 wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Can someone explain how Magnus was 1 shot with 7 wounds?

No, they can't.

After some research, it looks like the Helfrost Destructor is a STR8 AP1 weapon with some special rules that can result in a 1-shot if a strength test is failed.

It would be nice if someone could walk me through this combat... I'm very unclear on what happened.

Evidently they were rocking 3rd ed rules with that Rhino rush.

Martel732 wrote:
Evidently they were rocking 3rd ed rules with that Rhino rush.

...So, you think they accept applications for people to play against them?

 Marmatag wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Can someone explain how Magnus was 1 shot with 7 wounds?

No, they can't.

After some research, it looks like the Helfrost Destructor is a STR8 AP1 weapon with some special rules that can result in a 1-shot if a strength test is failed.

It would be nice if someone could walk me through this combat... I'm very unclear on what happened.

Not sure about the rest, but all Helfrost weapons have a rule where if you suffer a wound, you have to pass a Strength test or be removed from play. Hence why Magnus not being a GMC is fething stupid.

I wanted to say something in the chat, but you need to pay for a subscription so meh lol

Drop pod storm bolter did one wound then hell frost cannon on stormwolf did another wound, Hell frost rule is if suffer wound take strength test and if fail removed from play. Magnus rolled a 6 on the strength test so failed and was removed from play.
Rhinos where destroyed and charges came from 2 dropnaughts with shield and axe blood claws from the stormwolf turn after it arrived and went into hover mode.
If did charge from rhino with grey hunters missed it as was painting while listening not really watching.

I disagree. Feth GMCs. We need fewer, not more.

The Tsons player was outnumbered at least 2-1 from what I saw with nothing at all to even put a dent in a vehicle besides magnus and the odd force stave.

 Roknar wrote:
The Tsons player was outnumbered at least 2-1 from what I saw with nothing at all to even put a dent in a vehicle besides magnus and the odd force stave.

So typical 1K sons problems?

Martel732 wrote:

 Roknar wrote:
The Tsons player was outnumbered at least 2-1 from what I saw with nothing at all to even put a dent in a vehicle besides magnus and the odd force stave.

So typical 1K sons problems?

I could be wrong, didn't see it all and the volume was way too low. My impression was that he rolled onmalefic for summoning and magnus didn't fire a single D spell. No heretech that I was aware of.
Was weird.

 jreilly89 wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Can someone explain how Magnus was 1 shot with 7 wounds?

No, they can't.

After some research, it looks like the Helfrost Destructor is a STR8 AP1 weapon with some special rules that can result in a 1-shot if a strength test is failed.

It would be nice if someone could walk me through this combat... I'm very unclear on what happened.

Not sure about the rest, but all Helfrost weapons have a rule where if you suffer a wound, you have to pass a Strength test or be removed from play. Hence why Magnus not being a GMC is fething stupid.

The odds of Magnus being removed from that str test are slim, and the Stormfang is pretty much the only thing that's gonna be able to hit him reliably (in that battle) right?

1/6 for the failed test mulitplied by 3/6 to hit would be 3/36 chance for an individual shot to kill Magnus like it did... I mean I've seen batreps where 3 6's in a row produced a Dreadknight dying to overwatch... unlucky stuff happens.

Seems this is more an issue with the Hellfrost mechanic vs GMC... Just make it deal 5 wounds. Kills like 99% of things... avoids this scenario. If it is of that much concern.

Does the Stormfang even have skyfire anymore?

Martel732 wrote:
Does the Stormfang even have skyfire anymore?

It's a flyer...

Most flyers lost skyfire in DFTS.

Martel732 wrote:
Most flyers lost skyfire in DFTS.

That's if you use DFTS.

Most people don't use DftS, including (it seems) GW (at least in this particular game).

 Marmatag wrote:
The odds of Magnus being removed from that str test are slim, and the Stormfang is pretty much the only thing that's gonna be able to hit him reliably (in that battle) right?

1/6 for the failed test mulitplied by 3/6 to hit would be 3/36 chance for an individual shot to kill Magnus like it did... I mean I've seen batreps where 3 6's in a row produced a Dreadknight dying to overwatch... unlucky stuff happens.

Seems this is more an issue with the Hellfrost mechanic vs GMC... Just make it deal 5 wounds. Kills like 99% of things... avoids this scenario. If it is of that much concern.

If they assaulted out of it, it was probably a stormwolf, so twinlinked.

5/9 Hit, 2/3 Wound, 2/3 Failed Jink, 1/6 Failed Test. 20/486 or 10/283. That's pretty unlikely; No reason to nerf it.

They had a fun casual game. Gasps... HOW DARE THEY!!!! MY NECK BEARD IS OFFENDED!

MadMarkMagee 7113379082668 null wrote:They had a fun casual game. Gasps... HOW DARE THEY!!!! MY NECK BEARD IS OFFENDED!

Ironicaly thats GW problem, they don't play their game with cheese in mind and are way too casual when they do the little testing they do when writing rules.

if they had real players and testers, those would immidiatly point out the cheese and shenanigans and squash it from the game before its too late and it needs FaQ or erratas.

In an ITW they made at one podcast someone asked them about it, it was at the time of Wave serpent madness, and the guy from the design team just answered, "well in our opinion, we can't think of any reasons why someone would want 3 or more of the same units outside of troops", that was before all the formations and detachements madness...

Because they are casuals, so yeah for them One unit of X or Y thats a bit cheesy is not a real problem because there is onmy one of it, but they fail to see that people, when they see something strong and that works, they want dozens of it...

Now to be back on topic, that " auto fail on 6" Stat test as always bugged me, sure if the thing gets immunity its ridiculous, but if something is Str 6 or7 give him a reroll perhaps?

 pretre wrote:

2/3 Failed Jink

Jink is a 4+ not a 5+, besides Magnua would use his 4++ invul re-rolling 1s rather than his jink.

Did they have anything buffing him in the game? You said they rolled on malefic so if they got cursed earth off he has a 2++ re-rollable, even less chance of Magnus dying from Hellfrost.

...A real-time WH40k game streamed live on Twitch?

That is perhaps the most boring stream I can imagine.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

MadMarkMagee wrote:
They had a fun casual game. Gasps... HOW DARE THEY!!!! MY NECK BEARD IS OFFENDED!

I play fun, casual games.

The rules should not be playtested like that. Period. Serious flaws with the rules are missed and imbalanced combinations are never examined because the playtesters are not interested in seeing where the rules break down, only in having a fun game.

Playtesting is about improving the rules by figuring out where they don't work. You will not encounter situations like that in a casual setting where no one's trying to do anything absurd.

 jreilly89 wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Can someone explain how Magnus was 1 shot with 7 wounds?

No, they can't.

After some research, it looks like the Helfrost Destructor is a STR8 AP1 weapon with some special rules that can result in a 1-shot if a strength test is failed.

It would be nice if someone could walk me through this combat... I'm very unclear on what happened.

Not sure about the rest, but all Helfrost weapons have a rule where if you suffer a wound, you have to pass a Strength test or be removed from play. Hence why Magnus not being a GMC is fething stupid.

It's also a blast weapon that cant target flying creatures...which magnus would absolutely be flying vs a list that had helfrost weapons. lol.

 MagicJuggler wrote:
...do we have a more insightful look into how the GW design team thinks?

Every WD batrep ever. I vaguely remember one from 6 or 7 years ago where one of the main devs at the time (possibly Matt Ward) charged five TH/SS Terminators at a massive horde of Genestealers. The batrep text was all like, "the Emperor's Finest shall not be intimidated by these aliens!", then they charged. The inevitable occured, with all five Terminators were smushed at I6, and the batrep is all like, "the aliens vanquished all the mighty Terminators! How unexpected!"

It was at that point I realised GW don't play their games.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, this:

 MagicJuggler wrote:
Magnus getting one-shotted by Helfrost

Incoming Traditio thread entitled "OP Helfrost Cheese", or perhaps "Why you should boycott Helfrost weapons", or something like that.

 BBAP wrote:

 MagicJuggler wrote:
...do we have a more insightful look into how the GW design team thinks?

Every WD batrep ever. I vaguely remember one from 6 or 7 years ago where one of the main devs at the time (possibly Matt Ward) charged five TH/SS Terminators at a massive horde of Genestealers. The batrep text was all like, "the Emperor's Finest shall not be intimidated by these aliens!", then they charged. The inevitable occured, with all five Terminators were smushed at I6, and the batrep is all like, "the aliens vanquished all the mighty Terminators! How unexpected!"

It was at that point I realised GW don't play their games.

The precise moment I stopped caring about WD batreps was when there was a reference to a "practice game" that went completely the other way in the Island of Blood intro.

At that point I stopped giving a damn, since I concluded the following:

1-Batreps are intended to showcase the new army to drive sales.
2-They don't care enough to simply lie and pretend they played a game, inventing all facts they state.
3-They don't care enough to remove references to unverifiable attempts that didn't turn out the way they wanted.

Eventually there was a SoB batrep. Their Retributor Squad had some utterly ridiculous loadout, like two multi-meltas, a heavy bolter, and a heavy flamer. The points costs of the army didn't add up correctly either.

Eventually I unsubscribed from WD altogether.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BBAP wrote:
Incoming Traditio thread entitled "OP Helfrost Cheese", or perhaps "Why you should boycott Helfrost weapons", or something like that.

As a WoW player I'm familiar with the concept of merging damage types together for unique attacks, and giving it a unique name. Like Frostfire does Frost and Fire damage. Shadowfrost does Shadow and Frost damage.

I'm imagining the combination of damage types needed to call an attack "Hellfrost." Frost, obviously. And Hell is a mix of Shadow and Fire.

So it would do three different types of damage to vanquish an obscenely powerful creature.

Then I remembered Med'an and I realized I hate Hellfrost weapons.

The Thousand Sons Player made some questionable decisions (like not summoning Pink Horrors in a game whose objective is to have a psyker survive til the end, and is using the Tzeentch Warpstorm table, or not using enought mind bullets), and had some not so good roles (causing Magnus to deepstrike twice during the game, and the one role of 6 that would cause Magnus to fail the Strength Test from Helfrost).

It was not a surprise the game ended the way it did.

 mrhappyface wrote:

 pretre wrote:

2/3 Failed Jink

Jink is a 4+ not a 5+, besides Magnua would use his 4++ invul re-rolling 1s rather than his jink.

Did they have anything buffing him in the game? You said they rolled on malefic so if they got cursed earth off he has a 2++ re-rollable, even less chance of Magnus dying from Hellfrost.

Good call. So even more unlikely.

 Pouncey wrote:
...A real-time WH40k game streamed live on Twitch?

That is perhaps the most boring stream I can imagine.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

MadMarkMagee wrote:
They had a fun casual game. Gasps... HOW DARE THEY!!!! MY NECK BEARD IS OFFENDED!

I play fun, casual games.

The rules should not be playtested like that. Period. Serious flaws with the rules are missed and imbalanced combinations are never examined because the playtesters are not interested in seeing where the rules break down, only in having a fun game.

Playtesting is about improving the rules by figuring out where they don't work. You will not encounter situations like that in a casual setting where no one's trying to do anything absurd.

It's a good point... however this game wasn't about playtesting; it was about having fun.

It certainly seems the TSons player had no idea what they were doing from the sounds of it though... at the very least they made some weak tactical decisions.

MadMarkMagee wrote:
They had a fun casual game. Gasps... HOW DARE THEY!!!! MY NECK BEARD IS OFFENDED!

Casual here. Tempestus Scions, Eldar Aspects.. you see where I am coming from.

If I pay good money for codices, I expect that the rules written there being well tested and balanced. THEN, anybody, GW staff included, can modify them to suit the needs.

But to make something work as a "universal language" between people that met for the first time, you need those things worked out easily.

As you can imagine from proposed rules and discussions, not every gamer has the best grasp on rules and worst, there are people that would enforce house rules to gain a clear advantage. I expect GW to play on their own rules because I expect that for them is the best system possible.

GW has shown how they play. MAYBE for playtest they play differently, but seeing how weird, not functional, unbalanced, messy the rules are, one has the suspicion that they are just a bunch of unprofessional hacks that never, ever had the intention or the skill for a proper ruleset.

I do wonder if for 8th edition is the case for the community to ditch them and go in the direction of 9th age.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Can someone explain how Magnus was 1 shot with 7 wounds?

No, they can't.

After some research, it looks like the Helfrost Destructor is a STR8 AP1 weapon with some special rules that can result in a 1-shot if a strength test is failed.

It would be nice if someone could walk me through this combat... I'm very unclear on what happened.

Not sure about the rest, but all Helfrost weapons have a rule where if you suffer a wound, you have to pass a Strength test or be removed from play. Hence why Magnus not being a GMC is fething stupid.

It's also a blast weapon that cant target flying creatures...which magnus would absolutely be flying vs a list that had helfrost weapons. lol.

GW FAQed that skyfire blasts can hit flyers

Avadar wrote:
The Thousand Sons Player made some questionable decisions (like not summoning Pink Horrors in a game whose objective is to have a psyker survive til the end, and is using the Tzeentch Warpstorm table, or not using enought mind bullets), and had some not so good roles (causing Magnus to deepstrike twice during the game, and the one role of 6 that would cause Magnus to fail the Strength Test from Helfrost).

It was not a surprise the game ended the way it did.

They cannot play their own game. This explains a lot.

Someone was expecting GW to let Chaos win even on release of lots of extremely long awaited shiny stuff? Silly people! The Good Guys (tm) must always win crushingly!

 mrhappyface wrote:

 pretre wrote:

2/3 Failed Jink

Jink is a 4+ not a 5+, besides Magnua would use his 4++ invul re-rolling 1s rather than his jink.

Did they have anything buffing him in the game? You said they rolled on malefic so if they got cursed earth off he has a 2++ re-rollable, even less chance of Magnus dying from Hellfrost.

Unless this has been changed in a publication I do not own, but cursed earth targets the psyker, not a unit. So you have to have another psyker shadow magnus by 10-12 inchs. Magnus would also have to get a syphon off on himself or force. So besides this set up, sanctuary and herald with tome and possible fateweaver, there is no way of getting a 2++ rerollable? I am asking because I dont know myself. But I think these are the only methods.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 SilverMK2 wrote:
Someone was expecting GW to let Chaos win even on release of lots of extremely long awaited shiny stuff? Silly people! The Good Guys (tm) must always win crushingly!

And this. Every chaos player should know that to GW, we exist as two things. Revenue stream and as punching bags for the good guys. It is our role. Embrace it because I do not see this changing.

 CrownAxe wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
It's also a blast weapon that cant target flying creatures...which magnus would absolutely be flying vs a list that had helfrost weapons. lol.

GW FAQed that skyfire blasts can hit flyers

Helfire destructor can fire in blast or single shot.

Magnus would have to have a sorceror baby sitting him with cursed earth but he would only require cursed earth for the +2 to invul because he is being affected by a blessing.

MadMarkMagee wrote:
They had a fun casual game. Gasps... HOW DARE THEY!!!! MY NECK BEARD IS OFFENDED!

Yeah, feth those people who want the company that makes the game to actually know the rules of the game they make...

 Kaiyanwang wrote:


They cannot play their own game. This explains a lot.

I've been saying this for ages.

People say "new units are OP to get sales" but there are plenty of new units that are garbage as well. They simply don't understand the rules well enough to make units good or bad on purpose.

Take Grav. They made it great against MCs and weak against vehicles. It's a good idea. Then someone says "it should immobilise the vehicle though, that'd be cool and fluffy." I do not believe for a minute that they considered the extra HPs for subsequent immobilise results.

 Scott-S6 wrote:

 Kaiyanwang wrote:


They cannot play their own game. This explains a lot.

I've been saying this for ages.

People say "new units are OP to get sales" but there are plenty of new units that are garbage as well. They simply don't understand the rules well enough to make units good or bad on purpose.

Take Grav. They made it great against MCs and weak against vehicles. It's a good idea. Then someone says "it should immobilise the vehicle though, that'd be cool and fluffy." I do not believe for a minute that they considered the extra HPs for subsequent immobilise results.

Agree. I remember when they put "gets hot" on the Hot-Shot lasguns when the tempestus first came out. They are called Hot-Shot so they get's hot, right? is not that the first time the "gets hot" on plasma was a nowadays obsolete balance mechanism. It just "sounded" right. And I must be happy they patched it. Like, the day after. Is pathetic.

What really makes me shocked in disbelief is their bosses. These hack frauds managed to break whole edition (Ward with WHFB 7th edition, Daemons) made armies unplayable (Cruddace, once for WHFB and once for 40k, minimum) and yet none ever told hem to get their stuff together. Just think about how many less models Forgeworld sold because of the new 6th edition IG codex.

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

Avadar wrote:
The Thousand Sons Player made some questionable decisions (like not summoning Pink Horrors in a game whose objective is to have a psyker survive til the end, and is using the Tzeentch Warpstorm table, or not using enought mind bullets), and had some not so good roles (causing Magnus to deepstrike twice during the game, and the one role of 6 that would cause Magnus to fail the Strength Test from Helfrost).

It was not a surprise the game ended the way it did.

They cannot play their own game. This explains a lot.

To be fair, I'm not sure the players were GW employees. In fact the commentators (who were GW employees) were on point saying that not summoning more daemons was a bad move; and were wondering why not much was happening in the Psychic phase. They even stopped the game for a moment to ask what happened in the Psychic Phase. The rest was just bad rolling, which can happen to all of us.

I just remember a WD battle report when the Ork Dex dropped. The dude had a unit of Mek Guns, and each one was different. I think it was a Kannon, Lobba and Bubble Chucka? i think. Anyway, those guns have no business being in a unit together. To make it all worse, they played at 2000 points and one dude was like 100 points under and the other guy was like 50 points under. It was painful to look at, like seriously, they couldnt even do basic list building.

 Scott-S6 wrote:

 Kaiyanwang wrote:


They cannot play their own game. This explains a lot.

I've been saying this for ages.

People say "new units are OP to get sales" but there are plenty of new units that are garbage as well. They simply don't understand the rules well enough to make units good or bad on purpose.

Take Grav. They made it great against MCs and weak against vehicles. It's a good idea. Then someone says "it should immobilise the vehicle though, that'd be cool and fluffy." I do not believe for a minute that they considered the extra HPs for subsequent immobilise results.

Meanwhile at PP one of their playtesters recently used an army containing 26 Reptile Hounds to fully stress test them in a play test environment.

So, yeah GW...

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

 Scott-S6 wrote:

 Kaiyanwang wrote:


They cannot play their own game. This explains a lot.

I've been saying this for ages.

People say "new units are OP to get sales" but there are plenty of new units that are garbage as well. They simply don't understand the rules well enough to make units good or bad on purpose.

Take Grav. They made it great against MCs and weak against vehicles. It's a good idea. Then someone says "it should immobilise the vehicle though, that'd be cool and fluffy." I do not believe for a minute that they considered the extra HPs for subsequent immobilise results.

Agree. I remember when they put "gets hot" on the Hot-Shot lasguns when the tempestus first came out. They are called Hot-Shot so they get's hot, right? is not that the first time the "gets hot" on plasma was a nowadays obsolete balance mechanism. It just "sounded" right. And I must be happy they patched it. Like, the day after. Is pathetic.

What really makes me shocked in disbelief is their bosses. These hack frauds managed to break whole edition (Ward with WHFB 7th edition, Daemons) made armies unplayable (Cruddace, once for WHFB and once for 40k, minimum) and yet none ever told hem to get their stuff together. Just think about how many less models Forgeworld sold because of the new 6th edition IG codex.

Honestly, creative has needed a proper clean up for years. To bad it wont come until it is to late, if ever.

Table wrote:

Honestly, creative has needed a proper clean up for years. To bad it wont come until it is to late, if ever.

They were recruiting for creative last year.

With what they're paying they'll struggle to get anyone good.

How did the gray hunters assault from a rhino? That's not a thing in this edition.

OP Grey Hunter Cheese, I guess.

 Traditio wrote:
How did the gray hunters assault from a rhino? That's not a thing in this edition.

Probably GW forgetting their own rules.

 gnome_idea_what wrote:

 Traditio wrote:
How did the gray hunters assault from a rhino? That's not a thing in this edition.

Probably GW forgetting their own rules.

Wouldn't be the first time... Though I just hope it's in reality them mixing 7th and 8th, and they've returned the ability to charge out from vehicles again.

Didn't someone mention earlier that the Rhinos were destroyed in the previous turn, which would allow the Grey Hunters to charge in the current turn?

They still can't charge.

Oh yeah.
I play daemons and none of my opponents run assault units in Rhinos so *shrug*.

They couldn't have summoned horrors. Nobody (not even GW) has enough blues & brimstones, so they would have been stuck when one of the pinks got shot.

What a mess.
I think they should stop releasing such videos. That's utterly garbage.
What should be the message with those videos. Every medium player can do it better?

Ruin wrote:

 Scott-S6 wrote:

 Kaiyanwang wrote:


They cannot play their own game. This explains a lot.

I've been saying this for ages.

People say "new units are OP to get sales" but there are plenty of new units that are garbage as well. They simply don't understand the rules well enough to make units good or bad on purpose.

Take Grav. They made it great against MCs and weak against vehicles. It's a good idea. Then someone says "it should immobilise the vehicle though, that'd be cool and fluffy." I do not believe for a minute that they considered the extra HPs for subsequent immobilise results.

Meanwhile at PP one of their playtesters recently used an army containing 26 Reptile Hounds to fully stress test them in a play test environment.

So, yeah GW...

I'm now interested how that game turned out!

 jreilly89 wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Can someone explain how Magnus was 1 shot with 7 wounds?

No, they can't.

After some research, it looks like the Helfrost Destructor is a STR8 AP1 weapon with some special rules that can result in a 1-shot if a strength test is failed.

It would be nice if someone could walk me through this combat... I'm very unclear on what happened.

Not sure about the rest, but all Helfrost weapons have a rule where if you suffer a wound, you have to pass a Strength test or be removed from play. Hence why Magnus not being a GMC is fething stupid.

I think the helfrost rule is a typical case of stupid.

It doesn't bring much except some very weird corner cases which aren't beneficial in regular games yet can break the game at times.

It could've been, like most "removed from play" weapons, moved to strength D.

Or it could've simply used on a failed strength test, the wound causes instant death.

But no, it had to be a new USR that doesn't have any compatibility issues fixed, so that an EW like Magnus could still be OHKO from it...

I like it, personally, more things should ignore EW, or less things should have EW

 Bobthehero wrote:
I like it, personally, more things should ignore EW, or less things should have EW

Says the IG player. Mostly joking. Mostly.

 Bobthehero wrote:
I like it, personally, more things should ignore EW, or less things should have EW

I agree with the second option.

Having rules that ignore other rules is just bad game design. If you have a rule that says "I can't be killed via these things!" then make it rare rather making a bunch of weapons with the rule "lol nope".

morgoth wrote:
[
I think the helfrost rule is a typical case of stupid.

It doesn't bring much except some very weird corner cases which aren't beneficial in regular games yet can break the game at times.

It could've been, like most "removed from play" weapons, moved to strength D.

Or it could've simply used on a failed strength test, the wound causes instant death.

But no, it had to be a new USR that doesn't have any compatibility issues fixed, so that an EW like Magnus could still be OHKO from it...

Also.. why the Wolves have the frost weapons.... Does the Mechanicus know? Can they do that?

You don't need the Mechanicus to make you crazy weapons when you've got GW writers giving you top priority on the latest whizzpoppers from their holy Forge Worlds!

The Thousand Sons player , honestly due to the format it was hard to tell for sure but they were not using their psychic phase as strongly as they should be.
Even the commentators were talking about it.
I get the whole wanting to cast blessings for the +1 invul, but so much more should have been happening, especially with the dice on the table and Magnus.

xlDuke wrote:
You don't need the Mechanicus to make you crazy weapons when you've got GW writers giving you top priority on the latest whizzpoppers from their holy Forge Worlds!

Wow you could almost say that Spaces Wolves are special snoflakes or something...

Gee, I do wonder which writer is behind this....

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

xlDuke wrote:
You don't need the Mechanicus to make you crazy weapons when you've got GW writers giving you top priority on the latest whizzpoppers from their holy Forge Worlds!

Wow you could almost say that Spaces Wolves are special snoflakes or something...

Gee, I do wonder which writer is behind this....

I know, right? But we know better than to think they have favourites

It's no wonder they don't credit the codex writers any more.

Also:

 MagicJuggler wrote:
...do we have a more insightful look into how the GW design team thinks? Or is this just a hilarious mess overall?

Why not both? It does suggest that the GW design team's thinking process is a hilarious mess.

I'll bet they'd have an easier time remembering the rules correctly if the BRB wasn't 200 pages long and written poorly.

 Pouncey wrote:
I'll bet they'd have an easier time remembering the rules correctly if the BRB wasn't 200 pages long and written poorly.

I don't have any problem remembering those rules

 CrownAxe wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
I'll bet they'd have an easier time remembering the rules correctly if the BRB wasn't 200 pages long and written poorly.

I don't have any problem remembering those rules

Maybe it's just me then. But I do have a problem with remembering specific phrasing.

 Pouncey wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
I'll bet they'd have an easier time remembering the rules correctly if the BRB wasn't 200 pages long and written poorly.

I don't have any problem remembering those rules

Maybe it's just me then. But I do have a problem with remembering specific phrasing.

If browsing YMDC has taught me anything. it probably isn't just you

Its kind of pathetic how pessimistic people can be. I watched the stream, and I can guarantee you it wasn't a rigged corporate charade to sell the most OP units. It was 2 guys just having a regular game, one of which was new to tzeentch, as guess what, every single person playing wrath of magnus stuff is. They even did the math when Magnus died, failing everything he did was a 2% chance of ever happening, and now people in this thread are whining about how OP hellfrost is all of a sudden.

The very concept of games workshop setting up a casual game on twitch for fun is just too much for people apparently.

Can't we just have fun anymore, guys?

 CrownAxe wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
I'll bet they'd have an easier time remembering the rules correctly if the BRB wasn't 200 pages long and written poorly.

I don't have any problem remembering those rules

Maybe it's just me then. But I do have a problem with remembering specific phrasing.

If browsing YMDC has taught me anything. it probably isn't just you

Oh.

So then your personal lack of issue with remembering the rules isn't really a reason not to cut down on the length of the game's rules and write them better, is it?

Do you perhaps have an eidetic memory?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Don Savik wrote:
Its kind of pathetic how pessimistic people can be. I watched the stream, and I can guarantee you it wasn't a rigged corporate charade to sell the most OP units. It was 2 guys just having a regular game, one of which was new to tzeentch, as guess what, every single person playing wrath of magnus stuff is. They even did the math when Magnus died, failing everything he did was a 2% chance of ever happening, and now people in this thread are whining about how OP hellfrost is all of a sudden.

The very concept of games workshop setting up a casual game on twitch for fun is just too much for people apparently.

Can't we just have fun anymore, guys?

People still have fun playing WH40k?

 Don Savik wrote:
Its kind of pathetic how pessimistic people can be. I watched the stream, and I can guarantee you it wasn't a rigged corporate charade to sell the most OP units. It was 2 guys just having a regular game, one of which was new to tzeentch, as guess what, every single person playing wrath of magnus stuff is. They even did the math when Magnus died, failing everything he did was a 2% chance of ever happening, and now people in this thread are whining about how OP hellfrost is all of a sudden.

Not OP, just bad design.
The Helfrost is one of those things you can hardly balance.
97% of the time it sucks balls, and then, that one time, it deletes a Magnus.
That basically drives it's value as 97% * Mkay + 3% * MagnusWTF, i.e. dumb.

And then the other problem:

If it used Instant Death, it would've done the same on mostly every target, not have had that corner case, and one less rule to remember.

It's not a big deal, but given the choice, I would've just simplified Helfrost as: "on a 6 to wound: Instant Death with no saves of any kind allowed".



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Pouncey wrote:
People still have fun playing WH40k?

I do, thanks to my secret technique: I stopped playing against people who must win at any cost, including cheating (additional inch per movement, playing the clock, etc.) and being generally unfriendly.

Where I live, that means no tournaments, but hey... it's not like the glory of being the best of a total 30 guys in the country who care about it is really worth anything.

morgoth wrote:
I do, thanks to my secret technique: I stopped playing against people who must win at any cost, including cheating (additional inch per movement, playing the clock, etc.) and being generally unfriendly.

Where I live, that means no tournaments, but hey... it's not like the glory of being the best of a total 30 guys in the country who care about it is really worth anything.

I run into that argument a lot on the WoW forums: "Just stop caring about being the best, and it'll be fun, I promise."

People who make that argument never seem to consider that I already treat my gaming like that, since I don't handle pressure well enough to play competitively and never cared about competing with my fellow players. Yet despite that, the games, WoW and WH40k, still aren't enjoyable for me.

Maybe simply not caring about winning tournaments isn't enough to make anything fun?

 Don Savik wrote:
Its kind of pathetic how pessimistic people can be. I watched the stream, and I can guarantee you it wasn't a rigged corporate charade to sell the most OP units. It was 2 guys just having a regular game, one of which was new to tzeentch, as guess what, every single person playing wrath of magnus stuff is. They even did the math when Magnus died, failing everything he did was a 2% chance of ever happening, and now people in this thread are whining about how OP hellfrost is all of a sudden.

The very concept of games workshop setting up a casual game on twitch for fun is just too much for people apparently.

Can't we just have fun anymore, guys?

Here there is none accusing GW (at least, in this instance) of a "rigged corporate charade". You failed spectacularly to understand what people complained about.
We are well aware of the design issue of GW rules. those are not trivial, because they had an impact on the demise of one of their main line (WHFB).

People are not criticising what happened per se, but the fact that GW seems to ignore their own rules. This suggest to most of us that they have not faith in their system, and for a reason, because is an unbalanced, convoluted mess that casts a shadow on a system we all love, or at least want to love. The design team shows more often than not to be clueless and amateurish, and this is just another example. For further evidence of how sloppy they are, check the Codex: Imperial Agents thread.

The frost weapon is just an example of what's wrong with 40k nowadays: useless, unclear, redundant rules that stack on each other, and incoherent fluff added to special snowflakes loved by a designer (this specific designer is infamous for that) that just does not fit with the universe, while other factions are left in the dust. What happens in the report just triggered comments on the weapon. Again, you failed spectacularly to understand that, too.

What does fun means? For me, is to play with my friends a well designed game. None of us is a competitive cheesemonger, but we want to be challenged by the game and by each other, and this can be possible only with a decent ruleset. Asking for something smart is asking for having fun.

 Pouncey wrote:

morgoth wrote:
I do, thanks to my secret technique: I stopped playing against people who must win at any cost, including cheating (additional inch per movement, playing the clock, etc.) and being generally unfriendly.

Where I live, that means no tournaments, but hey... it's not like the glory of being the best of a total 30 guys in the country who care about it is really worth anything.

I run into that argument a lot on the WoW forums: "Just stop caring about being the best, and it'll be fun, I promise."

People who make that argument never seem to consider that I already treat my gaming like that, since I don't handle pressure well enough to play competitively and never cared about competing with my fellow players. Yet despite that, the games, WoW and WH40k, still aren't enjoyable for me.

Maybe simply not caring about winning tournaments isn't enough to make anything fun?

I think you misunderstand...

I love competition, I just think 40K competition is meaningless - at least where I live.

If you can't enjoy 40K despite playing with people you like, then it's not a game for you and you should find something else.

morgoth wrote:
I think you misunderstand...

I love competition, I just think 40K competition is meaningless - at lest where I live.

If you can't enjoy 40K despite playing with people you like, then it's not a game for you and you should find something else.

Yes, I agree.

That's why I decided to quit 40k and WoW until their latest iterations in the future become something I am willing to try again to see if I enjoy it. Haven't played a 40k game in a few years.

 Pouncey wrote:
I play fun, casual games.

The rules should not be playtested like that. Period. Serious flaws with the rules are missed and imbalanced combinations are never examined because the playtesters are not interested in seeing where the rules break down, only in having a fun game.

Playtesting is about improving the rules by figuring out where they don't work. You will not encounter situations like that in a casual setting where no one's trying to do anything absurd.

Was this one of their playtesting games though?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Pouncey wrote:
1-Batreps are intended to showcase the new army to drive sales.

Funnily enough I kept reading this claim all the time when I was buying WD's actively(somewhere 250-350 or so). Yet actual BR's won by new army was pretty much spot on 50-50...

If anything it was SUSPICIOUSLY close to 50-50.

tneva82 wrote:
Was this one of their playtesting games though?

I assumed it was.

Why else were they livestreaming this game?

Funnily enough I kept reading this claim all the time when I was buying WD's actively(somewhere 250-350 or so). Yet actual BR's won by new army was pretty much spot on 50-50...

If anything it was SUSPICIOUSLY close to 50-50.

I'm not enough of a conspiracy theorist to suggest it was intentional.

Point taken, though. I simply never cared enough to keep a record and I didn't even read most of the ones in the issues I received.

 Pouncey wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Was this one of their playtesting games though?

I assumed it was.

Why else were they livestreaming this game?

Promotional use? They seem to have started doing that lately. Why stream anything at all? Because it showcases the hobby thus(hopefully) leading to more sales.

Thread opened on 16.12. Was this posted much after the fact? Based on comments about trying to comment but requiring member sounds like it was live stream rather than video battle report. If it was live stream either thread was opened MONTHS too late or it couldn't be playtesting. They are already RELEASED. Assuming they have any sort of playtesting then by now they are playtesting what will be released next year(most likely 8th ed related) rather than TS vs SW.

tneva82 wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Was this one of their playtesting games though?

I assumed it was.

Why else were they livestreaming this game?

Promotional use? They seem to have started doing that lately. Why stream anything at all? Because it showcases the hobby thus(hopefully) leading to more sales.

Thread opened on 16.12. Was this posted much after the fact? Based on comments about trying to comment but requiring member sounds like it was live stream rather than video battle report. If it was live stream either thread was opened MONTHS too late or it couldn't be playtesting. They are already RELEASED. Assuming they have any sort of playtesting then by now they are playtesting what will be released next year(most likely 8th ed related) rather than TS vs SW.

Okay then.

I withdraw my comments about playtesting.

Aside from charging from Rhino's (Have not seen the stream) Is that the only rules issue besides "Bad Play"?

Is there a link to this video?

Also, it's great to point out GW's mistakes, but tbh most recorded games I've seen on Youtube had a few mistakes in there, sometimes big ones.

And that goes for most games of 40K anyway so really... not a big deal I guess.

Yes - GW does not employ tournament players that take min/max lists for their reports. Their reports have never had min/max lists, which is something also complained about since the beginning of the internet on AOL chat rooms in the 90s when discussing white dwarf reports and how "unrealistic they are".

 auticus wrote:
Yes - GW does not employ tournament players that take min/max lists for their reports. Their reports have never had min/max lists, which is something also complained about since the beginning of the internet on AOL chat rooms in the 90s when discussing white dwarf reports and how "unrealistic they are".

Not just theirs... I've rarely seen anything on youtube which looked like top tournament players with top lists - I know there are some but it's really a minority.

 auticus wrote:
Yes - GW does not employ tournament players that take min/max lists for their reports. Their reports have never had min/max lists, which is something also complained about since the beginning of the internet on AOL chat rooms in the 90s when discussing white dwarf reports and how "unrealistic they are".

You must've missed last month's WD then...

Looks to me like a game between two tournament players who are in their employment in their AoS batrep. I also distinctly remember an IW vs SW, one frm 5th ed. WHFB with some WE IIRC and a WHFB Beastmen v DoW (where there was a huge discussion about maths and angles after a particularly janky move from the Beastmen player) ones from back in the day.

BloodGrin wrote:The Thousand Sons player , honestly due to the format it was hard to tell for sure but they were not using their psychic phase as strongly as they should be.
Even the commentators were talking about it.
I get the whole wanting to cast blessings for the +1 invul, but so much more should have been happening, especially with the dice on the table and Magnus.

Well the main issue being he either could go for the +1 invul or go for the horrors. In reality he left it too late to cast the horrors.

Don Savik wrote:Its kind of pathetic how pessimistic people can be. I watched the stream, and I can guarantee you it wasn't a rigged corporate charade to sell the most OP units. It was 2 guys just having a regular game, one of which was new to tzeentch, as guess what, every single person playing wrath of magnus stuff is. They even did the math when Magnus died, failing everything he did was a 2% chance of ever happening, and now people in this thread are whining about how OP hellfrost is all of a sudden.

The very concept of games workshop setting up a casual game on twitch for fun is just too much for people apparently.

Can't we just have fun anymore, guys?

Having spoken to Jay before hand, he was pretty confident that it's pretty much impossible to kill Magnus but he was convinced that he'd roll something on the warp table (not a chaos player myself) that would result in him having to replace his model with a lord of change (or some gak like that). Turns out he didn't even have to be worried about that!

Now to all those conspiracy theorists out there. Jay is just a bog standard staff member from the warhammer world shop (it's filmed in the main hall) who was chosen because A) He's an extremely experienced player and B) Because he has a normal tzeentch Demon army. A lot of work went into that battle reports lists and tactics, he simply miscalled it turn one. Like all of us have never done that before? The mission was done to simply showcase the new models, mission and rules, the result was not fixed in the slightest.

Avadar wrote:

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

Avadar wrote:
The Thousand Sons Player made some questionable decisions (like not summoning Pink Horrors in a game whose objective is to have a psyker survive til the end, and is using the Tzeentch Warpstorm table, or not using enought mind bullets), and had some not so good roles (causing Magnus to deepstrike twice during the game, and the one role of 6 that would cause Magnus to fail the Strength Test from Helfrost).

It was not a surprise the game ended the way it did.

They cannot play their own game. This explains a lot.

To be fair, I'm not sure the players were GW employees. In fact the commentators (who were GW employees) were on point saying that not summoning more daemons was a bad move; and were wondering why not much was happening in the Psychic phase. They even stopped the game for a moment to ask what happened in the Psychic Phase. The rest was just bad rolling, which can happen to all of us.

In all honesty I think that's more of an issue with the programme format. Trying to have a pro league gaming format with commentators separated by the board doesn't really work. It was more of an issue of loads of dice being rolled (bad dice at that) during the Psychic phase and due to their (albeit small) distance from the board, they had no idea what was going on and then didn't respond and inform viewers when you can hear a fairly inaudible response when asked.

The players however were indeed GW employee's.

morgoth wrote:

 auticus wrote:
Yes - GW does not employ tournament players that take min/max lists for their reports. Their reports have never had min/max lists, which is something also complained about since the beginning of the internet on AOL chat rooms in the 90s when discussing white dwarf reports and how "unrealistic they are".

Not just theirs... I've rarely seen anything on youtube which looked like top tournament players with top lists - I know there are some but it's really a minority.

I've noticed that as well. I know that when I posted video reports of our campaign games, we'd get a lot of nasty troll comments about how the lists were awful and not tournament standard and horribad.

In all fairness the thousand sons list looked like a collection of available models rather than a real list.

I'm not worried about helfrost weapons, Magnus can always run off the board in his shooting phase if you're really scared.

Also opponents are less likely to complain about his usage if they've seen this humiliating defeat.

Most of the people in this thread aren't great at the game either. Took most of the first page to even establish what Helfrost does.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Most of the people in this thread aren't great at the game either. Took most of the first page to even establish what Helfrost does.

My lack of a firm grasp on the rules is offset by my terrible generalship, but thank you for the compliment and positive thinking that I am simply "not great". : D

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Most of the people in this thread aren't great at the game either. Took most of the first page to even establish what Helfrost does.

That just means some people aren't familiar with SW army. I for one have only played them once.

 mrhappyface wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Most of the people in this thread aren't great at the game either. Took most of the first page to even establish what Helfrost does.

That just means some people aren't familiar with SW army. I for one have only played them once.

Plus I don't think it's wrong that we hold the people writing the rules to a higher standard than ourselves, is it?

 Pouncey wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Was this one of their playtesting games though?

I assumed it was.

Why else were they livestreaming this game?

How exactly are they play testing for rules that are already printed and due for release soon?

GW has never been in touch with what their rules are capable of (or incapable) in the hands of a hardcore competitive player. They have always been content with what looks cool over any ideas about list building or a units power. They also have never been hardcore enough to even know all of their own rules. Although that is incredibly hard with their rate. Of recycling the rules, even for those paid to write them.

 Pouncey wrote:

 BBAP wrote:

 MagicJuggler wrote:
...do we have a more insightful look into how the GW design team thinks?

Every WD batrep ever. I vaguely remember one from 6 or 7 years ago where one of the main devs at the time (possibly Matt Ward) charged five TH/SS Terminators at a massive horde of Genestealers. The batrep text was all like, "the Emperor's Finest shall not be intimidated by these aliens!", then they charged. The inevitable occured, with all five Terminators were smushed at I6, and the batrep is all like, "the aliens vanquished all the mighty Terminators! How unexpected!"

It was at that point I realised GW don't play their games.

The precise moment I stopped caring about WD batreps was when there was a reference to a "practice game" that went completely the other way in the Island of Blood intro.

At that point I stopped giving a damn, since I concluded the following:

1-Batreps are intended to showcase the new army to drive sales.

Totally and 100% disagree. Anyone remember when new nids came out? They lost that fight horribly and that was their opening batrep. The author himself played the nids and they were absolutely crushed.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Most of the people in this thread aren't great at the game either. Took most of the first page to even establish what Helfrost does.

You could be excellent at this game and never have opened Codex: Wolf Wolves ... it's not like there's a single competitive list that uses Helfrost weapons - or codex wolf wolves.

For me as a really inexperienced player who's only into this for the setting and the awesome stories, it sounds a bit as if most of you really are angry because it was a game for fun and that they didn't play as some hardcore nerd at a tournament would.
and i really don't understand why you guys are always returning to that helfrost cannon. even though most of you state "it's not the cannon, we're displeased with the GW staff" many of you are complaining about that one hit kill a lot. you know, the rules of that weapon work for every enemy, not just for magus, right? xD

People complain about the hellfrost rule because no army should have ways of ignoring all your models rules, including eternal warrior, and removing them especially if that rule is on common weaponary within the army.

 mrhappyface wrote:
People complain about the hellfrost rule because no army should have ways of ignoring all your models rules, including eternal warrior, and removing them especially if that rule is on common weaponary within the army.

Honestly this is the first complaint I've ever seen outside calling Helfrost bad.

 Pouncey wrote:

 mrhappyface wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Most of the people in this thread aren't great at the game either. Took most of the first page to even establish what Helfrost does.

That just means some people aren't familiar with SW army. I for one have only played them once.

Plus I don't think it's wrong that we hold the people writing the rules to a higher standard than ourselves, is it?

Do you intend to keep spamming this thread with nonsense? ...clearly, the "people writing the rules" were not the folks controlling those armies. To what "high standard" do you hold yourself? Clearly most of the knee-jerk, spiteful venom spewed in this thread is based on misinformation, lack of knowledge of the rules, and a sick grudge against a toy company that makes no sense.

This is dakka so should I know better than to get involved but c'mon seriously!

I feel like if this game had gone in favor of TSons, you'd have people complaining about how strong Magnus is.

Don't worry, in typical GW fashion they'll just ignore the results of the game since they weren't what they wanted, and write the lore as if the 1K Sons had won. Just like they did with the last Black Crusade

 Cyprien wrote:
For me as a really inexperienced player who's only into this for the setting and the awesome stories, it sounds a bit as if most of you really are angry because it was a game for fun and that they didn't play as some hardcore nerd at a tournament would.
and i really don't understand why you guys are always returning to that helfrost cannon. even though most of you state "it's not the cannon, we're displeased with the GW staff" many of you are complaining about that one hit kill a lot. you know, the rules of that weapon work for every enemy, not just for magus, right? xD

My complaint is not that they don't play like hardcore gamers ( I'd really appreciate a bit more respect on both sides of this) it's that they don't even seem to recognize the concept of competitive gaming to the extent that they write such horribly flawed rules. Those rules are what perpetuates the divide between the casual and the competitive. If they wrote a balanced rules set with options that were equally appealing it wouldn't devolve into "take all of these I can and leave that obvious trash out" types of builds. If all the fluffy options were as powerful as the other options then we wouldn't have the paper rock scissors situation we have now. When people are coming up with lists that break the game a week after a codex drops it's clear that play testers don't try and test the system, they just play to have fun. Which ironically makes it no fun for a lot of their customers.

 nintura wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 BBAP wrote:

 MagicJuggler wrote:
...do we have a more insightful look into how the GW design team thinks?

Every WD batrep ever. I vaguely remember one from 6 or 7 years ago where one of the main devs at the time (possibly Matt Ward) charged five TH/SS Terminators at a massive horde of Genestealers. The batrep text was all like, "the Emperor's Finest shall not be intimidated by these aliens!", then they charged. The inevitable occured, with all five Terminators were smushed at I6, and the batrep is all like, "the aliens vanquished all the mighty Terminators! How unexpected!"

It was at that point I realised GW don't play their games.

The precise moment I stopped caring about WD batreps was when there was a reference to a "practice game" that went completely the other way in the Island of Blood intro.

At that point I stopped giving a damn, since I concluded the following:

1-Batreps are intended to showcase the new army to drive sales.

Totally and 100% disagree. Anyone remember when new nids came out? They lost that fight horribly and that was their opening batrep. The author himself played the nids and they were absolutely crushed.

They've had a few games like this actually, it just seems like they do whatever they think looks cool for a batrep.

 SlaveToDorkness wrote:


My complaint is not that they don't play like hardcore gamers ( I'd really appreciate a bit more respect on both sides of this) it's that they don't even seem to recognize the concept of competitive gaming to the extent that they write such horribly flawed rules. Those rules are what perpetuates the divide between the casual and the competitive. If they wrote a balanced rules set with options that were equally appealing it wouldn't devolve into "take all of these I can and leave that obvious trash out" types of builds. If all the fluffy options were as powerful as the other options then we wouldn't have the paper rock scissors situation we have now. When people are coming up with lists that break the game a week after a codex drops it's clear that play testers don't try and test the system, they just play to have fun. Which ironically makes it no fun for a lot of their customers.

Plus catering to competitive play is just good business sense. It doesn't take a rocket appliance to understand that good competitive rule sets translate into a balanced and fair game that make casual play more enjoyable as well. I'm a casual player and frankly I'd rather have a game built around balance of gameplay over writing in cheese because it just "feels fluffy".

 metallifan wrote:

 SlaveToDorkness wrote:


My complaint is not that they don't play like hardcore gamers ( I'd really appreciate a bit more respect on both sides of this) it's that they don't even seem to recognize the concept of competitive gaming to the extent that they write such horribly flawed rules. Those rules are what perpetuates the divide between the casual and the competitive. If they wrote a balanced rules set with options that were equally appealing it wouldn't devolve into "take all of these I can and leave that obvious trash out" types of builds. If all the fluffy options were as powerful as the other options then we wouldn't have the paper rock scissors situation we have now. When people are coming up with lists that break the game a week after a codex drops it's clear that play testers don't try and test the system, they just play to have fun. Which ironically makes it no fun for a lot of their customers.

Plus catering to competitive play is just good business sense. It doesn't take a rocket appliance to understand that good competitive rule sets translate into a balanced and fair game that make casual play more enjoyable as well. I'm a casual player and frankly I'd rather have a game built around balance of gameplay over writing in cheese because it just "feels fluffy".

People kept saying that about Warmahordes but all I remember is turn one death's from a balanced and fair competitive gameset.

 CrownAxe wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Can someone explain how Magnus was 1 shot with 7 wounds?

No, they can't.

After some research, it looks like the Helfrost Destructor is a STR8 AP1 weapon with some special rules that can result in a 1-shot if a strength test is failed.

It would be nice if someone could walk me through this combat... I'm very unclear on what happened.

Not sure about the rest, but all Helfrost weapons have a rule where if you suffer a wound, you have to pass a Strength test or be removed from play. Hence why Magnus not being a GMC is fething stupid.

It's also a blast weapon that cant target flying creatures...which magnus would absolutely be flying vs a list that had helfrost weapons. lol.

GW FAQed that skyfire blasts can hit flyers

Flyers, yes, but i'm not sure about FMC.

mmh scratch that:

Q: Do Blast weapons hit Swooping Flying
Monstrous Creatures?
A: No.
Q: Can a Swooping Flying Monstrous Creature or Zooming
Flyer be targeted by a Blast or Template weapon with the Skyfire
special rule?
A: No.
Q: Can Swooping Flying Monstrous Creatures be hit by nova
and beam powers?
A: Yes for nova powers, no for beam powers.

So anyone who play competitively at all knows that there are TONS of rule screw ups during a match. It's part of the game.

It's really not a big of deal as everyone in this thread is making it out to be.....

What's really annoying is when an outsider sits there and gives rules corrections and drive-by advice to one player or another. (That includes TOs, judges, and internet rage monsters.)

Chill out everyone.

CrownAxe wrote:[GW FAQed that skyfire blasts can hit flyers

I thought that was the First Draft FAQ. In the final FAQ it was changed back again. Or so I thought I read. So many changes not sure what is what anymore.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Pouncey wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
I'll bet they'd have an easier time remembering the rules correctly if the BRB wasn't 200 pages long and written poorly.

I don't have any problem remembering those rules

Maybe it's just me then. But I do have a problem with remembering specific phrasing.

If browsing YMDC has taught me anything. it probably isn't just you

Oh.

So then your personal lack of issue with remembering the rules isn't really a reason not to cut down on the length of the game's rules and write them better, is it?

Do you perhaps have an eidetic memory?

Can someone please explain this? Wasn't Crown Axe agreeing with Pouncey on his last post saying it wasn't just Pouncey with remembering rules but yet Pouncey turns it around on him/her and then goes on to out him/her out with asking if they had exceptional memory?

How am I reading this wrong?

The salt about frost weapons is real.

 gummyofallbears wrote:
The salt about frost weapons is real.

ANY item/weapon that removes an entire model from the game deserves salt.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:


People kept saying that about Warmahordes but all I remember is turn one death's from a balanced and fair competitive gameset.

So? This is no the fault of the rules. With respect; that's the fault of the player. Yes, WMH has a very high learning curve and you have to be aware of threat ranges of things etc. (which is less of problem now with premeasuring). But to blame your caster getting assassinated on turn 1 because of the rules of the game is patently false. You can block charge lanes, LOS, have things with counter charge. All these things and more can prevent such a thing from occurring.

 nintura wrote:

 gummyofallbears wrote:
The salt about frost weapons is real.

ANY item/weapon that removes an entire model from the game deserves salt.

The amount of space wolf units that can take Hellfrost is minimal, I can name like 4, one of which being unique. Also, it is so situational that in any of my games it has never even made a different.

If Long Fangs could take it, I would understand the salt, I would also buy some long fangs, but I would get where you're coming from.

There are so many other things to be angry about in that game, a stupid dice roll is near the bottom of the list.

Ruin wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:


People kept saying that about Warmahordes but all I remember is turn one death's from a balanced and fair competitive gameset.

So? This is no the fault of the rules. With respect; that's the fault of the player. Yes, WMH has a very high learning curve and you have to be aware of threat ranges of things etc. (which is less of problem now with premeasuring). But to blame your caster getting assassinated on turn 1 because of the rules of the game is patently false. You can block charge lanes, LOS, have things with counter charge. All these things and more can prevent such a thing from occurring.

40K has "a very high learning curve", and the codex is BRAND new... but completely irrational overreactions are only ok when it's negative about GW apparently.

Pffff... 40ks learning curve can't even be expressed as a curve. Is there such a thing as a learning ray?

 gummyofallbears wrote:

 nintura wrote:

 gummyofallbears wrote:
The salt about frost weapons is real.

ANY item/weapon that removes an entire model from the game deserves salt.

The amount of space wolf units that can take Hellfrost is minimal, I can name like 4, one of which being unique. Also, it is so situational that in any of my games it has never even made a different.

If Long Fangs could take it, I would understand the salt, I would also buy some long fangs, but I would get where you're coming from.

There are so many other things to be angry about in that game, a stupid dice roll is near the bottom of the list.

That doesn't disprove my statement though. Simply removing a model is strictly toxic and no fun for the person losing something they've wanted to use. It completely bypasses the rules, the text, and everything else. That's why it was such a big issue when SW's first came out and they had that line psyker power that made you take I tests or be removed.

A great couple of games, it got me back into watching Twitch. I think the live aspect of it made it more interesting than the ones on Youtube.

 nintura wrote:
That doesn't disprove my statement though. Simply removing a model is strictly toxic and no fun for the person losing something they've wanted to use.

"Don't kill my Wraithknight! I wanted to use it to kill you!"

I'm not buying it. I get that losing a model is not fun for the person losing it, but that's the game. Helfrost is not spammable, most of the weapons that have it are single-shot non-TL affairs, and there's precisely two melee weapons I'm aware of that have it, one of which is a Relic and the other of which is a Thunder Hammer only equippable by Iron Priests. It's fine.

 BBAP wrote:

 nintura wrote:
That doesn't disprove my statement though. Simply removing a model is strictly toxic and no fun for the person losing something they've wanted to use.

"Don't kill my Wraithknight! I wanted to use it to kill you!"

Is there a purpose for taking anything in the game other than facilitating the enemies' deaths?

The wraith knight doesn't get removed by helfrost becuse of being a GMC. That mostly what the complaints are abotu if you ask me. This is exactly the reason why magnus should have been a GMC.
Or in a more sane world, eternal warrior should really stop that too.

Or GMC also gets removed so that everyone is on the same boat.

Yea. Making everythign OP is no way to balance stuff, but I'd rather have everything be OP than the current "this cycle of codices is OP so let's tone down the volume on the next cycle" thing

 Gunzhard wrote:

Ruin wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:


People kept saying that about Warmahordes but all I remember is turn one death's from a balanced and fair competitive gameset.

So? This is no the fault of the rules. With respect; that's the fault of the player. Yes, WMH has a very high learning curve and you have to be aware of threat ranges of things etc. (which is less of problem now with premeasuring). But to blame your caster getting assassinated on turn 1 because of the rules of the game is patently false. You can block charge lanes, LOS, have things with counter charge. All these things and more can prevent such a thing from occurring.

40K has "a very high learning curve", and the codex is BRAND new... but completely irrational overreactions are only ok when it's negative about GW apparently.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH*cough*AHAHAHAHAHAHA

In 40k you often know the results just looking at the list. Please don't go on this way. You will just hurt yourself.

 nintura wrote:

 gummyofallbears wrote:

 nintura wrote:

 gummyofallbears wrote:
The salt about frost weapons is real.

ANY item/weapon that removes an entire model from the game deserves salt.

The amount of space wolf units that can take Hellfrost is minimal, I can name like 4, one of which being unique. Also, it is so situational that in any of my games it has never even made a different.

If Long Fangs could take it, I would understand the salt, I would also buy some long fangs, but I would get where you're coming from.

There are so many other things to be angry about in that game, a stupid dice roll is near the bottom of the list.

That doesn't disprove my statement though. Simply removing a model is strictly toxic and no fun for the person losing something they've wanted to use. It completely bypasses the rules, the text, and everything else. That's why it was such a big issue when SW's first came out and they had that line psyker power that made you take I tests or be removed.

So then get angry about magnus, ya know the giant flying monster with 2 D shots a turn (3 if your opponent has D). Get angry about the wraithknights and the S, not a silly rule that has never come into play in any game I have played.

 Roknar wrote:
Yea. Making everythign OP is no way to balance stuff, but I'd rather have everything be OP than the current "this cycle of codices is OP so let's tone down the volume on the next cycle" thing

"When everyone is OP, no one is," was the philosophy behind the Overwatch character design. Ultimate abilities in particular, I think.

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

 Gunzhard wrote:

Ruin wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:


People kept saying that about Warmahordes but all I remember is turn one death's from a balanced and fair competitive gameset.

So? This is no the fault of the rules. With respect; that's the fault of the player. Yes, WMH has a very high learning curve and you have to be aware of threat ranges of things etc. (which is less of problem now with premeasuring). But to blame your caster getting assassinated on turn 1 because of the rules of the game is patently false. You can block charge lanes, LOS, have things with counter charge. All these things and more can prevent such a thing from occurring.

40K has "a very high learning curve", and the codex is BRAND new... but completely irrational overreactions are only ok when it's negative about GW apparently.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH*cough*AHAHAHAHAHAHA

In 40k you often know the results just looking at the list. Please don't go on this way. You will just hurt yourself.

What's funny is that just looking in this thread alone, you can see that plenty of folks haven't learned the game yet. I'd agree that the list does, unfortunately, most often determine the win... but there is absolutely a very high learning curve. Blame GW and their scattered rules, or too many codex and too many supplements if you want - but I've yet to meet anyone that knew all the rules.

Do you know all the rules Kaiyanwang?

 Gunzhard wrote:

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

 Gunzhard wrote:

Ruin wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:


People kept saying that about Warmahordes but all I remember is turn one death's from a balanced and fair competitive gameset.

So? This is no the fault of the rules. With respect; that's the fault of the player. Yes, WMH has a very high learning curve and you have to be aware of threat ranges of things etc. (which is less of problem now with premeasuring). But to blame your caster getting assassinated on turn 1 because of the rules of the game is patently false. You can block charge lanes, LOS, have things with counter charge. All these things and more can prevent such a thing from occurring.

40K has "a very high learning curve", and the codex is BRAND new... but completely irrational overreactions are only ok when it's negative about GW apparently.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH*cough*AHAHAHAHAHAHA

In 40k you often know the results just looking at the list. Please don't go on this way. You will just hurt yourself.

What's funny is that just looking in this thread alone, you can see that plenty of folks haven't learned the game yet. I'd agree that the list does, unfortunately, most often determine the win... but there is absolutely a very high learning curve. Blame GW and their scattered rules, or too many codex and too many supplements if you want - but I've yet to meet anyone that knew all the rules.

Do you know all the rules Kaiyanwang?

I don't accept any comparison between WMH and 40k, but concerning the rest, I take the point and go home with the tail low.
(I know a good bunch, but I would be probably be taken by surprise by formations alone).

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

 Gunzhard wrote:

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

 Gunzhard wrote:

Ruin wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:


People kept saying that about Warmahordes but all I remember is turn one death's from a balanced and fair competitive gameset.

So? This is no the fault of the rules. With respect; that's the fault of the player. Yes, WMH has a very high learning curve and you have to be aware of threat ranges of things etc. (which is less of problem now with premeasuring). But to blame your caster getting assassinated on turn 1 because of the rules of the game is patently false. You can block charge lanes, LOS, have things with counter charge. All these things and more can prevent such a thing from occurring.

40K has "a very high learning curve", and the codex is BRAND new... but completely irrational overreactions are only ok when it's negative about GW apparently.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH*cough*AHAHAHAHAHAHA

In 40k you often know the results just looking at the list. Please don't go on this way. You will just hurt yourself.

What's funny is that just looking in this thread alone, you can see that plenty of folks haven't learned the game yet. I'd agree that the list does, unfortunately, most often determine the win... but there is absolutely a very high learning curve. Blame GW and their scattered rules, or too many codex and too many supplements if you want - but I've yet to meet anyone that knew all the rules.

Do you know all the rules Kaiyanwang?

I don't accept any comparison between WMH and 40k, but concerning the rest, I take the point and go home with the tail low.
(I know a good bunch, but I would be probably be taken by surprise by formations alone).

Hah wow, answers with humility are so unexpected here, and I have to admit I know nothing about WMH.

 gummyofallbears wrote:

 nintura wrote:

 gummyofallbears wrote:

 nintura wrote:

 gummyofallbears wrote:
The salt about frost weapons is real.

ANY item/weapon that removes an entire model from the game deserves salt.

The amount of space wolf units that can take Hellfrost is minimal, I can name like 4, one of which being unique. Also, it is so situational that in any of my games it has never even made a different.

If Long Fangs could take it, I would understand the salt, I would also buy some long fangs, but I would get where you're coming from.

There are so many other things to be angry about in that game, a stupid dice roll is near the bottom of the list.

That doesn't disprove my statement though. Simply removing a model is strictly toxic and no fun for the person losing something they've wanted to use. It completely bypasses the rules, the text, and everything else. That's why it was such a big issue when SW's first came out and they had that line psyker power that made you take I tests or be removed.

So then get angry about magnus, ya know the giant flying monster with 2 D shots a turn (3 if your opponent has D). Get angry about the wraithknights and the S, not a silly rule that has never come into play in any game I have played.

Ive played magnus. He's not a serious threat. I got first turn against a tau player, and did a whopping two wounds with both S: D hits. Yes, that's unlucky, but he doesn't do much damage for a 650 point model. Yes, he absorbs a gak load of shots, but he did not impress me at all. Exalted sorcerers on the other hand are much better. But for 650 points, Magnus is not impressive.

 nintura wrote:

 gummyofallbears wrote:

 nintura wrote:

 gummyofallbears wrote:

 nintura wrote:

 gummyofallbears wrote:
The salt about frost weapons is real.

ANY item/weapon that removes an entire model from the game deserves salt.

The amount of space wolf units that can take Hellfrost is minimal, I can name like 4, one of which being unique. Also, it is so situational that in any of my games it has never even made a different.

If Long Fangs could take it, I would understand the salt, I would also buy some long fangs, but I would get where you're coming from.

There are so many other things to be angry about in that game, a stupid dice roll is near the bottom of the list.

That doesn't disprove my statement though. Simply removing a model is strictly toxic and no fun for the person losing something they've wanted to use. It completely bypasses the rules, the text, and everything else. That's why it was such a big issue when SW's first came out and they had that line psyker power that made you take I tests or be removed.

So then get angry about magnus, ya know the giant flying monster with 2 D shots a turn (3 if your opponent has D). Get angry about the wraithknights and the S, not a silly rule that has never come into play in any game I have played.

Ive played magnus. He's not a serious threat. I got first turn against a tau player, and did a whopping two wounds with both S: D hits. Yes, that's unlucky, but he doesn't do much damage for a 650 point model. Yes, he absorbs a gak load of shots, but he did not impress me at all. Exalted sorcerers on the other hand are much better. But for 650 points, Magnus is not impressive.

I am not speaking of overall power of magnus, just Strength D.

I've played against him, and ignoring the passive death toll he took on my army, he has abillities that can (and will given statistical rolls) completely remove models from play, which is apparently "toxic and no fun for the person losing something they've wanted to use".

And I agree. S: D should not remove a model. It should be super powerful for sure. But not strictly remove. It could be something as simple as d6+3 if you roll a 6. Sure it has a chance to kill your big model, but it isn't guaranteed at least. There's no reason to progress from 1 wound > d3 wounds > d6 wounds > remove. That kind of power leap is just uncalled for.

Too many things have EW anyway, I welcome anything that gets rid of e'm easy.

 nintura wrote:
And I agree. S: D should not remove a model. It should be super powerful for sure. But not strictly remove. It could be something as simple as d6+3 if you roll a 6. Sure it has a chance to kill your big model, but it isn't guaranteed at least. There's no reason to progress from 1 wound > d3 wounds > d6 wounds > remove. That kind of power leap is just uncalled for.

I completely agree.

My argument simply lies in the fact that the rule is good, but it is so situational, as most of the of big guys you wanna remove with it need to either fail multiple rolls (Invuln/armour/cover saves depending, LoS, then a S test) or fail a S test, one a six or something of the sort.

It isn't an issue and doesn't really deserve to be complained about.

 nintura wrote:
And I agree. S: D should not remove a model. It should be super powerful for sure. But not strictly remove. It could be something as simple as d6+3 if you roll a 6. Sure it has a chance to kill your big model, but it isn't guaranteed at least. There's no reason to progress from 1 wound > d3 wounds > d6 wounds > remove. That kind of power leap is just uncalled for.

D doesn't straight up remove a model though. 2-5 is d3 wounds saveable as normal, which is totally fine.
6 causes a massive 6+d6 wounds, which is enough to kill like 95% of models in one shot, including forgeworld superheavies. And that's just from the guaranteed wounds.
Yet you could still save against that and have it be fine, but nooo they had to go and make that unsaveable.

Considering all the re-rollable invulnerable saves and abundance of 3+ invulnerables a 6 would be quite manageable. It could even ignore cover saves and still be ok imho.
One slip up though and you are fittingly destroyed. And the really big stuff comes with void shields to warrant that kind of destructive power.
Removing all saves though means it may as well outright remove models.

 Bobthehero wrote:
Too many things have EW anyway, I welcome anything that gets rid of e'm easy.

Then you lack strategy and like easy "I win" buttons.

Ruin wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:


People kept saying that about Warmahordes but all I remember is turn one death's from a balanced and fair competitive gameset.

So? This is no the fault of the rules. With respect; that's the fault of the player. Yes, WMH has a very high learning curve and you have to be aware of threat ranges of things etc. (which is less of problem now with premeasuring). But to blame your caster getting assassinated on turn 1 because of the rules of the game is patently false. You can block charge lanes, LOS, have things with counter charge. All these things and more can prevent such a thing from occurring.

I guess then it wasn't for me, considering that everyone I seemed to play with seemed to run assassin lists and I was just straight up new it just soured my opinion on the matter.

Deathblow:" The models suffers a hit that wound automatically and causes it to lose D6+6 wounds instead of 1. No saves of any kind are allowed against this hit."

It doesn't remove the model, but it also has the instant death special rule and counts as S10, which eternal warrior and GMC both turn into d3 wound instead.

What eternal warrior doesn't do, is turn "remove outright" into d3. GMC on the other hand does. Hence why Magnus went poof.

 nintura wrote:

 Bobthehero wrote:
Too many things have EW anyway, I welcome anything that gets rid of e'm easy.

Then you lack strategy and like easy "I win" buttons.

OR perhaps I am so good that I don't need the EW crutch to keep my important units alive. Who knows? Or I dislike the face that character X doesn't go poof when an artillery shell the size of him falls on him, but character Y goes poof when a meltagun is pointed at him.

 Bobthehero wrote:

 nintura wrote:

 Bobthehero wrote:
Too many things have EW anyway, I welcome anything that gets rid of e'm easy.

Then you lack strategy and like easy "I win" buttons.

OR perhaps I am so good that I don't need the EW crutch to keep my important units alive. Who knows? Or I dislike the face that character X doesn't go poof when an artillery shell the size of him falls on him, but character Y goes poof when a meltagun is pointed at him.

Then you haven't read any of the story. They are meant to survive. This isn't real life, it's sci-fi. Otherwise all artillery would have infinite range and AP 1. They don't. And power armor/terminator armor is far superior to anything

Well I think its stupid, and I am more than happy to remove them with as little effort as possible. Or rather, I'd be happy to do so if I could fit some of that sweet remove from play stuff in my lists, oh well.

 Bobthehero wrote:
Well I think its stupid, and I am more than happy to remove them with as little effort as possible. Or rather, I'd be happy to do so if I could fit some of that sweet remove from play stuff in my lists, oh well.

Exactly. Because that's what YOU want. You want the easy way. You don't want your opponent to have fun playing a game. Removing models is not fun, it doesn't require strategy, it's luck. People spend hundreds of dollars and weeks painting a big model, so what's the point of not getting to use them. That's whats toxic.

There's a good part of the models with EW that about infantry sized, too. And I want to have fun in the game, shooting a guy with enough shells to blow a tank and have him walk off almost unhurt is no fun for me.

Ideally, nothing would have EW and there'd be a lot less infantry models with more than a wound, but hey...

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

 Don Savik wrote:
Its kind of pathetic how pessimistic people can be. I watched the stream, and I can guarantee you it wasn't a rigged corporate charade to sell the most OP units. It was 2 guys just having a regular game, one of which was new to tzeentch, as guess what, every single person playing wrath of magnus stuff is. They even did the math when Magnus died, failing everything he did was a 2% chance of ever happening, and now people in this thread are whining about how OP hellfrost is all of a sudden.

The very concept of games workshop setting up a casual game on twitch for fun is just too much for people apparently.

Can't we just have fun anymore, guys?

Here there is none accusing GW (at least, in this instance) of a "rigged corporate charade". You failed spectacularly to understand what people complained about.
We are well aware of the design issue of GW rules. those are not trivial, because they had an impact on the demise of one of their main line (WHFB).

People are not criticising what happened per se, but the fact that GW seems to ignore their own rules. This suggest to most of us that they have not faith in their system, and for a reason, because is an unbalanced, convoluted mess that casts a shadow on a system we all love, or at least want to love. The design team shows more often than not to be clueless and amateurish, and this is just another example. For further evidence of how sloppy they are, check the Codex: Imperial Agents thread.

The frost weapon is just an example of what's wrong with 40k nowadays: useless, unclear, redundant rules that stack on each other, and incoherent fluff added to special snowflakes loved by a designer (this specific designer is infamous for that) that just does not fit with the universe, while other factions are left in the dust. What happens in the report just triggered comments on the weapon. Again, you failed spectacularly to understand that, too.

What does fun means? For me, is to play with my friends a well designed game. None of us is a competitive cheesemonger, but we want to be challenged by the game and by each other, and this can be possible only with a decent ruleset. Asking for something smart is asking for having fun.

Did I say anyone said it was a 'rigged corporate charade'? I wasn't quoting anyone. People said that GW is using it to push models. I don't think a 650 point magnus worth 130 dollars dying instantly does that. What did I not get exactly?

"we are well aware of....." Are you speaking for everyone? I was unaware of these forums being a hivemind.

As for the design team, they weren't playing the game. This wasn't a game to test rules or make rules. They didn't forget rules actually, the rhino died in the enemy turn so the charge was legal. And if they did make any mistakes, so what? I don't think I've played a single game of 40k were someone doesn't forget some obscure rule because the bloated, unorganized ruleset is confusing. And yes, the design team is responsible for that, but that wasn't a factor in the twitch stream. Did you even watch the stream or are you making accusations based on what your hivemind thinks?

Frost weapons came out almost 3 years ago. The most you'll see in a tournament list is 2 stormwolves worth. What's actually wrong with 40k these days is scatbikes, wraiths, and grav, not obscure silly rules that might as well not exist like hellfrost. I get it, you don't like space wolves, and that's fine, but special snowflake rules? Oh you mean like thousand sons getting to fly around on discs and having special demons, special terminators, and a primarch that other legions can't have! Or do you hate Thousands Sons too? I'm curious as to what specific armies fit your narrow minded criteria. Games Workshop has been expanding lore and factions for a long time now, and you can either continue to complain about it, or just....you know.....suck it up or stop playing. Me personally, if I don't like playing a game, I don't play it. Decent rulesets make it easier to play games well, you are correct, but that doesn't stop a lot of people from having fun with the current rules. As long as you stay away from cheese (which is really easy to do) then you can have a great time with 40k. Smart =/= fun for everyone.

 Don Savik wrote:

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

 Don Savik wrote:
Its kind of pathetic how pessimistic people can be. I watched the stream, and I can guarantee you it wasn't a rigged corporate charade to sell the most OP units. It was 2 guys just having a regular game, one of which was new to tzeentch, as guess what, every single person playing wrath of magnus stuff is. They even did the math when Magnus died, failing everything he did was a 2% chance of ever happening, and now people in this thread are whining about how OP hellfrost is all of a sudden.

The very concept of games workshop setting up a casual game on twitch for fun is just too much for people apparently.

Can't we just have fun anymore, guys?

Here there is none accusing GW (at least, in this instance) of a "rigged corporate charade". You failed spectacularly to understand what people complained about.
We are well aware of the design issue of GW rules. those are not trivial, because they had an impact on the demise of one of their main line (WHFB).

People are not criticising what happened per se, but the fact that GW seems to ignore their own rules. This suggest to most of us that they have not faith in their system, and for a reason, because is an unbalanced, convoluted mess that casts a shadow on a system we all love, or at least want to love. The design team shows more often than not to be clueless and amateurish, and this is just another example. For further evidence of how sloppy they are, check the Codex: Imperial Agents thread.

The frost weapon is just an example of what's wrong with 40k nowadays: useless, unclear, redundant rules that stack on each other, and incoherent fluff added to special snowflakes loved by a designer (this specific designer is infamous for that) that just does not fit with the universe, while other factions are left in the dust. What happens in the report just triggered comments on the weapon. Again, you failed spectacularly to understand that, too.

What does fun means? For me, is to play with my friends a well designed game. None of us is a competitive cheesemonger, but we want to be challenged by the game and by each other, and this can be possible only with a decent ruleset. Asking for something smart is asking for having fun.

Did I say anyone said it was a 'rigged corporate charade'? I wasn't quoting anyone. People said that GW is using it to push models. I don't think a 650 point magnus worth 130 dollars dying instantly does that. What did I not get exactly?

"we are well aware of....." Are you speaking for everyone? I was unaware of these forums being a hivemind.

As for the design team, they weren't playing the game. This wasn't a game to test rules or make rules. They didn't forget rules actually, the rhino died in the enemy turn so the charge was legal. And if they did make any mistakes, so what? I don't think I've played a single game of 40k were someone doesn't forget some obscure rule because the bloated, unorganized ruleset is confusing. And yes, the design team is responsible for that, but that wasn't a factor in the twitch stream. Did you even watch the stream or are you making accusations based on what your hivemind thinks?

Frost weapons came out almost 3 years ago. The most you'll see in a tournament list is 2 stormwolves worth. What's actually wrong with 40k these days is scatbikes, wraiths, and grav, not obscure silly rules that might as well not exist like hellfrost. I get it, you don't like space wolves, and that's fine, but special snowflake rules? Oh you mean like thousand sons getting to fly around on discs and having special demons, special terminators, and a primarch that other legions can't have! Or do you hate Thousands Sons too? I'm curious as to what specific armies fit your narrow minded criteria. Games Workshop has been expanding lore and factions for a long time now, and you can either continue to complain about it, or just....you know.....suck it up or stop playing. Me personally, if I don't like playing a game, I don't play it. Decent rulesets make it easier to play games well, you are correct, but that doesn't stop a lot of people from having fun with the current rules. As long as you stay away from cheese (which is really easy to do) then you can have a great time with 40k. Smart =/= fun for everyone.

You know the points cost of those sorcerers on discs? How about 190 base with no other upgrades? For a toughness 5 3+/4++ with only 2 master levels. My 1850 army with Magnus had a whopping 19 models in it, and 10 of those were rubrics. Care to guess how hard that is to take objectives when you have 2 squads? Those terminators? 250 points for 5 while you get what? 5 for 170? Yeah, they get +1 invuln save, but no ap 2 weapons and their heavy weapons are a joke. 30 points for a half assault cannon? 20 points for a half typhoon missile launcher that has half the range, half the uses? Yes the army is tough sure. But it's tiny. Everything is overpriced.

Is there really a market for unedited, livestreamed WH40k tabletop gameplay?

 nintura wrote:


You know the points cost of those sorcerers on discs? How about 190 base with no other upgrades? For a toughness 5 3+/4++ with only 2 master levels. My 1850 army with Magnus had a whopping 19 models in it, and 10 of those were rubrics. Care to guess how hard that is to take objectives when you have 2 squads? Those terminators? 250 points for 5 while you get what? 5 for 170? Yeah, they get +1 invuln save, but no ap 2 weapons and their heavy weapons are a joke. 30 points for a half assault cannon? 20 points for a half typhoon missile launcher that has half the range, half the uses? Yes the army is tough sure. But it's tiny. Everything is overpriced.

So we only hate 'special snowflake' rules if they're good? It's kind of hard to follow people's criteria sometimes.

And you don't just have to use the Wrath of Magnus models, you have access to the entire codex chaos space marines. I mean, cmon. I play orks, we don't have any ap 3 melee weapons. Preaching to the choir here.

 Don Savik wrote:

 nintura wrote:


You know the points cost of those sorcerers on discs? How about 190 base with no other upgrades? For a toughness 5 3+/4++ with only 2 master levels. My 1850 army with Magnus had a whopping 19 models in it, and 10 of those were rubrics. Care to guess how hard that is to take objectives when you have 2 squads? Those terminators? 250 points for 5 while you get what? 5 for 170? Yeah, they get +1 invuln save, but no ap 2 weapons and their heavy weapons are a joke. 30 points for a half assault cannon? 20 points for a half typhoon missile launcher that has half the range, half the uses? Yes the army is tough sure. But it's tiny. Everything is overpriced.

So we only hate 'special snowflake' rules if they're good? It's kind of hard to follow people's criteria sometimes.

And you don't just have to use the Wrath of Magnus models, you have access to the entire codex chaos space marines. I mean, cmon. I play orks, we don't have any ap 3 melee weapons. Preaching to the choir here.

Do you make things up as you go? I'm talking about any attack that just removes a model, not special snowflakes. There's a reason 1k sons are considered weak over in the tactica for them.

 Don Savik wrote:

 nintura wrote:


You know the points cost of those sorcerers on discs? How about 190 base with no other upgrades? For a toughness 5 3+/4++ with only 2 master levels. My 1850 army with Magnus had a whopping 19 models in it, and 10 of those were rubrics. Care to guess how hard that is to take objectives when you have 2 squads? Those terminators? 250 points for 5 while you get what? 5 for 170? Yeah, they get +1 invuln save, but no ap 2 weapons and their heavy weapons are a joke. 30 points for a half assault cannon? 20 points for a half typhoon missile launcher that has half the range, half the uses? Yes the army is tough sure. But it's tiny. Everything is overpriced.

So we only hate 'special snowflake' rules if they're good? It's kind of hard to follow people's criteria sometimes.

And you don't just have to use the Wrath of Magnus models, you have access to the entire codex chaos space marines. I mean, cmon. I play orks, we don't have any ap 3 melee weapons. Preaching to the choir here.

Speaking of Orks, my mom plays Orks, and she's my only opponent. My power swords are thus pretty worthless.

 nintura wrote:

 Don Savik wrote:

 nintura wrote:


You know the points cost of those sorcerers on discs? How about 190 base with no other upgrades? For a toughness 5 3+/4++ with only 2 master levels. My 1850 army with Magnus had a whopping 19 models in it, and 10 of those were rubrics. Care to guess how hard that is to take objectives when you have 2 squads? Those terminators? 250 points for 5 while you get what? 5 for 170? Yeah, they get +1 invuln save, but no ap 2 weapons and their heavy weapons are a joke. 30 points for a half assault cannon? 20 points for a half typhoon missile launcher that has half the range, half the uses? Yes the army is tough sure. But it's tiny. Everything is overpriced.

So we only hate 'special snowflake' rules if they're good? It's kind of hard to follow people's criteria sometimes.

And you don't just have to use the Wrath of Magnus models, you have access to the entire codex chaos space marines. I mean, cmon. I play orks, we don't have any ap 3 melee weapons. Preaching to the choir here.

Do you make things up as you go? I'm talking about any attack that just removes a model, not special snowflakes. There's a reason 1k sons are considered weak over in the tactica for them.

Because if you look carefully, my comment was replying to someone else, not you. Then you came in with a defense to what I was arguing, which was his comment about special snowflake rules like hellfrost. What was I making up exactly?

 Don Savik wrote:

 nintura wrote:

 Don Savik wrote:

 nintura wrote:


You know the points cost of those sorcerers on discs? How about 190 base with no other upgrades? For a toughness 5 3+/4++ with only 2 master levels. My 1850 army with Magnus had a whopping 19 models in it, and 10 of those were rubrics. Care to guess how hard that is to take objectives when you have 2 squads? Those terminators? 250 points for 5 while you get what? 5 for 170? Yeah, they get +1 invuln save, but no ap 2 weapons and their heavy weapons are a joke. 30 points for a half assault cannon? 20 points for a half typhoon missile launcher that has half the range, half the uses? Yes the army is tough sure. But it's tiny. Everything is overpriced.

So we only hate 'special snowflake' rules if they're good? It's kind of hard to follow people's criteria sometimes.

And you don't just have to use the Wrath of Magnus models, you have access to the entire codex chaos space marines. I mean, cmon. I play orks, we don't have any ap 3 melee weapons. Preaching to the choir here.

Do you make things up as you go? I'm talking about any attack that just removes a model, not special snowflakes. There's a reason 1k sons are considered weak over in the tactica for them.

Because if you look carefully, my comment was replying to someone else, not you. Then you came in with a defense to what I was arguing, which was his comment about special snowflake rules like hellfrost. What was I making up exactly?

And yet you were attacking everything under the sun.

 nintura wrote:

 Don Savik wrote:

 nintura wrote:

 Don Savik wrote:

 nintura wrote:


You know the points cost of those sorcerers on discs? How about 190 base with no other upgrades? For a toughness 5 3+/4++ with only 2 master levels. My 1850 army with Magnus had a whopping 19 models in it, and 10 of those were rubrics. Care to guess how hard that is to take objectives when you have 2 squads? Those terminators? 250 points for 5 while you get what? 5 for 170? Yeah, they get +1 invuln save, but no ap 2 weapons and their heavy weapons are a joke. 30 points for a half assault cannon? 20 points for a half typhoon missile launcher that has half the range, half the uses? Yes the army is tough sure. But it's tiny. Everything is overpriced.

So we only hate 'special snowflake' rules if they're good? It's kind of hard to follow people's criteria sometimes.

And you don't just have to use the Wrath of Magnus models, you have access to the entire codex chaos space marines. I mean, cmon. I play orks, we don't have any ap 3 melee weapons. Preaching to the choir here.

Do you make things up as you go? I'm talking about any attack that just removes a model, not special snowflakes. There's a reason 1k sons are considered weak over in the tactica for them.

Because if you look carefully, my comment was replying to someone else, not you. Then you came in with a defense to what I was arguing, which was his comment about special snowflake rules like hellfrost. What was I making up exactly?

And yet you were attacking everything under the sun.

I was responding to everything he commented about in response to my post.

 Don Savik wrote:
People said that GW is using it to push models. I don't think a 650 point magnus worth 130 dollars dying instantly does that.

QFT. Also because I lol'd. I'm not sure where anyone got the idea this was supposed to show off the WoM units, or why anyone would think that when there's a Helfrost weapon on the table. Maybe they did it to show off Helfrost? Tryna shift dem Stormwolves or something.

 BBAP wrote:

 Don Savik wrote:
People said that GW is using it to push models. I don't think a 650 point magnus worth 130 dollars dying instantly does that.

QFT. Also because I lol'd. I'm not sure where anyone got the idea this was supposed to show off the WoM units, or why anyone would think that when there's a Helfrost weapon on the table. Maybe they did it to show off Helfrost? Tryna shift dem Stormwolves or something.

Loyalists never lose. Even when they are trying to show off a new army. When I played Magnus, he was a fire magnet. He did bare minimal damage for a 650 pointer, but he took a helluva lot of shots. Worth it? Not really. Cool factor? You bet your ass. Fun to paint? Check my sig.

 Don Savik wrote:

 nintura wrote:


You know the points cost of those sorcerers on discs? How about 190 base with no other upgrades? For a toughness 5 3+/4++ with only 2 master levels. My 1850 army with Magnus had a whopping 19 models in it, and 10 of those were rubrics. Care to guess how hard that is to take objectives when you have 2 squads? Those terminators? 250 points for 5 while you get what? 5 for 170? Yeah, they get +1 invuln save, but no ap 2 weapons and their heavy weapons are a joke. 30 points for a half assault cannon? 20 points for a half typhoon missile launcher that has half the range, half the uses? Yes the army is tough sure. But it's tiny. Everything is overpriced.

So we only hate 'special snowflake' rules if they're good? It's kind of hard to follow people's criteria sometimes.

And you don't just have to use the Wrath of Magnus models, you have access to the entire codex chaos space marines. I mean, cmon. I play orks, we don't have any ap 3 melee weapons. Preaching to the choir here.

Not to nitpick, but Tankhammas still exist, and a Nob with one isn't the worst idea you could do, especially after the FAQ clarified "one grenade in melee".

morgoth wrote:

 auticus wrote:
Yes - GW does not employ tournament players that take min/max lists for their reports. Their reports have never had min/max lists, which is something also complained about since the beginning of the internet on AOL chat rooms in the 90s when discussing white dwarf reports and how "unrealistic they are".

Not just theirs... I've rarely seen anything on youtube which looked like top tournament players with top lists - I know there are some but it's really a minority.

Maybe because tournament top players prefer spending time tuning up their tournament performance while those willing to spend time to produce quality video BR(junky ones aren't even worth making) are less interested in tournament play?

Making videos isn't quick process(especially quality) so if somebody spends that time then odds are they either have no other life or they aren't top tournament players. There's only so much one can do in a day.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 nintura wrote:
And I agree. S: D should not remove a model. It should be super powerful for sure. But not strictly remove. It could be something as simple as d6+3 if you roll a 6. Sure it has a chance to kill your big model, but it isn't guaranteed at least. There's no reason to progress from 1 wound > d3 wounds > d6 wounds > remove. That kind of power leap is just uncalled for.

S does not remove model. But actually S is more powerful than hellfrost. So before touching hellfrost touch S first. Despite it not removing any models outright.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 nintura wrote:

 Bobthehero wrote:
Well I think its stupid, and I am more than happy to remove them with as little effort as possible. Or rather, I'd be happy to do so if I could fit some of that sweet remove from play stuff in my lists, oh well.

Exactly. Because that's what YOU want. You want the easy way. You don't want your opponent to have fun playing a game. Removing models is not fun, it doesn't require strategy, it's luck. People spend hundreds of dollars and weeks painting a big model, so what's the point of not getting to use them. That's whats toxic.

Hmm. Every game I enter many models I have gets removed from board. With possible exception of all out of LOS(not even then) or in reserve situations. That's life. I have lost my leman russes and land raiders before they move so many times even without S(no such thing in our games) or hellfrost(ditto)

 Roknar wrote:

 nintura wrote:
And I agree. S: D should not remove a model. It should be super powerful for sure. But not strictly remove. It could be something as simple as d6+3 if you roll a 6. Sure it has a chance to kill your big model, but it isn't guaranteed at least. There's no reason to progress from 1 wound > d3 wounds > d6 wounds > remove. That kind of power leap is just uncalled for.

D doesn't straight up remove a model though. 2-5 is d3 wounds saveable as normal, which is totally fine.
6 causes a massive 6+d6 wounds, which is enough to kill like 95% of models in one shot, including forgeworld superheavies. And that's just from the guaranteed wounds.
Yet you could still save against that and have it be fine, but nooo they had to go and make that unsaveable.

Considering all the re-rollable invulnerable saves and abundance of 3+ invulnerables a 6 would be quite manageable. It could even ignore cover saves and still be ok imho.
One slip up though and you are fittingly destroyed. And the really big stuff comes with void shields to warrant that kind of destructive power.
Removing all saves though means it may as well outright remove models.

And that's the thing, no it's not the same at all, you can still LoS, etc.

I've one-shot a Reaver Titan once, but that was a hit on one of the wost D-weapons there are (the Cobra's gun, 36" range), roll of 6 (strength D), roll of 6 (D6 Hull points), roll of 6 (Explosion), roll of 5 (D3 Hull points) = 15 hull points, void shields ignored, kaboom.
Chances of that happening ... if you get in range, that's still one in 648.

But really, the big thing about strength D is that it can only one-shot tiny things, like up to a Knight or an unshielded Warhound - on a 6.
Anything else is massive luck and brings home the following point: strength D is mostly good against huge expensive models, and that's a good thing.
It breaks in half stupid rerollable invul deathstars and it's only downside in its Apocalypse version is the lack of ability to nuke Invisible units, due to being large blast at a minimum.
The fact that it goes through the invul save is a very good thing about strength D, because it limits the abuse thereof.

Besides, all strength D weapons are very expensive and can generally be exchanged for weapons that kill a lot more regular units, so strength D is a trade off that lets you target only big expensive stuff and is a massive loss against anything else.

The reason the Helfrost sucks is that it's not a strength D weapon, wherein str D is well integrated in the game.
It's just one weird rule that sucks 97% of the time, and which accidentally may insta nuke some specific expensive character.
That does make it a rather bad rule tbh.

tneva82 wrote:

morgoth wrote:

 auticus wrote:
Yes - GW does not employ tournament players that take min/max lists for their reports. Their reports have never had min/max lists, which is something also complained about since the beginning of the internet on AOL chat rooms in the 90s when discussing white dwarf reports and how "unrealistic they are".

Not just theirs... I've rarely seen anything on youtube which looked like top tournament players with top lists - I know there are some but it's really a minority.

Maybe because tournament top players prefer spending time tuning up their tournament performance while those willing to spend time to produce quality video BR(junky ones aren't even worth making) are less interested in tournament play?

Making videos isn't quick process(especially quality) so if somebody spends that time then odds are they either have no other life or they aren't top tournament players. There's only so much one can do in a day.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 nintura wrote:
And I agree. S: D should not remove a model. It should be super powerful for sure. But not strictly remove. It could be something as simple as d6+3 if you roll a 6. Sure it has a chance to kill your big model, but it isn't guaranteed at least. There's no reason to progress from 1 wound > d3 wounds > d6 wounds > remove. That kind of power leap is just uncalled for.

S does not remove model. But actually S is more powerful than hellfrost. So before touching hellfrost touch S first. Despite it not removing any models outright.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 nintura wrote:

 Bobthehero wrote:
Well I think its stupid, and I am more than happy to remove them with as little effort as possible. Or rather, I'd be happy to do so if I could fit some of that sweet remove from play stuff in my lists, oh well.

Exactly. Because that's what YOU want. You want the easy way. You don't want your opponent to have fun playing a game. Removing models is not fun, it doesn't require strategy, it's luck. People spend hundreds of dollars and weeks painting a big model, so what's the point of not getting to use them. That's whats toxic.

Hmm. Every game I enter many models I have gets removed from board. With possible exception of all out of LOS(not even then) or in reserve situations. That's life. I have lost my leman russes and land raiders before they move so many times even without S(no such thing in our games) or hellfrost(ditto)

You said it yourself. S: D is NOT more powerful than Hellfrost. It doesn't remove the model. Is 1d6+6 powerful? Sure, but it never beats 100% removal. Should it be toned down? I've already said as much. Dying from getting hit is one thing, just straight up removing models is another. A single wound infantry or tank is not a big deal. A LoW who's meant to be around for most of the game, and is a large part of your army should not. Hell, if you removed Magnus first turn, I'd conceded, after all, why play a 1200 point army vs 1850, you're never going to win, or even likely to have fun playing it.

 nintura wrote:
tank is not a big deal.

 nintura wrote:
People spend hundreds of dollars and weeks painting a big model, so what's the point of not getting to use them

Whatever happened to that? A tank might not be hundreds of dollars, but it can take a long long time to paint only to have it blow up turn one. Meanwhile Magnus can only be instantly killed under rare circumstances.

 nintura wrote:
You said it yourself. S: D is NOT more powerful than Hellfrost. It doesn't remove the model. Is 1d6+6 powerful? Sure, but it never beats 100% removal. Should it be toned down? I've already said as much. Dying from getting hit is one thing, just straight up removing models is another. A single wound infantry or tank is not a big deal. A LoW who's meant to be around for most of the game, and is a large part of your army should not. Hell, if you removed Magnus first turn, I'd conceded, after all, why play a 1200 point army vs 1850, you're never going to win, or even likely to have fun playing it.

It's going to affect things lot more reliably than hellfrost and d6+6 is instakill on pretty much anything so on the 6 there's no practical difference. Difference comes on results OTHER than 6...

Would Magnus have survived 6 from S? I don't think so. 7 wounds is minimum on d6+6.

What things don't die to S rolling 6 that would die to hellfrost?

And I have had LOW's one-turned before I get to even move. Those are tad tougher to hide than most stuff for obvious reason...Boohoo.

tneva82 wrote:

 nintura wrote:
You said it yourself. S: D is NOT more powerful than Hellfrost. It doesn't remove the model. Is 1d6+6 powerful? Sure, but it never beats 100% removal. Should it be toned down? I've already said as much. Dying from getting hit is one thing, just straight up removing models is another. A single wound infantry or tank is not a big deal. A LoW who's meant to be around for most of the game, and is a large part of your army should not. Hell, if you removed Magnus first turn, I'd conceded, after all, why play a 1200 point army vs 1850, you're never going to win, or even likely to have fun playing it.

It's going to affect things lot more reliably than hellfrost and d6+6 is instakill on pretty much anything so on the 6 there's no practical difference. Difference comes on results OTHER than 6...

Would Magnus have survived 6 from S? I don't think so. 7 wounds is minimum on d6+6.

What things don't die to S rolling 6 that would die to hellfrost?

And I have had LOW's one-turned before I get to even move. Those are tad tougher to hide than most stuff for obvious reason...Boohoo.

You are completely missing the point and not understanding what you're reading. I've already answered both of these.

 SlaveToDorkness wrote:

 Cyprien wrote:
For me as a really inexperienced player who's only into this for the setting and the awesome stories, it sounds a bit as if most of you really are angry because it was a game for fun and that they didn't play as some hardcore nerd at a tournament would.
and i really don't understand why you guys are always returning to that helfrost cannon. even though most of you state "it's not the cannon, we're displeased with the GW staff" many of you are complaining about that one hit kill a lot. you know, the rules of that weapon work for every enemy, not just for magus, right? xD

My complaint is not that they don't play like hardcore gamers ( I'd really appreciate a bit more respect on both sides of this) it's that they don't even seem to recognize the concept of competitive gaming to the extent that they write such horribly flawed rules. Those rules are what perpetuates the divide between the casual and the competitive. If they wrote a balanced rules set with options that were equally appealing it wouldn't devolve into "take all of these I can and leave that obvious trash out" types of builds. If all the fluffy options were as powerful as the other options then we wouldn't have the paper rock scissors situation we have now. When people are coming up with lists that break the game a week after a codex drops it's clear that play testers don't try and test the system, they just play to have fun. Which ironically makes it no fun for a lot of their customers.

This right here. I'm so far on the casual side that hyper competitive play nausiates me and personally ruins a game for me. But that's just my personal preference and no more right than someone who does like competitive play. But I still want a well written rule set because that also makes casual play better. People seem to be conflating casual play with "who needs rules." I want to be able to build an army that's fluffy and have it not be a total mess, or be able to have a game against someone that isn't decided in the "pick which codex you're using" phase. Casual doesn't mean you don't want a challenge with a winner and loser, it just means you want to build an army that looks like an army instead of a joke.
Better rules benefit both casual and competitive players.

-

I think everyone is looking for the silver bell. You want the perfect answer but don't realize that the perfect answer doesn't exist. If you give something towards one party, you take away from the other.

Competitive players will always play competitively however, despite the rules but you will never find a perfect balance. There will always be better units and those units will always be obviously the best ones to take.

 nintura wrote:
I think everyone is looking for the silver bell. You want the perfect answer but don't realize that the perfect answer doesn't exist. If you give something towards one party, you take away from the other.

Competitive players will always play competitively however, despite the rules but you will never find a perfect balance. There will always be better units and those units will always be obviously the best ones to take.

Mostly I'm just baffled by why they decided to livestream a casual game of 40k.

40k tabletop tactix:
S
S




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Pouncey wrote:

 nintura wrote:
I think everyone is looking for the silver bell. You want the perfect answer but don't realize that the perfect answer doesn't exist. If you give something towards one party, you take away from the other.

Competitive players will always play competitively however, despite the rules but you will never find a perfect balance. There will always be better units and those units will always be obviously the best ones to take.

Mostly I'm just baffled by why they decided to livestream a casual game of 40k.

Cause it's way more fun than sporthammer magic deathstar fapping?

For fun, of course. What other reasons are there?

 koooaei wrote:
Cause it's way more fun than sporthammer magic deathstar fapping?

Don't get me wrong, I know why casual games can be fun to watch, as I play a lot of online video games. Two of my favorite YouTube channels are just highlights from games where people screwed up colossally.

But at the same time, the only times that the actual companies that make those online games officially host a livestreamed game is during an official tournament, during competitive play. Game creators uploading their own personal casual gameplay sessions on an official company channel is not the sort of thing I'm at all familiar with.

 Pouncey wrote:

 koooaei wrote:
Cause it's way more fun than sporthammer magic deathstar fapping?

Don't get me wrong, I know why casual games can be fun to watch, as I play a lot of online video games. Two of my favorite YouTube channels are just highlights from games where people screwed up colossally.

But at the same time, the only times that the actual companies that make those online games officially host a livestreamed game is during an official tournament, during competitive play. Game creators uploading their own personal casual gameplay sessions on an official company channel is not the sort of thing I'm at all familiar with.

Pouncey you've already declared you only want to see GW go down in flames and it's clear you'll never see any silver lining in anything they do.

Further, you've only spewed BS throughout this entire thread -- the "Game creators uploading their own personal casual gameplay" is not what happened, not at all, and at this point you know this, so you are simply just trolling.

Further I'd much rather see a fun game than "sporthammer", your assertion about "official tournament" is based on nothing, like everything else you've said.

 Gunzhard wrote:
Pouncey you've already declared you only want to see GW go down in flames and it's clear you'll never see any silver lining in anything they do.

You should probably have actually read what I said in that thread if you're going to try to tell me what I want and don't want.

Further, you've only spewed BS throughout this entire thread -- the "Game creators uploading their own personal casual gameplay" is not what happened, not at all, and at this point you know this, so you are simply just trolling.

I didn't watch the actual video, as I don't want to watch a few hours of real-time 40k gameplay, but I've been told the following:

-It's not a playtesting session
-It's not a competitive tournament match
-It's not a marketing video

And now you're telling me:

-It's not a casual game for fun

So what, the HELL, was ACTUALLY in the video then?

Further I'd much rather see a fun game than "sporthammer", your assertion about "official tournament" is based on nothing, like everything else you've said.

...It's based on having spent much of my life in online gaming and having noticed what the companies that make online games do and don't do. Like I said.

More BS... I didn't say it wasn't a casual game for fun, because it does appear to be that. I said it wasn't "Game creators" uploading their "own personal casual gameplay" - because it wasn't.

You didn't even watch the video and you've commented here more than anyone. Weak. You might not realize it - but you are literally just trolling.

 Gunzhard wrote:
More BS... I didn't say it wasn't a casual game for fun, because it does appear to be that. I said it wasn't "Game creators" uploading their "own personal casual gameplay" - because it wasn't.

...You're saying two entirely contradictory things there.

You didn't even watch the video and you've commented here more than anyone. Weak. You might not realize it - but you are literally just trolling.

I don't troll, actually.

Trolling is deliberately attempting to incite a negative reaction to ruin someone's day.

I. Don't. Troll.

People these days just have a very loose grasp on trolling and think it's "anyone saying anything negative about anything whatsoever."

 Pouncey wrote:

 Gunzhard wrote:
More BS... I didn't say it wasn't a casual game for fun, because it does appear to be that. I said it wasn't "Game creators" uploading their "own personal casual gameplay" - because it wasn't.

...You're saying two entirely contradictory things there.

You didn't even watch the video and you've commented here more than anyone. Weak. You might not realize it - but you are literally just trolling.

I don't troll, actually.

Trolling is deliberately attempting to incite a negative reaction to ruin someone's day.

I. Don't. Troll.

People these days just have a very loose grasp on trolling and think it's "anyone saying anything negative about anything whatsoever."

"loose grasp on trolling" ...ha that's pretty funny.

And there's no contradiction at all. It appeared to be a fun, casual game - but they weren't 'game creators/designers'. If you've ever worked in ANY professional company you might know that not every single employee is plugged into the datastream like some mechanicum servitor; at some point the rules are new to everyone, and these weren't game designers - but you know that already.

 Gunzhard wrote:
"loose grasp on trolling" ...ha that's pretty funny.

And also very true, which you'd know if you spent time online.

And there's no contradiction at all. It appeared to be a fun, casual game - but they weren't 'game creators/designers'. If you've ever worked in ANY professional company you might know that not every single employee is plugged into the datastream like some mechanicum servitor; at some point the rules are new to everyone, and these weren't game designers - but you know that already.

Actually I don't keep track of the names/jobs of every Games Workshop employee, but I am aware that GW is the company that creates the game.

Who exactly was playing the game then?

Seriously, you're insulting me for not knowing what actually happened in the video, while making zero effort to explain what actually happened so I can learn and form a more educated opinion on the video.