A flgs is having a tournament soon. But they have banned FW outright. Apparently the player base has a consensus that they don't want FW allowed. Why do you think that is? My only thought is that flyer army with Dante and malific lord spam. Other than that I can't think of anything. But the flyer army is moot after CA since they can't get obsec. Also this tournament has a Max of 1 on nonstandard attachment such as supreme command, vanguard, etc.
I'm not sure why some people ban FW from tournaments either. Maybe it's because some people aren't as wary of FW units and don't like having models they've never heard of sprung on them all of a sudden. Other than that I have no idea.
chimeara wrote: A flgs is having a tournament soon. But they have banned FW outright. Apparently the player base has a consensus that they don't want FW allowed. Why do you think that is? My only thought is that flyer army with Dante and malific lord spam. Other than that I can't think of anything. But the flyer army is moot after CA since they can't get obsec. Also this tournament has a Max of 1 on nonstandard attachment such as supreme command, vanguard, etc.
Most of it is tradition and inertia, people just seem to think FW=Broken. FW stuff has never really been any less unbalanced than anything else (which is not to say they haven't had overpowered units, just not any more or worse than the main studio, usually FW units have awful rules), especially in the last six or seven years, when allowed in Tournaments it certainly has never dominated the scene really.
A lot of it comes from someone bringing something from FW or claiming it's from FW, not having the appropriate rules or not playing it right or otherwise just making them up, something usually gets painted as being broken (especially when the money aspect comes into play which then gets associated as "pay2win"), and then FW stuff is tainted forever. People also often think FW = ALL TITANS ALL THE TIME, which, if they knew the rules for such, is certainly not true (not to mention that for 6th and 7th, the Titan rules were the main GW Studio's baby).
Some if it is a desire to reduce the number of rules sources, but given the last several editions of GW's business model, it doesn't really make sense.
Vaktathi wrote: FW stuff has never really been any less unbalanced than anything else (which is not to say they haven't had overpowered units, just not any more or worse than the main studio, usually FW units have awful rules), especially in the last six or seven years, when allowed in Tournaments it certainly has never dominated the scene really.
I can't speak for recent editions, but in 3/4e, just about every FW selection for Guard was a terrible waste of points.
There's a long-standing dislike of FW models in a competitive setting in 40k, this is much older than Malefic Lords or anything else that's currently a problem. I think it's partly that you can't buy FW models at your LGS, partly that they're expensive and require more of the hobbyist to build than most kits.
Another factor is that lots of people only see the best and most broken FW models played, and get the impression that FW models are generally a lot more broken and powerful than normal GW ones. While not necessarily true, it's easy to see how you could get that impression after being stomped by some players with much more money and hobby experience than you using the best models money can buy, FW or not.
Also, the rules aren't as widely available or known, and the faction imbalance numbers wise is even worse if you include FW.
In the end, it's another restriction you can put in a tournament to mix it up. Another tournament may not allow named characters, a third allows no flyers or lords of war. TOs aren't required to let you play everything every time.
My area doesn't allow forgeworld for a few reasons.
1. The store doesn't sell it, so it doesn't benefit them to advertise it by allowing it in their tournaments.
2. The models are significantly more expensive and the playerbase in the area doesn't want to feel like they need to spend more money to be competitive.
3. The new rules means that their's more to be familiar with and be aware of when designing your list.
4. They don't add enough to the tournament experience to offset the three costs above.
FW bans are TFG behavior. They come in three categories:
1) People who will accept any level of broken rules as long as it has the magic "codex" word on it, but if any FW unit is ever overpowered it's an excuse for a blanket ban on the whole category. This is usually accompanied by various lies about how FW is a "separate company" or "requires permission" or whatever.
2) Bad tournament players who are afraid of allowing FW units to change the meta and create lists they aren't prepared to beat. Why risk your chances of winning when you can just ban the potential threat? Why spend time playtesting against FW units/lists and trying to figure out how to beat them if you don't have to? These players are usually nowhere near as skilled as they want to believe, but the whole "big fish in a small pond" thing often feeds their ego.
3) TFG store owners (and GW employees) who ban anything they can't personally profit from. They can't sell FW kits, they don't allow them. Who cares about the good of the community, it's all about their personal profit numbers.
None of these reasons are acceptable, and none deserve any respect or sympathy.
Based on conversation I've had in the past with them about it, it seems like they ban it because"if I don't have it you can't use it" mentality. Lots of people at this shop can't afford the stuff so they feel they are at a disadvantage because they don't have the cool shiney thing from FW. They don't realize that the cool shiney things cost more but aren't much if at all better than the normal stuff. They just have more flavor.
The more I think about it, the more I realize thast most of warhammer 40k players... suck. Myself included.
Yeah, let me explain: To be a profesional gamer, people need to spend hours, and hours, and hours, and hours. Heck, even to enter a mid-tier ranking in some FPS, Moba, or something, like gold, etc... you need to play a LOT.
Other example, the number of hours a runner needs to put to end in the first third or the first half of a medium-sized marathon? Is insane.
And then you see all those Warhammer40k players, that play 1 game a week if not less, and the very idea that they can be actually bad at the game is unthinkable to them, and that many things that they thing are broken, is just that they don't know how to actually play the strenghts of their armies... and this applies to all kinds of wargames, really.
I have always been a opponent to the "git gud" mentality. But the more I go to tournaments, FLGS, clubs, and the more people I meet in person that play wargames, the more I see the CAAC people that just don't want to recognize that they just suck at the game, and not because they can't be better, is just that they don't play enough to become good.
chimeara wrote: Based on conversation I've had in the past with them about it, it seems like they ban it because"if I don't have it you can't use it" mentality. Lots of people at this shop can't afford the stuff so they feel they are at a disadvantage because they don't have the cool shiney thing from FW. They don't realize that the cool shiney things cost more but aren't much if at all better than the normal stuff. They just have more flavor.
At tournaments specifically the only things you'll see are the broken bits. Why bother bringing something balanced when you can bring something broken in half is one of the central tenets of all tournaments, and no matter how well balanced in general the outliers will always be the things present in a tournament setting. This increases the cost of competition for very little gain tactically, and keeping costs down is important to keep people interested in what's an expensive hobby. This is especially disheartening for new players who don't even know what forge world is until they get stomped by it, a group that usually makes up about a quarter of our monthly eight edition tournaments.
That said I think forgeworld is usually cool and flavorful, but it adds another monetary cost to the tournament scene that people in the area aren't prepared to pay. Almost anyone will gladly play against forgeworld in a casual game.
Lord Ruby34 wrote: At tournaments specifically the only things you'll see are the broken bits. Why bother bringing something balanced when you can bring something broken in half is one of the central tenets of all tournaments, and no matter how well balanced in general the outliers will always be the things present in a tournament setting. This increases the cost of competition for very little gain tactically, and keeping costs down is important to keep people interested in what's an expensive hobby.
Those same arguments apply to banning tons of codex rules too. Why allow SoB to exist at all? It increases the cost of competition for very little gain. If keeping costs down is legitimately a priority then we would see a lot more bans, but we don't.
This is especially disheartening for new players who don't even know what forge world is until they get stomped by it, a group that usually makes up about a quarter of our monthly eight edition tournaments.
Wait, I thought all you see in tournaments is the broken bits. Newbies don't bring nothing but the broken bits, because they don't know what the broken bits are yet. You can't simultaneously claim that people are playing nothing but the most broken lists, and people are such hopeless newbies that they don't even know that FW rules exist. And, honestly, a person who is such a newbie that they don't know FW exists is going to get seal-clubbed every game no matter what they're facing. If it isn't a FW unit it's "wait, I didn't know that Tyranids even existed!!!!!" or "WTF, Ultramarines get a primarch!?!?!?".
That said I think forgeworld is usually cool and flavorful, but it adds another monetary cost to the tournament scene that people in the area aren't prepared to pay. Almost anyone will gladly play against forgeworld in a casual game.
IOW, it's all about tournament players being afraid to lose. If you'll play against FW in a casual game, where enjoyment of the experience is the only thing to gain, but not in a tournament game then it's a clear concession that your sole reason is that you don't want to allow anything that might hurt your chances of winning. And I believe we have an acronym for the sort of person who would ban their opponent's army just to improve their own chances of winning...
Vallhund wrote: I'm not sure why some people ban FW from tournaments either. Maybe it's because some people aren't as wary of FW units and don't like having models they've never heard of sprung on them all of a sudden. Other than that I have no idea.
90% of the time you see something FW, it's something that's pretty nuts or being abused in most areas. Think about how many IG players you see bringing earthshaker carriages and searchlights right now. Now check how many of them are taking something like Stygies Vanquishers or a Thunderer. This leads to a bit of confirmation bias. "The only time I saw a FW unit it was OP as all get out, therefore all FW is OP." In addition, most people won't bother buying or converting suboptimal units. After all its a game and players want to win. Throw in FW's high cost and it means you're usually not going to see much but the best of the best from all but the most committed of hobbyist.
You also have a nasty tendency for people to not buy the books for FW units, which means there's no way to see what the rules for these units are. You then have to take the opponent's word for it. This doesn't sound like a big deal but this can be a common issue, both intentionally and accidentally. As much as I love programs like Battlescribe, they cause a massive amount of issues with people not reading their rules. Not just for FW, but even just general codexes too. I cannot count the amount of times I've had to correct new players on their own armies, armies I don't even play, because they only looked at the rules on battlescribe and haven't hardly even cracked open their codex. Tau players who never realized their jump suits fly because Battlescribe doesn't do keywords, Guard players not knowing their orders because they didn't see it on the battlescribe roster, tyranid players not knowing psychic abilities because it doesn't show up directly under the main statline. It's a bit ridiculous, and naturally with FW's books costing so much this makes it even more rare someone actually has their forgeworld book on them than someone just bringing their standard codex.
Back in the day, when codexes were a lot cheaper and a person could reasonably be expected to own all of them, the other primary reason that people hated FW was there was no way to "know" what this kind of stuff did before you saw it across from you. There were a good amount of tourney players who bought literally every codex that came out. After all they were $30 and only came out every few months, with less factions in existence to book. Tournament players could sit down with every codex and research it so they could know what they were in for at tournaments. This is back in say 5th, where formations didn't exist, supplements didn't exist, superheavies were these mystical things you only ever saw at 3,000pts, and in general you could pick any book up off the shelf and flip through it, as books weren't shrink wrapped back then, at least in my area. This meant that if say the local IG player was being a bit shady, your average ork player could just walk over to the shelf, pick an IG codex up off the rack, and call him out on it. But with FW, there are no books on the shelves, and with some people refusing to buy the books (or even more sketchy, refusing to let you check theirs) this leads to a lot of distrust. And unless you were absolutely insane, no person was going to buy all of forgeworld's book catalogue, some of which were two or 3 editions old and over $50 a pop, just in the off chance someone brought a weird looking dreadnaught. I think this honestly is one of the biggest factors in why there was so much FW hate and why it has carried on so long.
Finally, there has been a long standing viewpoint that Forgeworld is not "official". It doesn't matter that they're a licensed branch of GW, that they clearly have rights to the property, that their rules are clearly meant to tie into the game, even the massive "APPROVED FOR 40K" Stamp some units had, none of it mattered. There were people who would argue day in and day out that these were not official models, these were not official rules, and that you may as well have walked into the store with a completely homebrewed army of green dollar store army men. It got a bit ridiculous tail end of 5th through 6th and 7th, used to be just mentioning FW could get a thread nuked by mods. Obviously some of these players are still around and as older players go on to take over groups and raise new communities, it only makes sense that their viewpoints will be passed down and reinforced among newer players. And since FW is so rare, and these communities naturally forbid FW in the first place, it means that these new players will never be exposed to FW models in a favorable light, leaving little chance for their opinion to be changed.
Those same arguments apply to banning tons of codex rules too. Why allow SoB to exist at all? It increases the cost of competition for very little gain. If keeping costs down is legitimately a priority then we would see a lot more bans, but we don't.
Wait, I thought all you see in tournaments is the broken bits. Newbies don't bring nothing but the broken bits, because they don't know what the broken bits are yet. You can't simultaneously claim that people are playing nothing but the most broken lists, and people are such hopeless newbies that they don't even know that FW rules exist. And, honestly, a person who is such a newbie that they don't know FW exists is going to get seal-clubbed every game no matter what they're facing. If it isn't a FW unit it's "wait, I didn't know that Tyranids even existed!!!!!" or "WTF, Ultramarines get a primarch!?!?!?".
IOW, it's all about tournament players being afraid to lose. If you'll play against FW in a casual game, where enjoyment of the experience is the only thing to gain, but not in a tournament game then it's a clear concession that your sole reason is that you don't want to allow anything that might hurt your chances of winning. And I believe we have an acronym for the sort of person who would ban their opponent's army just to improve their own chances of winning...
You're making your points in a rather inflammatory way, you realize? You're also ascribing motivations to me, personally, that I've stated about my store, not myself. While I don't have the money to purchase Forgeworld I'd be fine playing against it if I went to a large tournament. It's just something that my store doesn't allow, for all the reasons I stated.
To address your points.
1. It doesn't increase the cost unless you play Sisters of Battle. If adding Forge World makes every army that uses it even 5% better than to adequately compete then if you want to win you should include it in your army, and the cost increase will be large for the players in our area, none of whom own FW models because they aren't allowed in tournaments in our area.
2. Again, this isn't something that comes up in our area. I might have been a little hyperbolic earlier when I said that they don't know forgeworld existed, but most of them have never seen a forgeworld model in person. I've only seen three and I've been playing for three years or so. And yes, new players tend to lose. Ideally they lose in ways that make them want to keep coming back to the hobby and the store specifically, rather than in ways that are either out or their price range or send them to buy models outside the store, although the last bit is hard to avoid with Ebay and similar websites in existence.
3. My own tournament performance has been middling at best lately. If I was afraid to lose I wouldn't attend. The reasons are primarily economic. I could just as easily say that people who won't play in tournaments that don't use forgeworld are only interested in games where they can win by virtue of their wallets. But I won't, because the reasons are more complex than that, but the comparison is similar to your rather unjust one.
Lord Ruby34 wrote: You're also ascribing motivations to me, personally, that I've stated about my store, not myself.
Nope. The "you" in question is the general, not the personal.
1. It doesn't increase the cost unless you play Sisters of Battle. If adding Forge World makes every army that uses it even 5% better than to adequately compete then if you want to win you should include it in your army, and the cost increase will be large for the players in our area, none of whom own FW models because they aren't allowed in tournaments in our area.
Except it does, because allowing SoB potentially changes the meta because tournament players have to prepare for SoB. Or Tyranids. Or DE. Or whatever other army you can think of. If you want to win you have to buy additional models every time the meta changes. So why allow rare armies? Why allow new codex releases? It would be cheaper to just ban all that stuff.
2. Again, this isn't something that comes up in our area. I might have been a little hyperbolic earlier when I said that they don't know forgeworld existed, but most of them have never seen a forgeworld model in person. I've only seen three and I've been playing for three years or so. And yes, new players tend to lose. Ideally they lose in ways that make them want to keep coming back to the hobby and the store specifically, rather than in ways that are either out or their price range or send them to buy models outside the store, although the last bit is hard to avoid with Ebay and similar websites in existence.
I strongly suspect that game experience is way more important than +/- $20 in cost in determining if a newbie comes back. Getting seal-clubbed is likely to drive them out no matter how much money the seal-clubbing list cost to buy. FW bans accomplish very little here compared to bans on top-tier competitive armies in general, aimed at bringing the power level down.
I could just as easily say that people who won't play in tournaments that don't use forgeworld are only interested in games where they can win by virtue of their wallets. But I won't, because the reasons are more complex than that, but the comparison is similar to your rather unjust one.
No, it's not at all similar. People like me own FW-heavy armies and can't play in no-FW events because we don't have enough points left if all of our key units are banned. And even people who could technically assemble a no-FW army are hurt by having their enjoyment of the "build your own list" part of the game destroyed by arbitrary rules on what is and isn't legal. A dedicated Tyranid player isn't going to be happy about having their army banned, even if they have an old space marine army gathering dust in the closet that they could theoretically play. No such equivalent exists for the no-FW player. They have literally nothing to gain besides win/loss ratio, they can continue playing the exact same army.
Largely from what I've seen is the really, really stupid idea that FW shouldn't be allowed because its more expensive, other than that there is no actual real reason for banning it when broken gak like rowboat lists are in 'vanilla' GW.
Forgeworld has a long history of publishing half-assed rule-sets filled with errors and broken rules. Much, much worse than the codex rules. Thankfully GW seems to have included the Forgeworld stuff in the Chapter Approved update which is surprising and exciting. You might even get the impression, that Forgeworld and Games Workshop is in fact one and the same company. Waddayouknow.
The TO just told me that their problem units are: the drop pods, decimator, scorpion, lynx, chaos fire raptor, Elysians, giant spawn, cobra, the big marine tanks, and "super chicken" whatever that is. Claiming it's a power and balance issue with said units.
Vallhund wrote: I'm not sure why some people ban FW from tournaments either. Maybe it's because some people aren't as wary of FW units and don't like having models they've never heard of sprung on them all of a sudden. Other than that I have no idea.
90% of the time you see something FW, it's something that's pretty nuts or being abused in most areas. Think about how many IG players you see bringing earthshaker carriages and searchlights right now. Now check how many of them are taking something like Stygies Vanquishers or a Thunderer. This leads to a bit of confirmation bias. "The only time I saw a FW unit it was OP as all get out, therefore all FW is OP." In addition, most people won't bother buying or converting suboptimal units. After all its a game and players want to win. Throw in FW's high cost and it means you're usually not going to see much but the best of the best from all but the most committed of hobbyist.
You also have a nasty tendency for people to not buy the books for FW units, which means there's no way to see what the rules for these units are. You then have to take the opponent's word for it. This doesn't sound like a big deal but this can be a common issue, both intentionally and accidentally. As much as I love programs like Battlescribe, they cause a massive amount of issues with people not reading their rules. Not just for FW, but even just general codexes too. I cannot count the amount of times I've had to correct new players on their own armies, armies I don't even play, because they only looked at the rules on battlescribe and haven't hardly even cracked open their codex. Tau players who never realized their jump suits fly because Battlescribe doesn't do keywords, Guard players not knowing their orders because they didn't see it on the battlescribe roster, tyranid players not knowing psychic abilities because it doesn't show up directly under the main statline. It's a bit ridiculous, and naturally with FW's books costing so much this makes it even more rare someone actually has their forgeworld book on them than someone just bringing their standard codex.
Back in the day, when codexes were a lot cheaper and a person could reasonably be expected to own all of them, the other primary reason that people hated FW was there was no way to "know" what this kind of stuff did before you saw it across from you. There were a good amount of tourney players who bought literally every codex that came out. After all they were $30 and only came out every few months, with less factions in existence to book. Tournament players could sit down with every codex and research it so they could know what they were in for at tournaments. This is back in say 5th, where formations didn't exist, supplements didn't exist, superheavies were these mystical things you only ever saw at 3,000pts, and in general you could pick any book up off the shelf and flip through it, as books weren't shrink wrapped back then, at least in my area. This meant that if say the local IG player was being a bit shady, your average ork player could just walk over to the shelf, pick an IG codex up off the rack, and call him out on it. But with FW, there are no books on the shelves, and with some people refusing to buy the books (or even more sketchy, refusing to let you check theirs) this leads to a lot of distrust. And unless you were absolutely insane, no person was going to buy all of forgeworld's book catalogue, some of which were two or 3 editions old and over $50 a pop, just in the off chance someone brought a weird looking dreadnaught. I think this honestly is one of the biggest factors in why there was so much FW hate and why it has carried on so long.
Finally, there has been a long standing viewpoint that Forgeworld is not "official". It doesn't matter that they're a licensed branch of GW, that they clearly have rights to the property, that their rules are clearly meant to tie into the game, even the massive "APPROVED FOR 40K" Stamp some units had, none of it mattered. There were people who would argue day in and day out that these were not official models, these were not official rules, and that you may as well have walked into the store with a completely homebrewed army of green dollar store army men. It got a bit ridiculous tail end of 5th through 6th and 7th, used to be just mentioning FW could get a thread nuked by mods. Obviously some of these players are still around and as older players go on to take over groups and raise new communities, it only makes sense that their viewpoints will be passed down and reinforced among newer players. And since FW is so rare, and these communities naturally forbid FW in the first place, it means that these new players will never be exposed to FW models in a favorable light, leaving little chance for their opinion to be changed.
chimeara wrote: The TO just told me that their problem units are: the drop pods, decimator, scorpion, lynx, chaos fire raptor, Elysians, giant spawn, cobra, the big marine tanks, and "super chicken" whatever that is. Claiming it's a power and balance issue with said units.
Superchicken is Aetaos'rau'keres, the FW Lord of Change. And... yeah, he's a balance problem.
chimeara wrote: The TO just told me that their problem units are: the drop pods, decimator, scorpion, lynx, chaos fire raptor, Elysians, giant spawn, cobra, the big marine tanks, and "super chicken" whatever that is. Claiming it's a power and balance issue with said units.
Interesting that he left out the only truly broken FW model; the Malefic Lord. Sure, the Kharybdis and the Lynx are mean, but literally every other unit you mentioned is either outside the power level cap for ITC, or really not that good in the first place; upper middle tier/low top tier choices at best.
I'd counter that there are PLENTY of abusive things in GW proper such as: Stormravens, Guilliman, Primaris psykers, Tau Commanders and drones, to name a few.
chimeara wrote: The TO just told me that their problem units are: the drop pods, decimator, scorpion, lynx, chaos fire raptor, Elysians, giant spawn, cobra, the big marine tanks, and "super chicken" whatever that is. Claiming it's a power and balance issue with said units.
Superchicken is Aetaos'rau'keres, the FW Lord of Change. And... yeah, he's a balance problem.
He's just hard to kill and pays a premium for that benefit. Best thing to do is treat him like Guilliman; kill the rest of the army around him and just play the objective game. He's only going to kill a few units at best, and unless you have a big juicy target for him he won't come even close to making his points back.
Yes, I imagine that the reason is what someone else already said: since FW isn't that common the only FW stuff they've seen is the super broken things which leads them to erroneously believe it's all broken.
There's a few old crotchety fellows around my FLGS that have the same belief, but fortunately I'm super lucky and am part of a wonderful gaming group that allows FW.
Pretty much every list you see around here is hyper competitive though, so no one is worried about someone else bring abusive or broken things, because we're all doing it.
I think everyone can agree that 40k has balance issues. Without FW is the same as with it.
Every FW ban I have ever seen does absolutely nothing to address the OP codex currently blowing up that edition. I was told I couldnt bring any of my Repressors to a tournament back when the WD update for Tzeentch Daemons (end of 5ed?) had screamers and flamers wrecking everything. I signed up for my Sisters anyways. Showed up with my Daemons (9 screamers and 6 flamers amidst a four god daemon army) and won the entire thing.
Would rather have played my Sisters.
Were the 8ed FW index books really so hard to get?
Except it does, because allowing SoB potentially changes the meta because tournament players have to prepare for SoB. Or Tyranids. Or DE. Or whatever other army you can think of. If you want to win you have to buy additional models every time the meta changes. So why allow rare armies? Why allow new codex releases? It would be cheaper to just ban all that stuff.
Accept that doesn't intrinsically increase the cost of your own army, like needing forge world to compete on equal footing does. Other armies existing does not make your army's own options weaker, having additional options from forge world can. If the Y'vahra exists that makes the riptide worse at it's role compared to something in your own force, just to use a random example. I'm not actually sure the that's true in this edition, but take it as a theoretical example. Either way, you can take my point. Your own army having more models that are competitive increases the cost of a competitive army.
Peregrine wrote: I strongly suspect that game experience is way more important than +/- $20 in cost in determining if a newbie comes back. Getting seal-clubbed is likely to drive them out no matter how much money the seal-clubbing list cost to buy. FW bans accomplish very little here compared to bans on top-tier competitive armies in general, aimed at bringing the power level down.
If the cost of FW was twenty dollars I might agree with you. It's not, and I don't.
Peregrine wrote: No, it's not at all similar. People like me own FW-heavy armies and can't play in no-FW events because we don't have enough points left if all of our key units are banned. And even people who could technically assemble a no-FW army are hurt by having their enjoyment of the "build your own list" part of the game destroyed by arbitrary rules on what is and isn't legal. A dedicated Tyranid player isn't going to be happy about having their army banned, even if they have an old space marine army gathering dust in the closet that they could theoretically play. No such equivalent exists for the no-FW player. They have literally nothing to gain besides win/loss ratio, they can continue playing the exact same army.
I understand that it isn't fun to be told your army doesn't conform to the rules of the tournament, and that does suck for someone playing Renegades and Heretics. But in almost all other cases it's a non-factor. You can still play your army, with your models, minus one or two that aren't produced by the same company, at the same price point, and that the majority of players don't have access to. The few people who've asked to play FW in our tournies still showed up after being denied, and I hope the tournament was still fun for them. I wasn't able to talk to everyone, considering I was busy with my own games at the time.
One thing that my store has considered and may implement is allowing forge world rules, but with proxy models allowed. I'm personally in support of that option, but the Store Owner isn't a fan. It seems like a good way to keep the price down while still allowing those who want to play with their forge world models and rules able to do so. It's my personal preferred solution, although I'm aware that it isn't a perfect one.
Lord Ruby34 wrote: One thing that my store has considered and may implement is allowing forge world rules, but with proxy models allowed. I'm personally in support of that option, but the Store Owner isn't a fan. It seems like a good way to keep the price down while still allowing those who want to play with their forge world models and rules able to do so. It's my personal preferred solution, although I'm aware that it isn't a perfect one.
Why would the store owner complain if conversions of FW models is allowed at their events? Your player base would still be buying models from the store. The store could buy the index as well to cover the 8ed units and sell it on their shelves. Seems like a fine solution to the supposed desire of the store owner to keep the price of playing down. IMO the more threats a player has to plan for in a given meta the less likely they are to be able to focus on one specific gimmick to unbalance their games in their favor.
I once had a guy say that people that buy FW products are just paying to win.
However, this guy also had the opinion that scratch-builds shouldn't be allowed in the store because if you can't afford the game you shouldn't play it.
I guess he didn't like poor people, or rich people.
Simple answer: don't play in tournaments that don't allow FW. Tell the tournament organizer why.
I don't play tournaments anymore, don't really feel like they prove anything. It's supposed to be about building great TAAC lists and being the best player you can be, but that's warped over the years.
If it's getting to the point where you can't play the army you want, then don't participate.
MrMoustaffa wrote: You also have a nasty tendency for people to not buy the books for FW units, which means there's no way to see what the rules for these units are. You then have to take the opponent's word for it. This doesn't sound like a big deal but this can be a common issue, both intentionally and accidentally. As much as I love programs like Battlescribe, they cause a massive amount of issues with people not reading their rules. Not just for FW, but even just general codexes too. I cannot count the amount of times I've had to correct new players on their own armies, armies I don't even play, because they only looked at the rules on battlescribe and haven't hardly even cracked open their codex. Tau players who never realized their jump suits fly because Battlescribe doesn't do keywords, Guard players not knowing their orders because they didn't see it on the battlescribe roster, tyranid players not knowing psychic abilities because it doesn't show up directly under the main statline. It's a bit ridiculous, and naturally with FW's books costing so much this makes it even more rare someone actually has their forgeworld book on them than someone just bringing their standard codex.
Easy solution for this: Enforce on tournaments "no rules to show, no model on game". Works pretty well in Finland. Can't imagine tournament where somebody would be allowed WITHOUT rules at hand.
Of course doesn't solve player not reading book but at least opponent can check rules himself if he's unfamiliar with them.
Lord Ruby34 wrote: One thing that my store has considered and may implement is allowing forge world rules, but with proxy models allowed. I'm personally in support of that option, but the Store Owner isn't a fan. It seems like a good way to keep the price down while still allowing those who want to play with their forge world models and rules able to do so. It's my personal preferred solution, although I'm aware that it isn't a perfect one.
Why would the store owner complain if conversions of FW models is allowed at their events? Your player base would still be buying models from the store. The store could buy the index as well to cover the 8ed units and sell it on their shelves. Seems like a fine solution to the supposed desire of the store owner to keep the price of playing down. IMO the more threats a player has to plan for in a given meta the less likely they are to be able to focus on one specific gimmick to unbalance their games in their favor.
I agree, and have suggested this. I will probably do so again. Although, to be clear we weren't just talking about conversions, but Counts As something close to a forge world equivalent as well.
cuda1179 wrote:I once had a guy say that people that buy FW products are just paying to win.
However, this guy also had the opinion that scratch-builds shouldn't be allowed in the store because if you can't afford the game you shouldn't play it.
I guess he didn't like poor people, or rich people.
Wow is he going to hate my list with 10 Arvus Lighters!
In my area there's no official ban. We simply dislike FW stuff, no one is interested in the models/units and FW prices discourage people to buy that resin.
The whole FW ban debate is rather amusing to me, as someone who missed the whole 4th, 5th, 6th edition “fiasco” with the units.
The way I see things now (as someone who came back for Warhammer Fest 2017 and 8th ed), is that people seem to tar everything FW with the same brush, and often seem to think including FW in your army = auto win. From what I’ve seen, and read up on in terms of event results, sure, some units are making a regular appearance in top armies, but armies that don’t include FW are doing just as well in major events.
With the advent of Chapter Approved changing some FW points costs (based on Malefic Lord changes I expect any changes are going to be either too much of a reduction or too much of an increase, with no middle ground), I think the time of “all FW is broken and never supported or updated” is coming to an end.
Sure, the price can, at times, be a deciding factor on whether or not to buy a unit or model, but, by punishing someone who saves up to buy that one centre-piece model/unit just because another hasn’t/doesn’t want to/can’t will only have a negative impact on the growth of the hobby. Also, with everything now being online and easy to order and get delivered, accessibility is at an all time high for FW. The same goes for the FW books. They were priced the same as the Indices and also had a digital version. Anyone claiming that they are in-accessible to the average player is just wrong.
An example I used previously in this debate was GW conscript spam vs something like an Elysian army from a cost point of view. As it stood, to buy enough models for the conscript units (talking 120-200 models) and then the cost of the rest of the army, you’d be spending more on GW plastic for those units, than an entire 2k Elysian FW army. So, if FW is in-accessible due to cost, then, TO’s also need to then ban certain army builds that also cost upwards of a certain cost to buy.
An example of this, is Brandon Grant’s winning Guard list at the SoCal Open. To go out and buy his army right now from GW (all of it is GW bar the mortar squads – which you could use GW kits for anyway), it would cost you a cool £707.55 ($941.31). Now… That’s a pure GW army for 2k points. If 1 FW model costing £100/$100 for example is “in-accessible”, then GW itself is EXTREMELY in-accessible for the average player. Now, if the “average” player is able to buy the army over time (like 99% of players do), then the argument of not somehow being able to do the same for FW models is stupid.
In regards to people not having the rules or books available to show people… Well, that’s simple to fix. If you don’t have the rules, you can’t use the model. This should be the case with all models, GW or FW and is a common curtesy, let alone, necessary requirement to play the game correctly.
Things are being addressed when they are a problem – both GW and FW. There has never been a better time than now (in my view) to start opening up the hobby and events to everything that is available. GW are proving, that if there is a problem, and if it is raised to them with evidence, they are willing to do something about it, and relatively quickly.
I’ve always planned to slow build a pure Elysian/FW Navy army, both thematic and competitive, but, each time I see this debate and people banning FW from events I keep putting it off. And that, to me, is bad for the hobby and the game, cos, if I am doing that, how many others are also not diversifying in army build and composition because of it?
Kdash wrote: The whole FW ban debate is rather amusing to me, as someone who missed the whole 4th, 5th, 6th edition “fiasco” with the units.
The way I see things now (as someone who came back for Warhammer Fest 2017 and 8th ed), is that people seem to tar everything FW with the same brush, and often seem to think including FW in your army = auto win. From what I’ve seen, and read up on in terms of event results, sure, some units are making a regular appearance in top armies, but armies that don’t include FW are doing just as well in major events.
With the advent of Chapter Approved changing some FW points costs (based on Malefic Lord changes I expect any changes are going to be either too much of a reduction or too much of an increase, with no middle ground), I think the time of “all FW is broken and never supported or updated” is coming to an end.
Sure, the price can, at times, be a deciding factor on whether or not to buy a unit or model, but, by punishing someone who saves up to buy that one centre-piece model/unit just because another hasn’t/doesn’t want to/can’t will only have a negative impact on the growth of the hobby. Also, with everything now being online and easy to order and get delivered, accessibility is at an all time high for FW. The same goes for the FW books. They were priced the same as the Indices and also had a digital version. Anyone claiming that they are in-accessible to the average player is just wrong.
An example I used previously in this debate was GW conscript spam vs something like an Elysian army from a cost point of view. As it stood, to buy enough models for the conscript units (talking 120-200 models) and then the cost of the rest of the army, you’d be spending more on GW plastic for those units, than an entire 2k Elysian FW army. So, if FW is in-accessible due to cost, then, TO’s also need to then ban certain army builds that also cost upwards of a certain cost to buy.
An example of this, is Brandon Grant’s winning Guard list at the SoCal Open. To go out and buy his army right now from GW (all of it is GW bar the mortar squads – which you could use GW kits for anyway), it would cost you a cool £707.55 ($941.31). Now… That’s a pure GW army for 2k points. If 1 FW model costing £100/$100 for example is “in-accessible”, then GW itself is EXTREMELY in-accessible for the average player. Now, if the “average” player is able to buy the army over time (like 99% of players do), then the argument of not somehow being able to do the same for FW models is stupid.
In regards to people not having the rules or books available to show people… Well, that’s simple to fix. If you don’t have the rules, you can’t use the model. This should be the case with all models, GW or FW and is a common curtesy, let alone, necessary requirement to play the game correctly.
Things are being addressed when they are a problem – both GW and FW. There has never been a better time than now (in my view) to start opening up the hobby and events to everything that is available. GW are proving, that if there is a problem, and if it is raised to them with evidence, they are willing to do something about it, and relatively quickly.
I’ve always planned to slow build a pure Elysian/FW Navy army, both thematic and competitive, but, each time I see this debate and people banning FW from events I keep putting it off. And that, to me, is bad for the hobby and the game, cos, if I am doing that, how many others are also not diversifying in army build and composition because of it?
If you're willing to buy 200 guardsmen you're a WAAC player, not an average one. An average player will buy the miniatures he/she prefers in order to collect an army that can work in games (maybe, sometimes they don't even care) but it's also good looking. Tournaments players are far from being the average ones, they're actually a minority.
FW hate also comes because not everyone likes the concept of centerpiece models, I can't stand them for example. I consider land raiders but also rhinos and dreads big models. Unfortunately even GW new releases are following this path, to provide huge vehicles/monters/superheroes to everyone, but this is a trend that was inherited by FW. Hence the FW hate.
FW prices are very very high for a standard player/collector. And we can have a 30% price cut on the GW catalogue here, while we can't have it on FW stuff.
To ban FW is wrong IMHO, but don't say that FW stuff is accessible to anyone, moneywise speaking, just because some WAAC player has collected an army with 200+ guardsmen.
Blackie wrote: FW hate also comes because not everyone likes the concept of centerpiece models, I can't stand them for example. I consider land raiders but also rhinos and dreads big models. Unfortunately even GW new releases are following this path, to provide huge vehicles/monters/superheroes to everyone, but this is a trend that was inherited by FW. Hence the FW hate.
Ah yes leman russes and chimeras are big center piece models
Oh and don't forget the HUGE infantry trooper center piece model!
Ah yes leman russes and chimeras are big center piece models
IMHO they are. Or better, there shouldn't be real centerpiece models, there also shouldn't be immortal superheroes/monsters/vehicles that do the entire job alone. I prefer having more infantries and standard sized vehicles than bringing huge models. I can't stand the GW policy that releases big models of characters that should be the size of a standard guy. Like Celestine, why making her fly in order to have a 15 cm tall model? Or the yncarne. Those two characters should have the dimensions of standard battle sisters or dark eldar but they have a scenic base and/or a pose that makes them quite big, this is something I really hate. And it comes from FW
Ah yes leman russes and chimeras are big center piece models
IMHO they are. Or better, there shouldn't be real centerpiece models, there also shouldn't be immortal superheroes/monsters/vehicles that do the entire job alone. I prefer having more infantries and standard sized vehicles than bringing huge models. I can't stand the GW policy that releases big models of characters that should be the size of a standard guy. Like Celestine, why making her fly in order to have a 15 cm tall model? Or the yncarne. Those two characters should have the dimensions of standard battle sisters or dark eldar but they have a scenic base and/or a pose that makes them quite big, this is something I really hate. And it comes from FW
Just my view about the game though.
So what problem you have with leman russes, chimeras, predators, land raiders, imperial guard troopers etc that form up hefty bulk of FW product line?
Kdash wrote: The whole FW ban debate is rather amusing to me, as someone who missed the whole 4th, 5th, 6th edition “fiasco” with the units.
The way I see things now (as someone who came back for Warhammer Fest 2017 and 8th ed), is that people seem to tar everything FW with the same brush, and often seem to think including FW in your army = auto win. From what I’ve seen, and read up on in terms of event results, sure, some units are making a regular appearance in top armies, but armies that don’t include FW are doing just as well in major events.
With the advent of Chapter Approved changing some FW points costs (based on Malefic Lord changes I expect any changes are going to be either too much of a reduction or too much of an increase, with no middle ground), I think the time of “all FW is broken and never supported or updated” is coming to an end.
Sure, the price can, at times, be a deciding factor on whether or not to buy a unit or model, but, by punishing someone who saves up to buy that one centre-piece model/unit just because another hasn’t/doesn’t want to/can’t will only have a negative impact on the growth of the hobby. Also, with everything now being online and easy to order and get delivered, accessibility is at an all time high for FW. The same goes for the FW books. They were priced the same as the Indices and also had a digital version. Anyone claiming that they are in-accessible to the average player is just wrong.
An example I used previously in this debate was GW conscript spam vs something like an Elysian army from a cost point of view. As it stood, to buy enough models for the conscript units (talking 120-200 models) and then the cost of the rest of the army, you’d be spending more on GW plastic for those units, than an entire 2k Elysian FW army. So, if FW is in-accessible due to cost, then, TO’s also need to then ban certain army builds that also cost upwards of a certain cost to buy.
An example of this, is Brandon Grant’s winning Guard list at the SoCal Open. To go out and buy his army right now from GW (all of it is GW bar the mortar squads – which you could use GW kits for anyway), it would cost you a cool £707.55 ($941.31). Now… That’s a pure GW army for 2k points. If 1 FW model costing £100/$100 for example is “in-accessible”, then GW itself is EXTREMELY in-accessible for the average player. Now, if the “average” player is able to buy the army over time (like 99% of players do), then the argument of not somehow being able to do the same for FW models is stupid.
In regards to people not having the rules or books available to show people… Well, that’s simple to fix. If you don’t have the rules, you can’t use the model. This should be the case with all models, GW or FW and is a common curtesy, let alone, necessary requirement to play the game correctly.
Things are being addressed when they are a problem – both GW and FW. There has never been a better time than now (in my view) to start opening up the hobby and events to everything that is available. GW are proving, that if there is a problem, and if it is raised to them with evidence, they are willing to do something about it, and relatively quickly.
I’ve always planned to slow build a pure Elysian/FW Navy army, both thematic and competitive, but, each time I see this debate and people banning FW from events I keep putting it off. And that, to me, is bad for the hobby and the game, cos, if I am doing that, how many others are also not diversifying in army build and composition because of it?
If you're willing to buy 200 guardsmen you're a WAAC player, not an average one. An average player will buy the miniatures he/she prefers in order to collect an army that can work in games (maybe, sometimes they don't even care) but it's also good looking. Tournaments players are far from being the average ones, they're actually a minority.
FW hate also comes because not everyone likes the concept of centerpiece models, I can't stand them for example. I consider land raiders but also rhinos and dreads big models. Unfortunately even GW new releases are following this path, to provide huge vehicles/monters/superheroes to everyone, but this is a trend that was inherited by FW. Hence the FW hate.
FW prices are very very high for a standard player/collector. And we can have a 30% price cut on the GW catalogue here, while we can't have it on FW stuff.
To ban FW is wrong IMHO, but don't say that FW stuff is accessible to anyone, moneywise speaking, just because some WAAC player has collected an army with 200+ guardsmen.
Ok, so my basic, none WAAC, fun, but competitive, Eldar list that I’m building clocks in at £522.50 from GW. And that’s not including the cost of the Codex and Cards.
So, essentially you could say that for an extra £200 I could get a WAAC smite, conscript and scion spam army. Sure, you’re now getting into the “pay to win” aspect of the game, where you are paying for the best setups, but, at the cost of a standard 2000 point army, there isn’t really any excuses that forgeworld models are “out of the budget” of many collectors.
Now, also take into account that a lot of the “big” cost models from FW also have point costs of several hundred points, this also can, strangely, have the effect of actually LOWERING the cost of your army overall, due to more points being taken up by the “big” models. Now, that’s only in a handful of cases, but, it’s worth noting it can happen.
Yes, FW is generally more expensive on a model for model basis (eg. Normal Guard Sentinal is £18.50, but FW’s Elysian one is £26) but, I guess that is where you now come into the cost of resin vs plastic.
FW itself, isn’t generally used to make a completely army, you’re likely only ever going to have a couple of units (unless you’re running a FW regiment). So, based on the cost of a couple of models, vs the cost of the rest of the army, the cost of the FW additions will always be substantially less than the rest of the army. If you are prepared to spend £500 on a new army, no matter how long you spread it out over, saying that you then can’t afford to spend £50-£150 on a large centre piece model/unit from FW is just frankly absurd. Sure, it can be a “big hit” all in one go for some players, but you can hardly use it as an argument for the cost being out of reach overall.
Also, using the excuse of getting a big GW discount in your local area as a reason for FW being “out of reach” is also a non-starter. What about all the other people that only have access to, either a GW store or the GW website? A 30% discount on my Eldar army would bring the cost down by £156.75. Pretty big drop, I agree, but a £365.75 army is still more of an outlay than spending something like £87 on 400 points of FW. For 1600 points of GW I’d be spending £00.18 per point, and then I’d be spending another £00.21 per point for the 400 points of FW. NOT using your 30% discount, i'd be spending £00.26 per point of GW (Which is MORE than the FW cost!)
Just because it is a big outlay in money for sometimes, a single model, doesn’t mean it’s way more inaccessible than GW armies when you take the time to compare the two.
cuda1179 wrote: I once had a guy say that people that buy FW products are just paying to win.
However, this guy also had the opinion that scratch-builds shouldn't be allowed in the store because if you can't afford the game you shouldn't play it.
I guess he didn't like poor people, or rich people.
FW is paying to have fun... like any other part of the hobby. Regarding scratch build; you could say the same applies!
Now if the community consensus for said tournament is that "Having Forgeworld reduces the fun quotient of our time spent" that is valid if it addresses *specific community issues*. As for a possible reason behind that, not knowing anything about an opposing army, having to halt the game in progress so everyone involved can look up a rule, is entirely valid - especially if said army is new and the rule source is digital and thus introduces further delays. If the rules aren't provided by the player then that's yet another layer of grief that isn't necessary.
For comparison, there was a discussion recently in my hobby group about a tournament heat where one player just crashed out because a *GW* codex army was in play that no-one had ever seen at that level, and the amount of rules overhead was too much for him. Given the arguments that have built up over 6 months for the rereleases of 8th - and the turnaround on the FAQ - the prospect of having to do all of that for a FW collection, on the spot, in a paid/limited time frame environment may legitimately not appeal as something which more trouble than it is worth. Now in a years time when 8th has 'settled' and FW is a known and settled quantity, then maybe that reason won't hold water.
I personally have about 15 kg of Forgeworld in various configurations, none of which has seen regular use since 8th because it doesn't *fit* with the community just now. I'm looking forward to when everyone is settled and we can go nuts
FW itself, isn’t generally used to make a completely army, you’re likely only ever going to have a couple of units (unless you’re running a FW regiment). So, based on the cost of a couple of models, vs the cost of the rest of the army, the cost of the FW additions will always be substantially less than the rest of the army. If you are prepared to spend £500 on a new army, no matter how long you spread it out over, saying that you then can’t afford to spend £50-£150 on a large centre piece model/unit from FW is just frankly absurd.
It's just your opinion. IMHO 60+pounds for a single model IS absurd, even if the model is a plastic GW one.
FW itself, isn’t generally used to make a completely army, you’re likely only ever going to have a couple of units (unless you’re running a FW regiment). So, based on the cost of a couple of models, vs the cost of the rest of the army, the cost of the FW additions will always be substantially less than the rest of the army. If you are prepared to spend £500 on a new army, no matter how long you spread it out over, saying that you then can’t afford to spend £50-£150 on a large centre piece model/unit from FW is just frankly absurd.
It's just your opinion. IMHO 60+pounds for a single model IS absurd, even if the model is a plastic GW one.
Oh, i NEVER said that the cost wasn't high or absurd, i simply stated that when you look at everything in comparison FW isn't really "out of reach" in the grand scheme of building, and paying for, a 2000 point army that you'd use in a tournament.
If i had to buy my Eldar army in one go as a new player i'd be likely to tell the GW store owner to " off. £500+ for a plastic army?!? Are you insane??"... But, as that's not the case, in some ways, the price doesn't hurt as much. Personally, i think, if GW can give some FLGS's up to 30% off their retail price, they should be able to just drop their prices by a good chunk.
But, unfortunately, there are more things to consider, along with business planning and customer response. For example, if everyone keeps buying models at x price, then, in some ways it says to GW - "the customers are buying this in huge amounts, so they must be ok with our current price structure".
1) I've always treated Forgeworld like any other supplementary rule system. The "Core" warhammer 40K game has always been the core rule book and the codex for each army.
Anything in addition to that is an expansion to the core game rules. Cities of Death, Forgeworld (Imperial Armour) etc.... That's not saying they are better/worse/balanced/unbalanced etc.. just that its an expansion to the core game.
In recent years the use of dataslates for new releases from GW has added to the core game rules. It's core products sold and marketed by the core game company.
In that line of thinking Foregeworld unique units are always an expansion to the game. Thus tournaments or play can very well exclude them because not everyone will have or choose to have access; and if the majority feel that the expansion isn't desired then its fine to have a competitive event without Forgeworld.
2) Forgeworld models cost a lot and are often bought by those who are very keen on the hobby. This often mean they are very proud of their models and thus get rather irate when people say they can't use them in games. Or feel its randomly unfair etc.. or the tournament is showing heavy bias.
I think this is the wrong attitude to have because its essentially a hostile reaction.
3) I think the internet tends to bias in that those who are online are often the more keen in the hobby; and also those who are often more open to buying online. As a result I think you get a heavier bias in forgeworld owning players online; which tends to steer most FW usage discussion toward the more irate "it should always be allowed" angle.
Note that the above is, of course, only relevant to FW unique models; rather than those that provide sculpts for codex units/upgrades.
I thought of this last night. This tournament has players from across the country supposedly, yet they made the FW ban because of the local players opinions.
This tournament is 70 players and takes 3 days to complete.
Holding up a FW ban as somehow attempting to save the local players from needing to spend too much money to win a game is ridiculous. I don't believe it for a second. Are those TO's claiming that this is their motive also banning SoB armies to ensure nobody is forced to drop the cash to field an extremely sub-optimal broken load out Sisters Brigade detachment?
Paying more money =/= winning.
If a TO and the players in a local meta are worried about getting their feelings hurt from losing why in the world are they having a tournament in the first place? An escalation league with specific game nights and raffle tickets for players painting new units, games played (not win or lose) club terrain building and such that go into a prize drawing bin at certain stages of the league is far healthier for a LGS/gaming community than a tournament.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
chimeara wrote: I thought of this last night. This tournament has players from across the country supposedly, yet they made the FW ban because of the local players opinions.
This tournament is 70 players and takes 3 days to complete.
Earth127 wrote: I wonder if an adventurer's league style limitation would help: " In matched play you can only select units from up to 2 scources."
So you could have space marines but then you would have to choose between adding AM bodies or FW fire raptors for instance.
My inquisition would absolutely love that.
After all, you get your book for acolytes and inquisitors. Then you get your book (Imperial Armor Index 1: Forces of the Adeptus Astartes) for your Inquisitorial Land Raider Prometheus, then codex AM for your Inquisitorial Chimeras and Valkyries and general support, and then you get the Adeptus Astartes book for rhinos, and then you take stuff from Deathwatch because you are Ordo Xenos and then you bring an Ordo Malleus Inquisitor and his Grey Knights because you are running a conclave list.
Kdash wrote: The whole FW ban debate is rather amusing to me, as someone who missed the whole 4th, 5th, 6th edition “fiasco” with the units.
The way I see things now (as someone who came back for Warhammer Fest 2017 and 8th ed), is that people seem to tar everything FW with the same brush, and often seem to think including FW in your army = auto win. From what I’ve seen, and read up on in terms of event results, sure, some units are making a regular appearance in top armies, but armies that don’t include FW are doing just as well in major events.
With the advent of Chapter Approved changing some FW points costs (based on Malefic Lord changes I expect any changes are going to be either too much of a reduction or too much of an increase, with no middle ground), I think the time of “all FW is broken and never supported or updated” is coming to an end.
Sure, the price can, at times, be a deciding factor on whether or not to buy a unit or model, but, by punishing someone who saves up to buy that one centre-piece model/unit just because another hasn’t/doesn’t want to/can’t will only have a negative impact on the growth of the hobby. Also, with everything now being online and easy to order and get delivered, accessibility is at an all time high for FW. The same goes for the FW books. They were priced the same as the Indices and also had a digital version. Anyone claiming that they are in-accessible to the average player is just wrong.
An example I used previously in this debate was GW conscript spam vs something like an Elysian army from a cost point of view. As it stood, to buy enough models for the conscript units (talking 120-200 models) and then the cost of the rest of the army, you’d be spending more on GW plastic for those units, than an entire 2k Elysian FW army. So, if FW is in-accessible due to cost, then, TO’s also need to then ban certain army builds that also cost upwards of a certain cost to buy.
An example of this, is Brandon Grant’s winning Guard list at the SoCal Open. To go out and buy his army right now from GW (all of it is GW bar the mortar squads – which you could use GW kits for anyway), it would cost you a cool £707.55 ($941.31). Now… That’s a pure GW army for 2k points. If 1 FW model costing £100/$100 for example is “in-accessible”, then GW itself is EXTREMELY in-accessible for the average player. Now, if the “average” player is able to buy the army over time (like 99% of players do), then the argument of not somehow being able to do the same for FW models is stupid.
In regards to people not having the rules or books available to show people… Well, that’s simple to fix. If you don’t have the rules, you can’t use the model. This should be the case with all models, GW or FW and is a common curtesy, let alone, necessary requirement to play the game correctly.
Things are being addressed when they are a problem – both GW and FW. There has never been a better time than now (in my view) to start opening up the hobby and events to everything that is available. GW are proving, that if there is a problem, and if it is raised to them with evidence, they are willing to do something about it, and relatively quickly.
I’ve always planned to slow build a pure Elysian/FW Navy army, both thematic and competitive, but, each time I see this debate and people banning FW from events I keep putting it off. And that, to me, is bad for the hobby and the game, cos, if I am doing that, how many others are also not diversifying in army build and composition because of it?
If you're willing to buy 200 guardsmen you're a WAAC player, not an average one. An average player will buy the miniatures he/she prefers in order to collect an army that can work in games (maybe, sometimes they don't even care) but it's also good looking. Tournaments players are far from being the average ones, they're actually a minority.
FW hate also comes because not everyone likes the concept of centerpiece models, I can't stand them for example. I consider land raiders but also rhinos and dreads big models. Unfortunately even GW new releases are following this path, to provide huge vehicles/monters/superheroes to everyone, but this is a trend that was inherited by FW. Hence the FW hate.
FW prices are very very high for a standard player/collector. And we can have a 30% price cut on the GW catalogue here, while we can't have it on FW stuff.
To ban FW is wrong IMHO, but don't say that FW stuff is accessible to anyone, moneywise speaking, just because some WAAC player has collected an army with 200+ guardsmen.
This is the first time in the history of 40k that anyone has ever accused someone of being a WAAC player for buying a lot of basic guardsmen...
More to the point though, FW stuff isn't necessarily more expensive than mainline GW stuff either by any means. There's a fair number of units that are cheaper than their mainline GW plastic counterparts (for example, most any Tech Priest/Mechanicum HQ and it's FW counterpart, GW's plastic Mortarion is much more expensive than FW's Mortarion, DKoK Grenadiers vs plastic Tempestus Scions).
Many FW models aren't big centerpiece models, in fact the overwhelmingly vast majority of FW stuff is not big expensive centerpiece models. GW's big model trend was not inherited from FW, it's a push driven by marketing (it's easy to hype and show them off) and by technology (GW is the only player in the tabletop game able to do big plastic models the way GW can and the variable cost to produce the big kits isn't really any more than the small kits once the fixed cost of the mold is covered so the profit margin is higher). FW does the biggest stuff but that's not actually most of what they make, GW pushes the big models a lot more, especially allowing them to be taken in quantities and in smaller games than FW would ever have allowed. Most of what FW makes is stuff like variant vehicle hulls and turrets, different marks of Power Armor, and factions that mainline GW does not.
The only thing I have in my army is my general Lord Zhufor, decimator and two blood slaughterers. I also use the rules for the FW predator and dreadnaught variants.
Automatically Appended Next Post: So my stuff is very far from op.
I had thought of a PL limit. Something like 18 or less is allowed, how's that sound?
Huh, I guess it's a good thing I did not go directly for a FW-based army. That's when I'd discover some guys with chips on their shoulders about money wouldn't let me play toy soldiers with them
Blackie wrote: If you're willing to buy 200 guardsmen you're a WAAC player, not an average one.
Or you like the idea of a horde of infantry from a fluff point of view, or enjoy painting infantry. Stop making assumptions about a player's motives based on nothing but the models they choose to buy.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Overread wrote: 1) I've always treated Forgeworld like any other supplementary rule system. The "Core" warhammer 40K game has always been the core rule book and the codex for each army.
Anything in addition to that is an expansion to the core game rules. Cities of Death, Forgeworld (Imperial Armour) etc.... That's not saying they are better/worse/balanced/unbalanced etc.. just that its an expansion to the core game.
And you're wrong to do so. CoD and the other expansions are rules that change the game as a whole: new missions, new list-building rules applied to both players, etc. They're clearly labeled as expansions that both players have to agree to use, because it's impossible for one player to include them in their army without their opponent also accepting the changes. FW rules, on the other hand, are just additional unit rules. GW does not treat them as an expansion, or otherwise apart from the "core game".
In recent years the use of dataslates for new releases from GW has added to the core game rules. It's core products sold and marketed by the core game company.
And this is a blatant double standard. If one set of units published outside the codex is an expansion to the core game open to rejection then so are all of the other units published the same way. Arguing otherwise is a completely unfair way of handling it, and comes across as "I've got mine, you".
not everyone will have or choose to have access
Only in the same way that not everyone will have or choose to have access to the space marine codex. Do I get to ban that just because I don't have a copy?
I think this is the wrong attitude to have because its essentially a hostile reaction.
A hostile reaction is exactly the right attitude to have when you're dealing with a hostile action. Don't ban FW and you won't have people angry at you over your bad behavior.
If a tournament organiser banned Forge World then I'd point out that even GW's 40k grand tournament at Warhammer World allows Forge World - it's a part of the game.
Insectum7 wrote: Imo any TO is free to ban anything they want as long as it's consistent. Banning FW seems totally fine to me.
So it's ok to ban Tyranids as long as you're consistent and ban all Tyranid players?
A TO can ban anything he wants, obviously. But no one wants a ban on Tyranids, whereas quite a lot of people wants a ban on Forgeworld it seems. Probably because of Forgeworlds sad history of shoddy rulemaking.
Normally I would try to be understanding when it comes to this point but quite frankly I am sick of it.
I boils down to Stupidity, pure and simple pig headedness, FW is no worse rules wise that GW, and yet stupid people keep insisting it is, I call them stupid because no matter how many times you show them they are wrong and prove it, they continue to hold onto there misguided opinion, you can work with ignorance, but not stupidity.
Its exactly the same as banning all Space marines because Guilliman is OP.....
Insectum7 wrote: Imo any TO is free to ban anything they want as long as it's consistent. Banning FW seems totally fine to me.
So it's ok to ban Tyranids as long as you're consistent and ban all Tyranid players?
A TO can ban anything he wants, obviously. But no one wants a ban on Tyranids, whereas quite a lot of people wants a ban on Forgeworld it seems. Probably because of Forgeworlds sad history of shoddy rulemaking.
It's not just that, FW is models and rules that are non-standard. An expansion of the core codex releases and thus presents units and models that otherwise players might well not encounter in regular games at all clubs. Heck some groups might well not have any players with access or purchase of FW models.
People get really irate about this, but honestly if you dislike a tournament ruling then organise your own; many tournaments allow FW just as many also have house rules of their own.
Yes they are. Significantly so in my opinion. Regards
Eldar 7th
Tau 3rd. 7th
Chaos 3.5, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th
Nids 3rd
Space marines 4th, Guilliman 8th
thats just off the top of my head, what we have from FW, a few UNITS here and there, not whole Codex's (unless you consider book 7 HH....), but rather than single line comments, explain why you think they are?
Yes they are. Significantly so in my opinion. Regards
This is a point that has been argued far to many times on here. Countless examples have been given over and over about there being more units and rules that are considered "OP" or "Broken" from GW than FW, but people still try to argue it the other way around.
Yes, i, and most others will admit that because of the number of FW units out there for 40k, FW probably has a slightly higher % of potentially broken to no broken than GW, BUT, there are still more actual broken rules from GW by number.
The one thing GW has going for it though, is the fact that they have FAQd or Errata'd several of the issues that have exploded in terms of publicity, whereas, up until GW did the Guard FAQ, FW hadn't really kept up to date with it.
Currently, the only thing that is probably considered "broken" from FW is the Malefic Lord and MAYBE earthshaker batteries. I say maybe here because it's not so much the battery that is the problem, but more how they were being used.
Considering that the Malefic Lords are now getting nerfed to hell in Chapter Approved, the list is now extremely small of FW "broken" to GW "broken".
Insectum7 wrote: Imo any TO is free to ban anything they want as long as it's consistent. Banning FW seems totally fine to me.
So it's ok to ban Tyranids as long as you're consistent and ban all Tyranid players?
A TO can ban anything he wants, obviously. But no one wants a ban on Tyranids, whereas quite a lot of people wants a ban on Forgeworld it seems. Probably because of Forgeworlds sad history of shoddy rulemaking.
It's not just that, FW is models and rules that are non-standard.
Says who?
An expansion of the core codex releases
This right here is the problem. There's nothing in the GW ruleset that defines FW as some sort of optional expansion (the way it does with things like Planetstrike or Cities of Death), it's a convention that's been taken up with no actual rules support to stand on from GW. The 8E FW Index books certainly do not refer to themselves as expansions.
In fact, for some armies (Renegades and Heretics, Death Korps of Krieg, Elysians) FW books *are* their Codex.
FW is there to make stuff that's not profitable to make in plastic or that the main studio isn't interested in for one reason or another, not as some special super secret exclusive expansion club.
and thus presents units and models that otherwise players might well not encounter in regular games at all clubs. Heck some groups might well not have any players with access or purchase of FW models.
This question of access boggles my mind. The internet is a ubiquitous thing. People buy much of their stuff online (and half the playerbase pirates the rules for everything anyway...). Most people don't buy all their stuff at the FLGS for full retail value. Aside from not being in the brick and mortar, FW is just as available as anything else. There's almost 200 40k models/kits that are exclusive to GW's webstore, and nobody ever seems to apply this logic to ban that stuff as inaccessible...(like pretty much the entire Sisters of Battle army)
People get really irate about this, but honestly if you dislike a tournament ruling then organise your own;
Yes, because there's always a venue, time, and money available to do that simply to play with some plastic models that another event centered around playing with plastic models will not allow...
Yes they are. Significantly so in my opinion. Regards
There doesn't seem to be any evidence to back up that assertion.
Despite FW being allowed pretty much without restriction in most major 6E and 7E events (and most by the end of 5E), there's certainly no evidence of FW being a particularly big rules issue in any of those editions, FW stuff was never necessary to compete, it never consistently dominated top tables, you'd see FW stuff splash a time or two and that's it. In 8E, aside from Malefic Lords, there's not much from FW that appears to be a particularly big balance issue of note that's making huge waves and those are already about to be hammered into oblivion.
Insectum7 wrote: Imo any TO is free to ban anything they want as long as it's consistent. Banning FW seems totally fine to me.
So it's ok to ban Tyranids as long as you're consistent and ban all Tyranid players?
A TO can ban anything he wants, obviously. But no one wants a ban on Tyranids, whereas quite a lot of people wants a ban on Forgeworld it seems. Probably because of Forgeworlds sad history of shoddy rulemaking.
It's not just that, FW is models and rules that are non-standard. An expansion of the core codex releases and thus presents units and models that otherwise players might well not encounter in regular games at all clubs. Heck some groups might well not have any players with access or purchase of FW models.
People get really irate about this, but honestly if you dislike a tournament ruling then organise your own; many tournaments allow FW just as many also have house rules of their own.
The problem here though, is 95% (probably as much as 98%) of FW rules and models use standard GW rules and stats as a copy and paste across to different units. Only a small %age actually have rules that are drastically different to GW. Currently Guard and Tyranids could be argued to also be "non standard" now as well, due to their regimental/hive fleet bonuses are drastically different to those of the other armies - where generally the bonuses have been copies and pastes of other factions. Just because something is different, does not mean it is no longer "standard".
In terms of expansions, what about all the GW expansions throughout 7th, in terms of supplements? There were several codex priced books released with new rules, formations, bonuses etc that were different to those of the basic codex. Sure, they might all likely be found on the GW store shelf, but in some smaller stores that might not be the case - especially if it is a non GW store. So, in that sense, half the supplements in 7th should have been banned due to the possibility of people not knowing they exist. An example of this, is for a while I did not know about the Angels of Death supplement. My local GW store here is a load of so i don't use it. I only found out about it due to places like this and buying online very infrequently as i've been dipping in and out for a while before fully committing to coming back. I would have been well within my rights then, apparently, to refuse to play anyone using any book for rules that was not an original, basic, codex... But, that is dumb and would have only harmed me in learning more about the game and hobby. I would never have taken Raven Guard to Warhammer Fest if i hadn't found out about the supplement and learnt about it, and i only had that opportunity because i saw someone with it and talking about it.
If you ban anything GW related (and yes, FW is GW regardless of people claiming it as a "separate" company) then you only limit its exposure to the player base. If you do that, then you'll never be in a situation where you can gauge its affects on your local community. How do you know something is "out of reach" of a lot of people, if the people don't even know it exists or have had an opportunity to look at some of the models and books in person via someone bringing the stuff in to play?
They should just ban Tyranids from events, since, let's face it, the only ones who actually ever know what any Tyranid guns ever do are Tyranid players themselves.
Insectum7 wrote: Imo any TO is free to ban anything they want as long as it's consistent. Banning FW seems totally fine to me.
So it's ok to ban Tyranids as long as you're consistent and ban all Tyranid players?
Sure.
If they're going to put the time and effort into running a tournament, they're free to do what they want. You're free not to play it, too. Banning Tyranids would be much less understandable than banning FW though. But rules like "single codex, highlander, no LOW, no FW" that's all fair game. Each affects certain factions more than others, just like different missions or terrain can effect different factions. But it's all completely up to the TO, and if it hurts turnout, they have the responsibility of dealing with those consequences too.
I don't particularly have an issue with FW besides the obvious skew in faction emphasis.
Insectum7 wrote: Imo any TO is free to ban anything they want as long as it's consistent. Banning FW seems totally fine to me.
So it's ok to ban Tyranids as long as you're consistent and ban all Tyranid players?
Sure.
If they're going to put the time and effort into running a tournament, they're free to do what they want. You're free not to play it, too. Banning Tyranids would be much less understandable than banning FW though. But rules like "single codex, highlander, no LOW, no FW" that's all fair game. Each affects certain factions more than others, just like different missions or terrain can effect different factions. But it's all completely up to the TO, and if it hurts turnout, they have the responsibility of dealing with those consequences too.
I don't particularly have an issue with FW besides the obvious skew in faction emphasis.
Ah HA! THAT I can at least understand, FW makes a lot of Space Marine stuff, guard etc. but next to nothing for DE, hell, it wont take long for Primaris to have more than DE, which is a real shame, I would love to see some DE stuff from FW.
"These select few units are a problem! Let's ban the entire category!"
"But if conscripts are a problem, shouldn't you ban all Troops, by the same logic?"
Yep, its exactly the same logic, take it to its most absurd level and you ban an entire codex because commisars are OP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Also still waiting for you to back up your statement Pismakron.
Yes they are. Significantly so in my opinion. Regards
Eldar 7th
Tau 3rd. 7th
Chaos 3.5, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th
Nids 3rd
Space marines 4th, Guilliman 8th
thats just off the top of my head, what we have from FW, a few UNITS here and there, not whole Codex's (unless you consider book 7 HH....), but rather than single line comments, explain why you think they are?
Yeah, read the Imperial Armor Index:Xenos. There is hardly a single unit entry without editing or typing errors in it. It reads like a youtube comment section. My only regret was that I was dumb enough to buy that rush-job abortion of a rulebook. I guess I'll never learn when it comes to ForgeWorld manure.
Anyone claiming that the rulemaking quality from ForgeWorld is not well below GW standards clearly needs a full frontal lobotomy. With a shotgun. But it is still very uplifting that GW has decided to include FW entries into Chapter Approved. Maybe GW should just discontinue their stillborn resin-casting daughter company and roll the ForgeWorld stuff into the proper codices, and sell the ForgeWorld models from the GW website under the GW brand. Then this eternal discussion can finally be put to rest.
Yes they are. Significantly so in my opinion. Regards
Eldar 7th
Tau 3rd. 7th
Chaos 3.5, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th
Nids 3rd
Space marines 4th, Guilliman 8th
thats just off the top of my head, what we have from FW, a few UNITS here and there, not whole Codex's (unless you consider book 7 HH....), but rather than single line comments, explain why you think they are?
Yeah, read the Imperial Armor Index:Xenos. There is hardly a single unit entry without editing or typing errors in it. It reads like a youtube comment section. My only regret was that I was dumb enough to buy that rush-job abortion of a rulebook. I guess I'll never learn when it comes to ForgeWorld manure.
Anyone claiming that the rulemaking quality from ForgeWorld is not well below GW standards clearly needs a full frontal lobotomy. With a shotgun. But it is still very uplifting that GW has decided to include FW entries into Chapter Approved. Maybe GW should just discontinue their stillborn resin-casting daughter company and roll the ForgeWorld stuff into the proper codices, and sell the ForgeWorld models from the GW website under the GW brand. Then this eternal discussion can finally be put to rest.
Meanwhile, you have GW carrying over typos from index to codex.
"These select few units are a problem! Let's ban the entire category!"
"But if conscripts are a problem, shouldn't you ban all Troops, by the same logic?"
It's not necessarily about attempting to ban OP units. It's just a different framework to operate in.
Yes, but why? I mean, it being a "different framework" doesn't make it automatically good. Playing a game of 40k where all troops are banned is also a "different framework".
Just because it's different, doesn't make it good. In fact in this case it makes it far far worse.
TO can do whatever he wants. Don't like the rules - don't play in the tournament. All it does is change the competitive parameters. I would actually love if more tournments did this because despite what the forge world defenders say - the biggest culprits of imbalance are almost always forge world.
Xenomancers wrote: TO can do whatever he wants. Don't like the rules - don't play in the tournament. All it does is change the competitive parameters. I would actually love if more tournments did this because despite what the forge world defenders say - the biggest culprits of imbalance are almost always forge world.
since...when? They certainly weren't in previous editions. FW didn't dominate or lead the meta in any previous edition. In 8th, aside from Malefic Lords, they don't seem to be either...
If you're willing to buy 200 guardsmen you're a WAAC player, not an average one. An average player will buy the miniatures he/she prefers in order to collect an army that can work in games (maybe, sometimes they don't even care) but it's also good looking. Tournaments players are far from being the average ones, they're actually a minority.
FW hate also comes because not everyone likes the concept of centerpiece models, I can't stand them for example. I consider land raiders but also rhinos and dreads big models. Unfortunately even GW new releases are following this path, to provide huge vehicles/monters/superheroes to everyone, but this is a trend that was inherited by FW. Hence the FW hate.
FW prices are very very high for a standard player/collector. And we can have a 30% price cut on the GW catalogue here, while we can't have it on FW stuff.
To ban FW is wrong IMHO, but don't say that FW stuff is accessible to anyone, moneywise speaking, just because some WAAC player has collected an army with 200+ guardsmen.
So I take it my 300 guardsmen collection that I've been building since 5th edition where infantry armies have sucked for a good 4 years makes me a WAAC player then? Good to know I was psychic and predicted the meta shift 4 years ago so I could crush all the casuals.
"These select few units are a problem! Let's ban the entire category!"
"But if conscripts are a problem, shouldn't you ban all Troops, by the same logic?"
It's not necessarily about attempting to ban OP units. It's just a different framework to operate in.
Yes, but why? I mean, it being a "different framework" doesn't make it automatically good. Playing a game of 40k where all troops are banned is also a "different framework".
Just because it's different, doesn't make it good. In fact in this case it makes it far far worse.
Superheavies or FW? Either way 'better' or 'worse' is pretty subjective in this case. IE, just because it's different doesn't automatically make it worse either.
I understand you normally do a three superheavy army. I don't personally have a problem with that, but you gotta admit it forces a particular type of game.
Admittedly, 200 conscripts probably forces another type of game. But then 'highlander' would effect that, too.
If you're willing to buy 200 guardsmen you're a WAAC player, not an average one. An average player will buy the miniatures he/she prefers in order to collect an army that can work in games (maybe, sometimes they don't even care) but it's also good looking. Tournaments players are far from being the average ones, they're actually a minority.
FW hate also comes because not everyone likes the concept of centerpiece models, I can't stand them for example. I consider land raiders but also rhinos and dreads big models. Unfortunately even GW new releases are following this path, to provide huge vehicles/monters/superheroes to everyone, but this is a trend that was inherited by FW. Hence the FW hate.
FW prices are very very high for a standard player/collector. And we can have a 30% price cut on the GW catalogue here, while we can't have it on FW stuff.
To ban FW is wrong IMHO, but don't say that FW stuff is accessible to anyone, moneywise speaking, just because some WAAC player has collected an army with 200+ guardsmen.
So I take it my 300 guardsmen collection that I've been building since 5th edition where infantry armies have sucked for a good 4 years makes me a WAAC player then? Good to know I was psychic and predicted the meta shift 4 years ago so I could crush all the casuals.
To be fair, I think his intended meaning was "if you're the type of player to buy 200 guardsmen once conscripts are deemed OP". Same type that suddenly bought 30 Eldar Scatbikes in 7th for "fluffy reasons".
Those players exist. If you're not one of those I think you are exempt from his statement.
pismakron wrote:
Anyone claiming that the rulemaking quality from ForgeWorld is not well below GW standards clearly needs a full frontal lobotomy. With a shotgun.
Overread wrote: It's not just that, FW is models and rules that are non-standard.
But they aren't, according to GW. This "standard game" is something that is entirely an invention of certain players, it has nothing to do with the rules that GW publishes. FW rules are just as much a part of "standard" 40k as a codex tactical squad.
"These select few units are a problem! Let's ban the entire category!"
"But if conscripts are a problem, shouldn't you ban all Troops, by the same logic?"
It's not necessarily about attempting to ban OP units. It's just a different framework to operate in.
Yes, but why? I mean, it being a "different framework" doesn't make it automatically good. Playing a game of 40k where all troops are banned is also a "different framework".
Just because it's different, doesn't make it good. In fact in this case it makes it far far worse.
Superheavies or FW? Either way 'better' or 'worse' is pretty subjective in this case. IE, just because it's different doesn't automatically make it worse either.
I understand you normally do a three superheavy army. I don't personally have a problem with that, but you gotta admit it forces a particular type of game.
Admittedly, 200 conscripts probably forces another type of game. But then 'highlander' would effect that, too.
Both.
If you ban FW or superheavies, you're forcing a "competition" that doesn't include crucial components of the game, like playing baseball without a shortstop or football without an offensive line. Sure, you could do it, but what's the point? All it does is harm people that want to have fun within the rules published by the publisher.
As for forcing a certain type of game: Yes, yes it does. That's rather the point. It's a skew list, much like 200 conscripts is a skew list or all-reserve drop pod marines was a skew list in 5th.
Skew is fine, and imo makes competition even more challenging and fun.
Yes they are. Significantly so in my opinion. Regards
Eldar 7th
Tau 3rd. 7th
Chaos 3.5, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th
Nids 3rd
Space marines 4th, Guilliman 8th
thats just off the top of my head, what we have from FW, a few UNITS here and there, not whole Codex's (unless you consider book 7 HH....), but rather than single line comments, explain why you think they are?
Yeah, read the Imperial Armor Index:Xenos. There is hardly a single unit entry without editing or typing errors in it. It reads like a youtube comment section. My only regret was that I was dumb enough to buy that rush-job abortion of a rulebook. I guess I'll never learn when it comes to ForgeWorld manure.
Anyone claiming that the rulemaking quality from ForgeWorld is not well below GW standards clearly needs a full frontal lobotomy. With a shotgun. But it is still very uplifting that GW has decided to include FW entries into Chapter Approved. Maybe GW should just discontinue their stillborn resin-casting daughter company and roll the ForgeWorld stuff into the proper codices, and sell the ForgeWorld models from the GW website under the GW brand. Then this eternal discussion can finally be put to rest.
That's an impressive amount of colorful language for plastic toy soldiers, I'm left wondering what sort of rustling was involved with those jimmies.
Lets take it from the top.
Yes, FW's editing is bad. So is GW's, routinely. FW's can arguably be worse, and that's fair to knock them on, but lets not make it out like it's a horrific crime against mankind either. Looking at tournament results, there's also zero evidence from any of the past three editions or the current one that they've been a major, consistent balance offender, particularly for anything more than a couple of months at a time (such as with Malefic Lords that usually gets nipped fairly quickly by FW, far faster than mainline GW has done in the past. FW was also the only ones to do public playtesting of new units in 5E and 6E until GW corporate stopped that and pulled all social media down for a while).
FW is not a "stillborn resin-casting daughter company", they're not even a separate company. Forgeworld is the part of Games Workshop that does stuff that isn't profitable to do in plastic, or that doesn't fit into the primary marketing plan, or that the main studio just can't find the time for. All the FW people work at the same place as everyone else at GW. It's just a different brand, all part of the same company.
GW has decided they don't want to incorporate FW stuff into their primary supply chain and distribution network. That's up to GW corporate to change if they so choose. It was GW corporate that pulled FW order availability from GW stores and battle bunkers (when they still existed), not FW.
I have it on good information (friend of a friend, so perhaps not so good) that the Forge World team were given hardly any time at all to write their 8th Edition rules and they were not playtested by Games Workshop at all before release.
With that in mind, I'm impressed they're as good as they are. Truly, there are some units (especially compared with the Index lists) that are downright balanced - e.g. Macharius tanks, Malcadors, Stormhammers, Thunderbolts, Marauder planes - just a few examples from the Imperial Armour I am most familiar with.
Now that the codex has arrived, the problem isn't even that the units in question are too good - essentially, the entirety of Codex: IG has been buffed so much that the FW stuff is far far less good.
And of course implicit in this talk of moving FW units/models into the codices and GW retail stores is a concession that it's about nitpicking irrelevant details instead of any substantial balance or quality of play issues. If simply changing what name is on the cover of the book would satisfy you then you don't have a valid point.
Unit1126PLL wrote: I have it on good information (friend of a friend, so perhaps not so good) that the Forge World team were given hardly any time at all to write their 8th Edition rules and they were not playtested by Games Workshop at all before release.
With that in mind, I'm impressed they're as good as they are. Truly, there are some units (especially compared with the Index lists) that are downright balanced - e.g. Macharius tanks, Malcadors, Stormhammers, Thunderbolts, Marauder planes - just a few examples from the Imperial Armour I am most familiar with.
Now that the codex has arrived, the problem isn't even that the units in question are too good - essentially, the entirety of Codex: IG has been buffed so much that the FW stuff is far far less good.
Half of those aren't even good, the basic Macharius sports identical firepower to an LRBT (two shot battlecannon woooo), it's just twice as much with ten extra HP and no ability to receive orders and harder to benefit from Doctrines
Unit1126PLL wrote: I have it on good information (friend of a friend, so perhaps not so good) that the Forge World team were given hardly any time at all to write their 8th Edition rules and they were not playtested by Games Workshop at all before release.
With that in mind, I'm impressed they're as good as they are. Truly, there are some units (especially compared with the Index lists) that are downright balanced - e.g. Macharius tanks, Malcadors, Stormhammers, Thunderbolts, Marauder planes - just a few examples from the Imperial Armour I am most familiar with.
Now that the codex has arrived, the problem isn't even that the units in question are too good - essentially, the entirety of Codex: IG has been buffed so much that the FW stuff is far far less good.
Half of those aren't even good, the basic Macharius sports identical firepower to an LRBT (two shot battlecannon woooo), it's just twice as much with ten extra HP and no ability to receive orders and harder to benefit from Doctrines
That's what I mean by "before the codex." After the codex dropped, yeah. LOL.
"These select few units are a problem! Let's ban the entire category!"
"But if conscripts are a problem, shouldn't you ban all Troops, by the same logic?"
It's not necessarily about attempting to ban OP units. It's just a different framework to operate in.
Yes, but why? I mean, it being a "different framework" doesn't make it automatically good. Playing a game of 40k where all troops are banned is also a "different framework".
Just because it's different, doesn't make it good. In fact in this case it makes it far far worse.
Superheavies or FW? Either way 'better' or 'worse' is pretty subjective in this case. IE, just because it's different doesn't automatically make it worse either.
I understand you normally do a three superheavy army. I don't personally have a problem with that, but you gotta admit it forces a particular type of game.
Admittedly, 200 conscripts probably forces another type of game. But then 'highlander' would effect that, too.
Both.
If you ban FW or superheavies, you're forcing a "competition" that doesn't include crucial components of the game, like playing baseball without a shortstop or football without an offensive line. Sure, you could do it, but what's the point? All it does is harm people that want to have fun within the rules published by the publisher.
As for forcing a certain type of game: Yes, yes it does. That's rather the point. It's a skew list, much like 200 conscripts is a skew list or all-reserve drop pod marines was a skew list in 5th.
Skew is fine, and imo makes competition even more challenging and fun.
Imo you're taking this too harshly. "All it does is harm people that want to have fun..." can be the opinion of narrative players who come up against WAAC types too. Tournaments already ban things like superheavies over a certain power value, and run their own mission types. Terrain is a huge issue that can skew results or faction favorability. No FW or no LOW is just a line drawn in a different place and to try and encourage different results, and it's completely valid.
Skew is fine, and obviously a part of entering any tournament. But attempting to curttail that skew, or types of skew is also perfectly acceptable. There's nothing inherently wrong with it.
As for sports analogies, my understanding is that the rules for sports change all the time. Likewise the 'house rules' for home sports, or minor league sports, or college sports, they can all have variations too in order to adapt to their needs. The whole reason it evolves is to produce different results.
2) Yeah, running their own mission types is something I actually kind of have issue with; I tabled an opponent at NOVA and lost on objectives - I'd've been 5/3 otherwise, but Tabling was never a mission victory condition. So, that's neat.
3) No FW or no LOW doesn't encourage different results. The lists that have been winning have no LOW and no FW, save a few, and the ones that do have FW (malefic lords) will easily find something else to do (e.g. a Tzeench Daemon herald).
4) Yes there is? Because it doesn't accomplish anything except keeping players with armies they love from participating? The winning lists aren't skew lists.
5) The type of changes that sports leagues go through are tiny. To use the same analogy: banning FW or LOW is like banning shortstops in baseball. The types of changes that baseball leagues actually do is more like +/- 5pts on a given model. It's a matter of scale.
2) Yeah, running their own mission types is something I actually kind of have issue with; I tabled an opponent at NOVA and lost on objectives - I'd've been 5/3 otherwise, but Tabling was never a mission victory condition. So, that's neat.
3) No FW or no LOW doesn't encourage different results. The lists that have been winning have no LOW and no FW, save a few, and the ones that do have FW (malefic lords) will easily find something else to do (e.g. a Tzeench Daemon herald).
4) Yes there is? Because it doesn't accomplish anything except keeping players with armies they love from participating? The winning lists aren't skew lists.
5) The type of changes that sports leagues go through are tiny. To use the same analogy: banning FW or LOW is like banning shortstops in baseball. The types of changes that baseball leagues actually do is more like +/- 5pts on a given model. It's a matter of scale.
1) I think you missed the point. Everyone has their own type of fun. Its the right of the TO to encourage certain types of fun if they want to.
2) agree
3) 'results' in this case does not mean final placement in a given tournament, but rather types of play within a tournament
4) You're going to have to do better. One example of a skew list winning is the skew list of spamming Stormravens in early 8th edition. Even if the skew lists are not winning, they still have a right to limit what units are taken to encourage certain types of play. If they want to run an all ingantry tournament, they can, and there's nothing wrong with that either.
5) scale of change doesn't matter. The principle is the same.
Peregrine wrote: And of course implicit in this talk of moving FW units/models into the codices and GW retail stores is a concession that it's about nitpicking irrelevant details instead of any substantial balance or quality of play issues. If simply changing what name is on the cover of the book would satisfy you then you don't have a valid point.
This is a very good point. Changing the name in this case make everything A-okay, and that's stupid.
2) Yeah, running their own mission types is something I actually kind of have issue with; I tabled an opponent at NOVA and lost on objectives - I'd've been 5/3 otherwise, but Tabling was never a mission victory condition. So, that's neat.
3) No FW or no LOW doesn't encourage different results. The lists that have been winning have no LOW and no FW, save a few, and the ones that do have FW (malefic lords) will easily find something else to do (e.g. a Tzeench Daemon herald).
4) Yes there is? Because it doesn't accomplish anything except keeping players with armies they love from participating? The winning lists aren't skew lists.
5) The type of changes that sports leagues go through are tiny. To use the same analogy: banning FW or LOW is like banning shortstops in baseball. The types of changes that baseball leagues actually do is more like +/- 5pts on a given model. It's a matter of scale.
#3 this is the my entire point. FW isn't making headlines in tournament play so why ban it?
Insectum7 wrote: Imo any TO is free to ban anything they want as long as it's consistent. Banning FW seems totally fine to me.
So it's ok to ban Tyranids as long as you're consistent and ban all Tyranid players?
A TO can ban anything he wants, obviously. But no one wants a ban on Tyranids, whereas quite a lot of people wants a ban on Forgeworld it seems. Probably because of Forgeworlds sad history of shoddy rulemaking.
If shoddy rulemaking is reason for ban all GW codexes should be banned.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Overread wrote: It's not just that, FW is models and rules that are non-standard. An expansion of the core codex releases and thus presents units and models that otherwise players might well not encounter in regular games at all clubs. Heck some groups might well not have any players with access or purchase of FW models.
People get really irate about this, but honestly if you dislike a tournament ruling then organise your own; many tournaments allow FW just as many also have house rules of their own.
Who doesn't have access to FW models and has access to GW? Somebody in backwater village middle of Africann forest?
How many worlds FW DOESN'T deliver to? Not many. North Korea is probably one of the few but frankly I suspect GW models aren't exactly common there either.
Yes they are. Significantly so in my opinion. Regards
Eldar 7th
Tau 3rd. 7th
Chaos 3.5, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th
Nids 3rd
Space marines 4th, Guilliman 8th
thats just off the top of my head, what we have from FW, a few UNITS here and there, not whole Codex's (unless you consider book 7 HH....), but rather than single line comments, explain why you think they are?
Ork 7th ed, 8th ed(yes being crappy useless piece of junk is also sign of bad rules).
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Xenomancers wrote: TO can do whatever he wants. Don't like the rules - don't play in the tournament. All it does is change the competitive parameters. I would actually love if more tournments did this because despite what the forge world defenders say - the biggest culprits of imbalance are almost always forge world.
Yes they are. Significantly so in my opinion. Regards
Eldar 7th
Tau 3rd. 7th
Chaos 3.5, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th
Nids 3rd
Space marines 4th, Guilliman 8th
thats just off the top of my head, what we have from FW, a few UNITS here and there, not whole Codex's (unless you consider book 7 HH....), but rather than single line comments, explain why you think they are?
Yeah, read the Imperial Armor Index:Xenos. There is hardly a single unit entry without editing or typing errors in it. It reads like a youtube comment section. My only regret was that I was dumb enough to buy that rush-job abortion of a rulebook. I guess I'll never learn when it comes to ForgeWorld manure.
Anyone claiming that the rulemaking quality from ForgeWorld is not well below GW standards clearly needs a full frontal lobotomy. With a shotgun. But it is still very uplifting that GW has decided to include FW entries into Chapter Approved. Maybe GW should just discontinue their stillborn resin-casting daughter company and roll the ForgeWorld stuff into the proper codices, and sell the ForgeWorld models from the GW website under the GW brand. Then this eternal discussion can finally be put to rest.
To your first point, you have buyers regret, thats fine, you want a quality product mistake free.
"Anyone claiming that the rulemaking quality from ForgeWorld is not well below GW standards clearly needs a full frontal lobotomy."
That is demonstrably untrue, we have a decade of FW to draw from to show this to be false, GW is not taking over the rules writing in CA, they are just changing the cost of several units, there is nothing to indicate that thay have brought FW units into the main studio. FW is not a seperate company, yet again the irrational anti FW crown needs to get this through there heads, and still born... hardly its massively popular, as to bringing it into the main site, its already there, there is a link for FW on the main site, under the GW brand...
If you're willing to buy 200 guardsmen you're a WAAC player, not an average one. An average player will buy the miniatures he/she prefers in order to collect an army that can work in games (maybe, sometimes they don't even care) but it's also good looking. Tournaments players are far from being the average ones, they're actually a minority.
FW hate also comes because not everyone likes the concept of centerpiece models, I can't stand them for example. I consider land raiders but also rhinos and dreads big models. Unfortunately even GW new releases are following this path, to provide huge vehicles/monters/superheroes to everyone, but this is a trend that was inherited by FW. Hence the FW hate.
FW prices are very very high for a standard player/collector. And we can have a 30% price cut on the GW catalogue here, while we can't have it on FW stuff.
To ban FW is wrong IMHO, but don't say that FW stuff is accessible to anyone, moneywise speaking, just because some WAAC player has collected an army with 200+ guardsmen.
So I take it my 300 guardsmen collection that I've been building since 5th edition where infantry armies have sucked for a good 4 years makes me a WAAC player then? Good to know I was psychic and predicted the meta shift 4 years ago so I could crush all the casuals.
I clearly meant to say that buying 200 guardsmen in a single time or in a short period makes that player a WAAC one. The comparison was between a super expensive single (or a few) product sold by FW and tons of cheaper boxes sold by GW. Of course 10+ years of collecting miniatures doesn't make the comparison fair.
Oh dear, this old chestnut has raised its ugly head again.
IMHO - if you are playing in a tournament you are participating in order to win. End of story. My view is that you use any GW and FW ruleset available to make the most obnoxious legal list possible. If you table little Jimmy on turn one and he runs off crying all the better!
In a local/flgs environment it is just polite to give people a heads-up you are using FW and/or a LoW.
NoiseMarine with Tinnitus wrote: In a local/flgs environment it is just polite to give people a heads-up you are using FW and/or a LoW.
Not really. This expectation needs to die, it isn't 3rd edition anymore. FW rules and LoW are part of the standard game and you should expect the possibility of them every time you play. If you don't have a TAC list and aren't prepared to deal with those threats then it's your fault for poor list building, your opponent doesn't owe you advance warning so you can tailor your list to beat them.
NoiseMarine with Tinnitus wrote: In a local/flgs environment it is just polite to give people a heads-up you are using FW and/or a LoW.
Not really. This expectation needs to die, it isn't 3rd edition anymore. FW rules and LoW are part of the standard game and you should expect the possibility of them every time you play. If you don't have a TAC list and aren't prepared to deal with those threats then it's your fault for poor list building, your opponent doesn't owe you advance warning so you can tailor your list to beat them.
I don't disagree as such, I just said it was polite - not mandatory.
If you want to rock up unannounced and drop Y'Vhara and Tau'Nar (however you spell them) spam and curbstomp opponents that is your perogative.
Personally, I prefer games where I am chalenged so happy to give a heads-up so people can optomise their list if so inclined.
There's really very little difference when being impolite is a bad thing and gets you shunned from the community. Being polite is the basic standard that everyone is expected to live up to. Telling your opponent what you're about to bring so they can tailor against it is an exceptional thing that goes way beyond mere politeness, and it should not be treated the same way.
Superheavies where a thing that should be noted before a game in 7th because many armies, without list-tailoring, couldn't literally do anything agaisn't them.
In 8th thats isn't the case anymore. A TAC list or a list with a good amount of Anti-Tank can deal with every kind of super heavy just like it can deal with a bunch of Leman Russes or Land Raiders.
I am of the mindset that things like superheavies don't belong in the "normal" game of 40k, they belong in Apocalypse (there was a reason they were never ported over from Epic for a long time; they didn't fit the scale of 40k). However that brought up the drawback of, since Apocalpse games were rare, it was rare to be able to field them.
That's not an issue with Forgeworld, though, that's an issue with GW losing sight of the scale of 40k and refusing to properly address it to scale up (see how Mantic did with Warpath; there is a "Firefight" which is for smaller size individual model movement combat and then the larger game uses movement trays and more abstracted rules for big fights). Forgeworld does have some dubious rules and tend to err on the side of being too strong/too cheap, but GW also has their share of dubious rules (GW seems to err more on the side of not strong enough/too expensive though).
IMHO - if you are playing in a tournament you are participating in order to win. End of story. My view is that you use any GW and FW ruleset available to make the most obnoxious legal list possible. If you table little Jimmy on turn one and he runs off crying all the better!
In a local/flgs environment it is just polite to give people a heads-up you are using FW and/or a LoW.
I agree with this guy. In addition, for whatever army you are playing, buy and bring the fething book. Digital is fine, if available. Even in a friendly game, I might want to read about stuff I am not familiar with for myself.
Excuse me while I pick up my sides. Apart from some truly outline units (which in all honesty there are considered about <10?) FW is as good as our in most cases worse than GW stuff.
Take my Autocannon chimera turrets. In a competitive sense, they are worse than the heavy bolter. But look baller as feth. But I've already had TWO members of my FLGS drop hints that I wouldn't get many games in if I use them. LOLWUT?
Those guys are considered idiots though (by the store owner himself!) Lots of the 40k crowd use FW, it's a part of it now and banning it is simply sour grapes and jealousy.
I can't wait to show them my Armageddon pattern Medusa arty and thunderbolt fighters. They mat have an aneurysm!
Wayniac wrote: I am of the mindset that things like superheavies don't belong in the "normal" game of 40k, they belong in Apocalypse (there was a reason they were never ported over from Epic for a long time; they didn't fit the scale of 40k). However that brought up the drawback of, since Apocalpse games were rare, it was rare to be able to field them.
That's not an issue with Forgeworld, though, that's an issue with GW losing sight of the scale of 40k and refusing to properly address it to scale up (see how Mantic did with Warpath; there is a "Firefight" which is for smaller size individual model movement combat and then the larger game uses movement trays and more abstracted rules for big fights). Forgeworld does have some dubious rules and tend to err on the side of being too strong/too cheap, but GW also has their share of dubious rules (GW seems to err more on the side of not strong enough/too expensive though).
Not ported over from epic for a long time?
Baneblades could be played in 2nd, 3rd, 4th, Baneblade companies in 5th, back to single tanks in 6th, and baneblade companies in 7th and 8th...
Baneblades could be played in 2nd, 3rd, 4th, Baneblade companies in 5th, back to single tanks in 6th, and baneblade companies in 7th and 8th...
Yeah, let's be honest here, if big models weren't "ported over from Epic" for a long time it's only because GW's model-making technology didn't allow larger kits to be practical. Once they started doing big kits, especially in plastic, they were put into the standard game fairly quickly.
After reading all this and speaking to the TO it definitely seems like sour grapes and jealousy. He seems to want to make an attempted problem unit free tournament. Which would include both GW and FW stuff. Hard ban on FW and soft on some GW stuff.
chimeara wrote: After reading all this and speaking to the TO it definitely seems like sour grapes and jealousy. He seems to want to make an attempted problem unit free tournament. Which would include both GW and FW stuff. Hard ban on FW and soft on some GW stuff.
Ugh... I really hate it when TO's do that. Yeah, the game has problems, but random Joe Blow TO isn't going to have a better idea on how to balance the game himself then GW does.
Wayniac wrote: Forgeworld does have some dubious rules and tend to err on the side of being too strong/too cheap, but GW also has their share of dubious rules (GW seems to err more on the side of not strong enough/too expensive though).
Compared to gw they err on side of weak units. Generally what they sell gw codex does it better
I can't believe this still happens in 8th. Chapter Approved is coming out Dec. 2 and has balance changes for both GW and Forgeworld. Forgeworld is obviously part of the standard line up.
This isn't 5th anymore. Expect Imperial Knight armies and Malefic Lord's (except maybe not after the points).
Dr. Mills wrote:Wha-? FW is considered OP nowadays?
Excuse me while I pick up my sides. Apart from some truly outline units (which in all honesty there are considered about <10?) FW is as good as our in most cases worse than GW stuff.
Take my Autocannon chimera turrets. In a competitive sense, they are worse than the heavy bolter. But look baller as feth. But I've already had TWO members of my FLGS drop hints that I wouldn't get many games in if I use them. LOLWUT?
Those guys are considered idiots though (by the store owner himself!) Lots of the 40k crowd use FW, it's a part of it now and banning it is simply sour grapes and jealousy.
I can't wait to show them my Armageddon pattern Medusa arty and thunderbolt fighters. They mat have an aneurysm!
I envy your autocannon turret! Forgeworld has stopped producing them (and the Aquila lander!).
There's really very little difference when being impolite is a bad thing and gets you shunned from the community. Being polite is the basic standard that everyone is expected to live up to. Telling your opponent what you're about to bring so they can tailor against it is an exceptional thing that goes way beyond mere politeness, and it should not be treated the same way.
Again, not that I disagree as such but when you get the likes of a vehicle/walker heavy list e.g. Astra or Iron Hands vs a list very light on anti-vehicle it is not much fun. Sure, in 8th anyone can chip away wounds but spending an entire game trying to take down one, let's say a Landraider, really is not fun in my books.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Sorry, to address OP.
Renegades & Heretics, love that army and it is FW. Permissible in tournaments? Better be as it is one of the weaker factions available. Bit of a one trick pony at the moment as the minute someone says "I play R&H" you know your are going to be facing Malefic Lord/Marauder spam.
Its FW and it is way way off being overpowered - if anyone has a problem with that then I despair. I am assuming overpowerrd is what OP was alluding to; TL;DR.
Also, I get the feeling Chapter Approved will put the nail in the coffin of Malefic Lord shenanigans anyhoo.
FWIW the Chapter Approved points leaks show in many cases massive price hikes to forgeworld things. So maybe GW thinks FW doesn't belong in normal games after all
Wayniac wrote: FWIW the Chapter Approved points leaks show in many cases massive price hikes to forgeworld things. So maybe GW thinks FW doesn't belong in normal games after all
By this logic, maybe they don't want Assault Cannon Razorbacks in the game either...
You're extrapolating something that doesn't exist based on your own biases.
If they didn't think FW belonged in normal games, they'd have straight up said so.
FW stuff belongs in normal games, there's no reason to expect otherwise. But Chapter Approved has done a good job of ensuring that they have no place in them. Or any games. Because good god, they went way off the deep end this time.
Wayniac wrote: Forgeworld does have some dubious rules and tend to err on the side of being too strong/too cheap, but GW also has their share of dubious rules (GW seems to err more on the side of not strong enough/too expensive though).
I have to assume you haven't actually read the FW indexes because I do not see how someone who has could possibly form that opinion.
The vast majority of FW units are under powered, over priced or both.
On the occasions when they let something OP through they generally nerf it into oblivion at it's next update which seems to be exactly what's happening with CA.
You know, why is that? I mean, that was the case with FW stuff back in 3e/4e - overpriced, underpowered, or (usually) both.
It's the same company, so not like there's some kind of real business reason to shoot FW in the foot like that. Not to mention their kits look *boss* so more of them on more tables is to be considered a good thing.
Infantryman wrote: You know, why is that? I mean, that was the case with FW stuff back in 3e/4e - overpriced, underpowered, or (usually) both.
It's the same company, so not like there's some kind of real business reason to shoot FW in the foot like that. Not to mention their kits look *boss* so more of them on more tables is to be considered a good thing.
M.
Well, maybe if FW is known to be universally not as good, maybe they can make it more mainstream? I mean if you can mathematically prove that literally every single Forgeworld model in the FW catalog is inferior to a base 40k equivalent I guess you could finally put the "FW is OP" argument to bed once and for all. I mean it's not like GW would try to intentionally kill a branch of their own company...
It's also a pretty commonly heard thing that some GW stores specifically forbid FW because it's not sold in the store. This means that if someone walked in and said "that's a cool model, I want one of those" he has to say "well, you actually have to order that online, we don't carry that here." That's about the only reason I could think of to kill FW intentionally, but that would be financial suicide when FW is a license to print money right now with Horus Heresy, provided there's not some sort of financial trouble in the background I'm not aware of.
That being said not every single unit for FW was nerfed. I noticed the Leman Annihilator got about a 10pt discount, if my battlescribe files before the leak were correct. It's only about 170pts now whereas it used to be a flat 180, if you had both versions outfitted with a heavy bolter.
I remember back in 5th there was a rumor going around for a long time that GW was going to put a FW distributor or manufacturer in Memphis that never materialized. The theory was that it was a plan to make FW more mainstream so that they could actually build up enough stock to sell things in stores like regular GW kits. Since that's one of the main complaints about FW, I wonder if that had happened if people would still be as adamantly against FW as they are today.
They don't neccessarily want to kill fw but 100 pounds on fw models gives less profit than 100 pounds on gw models so guess which they want to sell more...
Infantryman wrote: You know, why is that? I mean, that was the case with FW stuff back in 3e/4e - overpriced, underpowered, or (usually) both.
It's the same company, so not like there's some kind of real business reason to shoot FW in the foot like that. Not to mention their kits look *boss* so more of them on more tables is to be considered a good thing.
M.
I know that GW and FW are technically the same company, but for all intents and purposes they are completely different entities that does not even share the same planet. You know that Forgeworld models are completely banned at many official GW stores?
Infantryman wrote: You know, why is that? I mean, that was the case with FW stuff back in 3e/4e - overpriced, underpowered, or (usually) both.
It's the same company, so not like there's some kind of real business reason to shoot FW in the foot like that. Not to mention their kits look *boss* so more of them on more tables is to be considered a good thing.
M.
It'll be the FW team making the adjustment. Nerfing the hell out of stuff they accidentally made good is business as usual for them.
pismakron wrote: You know that Forgeworld models are completely banned at many official GW stores?
That doesn't mean much. GW's own stores have all kinds of stupid rules for in-store gaming, and those rules are set by the local employee, not by GW policy. In terms of how "official" a rule is a local employee's opinion is no more valid a statement from GW than your opinion or mine.
Infantryman wrote: You know, why is that? I mean, that was the case with FW stuff back in 3e/4e - overpriced, underpowered, or (usually) both.
It's the same company, so not like there's some kind of real business reason to shoot FW in the foot like that. Not to mention their kits look *boss* so more of them on more tables is to be considered a good thing.
M.
I know that GW and FW are technically the same company, but for all intents and purposes they are completely different entities that does not even share the same planet.
Aside from sharing the same offices...yes there's disconnect, but that's not generally FW's fault.
You know that Forgeworld models are completely banned at many official GW stores?
This is because individual store managers make that decision because Forgeworld sales do not contribute to their sales quotas, it has nothing to do with any game rules or officialdom.
If I was a newbie TO I would be wary of forgeworld.
Yes it is all about players having a good time. Yes you can be curbstomped by RG and Razorbacks and that isn't great.
But there is something bitter (the pay to win element perhaps) if your opponent pulls out a £150 model they have never seen before and proceeds to wipe the floor with them. Much of Forgeworld is bad. Even more that isnt optimal. There are a few things however which are just not balanced. Its very easy to get skewed games with the big expensive stuff.
At a big established Grand Tournament thats fine. Its not the same for a small store tourney.
Tyel wrote: But there is something bitter (the pay to win element perhaps) if your opponent pulls out a £150 model they have never seen before and proceeds to wipe the floor with them.
Well then, I think we're also going to have a long ban list of codex units. Why should I have to tolerate my opponent bringing a Tyranid army that I've never seen and crushing me with it? Ban everything that isn't my own army so that I never have to be surprised by anything. And ban everything except $100 salvage armies from ebay, because anyone spending more than the absolute minimum should not gain any benefit from it.
pismakron wrote: You know that Forgeworld models are completely banned at many official GW stores?
That doesn't mean much. GW's own stores have all kinds of stupid rules for in-store gaming, and those rules are set by the local employee, not by GW policy. In terms of how "official" a rule is a local employee's opinion is no more valid a statement from GW than your opinion or mine.
It means that GW treats Forge World units as second class units that it is reasonable to exclude from the game. Which kind of goes a long with FWs second class rulebooks.
Why would people consider FW as officially part of the game, when GW does not do so consistently?
pismakron wrote: It means that GW treats Forge World units as second class units that it is reasonable to exclude from the game. Which kind of goes a long with FWs second class rulebooks.
Why would people consider FW as officially part of the game, when GW does not do so consistently?
It means no such thing. Again, GW store employees have zero power to speak on behalf of GW or determine GW policy. Running a cash register in a GW store does not make an employee's position on FW units any more "official" than yours or mine. The fact that a GW retail employee does or does not allow certain units is irrelevant, that policy was set by the individual employee, not by GW.
pismakron wrote: It means that GW treats Forge World units as second class units that it is reasonable to exclude from the game. Which kind of goes a long with FWs second class rulebooks.
Why would people consider FW as officially part of the game, when GW does not do so consistently?
It means no such thing. Again, GW store employees have zero power to speak on behalf of GW or determine GW policy. Running a cash register in a GW store does not make an employee's position on FW units any more "official" than yours or mine. The fact that a GW retail employee does or does not allow certain units is irrelevant, that policy was set by the individual employee, not by GW.
I just disagree with that. I think the actions of GW employees says more about GW policy than the opinion of random people on the internet. And as long as GW acts as if FW are at best semi-officially part of the game, then I think the widespread disdain for Forgeworld units will continue.
And it is not inherently so. All Ork flyers were originally FW units, that has now been included in the game proper, with codex entries and shelf space in GW stores. And these things matter. I have never met anybody that disapproved of Ork flyers, not TOs nor players.
pismakron wrote: I think the actions of GW employees says more about GW policy than the opinion of random people on the internet.
And you are wrong. The employees in question have zero authority to speak on behalf of GW, on any subject. Any FW bans they have are their own invention, not something GW has endorsed or requested. Just like any time you ask a GW store employee a rules question the answer you get is no more official than asking your friend. Just like anything they tell you about upcoming releases is nothing more than the rumors they read on various third-party sites.
And as long as GW acts as if FW are at best semi-officially part of the game, then I think the widespread disdain for Forgeworld units will continue.
GW does not act this way. Certain players act this way. There is a huge difference between the two.
Wayniac wrote: FWIW the Chapter Approved points leaks show in many cases massive price hikes to forgeworld things. So maybe GW thinks FW doesn't belong in normal games after all
By this logic, maybe they don't want Assault Cannon Razorbacks in the game either...
Razorbacks with twin assault cannons are regular GW units included in the SM codex. The model is FW, but the rules are GW. It can be converted/kit bashed quite easily, I've done my 3 razorbacks with assault cannons taken from the dreads bitz. If you ask some spared bitz from imperium players or find good deals on sites that sell bitz (like I did) you may have your twin assault cannons without buying from FW and usually saving money.
Checking out the CA points changes, everything I use either got cheaper or unchanged.... meanwhile a bunch of stuff in chaos (that's the only FW book I have) got 100+ points increase. I wonder how the TO will deal with it.
On the topic of GW's stance on FW, I am connected with the guy running the London GT and his attempts at banning or even changing up FW units was so vehemently opposed by GW that they threatened to withdraw their support for and endorsement of the GT.
That says far more about whether or not FW is part of the game than some store manager's opinon.
Unit1126PLL wrote: On the topic of GW's stance on FW, I am connected with the guy running the London GT and his attempts at banning or even changing up FW units was so vehemently opposed by GW that they threatened to withdraw their support for and endorsement of the GT.
That says far more about whether or not FW is part of the game than some store manager's opinon.
Wow, I didn't know that. Perhaps I should get ahold of GW......
Unit1126PLL wrote: On the topic of GW's stance on FW, I am connected with the guy running the London GT and his attempts at banning or even changing up FW units was so vehemently opposed by GW that they threatened to withdraw their support for and endorsement of the GT.
That says far more about whether or not FW is part of the game than some store manager's opinon.
Wow, I didn't know that. Perhaps I should get ahold of GW......
Does your store have a FW or GW booth showing up? Is your store being advertised on the FB page? I think that is what they meant by "endorsement"
I know that GW and FW are technically the same company, but for all intents and purposes they are completely different entities that does not even share the same planet.
Yeah, nah.
pismakron wrote:
You know that Forgeworld models are completely banned at many official GW stores?
I do not care. There isn't even a GW store in my state that I'm aware of. After they closed the HQ in Glen Burnie, the mall shop in Arundel Mills, and stopped doing Games Day in Baltimore I stopped paying attention to them. It's been probably nearly 15 years since I've been in one.
Unit1126PLL wrote: On the topic of GW's stance on FW, I am connected with the guy running the London GT and his attempts at banning or even changing up FW units was so vehemently opposed by GW that they threatened to withdraw their support for and endorsement of the GT.
That says far more about whether or not FW is part of the game than some store manager's opinon.
Wow, I didn't know that. Perhaps I should get ahold of GW......
Does your store have a FW or GW booth showing up? Is your store being advertised on the FB page? I think that is what they meant by "endorsement"
I'll look into that. The store has it's own website and they advertise it on there plus the tournament has it's own site. Not sure how much is on FB, the event isn't until Feb.
off. £500+ for a plastic army?!? Are you insane??"... But, as that's not the case, in some ways, the price doesn't hurt as much. Personally, i think, if 
