dadx6 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Oh hell that's just two Dev squads with Miltimeltas at short range. Not even using rerolls for that.

4 Tactical Squads with Plasma, Combi-Plasma, Multimelta and rerolls is:
0.777×0.4×0.333×(28×2)+(8
×0.777×0.777×0.5×2)+(4×2
×0.777×0.777×0.5×4.5) = 21.5w.

Edit: 27.5 if I give them Melta/Combi melta instead of the Plas and they're in short range.

This comment is ludicrous. The OP is talking about a 1000 point game. Your response is "oh, well, 800 points of tactical marines with 200 points of support can statistically defeat Magnus if they start within 12 inches and he doesn't move or attack first and there are no penalties and Magnus doesn't have any save buffs or re-rolls."

And yet you toss it off as if this means dealing with Magnus is easy.

800 points of Tac squads is in no way ideal, it's just possible to take out Magnus using a unit that so many people seem to hate. My first sentence, you may note, is about how two Dev squads without rerolls can kill Magnus. That means a single Dev squad can bracket him, especially if you're buffing them with rerolls or whatever.

The technique for big-nasties that I like to use is to run the numbers for the ideal situation. Then work backwards from there to find something practical. Seeing that a Devastator squad can bracket him is a good starting point. Seeing that my basic troops can also do significant damage in the right position is also handy. To me that means that on-table I can have sufficient ability to knock him out.

Question, does he have a 2+ armor save or a 3+? I rememder 3+. Trying to confirm how many bolter shots it takes to kill him. At the moment I get 180ish with rerolls.
180×0.777×0.4×0.333=18.6

Voss wrote:


Maybe no one is 'getting shafted' by a five game hot streak? This is exactly why I said 'spin.'
Sure, losing several times in a row isn't fun, but that still isn't an obligation for the other player (whose side of the story we haven't heard and probably won't)

You should be respectful of other player's fun and generally try to avoid skew lists in casual (low points and non tournament) 40k games, just like you should avoid gouging someone's eyes in a sparring match. A game of 40k is a mutually agreed sparring match, not a street fight with someone you jumped behind the strip club.

It's very easy to create truly awful, and damn near unbeatable, lists in the 1k and below range. That doesn't mean you should do it. Wargames operate on a kind of gentlemen's agreement, and if you make it clear you're only there for yourself you'll quickly have no one to play with. Tournament play is a different matter obviously, as the entire point there is to do everything in your power to win.

 morganfreeman wrote:

Voss wrote:


Maybe no one is 'getting shafted' by a five game hot streak? This is exactly why I said 'spin.'
Sure, losing several times in a row isn't fun, but that still isn't an obligation for the other player (whose side of the story we haven't heard and probably won't)

You should be respectful of other player's fun and generally try to avoid skew lists in casual (low points and non tournament) 40k games, just like you should avoid gouging someone's eyes in a sparring match. A game of 40k is a mutually agreed sparring match, not a street fight with someone you jumped behind the strip club.

It's very easy to create truly awful, and damn near unbeatable, lists in the 1k and below range. That doesn't mean you should do it. Wargames operate on a kind of gentlemen's agreement, and if you make it clear you're only there for yourself you'll quickly have no one to play with. Tournament play is a different matter obviously, as the entire point there is to do everything in your power to win.

Losing =/= no fun
Losing = learning

I fully support Magnus in 1K games. Overcoming that challenge is only going to make someone a better player. If you take it on the chin 20 times trying to figure out how to win and still had fun trying then nothing bad actually happened.

 Gert wrote:

Voss wrote:
Wait, why is it 'not necessarily an option' for one player to modify their army but it is for the other?

How much would it cost to rededicate the army to killing Magnus compared to the Tsons player just not using Magnus?
The OP said Magnus only showed up recently implying Magnus wasn't there from the start, which indicates to me that the Tsons player has access to units to fill the Magnus-sized hole in the list. The other option would be the OP buying a load of new units to remake their current army just to kill one model that could just be politely removed until larger games are played so both players don't end up with anybody to do 40k with.

If OP can't deal with Magnus at all, he's probably going to have problems with whatever fills that void in the points. You can't make an army without any anti-tank and then get mad because your friends favorite models are tanks.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 morganfreeman wrote:

Voss wrote:


Maybe no one is 'getting shafted' by a five game hot streak? This is exactly why I said 'spin.'
Sure, losing several times in a row isn't fun, but that still isn't an obligation for the other player (whose side of the story we haven't heard and probably won't)

You should be respectful of other player's fun and generally try to avoid skew lists in casual (low points and non tournament) 40k games, just like you should avoid gouging someone's eyes in a sparring match. A game of 40k is a mutually agreed sparring match, not a street fight with someone you jumped behind the strip club.

It's very easy to create truly awful, and damn near unbeatable, lists in the 1k and below range. That doesn't mean you should do it. Wargames operate on a kind of gentlemen's agreement, and if you make it clear you're only there for yourself you'll quickly have no one to play with. Tournament play is a different matter obviously, as the entire point there is to do everything in your power to win.

Losing =/= no fun
Losing = learning

I fully support Magnus in 1K games. Overcoming that challenge is only going to make someone a better player. If you take it on the chin 20 times trying to figure out how to win and still had fun trying then nothing bad actually happened.

Correct simply loosing is not equivalent to no fun.
However, speaking from lots of experience, no one enjoys a game where they set their models out, only to have the vast majority of them be removed before they even get a chance to activate.
Setting up an army only to have it be a shooting gallery or a pinata to be beat on and get to do near nothing in return is a very very VERY quick way to be burned out on the hobby

 Backspacehacker wrote:
Correct simply loosing is not equivalent to no fun.
However, speaking from lots of experience, no one enjoys a game where they set their models out, only to have the vast majority of them be removed before they even get a chance to activate.
Setting up an army only to have it be a shooting gallery or a pinata to be beat on and get to do near nothing in return is a very very VERY quick way to be burned out on the hobby

In what way does Magnus do this that a number of points spent on other units wouldn't?

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:
Correct simply loosing is not equivalent to no fun.
However, speaking from lots of experience, no one enjoys a game where they set their models out, only to have the vast majority of them be removed before they even get a chance to activate.
Setting up an army only to have it be a shooting gallery or a pinata to be beat on and get to do near nothing in return is a very very VERY quick way to be burned out on the hobby

In what way does Magnus do this that a number of points spent on other units wouldn't?

Im not talking magnus, specifically, im just talking in general, loosing is not necessarily not fun, but if you get dick stomped constantly its definitely not fun.
Magnus, depended on what he does CAN do this but its a lot harder to pull off.

 Backspacehacker wrote:
Im not talking magnus, specifically, im just talking in general, loosing is not necessarily not fun, but if you get dick stomped constantly its definitely not fun.
Magnus, depended on what he does CAN do this but its a lot harder to pull off.

At a certain point, your losses are on you. In the OPs case they're losing because they're playing a mission type that favors the other player's list and using an odd house rule. If they started playing proper missions with the actual rules he wouldn't be getting stomped.

BigShotBeale wrote:
but he's able to drop his scarabs reinforcements really close to them turn 1

Remember that reinforcements in matched play (and you should be using the matched play balance rules) can not arrive on turn 1. Putting them into reserve gives you flexibility but they will have to miss a turn off the table as the price of it.

I can't put too many units in front of my Havocs as we use the rule of not being able to shoot though dense units.

This is not an actual rule in 40k and you shouldn't be using it. It's a massive buff to units like Magnus if you can put some cheap cannon fodder out in front and deny any shooting. Play by the normal rules, don't house rule in extra buffs for your opponent when you're already losing every game.

 Backspacehacker wrote:

Correct simply loosing is not equivalent to no fun.
However, speaking from lots of experience, no one enjoys a game where they set their models out, only to have the vast majority of them be removed before they even get a chance to activate.
Setting up an army only to have it be a shooting gallery or a pinata to be beat on and get to do near nothing in return is a very very VERY quick way to be burned out on the hobby

That's a pretty rare experience if you follow the current terrain guidelines.

This is what I'd take to face him with the new book ( as a super quick exercise ):

DP, Sword w/ Daemon weapon
1x5 CSM plus an upgrade or two
2x10 Cultists
2x6 Raptors
2 Spawn
2x1 Obliterators
Vindicator, Shield

Maybe squeeze in an MoE for the 6" HI and mortal wounds. Take marks and icons as you wish.

Deploy as far into the corners and out of sight as possible. For Magnus to commit to one corner or the other. Make him max his movement out. If CSM have a jump crystal ( I think they do? Haven't been through the whole book yet ) then use that to redeploy once Magnus comes towards them.

Use RND for one secondary. The Raptors are 6 mans so that you can't fail when they drop in. Use the cultists to alternate 'For the Dark Gods' and RND. Incursion missions are all 'Take and Hold' so you don't have to stretch beyond 2 objectives.

Then just focus on hurting everything except Magnus first and you should have a good chance of picking up a win. Magnus, 5 Scarabs, and 5 Rubrics is 750 points. The other player is unlikely to be very flexible or capable of sustaining secondaries in the face of losses.

Not just current ed in any edtion, and really in any hobby not just warhammer, its like playing a game with people who are league better then you, its not fun getting dicked stomped by some one who way out skills you, nor is it fun to be the one dishing it out.

Your friend is 100% in the right to bring Magnus. Magnus isn't even that GOOD. Anyone saying "TaLk BeFoRe GaMe" shouldn't be listened to. If there's actual balance issues, take it to GW.

EviscerationPlague wrote:
Your friend is 100% in the right to bring Magnus. Magnus isn't even that GOOD. Anyone saying "TaLk BeFoRe GaMe" shouldn't be listened to. If there's actual balance issues, take it to GW.

Yep op thats what to do, dont talk with your mate, email gw theyll sort it for you any day now.

 morganfreeman wrote:

Voss wrote:


Maybe no one is 'getting shafted' by a five game hot streak? This is exactly why I said 'spin.'
Sure, losing several times in a row isn't fun, but that still isn't an obligation for the other player (whose side of the story we haven't heard and probably won't)

You should be respectful of other player's fun and generally try to avoid skew lists in casual (low points and non tournament) 40k games, just like you should avoid gouging someone's eyes in a sparring match. A game of 40k is a mutually agreed sparring match, not a street fight with someone you jumped behind the strip club.

It's very easy to create truly awful, and damn near unbeatable, lists in the 1k and below range. That doesn't mean you should do it. Wargames operate on a kind of gentlemen's agreement, and if you make it clear you're only there for yourself you'll quickly have no one to play with. Tournament play is a different matter obviously, as the entire point there is to do everything in your power to win.

Thanks for your Tedd Talk on wargames for babies, but I'm struggling to see the relevance.
The spin here is that's totally on the opponent to change a huge chunk of his list, indeed has an absolute obligation to do so, and the OP can just keep doing the same thing and shouldn't try even the slightest thing differently. That's my issue with the responses. Not gouging out people's eyes or clubbing baby seals.

What if… players talked before the game about what kind of game they wanted to play?

This concept is anathema around here but kids, I can tell you: it works.

Remember kids, bad balance is your fault and you should be ashamed of yourselves.

That ship sailed before the OP.

This started with a request for rules to make his opponent stop using Magnus. Talking was never in the cards.

EviscerationPlague wrote:
Your friend is 100% in the right to bring Magnus. Magnus isn't even that GOOD. Anyone saying "TaLk BeFoRe GaMe" shouldn't be listened to. If there's actual balance issues, take it to GW.

But if you're having problems in your games you'll often get faster results by discussing things with those you're actually playing with than "taking it to GW".

Dai wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:
Your friend is 100% in the right to bring Magnus. Magnus isn't even that GOOD. Anyone saying "TaLk BeFoRe GaMe" shouldn't be listened to. If there's actual balance issues, take it to GW.

Yep op thats what to do, dont talk with your mate, email gw theyll sort it for you any day now.

Bad balance is for GW to fix, not the player. Telling the players to fix the game is a copout.

EviscerationPlague wrote:

Dai wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:
Your friend is 100% in the right to bring Magnus. Magnus isn't even that GOOD. Anyone saying "TaLk BeFoRe GaMe" shouldn't be listened to. If there's actual balance issues, take it to GW.

Yep op thats what to do, dont talk with your mate, email gw theyll sort it for you any day now.

Bad balance is for GW to fix, not the player. Telling the players to fix the game is a copout.

Please, share your expert opinion on what players should do once they've sent their issue to GW & are waiting for GW to fix it. Bear in mind that the GW fix is at best months off & possibly never....
What should the players do?

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:
Correct simply loosing is not equivalent to no fun.
However, speaking from lots of experience, no one enjoys a game where they set their models out, only to have the vast majority of them be removed before they even get a chance to activate.
Setting up an army only to have it be a shooting gallery or a pinata to be beat on and get to do near nothing in return is a very very VERY quick way to be burned out on the hobby

In what way does Magnus do this that a number of points spent on other units wouldn't?

By being less binary requiring less specialised tools to deal with.

You know what was problem with knights 7e? It being skew that negates units unable to influence.


Sure magnus might be beatable. But just sitting at objectives hoping you win because you didn't bring enough at to kill isn't fun in long run. And in 1k it's hard to deal with every skew list. And op might not even have models to deal with it.

You think you can kill tyranid/ork inf horde and magnus with same units? In 1k games?

Of course op could buy models. Make skew list to auto win and...then is that game fun? You end up with rock paper scissor and games have no need to even be played.

ccs wrote:

Please, share your expert opinion on what players should do once they've sent their issue to GW & are waiting for GW to fix it. Bear in mind that the GW fix is at best months off & possibly never....
What should the players do?

Forge the narrative, obviously!

 Backspacehacker wrote:
Not just current ed in any edtion, and really in any hobby not just warhammer, its like playing a game with people who are league better then you, its not fun getting dicked stomped by some one who way out skills you, nor is it fun to be the one dishing it out.

Of course that theory fails in skew lists not requiring skill...

Nor does it require skill to kill magnus. Just cash, skew your self and result in boring matches you have no need to even pull models out.

That magnus player demonstrated skill level of kindergarden kid. Maybe he is good player but winning that way requires no skill so his skill level is unproven.

I would suggest in this case insisting on the match play rules being fully followed. You can't bring scarabs down on the first turn due to no reinforcement phase. Its an easy rule to miss but important.
Scarabs and magnus will be 3/4 of his list, so he will lack in troops and will struggle to cover multiple objectives.
It's worth checking using the points match played published list that his army is legal.
Magnus is a supreme and scarabs are elites. This will mean losing CP, which reduces the few he can use.
Also, deep striking at 9" means you can move your havocs to the side to draw line of sight on magnus. It's -1 to hit for moving heavy weapons, but it makes things more difficult (particular if you are careful with terrain).
Hope those ideas give you some food for thought.

ccs wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

Dai wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:
Your friend is 100% in the right to bring Magnus. Magnus isn't even that GOOD. Anyone saying "TaLk BeFoRe GaMe" shouldn't be listened to. If there's actual balance issues, take it to GW.

Yep op thats what to do, dont talk with your mate, email gw theyll sort it for you any day now.

Bad balance is for GW to fix, not the player. Telling the players to fix the game is a copout.

Please, share your expert opinion on what players should do once they've sent their issue to GW & are waiting for GW to fix it. Bear in mind that the GW fix is at best months off & possibly never....
What should the players do?

They should do nothing. Don't give GW money for the garbage they spew, and be patient.

EviscerationPlague wrote:

Dai wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:
Your friend is 100% in the right to bring Magnus. Magnus isn't even that GOOD. Anyone saying "TaLk BeFoRe GaMe" shouldn't be listened to. If there's actual balance issues, take it to GW.

Yep op thats what to do, dont talk with your mate, email gw theyll sort it for you any day now.

Bad balance is for GW to fix, not the player. Telling the players to fix the game is a copout.

Do you want to have fun with your leisure time?

Or spend that time being dogmatically 100% right and hating your games vs a guy who brings Magnus at sub-1K and steamrollers you on Planet Bowling Ball with made-up targeting rules?

What if a conversation was the difference between the two?

What if…

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Remember kids, bad balance is your fault and you should be ashamed of yourselves.

This isn't bad balance though. It's a learning curve. One that includes them using rules that don't exist.

Magnus isn't the problem.

And tbh Unit used to post about being annoyed his opponents didn’t wanna face his multiple superheavy list back when that was a little oppressive, so it’s odd to see them hewing a different path!

tneva82 wrote:

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:
Correct simply loosing is not equivalent to no fun.
However, speaking from lots of experience, no one enjoys a game where they set their models out, only to have the vast majority of them be removed before they even get a chance to activate.
Setting up an army only to have it be a shooting gallery or a pinata to be beat on and get to do near nothing in return is a very very VERY quick way to be burned out on the hobby

In what way does Magnus do this that a number of points spent on other units wouldn't?

By being less binary requiring less specialised tools to deal with.

You know what was problem with knights 7e? It being skew that negates units unable to influence.


Sure magnus might be beatable. But just sitting at objectives hoping you win because you didn't bring enough at to kill isn't fun in long run. And in 1k it's hard to deal with every skew list. And op might not even have models to deal with it.

You think you can kill tyranid/ork inf horde and magnus with same units? In 1k games?

Of course op could buy models. Make skew list to auto win and...then is that game fun? You end up with rock paper scissor and games have no need to even be played.

If the issue is winning playing objectives and not using houserules that favor Magnus should be enough to balance the games. From there, what people do or don't find rewarding in their games is completely subjective.

EviscerationPlague wrote:

ccs wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

Dai wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:
Your friend is 100% in the right to bring Magnus. Magnus isn't even that GOOD. Anyone saying "TaLk BeFoRe GaMe" shouldn't be listened to. If there's actual balance issues, take it to GW.

Yep op thats what to do, dont talk with your mate, email gw theyll sort it for you any day now.

Bad balance is for GW to fix, not the player. Telling the players to fix the game is a copout.

Please, share your expert opinion on what players should do once they've sent their issue to GW & are waiting for GW to fix it. Bear in mind that the GW fix is at best months off & possibly never....
What should the players do?

They should do nothing. Don't give GW money for the garbage they spew, and be patient.

Ok, let's try this again. This time make the assumption (like the rest of us are doing) that both players want to play 40k in the here & now. How much $ is/is not being spent has nothing to do with it.
They've identified a problem,
They've forwarded it to GW,
GW has yet to answer....

How would you suggest they improve their game while they wait for GW?

ccs wrote:
Ok, let's try this again. This time make the assumption (like the rest of us are doing) that both players want to play 40k in the here & now. How much $ is/is not being spent has nothing to do with it.
They've identified a problem,
They've forwarded it to GW,
GW has yet to answer....

How would you suggest they improve their game while they wait for GW?

They can start by playing by the actual fething rules and not making the games balance worth with harebrained house rules that clearly favor one player over the other.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
And tbh Unit used to post about being annoyed his opponents didn’t wanna face his multiple superheavy list back when that was a little oppressive, so it’s odd to see them hewing a different path!

I have grown since then. Wasn't that like 2017 or 2018?

Plus, if they truly were oppressive, it isn't wrong to tell my opponents to ask GW to fix them so they aren't. those aren't mutually exclusive positions

 Canadian 5th wrote:

ccs wrote:
Ok, let's try this again. This time make the assumption (like the rest of us are doing) that both players want to play 40k in the here & now. How much $ is/is not being spent has nothing to do with it.
They've identified a problem,
They've forwarded it to GW,
GW has yet to answer....

How would you suggest they improve their game while they wait for GW?

They can start by playing by the actual fething rules and not making the games balance worth with harebrained house rules that clearly favor one player over the other.

You can let the OP know they’re misreading the rules without being insulting, you know.

At the OP…
The rules allow it, but if you’re not having fun, definitely talk to your friend and figure out how to both have a good time. Consider changing up missions and whatnot, if your buddy can’t swap something else for Magnus.

Have you tried swapping forces? Can be good fun to try things the other way around.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
What if… players talked before the game about what kind of game they wanted to play?

This concept is anathema around here but kids, I can tell you: it works.

No it doesn't. I remember right when the Tyranids codex dropped a player at my lgs insisting that the codex wasn't good and that Tyranids were a gatekeeper army at best. He had a Leviathan Warriors/double tyrant/harpy setup that was clearly optimized from the leaks on the Tyranid discord. When he absolutely destroyed his opponent, after refusing to alter his list, and then was called out on it, he started ranting about how Tyranids have been bad for so long that he deserved to get wins now.

The community is too toxic for this to work, and it's so toxic because gw has encouraged imbalance for so long.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ccs wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

Dai wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:
Your friend is 100% in the right to bring Magnus. Magnus isn't even that GOOD. Anyone saying "TaLk BeFoRe GaMe" shouldn't be listened to. If there's actual balance issues, take it to GW.

Yep op thats what to do, dont talk with your mate, email gw theyll sort it for you any day now.

Bad balance is for GW to fix, not the player. Telling the players to fix the game is a copout.

Please, share your expert opinion on what players should do once they've sent their issue to GW & are waiting for GW to fix it. Bear in mind that the GW fix is at best months off & possibly never....
What should the players do?

Play Infinity ;-)

Love that you try one skewed anecdote about an unreasonable human like that somehow negates my point. Did you know; the world is about more than your experience, and an unreasonable douchebag will always be an unreasonable douchebag?

Now imagine people who want the same type of game talking.

And if they don’t want the same type of game they can save 2-5 hrs of their life.

Being reasonable and not a douche is the key. But sure, go off about That One Tyranid Guy.

 JNAProductions wrote:
You can let the OP know they’re misreading the rules without being insulting, you know.

I didn't force the OP to make up terrible house rules. If they can't figure out that they're playing incorrectly, that's not on me.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Love that you try one skewed anecdote about an unreasonable human like that somehow negates my point. Did you know; the world is about more than your experience, and an unreasonable douchebag will always be an unreasonable douchebag?

My point is that a lot of the people who aren't unreasonable douchebags leave for other games.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
Now imagine people who want the same type of game talking.

They probably don't need to do much talking. But let's say they do want the same kind of game, but aren't professional game designers and thus don't know how to re-balance 40k every week for their pickup games? What then?

 JohnnyHell wrote:
And if they don’t want the same type of game they can save 2-5 hrs of their life.

Or they could play a different game that doesn't require players to do hours of legwork rebalancing it before they start playing.

Agree with a lot of what's already been said, it sounds like putting Magnus on the table in this case is a 'can do rather than should do' situation. A conversation between friends like Gert put so well is your easiest fix.

Steiner wrote:
Agree with a lot of what's already been said, it sounds like putting Magnus on the table in this case is a 'can do rather than should do' situation. A conversation between friends like Gert put so well is your easiest fix.

Why should the friend need to compromise on what models to bring? Why shouldn't OP?

EviscerationPlague wrote:

Steiner wrote:
Agree with a lot of what's already been said, it sounds like putting Magnus on the table in this case is a 'can do rather than should do' situation. A conversation between friends like Gert put so well is your easiest fix.

Why should the friend need to compromise on what models to bring? Why shouldn't OP?

Watch them avoid answering this question lol.

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
You can let the OP know they’re misreading the rules without being insulting, you know.

I didn't force the OP to make up terrible house rules. If they can't figure out that they're playing incorrectly, that's not on me.

No-but your rude attitude is.

I, for one, like to help new players. Not crap on them for making mistakes.

Hecaton wrote:
No it doesn't. I remember right when the Tyranids codex dropped a player at my lgs insisting that the codex wasn't good and that Tyranids were a gatekeeper army at best. He had a Leviathan Warriors/double tyrant/harpy setup that was clearly optimized from the leaks on the Tyranid discord. When he absolutely destroyed his opponent, after refusing to alter his list, and then was called out on it, he started ranting about how Tyranids have been bad for so long that he deserved to get wins now.

The community is too toxic for this to work, and it's so toxic because gw has encouraged imbalance for so long.

Sounds a bit like that guy got shafted in the past by the other players with their lists. If your mindset is a typical example of your local community, you might be part of the problem that fosters such behaviour.
Maybe the water in my local town is different, but people are usually open for a short talk about army composition / houserules / special missions or whatever when arranging a game.

If you treat the other player like a human being to actual play and have fun with and not just some faceless entity to play against for 2-3h, people tend to be reasonable.

Hecaton wrote:
Or they could play a different game that doesn't require players to do hours of legwork rebalancing it before they start playing.

"Do you mind not bringing Magnus for the next game? I don't feel I have the tools to take him on just yet and didn't really enjoy the last 5 games getting creamed."
"Sure"
...literal hours of legwork.

There are several approaches how to tackle the Magnus situation:
- Switch armies. Controlling the problematic unit yourself gives you a great experience what to look out for and how to counter it.
- Switch the mission around. Without going straight to a tournament mission pack, introducing secondaries and multiple objective markers will help to reduce the impact of a single, large and expensive unit.
- Talk with your buddy and tell him about that you're not having fun getting pounded by Magnus game after game. Maybe they can bring some other units until you both are ready to play bigger games where units like Magnus have less of an impact.
- Switch up your tactics. For this to work you have to play a different kind of mission that is not just "go in the middle and stab each other".
- Get some more units that are good for dealing with Magnus. Good advice what units those are can probably be found in the tactica thread of your respective faction in this forum.

a_typical_hero wrote:

Sounds a bit like that guy got shafted in the past by the other players with their lists. If your mindset is a typical example of your local community, you might be part of the problem that fosters such behaviour.
Maybe the water in my local town is different, but people are usually open for a short talk about army composition / houserules / special missions or whatever when arranging a game.

Considering I just moved here in the last year, no, it's not me, but nice try flinging insults like that. Moreover, the communities for other games (Infinity and ASOIAF) that I play don't have this problem. It's not the town, it's Warhammer/GW.

a_typical_hero wrote:
If you treat the other player like a human being to actual play and have fun with and not just some faceless entity to play against for 2-3h, people tend to be reasonable.

Nah. There's a lot of people who have drank GW's kool-aid about not being able to make a balanced game, so the only good meta environment they can imagine is one where *their* faction is overpowered.

a_typical_hero wrote:

"Do you mind not bringing Magnus for the next game? I don't feel I have the tools to take him on just yet and didn't really enjoy the last 5 games getting creamed."
"Sure"
...literal hours of legwork.

"I'm playing Guard. How can I have a good game against your Tyranids?"

That's something that basically requires a re-balancing of the game. Or the player says "I bought 1k sons because I think magnus is cool, why don't *you* run something that counters him if you have a hard time with it?" or "I don't have things besides this Magnus list."

 JNAProductions wrote:
No-but your rude attitude is.

I, for one, like to help new players. Not crap on them for making mistakes.

I expect new players to make rules mistakes and build really bad lists. I don't expect them to start adding on random houserules and then come here because it broke their game.

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
No-but your rude attitude is.

I, for one, like to help new players. Not crap on them for making mistakes.

I expect new players to make rules mistakes and build really bad lists. I don't expect them to start adding on random houserules and then come here because it broke their game.

you are a genuinely unpleasant person, welcome to my small ignore list.

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
No-but your rude attitude is.

I, for one, like to help new players. Not crap on them for making mistakes.

I expect new players to make rules mistakes and build really bad lists. I don't expect them to start adding on random houserules and then come here because it broke their game.

Yes, how dare they...be wrong? What nerve they have asking for help!

I'm not even convinced playing objectives and standard rules would help all that much with the core problem anyway. In small points games models like Magnus are easily capable of deleting multiple units a turn and fast enough to influence huge swathes of the board. Playing objectives doesn't help when Magnus is capable of clearing units from two a turn through psychic and close combat superiority. Equally, playing objectives isn't that relevant if Magnus gets deleted in one turn.

EviscerationPlague wrote:

ccs wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

Dai wrote:

EviscerationPlague wrote:
Your friend is 100% in the right to bring Magnus. Magnus isn't even that GOOD. Anyone saying "TaLk BeFoRe GaMe" shouldn't be listened to. If there's actual balance issues, take it to GW.

Yep op thats what to do, dont talk with your mate, email gw theyll sort it for you any day now.

Bad balance is for GW to fix, not the player. Telling the players to fix the game is a copout.

Please, share your expert opinion on what players should do once they've sent their issue to GW & are waiting for GW to fix it. Bear in mind that the GW fix is at best months off & possibly never....
What should the players do?

They should do nothing. Don't give GW money for the garbage they spew, and be patient.

Bull****. They should definitely give GW money if they like the models or if they have a way to increase balance to their games by adding new stuff, and/or the other hand they should absolutely leave immediately if they are not satisified with the game's direction but still want to play miniature wargames, or if they refuse to play under pre-game talks since they just play to prove the point of how good they are in that game and anything unofficial doesn't validate their records.

That's not a healthy way to experience the hobby. If you're satisfied with that way of thinking good for you, but I wouldn't recommend your suggestions to other people.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

EviscerationPlague wrote:

Steiner wrote:
Agree with a lot of what's already been said, it sounds like putting Magnus on the table in this case is a 'can do rather than should do' situation. A conversation between friends like Gert put so well is your easiest fix.

Why should the friend need to compromise on what models to bring? Why shouldn't OP?

They're both on the same level, one or both have to compromise. In general playing 40k with limited collections and no alternatives is a terrible experience in my opinion, unless it's early stages into the hobby and such players will expand their collections at some point, not to far from now. But if it's early stages they should also be extremely open to house rules or proxies.

a_typical_hero 805744 11390612 wrote:
Sounds a bit like that guy got shafted in the past by the other players with their lists. If your mindset is a typical example of your local community, you might be part of the problem that fosters such behaviour.
Maybe the water in my local town is different, but people are usually open for a short talk about army composition / houserules / special missions or whatever when arranging a game.

I have seen the reverse happen in 8th. One of the guys from my school started IH, because he liked robots and found IH easy to paint. His 2000 army was 2 No know Fear, 1 Dark Imperium and two of the , at that time, horrible primaris dreads. Painted his dude, played every week with them and got destroyed. Then 2.0 came out, and suddenly his army of intercessors, dreads and foot HQs was a clear sign of him being an evil WAAC player. And this was coming from people who were beating his list up week prior.

As the special missions goes and house rules go. How is a new player suppose to do that? If GW seems to not be able to do it with 40+ years of expiriance in design a bunch of noobs designers are suppose to sit down and start changing points costs , unit rules etc. Plus from what I have seen on forums, the special rules seem to be often writen to nerf everyone elses army, while leaving the writers army more or less intact.

Karol wrote:


As the special missions goes and house rules go. How is a new player suppose to do that?

Trial and error. Like anything. Or else reach out to others for advice.

Imo its eapecially important for vets* to support, guide and suggest the new players in the community. This, imo is part of that. Otherwise communities ultimately wither and die.

*and yes, in real life I do this. Happily too.

Karol wrote:


If GW seems to not be able to do it with 40+ years of expiriance in design a bunch of noobs designers are suppose to sit down and start changing points costs , unit rules etc.

Gw might have been around for 40 year but a lot of the designers individually have about 35 years less than that, if not more. Remember the game shifts with every release. Gw are not interested in balancing it, only 'changing' it.

Ans besides, most gamers probably have a better grasp on the game than the designers. Or at least they claim to. Considering the specific circumstances imo players are better placed to be aware of the issues and imo, are in a place to fix and adapt as well.

Karol wrote:

Plus from what I have seen on forums, the special rules seem to be often writen to nerf everyone elses army, while leaving the writers army more or less intact.

Meh, forums aren't everything. in our games I don't think I've ever seen anything that skewed the game, or one player over the other to the point that the game was unplayable.

Trial and error. Like anything. Or else reach out to others for advice.

Why should a player , to use the example from the thread, the magnus using one, want to change anything if he is having fun? He is not doing anything illegal. w40k is not optimised to be played at 1000pts. What advice can be given in a situation like that anyway, stop using the model you like, buy models you don't like or like less, in order for others to have fun? You would be paying your own money for others to have fun. Instead of them paying for their own fun stuff, the way you just did it. Lets say the situation was reveresed for what ever reason the 1ksons player loved the bird beastman, and his army was full of them, almost non 1ksons in them. the army would also be crap, would he be in the right to tell other people to rebuy their armies to fit his bad build one?

Gw might have been around for 40 year but a lot of the designers individually have about 35 years less than that, if not more. Remember the game shifts with every release. Gw are not interested in balancing it, only 'changing' it.

From what I read people like Crudance or Phill Kelly have been in the company for decades. I also was talking about the company. After four decades there should be a culture designed on how rules are produced for GW games. And yes GW is not interested in balance, the odium of that falls on the players. Ergo the two guys who build the armies the wrong way, or picked bad armies , should either tough it out or buy stuff to properly play the game. It is sounds like people who don't do sports complain that someone who does do it, is better then them and wins every or close to every time. Very much want to fun and the wins, but don't want to invest and learn the game to me.

Meh, forums aren't everything. in our games I don't think I've ever seen anything that skewed the game, or one player over the other to the point that the game was unplayable.

That is true. But I think that if you get to read what people are saying in 4 different countries and a multi national forum, then you get a view of the game to a large degree. Specialy if the people are all saying the same things. My dudes were unplayable for almost the entire 8th ed, and when they got better corona started, and then they got bad again in 9th. I know that if I would want to win more game with my army, I would have to buy 4 NDKS and 6 boxs of power armoured troops. But I dislike both of those models, so I don't get the wins. Now I do want GW to fix the units I like, specialy when for other factions they can make termintors good, but it would be insane from me if I started going around the shop and asking for people to play only armies that are on the power level of my army. Double so, considering it would involve people to have to buy models to do so and play their armies they way they do not want to.

Karol wrote:

Trial and error. Like anything. Or else reach out to others for advice.

Why should a player , to use the example from the thread, the magnus using one, want to change anything if he is having fun? He is not doing anything illegal.

True, but you are not the only player in a game and you are not the only person in a community. Sometimes other people need to be considered as well, especially if you want to consider the long-term health of a community- for example, I'm married. I can't just consider myself, and neither can mrs.deadnight, it's 'us'. If I'm having all of my fun, and it's all at her expense, how long before our partnership falls apart?

Karol wrote:
w40k is not optimised to be played at 1000pts. What advice can be given in a situation like that anyway, stop using the model you like, buy models you don't like or like less, in order for others to have fun? You would be paying your own money for others to have fun. Instead of them paying for their own fun stuff, the way you just did it. Lets say the situation was reveresed for what ever reason the 1ksons player loved the bird beastman, and his army was full of them, almost non 1ksons in them. the army would also be crap, would he be in the right to tell other people to rebuy their armies to fit his bad build one?

40k is not optimised to be played at any level. Its a crude game.

What makes you think that I'm buying models for other people's enjoyment? I'm buying them for mine, too. Otherwise I wouldn't buy them.

To your example, would he be right? Possibly. Should other people consider accomodating him? Sure, in my case if he's a decent chap, I would. I have done. Just like id consider accomodating your awful grey knights. Bigger table, not higher walls.

Karol wrote:

From what I read people like Crudance or Phill Kelly have been in the company for decades. I also was talking about the company. After four decades there should be a culture designed on how rules are produced for GW games. And yes GW is not interested in balance, the odium of that falls on the players.

Most players aren't interested in balance either. 'The rules' isn't what sells 40k. Gw focus on awesome models. As do most of the fans.

Karol wrote:
It is sounds like people who don't do sports complain that someone who does do it, is better then them and wins every or close to every time. Very much want to fun and the wins, but don't want to invest and learn the game to me.

You'd be wrong. A sports analogy isn't really appropriate.We can all appreciate the olympian boxer doing his thing -its just context that's important. Them against their peers? Fine. Them taking that to a bunch of half-fit guys doing a bit of light sparring and fitness after work and refusing to pull their punches and just goung in for the kill evey time? I'm sorry but it just leaves a sour taste in everyone's mouth.

It's not about not wanting to learn the game - with your gk's you probably know the game as well as any player with an s-tier army.

Taking a more powerful army isn't 'playing the game better' or 'learning more of the game'. You're not a better player because your list is more powerful. Its thr same game, just bigger numbers.

It's about playing the game at the same level and with the wildly varying power levels, doing that, like being in a relationship, requires a bit of accommodation.

Karol wrote:

That is true. But I think that if you get to read what people are saying in 4 different countries and a multi national forum, then you get a view of the game to a large degree. Specialy if the people are all saying the same things.

Youre looking at it the wrong way. The internet generally self-selects for the most hardcore players, typically competitives. Casual players and less-serious players don't really trawl through forums.

What you're seeing isn't 'a view of the game to a large degree'. You're seeing 'a view of the game from a particular perspective to a large degree' and one that isn't bound to a particular geographical area - not a representative view of all the different perspectives.

Karol wrote:

My dudes were unplayable for almost the entire 8th ed, and when they got better corona started, and then they got bad again in 9th. I know that if I would want to win more game with my army, I would have to buy 4 NDKS and 6 boxs of power armoured troops. But I dislike both of those models, so I don't get the wins.

I played tau back in fourth. An extremely underpowered codex, especially by mid to late edition. And folks around me relentlessly took cookie cutter power builds of the day like iron warriors. Ruined my hobby to the point that I walked away from the whole hobby for about 5 years. &shrug& it's not nice being that miserable guy in that position and I resolved never to be the other guy in the other position because to me, unless everyone is having a good time, its a pointless exercise.

Karol wrote:

Now I do want GW to fix the units I like, specialy when for other factions they can make termintors good, but it would be insane from me if I started going around the shop and asking for people to play only armies that are on the power level of my army. Double so, considering it would involve people to have to buy models to do so and play their armies they way they do not want to.

I'd like gw to fix things too. Until they do though I can shamelessly wield all of the broken things and hypocritically feed the very same monster I claim to despise, or I can try to do something about it at my end, take a step back, consider the bigger picture and put the value on the person across from me. Or i can complain bitterly into the internet, and while it self-vindicates and reinforces my resentments, it doeant really solve or resolve anything. It just leaves me stewing. Or I can walk away from an ip and models I enjoy immensely. And that last choice does nothing but punish me more than it does them (as gw says, I will not be missed).


And accomodating the other person is not 'insane'. Thats a lazy cop out . Regardless of gws (in)action, you ALSO have a responsibility, both to yourself towards making your hobby work for you and to contributing towards a healthy community. What youve experienced is entirely down to your local group having an utterly selfish and self-centered focus, its not the only way to play and its not the 'right' way to play. If you said that to nou, gert, smudge, mad doc or his group or me and mine, you'd get accomodated. No question. That's Poland, UK, US so don't go thinking our way of playing is rare.

Call me old fashioned but there is a bit of a lack of awareness from the opposing player. If I won 5 on the bounce and the difference each time seemed to be my one big, shiny model then I'd want to mix it up and challenge myself by trying to win without that big, shiny model.

If it's tricky bringing it up politely with the opposing player, just make a joke about how you bet you could win against a list without Magnus.

 ComeFindMe wrote:
Call me old fashioned but there is a bit of a lack of awareness from the opposing player. If I won 5 on the bounce and the difference each time seemed to be my one big, shiny model then I'd want to mix it up and challenge myself by trying to win without that big, shiny model.

If it's tricky bringing it up politely with the opposing player, just make a joke about how you bet you could win against a list without Magnus.

Yeah I came back from a deployment after the change from 8th to 9th. I played my buddies guard army which was extremely tank and vehicle heavy. We played like two turns and realized the CSM list just didn't have the ability to answer that much armor so we re-racked, I pulled out more of my tanks and anti-tank systems, and had a much better game.

In a non-tournament setting you should prioritize both players enjoyment over the most efficient win condition. For OP, I'd either suggest proxying some units that do good damage against large models. Just be careful with the single shot high damage ones because invuls tend to hurt those the most. Also definitely drop the house rules for now. I definitely get trying to improve the game, but you have to rethink a lot to get to that point.

40k is a costly game and its at its most costly when players are just getting started. Without knowing you or your friend it's hard to say about the motives of your opponent. Maybe they bought Magnus bc they love Magnus, or maybe they bought magnus because they wanted a way to increase the points value of their army quickly, or maybe they bought Magnus because they considered what units you had and determined that it would be extremely difficult for you to deal with a Primarch, thus leading to easy wins.

Regardless of the motive, your friend as other people have pointed out is within the rules of the game to bring him. But I would at least say that in the case of #3 it was not socially appropriate.

Pertaining to the situation as it is *now*, your friend can not be blind to the fact that Magnus is really hard for you to deal with at 1k.

Discuss the situation with your friend. While asking your friend just to hold off on Magnus for a bit while your armies gather strength is an option; it isn't the only one.

If your friend really wants to continue using Magnus, I think this would be a good situation to go ahead and admit the use of proxies. Play a larger game, 1500 or 2k points. Your friend can bring Magnus, plus experiment with different directions in their list; and you can add some things to help you counter Magnus, and experiment a bit yourself.


best of luck to you both.