Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Clearly you missed the "just like they can today" part of Xca|iber's post nkelsch.

And it's not a 'tough guy' comment to say that people who don't want to use FW are afraid of losing, especially when it's coming from someone like me who couldn't give two gaks about tournament play.

Hell we even use flyers in normal games from time to time and they're no big issue.

if they can still refuse to play... Then why need a change except to try to shift moral high ground with a note from mommy making the mean people play with your toys? You can see where CT has already said if some refuses to play against "codex legal" FW then they are a bad person... If people can continue to deny games after a change then why the change in attempting to villanize people who don't want to play with or against FW? It is all people trying to claim the moral high ground and the current policy of opponents consent means if you try to force FW on someone and they decline, then you are seen as the stooge. All I see is WAAC people demanding people line up to get spammed by drop pod proxies with " you can't refuse to play me GEEDUBBYAH said so!"

It is already legal for casual play... Nothing needs to change. Your whines of "you don't want to lose" are just "I want to win at all costs."

H.B.M.C. wrote:People always pick on the few examples where the FW writers have lost their minds and created something either powerful, or just plain overpowered

You mean like how people pick TH/SS termies or long fang spam and use that as proof that regular 40k is horribly unbalanced?

Not so much Sid (but nice try). It's more a case of saying that FW has unbalanced rules just like 40K has unbalanced rules. Neither is above one or the other when it comes to unbalanced... ness.

nkelsch wrote:Your whines of "you don't want to lose" are just "I want to win at all costs."

Except that they're not. Try re-reading a lot of what we're saying. Me wanting to bring a Sentinel Power Loader can hardly be misconstrued as wanting to win and all costs. Plus hasn't what CT and I've been saying about non-tournament (or sportshammer, as he calls it) gamers gotten through to you yet? You seem to be stuck in that mindset, and assume anyone wanting FW rules just wants an advantage. That's bs.

What the hell does the power loader even do?

Sidstyler wrote:What the hell does the power loader even do?

You can use it to fight Hive Tyrants.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Not so much Sid (but nice try). It's more a case of saying that FW has unbalanced rules just like 40K has unbalanced rules. Neither is above one or the other when it comes to unbalanced... ness.

nkelsch wrote:Your whines of "you don't want to lose" are just "I want to win at all costs."

Except that they're not. Try re-reading a lot of what we're saying. Me wanting to bring a Sentinel Power Loader can hardly be misconstrued as wanting to win and all costs. Plus hasn't what CT and I've been saying about non-tournament (or sportshammer, as he calls it) gamers gotten through to you yet? You seem to be stuck in that mindset, and assume anyone wanting FW rules just wants an advantage. That's bs.

Casual play or non sportshammer is already legal... You are just pouting because people don't want to play with your toys. All a change in codex legal will domis give you the moral high grounds to browbeat your rules over casual opponents heads.

Casual players already can use forge world if they wish... Working as intended. Balance is important to both friendly play and the dreaded evil sportshammer. 10% poison with 90% good is still poison.

Sidstyler wrote:What the hell does the power loader even do?

That's one of the free ones:

http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Downloads/Product/PDF/i/IA1update28AUG.pdf

A S7 A2 Sentinel - no guns, no power weapons. Absolutely worthless, competitively.

MasterSlowPoke wrote:

Sidstyler wrote:What the hell does the power loader even do?

That's one of the free ones:

http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Downloads/Product/PDF/i/IA1update28AUG.pdf

A S7 A2 Sentinel - no guns, no power weapons. Absolutely worthless, competitively.

The cost is only 25 points a model, and actually they would scare the snot out of dark eldar.
S7 instant kills/ignores FNP on DE.
At 25 points a pop they can really tarpit wyches, wracks, and incubi. For that matter a single 25 point model can tarpit just about any standard assault unit that doesn't have a power fist.

3 attacks at S7 on the charge against the rear armor of vehicles is also really good for IG, and an absolute steal at 25 points.

The thing can't outflank or scout, is AV10 opentopped. If its such a threat just shot it. Thank your opponent for burning a FA slot.

Theduke07 wrote:The thing can't outflank or scout, is AV10 opentopped. If its such a threat just shot it. Thank your opponent for burning a FA slot.

There are no force org slots in an apoc game.

In a regular game keep them in reserve as a counter attack element.

If they get blown up fine, it's a 25 point model or 75 for a squad of 3. The only real issue is KP, but once again that would not matter in an apoc game.

nkelsch wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:Not so much Sid (but nice try). It's more a case of saying that FW has unbalanced rules just like 40K has unbalanced rules. Neither is above one or the other when it comes to unbalanced... ness.

nkelsch wrote:Your whines of "you don't want to lose" are just "I want to win at all costs."

Except that they're not. Try re-reading a lot of what we're saying. Me wanting to bring a Sentinel Power Loader can hardly be misconstrued as wanting to win and all costs. Plus hasn't what CT and I've been saying about non-tournament (or sportshammer, as he calls it) gamers gotten through to you yet? You seem to be stuck in that mindset, and assume anyone wanting FW rules just wants an advantage. That's bs.

Casual play or non sportshammer is already legal... You are just pouting because people don't want to play with your toys. All a change in codex legal will domis give you the moral high grounds to browbeat your rules over casual opponents heads.

Casual players already can use forge world if they wish... Working as intended. Balance is important to both friendly play and the dreaded evil sportshammer. 10% poison with 90% good is still poison.

And sure, it lets you bring all your undepowered stuff that no one cares about you taking now anyway. But the other side effect is a sudden increase of all the cheesey overpowered units showing up. And proxies of those units because people won't want to actually buy FW. And the sheer hell of suddenly needing to own a set of IA books to have all the rules. Especially if you run tournaments.

mikhaila wrote:And sure, it lets you bring all your undepowered stuff that no one cares about you taking now anyway. But the other side effect is a sudden increase of all the cheesey overpowered units showing up. And proxies of those units because people won't want to actually buy FW. And the sheer hell of suddenly needing to own a set of IA books to have all the rules. Especially if you run tournaments.

Oooh! A whole pack of false dilemmas there mikhaila. Excellent job.


1. Increase in cheesy overpowered units - This isn't a real problem much of a problem as you think it is because there really aren't that many of them and the FOC tends to limit their use in the first place. It's not as if someone can take any army of Achilles Land Raiders now is it? Moreover, there are 'cheesy overpowered units' in every existing Codex as it is, so how would this be any different?
2. Proxies - Someone already presented a pretty obvious solution to this. If you don't have the FW model, you can't use the FW rules.
3. Needing to own the books - That's not your responsibility, that's your opponent's responsibility. If they don't have the rules with them, then you don't use the unit. Really simple, and again, already discussed within this thread.
4. Needing to own the books if you run a tournament - Tournament Organisers have the final say in anything that shows up in a tournament, so they wouldn't need to have the IA books if they simply disallowed their use (which is and has always been the prerogative of a TO). And even if they did allow them without personally owning the books, it would be up to the players to bring their copies with them would it not?

Indeed. The idea of disallowing something because you don't have the book the rules are in is laughable - the majority of players wouldn't own every codex, and don't disallow armies they don't have the codex for. Make sure your opponent has the book, and lets you see the unit entry before playing. Simple.

And, as HBMC says, don't allow proxies of Forgeworld units. Again, simple.

Well I think a good way to look at this is by examples, take your own personal standard tournament army, you are against a Necron player, now they produce a pair of tomb stalkers, is that over powering their army, or perhaps pushing them slightly towards the current power curve?

Now consider a SM army your playing next and face an Achilles, does your army have to drastically change to deal with it? Is it so game breaking in a tournament it's going to change the way the army plays or how you play an SM army?

Now consider you're against the ork mek army from kastorel novem, again is that an unfair list? Or do you just need more skill to adapt?

If all lists were 'legal' it's just like new codices getting ready to play them

And? So? But? Therefore?

If this is a tournament, and the TO has allowed the use of FW units, then people shouldn't be surprised when they show up. They needn't own the rules - as has been stated by several people - but they went in there knowing FW would be there, so what's the big deal?

Furthermore, a TO can allow/disallow anything. They could say 'No Marines' or 'No Orks' or 'No armies starting with D' if they wanted to. None of this changes the legality of FW models.

Just on the Achilles - it's not the powerhouse it was in the experimental rules. It lost some of it's absurd defense and got more expensive in the Badab Wars books.

I still don't get why GW or FW have to declare IA books 'legal'. As GW have always encouraged house rules and making it 'your own game'. TOs have the final say in tournaments. Given that regular WHFB and WH40k are already comped then the IA books could also be comped. The only hassle with that is that it's already hard enough to comp the core game let alone another range of books.

As for balance issues with FW books, WH40k is already unbalanced and I don't see GW making any such statements until the next edition if WH40k.

H.B.M.C. wrote:1. Increase in cheesy overpowered units - This isn't a real problem much of a problem as you think it is because there really aren't that many of them and the FOC tends to limit their use in the first place. It's not as if someone can take any army of Achilles Land Raiders now is it? Moreover, there are 'cheesy overpowered units' in every existing Codex as it is, so how would this be any different?
2. Proxies - Someone already presented a pretty obvious solution to this. If you don't have the FW model, you can't use the FW rules.
3. Needing to own the books - That's not your responsibility, that's your opponent's responsibility. If they don't have the rules with them, then you don't use the unit. Really simple, and again, already discussed within this thread.
4. Needing to own the books if you run a tournament - Tournament Organisers have the final say in anything that shows up in a tournament, so they wouldn't need to have the IA books if they simply disallowed their use (which is and has always been the prerogative of a TO). And even if they did allow them without personally owning the books, it would be up to the players to bring their copies with them would it not?

1. Hahahahaha you are kidding yourself if you think even 1 or 2 LRAs does not completely imbalance the game for anyone who isn't Tau.
2. You know it would happen. You know it would be a problem. Saying "well just deal with it jeez" does not make the problem go away.
3. FW has some obscure and weird rules. This combined with the extreme cost of the FW books and the sheer number of them, along with the fact that you need many $90 books to get all of the FW rules for one race, make it much harder for anyone to know all the FW rules well. Slap on the fact that most stores don't stock all the IA books and you have a big problem.
4. "TOs have the final say" is just as much an argument against your stance as it is for your stance. You can't use that to defend yourself.

1. The argument that FW has unbalanced rules and therefore should not be legal is fallacious because it implies that FW unbalanced rules are some how different or more unbalanced than rules from standard 40K Codices. The fact of the matter is that unbalanced rules exist equally in both/all publications, and their existence (or even frequency) is not a good enough reason to ban them.

2. Yes, it would happen in places. But there are solutions, as have already been stated. And, once again, just because it might happen somewhere is no reason to ban them all.

3. You're going to need to quote some of those obscure and weird rules. Most of their more recent rules just use existing examples. In fact, FW has a history of 'copypasta', much to the detriment of their books. And, as has been stated (ad nauseam) the person bringing the units should bring the books, and if they don't have the books (or the models) they shouldn't be using the rules. It's really not that difficult to fathom. And, if someone did, somewhere, in the world, proxy a FW unit without the rules for it then the person playing them is an idiot, and it's STILL no reason to ban them.

4. How? My argument is that FW should always be legal and should not require opponent's permission (or, to be more accurate, any more permission than anything else in the game). At no point does that contradict the notion that TO's are essentially God within their own space and can allow and ban whatever they want regardless of reason and, if they want to, in a completely arbitrary manner. This viewpoint on TO's does not contradict my viewpoint on FW rules.

H.B.M.C. wrote:1. The argument that FW has unbalanced rules and therefore should not be legal is fallacious because it implies that FW unbalanced rules are some how different or more unbalanced than rules from standard 40K Codices. The fact of the matter is that unbalanced rules exist equally in both/all publications, and their existence (or even frequency) is not a good enough reason to ban them.

2. Yes, it would happen in places. But there are solutions, as have already been stated. And, once again, just because it might happen somewhere is no reason to ban them all.

3. You're going to need to quote some of those obscure and weird rules. Most of their more recent rules just use existing examples. In fact, FW has a history of 'copypasta', much to the detriment of their books. And, as has been stated (ad nauseam) the person bringing the units should bring the books, and if they don't have the books (or the models) they shouldn't be using the rules. It's really not that difficult to fathom. And, if someone did, somewhere, in the world, proxy a FW unit without the rules for it then the person playing them is an idiot, and it's STILL no reason to ban them.

4. How? My argument is that FW should always be legal and should not require opponent's permission (or, to be more accurate, any more permission than anything else in the game). At no point does that contradict the notion that TO's are essentially God within their own space and can allow and ban whatever they want regardless of reason and, if they want to, in a completely arbitrary manner. This viewpoint on TO's does not contradict my viewpoint on FW rules.

1. Letting all FW units into 40k as is would wreck the game, by virtue of a few extra imbalanced units. GW should continue to transition units from FW to mainstream as they have been doing. Faster would be good, 95% of FW units are good and cool and should be in normal 40k. Opening the flood gates would ruin the game. We can thank deathstorms and LRAs for that.

2. There are also solutions to FW being quasi-illegal right now.

3. I don't need to quote gak. I'm not going to go trawl through IA books to quote the most obscure and random rules just to prove you wrong.

4. If FW was always legal TOs could just ban it, just like right now they could allow it. Nothing would change.

Well HBMC has the best point here, FW units are not usually OP as they look, people read the experimental rules, go and think all FW stuff is like that.
On the other hand, I would not want to be facing down a Tank Company, walls of AV14 are not nice things.
I would also rather like to have the diversity that FW gives.
Ban the stupid units like the Dreadpod and play away!
If you want a perfectly balanced game, go play chess!

Support your point rather than just flaming, people will listen to evidence

ph34r wrote:4. If FW was always legal TOs could just ban it, just like right now they could allow it. Nothing would change.

But this isn't about tournaments (well, ok, it kinda is, but it's a separate point), but is more about the general (wrongly held) opinion that all FW units require opponent's permission* and the stigma that goes with them that make people think that they are all unbalanced and therefore shouldn't be allowed in regular games (and, of course, tournaments). Really, after 5 pages of this ph34r this isn't clear to you yet what we're actually talking about?

GW (or FW) coming out and saying "All FW units are as legal as everything in all of our Codices** so they can now be used freely in any and all games, keeping in mind the existing restrictions on Super-Heavy units present within those books." would change things. So far we've got two sides in this:

1. The side that thinks this would be a bad idea because of unbalanced units like the LRA and the Dreadnought Drop Pod.
2. Those that don't see how unbalanced FW units would make any difference because 40K already has unbalanced units and there's nothing particularly special about FW unbalanced units in comparison to Codex 40K units.







*ie. any more permission than anything else currently in the game, etc. etc. etc.

**Of course they wouldn't say 'Codices', they'd say 'Codexes' because they're idiots...


Oh, and while I'm here...

ph34r wrote:3. I don't need to quote gak. I'm not going to go trawl through IA books to quote the most obscure and random rules just to prove you wrong

Putting aside the fact that I'm not wrong, I have one thing to say this comment:

Nor should you.

You shouldn't have to go through and find obscure rules for my units because it would be my responsibility to bring the rules for the FW units, and if I did not bring those rules you would be quite within your rights to go "No dice!" and not play me because I have failed to bring printed legal rules for the units I am attempting to use.

What on earth is the problem here?

If you don't want to play against FW there will NEVER be anything forcing you to play against something you don't want to play against.

It's the exact same analogy as playing against a codex army like Dark Eldar, just because GW has published it as a codex does not mean you are obliged to play against Dark Eldar.

Opponent's Permission is applicable to EVERY game and always will be. Nobody will ever point a gun to your head and say "You MUST play against my FW army" (unless if you're in a weird hostage situation).

In tournaments, it will always be up to the TO to allow what they want in their tournament. A TO wants to ban the Space Marine codex and all their models? Their choice. Exactly the same with IA books and lists and always will be. GW can never put a clause in forcing people to play against something that they don't want to.

The way I see it, announcing it as 'offical' is only going to change perception. TO's will feel pressured to allow FW models and rules into there tourneys much as they would be to allow a codex that had been just released. It's all fine and well to state that this wouldn't affect casual play but it's wrong. In my area about 3/4 of the players that actually play at the game store play in the monthly tourney. When there isn't a tourney they are usually testing out and tweaking thier lists. They PREFER to play against army configurations that are possible to face in the tourneys. Currently the TO only allows codex. If the local tourneys allow codex and FW then it would change the tournament gamers attitudes toward FW in casual play. I have found this to be true especially around Adepticon when people encourage each other to bring thier FW units.

Also, saying that allowing 'broken' FW units would not effect things any more than the 'broken' rules for some of the codexes is just plain false. The most 'broken' codexes have access to the most 'broken' FW rules.

nkelsch wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:Clearly you missed the "just like they can today" part of Xca|iber's post nkelsch.

And it's not a 'tough guy' comment to say that people who don't want to use FW are afraid of losing, especially when it's coming from someone like me who couldn't give two gaks about tournament play.

Hell we even use flyers in normal games from time to time and they're no big issue.

if they can still refuse to play... Then why need a change except to try to shift moral high ground with a note from mommy making the mean people play with your toys? You can see where CT has already said if some refuses to play against "codex legal" FW then they are a bad person... If people can continue to deny games after a change then why the change in attempting to villanize people who don't want to play with or against FW? It is all people trying to claim the moral high ground and the current policy of opponents consent means if you try to force FW on someone and they decline, then you are seen as the stooge. All I see is WAAC people demanding people line up to get spammed by drop pod proxies with " you can't refuse to play me GEEDUBBYAH said so!"

It is already legal for casual play... Nothing needs to change. Your whines of "you don't want to lose" are just "I want to win at all costs."

Just wow...


Care to offer a quote showing I said those are "bad people"? This is toy soldiers. I can certainly choose those opponents I have a common worldview with in regards to gaming to spend my time playing. I may not want to play you nkelsch for any number of reasons, but at the end of the day it doesn't make you a "bad" person, even if I don't enjoy 40k for the same reasons you do, or want to play it the way you do.

Try to maintain some perspective...

CT GAMER wrote:

Just wow...


Care to offer a quote showing I said those are "bad people"? This is toy soldiers. I can certainly choose those opponents I have a common worldview with in regards to gaming to spend my time playing. I may not want to play you nkelsch for any number of reasons, but at the end of the day it doesn't make you a "bad" person, even if I don't enjoy 40k for the same reasons you do, or want to play it the way you do.

Try to maintain some perspective...

"What this change would do is allow casual players a little more freedom to play what they want in public games (non-tournament) without someoen being a dick and refusing you the right to play a model that might in no way be broken simply becasue it happens to be FW... "

What did you mean when you called someone who wouldn't play against FW a dick? maybe I misunderstood what calling someone a dick means, maybe you were paying the person a compliment? If changing from permission to codex legal meant people could still refrain from playing against unbalanced models or simply models they don't want to play against why are they now a dick? Oh, because people want to force others to play with thier toys and throw more imbalance into the game. Poison is poison and FW has enough poison to taint the whole water supply.

It is all about claiming the moral highground... Shifting the rules makes one side 'right' and the other 'a dick'. People already consent to playing against fair FW units in casual play. But you have to have the social skills to ask permission not demand compliance. Shifting the legality of the rules is basically and attempt to steamroll people and anyone who refuses the 'new world order' is now a dick or afraid of losing or whatever schoolyard bullying insult you can come up with once you claim the moral highground.

Well it sounds like if the FW stuff becomes properly official than much more will be bought by some of the more competative tournament goers - so if it means more product will be shifted guess that makes the offical thing more likely!

From what I understand of the varied posts on this thread - pretty much nothing would really change except the FW stuff will get played a bit more with in non tourney games. Tournaments will ban some (or even all)FW stuff and they will pretty carry on as before.

So if this is true, apart from making some people happy what harm does it do?

nkelsch wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:

Just wow...


Care to offer a quote showing I said those are "bad people"? This is toy soldiers. I can certainly choose those opponents I have a common worldview with in regards to gaming to spend my time playing. I may not want to play you nkelsch for any number of reasons, but at the end of the day it doesn't make you a "bad" person, even if I don't enjoy 40k for the same reasons you do, or want to play it the way you do.

Try to maintain some perspective...

"What this change would do is allow casual players a little more freedom to play what they want in public games (non-tournament) without someoen being a dick and refusing you the right to play a model that might in no way be broken simply becasue it happens to be FW... "

What did you mean when you called someone who wouldn't play against FW a dick? maybe I misunderstood what calling someone a dick means, maybe you were paying the person a compliment? If changing from permission to codex legal meant people could still refrain from playing against unbalanced models or simply models they don't want to play against why are they now a dick? Oh, because people want to force others to play with thier toys and throw more imbalance into the game. Poison is poison and FW has enough poison to taint the whole water supply.

It is all about claiming the moral highground... Shifting the rules makes one side 'right' and the other 'a dick'. People already consent to playing against fair FW units in casual play. But you have to have the social skills to ask permission not demand compliance. Shifting the legality of the rules is basically and attempt to steamroll people and anyone who refuses the 'new world order' is now a dick or afraid of losing or whatever schoolyard bullying insult you can come up with once you claim the moral highground.

Lots of perfectly decent people are dicks at various times in their lives and in regards to various things. Acting like a dick oversomething and being a bad person are not one and the same.

Refusing to let someone use their toy soldiers can definitely be a dick move, especially when the concerns are largely overblown. Doesn't mean they are a "bad person", just means it is probably someone I'd rather not spend my limited amount of gaming time playing.

I'm sure we can both find another opponent that has a similar playstyle and view of the game to play instead.

Life goes on...

CT GAMER wrote:

Lots of perfectly decent people are dicks at various times in their lives and in regards to various things. Acting like a dick oversomething and being a bad person are not one and the same.

Refusing to let someone use their toy soldiers can definitely be a dick move, especially when the concerns are largely overblown. Doesn't mean they are a "bad person", just means it is probably someone I'd rather not spend my limited amount of gaming time playing.

I'm sure we can both find another opponent that has a similar playstyle and view of the game to play instead.

Life goes on...

Do your legs cramp up with all that backpeddling? There is plenty of schoolyard insults in this thread to anyone who doesn't play where 'FW is always legal'.

If the unit is not overpowered or is even balanced, most people have no problem playing against it in casual play so the current sytem works fine due to the poor quality of the current FW rules.

And you know what? saying 'Oh they are underpowered, so it is ok...' Not everyone wants to play games where they have an advantage because the person is handicapping themselves with really bad FW units either. I want all the units added to the core ruleset to be balanced, not overpowered or underpowered. Wanting balance is a good thing and helps everyone. Introducing broken units into the game and calling people Dicks and afraid to lose is a bad thing.

backpeddling?

It's called agreeing to disagree and attempting to move on as we are not going to agree.

Take a deep breathe...

Better?