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.
Kudos to those that can play what ever they want, but it starts to enter the area of in order to properly play GW games, you need a house, the income of a 30+ year old, a large group of friends, no or an accepting spouse etc. Not a very achivable thing for teens or young people playing GW games.
This will blow your mind.
The other day (sat afternoon) I'm at the shop. I'm setting up a table for a different game. Across the aisle & a bit behind me I hear two of the kids (both 15/16 yr olds) discussing the details of a custom scenario/mission.
●They don't own houses.
●They don't own infinite models.
●They don't have anything resembling the income of an adult.
●Niether has custom built an army to play custom rules.
●and I happen to know that outside the shop neither has a pool of 40k playing friends/family.
● Oh, and neither seemed worried that the other guy was trying to gain some sort of game advantage.
They were just two (not quite random) 40k players taking a few minutes to come up with a unique mission they thought would be fun.
And over the next 2 hours or so they did indeed seem to be having fun....
So if these two kids could take a few moments?
What stops the rest of you?
I think a few things are being conflated here, which is monetary means, time, and your opponent's willingness to talk and be sportsmanlike.
Obviously Karol isn't making his argument in good faith but there's a bit going on here.
ccs 807659 11460874 wrote:Tell me again how hard is it for a DA/WS player to switch back & forth?
VS real humans, who act like real humans vs other humans. You very fast find out that no one wants to play against you. Same way as dudes who try to run a ton of legends stuff.
Daedalus81 wrote: I posted this in another thread when the topic came up with data as per the dashboard. As others have mentioned - more people get into the hobby with marine models than a faction like GSC. It can absolutely be a factor that changes our perception of the strength of a faction.
A special secondary to try and fix this may not have worked, but it was absolutely an idea worth testing. At this point I think marines are largely locked behind pretty old supplements with high cost stratagems and middling secondaries. GW probably isn't sweeping through those supplements, because they probably intend to update them with 10th. I don't see points being a good way to save them without breaking others and creating that race to the bottom again.
This is good data that fails on one point, it doesn't give you the Newcomer Win-Rate and the non-Newcomer Win-Rate. Only if those differ substantially is the issue Newcomers rather than the Codex/Supplement.
Two points - we haven't been presented with the methodology defining what a "Newcomer" is, especially how we know when someone has moved from Newcomer to non-Newcomer status, etc. I wouldn't call it "good data" rather than "noise" until we have some understanding of that.
Gamgee on Tau Players wrote:we all kill cats and sell our own families to the devil and eat live puppies.
Kanluwen wrote: This is, emphatically, why I will continue suggesting nuking Guard and starting over again. It's a legacy army that needs to be rebooted with a new focal point.
Confirmation of why no-one should listen to Kanluwen when it comes to the IG - he doesn't want the IG, he want's Kan's New Model Army...
tneva82 wrote: You aren't even trying ty pretend for honest arqument. Open bad faith trolling.
- No reason to keep this here, unless people want to use it for something...
Karol wrote: VS real humans, who act like real humans vs other humans. You very fast find out that no one wants to play against you. Same way as dudes who try to run a ton of legends stuff. Try to use their ad mecha as LoV etc.
Because of paint job?-) Paint job != rules. Hell you can't even say all blood angel rule using should be red because there are official non-red successors who would be using BA rules...So go figure. Same for others. There's more than enough fluff justification for non-X chapter-Y rules that trying to argue paint=rules makes one just look ignorant TFG.
Lol you really think people are going to get fooled by your tales of your imaginary gaming group makes rather ironic your use of real humans as your only opponents are figments of your imagination. Yeah real real people those are.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2022/11/30 06:04:17
ccs 807659 11460874 wrote:Tell me again how hard is it for a DA/WS player to switch back & forth?
VS real humans, who act like real humans vs other humans. You very fast find out that no one wants to play against you. Same way as dudes who try to run a ton of legends stuff. Try to use their ad mecha as LoV etc.
Theres nothing wrong with Legends. It's not my fault GW shoved my entire army in there. It's the rules I've got, and I'll use them.
ccs 807659 11460874 wrote:Tell me again how hard is it for a DA/WS player to switch back & forth?
VS real humans, who act like real humans vs other humans. You very fast find out that no one wants to play against you. Same way as dudes who try to run a ton of legends stuff. Try to use their ad mecha as LoV etc.
Theres nothing wrong with Legends.
There's a LOT wrong with Legends. Don't pretend otherwise.
ccs 807659 11460874 wrote:Tell me again how hard is it for a DA/WS player to switch back & forth?
VS real humans, who act like real humans vs other humans. You very fast find out that no one wants to play against you. Same way as dudes who try to run a ton of legends stuff. Try to use their ad mecha as LoV etc.
Theres nothing wrong with Legends.
There's a LOT wrong with Legends. Don't pretend otherwise.
i think they meant nothing wrong [with using] legends.
Obviously the concept of abandoning armies/units to die in there is a stupid concept that should never have become a thing.
DA are 43%
New - 42% @ 483
Exp - 42% @ 414
Vet - 48% @ 222
-- 43% newbie
Salamanders are 43%
New - 41% @ 221
Exp - 41% @ 150
Vet - 50% @ 88
-- 48% newbie
UM are 36%
New - 32% @ 322
Exp - 34% @ 173
Vet - 48% @ 145
-- 50% newbie
Tyranids are 58%
New - 52% @ 1164
Exp - 57% @ 1277
Vet - 66% @ 1127
-- 33% newbie
BA and SW noobs seem to struggle, but the factions are held up by vets who do really well. Their % of new players is much lower than other marines - similar to Nids. Those numbers likely represent the higher skill ceiling needed to succeed as BA. DA likewise are a more self-contained faction and seem to have fewer new players to drag them down. IF are just a dumpster fire.
What GW did in 9th is butcher the doctrine mechanic. No matter what marines have if your chapter happens to be based around devastator it will struggle.
At the time they had to, because it was busted in comparison to armies with no durability upgrades or similar lethality, however lots of things have changed. In almost all my games I prefer to go second. The understanding of terrain and scoring has changed the go-first dynamic quite a bit, which has in turn caused Devastator to suffer even more. It's probably time to roll that back a bit, BUT Iron Hands are a devastator faction and they do pretty well. They also have few new players and tools that make a certain set of units pretty damn good.
Marines didn't not have the shoting to levarge vs those armies, while at the same time they were weaker then those armies in melee.
I think it's hard for marines to afford to do both shooting and melee really well. It's usually a token representation. Harlequins do it all, but are "soft" and so utilize terrain to get the drop on you.
There's no cure all for marines at this point. IF are one of the few armies that need real help. Other marines are on the edge and a higher percentage of new players makes them look worse. There's likely a selection bias at play where vets migrate away from marines as well.
It's complicated. It's messy. We could spend days talking about the ins and outs of all the potential pitfalls here.
Daedalus, where did you get the breakdown of numbers for new, experienced and veteran win-rates? It's the first time I've seen any info broken down like that and I wondered how players were filtered into those categories?
Blndmage wrote: Theres nothing wrong with Legends. It's not my fault GW shoved my entire army in there. It's the rules I've got, and I'll use them.
Sure, as long as you can find anyone willing to use them with you. Most people won't because they know legends rules are a broken mess that GW is no longer supporting and don't want to deal with it.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
VladimirHerzog wrote: Obviously the concept of abandoning armies/units to die in there is a stupid concept that should never have become a thing.
Of course. But in the unfortunate reality where GW is abandoning units/armies to die legends rules aren't real rules and most people will continue to treat them that way.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/11/29 23:45:53
The Black Adder wrote: Daedalus, where did you get the breakdown of numbers for new, experienced and veteran win-rates? It's the first time I've seen any info broken down like that and I wondered how players were filtered into those categories?
They define the groups as "Veteran (attended 4+ GT), an Experienced player (2-3 GT+) or a GT+ Newcomer (attended 1)."
Obviously the groups don't indicate their actual skill, but rather their experience and time acquiring game knowledge. I believe that these counts are also not specific to that faction and is instead tied to the player ID in BCP, so a set of Vet games for a faction doesn't mean that player stuck with that faction for all 4+ tournaments.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/12/01 14:51:34
Dai wrote: Are total noobs really going to tournies in meaningul numbers? Genuine question, i am pretty out of touch with the larger community.
I don't have statistics, but I've definitely encountered some "sub-par" players who would still travel to major events. Genuinely I think it's just a social thing that some groups/people will do, and the skill level amongst a group that goes can be pretty scattershot.
Dai wrote: Are total noobs really going to tournies in meaningul numbers? Genuine question, i am pretty out of touch with the larger community.
I don't have statistics, but I've definitely encountered some "sub-par" players who would still travel to major events. Genuinely I think it's just a social thing that some groups/people will do, and the skill level amongst a group that goes can be pretty scattershot.
You can only get good through practice. Also, not all tournament players care about winning and nothing else.
Dai wrote: Are total noobs really going to tournies in meaningul numbers? Genuine question, i am pretty out of touch with the larger community.
most tournaments arent all that big and organised by LGSs across the world. So yeah, noobs are often told to show up to tournaments by their LGS staff
This is the right answer. Where I live you have a lot of beginners and pros attend the GT, but the GT tends to be 30 people or so.
Honestly noobs enjoy just playing new and interesting people and to see everyone's armies. There is a great social aspect to tournaments that I feel some people are ignoring and it isn't always about being in the top 5 placements. I have a friend group that is journeying around Europe and US to compete in GTs and many of them place in the 100s in the largest tournaments(LVO). For them the sport is just being part of a larger and vibrant community.
At the time they had to, because it was busted in comparison to armies with no durability upgrades or similar lethality, however lots of things have changed. In almost all my games I prefer to go second. The understanding of terrain and scoring has changed the go-first dynamic quite a bit, which has in turn caused Devastator to suffer even more. It's probably time to roll that back a bit, BUT Iron Hands are a devastator faction and they do pretty well. They also have few new players and tools that make a certain set of units pretty damn good.
I don't think so. Other factions had crazy rules, and they knew what rules they were testing for other armies. When they were finishing PA, they were already testing stuff like Ad Mecha and DE. GW does a ton of knee jerk reaction followed combined with "wait and see aproche". The first one means stuff like DG can get hit with a nerf bad over and over and over again, because in some sort of in house meta they are or were too strong. The second means they throw something like a secondary to marines, while making the silent king no longer core, and somehow expect that this changes , plus some other, will somehow stabilise the meta. And it finaly shows in stuff like Ad Mecha, where they can just unnerf the whole thing, and it really matters little. And by little I mean for the regular w40k player. for top Ad Mecha players having their old army back, even in a new setting could be huge. But I am not smart enough to judge that.
The last thing is that with other armies GW has no problem with making them powerful and easy to play. Take flying open top skimmers, ignore half the core rules and then we make you both resilient, and super killy on top of a lot of MW mechanics, and a noob won't be able to play with that? Especialy when the army collection is limited and the number of trap units close to zero? Tyranids with FnP on the entire army, Necron and SoB playing soliter. A new player can handle those armies. Chaos CoB are an army like that, not good enough to beat the top of the top, as a new player, but for playing against your marine or custodes friend? It is an instant win army.
Plus those non marine armies come out later in the meta, and they often have a longer span of being fun to play. If someone played eldar soup or Harlis in 9th they had two moments when those armies were at the very top and fun to play. If someone missed the early 9th, and is thinking of starting a marine army now, they better pick the right army, with the right units.
I think it's hard for marines to afford to do both shooting and melee really well. It's usually a token representation. Harlequins do it all, but are "soft" and so utilize terrain to get the drop on you.
But you can't stop them from it, because they are all mounted. And they have invs every where. And yeah marine specilise in to melee, because their army selection is in general bad as far as shoting unit goes. This creates the "best" army problem , where one could play IF with venguard veterans, some blade guard etc but it is like playing a worse version of a BA list. And just by a bit. Which still wouldn't be as bad outside of tournaments, if there wouldn't be armies that just cancel regular marine assault armies. CoB, nids, harlequins not even BAs deal with those. And when combined with armies like necron and SoB being in the meta, marines suddenly are in a position where they can't even beat half of the meta on a 50/50 basis. And it is not good, because the drip down effect works against weaker armies much stronger. A necron army or a SoB army outside of tournament setting is not that different, neither is the marine list, but the gap in how much the rules can cover for is much bigger. A marine player to get good results, has to be a good player and be lucky and not run in to counter set ups. Which, to marine players joy I am sure, can just happen by accident.
It's complicated. It's messy. We could spend days talking about the ins and outs of all the potential pitfalls here.
Well all I know is that I have not yet seen a marine player who would be happy about their army 6 months in to playing the game in 9th ed. With other armies it much different. Some armies like a yoyo, orks for example or ad mecha. It wouldn't be a problem, well a big problem, if marines weren't the flagship and the starting army for many people. And while I do understand that having 2-3 or more armies is normal in other countries. There is to many players where I live, who when faced with the prospect of being forced to rebuy an army, just quit. And often never come back. Or they go really heavy in to 3d printing, but then a lot seem to just start playing Horus Heresy.
If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain.
makes rather ironic your use of real humans as your only opponents are figments of your imagination. Yeah real real people those are.
60PL 
12PL 
