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.

schadenfreude wrote:

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.

But who cares about Apoc games? "Legalizing" Forgeworld rules is not the same as saying "Use Apoc rules in all your games."

Xca|iber wrote:

But who cares about Apoc games? "Legalizing" Forgeworld rules is not the same as saying "Use Apoc rules in all your games."

Not really. Forge World units are as much a game expansion as are rules sets like Apocalypse, Planet Strike, or Cities of Death. I do not assume that Apocalypse rules are available for a regular game without talking about it with an opponent first, any more than I expect FW units or army lists to be.

I don't think there are any problems with the way things are right now. I know people who use certain FW units and most of the people they play at my FLGS don't really care. The problem I see with the idea of GW coming out and "legitiatizing" FW units/army lists for casual play, is that it will lead people to seek out and utilize the most broken units from those books. As it stands, usually people asking to introduce FW models into games are not trying to spam the OP stuff, but rather using stuff that fits into the theme of their army. I would hate to see tournaments around me start allowing FW stuff regularly.

augustus5 wrote:

Xca|iber wrote:

But who cares about Apoc games? "Legalizing" Forgeworld rules is not the same as saying "Use Apoc rules in all your games."

Not really. Forge World units are as much a game expansion as are rules sets like Apocalypse, Planet Strike, or Cities of Death. I do not assume that Apocalypse rules are available for a regular game without talking about it with an opponent first, any more than I expect FW units or army lists to be.

I don't think there are any problems with the way things are right now. I know people who use certain FW units and most of the people they play at my FLGS don't really care. The problem I see with the idea of GW coming out and "legitiatizing" FW units/army lists for casual play, is that it will lead people to seek out and utilize the most broken units from those books. As it stands, usually people asking to introduce FW models into games are not trying to spam the OP stuff, but rather using stuff that fits into the theme of their army. I would hate to see tournaments around me start allowing FW stuff regularly.

My point was that his argument against power-lifters was entirely based on the Apocalypse ruleset. In a regular game, I find it very hard to believe that any but the most broken FW units would change the game as dramatically as "removing the Force Org chart" (as in Apoc) or "allowing DS units to assault on the turn they arrive" (as in Planet Strike).

As far as I'm concerned, unless someone is dropping units on the table that no vanilla 40k army can handle (e.g. titans, superheavies, some flyers), and as long as they bring the relevant rules themselves, I've got no problem facing off against their army.

Xca|iber wrote:the Force Org chart" (as in Apoc) or "allowing DS units to assault on the turn they arrive" (as in Planet Strike).

As far as I'm concerned, unless someone is dropping units on the table that no vanilla 40k army can handle (e.g. titans, superheavies, some flyers), and as long as they bring the relevant rules themselves, I've got no problem facing off against their army.

Then you can choose to gove your consent and play them? The same way it works right now?

Unsure why you need to harm the game as a whole and ruin everyone else's way of playing both casual and sportshammer when people can simply continue to ask permission/give consent as they do now. The only people who don't work under the current system are people who are looking to abuse forgeworld and people who lack the social skills to ask permission in a reasonable way.

Except I can't take my krieg list to my local GW and play a pick-up game.

Adding in FW stuff, assuming they're cleaning up the various lists like they did with the Krieg list (bringing it in line with the current IG dex), does no more harm than showing up with a draigo list with 3 psyriflespam dreads, or any of the other spam lists from any of the codexes.

Players ruin people's way of playing the game, not the lists or what's available in them.

Cruentus wrote:Except I can't take my krieg list to my local GW and play a pick-up game.

Sure you can. You just have to ask permission and since all pick-up games require permission, nothing has changed.

I have played IA dredbash in GW stores before. I show up. I take out my models and I say "Would you play against the IA Dredbash list?" they either say yes or no.

If you have your models and ask permission, most people will be fine with it. If they decline, play someone else. I am unsure why people seem to be so socially inept they can't seem to ask permission and need mommy GW to force people to play with them. I think it is perfectly valid for someone who had no idea what a meka dred is and has no counter for it to decline a game since he was planning for the core ruleset. What is the point of playing a game unfairly stacked before a dice is rolled? except if your goal is to win games against unprepared opponents. Expanding the core ruleset and adding the horribly unfair units to it ruins the game for everyone.

Drop the 10% broken and everyone will be fine, until then opponents consent which works fine for people who have social skills.

Also all the Iguard codexes and Ork Codexes can be fielded with core codex rules. You can always play your Krieg as regular iguard the same way my Dredbash can be a regular ork army.

So after 6 pages we have:

1. All pickup games require opponent permission
2. Tournament organizers control what army lists are available for tournament play.

I do not see how anything GW could say/do would change those two facts. At my FLGS we have allowed forgeworld army lists (in complete, so Kreig, Elysians, Seige, etc) but not just random units from IAA or the earlier IAs. This has worked out well so far, especially since we enforce ether having the FW model or a wysiwyg conversion thereof if you are using something GW does not make. It has worked out pretty well so far. We are even looking at allowing the standalone 40k approved units from IAA2nd to be entered into our tournaments in the appropriate codex...but this is TBD at the moment. As for casual games, were pretty chill about it...but then again we also do not have anyone trying to break the game for casual play.

Oh and if you build your army for the Krieg list it is really hard to play regular IG...because it means that you probalby own several gun emplacements, for both your elite and HS slots...these have no equivalent in the IG codex...unless you want me to pretend my Bassilisk emplacement is a tank

augustus5 wrote:

I don't think there are any problems with the way things are right now. I know people who use certain FW units and most of the people they play at my FLGS don't really care. The problem I see with the idea of GW coming out and "legitiatizing" FW units/army lists for casual play, is that it will lead people to seek out and utilize the most broken units from those books.

Of which there are, at most, maybe 5 or 6, probably fewer? And how is that different than the situation with normal codex books?

As it stands, usually people asking to introduce FW models into games are not trying to spam the OP stuff, but rather using stuff that fits into the theme of their army. I would hate to see tournaments around me start allowing FW stuff regularly.

If you think tournaments will be any more unbalanced than they already are, I hate to break it to you, but it'll just be a different flavor of unbalanced, nothing more. You pretty much have 6 or so armies that will routinely do well at tournaments and the other 10 will generally be there for fodder, occaisionally making surprising results but primarily only about 1/3rd of the armies routinely place well. Adding FW to that won't change much there.

I've seen more productive arguments on politics and religion. This is going nowhere.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

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.

I'm just responding to one of your 4 points. How did you get all of that gak from a response to something YOU said? Even just the LRA being included would wreck the game. IG Tank companies would be impossible for certain codexes** to beat.

**GW says codexes, and half the words in 40k are bastardized, but you don't go around correcting everything else do you? therefore it is in fact incorrect to say codices

H.B.M.C. wrote: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.

Of course you are still wrong if you believe that there are not FW rules that are completely convoluted and complicated, anyone could realize that upon inspection of an IA or two, but the point that you missed entirely is that IA has some wacky ass rules and you are the one that literally just said "You're going to need to quote some of those obscure and weird rules."

Or had you forgotten? I mean, you did write that a whole several hours ago, and I only quoted it once in my response.

But hey, making a grand point against something I didn't even almost say is way way easier than responding to things I do say.

The TO in a tournament can do whatever they feel like.
People at a FLGS can refuse to play any army they don't feel like playing.
Fully legal in all games=GW saying it's fully legal in Ard Boys.
I don't think FW will ever be fully legal in all games.

There are too many models in FW to do so, and not enough playtesting.

What I can see GW doing is printing more FW models in white dwarf and endorsing specific models as being fully legal (like the nightspinner), but let's face 1 simple fact. GW is not going to green light every single unit from nearly a dozen imperial armor books.

Let's take this 1 link for example.



Forget power lifters, FW would green light the following.

Cyclops demo charges at 25 points a pop.
Manticores would have 2 missiles to choose from. The familiar storm eagle the Manticore missile S9 AP2 Heavy 1 with a 7" blast radius
100 point immobile manticore platforms can also be purchased.
Full flyer rules would be in place.

Armored battle groups would be in effect. Every vehicle could take 1 ace skill. Just imagine a standard IG army with the following.
Night fighting +5 points on a unit with a spotlight
Ace Gunner +10 points: +1 to pen so Hydras would be S7 +1 +1D6, Vendettas would be S9 +1 +1D6, and Manticores would be S10 +1 +best of 2D6
Hardened crew 10 points to ignore shaken on a 4+ Not as good as fortitude, but this would be on an IG vehicle probably a Vendetta with built in extra armor that reduces all stunned down to shaken anyways.
Slight loader +20 points: A stationary ordinance weapon fires twice. Start the game turn 1 with 3 manticores firing off 6 of their 12 missiles, or Basiliks get to shoot twice each turn.

Add in HQ command tanks: Any tank (which includes ordinance platforms as they are a tank) within 6" ignores all shaken results

Being too poor to afford the splurge onto FW stuff after paying out my normal bills and putting cash aside for my kids I can honestly say that as long as I could see the rules beforehand and got to agree or say nope beforehand wouldn't bother me. Too many people seem to "misread" rules for stuff their opponents don't know anything about these days.
However pickup games, I'd prefer to have it base 40K, no additions.

Being I personally use extended codexes / fan units etc, and am happy to so long as it's balanced on paper and a relevent model is on the table (be it scratchbuilt or converted) it would be a little hypocrytical of me to have any other attitude to any other aspect of the game.

Lightcavalier wrote:
1. All pickup games require opponent permission

Er, of course they do. It's not as if you have a gun to your opponent's head and are forcing them to play against you.

Are you?

schadenfreude wrote:Let's take this 1 link for example.

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

Link fixed for the unwary. This gentleman is referring to IA1, by the way.

schadenfreude wrote:Cyclops demo charges at 25 points a pop.
Manticores would have 2 missiles to choose from. The familiar storm eagle the Manticore missile S9 AP2 Heavy 1 with a 7" blast radius
100 point immobile manticore platforms can also be purchased.

1, 25 pts for a 10/10/10 one-shot demo charge, which is destroyed on a glancing or penetrating hit, and can even explode amongst the enemy if hit correctly? Or you could just gun down the lone IG controler, at which point it just sits there...
2, 3 choices, actually - Manticore (really big boom, 1 template per missile), Storm Eagle (see IG dex) and Sky Eagle (AA missile). You can't mix & match during a game, and the Manticore missile costs additional points. Oh, and the Manticore missile has a 36" min range rendering it useless in most games on a 6'x4' table.
3, 100 points for an immobile, 11/11/11 platform that needs LOS to shoot at things? Also, see point 2 re missile types.

schadenfreude wrote:Full flyer rules would be in place.

There's already been talk about full flyer rules being in 6th edition anyway.

schadenfreude wrote:Armored battle groups would be in effect. Every vehicle could take 1 ace skill. Just imagine a standard IG army with the following.
Night fighting +5 points on a unit with a spotlight
Ace Gunner +10 points: +1 to pen so Hydras would be S7 +1 +1D6, Vendettas would be S9 +1 +1D6, and Manticores would be S10 +1 +best of 2D6
Hardened crew 10 points to ignore shaken on a 4+ Not as good as fortitude, but this would be on an IG vehicle probably a Vendetta with built in extra armor that reduces all stunned down to shaken anyways.
Slight loader +20 points: A stationary ordinance weapon fires twice. Start the game turn 1 with 3 manticores firing off 6 of their 12 missiles, or Basiliks get to shoot twice each turn.

Add in HQ command tanks: Any tank (which includes ordinance platforms as they are a tank) within 6" ignores all shaken results

Except that the Armoured Battlegroup is its own army list, so your standard IG army isn't going to get those Ace Skills. And if you actually read through the list, you'll note the many units missing that an IG army would normally have access to, with tank squadrons in their place.

Also, the Armoured Battlegroup can't take the Hydra/Earthshaker/Manticore platforms, and can't field the Manticore as a HS choice, either. Basilisks getting to double tap isn't unheard of, either - they used to in Epic, and *might* have been able to do something along those lines in 2nd Edition, though I'd need to find the rules for them then. I thought the current net opinion was that Basilisks were rubbish, anyway...

Dysartes wrote:

schadenfreude wrote:Let's take this 1 link for example.

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

Link fixed for the unwary. This gentleman is referring to IA1, by the way.

schadenfreude wrote:Cyclops demo charges at 25 points a pop.
Manticores would have 2 missiles to choose from. The familiar storm eagle the Manticore missile S9 AP2 Heavy 1 with a 7" blast radius
100 point immobile manticore platforms can also be purchased.

1, 25 pts for a 10/10/10 one-shot demo charge, which is destroyed on a glancing or penetrating hit, and can even explode amongst the enemy if hit correctly? Or you could just gun down the lone IG controler, at which point it just sits there...
2, 3 choices, actually - Manticore (really big boom, 1 template per missile), Storm Eagle (see IG dex) and Sky Eagle (AA missile). You can't mix & match during a game, and the Manticore missile costs additional points. Oh, and the Manticore missile has a 36" min range rendering it useless in most games on a 6'x4' table.
3, 100 points for an immobile, 11/11/11 platform that needs LOS to shoot at things? Also, see point 2 re missile types.

schadenfreude wrote:Full flyer rules would be in place.

There's already been talk about full flyer rules being in 6th edition anyway.

schadenfreude wrote:Armored battle groups would be in effect. Every vehicle could take 1 ace skill. Just imagine a standard IG army with the following.
Night fighting +5 points on a unit with a spotlight
Ace Gunner +10 points: +1 to pen so Hydras would be S7 +1 +1D6, Vendettas would be S9 +1 +1D6, and Manticores would be S10 +1 +best of 2D6
Hardened crew 10 points to ignore shaken on a 4+ Not as good as fortitude, but this would be on an IG vehicle probably a Vendetta with built in extra armor that reduces all stunned down to shaken anyways.
Slight loader +20 points: A stationary ordinance weapon fires twice. Start the game turn 1 with 3 manticores firing off 6 of their 12 missiles, or Basiliks get to shoot twice each turn.

Add in HQ command tanks: Any tank (which includes ordinance platforms as they are a tank) within 6" ignores all shaken results

Except that the Armoured Battlegroup is its own army list, so your standard IG army isn't going to get those Ace Skills. And if you actually read through the list, you'll note the many units missing that an IG army would normally have access to, with tank squadrons in their place.

Also, the Armoured Battlegroup can't take the Hydra/Earthshaker/Manticore platforms, and can't field the Manticore as a HS choice, either. Basilisks getting to double tap isn't unheard of, either - they used to in Epic, and *might* have been able to do something along those lines in 2nd Edition, though I'd need to find the rules for them then. I thought the current net opinion was that Basilisks were rubbish, anyway...

Oh Dysartes, facts are meaningless. You can use facts to prove anything that is even remotely true...

What ever happened to Use your codex and no more than one codex? So in essence, youi are using 2 books now instead of one.

Again, easy to say if you are a SM or IG player not so easy when you are not and you don't have anything updated in years or not even in a FW book.

I don't see it happening.

hsojvvad wrote:What ever happened to Use your codex and no more than one codex? So in essence, youi are using 2 books now instead of one.

Again, easy to say if you are a SM or IG player not so easy when you are not and you don't have anything updated in years or not even in a FW book.

I can only think of two armies that don't, to my knowledge, have units in an IA volume, and they're DE and Necrons - and I'm not certain that the Necron Pylon hasn't turned up in books previously. On the other hand, both races are getting stuff in Imperial Armour: Apocalypse Second Edition, when it comes out.

Having said that, I'd be interested in seeing what FW might do if they did a campaign book featuring either of the above (though I would hope that Necrons have a new 'dex before that happens).

I see this happening for 1 reason, the white dwarf stuff, sisters of battle codex is fully legal and is written inside white dwarf, it would be very easy to include forge world rules into white dwarf pages and call it legal, so GW can pick a choose which forge world rules they like and include those legally.

Think about the potential for profit making if they do include FW rules - so many expensive units to sell.

If GW is going to release more LEGAL rules (like the chaos legion rumors) in the white dwarf pages its surely possible to see FW stuff legalized and hopefully they will be as this will allow people to play with more variation.

I remember someone at FW saying that they want to make AdMech codex (something about being Vampire counts of 40k i.e Powerful leaders and lots of cannon fodder).
Would you not want to have such rules legalised? same as chaos dwarfs, surely you would want them tourny legal? I know I do.

yevix wrote:I see this happening for 1 reason, the white dwarf stuff, sisters of battle codex is fully legal and is written inside white dwarf, it would be very easy to include forge world rules into white dwarf pages and call it legal, so GW can pick a choose which forge world rules they like and include those legally.

We had this. it was called Chapter approved. Imperial Armorer was released side-by-side with Chapter approved. Chapter approved was in two categories: Codex Legal or test rules. Imperial Armorer never made chapter approved. Having WD return the Codex legal rules in WD means nothing for Forgeworld.

schadenfreude wrote:
Fully legal in all games=GW saying it's fully legal in Ard Boys.

QFT

If it's legal in 'ard boyz a lot of other tourneys will follow suit. Then the tourney players will be more than willing to face them in 'casual' practice games.

hsojvvad wrote:What ever happened to Use your codex and no more than one codex? So in essence, youi are using 2 books now instead of one.

Again, easy to say if you are a SM or IG player not so easy when you are not and you don't have anything updated in years or not even in a FW book.

This is a pretty recent thing. Talk to people who ran Salamanders, Black Templars, Speed Freeks, Seeding Swarms, Lost and the Damned, or even Daemon Hunter and Witch Hunter allies.

Lightcavalier wrote:So after 6 pages we have:

1. All pickup games require opponent permission
2. Tournament organizers control what army lists are available for tournament play.

I do not see how anything GW could say/do would change those two facts. At my FLGS we have allowed forgeworld army lists (in complete, so Kreig, Elysians, Seige, etc) but not just random units from IAA or the earlier IAs. This has worked out well so far, especially since we enforce ether having the FW model or a wysiwyg conversion thereof if you are using something GW does not make. It has worked out pretty well so far. We are even looking at allowing the standalone 40k approved units from IAA2nd to be entered into our tournaments in the appropriate codex...but this is TBD at the moment. As for casual games, were pretty chill about it...but then again we also do not have anyone trying to break the game for casual play.

Oh and if you build your army for the Krieg list it is really hard to play regular IG...because it means that you probalby own several gun emplacements, for both your elite and HS slots...these have no equivalent in the IG codex...unless you want me to pretend my Bassilisk emplacement is a tank

Yes this is it I think, but the discussion has devolved into people trying to score points off one another.

As has been said, all the 'issues' with Forgeworld stemmed from the early books, and the fear that your opponent was going to plonk a baneblade on the table in front of you - and so 'opponents permission' was born.

To be fair, I have never ever refused to play against an FW army, nor has anyone refused to play against the small FW elements in my own armies. I have also never ever seen anyone refuse, across a multitude of gaming stores and clubs.

The key is having a level of politeness with your opponent - the whole shared experience thing. If anything is out of the ordinary with my force, and I don't know my opponent well, I always make sure that they know exactly what my army is and the various bits and pieces are. In this kind of situation, "are you OK with me using this?" will sit far better than having an abrasive attitude and "it's my right to use this model, GW says it's ok SO THERE ".

Given this approach, outside of a tournament game I can't imagine anyone who would react badly to it and refuse.

nkelsch wrote:

yevix wrote:I see this happening for 1 reason, the white dwarf stuff, sisters of battle codex is fully legal and is written inside white dwarf, it would be very easy to include forge world rules into white dwarf pages and call it legal, so GW can pick a choose which forge world rules they like and include those legally.

We had this. it was called Chapter approved. Imperial Armorer was released side-by-side with Chapter approved. Chapter approved was in two categories: Codex Legal or test rules. Imperial Armorer never made chapter approved. Having WD return the Codex legal rules in WD means nothing for Forgeworld.

Agreed. CA = fail. I hope it never comes back.

Consider first that Forge World makes primarily Super-Heavy, Gargantuan Creature, and Flyer models that are explicitly legal in Apocalypse and are explicitly illegal in non-Apocalypse games. Most Forge World stuff that isn't Apocalypse-scale is either useless (come on, would you really give up your Hammerhead's railgun to take a longer-ranged plasma rifle?) or overpriced (Lord Zhufor has +1 S, +1 WS, and a technically illegal weapon configuration over a normal Khorne-marked Terminator Lord for +50pts); a good percentage of the rest is only relevant in Apocalypse (what's the point of having a Firestorm with AA scatter lasers if there are no flyers?).

The tiny little bit of stuff that's left (Tau Tetras, Eldar Hornets, that sort of thing) is mostly pretty well-balanced, but if you're polite you'll still ask if your opponent will let you use it (heck, casually it's generally a good idea to ask if Special Characters are allowed if you're not facing a regular opponent under a set of established house rules).

AnomanderRake wrote:Consider first that Forge World makes primarily Super-Heavy, Gargantuan Creature, and Flyer models that are explicitly legal in Apocalypse and are explicitly illegal in non-Apocalypse games.

This hasn't been true for a long, long time. While yes, they have a large amount of superheavy/gargantuan/flier units, it usually amounts for only a handful for each race, and some have none. The vast majoirty of their inventory now is alternate models that use exisiting rules (older/alternate pattern tanks and vehicles, infantry that can use existing rules, conversion bits with existing rules).

AnomanderRake wrote:Consider first that Forge World makes primarily Super-Heavy, Gargantuan Creature, and Flyer models that are explicitly legal in Apocalypse and are explicitly illegal in non-Apocalypse games.

Except they don't. And they aren't. Super heavies are legal in non-Apoc games, as long as the rules for super heavies are obeyed (must be a game of 2000+ points, must use second detachments). And FW makes far, far, far more non-super heavy units than they make super heavy.

AnomanderRake wrote:(heck, casually it's generally a good idea to ask if Special Characters are allowed if you're not facing a regular opponent under a set of established house rules).

That's an interesting one - I thought Special Characters had lost the "opponent's consent" stigma they have in 3rd/4th.

To be honest anyone who can read should understand that FW material has to go threw GW editors before they hit the prints becasue of the copy right laws with GW on FW....if it got the 40k/GW seals its fair game by me and legallly passed by GW also if it was there seal on it plus ....its nice to see something different in armys besides these cookie cutters ive been reading and having to play.....plus I dont think anyone at GW would mind FW doing all the work while stuffing the wallets of GW