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.

If games workshop wants forgeworld models in their games, why not put them in the codex?

Some of these IA units are older than the codex for their army. So why aren't they included? I am not buying extra books to field some overpriced models with silly rules that usually break some aspect of the game. And I am not playing against them either.

Kevlar wrote:If games workshop wants forgeworld models in their games, why not put them in the codex?

Some of these IA units are older than the codex for their army. So why aren't they included? I am not buying extra books to field some overpriced models with silly rules that usually break some aspect of the game. And I am not playing against them either.

I don't usually use FW but I think I can say that with that mentality I wouldn't enjoy playing against you. Do you by any chance play GK and are afraid of other armies beating you? Cause it really looks like that

Kevlar wrote:If games workshop wants forgeworld models in their games, why not put them in the codex?

Some of these IA units are older than the codex for their army. So why aren't they included? I am not buying extra books to field some overpriced models with silly rules that usually break some aspect of the game. And I am not playing against them either.

Well, they have put some in the codex. (along with filling codex gaps) I'm not going to make a total list, but look at the Valkyrie FW. Tau piranha FW, hydra flack tank FW. Manticore FW wait for it......Wave serpent, in the codex for years, options scratch build or FW (Untill a few years ago). Plus most of the leman Russ variants that make it back into 5th Ed. Forgeworld.

Kevlar wrote:If games workshop wants forgeworld models in their games, why not put them in the codex?

Some of these IA units are older than the codex for their army. So why aren't they included? I am not buying extra books to field some overpriced models with silly rules that usually break some aspect of the game. And I am not playing against them either.

Short answer:
Because there is a lot of money to be made in having to order Imperial Arour books as they come out to give the rules for the new FW models everyone wants to buy.

Kevlar wrote:If games workshop wants forgeworld models in their games, why not put them in the codex?

Some of these IA units are older than the codex for their army. So why aren't they included? I am not buying extra books to field some overpriced models with silly rules that usually break some aspect of the game. And I am not playing against them either.

In what way do they have silly, broken rules? LR Achilles is strong, but for it's monstrous cost I can field 4 broadsides with Targeting Arrays, which WILL wreck it.

XV9s can make 6 melta shots a turn...on a roll of a dice, for the price of 2-3 crisis suits.

The Contemptor has amazing weaponry and stats? It also costs about as much as Lysander when kitted out.

The Caestus assault ram is really good at ramming stuff? Really, that's the only thing it's good at, and is specifically what it's designed for.

Psyfleman dreads, Purifiers, Paladins, Blood talons, all these things are just so much more broken, and very, very cheesy

I really, really can't understand the attitude of some of the people posting in this thread. It's as though the FW break some perfectly balanced version of the game, as though 40k is like the sky city in Star Wars which, instead of being able to float in the sky, is instead balanced on a big stick with people having to walk exactly opposite sides of the disk otherwise it will tip over and be destroyed.

Well, here is a wake up call: 40k is not a fairly balanced game most of the time. It's very much paper, scissors, stones, and I have lost track of the number of games of which I have known the outcome without a single dice being rolled. That doesn't bother me that much - I take it for what it is, and have fun in the look of a well set up game and having banter with my opponent as the games go on. But, chess (or any approximation of it), with 2 minds locked in ferocious struggle across a balanced playing field, it most certainly ain't.

As well as that, after playing for many, many years, and seeing perhaps 426,000 tactical marines disembark from a Rhino, it's actually massively refreshing to come up against something new for once. As HBMC says I would love to play against D.E. The chap at my club who plays orks, a beautifully painted and converted force, is often booked what seems to be a month in advance. I have some FW bits, but a mass of non-GW bits in my armies (and perhaps most importantly, not all SM armies) and I am often in a similar situation. I would like to see a Cestus Assault Ram disembark some marines for once, and why not a few of the fancy old-style armour mark marines while they are at it?

I can only assume that people objecting to it:
a) Have not read the rules and are just going off hearsay.
b) Have some inaccurate notion about the 'balance' of 40k, and think that the FW books are spoiling something that does not actually exist.
c) Have played so few games of 40k that they haven't got bored with the basic set-up yet.

Anyway, end of rant. In summary, anyone who says 'I won't play that army, you've got a FW turret on that razorback' needs their head examining.

Pacific wrote:I really, really can't understand the attitude of some of the people posting in this thread. It's as though the FW break some perfectly balanced version of the game, as though 40k is like the sky city in Star Wars which, instead of being able to float in the sky, is instead balanced on a big stick with people having to walk exactly opposite sides of the disk otherwise it will tip over and be destroyed.

Well, here is a wake up call: 40k is not a fairly balanced game most of the time. It's very much paper, scissors, stones, and I have lost track of the number of games of which I have known the outcome without a single dice being rolled. That doesn't bother me that much - I take it for what it is, and have fun in the look of a well set up game and having banter with my opponent as the games go on. But, chess (or any approximation of it), with 2 minds locked in ferocious struggle across a balanced playing field, it most certainly ain't.

As well as that, after playing for many, many years, and seeing perhaps 426,000 tactical marines disembark from a Rhino, it's actually massively refreshing to come up against something new for once. As HBMC says I would love to play against D.E. The chap at my club who plays orks, a beautifully painted and converted force, is often booked what seems to be a month in advance. I have some FW bits, but a mass of non-GW bits in my armies (and perhaps most importantly, not all SM armies) and I am often in a similar situation. I would like to see a Cestus Assault Ram disembark some marines for once, and why not a few of the fancy old-style armour mark marines while they are at it?

I can only assume that people objecting to it:
a) Have not read the rules and are just going off hearsay.
b) Have some inaccurate notion about the 'balance' of 40k, and think that the FW books are spoiling something that does not actually exist.
c) Have played so few games of 40k that they haven't got bored with the basic set-up yet.

Anyway, end of rant. In summary, anyone who says 'I won't play that army, you've got a FW turret on that razorback' needs their head examining.

Could'nt agree more,

I also agree exactly with that statement.

I would rather go up against an Ultramarines army with a single Land Raider Achilles, or some other Forgeworld tank, than someone with an army of Grey Knights.

AegisGrimm wrote:I also agree exactly with that statement.

I would rather go up against an Ultramarines army with a single Land Raider Achilles, or some other Forgeworld tank, than someone with an army of Grey Knights.

THIS.

I run an Armored Battlegroup list out of IA1, using the August 2008 FAQ to bring it in line with the latest Codex: Imperial Guard.

It has ten Leman Russes and a techpriest with a chimera and some servitors.

It has lost many more games than it has won, and takes some real tactical acumen to field without getting stomped into the ground by close combat attacks.

Who here would play me? If not, why not?

I have a similar situation, Unit, where I run an armoured interdiction cadre, with literally every unit in my armour with an AV other than the commander, using a generous amount of FW armoured piranhas, and it is about 50/50 wins to losses.

Yeah, I catch flak from a friend in our club for the rare occasions I field my Namarian Arm'd Company (Gaunts Ghost Arm' d w/ Gen Grizmund). He runs an extremely effective BA Mech list, and has often beaten me, yet he has often taken issue with me fielding a Forge world/ IA tank list. Strange, considering his list is pretty much a leaf blower against most other standard armies in our club.

Kevlar wrote:If games workshop wants forgeworld models in their games, why not put them in the codex?

Some of these IA units are older than the codex for their army. So why aren't they included? I am not buying extra books to field some overpriced models with silly rules that usually break some aspect of the game. And I am not playing against them either.

I kind of have to agree, why GW doesn't just release Chapter Approved's for FW model is kind of odd.

I put more love into my armored company than every other army I own.

It's lovingly painted, with every tank named and organized into squadrons. Hell, I have an entire regiment based on the Armored Battlegroup list.

I have 23 Leman Russes, two Shadowswords, a Baneblade, and a Stormblade. Many of them have Forgeworld upgrades / parts.

I sincerely wonder why anyone would avoid playing against it - with the amount of love I put into it, I am sometimes put off by people who refuse to play it because it has "ten LRBTS!!!!"

They know that the Imperial Guard codex can field 9, right? With better options for the remaining points to boot.

Unit1126PLL wrote:I run an Armored Battlegroup list out of IA1, using the August 2008 FAQ to bring it in line with the latest Codex: Imperial Guard.

It has ten Leman Russes and a techpriest with a chimera and some servitors.

It has lost many more games than it has won, and takes some real tactical acumen to field without getting stomped into the ground by close combat attacks.

Who here would play me? If not, why not?

I would love to, if only to see how many tanks I can fit under my Warp Hunter's D-Cannon marker =P Nothing else bar two Prisms, two Hornets, and 1 squad of Fire Dragons can touch you unless they hit rear armour or the Chimera anyway

EDIT: Of course, that's at about 1500pts, if higher then I get more Fire Dragon goodness.

Unit1126PLL wrote:I put more love into my armored company than every other army I own.

It's lovingly painted, with every tank named and organized into squadrons. Hell, I have an entire regiment based on the Armored Battlegroup list.

I have 23 Leman Russes, two Shadowswords, a Baneblade, and a Stormblade. Many of them have Forgeworld upgrades / parts.

I sincerely wonder why anyone would avoid playing against it - with the amount of love I put into it, I am sometimes put off by people who refuse to play it because it has "ten LRBTS!!!!"

They know that the Imperial Guard codex can field 9, right? With better options for the remaining points to boot.

I think in this case, people are reticent to play against this because they haven't tailored their list to the amount of armor presented them....


Personally, I would love to play against this list, as I don't really tailor anything anyways, i'd just have to hope that what AT i did bring was enough.

Ensis Ferrae wrote:
I think in this case, people are reticent to play against this because they haven't tailored their list to the amount of armor presented them....


Personally, I would love to play against this list, as I don't really tailor anything anyways, i'd just have to hope that what AT i did bring was enough.

Avatar 720 wrote:
I would love to, if only to see how many tanks I can fit under my Warp Hunter's D-Cannon marker =P Nothing else bar two Prisms, two Hornets, and 1 squad of Fire Dragons can touch you unless they hit rear armour or the Chimera anyway

EDIT: Of course, that's at about 1500pts, if higher then I get more Fire Dragon goodness.

SECRET WEAPON:
Anyone with a Str. 4 or higher CQB attack can significantly damage a Leman Russ.

Y'know, Striking Scorpions, any warlocks with the Spear of Str9 against vehicles, etc.

Assuming CQB is something to do with CC (further augmented by the fact you mention CC units - also bear in mind that witchblades are S9 in CC against vehicles too, the spear can just be thrown for a S9 ranged attack first), then it's pointless for me.

I run a complete mech list, Farseer holed up with avengers, of which there are 3 lots of 5 in scatter serpents with spirit stones. At 1500, there's one squad of FDs in a shuriserpent with SS, at 1750 there are two. At 1750 the Farseer is Eldrad and I also have an Autarch with a fusion gun and no S4+ CC. I also have a Warp Hunter, two Prisms, and two Hornets with Scatter Lasers or Pulse Lasers (the latter if I can shave 80pts somewhere).

There's nothing there that can damage you in CC unless it's the Farseer (unlikely to reach combat) or Fire Dragons (unlikely to be able to charge with Melta Bombs). Next best thing is attempting S10 rams with vehicles.

Kevlar wrote:If games workshop wants forgeworld models in their games, why not put them in the codex?

Some of these IA units are older than the codex for their army. So why aren't they included? I am not buying extra books to field some overpriced models with silly rules that usually break some aspect of the game. And I am not playing against them either.

You're obviously free to choose whoever you want to play with, but refusing to play someone because they have a Forgeworld unit is just as stupid as refusing to play someone because they are wearing a red T-shirt.

The cynics view on FW models is as follows:

To make elitist models that people will pay a fortune for because not everyone will have them.


but another way to view it is that FW produce miniatures that are supposed to be few and far between. they are not meant to be in every army going. it's to add a bit of variety out there in peoples armies.

If you want to refuse to play someone with FW stuff, then your either not a good player, or a very sore loser. either way. you need to take a look in the mirror, as there is no reason to refuse playing anything FW.

I have a mass amount of FW, and I've yet to meet someone who won't play me. even if they know they are going to lose.

One thing to remember, ITS A GAME, don not take it so seriously.

I rather like most of the units, as do my Tau-playing friends. I'm seriously considering investing in a Tomb Stalker, as the model is awesome and so are the rules. It also takes up a HS slot, which I am completely OK with.

I think that if you show your opponent the datasheet prior to the game starting, it should be fine. Experimental rules are just that, experimental, and so need to be experimented with in games.

--Interesting note: apparently, no one told the writes of the Apoc 2nd ed that "we'll be back" is no longer an actual thing.

McNinja wrote:I rather like most of the units, as do my Tau-playing friends. I'm seriously considering investing in a Tomb Stalker, as the model is awesome and so are the rules. It also takes up a HS slot, which I am completely OK with.

I think that if you show your opponent the datasheet prior to the game starting, it should be fine. Experimental rules are just that, experimental, and so need to be experimented with in games.

--Interesting note: apparently, no one told the writes of the Apoc 2nd ed that "we'll be back" is no longer an actual thing.

That was made before Necrons were remade.

really, when you think about it, most of the FW 40K units only cost about the cost of an extra unit. Pricey, but by no means excessive once someone is already hitting the 2000-2500+ points range. You've already invested substantial money in the army and your over the common points so double price for one unit probably isn't going to break the bank. I really don't see FW as nearly as elitist as it used to be, just more inconvenient to order from as you can't just walk in and buy them.

wolf13 wrote:really, when you think about it, most of the FW 40K units only cost about the cost of an extra unit. Pricey, but by no means excessive once someone is already hitting the 2000-2500+ points range. You've already invested substantial money in the army and your over the common points so double price for one unit probably isn't going to break the bank. I really don't see FW as nearly as elitist as it used to be, just more inconvenient to order from as you can't just walk in and buy them.

Except for the monstrous shipping costs.

Emerett wrote:

Kevlar wrote:If games workshop wants forgeworld models in their games, why not put them in the codex?

Some of these IA units are older than the codex for their army. So why aren't they included? I am not buying extra books to field some overpriced models with silly rules that usually break some aspect of the game. And I am not playing against them either.

I kind of have to agree, why GW doesn't just release Chapter Approved's for FW model is kind of odd.

Because they don't have to, and likely don't want to. Why release the rules for free via White Dwarf when you have a division selling books for you which the target audience (that is, this particular niche within their niche hobby) is quite happy buying?

Chapter Approved articles are going to have the same legality issues (since they're still not in the codex), and knowing GW's apathy for the simple uploading of PDFs, have availability issues beyond needing to special order a book at a GW. Not to mention GW's apathy for updating anything not in a codex. You know those units in the Apocalypse books? Forgeworld can't do new rules for them anymore. That's why there were no 5th edition rules for Warhound titans, Reaver titans, Heirophants, Barbed Heirodules, Barracudas, Revenant titans, Gargantuan Squiggoths, Thunderbolts, standard Marauders (they squeezed Marauder Destroyers in) in Imperial Armour Apocalypse Second Edition. We need GW to make a new Apocalypse book and not forget to include some of those units (they won't) or release PDF updates for them (they won't) f we want new rules for those.

What irritates me is people complain about the lack of accessibility in FW rules, and use it as a means to say how they shouldn't be allowed in any games. FW recently released IAA Secon Edition, which aside from the above Apocalypse only units, has all of their standard units, plus other Apocalypse only units, bar some outliers like Shadow Spectres. It's like buying an 'all 5th edition army lists in 1' book sans fluff. And this still isn't good enough. You literally have to make a single purchase and you'll know 99% of the units that can be fielded in a regular 40k game. And this isn't good enough.

Pacific wrote:I can only assume that people objecting to it:
a) Have not read the rules and are just going off hearsay.
b) Have some inaccurate notion about the 'balance' of 40k, and think that the FW books are spoiling something that does not actually exist.
c) Have played so few games of 40k that they haven't got bored with the basic set-up yet.

I choose d), all of the above.

imrandomghgh wrote:

wolf13 wrote:really, when you think about it, most of the FW 40K units only cost about the cost of an extra unit. Pricey, but by no means excessive once someone is already hitting the 2000-2500+ points range. You've already invested substantial money in the army and your over the common points so double price for one unit probably isn't going to break the bank. I really don't see FW as nearly as elitist as it used to be, just more inconvenient to order from as you can't just walk in and buy them.

Except for the monstrous shipping costs.

I just save up my wants until I have enough of an order to get free shipping. I've also found that when I order that much the order is shipped a heck of a lot faster too. Smaller orders seem to take weeks before they are shipped, yet every big order I have placed is on its way within a couple days.

Skriker

Pacific wrote:

I can only assume that people objecting to it:
a) Have not read the rules and are just going off hearsay.
b) Have some inaccurate notion about the 'balance' of 40k, and think that the FW books are spoiling something that does not actually exist.
c) Have played so few games of 40k that they haven't got bored with the basic set-up yet.

Anyway, end of rant. In summary, anyone who says 'I won't play that army, you've got a FW turret on that razorback' needs their head examining.

I am not sure anyone is objecting to anything. I am just exercising my right to not play it. Noone is forced to play something they do not like. Me, for example, I do not play Warhmmer Fantasy Battle. I do not play Warmachine. I do not play BFG. And though I play 40K, I do not play Cities of Death or Spearhead or Apocalypse either. And I do not play Forgeworld.

To answer your questions, I have read the rules for all of the above, I have no assumption that the game I do choose to play (i.e. 40K) is more balanced than those I do not play (WFB, Warmachine, 40K Cities of Death, 40K cum FW). And I have played so many games of 40K over the last 20 years or so, that I got thoroughly bored with cluttered, oversized games that stretch it beyond the game's sweat spot.

In consequence. I play 40K. No expension. Never above 1500. No FW or other expansion and addenums (hell, the 40K mainline could arguably do with less, rather than more). It's where 40K is the most fun. If it ever stops being fun, I likely stop playing 40K. And I do not appreciate uppity, condescending snobs who try to eductate me that Warmachine, WFB, FW, whatever-have-you would be "More fun" and provide a better game. Sorry. Not for me. Been there, done that. FW may not be (more or less) broken than any other tabletop-game out there. But it doesn't ADD anything worthwhile either. And 99% of the miniatures it produces are (in my humble opinion) butt-ugly. So keep it away from me.

Nothing obliges you to buy Forge World's models or rules if you don't like them. A reasonable and mature human being, however, doesn't arrogate to themselves the right to allow their preferences to dictate how other people play the game. Wargames require a measure of co-operation and mutual respect between the players, something you're simply refusing to extend to your opponents.

English Assassin wrote:Nothing obliges you to buy Forge World's models or rules if you don't like them. A reasonable and mature human being, however, doesn't arrogate to themselves the right to allow their preferences to dictate how other people play the game. Wargames require a measure of co-operation and mutual respect between the players, something you're simply refusing to extend to your opponents.

I would argue the same about other people trying to force an acceptance of Forgeworld products on my by presenting me with "play-it or be called a fool" choice. By and large, the attitude of FW players/proponents in this very thread has been to equate some people's reluctance to play against FW with a) ignorance, b) fear of loosing, c) small-mindedness and much worse.

I am not quite sure how this sort of arrogant prejudgement demonstrated so vividly right here in this discussion could in any way comply with anything approaching "mutual respect".