Switch Theme:

40k is at its worse point since 7th edition.  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba






tneva82 wrote:
 Gert wrote:
Wait hold up, Drukhari and Admech are hitting under 70%? That's not as bad as people have made it out to be. I'm here thinking that those two factions are taking home 80-90% win rates.


So let's have 5 games.

DE vs DE
DE vs SM
DE vs AM
DE vs IG
DE vs Ork.

All games are DE win.

DE gets 5 wins, 1 loss. 83% win rate.

See the problem?

If that 70% doesn't filter out mirror matches then 70% is sick rate.


True, but it's worth pointing out that at their craziest headiest height drukhari were at something like a ~10% playrate. Compare to post-2.0 space marines who were rocking a 45-50% playrate. The number of drukhari vs drukhari mirror-matches is an order of magnitude smaller than marine-marine mirror matches and, to make matters even worse, many armies that aren't technically marines are statistically similar enough that you're very nearly looking at a mirror match (DG, GK, Custodes etc) - other than Harlequins few armies play similarly to drukhari.

"I can't believe all these tryhard WAACs out there just care about winning all the time when it's supposed to be a game for fun!!!!!!! Also here's my 27 page essay on why marines are OP and Orkz should get a bunch of OP rules so I can win more games

-the_scotsman"

-ERJAK 
   
Made in gb
Ship's Officer





Bristol (UK)

No, but when discussing how balanced a game is pick-rates and win-rates in competitive gaming is a popular place to look.

Primarily because we have statistics for that and you can reasonably assume that, when looking at top tables, player skill and intention (eg playing to win vs fluff) isn't a million miles apart.

The data is far less sanitary when looking over my local group.
There's that player who's just a bad player, every army they touch turns to gak. There's that try-harder that takes the most meta list he can and rofl stomps all over that other player. Etc etc.
Winrates can be absolutely all over the place for all manner of reasons.
   
Made in de
Ork Admiral Kroozin Da Kosmos on Da Hulk






 kirotheavenger wrote:
No, but when discussing how balanced a game is pick-rates and win-rates in competitive gaming is a popular place to look.

Primarily because we have statistics for that and you can reasonably assume that, when looking at top tables, player skill and intention (eg playing to win vs fluff) isn't a million miles apart.

The data is far less sanitary when looking over my local group.
There's that player who's just a bad player, every army they touch turns to gak. There's that try-harder that takes the most meta list he can and rofl stomps all over that other player. Etc etc.
Winrates can be absolutely all over the place for all manner of reasons.


This, and often enough an army too powerful on a top competitive level also is too powerful at casual levels. Notable exceptions usually occur when a very specific combo is breaking tournament play that is unlikely to be part of a regular collection or particularly expensive to acquire. The 7 stormraven list is a good example of this, it had next to no impact on casual play.

But, as always, a single number is not a replacement for common sense.

Earth is not flat
Vaccines work
We've been to the moon
Climate change is real
Chemtrails aren't a thing
Evolution is a fact
Orks are not a melee army
Stand up for science!
 
   
Made in ca
Regular Dakkanaut





Do we really need pseudoscientific statistical analysis on small N sample to know that raider/dark lance spam and skitarri spam is bad game design?

Every discussion of tournament win rates always devolves into critiques of social science methodologies which are tertiary to the topic at hand.

We don't need that to know DE and AdMech are poorly balanced.
   
Made in pl
Fixture of Dakka




He is right about the fact that there is a difference, at least in some cases, between a powerful tournament list, which has a low chance to being seen at the store. And armies that are broken, because somehow the most common and popular units in them suddenly became OP.

If Ad mecha were powerful, the way they are now, but to be so they would require 6 FW tanks and 40 FW infantry, the impact would be a lot smaller, then when the basic trooper becomes the doom for other armies option.

It works in reverse too. In prior editions it would sometimes happen that tournament players would say that a faction is okey or even good, but what it requires to work is "just" a drone farm and max slots riptides. Or the above mentioned Gulliman or other re-roll base and a wall of razorbacks or stormravens.

I don't think that many GK players would be happy if someone at the studio decided to give my brotherhoods lore actual rules. And suddenly GK armies were made out of 50-60 combat sertivtors teleported in to enemy melee range turn 1. Specially if it somehow ended up both very powerful and the only proper way to play GKs.

On the flip side if GK termintors start running around with stormbolters that shot 4 times at str 5-6 with ap1-2, I would be happy, but everyone not playing GK , not so much.

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. 
   
Made in us
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba






Yep. Part of the reason why a codex drukhari/admech or a marines 2.0 caused such fervor compared to such builds as the infamous 'castellan+30 guardmen+smashcaptains" setup is that real people in casual settings actually have some of the things that are overpowering in their casual lists.

You have to make a much more active effort to avoid giving your opponent a bad time if the strong stuff in the 'dex is just...the standard troops, as opposed to weird FW/obscure allied combo funkiness.

This is, for the record, why the whole "BUT MUH ELDAR FLYERSPAM!!!" argument during marines 2.0 was bs. The number of people who could field a powerful marine army using....the contents of the game's starter boxes, vs the number of people who could bring whatever six eldar flyers to the table was preeeeeeetty lopsided.

Luckily for admech players, most of what sucks is just...stratagems. Skitarii aren't THAT crazy just on their own, if you reduced some of the combo-wombo nature of their stratagem power they'd be far less insane.

Enriched rounds going to 5+ autowound, 1CP for 10 or fewer models, 2CP for 11 or more, and the skitarii rangers one going to Assault 2 instead of Rapid Fire 2 would be a pretty solid way towards skitarii being less miserable to experience while still keeping them a satisfying, powerful unit that you can plop down on the table and get value out of.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/27 13:41:21


"I can't believe all these tryhard WAACs out there just care about winning all the time when it's supposed to be a game for fun!!!!!!! Also here's my 27 page essay on why marines are OP and Orkz should get a bunch of OP rules so I can win more games

-the_scotsman"

-ERJAK 
   
Made in pl
Fixture of Dakka




Well the eldar players did swtich to running 3-4 flyers, when castellans became the norm for imperial lists. So there is gradation to everything. And even singles can be annoying too. I did not get to expiriance it, because of codex delays, but 10 paladins in area terrain shoting out of LoS while buff stacking were annoying as hell, or so people say.

Transport of models is important too, at least in countries where a car is not the basic form of transportation. And I am ignoring people like me here. There arent many adults that will do a 2v2 hour trip to the store and back with 4 bags carrying all 8 of their hive tyrants.

In the end I think that GW will never be able to balance stuff. And it is better if they make all armies OP, because if all are then non is in reality. It does take a LONG time though. If tau get their codex end of this or start of next year, then this is a year of waiting with a kind of a meh list. But if csm are the same kind of a pushed back, then their players are having a no fun time for something like 3-4 years, and I don't even know how efficient or fun csm were pre 8th ed.

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. 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




The problem with using meta data and comp data and than relating it to FLGS games is that a lot of people attempting to "Defend" a factions power rating will point to W/L ratio at tournaments as proof that a faction isn't that great, and at the same time they will also point out that most of the codex isn't really that powerful at all.

Great, but when they are dominating the top tables lets tone down those combo/wombos at the top and maybe minor nerfs to the biggest offenders. Christ the Ork 8th Edition codex wasn't OP in the slightest but people screamed for days about the Lootas bomb and the SSAG once we got that.

Scotsman has the right idea in and of itself, tone down the offending strats and maybe a few weapon profiles and the game balances itself out.

 Xenomancers wrote:
It is utterly idiotic...like 8.5 ironhands idiotic to include this rule. I can assure you within 1 month it will be nerfed too...to only be DA characters...which is fine for a free rule that no other marines get...

Just cant stand these snow flake marines anymore.
 
   
Made in gb
Ship's Officer





Bristol (UK)

I agree, it's important to consider the differences between competitive and casual play, whilst also considering the similarities.

   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





 Gregor Samsa wrote:
Do we really need pseudoscientific statistical analysis on small N sample to know that raider/dark lance spam and skitarri spam is bad game design?

Every discussion of tournament win rates always devolves into critiques of social science methodologies which are tertiary to the topic at hand.

We don't need that to know DE and AdMech are poorly balanced.


Right. However, when we're discussing if the edition is "at it's worse point ever" and a small amount of data helps refute that despite Admech and DE being unbalanced.


   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




I know its my hobby horse, but I disagree on the whole "infamous list" above. The issue was the Castellan completely warped the game at every level. You didn't need "the list" - you needed "Castellan+Mates". Guard was preferable, but Marines, Ad Mech, Custodes, possibly even Sisters (not sure I ever encountered this) would all work, because the Castellan was just that busted. (And many Chaos armies started throwing in a Knight, because if you can't beat them, join them.)

With that said I agree in principle that making stuff everyone has is more of an issue than rarities - although equally I'm no sure the examples today are really good ones. I'm suspect for instance any DE player in the world was sitting on 3-6 Cronos (having been more or less universally bad for years). And while some units have perhaps floated up the pecking order to become more relevant recently, its not as if Wracks, Drazhar and Incubi or the Court of the Archon were staples of the DE meta going back edition after edition. I'm not sure you can say "DE are a smol faction, every DE player's been around for 10 years and so should have a grab bag of just about every unit in the codex.." and definitely not a pile of Talos, Flyers and Venoms... who'd be stupid enough to have ever acquired some of those?

Equally I'm not convinced Ad Mech players have all been sitting on 60+ Skitarii just waiting for the day they could push these bricks forward to victory. Lascannon chickens have been good for a while - but acquiring the 6-8 of them appearing in lists represents commitment. Similar for the newish and extortionate dogs+flyers.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




Annandale, VA

I think the idea that you don't need to worry about tournament combos in casual play is a really weird sentiment in 2021, with list optimization being a common topic of discussion online.

Look at literally any hobby forum or social media venue where people ask for list advice. Are the replies more along the lines of 'we're all just casual players, take whatever you want!', or 'here's the three units and two stratagem combos you should take to make your army strong'? Gonna say more the latter.

That's not to say that everyone is netlisting the latest and greatest ITC builds, but 'take Castellan + Loyal 32' is not esoteric knowledge known only to a few, and you can find plenty of examples of casual players doing it because it worked.

   
Made in ca
Master Sergeant





 Gert wrote:
You've just made up a statistic though. That doesn't prove anything at all. I could easily just say that Drukhari lose all those games because we're just making up numbers.
And just as a side note, people really need to stop looking at tournament data IMO. Do you compare your casual running times with athletes who train for it? Do you compare your CoD K/D ratio with Esports players? I certainly don't.


What a magnificent whoosh. I feel compelled to point out that he literally made up the example to illustrate to people like you who can't read statistics how it is possible for a faction to win 100% of the games and still somehow end up with a far lower winrate.
   
Made in gb
Ship's Officer





Bristol (UK)

Even in casual play I would say competitive thinking is very common.
"X is really good, you should totally get it"
Or "Y is really cool, but it's pretty naff so I'd avoid it".
Are very common points in a discussion. People might not go all-in in the same way tournaments do, but they definitely trend in the same direction.

If a new unit comes out and it's good, it's everywhere. If it's crap, it's nowhere, and people lament how unplayable the cool new thing is.
   
Made in gb
Warning From Magnus? Not Listening!






It was part of a discussion that was had some time ago about Comp VS Casual play, where it was sort of hashed out that the majority of Warhammer hobbyists don't post on forums or pages so any discussion had on said forums and pages is skewed towards those who have a greater interest in competitive play. In IRL discussion I'm not talking about the most optimised lists I can take, at most I'll comment on individual units or games but those always arise from the situation at hand, for example, I've started play testing Blackshields in 30k and my opponents noted how good the Marauder units seemed to be and we discussed it.
   
Made in pl
Fixture of Dakka




Well in some cases it is true. But in others like the 2.0 space marines it was kind of a hard to not build an "OP" list. Had a class mate who started at the same time as I did, with 2 dark empires run as iron hands with 2 primaris dreads. Horrible list through out 8th ed. And then in a single day, he was made a persona non grata, who no one wanted to play, because his list run 40 intercessors, 10 hellblasters , 2 dreads and characters. People who week before were dunking on him with their lists, made him quit for being a unfun to play against.

Plus in this day an age nothing is esoteric anymore. No idea how lists spread 15-20 years ago, but today in two first weeks of heavy playtesting the good stuff is clear as day to everyone.

Plus it is a question of design too. If the design team is influanced by tournament players and tournament organisers, then the lists will often end up more skewed to be good for tournaments. If the test and design teams were all made out of painters or people that only play crusade the rules would be skewed those ways too.

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. 
   
Made in us
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba






Tyel wrote:
I know its my hobby horse, but I disagree on the whole "infamous list" above. The issue was the Castellan completely warped the game at every level. You didn't need "the list" - you needed "Castellan+Mates". Guard was preferable, but Marines, Ad Mech, Custodes, possibly even Sisters (not sure I ever encountered this) would all work, because the Castellan was just that busted. (And many Chaos armies started throwing in a Knight, because if you can't beat them, join them.)

With that said I agree in principle that making stuff everyone has is more of an issue than rarities - although equally I'm no sure the examples today are really good ones. I'm suspect for instance any DE player in the world was sitting on 3-6 Cronos (having been more or less universally bad for years). And while some units have perhaps floated up the pecking order to become more relevant recently, its not as if Wracks, Drazhar and Incubi or the Court of the Archon were staples of the DE meta going back edition after edition. I'm not sure you can say "DE are a smol faction, every DE player's been around for 10 years and so should have a grab bag of just about every unit in the codex.." and definitely not a pile of Talos, Flyers and Venoms... who'd be stupid enough to have ever acquired some of those?

Equally I'm not convinced Ad Mech players have all been sitting on 60+ Skitarii just waiting for the day they could push these bricks forward to victory. Lascannon chickens have been good for a while - but acquiring the 6-8 of them appearing in lists represents commitment. Similar for the newish and extortionate dogs+flyers.


No, but I think you're overselling what it takes for a player to have 'the killer list' in a casual setting.

To use an example: at the present moment, the guy with 'the killer list' is a guy who's been playing the same Admech+Krieg+1 knight warden for basically ever, but he really liked the skitarii stuff, particularly the Ranger models with hoods and long guns. He had about 40 skitarii, 6 of the ranger dog riders, he got one unit of the flying flamer dudes when those came out, and he had 2 Dunecrawlers and a couple of the autocannon chickens. It's a horseshoes and hand grenades thing - sure, it's not THE competitive tournament list, but getting "The most competitive list someone is playing in the club" just generally required him to have a skitarii-heavy admech collection, rather than getting 5 more boxes of the same relatively obscure unit, or skewing into like 1000+ points of flyers, or getting anything from Forgeworld, or getting into a whole new faction as allies.

My most powerful list, that I regularly have to purposefully take less competitive combos and traits to avoid stomping opponents, is basically just 'generally wych cults focused drukhari.' It's not the exact precision combo of whatever, but it's got enough wyches in raiders to have a super-nasty turn 2 crash, enough Hellions to dish 6 MWs if they get over you, a Voidraven that drops a huge bomb of MWs, and succubi that still wreck gak in combat even after the removal of the first crazy combo.

"I can't believe all these tryhard WAACs out there just care about winning all the time when it's supposed to be a game for fun!!!!!!! Also here's my 27 page essay on why marines are OP and Orkz should get a bunch of OP rules so I can win more games

-the_scotsman"

-ERJAK 
   
Made in nl
Longtime Dakkanaut





 catbarf wrote:
I think the idea that you don't need to worry about tournament combos in casual play is a really weird sentiment in 2021, with list optimization being a common topic of discussion online.

Look at literally any hobby forum or social media venue where people ask for list advice. Are the replies more along the lines of 'we're all just casual players, take whatever you want!', or 'here's the three units and two stratagem combos you should take to make your army strong'? Gonna say more the latter.

That's not to say that everyone is netlisting the latest and greatest ITC builds, but 'take Castellan + Loyal 32' is not esoteric knowledge known only to a few, and you can find plenty of examples of casual players doing it because it worked.
The problem with this reasoning is that you ignore the people who don't come to forums in the first place. Which from my experience with the casual members of my club is that most of them don't.

The people who come to forums for list advise tend to be looking for competitive advise because, as you said, the casual advise is "do whatever you feel like, it doesn't matter" and they don't need to go online to hear that. Therefor forums are full of competitive list advise.
   
Made in pl
Fixture of Dakka




The problem with the castellan lists, was , at least for marine players, linked to the fact that marine lists weren't that good to begin with. Even before the castellan was a thing they often run the loyal 32. After the castellan came out, if was just a case of cutting the stuff that didn't work in the marine army, limit it to the basic cheapest scouts, who had utility with infiltration, and running smash hammer characters. It really didn't require a lot to do, especially when for a lot of armies the counter to castellan lists was running one of your own. As not everyone had a viable flyer lists like eldar had.

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. 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





 Ventus wrote:
 Gert wrote:
You've just made up a statistic though. That doesn't prove anything at all. I could easily just say that Drukhari lose all those games because we're just making up numbers.
And just as a side note, people really need to stop looking at tournament data IMO. Do you compare your casual running times with athletes who train for it? Do you compare your CoD K/D ratio with Esports players? I certainly don't.


What a magnificent whoosh. I feel compelled to point out that he literally made up the example to illustrate to people like you who can't read statistics how it is possible for a faction to win 100% of the games and still somehow end up with a far lower winrate.


And he was noting that they were making up stats instead of referring to the actual events. So here's some actual events.

DE player losses --

Lonestar GT

Preece - Admech
Johnson - Necrons
Fennel - Necrons
Jackson - Admech & DE
QJohnson - Imperium & BA
Tweedel - Sisters & DG
Nanez - DG & Tau
Phillips - DG & Orks
Loots - DG, DE & DE
Borovilos - Admech, DE & Necrons
Shadwick - DG & Imperium ( 5 games only )
Wilson - Tau, DA, & Sisters ( draw vs DA )
Xie - DE ( 3 games only )

66 games w/o mirror & 20.5 losses = 45.5 wins = 69%

Meltdown DE losses

Root - none
Pallas - Imperium & Orks
Seeley - IW & Necrons ( draw to Custodes )
Cool - Admech, DE, Sisters ( 3 games only )

16 games w/o mirror, 6.5 losses = 60%


Midlothian GT

Beardsley - Admech
Pollack - Daemons
Csaszar - Admech
Lobb - Salamanders & Sisters
Strootman - Admech & DE
Phillips - Custodes & Necrons
Heatwole - DE & Chaos ( tie to WE )
Cardamone - Admech & Necrons ( tie to Chaos )

36 games w/o mirror, 12 losses = 66.7%


Kent GT

Bartkiewicz - Admech & Admech
Denton - DE, DG & DG
Cayuela - Admech, DE, WS & Necrons

14 games w/o mirror, 7 losses = 50%

   
Made in us
Tunneling Trygon




Mexico

Casual meta is more complex than simply having/lacking "the killer" list.

Models and lists do not exist in a binary state of either being broken or being fine, but a spectrum that goes from being worthless to being OP.

A casual gamer might never face a net list and still have a horrible experience because their units are simply worthless while everyone else's are fine. This was my experience as a Tyranid player in 5th to 7th, in which 99% of the codex was so bad it wasn't even fieldable in a casual setting. Now the faction is still on the weak side of things, but I can actually play a casual game without feeling I'm handicapped.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/27 15:26:35


 
   
Made in us
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba






 Tyran wrote:
Casual meta is more complex than simply having/lacking "the killer" list.

Models and lists do not exist in a binary state of either being broken or being fine, but a spectrum that goes from being worthless to being OP.

A casual gamer might never face a net list and still have a horrible experience because their units are simply worthless while everyone else's are fine. This was my experience as a Tyranid player in 5th to 7th, in which 99% of the codex was so bad it wasn't even fieldable in a casual setting. Now the faction is still on the weak side of things, but I can actually play a casual game without feeling I'm handicapped.


Yep. That is 100% true. In my experience, a player getting stuck with a bad book or having their favorite unit be bad is a much more common thing to happen than someone mysteriously 'lucking into' a killer, unbeatable list. The latter HAPPENS, and you always remember it, but players slowly dropping off because they for example love leman russ tanks and their list is just bad for 3 editions straight is much more common.

"I can't believe all these tryhard WAACs out there just care about winning all the time when it's supposed to be a game for fun!!!!!!! Also here's my 27 page essay on why marines are OP and Orkz should get a bunch of OP rules so I can win more games

-the_scotsman"

-ERJAK 
   
Made in ca
Master Sergeant





 Daedalus81 wrote:
And he was noting that they were making up stats instead of referring to the actual events.


Pointing out that hypotheticals conjured up for demonstration purposes aren't real is peak DakkaDakka.
   
Made in pl
Fixture of Dakka




 Ordana wrote:


The people who come to forums for list advise tend to be looking for competitive advise because, as you said, the casual advise is "do whatever you feel like, it doesn't matter" and they don't need to go online to hear that. Therefor forums are full of competitive list advise.

That is a very bad advice by the way. A tournament player will just adjust or drop a bad list. Someone who doesn't want to go big at tournaments, may end up with a horrible army and gaming expiriance. Imagine telling a tau player in 9th that he should just pick what ever he likes, and then you see him spend a ton of money on something else then riptides.

In fact I would say that the over all powerful armies, like the ad mecha or DE, have an even bigger impact in non tournament metas. A tournament player will do the math and test, and then will decide if he can pilot a counter build or just jump the shark and play the best army at the time. What adjustment can a store marine player do, when playing vs something like as store players DE lists, when the difference between the store and tournament version is rather small.

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. 
   
Made in us
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba






Karol wrote:

In fact I would say that the over all powerful armies, like the ad mecha or DE, have an even bigger impact in non tournament metas. A tournament player will do the math and test, and then will decide if he can pilot a counter build or just jump the shark and play the best army at the time. What adjustment can a store marine player do, when playing vs something like as store players DE lists, when the difference between the store and tournament version is rather small.


In normal settings where people aren't weird sociopaths, typically after 1 or 2 games of one-sided stomps, if the two players enjoy playing against each other, they might do something like:

-have one of the two players bring bonus points of stuff
-try swapping out 1 or 2 units if they seem like super hard counters, i.e. if a unit of Incubi is really butchering the marines every time, maybe bring something else
-play without a particular rule. I generally just don't use Blade Artists

If you find yourself really, actually enjoying super one-sided games where it's clear that there's no mental thing you did to earn the win because before you got a new codex you didn't use to beat this player all the time and after the codex suddenly you never lose and it isn't even close, that's probably a sign that you should find some new avenue to get a 'win' in life that is more real/impactful. Train your body and play a physical sport or take a class to learn a new useful skill that you can take forward with you in your life.

In general, if you're substituting some good feeling from doing something in your life with a product that you're purchasing from a company, that's probably an indicator that there is some area of your life you ought to be working on. Gaining genuine pleasure from winning one-sided games of a system as imbalanced as 40k has exactly the same energy as going to a trophy store and buying yourself a trophy that says 'wrestling first place' and feeling proud of it.

"I can't believe all these tryhard WAACs out there just care about winning all the time when it's supposed to be a game for fun!!!!!!! Also here's my 27 page essay on why marines are OP and Orkz should get a bunch of OP rules so I can win more games

-the_scotsman"

-ERJAK 
   
Made in pl
Fixture of Dakka




Yeah and I guess this does work in places where the norm is owning 3-4 armies. In places where the norm is one army, ending up with a bad one results, the person leaving the hobby, often for ever.

But then again it also shapes the inital buying too. If all you can afford is one army, as long as you are normal, or at least understand the idea of bad armies existing, you are not going to be picking bad stuff.

Plus here stuff like , can you not use X, would end up with the anwser of, sure just buy the models for me to replace the ones you don't want to play against. And that is assuming the person was in good state at the time, and it didn't just end with a no or something more harsh.

Plus sometimes you just can't downgrade enough. I remember a video report on YT eldar vs GK. no idea what edition it was, and what the guys were talking about, as I don't know hungarian. But the eldar army went second, had no cover, and all its down started turned butt to the front and at the end of turn 4 the game was done. They did seem to have fun and the GK player did make one of the serpents not move.

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. 
   
Made in us
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba






Karol wrote:
Yeah and I guess this does work in places where the norm is owning 3-4 armies. In places where the norm is one army, ending up with a bad one results, the person leaving the hobby, often for ever.

But then again it also shapes the inital buying too. If all you can afford is one army, as long as you are normal, or at least understand the idea of bad armies existing, you are not going to be picking bad stuff.

Plus here stuff like , can you not use X, would end up with the anwser of, sure just buy the models for me to replace the ones you don't want to play against.


Are you actually seriously claiming that literally everybody plays with 100% all of their collection and only ever owns exactly whatever the points value the game is being played as?

Even in that.....EXTREMELY suspicious situation, you can just do things like:

-give one player extra CP.
-give one player first turn
-not play with particular army-wide rules




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Karol wrote:
I remember a video report on YT eldar vs GK. no idea what edition it was, and what the guys were talking about, as I don't know hungarian. But the eldar army went second, had no cover, and all its down started turned butt to the front and at the end of turn 4 the game was done. They did seem to have fun and the GK player did make one of the serpents not move.


it is one of my new favorite entries in the Karolverse canon that you literally hate Eldar so much and will seek out material that confirms that hatred so hard that you are willing to watch an entire battle report in a language that you don't understand from an edition of the game you've never played just to confirm that Eldar are OP and GK can never beat them

Never, ever, ever change Karol, you're my single favorite human being.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/27 16:33:33


"I can't believe all these tryhard WAACs out there just care about winning all the time when it's supposed to be a game for fun!!!!!!! Also here's my 27 page essay on why marines are OP and Orkz should get a bunch of OP rules so I can win more games

-the_scotsman"

-ERJAK 
   
Made in us
Been Around the Block





The new ork squigg boys are 25 points.


Daemon blood crushers are 40 points.

GW missing the mark here by about 50% they are a pretty comparable unit with the ork squiggy winning out. Discrepancy like this can't be tolerated by the community.
   
Made in fr
Trazyn's Museum Curator





on the forum. Obviously

 IanMalcolmAbs wrote:
The new ork squigg boys are 25 points.


Daemon blood crushers are 40 points.

GW missing the mark here by about 50% they are a pretty comparable unit with the ork squiggy winning out. Discrepancy like this can't be tolerated by the community.

Have blood crushers been updated though? If not, then it's not really a proper comparison.

What I have
~4100
~1660

Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!

A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble

 
   
Made in gb
Warning From Magnus? Not Listening!






^Bingo.
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: