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.

I say get it off the table if each time I have to ask what models are proxying what models.

Interesting results... Seems to be an almost even split over the weekend, with more vocal opponents to the idea while the proponents simply cast their votes.

I appreciate the varying points of view in what players would be against, and I can certainly empathize with being concerned about having to keep track of what models are what. Some of the proxy armies I've seen that are very clear in which models are which (I include my own in that assesment, of course ) and some are more of a stretch. Players that are hardcore for WYSIWYG would be happy to know that each pack of my Gray Hunters includes a model equipped with a power weapon, two melta guns, six bolter-equivalents, and a close combat model traditionally capable of making multiple attacks to count as Mark of the Wolfen.

I don't feel that the extensive conversions and time I spend painting my man-dollies is any less of an investment than someone's gray tide of orks and I'm sure my wife would take umbrage with the implication that the money I spend on my hobby is worth less than someone else's. I'd love to use the SW codex exclusively for my eldar and like the challenge of converting models to match rules while staying true to the style of my exodites. I like the blood-thirsty-in-your-face, attacking on the run and shooting from afar style that codex puppies has to offer and feel that it matches the fluff of my exodites very nicely. If someone doesn't like it, then I'll be happy to play them using Codex: Eldar until I convince them otherwise.

After playing Cyporiean Saturday, told me flat out that until she gets a new codex for her iron warriors I have to use codex eldar because the tournament puppy list I ran hit very hard. I think if her dice treated her a little better and my dice weren't quite so hot, she might not be reticent about playing again. Issues of codex creek were discussed as well and she did offer to play me again once the 'nids codex comes out.

Your last point there raises an interesting question. Why does no-one want to use the necron codex to represent things? (alright, it's because they don't get any squad upgrades, anything else fun, and the rules are a clinging morass of potential arguments, often leading to stabbings)

Bad example, sorry: Someone said earlier that they wanted to use the IG codex to represent their Tau. Does this have anything to do with the IG codex being full of powerful, effective, varied options for building a competitive list?

While I understand that people feel the usual codex for their army doesn't represent the background well enough, is another codex really any closer? Gavin Thorne, how do you justify your exodite eldar having S4 T4? Or ATSKNF? It's inconsistencies like this which make me think a lot of 'counts-as' users are on some level seeking an army that is more powerful or suits their playstyle better, and the 'suitability' of the background is just a cover.

Don't mean to offend anyone by that. I hope people who use this system will try and allay my suspicions, not take offence.

I-bounty-hunt-the-elderly wrote:Your last point there raises an interesting question. Why does no-one want to use the necron codex to represent things? (alright, it's because they don't get any squad upgrades, anything else fun, and the rules are a clinging morass of potential arguments, often leading to stabbings)

Too true! I have considered running the marine models I do have using the Necron rules: tacs for warriors, termies for Immortals, bikes for destroyers, and my sole landraider for a monolith. But I don't mind the skeevy rules necrons have.

I-bounty-hunt-the-elderly wrote:Bad example, sorry: Someone said earlier that they wanted to use the IG codex to represent their Tau. Does this have anything to do with the IG codex being full of powerful, effective, varied options for building a competitive list?

Quite possibly! Codex creep is obviously something any player must take into consideration when playing a newly released army. Does this keep older codeci from having "powerful, effective, varied options for building a competitive list"? I don't think so, but the newest codeci are written with the most recent ruleset in mind and sometimes take advantage of current rules that an older codex has written differently. I'd actually like to see an IG x Tau army/codex list - both versions: IG models w/ tau codex and Tau models with IG codex. Then let me see orks running with IG rules and vice versa - Bloodaxe Kommando army vs. say, Chem-dogs. And eldar to IG which was my first choice to alt-list with. I'm sure Cyporiean would be happy to play an Eldar-IG list

I-bounty-hunt-the-elderly wrote:While I understand that people feel the usual codex for their army doesn't represent the background well enough, is another codex really any closer? Gavin Thorne, how do you justify your exodite eldar having S4 T4? Or ATSKNF? It's inconsistencies like this which make me think a lot of 'counts-as' users are on some level seeking an army that is more powerful or suits their playstyle better, and the 'suitability' of the background is just a cover.

Well, if you'd like to hear about the fluff, I'll make an army roster and post what I've written for them. It explains most of the differences between codex eldar and my exodites. Advanced craftworld armor combined with a very hardy exodite population following the Warrior Path under the direct supervison of the first of the Phoenix Lords accounts for thier attribute differences, tactics, and special rules. Asurmen has taught them to know no fear under his direction, but I've lost Fleet army-wide because the Exodites lack the essential grace and speed of their craftworld brethren in favor of a hardier constitution and stronger build. They do have acute senses and counterstrike, and given the dinosaur planet hunter/gatherer society exodites come from, it's no wonder they are able to shoot farther in darkness and react in a ferocious manner when confronted in battle.

There's plenty of tradeoffs. I may get thunderwolf cavalry, but I lose jetbikes - both of which I field using my Exodite Dragon Knights or Dragon Riders. I pick up a landraider, but lose hovertanks - and only if my opponent graciously accepts the converted stegadon I use as a model. Vypers at least have some use as Landspeeders (again, converted terradons), but I'm at a loss as to using warwalkers (converted allosaurs). I can use up to four Exodite Shamans (Farseers/Rune Priests), but I lose out on a Jetseer council. My Dragon Lord (Autarch/Wolflord) is tough as nails with great equipment, but doesn't have the tactical genius that gets reserved units on the board when I need them.

I-bounty-hunt-the-elderly wrote:Don't mean to offend anyone by that. I hope people who use this system will try and allay my suspicions, not take offence.

I take no offence or umbrage and my replies are made in the hope of preventing knee-jerk reactions. I like to consider all options for gameplay, honestly, and unlike much of dakkadakka, I'd say my interpretations are fairly liberal in content. I'm not a "hardcore" casual gamer. I have yet to play in my first tournament. Indeed, one of the reasons I started this discussion was to gauge a reaction from my peers in regard to proxying an army for tournament play because my first club tourney is this weekend. They've already told me not to run the list which honestly and sincerely isn't a problem for me in any way - I don't want to upset anyone or make anyone think I'm a WAAC player or TFG because I'm anything but. However, their reaction did prompt me to begin discussion about the topic here and I appreciate hearing the opposing point of view!

I've got several examples and opinions on this subject. So type by type:
I''m cheap. I started this game when I was buying marines that nobody wanted and making them stretch. I had a 700+ nurgle biker command squad in 3rd just so I could play 1500. I've come a little way, but I hate buying a model just to be a dust magnet.

Friendly Play: I'll play and have played anything. If you want to try something out, then buy all means get 5 games in before you burn 200 bucks. I proxied a whole eldar army with my chaos. Found out after 6-7 games it wasn't working so I dropped the project. You wanna replace a book with a book? I'm planning on doing that right now. Say what you want about codex creep, but if you strip everything to just the numbers does the fluff fit the rules? Does that awesome fluffy unit just get kicked in the nuts by your current dex? We have whole threads here about who got screwed in the new dex. Are mega-nobz worth it? Who really wants flash gitz? Why do chaos dreads make you pay extra to suck a little more than average? The list is endless. Without looking at the king of the codex hill, how can you BEST represent your (hopefully) fluffy army? I want to model a bunch of orks with extra armor (mostly power armor bits) and run them as SM. I think it'll work well and I can represent a good ork trader/looter army well.

Tourney Play: Everybody has a different opinion here, but the reality is this: Can we afford to lose you next week? I play in a store with 5 total gamers. One wants to run some proxies next week and we'll probably let him with a stiff kick to get it in gear. Go to a big tourney with a hard to translate counts as army and they might shoo you away at the door. How close can you get the models? Very subjective. Do they accurately represent what your going for? I do agree that I would be upset if your tiny eldar that I mistook for something tiny (scouts) turned out to be a command squad or terminators.