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.

Even a fool could tell that heavy flamers don't make sense on something that's carrying a massive battlecannon.

What about when a squad of wyches is out in the open after killing a 5 man marine squad?

How about when a big mob of orks are about to hit your lines, and you'd like to thin them out before you charge in?

Maybe some IG vets got blasted out of a vendetta and you want to barbeque them?

Maybe you have been running at the enemy and you battlecannon was destroyed?

What if you are going to charge a vehicle, and an infantry squad is behind it, and you target the tank with the flamer to hit both targets and still get the charge off on the vehicle?

Wait, those are all foolish reasons.

Because people are in love with the ideal behind the option not the their use, ya know, for fun, sh¤ts n giggles.

Some people aren't gamers at all and it looks cooler to kit out all the bits?

I've been told im a ****** fool for fielding Kanz with skorchas. They look awesome to me, and I use them in non--net list ways..

Need to knock out an eldar pathfinder sniper team entrenched in cover (2+ saves) without committing your other vehicles to blocking/eradicating the withering sniper fire or losing an expensive unit?

3 skorcha kanz (skorcha dredds work too, but i like kanz better) will bounce sniper fire and toast space-elf rather well.

Is it efficient use of points? not really.

Is it fun? Oh yes


*edited for clarity*

Also, there are a lot of kids buying this stuff and then selling it years later when they're strapped for cash. When I was kid, I used to put every piece of plastic in the box (except the sprue itself) onto the vehicle. Some of my old Rhinos look pretty silly.

OP, to paraphrase a legend, who is the more foolish the fool with a mortar team or the fool who boldly demonstrates that he doesn't seem to know much beyond what he's read about par and cmpetative lists units.

Platuan4th wrote:

Mr. Burning wrote:
You have used words like silly and fool maybe you could preface with the words 'in my opinion?'.

Does smack a bit of an ignorance borne of "my way to play and think is the best and therefore only way" mentality. But so does the whole reasoning for starting the thread.

That sums it up

Strong Troll OP, Strong Troll

I build models based on looks and if that means someone gets a sucky gun, so be it. After 17 years or so, I still don't think I've ever built a list based on what the fellas on the net say is the best, I have fun building my army and losing with it 9 times outta 10. At least my dead pile will look better than the other guy's.

I bought pyrovores because I love the models. And I use them in most of my lists.

I have a Crushing Claw Fex because it used to not completely suck.

My buddy has a dozen IG Mortars because they go with his other 70+ Heavy Weapon teams.


Some people like options. What fun is it to use the same list over and over again? I know I wouldn't want to, nor would I want to fight the same list over and over again.

MM on Russes are a decent choice, especially if your table top is clogged up with buildings. Same with a Heavy Flamer on a Defiler, why not give the infantry a light toasting before you assault them?

The same reason why people make idiotic threads like this: because they want to.

And there are adherents to an idea that make others cringe.

Imagine historical miniature players. Let's say its the Civil War, and they are playing the Battle of First Bull Run in 1861.

They bring their armies, exchange lists, and the Union player notices the Confederate cavalry have Spencer repeating carbines.

Says the Union player, "Hey buddy, your guys have Spencer repeating carbines."

Confederate player says, "So?"

UP: "Well, these guns weren't seen in quantity this early in the war."

CP: "Well, they were available in 1861, and I'm using the best weapons I can get for them."

UP, vein popping: "But the Confederacy couldn't obtain this many good guns so early in the war!"

CP: "So? Who cares about history? I want to win."

UP- eye twitches.

So people who are adherents to playing the best darn game they can will never understand why a person will adhere to the spirit and letter of what an army fluff-wise brings than packing what a competitive list will bring.

Battle Brother Lucifer wrote:Cause some bad options look way cool

maybe so, but im still with Samus on this one...there is no justification for stupid options on any model

Element206 wrote:

Battle Brother Lucifer wrote:Cause some bad options look way cool

maybe so, but im still with Samus on this one...there is no justification for stupid options on any model

What qualifies as a stupid option?

Samus_aran115 wrote:I've been noticing this a lot, as I hunt around for trades/ look at ebay auctions... But... why?

Why?

I do it purely out of spite. If it keeps you from sleeping at night, all the extra work was worth it. Adding nightscopes to thunder hammers may seem silly, but at least they can see their targets in the darkness. Duh.

I can always deal with bad options. Hell some people are just working with what's in the box but just plain illegal stuff always get me. Especially stuff that has NEVER been legal in any recent edition. I sure loved my devastator sarge with powerfist and missile launcher I got in a swap lol.

Element206 wrote:

Battle Brother Lucifer wrote:Cause some bad options look way cool

maybe so, but im still with Samus on this one...there is no justification for stupid options on any model

Aside from looking cool or being useful in that player's mind? I use Stormtroopers. Most people say they're terrible. I think they look awesome, so I use them.

Element206 wrote:

Battle Brother Lucifer wrote:Cause some bad options look way cool

maybe so, but im still with Samus on this one...there is no justification for stupid options on any model

How serendipitous that the "Don't be a Dick" quote was on the page when I read this and the "It's better to look good than to play good" one is up as I respond.

People paid good money for their miniatures when they bought them. They are well within their right to glue whatever the hell they want onto their property, without the slightest concern for how you feel as a second-hand consumer.

If you don't like buying other people's stuff I question as to why you are looking on eBay in the first place. If you realise and accept that not everyone is an avid forum-goer who only ever builds uber-optimised, internet lists then you'll probably stop stressing over little plastic spacemanz, get a better night's sleep, and then realise what a complete waste of time this thread is...

Just my £0.02

L. Wrex

Related:

If you're buying them from e-bay, or trade/buying them here, and have seen a picture (a must! ) you know what they are kitted up with before you buy, unless the pic is really dire. Even then you can generally make a pretty good guess.

If you don't like it, don't buy it. The 'place bid' button isn't mandatory

If you buy it anyway, then quit whining

Mr. Burning wrote:
You have used words like silly and fool maybe you could preface with the words 'in my opinion?'.

Samus_aran IS a teen (judging by many of their previous posts).

Teens opinions rarely gel with many other people who have left those years behind.

I use mortars in my praetorian guard because lascannons are unfluffy. Autocannons, heavy bolters and mortars all the way, baby.
The tanks are assigned from another section as support (since my guard are purely a colonial pdf).

I model stuff based on what looks cool to ME, whether other people think it's cool is irrelevant. That they might is a bonus.
If some teen I've never met irl thinks it's lame, then that's also irrelevant. I tend not to care about the opinions of someone who wasn't born when I started gaming.

I build armies because I want to play them. If I was thinking of selling them in the future, I WOULDN'T have started them.

Mastiff wrote:

Samus_aran115 wrote:I've been noticing this a lot, as I hunt around for trades/ look at ebay auctions... But... why?

Why?

I do it purely out of spite. If it keeps you from sleeping at night, all the extra work was worth it. Adding nightscopes to thunder hammers may seem silly, but at least they can see their targets in the darkness. Duh.

Haha

To the OP, seriously mate take a look out the window and get something worthwhile to worry about!

i try and always model my figures wysiwyg.........but i am more into the painting and modeling than playing so i dont always care if something is the best game wise.....but on another note i wont play an army till i have at least 3000 pts of models for it so it leaves me plenty of options for the most efficient force possible on the board

Bookwrack wrote:The same reason why people make idiotic threads like this: because they want to.

BTW, if you don't like the power or utility of something, don't run up and down the net ranting about the "idiots" selling it. 'Looks freaking cool" and "powergamer's death-tool of choice" are often mutually exclusive. In other words, go bother some greenskins 'cause you're acting like a troll.

I think it's hilarious that you all keep using the same examples I posted. Those are just things I've seen that broke the trade for me. Combi flamers are certainly fine, although that isn't the purpose of terminators (there's almost always something that can do "flamers" better). A single, random combi flamer is just not something I want to have. Redundancy is key, and all players, competitive or not, should consider that when making modeling decisions, IMO.

See, YOU don't want a single random combi flamer. YOU don't think that it's good. Why on earth should what you think about the model affect how I build it?

Ork Trukks with everything possible crammed onto them

Cuz Orks like all kinds of shooty bitz!

Also, I have to agree with whoever mentioned impossible options simply for cool points. Just because it's on the sprue doesn't mean you have to use it

But I'm understanding what you guys are saying. Of course I don't have to buy it, and I get that. But it's horribly unsatisfying when you find a good deal on a cool model and find out it has some silly thing on it you don't want/ can't remove. I'm sure that's happened to some of you before.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

ChrisWWII wrote:See, YOU don't want a single random combi flamer. YOU don't think that it's good. Why on earth should what you think about the model affect how I build it?

Okay, okay! I get it!

I'm sure you're arguing just to prove a point, and I gotcha. The chaos terminator set is a piece of crap anyway, and forces you to take at least a couple silly options (only two powerfists on the sprue, and only three twin linked bolters. I can't really blame anyone for taking that flamer instead of a heavy weapon.

I have a Chaos Terminator Lord with a thunder hammer and storm shield...and a loyalist Terminator with 2 storm bolters. Check my gallery, they are in there.


In all fairness though...I did them just to look cool for display, I dont even play 40k, but I love me some Terminators and the funky options they have.

Well this was clearly a pointless thread? Why rant on about his, you are clearly just trying to annoy someone or you generally go about calling people "Idiots" and "fools", well aren't you Mr Perfect.