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.

biccat wrote:
Second, some units in FW lists may be overpowered and shouldn't be allowed at a game. I have no interest in going through your "codex" to figure out what those units are to decide if I want to play against your list.

So. What army do you play?

krazynadechukr wrote:FW & GW are now one company (have been for several years). FW rules are accepted by GW, and on the occassional independent tournies and unofficial tournies many TOs have not allowed FW lists. Some local GW BB tournies HAVE allowed FW lists & National GW tournies sometimes have & have NOT allowed them....

What is your opinion on FW models &/or lists in 2k or less (no superheavies) games?

Non tournament: bring it!
Local RT Tournament: clear with TO but its a 'shall play unless clearly loopy' standard
Major tournament: No

Smitty0305 wrote:I dont care if you proxy gw models with fw models....but I think any kind of apocalpse type vehicle in a 2k- game is dumb.

Yep.

If the FW unit description states "This unit takes up an FA or T or HS or HQ or Elite slot in X Army", then bring it on. I'll play against it.

Worglock wrote:

biccat wrote:
Second, some units in FW lists may be overpowered and shouldn't be allowed at a game. I have no interest in going through your "codex" to figure out what those units are to decide if I want to play against your list.

So. What army do you play?

Thousand sons.

You have no problem beating me with a generic list, please leave your overpowered FW stuff at the door.

All of the questions posed below are asked as serious enquiries, and spring from a desire to seek more clarity in the arguments presented in this debate. I apologize if they might be construed as "snarky" or "rude" as they are not intended as such.

krazynadechukr wrote:FW & GW are now one company (have been for several years).

As the rules are not written, tested nor approved by the same group of people (ie. the Design Studio), what is the relevance of the business-relationship between the two entities?

FW rules are accepted by GW,

How does that acceptance take shape? I have seen no references to Imperial Armour in codexes, rulebooks (beside the Apocalypse Expansion) or battle-reports. Nor have I seen any references on the GW website (though I might have missed those as I am not overly active there).

and on the occassional independent tournies and unofficial tournies many TOs have not allowed FW lists.

Is it your experience that independent and unofficial tournies allow Imperial Armour more often than not? I ask because my experience is the opposite.

Some local GW BB tournies HAVE allowed FW lists

What does the "BB" mean in this sentence. Blood Bowl with Imperial Armour?

& National GW tournies sometimes have & have NOT allowed them....

What national GW tournies are you refering to?

I got hit by an IA all tank IG list where the commander and troops were all tanks too. Gotta love chaos with tons and tons of meltas It ate him alive. But I still wasn't asked just told "I'm gonna play an all tank list" and no mention was given of using FW rules. I only lost a couple models anyway, since I knew he was playing dirty I did too. 2 units of flanking chosen in rhinos with meltaguns=bad day for tanks. I'm usually the opposite of a list tailorer...but this time was well deserved after the 'custom' crap that he has used on me in the past.

Are you sure it was actually the FW list from Imperial Armour Volume One, timetowaste85?

There was an 'Armored Company' published by GW themselves that was pretty blah considering.

nkelsch wrote:Don't you have some money to give to GW so you can buy your Stormravens to convert?

*slow clap*

Nice try.

Though for the record, I never lied about what I was going to buy nor did I say one thing or do another - I said I'd make final orders before the embargo, and that's exactly what I did. So once again, nice try.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

N'Ferno wrote:Just more excuses. God forbid someone would prefer to keep his book in good shape and use printed sheets instead. Rules, units, painted/not painted, book or pdf, etc. Keep adding and you'll end up with no one to play with. I like playing with people. I do not like playing against them. I like even less not playing at all

Sorry, you've lost me. Are you attempting to accuse me of something?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Mr. Burning wrote:The current competitive meta that GW finds its products placed in causes divisive issues anyway let alone that GW release supplements under the aegis of a subsidiary company. And I have never known a game system where supplements to a current game edition are so hotly disputed by the fans.

Or, to put it in the words I used on the previous page:

People. Are. Afraid. Of. Losing.

... and they don't want to admit it, so they throw up smoke screens with FW being 'unbalanced' as a way of getting out of admitting that they just don't want to lose (see the quoted post below for an example of this).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

And none of this makes any sense...

biccat wrote:First, the units are completely at odds with what is expected and normally encountered on the battlefield.

What battlefield? You mean the game, 40K, in general? You could say the same thing to any player playing a new army. How is not 'normally' encountering something reason enough to ban it?

biccat wrote:Second, some units in FW lists may be overpowered and shouldn't be allowed at a game.

Because, as we all know, there are no overpowered units in any standard Codex, right?

biccat wrote:I have no interest in going through your "codex" to figure out what those units are to decide if I want to play against your list.

You shouldn't need to. Just play the damned game.

biccat wrote:Third, most FW stuff can be adequately played as a proxy for either another army or incorporated into another army. I would much rather face an army of proxies where I know what the rules are than an army that has completely new rules that are beyond what is normally expected in a game.

Again with this 'normally expected' nonsense. That's a thin argument. Who determines what's normal? Is normal a location thing? No one in my group plays DE, so should I refuse to play them because it's not what I'd 'normally expect' to play against? I've played with and against FW Armoured Companies, and people consider them 'normal' in our group.

If you own somethign and want to play it (be it FW models or IA army lists) then go for it. I'm game.

This game ISN'T the serious buisness that some want to pretend it is. It is glorified toy soldiers that we have all been playing since when we crawled around in a sand box.

Even if we play a game and your IA list or FW model turns out to be OTT was anyone really harmed? Make a note of it and plan accordingly next game.

What is the big deal again?

H.B.M.C. wrote:

biccat wrote:First, the units are completely at odds with what is expected and normally encountered on the battlefield.

What battlefield? You mean the game, 40K, in general? You could say the same thing to any player playing a new army. How is not 'normally' encountering something reason enough to ban it?

Ban it? No, I'm just saying that I wouldn't play against that army.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

biccat wrote:Second, some units in FW lists may be overpowered and shouldn't be allowed at a game.

Because, as we all know, there are no overpowered units in any standard Codex, right?

I'm under no illusions that codices are balanced or not overpowered, but they are playtested a lot more than FW lists.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

biccat wrote:I have no interest in going through your "codex" to figure out what those units are to decide if I want to play against your list.

You shouldn't need to. Just play the damned game.

I expect a fair game. This means a standard system for rules, points, and playtesting. Standard GW lists are subject to the same standards, Forgeworld are not subject to the same standard.

Further, you appear to have a problem with people playing the game in the manner that they want. If I don't want to play a FW list, why should I have to accept it? Someone spending a ton of money on ForgeWorld models doesn't obligate me in any way to support their decision.

I would likewise have no problem with someone who refused to play me because my Khorne Berzerkers are painted white instead of red. If that's the way they want to enjoy the hobby, then they can do so. But I think they'll find fewer players who always paint their models "codex standard." (Although there is a pervasive view among some local younger players that codex colors are required...no idea where that comes from).

H.B.M.C. wrote:

biccat wrote:Third, most FW stuff can be adequately played as a proxy for either another army or incorporated into another army. I would much rather face an army of proxies where I know what the rules are than an army that has completely new rules that are beyond what is normally expected in a game.

Again with this 'normally expected' nonsense. That's a thin argument. Who determines what's normal? Is normal a location thing? No one in my group plays DE, so should I refuse to play them because it's not what I'd 'normally expect' to play against? I've played with and against FW Armoured Companies, and people consider them 'normal' in our group.

"Nrmally expected" means within the bounds of what I would expect to see at a tournament. Tournaments limit ForgeWorld units for a variety of reasons, many of those based on the accessability of codices and the perception of balance issues with ForgeWorld lists.

If you are O.K. with people bringing a ForgeWorld list to a game, would you have any problem with a homemade codex? The same arguments can be made by a homebrew codex writer as for ForgeWorld. What is the difference?

CT GAMER wrote:If you own somethign and want to play it (be it FW models or IA army lists) then go for it. I'm game.

This game ISN'T the serious buisness that some want to pretend it is. It is glorified toy soldiers that we have all been playing since when we crawled around in a sand box.

Even if we play a game and your IA list or FW model turns out to be OTT was anyone really harmed? Make a note of it and plan accordingly next game.

What is the big deal again?

@H.B.M.C.: A game requires some sense of fairness and in 40k incorporating FW units is widely considered beyond the pale, as you well know. Dismissing someone's concerns about fairness as "nonsense" is itself a pretty thin argument.

biccat wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:

biccat wrote:Second, some units in FW lists may be overpowered and shouldn't be allowed at a game.

Because, as we all know, there are no overpowered units in any standard Codex, right?

I'm under no illusions that codices are balanced or not overpowered, but they are playtested a lot more than FW lists.

Even though (as I already pointed out in another thread) the amount of units most informed people consider overpowered and /or underpriced can be counted on 1 hand.

Shall we list them?

Chemical Mortars
Lucius pattern Dreadnought Drop Pods (more of a byproduct of being able to put DC Dreads in them, but the BA codex had more playtesting than FW right?)
Land Raider Achilles.

That's it.

Do you think that could be because so few people are familiar with the IA books?

The amount or presence of over/underpowered units is completely irrelevant.
As is the amount of money spent of acquiring said units.
So is the price and availability of Forgeworld books.
So are any homemade justifications made up in ones head.

The only thing relevant to this discussion is that FACT that Imperial Armour is a 100% official Expansion to the game of Warhammer 40K.....with all that entails.

Manchu wrote:@H.B.M.C.: A game requires some sense of fairness and in 40k incorporating FW units is widely considered beyond the pale, as you well know. Dismissing someone's concerns about fairness as "nonsense" is itself a pretty thin argument.

Widely by who? Has there been a study?
If not I don't know of anyone who thinks FW non superheavies are "beyond the pale." Absent a study my results are equally as valid.

Grimtuff wrote:

biccat wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:

biccat wrote:Second, some units in FW lists may be overpowered and shouldn't be allowed at a game.

Because, as we all know, there are no overpowered units in any standard Codex, right?

I'm under no illusions that codices are balanced or not overpowered, but they are playtested a lot more than FW lists.

Even though (as I already pointed out in another thread) the amount of units most informed people consider overpowered and /or underpriced can be counted on 1 hand.

Shall we list them?

Chemical Mortars
Lucius pattern Dreadnought Drop Pods (more of a byproduct of being able to put DC Dreads in them, but the BA codex had more playtesting than FW right?)
Land Raider Achilles.

That's it.

Don't forget the Tyranid Creatures. Especially as a lot of their rules haven't been FAQed or updated - Hierodules with 7 attacks, HS Gargantuan creatures rerolling all tohit?

Of course there are some gems out there who practically have no rules because all the biomorphs disappeared

I agree with the idea that a lot of FW is overcosted, and that a few are way undercosted. And that means we will rarely see the stuff that doesn't work, just the dreadnaught drop pods in BA armies, and similar things.

In a friendly game, where players can discuss the armies, and pass the IA book over for a look, it's no problem. But in a tournament, it can be very unfair. You are already up against a time limit, and now you need to read an IA book the guy just handed to you, ask questions about units you are unfamiliar with, and struggle through a game not quite knowing what to do. You're opponent has no such problems.

I also agree that a lot of the problem with FW is that most people have never cracked open an IA book. Of course, why the hell should they? If they don't want to order FW themselves, why should they be spending 80 bucks on books to keep up with other peoples armies? Until recently you could only get them from FW direct or at GamesDays or a GW bunker. Not really good distribution. Better now that some countries have them from GW mailorder, and shops can order them.

The arguement of "I spent the money, why can't I play with it" is not a valid arguement. Your codex doesn't allow the FW models anymore than it allows you taking 7 elites or 12 heavy support. Having bought the models doesn't over ride the rules.

Using FW in friendly games is easy. You just take the time to explain stuff to your opponent. No brainer in Apoc, as it's totally legal and encouraged. Some tournaments will allow IA lists, some won't. As usual, check with the TO running the tournament.

Grimtuff wrote:

biccat wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:

biccat wrote:Second, some units in FW lists may be overpowered and shouldn't be allowed at a game.

Because, as we all know, there are no overpowered units in any standard Codex, right?

I'm under no illusions that codices are balanced or not overpowered, but they are playtested a lot more than FW lists.

Even though (as I already pointed out in another thread) the amount of units most informed people consider overpowered and /or underpriced can be counted on 1 hand.

Shall we list them?

Chemical Mortars
Lucius pattern Dreadnought Drop Pods (more of a byproduct of being able to put DC Dreads in them, but the BA codex had more playtesting than FW right?)
Land Raider Achilles.

That's it.

That's your opinion. I don't know that there isn't some other horribly undercosted and overpowered item in FW books.

One overpowered unit places a cloud over the entire book. If we can all accept that X is OP, then why not Y? As long as Forgeworld is "with opponent's permission," I will withhold permission.

Fortunately, there are plenty of other 40k gamers (locally, nationally and globally), so I don't think you'll be at a loss for opponents.

I tend to dislike forgeworld because they are mostly imperial centric...

anyways, I have no problem playing against FW units, but I prefer not to play against super heavies, flyers, or titans.

Main reasons:

some armies aren't equipped in any way to fight against titans/flyers/ super heavies unless they take a very specific build.

and final reason.

Every FW game I have seen that is 2k points or less and has a expensive pointwise FW model, the FW model dies and the FW player basically gives up because his expensive precious model is gone. Its boring. I really disdain people that concede or just become apathetic and stop trying.

DarkStarSabre wrote:

Grimtuff wrote:

biccat wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:

biccat wrote:Second, some units in FW lists may be overpowered and shouldn't be allowed at a game.

Because, as we all know, there are no overpowered units in any standard Codex, right?

I'm under no illusions that codices are balanced or not overpowered, but they are playtested a lot more than FW lists.

Even though (as I already pointed out in another thread) the amount of units most informed people consider overpowered and /or underpriced can be counted on 1 hand.

Shall we list them?

Chemical Mortars
Lucius pattern Dreadnought Drop Pods (more of a byproduct of being able to put DC Dreads in them, but the BA codex had more playtesting than FW right?)
Land Raider Achilles.

That's it.

Don't forget the Tyranid Creatures. Especially as a lot of their rules haven't been FAQed or updated - Hierodules with 7 attacks, HS Gargantuan creatures rerolling all tohit?

Of course there are some gems out there who practically have no rules because all the biomorphs disappeared

I should've clarified, I was on about units for standard 40k. All of the gargantuan creatures etc. should really be APOC only. I'm unsure whether to add the Malanthrope to the list as i've never played against one with the current Nid codex version of Warp Field.

mikhaila wrote:I agree with the idea that a lot of FW is overcosted, and that a few are way undercosted. And that means we will rarely see the stuff that doesn't work, just the dreadnaught drop pods in BA armies, and similar things.

In a friendly game, where players can discuss the armies, and pass the IA book over for a look, it's no problem. But in a tournament, it can be very unfair. You are already up against a time limit, and now you need to read an IA book the guy just handed to you, ask questions about units you are unfamiliar with, and struggle through a game not quite knowing what to do. You're opponent has no such problems.

I also agree that a lot of the problem with FW is that most people have never cracked open an IA book. Of course, why the hell should they? If they don't want to order FW themselves, why should they be spending 80 bucks on books to keep up with other peoples armies? Until recently you could only get them from FW direct or at GamesDays or a GW bunker. Not really good distribution. Better now that some countries have them from GW mailorder, and shops can order them.

The arguement of "I spent the money, why can't I play with it" is not a valid arguement. Your codex doesn't allow the FW models anymore than it allows you taking 7 elites or 12 heavy support. Having bought the models doesn't over ride the rules.

Using FW in friendly games is easy. You just take the time to explain stuff to your opponent. No brainer in Apoc, as it's totally legal and encouraged. Some tournaments will allow IA lists, some won't. As usual, check with the TO running the tournament.

What this guy, with the scary pumpkin worshoping minions, said.

Frazzled wrote:

Manchu wrote:@H.B.M.C.: A game requires some sense of fairness and in 40k incorporating FW units is widely considered beyond the pale, as you well know. Dismissing someone's concerns about fairness as "nonsense" is itself a pretty thin argument.

Widely by who? Has there been a study?
If not I don't know of anyone who thinks FW non superheavies are "beyond the pale." Absent a study my results are equally as valid.

Really? Okay, list of the GW-supported torneys in which one may field FW units please? (Your "results," presumably.)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

mikhaila wrote:In a friendly game, where players can discuss the armies, and pass the IA book over for a look, it's no problem. But in a tournament, it can be very unfair. You are already up against a time limit, and now you need to read an IA book the guy just handed to you, ask questions about units you are unfamiliar with, and struggle through a game not quite knowing what to do. You're opponent has no such problems.

Did mikhaila really have to explain what biccat was talking about? Yes, he apparently did.

Steelmage99 wrote:The only thing relevant to this discussion is that FACT that Imperial Armour is a 100% official Expansion to the game of Warhammer 40K.....with all that entails.

Right, and some opponents are fine with playing that expension, some want to play the regular game. Therefore ask. And be ready to show (real book) and explain all rules and units.

blaktoof wrote:some armies aren't equipped in any way to fight against titans/flyers/ super heavies unless they take a very specific build

Yeah, a Kroot shaper with his eviscerator (almost only anti-tank the Mercenary list has) looks pretty dumb when jumping up and down and waving his eviscerator at the flyer

Kroothawk wrote:Yeah, a Kroot shaper with his eviscerator (almost only anti-tank the Mercenary list has) looks pretty dumb when jumping up and down and waving his eviscerator at the flyer

As opposed to some alien-bird think scampering around and waving around a chainsaw any other way?)

But I see your point. He's going to need long legs to catch up to a flyer.

Ok, line up 4 krootox, then put 3 krootox on top of them, then two. Now have 5 kroot on the two krootox, then 4, 3, and 2. Cover the whole thing in branches. I'll stand on top with the Evisorator and we'll sneak up on the flyers! No one expects the Kroot Assault Pyramid!

Manchu wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

Manchu wrote:@H.B.M.C.: A game requires some sense of fairness and in 40k incorporating FW units is widely considered beyond the pale, as you well know. Dismissing someone's concerns about fairness as "nonsense" is itself a pretty thin argument.

Widely by who? Has there been a study?
If not I don't know of anyone who thinks FW non superheavies are "beyond the pale." Absent a study my results are equally as valid.

Really? Okay, list of the GW-supported torneys in which one may field FW units please? (Your "results," presumably.)

False argument Man of the chu. You noted sense of fairness widely considered. Thats not related to whether or not GW tournaments don't use them. You can't use that for RAI purposes unless the intent is actually expressed by GW.

I accept NO forgeworld units unless it is in the friendliest of friendly games. I'm sorry but Forgeworld is not a GW codex. I can't go to a store and look at the units and get a feel for what i'm fighting. It's always a surprise.

biccat wrote:

Worglock wrote:

biccat wrote:
Second, some units in FW lists may be overpowered and shouldn't be allowed at a game. I have no interest in going through your "codex" to figure out what those units are to decide if I want to play against your list.

So. What army do you play?

Thousand sons.

You have no problem beating me with a generic list, please leave your overpowered FW stuff at the door.

Ok. So we're back to the mythical "Forge World is Overpowered". So, I'm going to set my "surprised face" to the side for a moment and take you at your word that you honestly believe that somehow, somewhere, sometime they made a non-Apoc unit that really is "overpowered".

So, what is it? I need a few of them. Because somehow, in buying every Forge World book ever made, I missed it.

This is my amazed face.

Remember: Since we're talking about Tournament play (which is just bad, but that's another thread) the difficulty level is "No Apocalypse". So that means, no super heavies, no Tyranid Giant Gribblies of Doom and (I think), no flyers.

And btw: if you're playing Thousand Sons, you should do pretty good against the average Speds Mahreenz player.

Frazzled wrote:Non tournament: bring it!
Local RT Tournament: clear with TO but its a 'shall play unless clearly loopy' standard
Major tournament: No

Frazzled shoots - Frazzled scores!

Seriously, did anything other than this really need to be said? Anyone fetching SHTs or Titans in an inappropriately sized game has more problems. So long as you're not fetching them or flyers, you're golden.

mikhaila wrote:Ok, line up 4 krootox, then put 3 krootox on top of them, then two. Now have 5 kroot on the two krootox, then 4, 3, and 2. Cover the whole thing in branches. I'll stand on top with the Evisorator and we'll sneak up on the flyers! No one expects the Kroot Assault Pyramid!

OK, mik, I've *got* to see you model this one

The Grundel wrote:I accept NO forgeworld units unless it is in the friendliest of friendly games. I'm sorry but Forgeworld is not a GW codex. I can't go to a store and look at the units and get a feel for what i'm fighting. It's always a surprise.

So a Warhams game isn't by definition friendly? Really? I mean, I can be the most anti-social guy in the room without expending any effort at all. But, really?


Really?