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.

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:

not sure if Gorkamorka was/is a citadel model,.

Of course it was. The GorkaMorka Trukk was the only official model for years and as such anyone who complains about people using them in 40K can poke it.

Pre 3rd ed models form the bulk of most of my armies, if someone has a problem with that then they can play by themselves in a 'competative' environment with GW's wonderfully balanced codices.

TLOS was always a bad idea and this thread illustrates one of the reasons why.

TLOS isn't a bad idea.

The bad idea is expecting 40K's rules to be as tight as chess in a competitive environment when that simply isn't what the game was designed for.

TLOS as a concept is fine. but when combined with GW's general refusal to define appropriate model size and/or posing, you can't expect the result to be totally consistent from game to game. That way lies madness.

I would have no problem with someone using models from any edition, or good-looking conversions (even ones that departed a little from the official mini's size), even in a competitive game, even if they had a mix of old and new models. It just doesn't make enough of a difference, often enough, to worry about.

I might get mildly pissed off about someone who had deliberately bought certain small old models to represent stuff he wanted to hide behind newer models, like the aforementioned Whirlwind sneakiness, but the way to express that pissed-offness is by gentle mockery and a '0' for sportsmanship, not by whining to the tournament organiser.

 insaniak wrote:
TLOS isn't a bad idea.

The bad idea is expecting 40K's rules to be as tight as chess in a competitive environment when that simply isn't what the game was designed for.

TLOS as a concept is fine. but when combined with GW's general refusal to define appropriate model size and/or posing, you can't expect the result to be totally consistent from game to game. That way lies madness.

From one thread to another, eh?

Why do these rules have to be airtight? Name another game, played competitively, with as many different ways to play as Warhammer that has better rules. Does no one know how to compromise or let a die roll take care of rules issues? Sorry, chess has two identical armies and centuries of rules development. If you can't deal with having some looseness to the rules, maybe this isn't the game for you...

I very much dislike the trend towards "you must use this specific model" I've been seeing, both in GW and in the local tournament scene. Now we have power weapons that vary depending on what model you use and how you convert it - leading to arguments. Changing base sizes. Forgeworld allowed tournaments where you can use a blu-tac'd unpainted FW models but not the scratch build you spent uncounted hours on.
Its a slap in the face to true modellers everywhere.

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:

Why do these rules have to be airtight? Name another game, played competitively, with as many different ways to play as Warhammer that has better rules.

Flames of War. Do I win a prize?

Palindrome wrote:

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:

Why do these rules have to be airtight? Name another game, played competitively, with as many different ways to play as Warhammer that has better rules.

Flames of War. Do I win a prize?

+3

Flames of war type rules with 40K modeling and fluff is my dream. Sadly, I can't get too excited about tiny grey and brown men from a modeling perspective, but its a great game.

Palindrome wrote:

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:

Why do these rules have to be airtight? Name another game, played competitively, with as many different ways to play as Warhammer that has better rules.

Flames of War. Do I win a prize?

People play FoW competitively?

People travel to the other side of the world to take part in FoW tournaments. Does that count?

 Carnage43 wrote:

 Lordhat wrote:
I have never once seen anybody complain about the old Rhinos/Razorbacks/Landraiders excepting complaints about aesthetics, cause they are ugly as sin.

Had my opponent make a minor rumble last week about me using a second edition Hive Tyrant. The thing is barely larger then a tyranid warrior, and with the Blood Thirster wings I gave him, he still has a really small profile. He was upset that I was hiding behind a hedge that a "normal" sized tyrant wouldn't have had any chance to hide behind.

Legit GW model? If yes, it's legal.



Not mine, but for comparison.

What we have been doing is putting the old models on the current base, so if you put Tiny T on the Big T's base, you should be covered from a rules-legal standpoint. To make it even less controversial, build up the base somewhat so that Tiny T is roughly the same height as Big T. If you do this, you will likely never run into any trouble. I'm doing the same thing with my old 2nd edition terminators. If you leave them on the old base and then attach that to a full sized modern base, they are the same height as the newer terminator models.

SoloFalcon1138 wrote:Why do these rules have to be airtight? Name another game, played competitively, with as many different ways to play as Warhammer that has better rules. Does no one know how to compromise or let a die roll take care of rules issues? Sorry, chess has two identical armies and centuries of rules development. If you can't deal with having some looseness to the rules, maybe this isn't the game for you...

It's not a matter of people not knowing how to compromise. Most people have no issue with that whatsoever. But being able to compromise in no way changes the irritation at the rules not being more competently written so as to remove that need.

On their 6th attempt, GW released a rulebook that included several sections that required revisions immediately after release. We have rules that are missing, rules that are made ambiguous by poor phrasing or punctuation, and FAQs that randomly change rules or provide contradictory clarifications.

Whether or not there are other games out there that are better written is largely irrelevant. If I sell a product that is faulty, the fact the it is the best on the market (or seen as such) doesn't alter the fact that it is faulty.


All of which is veering somewhat off topic, though. The discussion at hand was about models not being the 'right' size... The discussion of how much of a mess the rules are is just to illustrate why using a model that is a different size from the 'current official' one just isn't that big a deal..

kestral wrote:Now we have power weapons that vary depending on what model you use and how you convert it

WYSIWYG is not a new thing...

Forgeworld allowed tournaments where you can use a blu-tac'd unpainted FW models but not the scratch build you spent uncounted hours on.

Which tournament would that be?

I've been pushing my Tyranid playing friend to field a Swarmlord/Hive Tyrant/Flyrant using the old metal models instead of the new plastic ones because I think they are much better looking. It potentially puts me at a disadvantage, especially since our group plays with pretty terrain heavy boards, but I love the look of them.

People who complain about small models would simply find something else to complain about if you ran what is the "right" model in their mind.

Aside from Melee only models, LOS is a two way street, so the short model is sometimes going to suffer from his own 'advantage'.

That said, I am firmly in the "its a game of toy soldiers, who cares" camp, with the addition of being far more bothered by folks getting up in arms over interesting conversions not being 'fair' then by being worried about whatever sort of changes those conversions inflict on supposed 'balance'.

Jack

 kcwm wrote:
I've been pushing my Tyranid playing friend to field a Swarmlord/Hive Tyrant/Flyrant using the old metal models instead of the new plastic ones because I think they are much better looking. It potentially puts me at a disadvantage, especially since our group plays with pretty terrain heavy boards, but I love the look of them.

People who complain about small models would simply find something else to complain about if you ran what is the "right" model in their mind.

Pretty much, this.

Its not like anyone is proposing to use just a base to represent models, they are official GW releases. There are pros and cons on both sides. If this is what upsets you at a game, you may need a hobby. Or drugs.