Switch Theme:

ITC / GT / TO - are Forgeworld units legal?  [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
Douglas Bader






MaxT wrote:
Please. It's half a dozen units across 4 books that have typo issues that are fixable in 10 seconds with a reasonable opponent (or TO). If errors are a reason to not allow entire books to be played, no GW game would ever be played !


It's not just the errors themselves, it's the fact that playtesting must have been nonexistent if blatant errors like that made it to print and therefore the rest of the book can't be trusted either. There's no reason to believe that any of the new FW rules are balanced or reasonable, until it is demonstrated that the typos are by some miracle an isolated incident. Or until FW puts some work into fixing their mistakes.

There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. 
   
Made in gb
Horrible Hekatrix With Hydra Gauntlets




 Peregrine wrote:

It's not just the errors themselves, it's the fact that playtesting must have been nonexistent if blatant errors like that made it to print and therefore the rest of the book can't be trusted either. There's no reason to believe that any of the new FW rules are balanced or reasonable, until it is demonstrated that the typos are by some miracle an isolated incident. Or until FW puts some work into fixing their mistakes.


I don't see how the printing of the book has any relevance to whether or not it was playtested and to what extent. It's entirely possible that what was tested was a very rough/informal draft of the rules, and the typos and errors that exist were introduced while the book was being written up ready for printing.
   
Made in us
Douglas Bader






Eldar Vampire Hunter wrote:
I don't see how the printing of the book has any relevance to whether or not it was playtested and to what extent. It's entirely possible that what was tested was a very rough/informal draft of the rules, and the typos and errors that exist were introduced while the book was being written up ready for printing.


Because even a superficial look at the rules by the playtesters would have caught the problem. I mean, these aren't hard issues to spot, the community had an ongoing list of them within a few minutes of the first copies leaking. It's clearly a zero-effort book that was rushed out as quickly as possible.

There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. 
   
Made in gb
Junior Officer with Laspistol




Manchester, UK

 Peregrine wrote:
Eldar Vampire Hunter wrote:
I don't see how the printing of the book has any relevance to whether or not it was playtested and to what extent. It's entirely possible that what was tested was a very rough/informal draft of the rules, and the typos and errors that exist were introduced while the book was being written up ready for printing.


Because even a superficial look at the rules by the playtesters would have caught the problem. I mean, these aren't hard issues to spot, the community had an ongoing list of them within a few minutes of the first copies leaking. It's clearly a zero-effort book that was rushed out as quickly as possible.


I'm considering returning mine. I may keep it just as a funny example of bad proofing. Also, the units I want to use came out fine (Vulture, death riders, mars pattern russ).

The Tvashtan 422nd "Fire Leopards" - Updated 19/03/11

"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." - Hanlon's Razor 
   
Made in se
Dakka Veteran




 Peregrine wrote:
Eldar Vampire Hunter wrote:
I don't see how the printing of the book has any relevance to whether or not it was playtested and to what extent. It's entirely possible that what was tested was a very rough/informal draft of the rules, and the typos and errors that exist were introduced while the book was being written up ready for printing.


Because even a superficial look at the rules by the playtesters would have caught the problem. I mean, these aren't hard issues to spot, the community had an ongoing list of them within a few minutes of the first copies leaking. It's clearly a zero-effort book that was rushed out as quickly as possible.


Again, if "level of playtesting" was a bar to whether something is legal to play with or not, no GW game in 15 years would have been played. Typo's in layout have NOTHING to do with playtesting, playtesters do not use fully laid out completed books !

Should these typoes have been caught prior to publishing? Absolutely. Fully agree there. But banishing hundreds of models from the game because of it is total bs.
   
Made in us
Pestilent Plague Marine with Blight Grenade





cedar rapids, iowa

 Peregrine wrote:
Eldar Vampire Hunter wrote:
I don't see how the printing of the book has any relevance to whether or not it was playtested and to what extent. It's entirely possible that what was tested was a very rough/informal draft of the rules, and the typos and errors that exist were introduced while the book was being written up ready for printing.


Because even a superficial look at the rules by the playtesters would have caught the problem. I mean, these aren't hard issues to spot, the community had an ongoing list of them within a few minutes of the first copies leaking. It's clearly a zero-effort book that was rushed out as quickly as possible.


Chill out dude.

It's pretty dang easy to fix these, Forge world tends to fix things quickly, this is a temporary solution and I don't see any major tournies banning units unless they are blatantly overpowered. Most of the units have been made usable that were not before. A ton of books had out of date rules by the end of 7th; so I much prefer this to having to try and understand why ork, nid, dark eldar, and sisters players never fielded any of their units from forge world. I have quite a few of these models (Greater Plague Drone, Avenger, redeemer, Solomon Lok, Vendettas, Typhon Tank, Macharius...) None of these is "broke" or whatever it is you are trying to convince everyone of. Are there units that need help? Probably, but so do a bunch of units in the GW books or are you suggesting we all just stop playing 40k?

 
   
Made in us
Potent Possessed Daemonvessel





The things I have seen to me seem to lack the same kind of playtesting that the base game units received. Like FW has for a long time everything needs shiny rules, and they tend to either be terribly overcosted, or broken. The Gauss Pylon was brought up, that thing is broken by comparison to any other anti-tank unit. Sure it kills one vehicle a turn, the problem is that should read it kills any vehicle reliably every turn. It is not a stretch for it to oneshot a 1000 point ork stompa (which has T8 and 40 wounds and a 3+ save). A gun that does D6 shots and D3 + 6 damage that gets double against superheavies, is crazy. It is flat out better than anything in the base game by miles. A relatively below average roll kills a land raider (2 shots, at 8 damage each), which is a fairly comparably priced unit. That same shot kills a knight. 3 shots, reliably kills a Stompa. Nothing I can think of in the base game does more than 6 damage per attack. this thing does 7 minimum.

I look at things like basically nothing in the base game having Toughness 9 or 10, and it being fairly common for FW units to be bad balance. I mean the salamaders character dread (Brayarth) is untargetable (character with <10 wounds), has T9 a 2+ save, and 4+ FNP. So even if he was targetable he would be more durable than a land raider, making him untargetable is dumb, or if he is he shouldn't also have one of the highest T in the game and 4+ FNP (nothing in the base game has better than 5+). His flamers are better than any flamers in the base game doing flat 3 damage with AP -2.

I'd much prefer FW make cool models for units that are not all super special compared to the base models, but guess that is out of the question.

I also always have the issue with FW that it is gives more advantage to the imperium in sheer choice than any other faction. When that faction already has the most choices. The fanboy style rules are cool to look at, but I'd rather all rules came from the same place, and had the same level of playtesting. Maybe when codices come out my mind may change, but so far most index units are pretty toned down.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/06/26 14:13:03


 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





Hyperspace

I do not believe that a single rule in the GW indexes requires time travel to work.



Peregrine - If you like the army buy it, and don't worry about what one random person on the internet thinks.
 
   
Made in us
Enigmatic Chaos Sorcerer




Tampa, FL

While I certainly get wanting solid rules, I think a lot of it shows how RAW vs. RAI works. In many of these cases the intent is obvious (e.g. that "preceding shooting phase" nonsense or the flyer with the macro cannon and not titanic) but it shows the level that a rules lawyer will argue that you can/can't do something, and completely ignoring intent.

- Wayne
Formerly WayneTheGame 
   
Made in gb
Junior Officer with Laspistol




Manchester, UK

Wayniac wrote:
While I certainly get wanting solid rules, I think a lot of it shows how RAW vs. RAI works. In many of these cases the intent is obvious (e.g. that "preceding shooting phase" nonsense or the flyer with the macro cannon and not titanic) but it shows the level that a rules lawyer will argue that you can/can't do something, and completely ignoring intent.


There is a difference between the RAW vs RAI arguments that are over stupid things like "models don't have eyes" and the ones we see here. These are the sorts of things that should have been picked up as broken. Also, I'm beginning to think that there are a lot of points errors in the books too. Two examples are the Conqueror and the Thunderer. The Conqueror is probably the best Russ by far because of how cheap it is, whilst the Thunderer is completely pointless as it is 40pts more than a Demolisher for no real reason.

The Tvashtan 422nd "Fire Leopards" - Updated 19/03/11

"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." - Hanlon's Razor 
   
Made in ru
!!Goffik Rocker!!






 Trickstick wrote:
 Ashiraya wrote:
Explain.


Macharius vulcan mega-bolter rule: If this model does not move during the Movement phase, in the preceding Shooting phase, change this weapon's Type to Heavy 30 until the end of the turn.

Now we all know what it is supposed to mean but if you go off RAW then you have some weird time travel thing going on.


DON'T USE FW! Otherwise the universe is screwed. I've warned you since forever. FW is illegal. And you didn't listen...YOU DIDN'T LISTEN!..
   
Made in us
Omnipotent Necron Overlord






If it were up to me - FW would be illegal until it rules are written into legit warhammer 40k books (written by the same rules writters) and sold in GW stores. If I were a tournament organizer - I'd use the same logic.

If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder 
   
Made in us
Ragin' Ork Dreadnought




Eyjio wrote:
Waaaghpower wrote:
Nah. EVERYTHING is broken, if you'll excuse the minor hyperbole. I'm sure there are some fun and fair units, but a huge number of units have legitimate errors that make them worthless, and there's a balance gap the size of the grand canyon between some of the units. The pricing is all over the place, and some units are straight-up better or obviously worse than their codex equivalents for no reason.
I can honestly say that, based on what I've seen, less than a fifth of the units are both fair, balanced, and lack any major errors.


Which units would you say are particularly unbalanced in the FW indices, out of interest, versus the equivalent units in the main indices?

For the sake of not spending my whole day on this, I'll only be using units from the Astartes Imperial Armor, and only be going until I get bored. Is this scientific? Nope!

Many of the balance errors aren't game-breaking, but they do demonstrate a general lack of care put into the fine-tuning of the rules that's very visible in the main Indexes.



The Deimos Relic Predator gets +1 wound for only 3 points compared to a regular predator, and its Plasma Destroyer is better than the Autocannon in most contexts for only 3 more points as well. (Losing 1 damage and 12" of range is absolutely worth triple the AP.)

The Vindicator Laser Destroyer is also explicitly better than a Trilas Predator in almost every context - It has slightly shorter range and can't cause maximum damage while moving, but is notably cheaper, far more durable (Since it gets to the T8 threshold, meaning that most S4 can't easily wound it and S7 and S8 both take a -1), it causes damage more reliably (3 instead of d6 is technically lower, but can't fail) and has versatile options since it can go for a stronger shot that will obliterate any non-invuln save.

There's nothing wrong with the Infernum-Pattern Razorback, though it's such a minor difference from a regular Razorback that I don't know how they could have screwed it up. (So that's one 'Not broken'.)

The Land Raider Proteus seems mostly fine, if a bit overcosted, (it's flat-out worse than a Land Raider stock, but if you're taking it for the Augury Web, it's... Well, it adds only 3", but that's not the worst thing ever.) However, it also has the ability to take the 'Heavy Armor' ability, which is an ability that, to my searching, does not exist. I have no idea what that does, because it's not listed anywhere.

The Land Raider Helios isn't overpowered or particularly broken, though it's pretty disincentived from being taken - Transporting only 6 models is bane for a model designed to transport powerful shock troops and Transports, and the weapon does not seem worth it. Since it costs as much as a regular Land Raider, I don't expect to see it taken except in narrative games. (Though I'll list this one as 'Not broken'.)

The Prometheus is fine. I think it's a little redundant compared to a Crusader, who fills the same role for much cheaper, but it's not broken or particularly underpowered, just balanced a bit differently.

The Achilles seems mostly OK as well. (In fact, overall, the Land Raider variants all seem mostly OK, outside of the Proteus having missing rules.)

The Relic Sicaran is too darned expensive for its durability. All it gets over a Predator is 3 wounds, and while it has a notably higher damage output, (Getting 8 Autocannon shots with buff against fliers and psuedo-rending, instead of 2d3 autocannon shots with extra Damage,) that's not worth the 80 points you're spending - It ends up on the scrap heap just as quickly.

The Sicaran Venerator is also glass cannony, but has extra cheese in that you can use it against Lord of War-scale vehicles and render them useless pretty easily. That -1 to hit debuff is going to be negligible in some armies, but when you go up against any big vehicle that costs more than 500 points, getting first turn and shooting up that tank is going to singlehandedly win games.

The Sicaran Punisher actually seems ok. It doesn't double-up its role with any other Space Marine tank, and is notably cheaper - Which helps with the glass cannon effect.


Looking pretty good so far? Well...

The Spartan,
Typhon,
Cerberus,
Fellblade,
Falchion,
and Mastadon
are all unplayable due to how the 'Relic' rule works and interacts with detachments. You need to bring a minimum of 3 Lords of War just to get ONE of these in your army, meaning that in order to get the cheapest of them into a 2k game, you're going to be spending most of your points just to get access to them and add in the model itself.


The Mortis dreadnought is mostly fine, except that if you take the Rifleman build, it's identical to a regular Rifleman dreadnought, but 5 points more expensive.

The Siege Dreadnought is ok as an alternate Ironclad.

The Contemptor Mortis is fine on paper, but is missing previously-legal options (Namely, the ability to take a missile launcher, though it also doesn't have a Helical Targetting Array anymore,) making many previously-legal models unplayable without conversion.

The Chaplain VenDread seems like he *could* be exploitable by giving +1 Strength, but seeing as I haven't seen anything explicitly broken with this I'll ignore it for now and call it 'all good'.

The Relic Contemptor, Relic Deredeo, and Relic Leviathan are both variants of other builds that pay a huge premium for extra durability. They actually have the opposite of a glass-cannon effect - Their damage doesn't go up, but they get more durable. Unfortunately, a notable but ultimately minor buff in durability is generally not worth costing 70-80% more than other units that provide the same firepower.


So that's 7 units that have no obvious problems, 7 that have noteworthy issues that are pretty obvious, but aren't rendered unplayable or blatantly overpowered, and 9 units that are either explicitly broken in some way, have flat-out missing rules, or are straight-up cheesy.


I'll admit, I was wrong. It's not 20% of units that are good and problem-free, it's 30%.
   
Made in us
Fresh-Faced New User





Just to ask a more specific portion of this larger question (now that we've had a few tournaments, world-wide...)

1. Forgeworld units still ok?
2. All Detachments still ok?

*3. Revenant Titan still ok?

   
Made in us
Imperial Guard Landspeeder Pilot




On moon miranda.

Are we really going back to the whole "FW is illegal" thing?

Really?

That's where we're at?

We're gonna go back to "you can't use your little plastic army toy because it's not in the book I deem correct"? Really?

The 8E FW books are poor. No argument from me. They reek of "we were told about 8th the same time the public was and had the shop intern make up all the rules".

However, most of the stuff is either fixable by one second of common sense application or isn't something 99%+ of players are ever going to actually see on a table.

Likewise, lets not make it out like the core GW army lists have been spectacularly handled either. This is par for the course with GW and nothing new.



IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.

New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights!
The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.  
   
Made in us
Damsel of the Lady




So, actually having fought a Spawn and Giant Spawn army, here is my two cents:

Chaos Spawn are great! A squad of 7-8 of them can mulch a 5-man Terminator team in one round of combat. They're decently fast too, but they're not Daemons and they have no ranged weapons. You really can take a heavy toll on them with shooting.

Giant Chaos spawn deal like no damage. Now I was Grey Knights, but my Terminators and Dreadknights basically just got tickled by these guys (there were 6). Conversely, the Dreadknights were dropping 1 Giant per turn per Dreadknight between shooting and charging. They're good, cheap sponges, but that's about it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Vaktathi wrote:
Are we really going back to the whole "FW is illegal" thing?

Really?

That's where we're at?

We're gonna go back to "you can't use your little plastic army toy because it's not in the book I deem correct"? Really?




Also, this.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/07/09 19:34:07


 
   
Made in us
Terminator with Assault Cannon





Waaaghpower wrote:
The Deimos Relic Predator gets +1 wound for only 3 points compared to a regular predator, and its Plasma Destroyer is better than the Autocannon in most contexts for only 3 more points as well. (Losing 1 damage and 12" of range is absolutely worth triple the AP.)

The Vindicator Laser Destroyer is also explicitly better than a Trilas Predator in almost every context - It has slightly shorter range and can't cause maximum damage while moving, but is notably cheaper, far more durable (Since it gets to the T8 threshold, meaning that most S4 can't easily wound it and S7 and S8 both take a -1), it causes damage more reliably (3 instead of d6 is technically lower, but can't fail) and has versatile options since it can go for a stronger shot that will obliterate any non-invuln save.


Keep in mind normal Predators are quite overpriced - compare a Predator to a Rhino, for instance. The Predator gets +1 wound but loses its transport capacity and costs 30+ points more before weapons. Comparing things to one of the less efficient choices in the Index is going to end up with some screwy conclusions.
   
Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut





 Xenomancers wrote:
If it were up to me - FW would be illegal until it rules are written into legit warhammer 40k books (written by the same rules writters) and sold in GW stores. If I were a tournament organizer - I'd use the same logic.


Forgeworld is completely owned by Games Workshop and is just a sub group inside. Banning them would really be no different than banning Guy-B Codexes because they weren't written by Guy-A inside store codexes. They're really just fancy GW Models (besides being resin) that they can use the exclusivity of the Forgeworld name to push up the pricing.

 
   
Made in us
Potent Possessed Daemonvessel





Hatachi wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
If it were up to me - FW would be illegal until it rules are written into legit warhammer 40k books (written by the same rules writters) and sold in GW stores. If I were a tournament organizer - I'd use the same logic.


Forgeworld is completely owned by Games Workshop and is just a sub group inside. Banning them would really be no different than banning Guy-B Codexes because they weren't written by Guy-A inside store codexes. They're really just fancy GW Models (besides being resin) that they can use the exclusivity of the Forgeworld name to push up the pricing.


I'd buy that if the rules didn't read like fan boy rules written without any balance in mind. By that I mean many are OP and others are awful.
   
Made in se
Road-Raging Blood Angel Biker




I'd be fine with FW if the game was balanced with and around those models. As is they just allow you to cheese your opponent with broken combos.
   
Made in us
Clousseau





East Bay, Ca, US

People saying banning FW is like banning GW - No, this isn't true.

While that may have been true in previous editions, there is a significant difference here.

The base GW ruleset was extensively playtested, for quite some time, and they involved the community in the testing, which is totally unheard of for GW.

NONE of this happened with Forgeworld. There are already absurdly strong units from them.

If you want a balanced game, and a level playing field - i don't see how you can include FW content.

 Galas wrote:
I remember when Marmatag was a nooby, all shiney and full of joy. How playing the unbalanced mess of Warhammer40k in a ultra-competitive meta has changed you

Bharring wrote:
He'll actually *change his mind* in the presence of sufficient/sufficiently defended information. Heretic.
 
   
Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut





Hatachi wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
If it were up to me - FW would be illegal until it rules are written into legit warhammer 40k books (written by the same rules writters) and sold in GW stores. If I were a tournament organizer - I'd use the same logic.


Forgeworld is completely owned by Games Workshop and is just a sub group inside. Banning them would really be no different than banning Guy-B Codexes because they weren't written by Guy-A inside store codexes. They're really just fancy GW Models (besides being resin) that they can use the exclusivity of the Forgeworld name to push up the pricing.


My point kind of comes to soon as you start blocking official index/codexes from play you're really just making alternate formats. You're not really playing "the official full game." If you want to do that, it's fine, but we shouldn't consider it the all encompassing standard play and you need to be notated as such.

 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: