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.

People keep attributing some past heinous sins to FW and some long past track record of brokenness, but nobody can actually say when this was, or, for the last 4 editions where FW has been allowed in large events (starting with late 5E normalization) when FW was a consistent and major balance issue in tournaments.

Even going back to 3E and 4E, it's hard to see much that was an issue. 200pt Hydras? 650pt Baneblades that were hilariously easy to disable or destroy? Dark Eldar Raven fighters? Even the Warhound was only putting out four S9 AP2 small blast shots back then with its turbolasers, and required a separate FoC to field (so basically you had to be playing an above 2k game).

At worst, there's a couple stinkers that inevitably get nerfed within a few months, and in 5E and 6E FW actually did public playtesting of many new units that universally resulted in better rules while GW's " months between codex releases" meant units often went multiple editions without fixes.

As a chaos player I say forgeworld is fine and it shoud not be banned! With that said, I think chaos has the most to benefit from IA. Whole chunks of our army are still missing with GW refusing to produce mini's for it. Things we have had in the fluff for years and years, things our legions and warband could not operate without (drop pods and thunderhawks). It also gives us our only REAL flyer. Sicario tanks are icing. But in the end I say chaos as a faction has the most to lose from a FW ban.

That being said I always have two lists for each army composition. One with FW and one without for the cry dinks ..

I just wish GW would make them MORE official to get the optional part out of peoples minds. Currently. RAW, FW is just as legal as a GW codex. Its time to get people to understand that so we can have less debates and arguements.

But even as a FW mega fan I think both dev teams need to work closer. The insane prices pre CA are evidence of this.

 Vaktathi wrote:
People keep attributing some past heinous sins to FW and some long past track record of brokenness, but nobody can actually say when this was, or, for the last 4 editions where FW has been allowed in large events (starting with late 5E normalization) when FW was a consistent and major balance issue in tournaments.

It would probably be a good idea to ban Grey Knights since they were broken in 5th.

Jaleous people with no money trying to stop others people playing with theirs own toys...
FW rocks and haters gonna hate

Again not all, just some forge world are broken

 Backspacehacker wrote:
Again not all, just some forge world are broken

Much like some GW.

I'll expect your support in my upcoming "Ban GW, Forge World Only!" thread.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:
Again not all, just some forge world are broken

Much like some GW.

I'll expect your support in my upcoming "Ban GW, Forge World Only!" thread.

Yeah sure

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:
Again not all, just some forge world are broken

Much like some GW.

I'll expect your support in my upcoming "Ban GW, Forge World Only!" thread.

Yeah sure

touche.

Still, you see the point, yes?

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:
Again not all, just some forge world are broken

Much like some GW.

I'll expect your support in my upcoming "Ban GW, Forge World Only!" thread.

Yeah sure

touche.

Still, you see the point, yes?

Nope, because the point you are trying to make falls appart really quickly.

You cant just pull the "let's ban GW! Forge world only!" Because 40k is a GW game. fW products are basically the exp. A more apt example would be if games workshop all of a sudden made units for 30k which forge world runs as a game, and we're crazy strong in 30k. Then I would be ok with a forge world only, no gw stuff for our Horus heresy games.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Again I have no issue withFW in my games mostly because it's an all your eggs in one basket unit.

I wouldn't mind playing against FW units... If anyone actually had a real copy of IA and not dome battlescribe screenshots.

I often find out after a game, whatever was too good to be true with their questionable rules usually is.

 Nightlord1987 wrote:
I wouldn't mind playing against FW units... If anyone actually had a real copy of IA and not dome battlescribe screenshots.

I often find out after a game, whatever was too good to be true with their questionable rules usually is.

This is why I ask that people have a physical or digitally purchased copy of their army book for 40k. Forge World or GW proper. With the advent of FW making their stuff available via iTunes(cheaper no less!), there's no excuse for someone to not have it.

Battlescribe is something I do not trust. Period. Nor do I trust anything that they 'found' online.

 Nightlord1987 wrote:
I wouldn't mind playing against FW units... If anyone actually had a real copy of IA and not dome battlescribe screenshots.

I often find out after a game, whatever was too good to be true with their questionable rules usually is.

Then insist people bring physical copies. I have two physical copies thanks to my own ineptitude. I don't think this is onerous as long as you also ban non-physical GW rules.

 Nightlord1987 wrote:
I wouldn't mind playing against FW units... If anyone actually had a real copy of IA and not dome battlescribe screenshots.

I often find out after a game, whatever was too good to be true with their questionable rules usually is.

That's another big issue, is people don't have the rules for them, the actual rules.

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 Nightlord1987 wrote:
I wouldn't mind playing against FW units... If anyone actually had a real copy of IA and not dome battlescribe screenshots.

I often find out after a game, whatever was too good to be true with their questionable rules usually is.

That's another big issue, is people don't have the rules for them, the actual rules.

No more an issue than it is with GW. If you want to see the rules, make sure people have them.

I once had to explain to a player that his Long Fangs got to pick a target to re-roll 1's against, because he only used Battlescribe as his codex and didn't read anything. He didn't even own the book.

Nope, the majority of FW is fine, heck even Malific's main issue was GW bodge job on Smite

Unfortunately, codexes just don't support the game very well. The IA codex is part of the problem, but its just a piece of the scattered rules issues. You see similar problems with stuff like the latest rules for Knights and all the armies that only have like 10 pages of rules trying to justify a $40 codex.

 Nightlord1987 wrote:
I wouldn't mind playing against FW units... If anyone actually had a real copy of IA and not dome battlescribe screenshots.

I often find out after a game, whatever was too good to be true with their questionable rules usually is.

this is honestly most of the issue with FW has historically been.

Someone tries to run something with ridiculous rules, claims its FW, but either makes up the rules or plays them wrong, and then sours everyone in FW despite as a result.

It was touched on in an earlier post, but I’ll bet a lot of the bias has to do with unfamiliarity and inaccessibility of FW for 40K.

Up until a year or two ago, I myself had no access to any of the FW books, much less the models (for various reasons). I imagine most 40K players like me - only some have even heard of FW, and even fewer own any of the books or models. That unfamiliarity - coupled with it being promoted some independantly of standard 40K makes for a recipe of “I don’t know anything about it, therefore it’s easier just to ban it all” instead of go through books you don’t have (and may not want at all) and determine which individual items to ban from tournament play.

craftworld_uk wrote:
I say ban everything except tactical marines to avoid imbalance.

The 1990 Warhammer 40,000 league only allowed Space Marine armies - and only a Captain and Assault, Tactical and Devastator squads, so that's not as silly an idea as you think.

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:
Again not all, just some forge world are broken

Much like some GW.

I'll expect your support in my upcoming "Ban GW, Forge World Only!" thread.

Yeah sure

touche.

Still, you see the point, yes?

Nope, because the point you are trying to make falls appart really quickly.

You cant just pull the "let's ban GW! Forge world only!" Because 40k is a GW game. fW products are basically the exp. A more apt example would be if games workshop all of a sudden made units for 30k which forge world runs as a game, and we're crazy strong in 30k. Then I would be ok with a forge world only, no gw stuff for our Horus heresy games.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Again I have no issue withFW in my games mostly because it's an all your eggs in one basket unit.

But you see, RAW states that FW is not optional. They are as legal as GW units in warhammer. You really dont even have to discuss using them outside of talking things over for the sake of others. Its like we started a game and I said " I dont like knights, dont use knights". Nothing "legal" about that request. GW needs to support FW more in the core rule book to get it to stick to people that RAW, it is not optional but legal, which it is, but its not apparent enough in writing. And I do, for the record think some FW models are OP. Most of those got fixed in the CA release. Fire Raptors are to good for the point cost.

Now of course im not a hard ass. If someone asked for me not to use FW outside of a tourney setting then I have lists to sub with. But I wouldnt play in a any tournaments that blanket banned FW for the above reasoning. Long story short. His statement is valid.

When GW puts forgeworld in their regular distribution channels I think that would really help. It would give LGS a reason to care about them, and have easier access to the models and especially rules.

Now that I think about it, despite all the years and scores of FW units I’ve played against, i have never actually seen a rulebook from FW with my own eyes. Not once that I can think of. The obscure nature of the rules is a major barrier.

Better yet, just roll the models from FW into the main GW books if you want them to really be considered part of the main game.

dosiere wrote:
When GW puts forgeworld in their regular distribution channels I think that would really help. It would give LGS a reason to care about them, and have easier access to the models and especially rules.

Now that I think about it, despite all the years and scores of FW units I’ve played against, i have never actually seen a rulebook from FW with my own eyes. Not once that I can think of. The obscure nature of the rules is a major barrier.

Better yet, just roll the models from FW into the main GW books if you want them to really be considered part of the main game.

Idk if that's ever going to happen. Forge world has always been a luxury pay to win item. I mean the last units I can think of that they ported over to GW was the baneblade which was horrible in 7th. And the Terminator patterens which really was just GW wanting to get in on the Horus heresy action. But there are not a lot of forge world made units that ever got made into GW units and I don't think there will be. Another really good example of a crazy strong forge world unit is the xyphon intercepter. This is crazy dumb for it's point cost and will decimate anything that has the fly keyword.

From what I remember when our club started to come together during 4th edition FW was hugely OP and under costed. As the years have gone along, they seem to have fixed that for the most part. These days I don't have an issue with any of the FW units or rules. If it's a legal unit then by all means bring it to the table.

 Backspacehacker wrote:

dosiere wrote:
When GW puts forgeworld in their regular distribution channels I think that would really help. It would give LGS a reason to care about them, and have easier access to the models and especially rules.

Now that I think about it, despite all the years and scores of FW units I’ve played against, i have never actually seen a rulebook from FW with my own eyes. Not once that I can think of. The obscure nature of the rules is a major barrier.

Better yet, just roll the models from FW into the main GW books if you want them to really be considered part of the main game.

Idk if that's ever going to happen. Forge world has always been a luxury pay to win item.

Expensive? Yes. Pay to win? No. The overwhelmingly vast majority of FW units are decidedly noncompetitive, and always have been. If you look at tournament results across the last 4 editions where FW is included, there is no evidence it has any major impact, especially for more than a few months. That said, for many units, particularly many infantry and characters, GW has matched or exceeded FW prices since at least 6th edition.

I mean the last units I can think of that they ported over to GW was the baneblade which was horrible in 7th.

The Baneblade was ported over in 2007, during 4th edition, and was made monstrously more powerful than it ever was under FW's rules though it did suck in 7E (along with pretty much anything IG).


The Hydras were similarly treated, going from 200pt FW units to 75pt squadronable GW Codex units that got to ignore skimmer saves to boot. Valkyries got better armor and more abilities and their cost halved when moved away from FW.
Pretty much every unit I can think of ported from FW to GW got a massive boost in the process. Lets also not forget units like the Exterminator Russ, Vendetta or Griffon, which have popped back and forth multiple times, or the Thudd Gun which was an old school RT/2E Imperial artillery unit that was brought back by FW in late 4E and then adapted by GW later as the Thunderfire Cannon. The Tau Pirhana and Tyranid Trygon and others also were FW before they were GW.

But there are not a lot of forge world made units that ever got made into GW units and I don't think there will be.

There is a reason for this. FW makes things that cannot be made profitably in plastic, or that the core design studio doesn't want to do or doesnt have time to do (like the HH stuff). If the core studio can and wants to do it, there is no reason for FW.

Another really good example of a crazy strong forge world unit is the xyphon intercepter. This is crazy dumb for it's point cost and will decimate anything that has the fly keyword.

So will a Vendetta for the same points, with a transport capacity and more wounds to boot. The Xiphon is, IIRC a 230pt unit. Neither are spectacularly popular in competitive arenas.

Not once in my time playing have I ever thought that FW needs a ban from anything.

As many have stated FW has some OP units but not every unit is OP. Have you seen the meta from the past editions? How many relied on FW to win major tournaments? Just because your snowflake list lost to a single FW model doesn't mean an all out ban of these models.

50% of my lists I make have some form of FW model being an actual rule tide to them or just having nice looking models (ie their wonderful PA).

We have a guy at our FLGS that hates FW in all forms put likes to spam the latest cheese and thinks that is okay.

It might help with acceptance if FW covered all factions evenly.

There are a ton of IOM units against every possible need but what... two rather underwhelming dark Eldar ones?

Chaos, Eldar and Tau do a little better, but it’s hard not to see FW as Codex: Yet More Imperial Options if you don’t play IOM or steal their stuff, like my GSC

I regularly use FW models in our play group and nobody has had any prob w them. they like how fluffy the units are and are not OP. Most times since they're a target priority getting shot at first may help divert forces enuff from my main contingent. so I guess as a distraction it might be OK.

but this is from someone whom will never play in a tournament that would ban certain units from an official source. if you couldn't bring your favorite model would you play?

BTW my FLGS and local GW store seem to not have a problem w my army, so it sucks thats the case for some people.

I have the official book from FW AND EVERY SINGLE PERSON USING FW MUST USE THE BOOK, otherwise you shouldn't play them since they're bullshitting and are too cheap to play the right way.

 Ascalam wrote:
It might help with acceptance if FW covered all factions evenly.

There are a ton of IOM units against every possible need but what... two rather underwhelming dark Eldar ones?

Chaos, Eldar and Tau do a little better, but it’s hard not to see FW as Codex: Yet More Imperial Options if you don’t play IOM or steal their stuff, like my GSC

Its a mirror of GW proper. The major sellers get more attention. IoM players make up the largest bulk of players (as evident by sales), then its chaos followed by eldar and tau. But the gulf between IoM and chaos seems to be getting smaller??? Well thats what I take from the increased attention chaos has been getting, with two new factions and CSM and Demon releases so close to each other. We may even be seeing a dark mech faction soon (which would be awesome). But the point is, what sells is what gets made. Its the same at FW as it is at GW. And the gulf widens because its a self repeating cycle. Outside of Deldar releases 5 years ago what have they gotten since? A updated codex. This is not a forge world issue.

Not JUST a FW issue, to be sure.

They could definitely offset that by supporting the factions GW doesn't though.

 Vaktathi wrote:
The Baneblade was ported over in 2007, during 4th edition, and was made monstrously more powerful than it ever was under FW's rules though it did suck in 7E (along with pretty much anything IG).


The Hydras were similarly treated, going from 200pt FW units to 75pt squadronable GW Codex units that got to ignore skimmer saves to boot. Valkyries got better armor and more abilities and their cost halved when moved away from FW.

The Hydra didn't get to "ignore skimmer saves".
It got to ignore the cover saves granted to skimmers and bikes/jetbikes from moving flat out/turbo-boosting.

It might sound silly, but it's an important distinction to make I feel. It's like later on when FW did the "Auto-Targeting System" that allowed for their Hydra/Hydra Flak Batteries to ignore Supersonic and Jink saves. It was an incredibly specific thing especially in comparison to other things that just had "Ignores Cover".