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.
A slope you have constructed yourself, as I'd like to point out. You do know that it is a logical fallacy, right?
There are still people who avoid going to Wendy's because some guy was caught on camera spitting on the burgers in the kitchen almost twenty years ago.
No matter how often the news will report about rats at McDonalds, those people will still not go to Wendy's.
Forgeworld is a brand with a reputation for low quality rules. If anything, they should be taking special care to no longer cause any huge rule or balance issues. As long as they keep making low quality rules, they will retain that reputation, no matter what GW does in the meantime.
7 Ork facts people always get wrong: Ragnar did not win against Thrakka, but suffered two crushing defeats within a few days of each other. A lasgun is powerful enough to sever an ork's appendage or head in a single, well aimed shot. Orks meks have a better understanding of electrics and mechanics than most Tech Priests. Orks actually do not think that purple makes them harder to see. The joke was made canon by Alex Stewart's Caphias Cain books. Gharkull Blackfang did not even come close to killing the emperor. Orks can be corrupted by chaos, but few of them have any interest in what chaos offers. Orks do not have the power of believe.
Jidmah wrote: A slope you have constructed yourself, as I'd like to point out. You do know that it is a logical fallacy, right?
There are still people who avoid going to Wendy's because some guy was caught on camera spitting on the burgers in the kitchen almost twenty years ago.
No matter how often the news will report about rats at McDonalds, those people will still not go to Wendy's.
Forgeworld is a brand with a reputation for low quality rules.
GW as a whole is is a brand with a reputation for low quality rules, nobody plays 40k because it's a great tactical wargame ruleset, and GW are fairly open about this.
If anything, they should be taking special care to no longer cause any huge rule or balance issues.
Broadly speaking, they do. The only issues people can point to were quickly addressed and are no longer issues. When people point to FW balance issues, they really have to cherrypick a whole lot harder than with main studio stuff.
Looking at tournament lists and results, FW clearly is not a problem, and is relatively rare in top end competitive lists.
Hell, FW has actually done experimental test rules for some units to get and act on feeedback before publishing new units in books over the last several editions, GW has not.
As long as they keep making low quality rules, they will retain that reputation, no matter what GW does in the meantime.
What "low quality" rules specifically are we talking about here...?
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.
Jidmah wrote: A slope you have constructed yourself, as I'd like to point out. You do know that it is a logical fallacy, right?
There are still people who avoid going to Wendy's because some guy was caught on camera spitting on the burgers in the kitchen almost twenty years ago.
No matter how often the news will report about rats at McDonalds, those people will still not go to Wendy's.
Forgeworld is a brand with a reputation for low quality rules.
GW as a whole is is a brand with a reputation for low quality rules, nobody plays 40k because it's a great tactical wargame ruleset, and GW are fairly open about this.
If anything, they should be taking special care to no longer cause any huge rule or balance issues.
Broadly speaking, they do. The only issues people can point to were quickly addressed and are no longer issues. When people point to FW balance issues, they really have to cherrypick a whole lot harder than with main studio stuff.
Looking at tournament lists and results, FW clearly is not a problem, and is relatively rare in top end competitive lists.
Hell, FW has actually done experimental test rules for some units to get and act on feeedback before publishing new units in books over the last several editions, GW has not.
As long as they keep making low quality rules, they will retain that reputation, no matter what GW does in the meantime.
What "low quality" rules specifically are we talking about here...?
You did not understand the analogy about Wendy's and McDonalds, did you?
7 Ork facts people always get wrong: Ragnar did not win against Thrakka, but suffered two crushing defeats within a few days of each other. A lasgun is powerful enough to sever an ork's appendage or head in a single, well aimed shot. Orks meks have a better understanding of electrics and mechanics than most Tech Priests. Orks actually do not think that purple makes them harder to see. The joke was made canon by Alex Stewart's Caphias Cain books. Gharkull Blackfang did not even come close to killing the emperor. Orks can be corrupted by chaos, but few of them have any interest in what chaos offers. Orks do not have the power of believe.
Jidmah wrote: A slope you have constructed yourself, as I'd like to point out. You do know that it is a logical fallacy, right?
There are still people who avoid going to Wendy's because some guy was caught on camera spitting on the burgers in the kitchen almost twenty years ago.
No matter how often the news will report about rats at McDonalds, those people will still not go to Wendy's.
Forgeworld is a brand with a reputation for low quality rules.
GW as a whole is is a brand with a reputation for low quality rules, nobody plays 40k because it's a great tactical wargame ruleset, and GW are fairly open about this.
If anything, they should be taking special care to no longer cause any huge rule or balance issues.
Broadly speaking, they do. The only issues people can point to were quickly addressed and are no longer issues. When people point to FW balance issues, they really have to cherrypick a whole lot harder than with main studio stuff.
Looking at tournament lists and results, FW clearly is not a problem, and is relatively rare in top end competitive lists.
Hell, FW has actually done experimental test rules for some units to get and act on feeedback before publishing new units in books over the last several editions, GW has not.
As long as they keep making low quality rules, they will retain that reputation, no matter what GW does in the meantime.
What "low quality" rules specifically are we talking about here...?
You did not understand the analogy about Wendy's and McDonalds, did you?
I absolutely did, but I think it only applies to people intentionally fixating on it, the main GW studio certainly doesn't have a better reputation (man, remember that Wendys Forgeworld spit burger from 20 years ago? Lets instead go to Main Studio Chipotle where dozens of people have gotten E. Coli in recent years!).
FW absolutely has a better balance record looking at tournament results and standings, and *does* make more efforts to avoid balance issues. They aren't perfect, but unless you're just looking to hit FW for being FW, there's no reason why they should have a worse balance reputation in this day and age.
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.
Jidmah wrote: You did not understand the analogy about Wendy's and McDonalds, did you?
We understand the analogy, it's just a terrible analogy. You've proved that there are really irrational and stupid people in the world (and yes, it is stupid and irrational to boycott an entire chain for 20+ years over a single incident involving people entirely unrelated to your local franchise), but that's a meaningless statement to make. The existence of those people doesn't argue in favor of any particular set of rules for playing 40k, or for pretending that their actions are anything but stupid and irrational.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/07/12 20:11:07
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.
If this thread was "Are you OK with going to Wendy's despite that one time that somebody spat in a burger 20 years ago?" instead of "Are you OK playing with Forgeworld?" I'm pretty sure the reaction to anyone still maintaining a boycott after two decades would receive equal, if not substantially more, skepticism than people ITT taking issue with FW and then trying to make a logical justification for an emotional decision where none really exists any more.
We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark
The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.
The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox
If this thread was "Are you OK with going to Wendy's despite that one time that somebody spat in a burger 20 years ago?" instead of "Are you OK playing with Forgeworld?" I'm pretty sure the reaction to anyone still maintaining a boycott after two decades would receive equal, if not substantially more, skepticism than people ITT taking issue with FW and then trying to make a logical justification for an emotional decision where none really exists any more.
I got food poisoning once from a long john silver's when I was a kid.... had to be something like 20 years ago now and I've still never gone back. Not saying people should or shouldn't play FW (imo just ask before pick up games and nothing of value is lost if someone says no) just pointing out that bad incidents with food can scar you for life lol
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Cities of Death affects how both armies are played.
Forge World only affects what possible options one player might take.
Saying "you can't assuming FW is always active" makes no sense unless you also have rules like "you can't assume taking Primaris Marines are okay" or "you can't assume batallions are fine".
You taking FW in your army affects me too, because I have to play against it.
You taking anything in your codex affects me. Do I get to dictate to you what you can and can't take, and be the "reasonable" one in that situation? Because I think that if I did that, I'd deserve all the scorn and condescension people threw at me.
Again, supplementary book + supplementary models = suplementary and totally optional. This is not how I think but it is how a lot of people who don't like forgeworld think.
Absolutely wrong. Nothing about FW is supplementary. Not the models (I mean, seriously, how can FW MODELS be supplementary any more so than GW ones?), not the rules (published in GW books and outright stated to be part of "normal" 40k games) = absolutely not a supplement, and only optional to the discretion of the player building their army.
It's good you don't think that, but instead of validating that mindset by defending it, perhaps you should work towards systematically disproving it to all the FW haters, and maybe we could get something constructive done.
Asmodios wrote:I got food poisoning once from a long john silver's when I was a kid.... had to be something like 20 years ago now and I've still never gone back. Not saying people should or shouldn't play FW (imo just ask before pick up games and nothing of value is lost if someone says no) just pointing out that bad incidents with food can scar you for life lol
Are you suggesting that playing a game against some resin models could scar someone for life?
I'm aware that some memories run deep, some scars never fade, etc etc. However, it doesn't mean that they're always rational and based in current facts.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/07/12 22:10:46
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Cities of Death affects how both armies are played.
Forge World only affects what possible options one player might take.
Saying "you can't assuming FW is always active" makes no sense unless you also have rules like "you can't assume taking Primaris Marines are okay" or "you can't assume batallions are fine".
You taking FW in your army affects me too, because I have to play against it.
You taking anything in your codex affects me. Do I get to dictate to you what you can and can't take, and be the "reasonable" one in that situation? Because I think that if I did that, I'd deserve all the scorn and condescension people threw at me.
Again, supplementary book + supplementary models = suplementary and totally optional. This is not how I think but it is how a lot of people who don't like forgeworld think.
Absolutely wrong. Nothing about FW is supplementary. Not the models (I mean, seriously, how can FW MODELS be supplementary any more so than GW ones?), not the rules (published in GW books and outright stated to be part of "normal" 40k games) = absolutely not a supplement, and only optional to the discretion of the player building their army.
It's good you don't think that, but instead of validating that mindset by defending it, perhaps you should work towards systematically disproving it to all the FW haters, and maybe we could get something constructive done.
Asmodios wrote:I got food poisoning once from a long john silver's when I was a kid.... had to be something like 20 years ago now and I've still never gone back. Not saying people should or shouldn't play FW (imo just ask before pick up games and nothing of value is lost if someone says no) just pointing out that bad incidents with food can scar you for life lol
Are you suggesting that playing a game against some resin models could scar someone for life?
I'm aware that some memories run deep, some scars never fade, etc etc. However, it doesn't mean that they're always rational and based in current facts.
I was simply stating that something being wrong with your food is certainly grounds to hold something against it. I got food poisoning once and never went back and if someone spit in my burger at a particular place I wouldn't go back no matter how many decades later it was. Actually, most people I know have some food they won't eat because of a similar issue when they were younger (for my fiance its rice-a-roni). That's all my comment was aimed at. If you're asking my particular view on the whole matter I placed it a long time ago in this thread. I personally have no issue with FW and i also have no issue for people who won't play against it. IMO its no different then people that don't want to play 1000 point game or don't want to play against grey models. Some people clearly have had issues in the past with FW so whats the big deal if they won't play against it? some people seem to think people are obligated to play against anyone, but the truth is that most people have a very limited time to play so are looking for someone to play against that has a similar mindset. I just wouldnt care that much if someone didnt want to play against me because i brought FWid rather have them let me know so i dont waist my time against someone that wont have fun playing me and chances are i wont have fun because of those feelings.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: You taking anything in your codex affects me. Do I get to dictate to you what you can and can't take, and be the "reasonable" one in that situation? Because I think that if I did that, I'd deserve all the scorn and condescension people threw at me.
Again, in these people's minds taking a scout squad != taking a rapier laser battery. It doesn't help that in the earlier forgeworld books it said explicitly in the opening sections that you needed to get your opponent's permission before you can use anything in the book. That way of thinking has carried over to later editions where it isn't as applicable.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: (I mean, seriously, how can FW MODELS be supplementary any more so than GW ones?)
Because they are made of a different material and sold on a different website. How hard is that to understand?
w1zard wrote:Again, supplementary book + supplementary models = suplementary and totally optional. This is not how I think but it is how a lot of people who don't like forgeworld think.
Absolutely wrong. Nothing about FW is supplementary. Not the models (I mean, seriously, how can FW MODELS be supplementary any more so than GW ones?), not the rules (published in GW books and outright stated to be part of "normal" 40k games) = absolutely not a supplement, and only optional to the discretion of the player building their army.
It's good you don't think that, but instead of validating that mindset by defending it, perhaps you should work towards systematically disproving it to all the FW haters, and maybe we could get something constructive done.
There is absolutely nothing you or I can say to change these people's minds because as others have pointed out, their opinion comes from an emotional place rather than a logical one. Only GW has the power to change this by releasing an official statement on the matter, or by consolidating the FW datasheets into the codices.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2018/07/12 23:35:49
Asmodios wrote:I was simply stating that something being wrong with your food is certainly grounds to hold something against it. I got food poisoning once and never went back and if someone spit in my burger at a particular place I wouldn't go back no matter how many decades later it was. Actually, most people I know have some food they won't eat because of a similar issue when they were younger (for my fiance its rice-a-roni). That's all my comment was aimed at.
Yes. I agree, that's what some people do.
It doesn't mean that it's rational, especially when we're not talking about food poisoning that could very well kill you, but rather playing a game with models.
If you're asking my particular view on the whole matter I placed it a long time ago in this thread. I personally have no issue with FW and i also have no issue for people who won't play against it. IMO its no different then people that don't want to play 1000 point game or don't want to play against grey models. Some people clearly have had issues in the past with FW so whats the big deal if they won't play against it? some people seem to think people are obligated to play against anyone, but the truth is that most people have a very limited time to play so are looking for someone to play against that has a similar mindset. I just wouldnt care that much if someone didnt want to play against me because i brought FWid rather have them let me know so i dont waist my time against someone that wont have fun playing me and chances are i wont have fun because of those feelings.
I'm not saying people shouldn't be allowed to refuse a FW game, or refuse to play against grey models, or to only play 1457 point games exactly. You can't force people to do what you want.
What you CAN do, and I advocate, is calling people out on things in which their "facts" are simply incorrect, their opinions guided by irrational hatred, and can often be unreasonable to the often completely innocent person they were going to play against. In that situation, there is very clearly a part who has wronged the other. Can you force the anti-FW player to play? Absolutely not. Can you point out that they are absolutely the ones in the wrong, and howso? Yes.
Letting people get away with that is how we end up with situations like this - viewpoints that have been allowed to rest unchallenged and can now comfortably ignore the actual reality of the situation.
w1zard wrote:There is absolutely nothing you or I can say to change these people's minds. Only GW has the power to do that by releasing an official statement on the matter, or by consolidating the FW datasheets into the codices.
Even if GW released an official statement, they'd still ignore it.
The FW books say that they can be used in normal games of 40k (which means no permission needed, or to be more precise, the same amount of permission a "normal" Codex unit needs).
Chapter Approved has FW units in it. Is that not good enough?
Frankly, the fact that people aren't challenging and confronting the anti-FW crowd is how we get to this position - a position where even if GW were to categorically say "all Forge World units, rules and models are a non-supplementary and non-optional part of normal Warhammer 40k games" people would STILL ignore it.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: You taking anything in your codex affects me. Do I get to dictate to you what you can and can't take, and be the "reasonable" one in that situation? Because I think that if I did that, I'd deserve all the scorn and condescension people threw at me.
Again, in these people's minds taking a scout squad != taking a rapier laser battery. It doesn't help that in the earlier forgeworld books it said explicitly in the opening sections that you needed to get your opponent's permission before you can use anything in the book. That way of thinking has carried over to later editions where it isn't as applicable.
>EARLIER
That's the problem. You're stuck on things that have been in books before the current ones. Let go of that. It's not a thing any more.
It's not a case of "isn't AS applicable". It's "ISN'T applicable", full stop.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: (I mean, seriously, how can FW MODELS be supplementary any more so than GW ones?)
Because they are made of a different material and sold on a different website. How hard is that to understand?
Finecast is different to plastic. Metal is different to plastic. Does this make Sisters supplementary?
Furthermore, Sisters can only be bought on website, not in store. Forge World's website is clearly linked to GW's, which makes the argument of "it's on a different site" about as convincing as me saying that T'au are supplementary, because they're not on the same page as Space Marines.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/07/12 23:48:04
Asmodios wrote:I was simply stating that something being wrong with your food is certainly grounds to hold something against it. I got food poisoning once and never went back and if someone spit in my burger at a particular place I wouldn't go back no matter how many decades later it was. Actually, most people I know have some food they won't eat because of a similar issue when they were younger (for my fiance its rice-a-roni). That's all my comment was aimed at.
Yes. I agree, that's what some people do.
It doesn't mean that it's rational, especially when we're not talking about food poisoning that could very well kill you, but rather playing a game with models.
If you're asking my particular view on the whole matter I placed it a long time ago in this thread. I personally have no issue with FW and i also have no issue for people who won't play against it. IMO its no different then people that don't want to play 1000 point game or don't want to play against grey models. Some people clearly have had issues in the past with FW so whats the big deal if they won't play against it? some people seem to think people are obligated to play against anyone, but the truth is that most people have a very limited time to play so are looking for someone to play against that has a similar mindset. I just wouldnt care that much if someone didnt want to play against me because i brought FWid rather have them let me know so i dont waist my time against someone that wont have fun playing me and chances are i wont have fun because of those feelings.
I'm not saying people shouldn't be allowed to refuse a FW game, or refuse to play against grey models, or to only play 1457 point games exactly. You can't force people to do what you want.
What you CAN do, and I advocate, is calling people out on things in which their "facts" are simply incorrect, their opinions guided by irrational hatred, and can often be unreasonable to the often completely innocent person they were going to play against. In that situation, there is very clearly a part who has wronged the other. Can you force the anti-FW player to play? Absolutely not. Can you point out that they are absolutely the ones in the wrong, and howso? Yes.
Letting people get away with that is how we end up with situations like this - viewpoints that have been allowed to rest unchallenged and can now comfortably ignore the actual reality of the situation.
w1zard wrote:There is absolutely nothing you or I can say to change these people's minds. Only GW has the power to do that by releasing an official statement on the matter, or by consolidating the FW datasheets into the codices.
Even if GW released an official statement, they'd still ignore it.
The FW books say that they can be used in normal games of 40k (which means no permission needed, or to be more precise, the same amount of permission a "normal" Codex unit needs).
Chapter Approved has FW units in it. Is that not good enough?
Frankly, the fact that people aren't challenging and confronting the anti-FW crowd is how we get to this position - a position where even if GW were to categorically say "all Forge World units, rules and models are a non-supplementary and non-optional part of normal Warhammer 40k games" people would STILL ignore it.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: You taking anything in your codex affects me. Do I get to dictate to you what you can and can't take, and be the "reasonable" one in that situation? Because I think that if I did that, I'd deserve all the scorn and condescension people threw at me.
Again, in these people's minds taking a scout squad != taking a rapier laser battery. It doesn't help that in the earlier forgeworld books it said explicitly in the opening sections that you needed to get your opponent's permission before you can use anything in the book. That way of thinking has carried over to later editions where it isn't as applicable.
>EARLIER
That's the problem. You're stuck on things that have been in books before the current ones. Let go of that. It's not a thing any more.
It's not a case of "isn't AS applicable". It's "ISN'T applicable", full stop.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: (I mean, seriously, how can FW MODELS be supplementary any more so than GW ones?)
Because they are made of a different material and sold on a different website. How hard is that to understand?
Finecast is different to plastic. Metal is different to plastic. Does this make Sisters supplementary?
Furthermore, Sisters can only be bought on website, not in store. Forge World's website is clearly linked to GW's, which makes the argument of "it's on a different site" about as convincing as me saying that T'au are supplementary, because they're not on the same page as Space Marines.
Just so you know I wasn’t the one that brought up the food analogy,someone was equating not liking FW to getting your food spit in. That’s why I brought up food poisoning and it’s perception on long John silvers for me. I agree that plastic models aren’t as serious and I guess that got lost in my original post.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Finecast is different to plastic. Metal is different to plastic. Does this make Sisters supplementary?
Furthermore, Sisters can only be bought on website, not in store. Forge World's website is clearly linked to GW's, which makes the argument of "it's on a different site" about as convincing as me saying that T'au are supplementary, because they're not on the same page as Space Marines.
No, it's not the same thing. Sisters are made out of metal, and there are a lot of models that are still finecast, but you can buy them all off of GW's website directly. Even if the FW site is linked on GW's website, it is NOT the same site, and is a degree of seperation that a lot of people notice and "assume" things about... whether or not those assumptions are accurate. I know this is true because I used to be one of these people. It is not the same as having two different sections on the same website.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Frankly, the fact that people aren't challenging and confronting the anti-FW crowd is how we get to this position - a position where even if GW were to categorically say "all Forge World units, rules and models are a non-supplementary and non-optional part of normal Warhammer 40k games" people would STILL ignore it.
If you seriously believe this you are just as deluded as the anti-FW people.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2018/07/13 04:49:47
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Frankly, the fact that people aren't challenging and confronting the anti-FW crowd is how we get to this position - a position where even if GW were to categorically say "all Forge World units, rules and models are a non-supplementary and non-optional part of normal Warhammer 40k games" people would STILL ignore it.
If you seriously believe this you are just as deluded as the anti-FW people.
Not really - I believe someone earlier quoted the text from IA1 v2 introduction, which made it clear that you no longer needed opponent's permission to use these rules. It did say it was nice if you asked, but it wasn't mandatory.
Clear verbiage that the rules were part of the game - the anti-FW people still ignored it.
I'm not going to argue against reiterating the point that the units are part of the game, and for people to stop being a PITA about it, but I am pretty sure such a pronouncement would have minimal effect.
Gamgee on Tau Players wrote:we all kill cats and sell our own families to the devil and eat live puppies.
Kanluwen wrote: This is, emphatically, why I will continue suggesting nuking Guard and starting over again. It's a legacy army that needs to be rebooted with a new focal point.
Confirmation of why no-one should listen to Kanluwen when it comes to the IG - he doesn't want the IG, he want's Kan's New Model Army...
tneva82 wrote: You aren't even trying ty pretend for honest arqument. Open bad faith trolling.
- No reason to keep this here, unless people want to use it for something...
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Frankly, the fact that people aren't challenging and confronting the anti-FW crowd is how we get to this position - a position where even if GW were to categorically say "all Forge World units, rules and models are a non-supplementary and non-optional part of normal Warhammer 40k games" people would STILL ignore it.
If you seriously believe this you are just as deluded as the anti-FW people.
Not really - I believe someone earlier quoted the text from IA1 v2 introduction, which made it clear that you no longer needed opponent's permission to use these rules. It did say it was nice if you asked, but it wasn't mandatory.
EDIT: "For use in normal games of 40k" != "has the same non-optional status as codices" especially since the earlier versions of IA stated that they were for use in normal games of 40k but still said you needed your opponents permission first.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2018/07/13 06:31:01
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Frankly, the fact that people aren't challenging and confronting the anti-FW crowd is how we get to this position - a position where even if GW were to categorically say "all Forge World units, rules and models are a non-supplementary and non-optional part of normal Warhammer 40k games" people would STILL ignore it.
If you seriously believe this you are just as deluded as the anti-FW people.
Not really - I believe someone earlier quoted the text from IA1 v2 introduction, which made it clear that you no longer needed opponent's permission to use these rules. It did say it was nice if you asked, but it wasn't mandatory.
Can you give me an actual quote on that? Because "for use in normal games of 40k" != "has the same non-optional status as codices".
I can't, as I don't own that specific version of IA1 - I've got the original one. As I said, I think it was quoted in this thread, a page or two back.
Gamgee on Tau Players wrote:we all kill cats and sell our own families to the devil and eat live puppies.
Kanluwen wrote: This is, emphatically, why I will continue suggesting nuking Guard and starting over again. It's a legacy army that needs to be rebooted with a new focal point.
Confirmation of why no-one should listen to Kanluwen when it comes to the IG - he doesn't want the IG, he want's Kan's New Model Army...
tneva82 wrote: You aren't even trying ty pretend for honest arqument. Open bad faith trolling.
- No reason to keep this here, unless people want to use it for something...
Dysartes wrote: I can't, as I don't own that specific version of IA1 - I've got the original one. As I said, I think it was quoted in this thread, a page or two back.
All I found was...
"This book contains profiles for a variety of diffrent units for use in standard games of Warhammer 40'000 and games played using the rules found in Warhammer 40'000 apocalypse"
Which again != "you don't need your opponent's permission". Especially since earlier versions of IA explicitly stated that you needed your opponent's permission first and still stated that they were for use in normal games of 40k.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/07/13 06:36:04
Jidmah wrote: You did not understand the analogy about Wendy's and McDonalds, did you?
We understand the analogy, it's just a terrible analogy. You've proved that there are really irrational and stupid people in the world (and yes, it is stupid and irrational to boycott an entire chain for 20+ years over a single incident involving people entirely unrelated to your local franchise), but that's a meaningless statement to make. The existence of those people doesn't argue in favor of any particular set of rules for playing 40k, or for pretending that their actions are anything but stupid and irrational.
According to the poll on top of this thread 89% of the players on dakka are fine with playing against forgeworld, and only 7% are never fine with it.
The only way to get a poll with a more one-sided result would be asking if people like to get models for free.
This thread is pretty much dedicated to stupid and irrational people and nothing else.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ValentineGames wrote: Good to see after 15 pages nothing has gotten anywhere...like the millions of times the FW vs Legality rubbish comes up.
Gee, who would have thought that snarky comments, insults and logical fallacies do not convince people of your noble goals?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/07/13 08:17:23
7 Ork facts people always get wrong: Ragnar did not win against Thrakka, but suffered two crushing defeats within a few days of each other. A lasgun is powerful enough to sever an ork's appendage or head in a single, well aimed shot. Orks meks have a better understanding of electrics and mechanics than most Tech Priests. Orks actually do not think that purple makes them harder to see. The joke was made canon by Alex Stewart's Caphias Cain books. Gharkull Blackfang did not even come close to killing the emperor. Orks can be corrupted by chaos, but few of them have any interest in what chaos offers. Orks do not have the power of believe.
There is absolutely nothing you or I can say to change these people's minds because as others have pointed out, their opinion comes from an emotional place rather than a logical one. Only GW has the power to change this by releasing an official statement on the matter, or by consolidating the FW datasheets into the codices.
While I can see the argument for putting the FW datasheets in the codices, I don't think that's something that GW would want to do. Weirdly (from the perspective of this thread) because it would make the FW units more 'mainstream'.
The purpose of FW as I see it is to make niche, low-volume kits aimed at modellers and collectors - the sort of people who don't mind if they're a bit harder to get hold of, more expensive or more fiddly to put together. GW allows these units to have totally valid 40k rules as a bonus to those people that have spent a lot of money on FW. People who aren't interested in FW kits don't even see what rules they have and so don't even think about buying them.
But if the rules were in the Codex, every person who plays that army will be studying the FW rules and deciding that they want, say, a Deredeo, a Squiggoth or a Brass Scorpion in their army, only to find that they can't buy them in their local GW or FLGS, they have to order them online at an even higher price - and if they're not in the UK it's an international order to boot. Some of their younger customers probably don't have bank cards for ordering online anyway. Then they manage to get their hands on them expecting something like Citadel plastic - and instead find that it's FW resin full of casting defects and warped pieces. I'd think that an increased demand for FW wouldn't really make GW as a whole much more money, because for a lot of those customers they'd be spending money on FW that they would have spent on Citadel plastic anyway. The increased demand may well also outpace FW's production techniques as well meaning they will start having stock problems or need to start changing their methods. This could be a sort of bonus if it shows GW that there would be enough demand for certain FW units to be remade as Citadel kits, but in the meantime it would be an irritating mess of stock problems.
I suspect that this is also the reason the FW rules are generally quite weak. Strong rules (even not in the Codex) would drive demand among competitive players, weak rules which you have to go out of your way to get mean that the only players fielding FW units will be the aforementioned collectors and modellers who think that they're cool.
Table wrote: So wait? People are calling 1ksons OP now? I didn't know Ahri and crew were winning GT's now.....
Ari is used in some dp smite batteries. Or was used that way.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Jidmah wrote: A slope you have constructed yourself, as I'd like to point out. You do know that it is a logical fallacy, right?
There are still people who avoid going to Wendy's because some guy was caught on camera spitting on the burgers in the kitchen almost twenty years ago.
No matter how often the news will report about rats at McDonalds, those people will still not go to Wendy's.
Forgeworld is a brand with a reputation for low quality rules. If anything, they should be taking special care to no longer cause any huge rule or balance issues. As long as they keep making low quality rules, they will retain that reputation, no matter what GW does in the meantime.
No. It is not a logical fallacy. What i did is a reductio ad absurdum.
Or basically i applied the same standards that those people have equally. I showed the results with the exemple of prenerf Brimstone horrors. If you were to argue ban FW for bad rule writting/ balance issues, you would have to apply this standart overall, ergo in the case of Brimstones,etc.
This would lead in the end if properly applied, that you would have to bann literally all Codexes. Which makes the argument that is used aggainst FW a slippery-slope argument. Because when you need to bann unbalanced Units/models you would automatically lower the overall powerlevel possible for each Codex.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/07/13 09:14:16
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
Jidmah wrote: According to the poll on top of this thread 89% of the players on dakka are fine with playing against forgeworld, and only 7% are never fine with it.
The only way to get a poll with a more one-sided result would be asking if people like to get models for free.
This thread is pretty much dedicated to stupid and irrational people and nothing else.
So you admit that the anti-FW side is an irrational minority, on the same level as the small percentage of people who would vote "no, I don't want free models"? I mean, I'll admit that this is true, but I'm not sure this comparison is really making your side look good...
Gee, who would have thought that snarky comments, insults and logical fallacies do not convince people of your noble goals?
Apparently it does, because the anti-FW crowd is becoming much less of a crowd, and more of an irrelevant minority.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
w1zard wrote: Which again != "you don't need your opponent's permission".
Nope. "Standard game" means that FW rules/models are included by default, you don't have to ask for a special "FW allowed" game to use them. It's just like how a tactical squad is part of the standard game, and assumed to be permitted by default unless one player is a whiny TFG and insists on trying to ban tactical squads. You would never ask for permission to bring a tactical squad, so why would you ask for permission to use any other part of the standard rules?
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/07/13 09:15:43
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.
Bellerophon wrote: While I can see the argument for putting the FW datasheets in the codices, I don't think that's something that GW would want to do. Weirdly (from the perspective of this thread) because it would make the FW units more 'mainstream'.
Yes, and thus more acceptable to the community as a whole. The entire reason why there is a loud minority who have a problem with FW is BECAUSE the models and rules are so niche. It feels like an "expansion" pack, or "add-on" to the game rather than an integral part like the codices are. If the pro-FW people want 100% acceptance of FW they might have to get used to FW models becoming more mainstream. Having their models be "niche", "rare", and "exclusive" and having said models be accepted by everyone without argument are mutually exclusive states unless GW puts their foot down.
Peregrine wrote: Nope. "Standard game" means that FW rules/models are included by default, you don't have to ask for a special "FW allowed" game to use them. It's just like how a tactical squad is part of the standard game, and assumed to be permitted by default unless one player is a whiny TFG and insists on trying to ban tactical squads. You would never ask for permission to bring a tactical squad, so why would you ask for permission to use any other part of the standard rules?
Because previous versions of Imperial Armour had the same "intended for use in standard 40k games" while still maintaining that "you need your opponent's permission to field any of these units". Therefore, "intended for use in standard 40k games" != "you don't need your opponent's permission".
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2018/07/13 09:45:56
Not sure how the reaction to this will be, feels like I'm wading into something thick and dangerous...
I completly agree that there is no real basis behind needing your opponent's permission. I've encountered it before when it was a genuine thing in the book, and I've come across people who refused permission not because of rules, or OP-ness, but simply because they didn't have it.
I had the old LR Executioner turret, back in the older editions where it was a single Plasma Cannon shot, not the devastating 3-shot thing they brought out in 5th. A couple of notable players refused to let me use it, simply because they didn't have one. They were simply doing it out of spite, something I had saved up for and spent many hours working on, and they wouldn't play against it.
Now I'm fully aware that this is not reflective of the entire anti-FW crowd, but when you simply refuse just because it's resin, or it's made by a company which is still owned by GW but not named GW, I'm always dubious as to their motive. There are a small number of FW units that, yes I admit, are a bit OP, such as Leviathans, but on the other hand there are many, many times that number that are average at best, crap at worse. Malcadors, pretty much any Ork vehicle they produce, Sagittarus Guard. FW even seem to be nerfing some of their most powerful units into oblivion; Titans are all but gone, the Fire Raptor isn't nowhere near as competitive as it used to be (sad as I had ordered one a week before the points went up), yet some individuals' seem to be fixed on the notion of "resin=bad" despite this.
On a side note, we used to have to ask permission to use *any* special character, and the opponent could have easily refused then. If we don't follow that rule anymore, how come this one is still up in the air, despite some characters being far more OP than the majority of FW units?
12000p
