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.

Hello eveyone, this is a question that has sparked some serious debate (and a little drama) @ my local gaming store recently and wanted to take it up with the community of Dakka. As the title of the thread says why do people have a beef with taking Forgeworld lists/models in games? I really see no point to it, especially since Forgeworld is part of GW. The most common complaint that I have seen is that "oh Forgeworld lists are totally OP and cheessy" however when actually playtested and using them we have found this to be hugely exaggerated. People can make the argument that the lists are "unbalanced" but with the playing field of 40k in particular already unbalanced I find it to be an empty argument. Seriously what is the point of GW tempting us to buy these amazing models to only be told we cant use them in games, there is nothing in the books that says they are illegal to run in tournaments or friendly games and I think is taking away alot of the diversity of the game. This all started when the local store owner gave no real or good reason as to why you cant run forgeworld lists (we basically have come to the opinion that its because he doesnt know how to power game against them) and it has now forced us to possibly play a tournament @ another game store so we actually can use the books and minitures. So I want to know guys, what are your reasons for and against running/using Forgeworld books and lists in tournaments and friendly games?

Seeing as several models from Gray Knights, Space Wolves, and Imperial Guard are legal, my decision is that forgeworld is just like the standard codex's, there's overpowered, underpowered, and just right stuff.

ZebioLizard2 wrote:Seeing as several models from Gray Knights, Space Wolves, and Imperial Guard are legal, my decision is that forgeworld is just like the standard codex's, there's overpowered, underpowered, and just right stuff.

But these are the armies that get most of the special stuff on Forge World...

But in all seriousness, I've fought Forge World units before, for the most part they're not so bad that I'd refuse to play them. I'd probably make an exception for a few units, but for the most part it's fun to face off against a special model.

There are precious few units Forgeworld has released that are somewhat overpowered/undercosted. People seem to ignore the fact that a good 95% of their stuff is somewhere between fairly costed to overpriced. There's also a fear of the unknown factor, as most people aren't used to playing against Forgeworld units. Personally, I welcome the challenge of an unfamiliar unit. A good commander can adapt his strategy to unknown factors, and if that includes an unusual unit here and there, so be it.

Andilus Greatsword wrote:

ZebioLizard2 wrote:Seeing as several models from Gray Knights, Space Wolves, and Imperial Guard are legal, my decision is that forgeworld is just like the standard codex's, there's overpowered, underpowered, and just right stuff.

But these are the armies that get most of the special stuff on Forge World...

But in all seriousness, I've fought Forge World units before, for the most part they're not so bad that I'd refuse to play them. I'd probably make an exception for a few units, but for the most part it's fun to face off against a special model.

Tau get's a fair bit, surprisingly so.

I think it pointless at my FLGS last week my mate used a shadow sword in a normal game

Brother SRM wrote:There are precious few units Forgeworld has released that are somewhat overpowered/undercosted. People seem to ignore the fact that a good 95% of their stuff is somewhere between fairly costed to overpriced. There's also a fear of the unknown factor, as most people aren't used to playing against Forgeworld units. Personally, I welcome the challenge of an unfamiliar unit. A good commander can adapt his strategy to unknown factors, and if that includes an unusual unit here and there, so be it.

I agree with this.

To the OP, I think it is more to do with the origins of Forge World. When the first IA book came out, it featured rules for super-heavy tanks. I think because of the fear of facing one of these (regardless of the fact that probably 98% of gamers would never do so, because the models were prohibitively expensive) people automatically associated anything 'Forge-World' with being overpowered, perhaps a lot of the time without ever even reading the books.

The fact is that a lot of the stuff is overpriced, and adds character to a lot of armies, I don't see the point in denying their use and most of it is from gamers who don't realise they are playing a game that is already pretty unbalanced.

Pacific wrote:

Brother SRM wrote:There are precious few units Forgeworld has released that are somewhat overpowered/undercosted. People seem to ignore the fact that a good 95% of their stuff is somewhere between fairly costed to overpriced. There's also a fear of the unknown factor, as most people aren't used to playing against Forgeworld units. Personally, I welcome the challenge of an unfamiliar unit. A good commander can adapt his strategy to unknown factors, and if that includes an unusual unit here and there, so be it.

I agree with this.

To the OP, I think it is more to do with the origins of Forge World. When the first IA book came out, it featured rules for super-heavy tanks. I think because of the fear of facing one of these (regardless of the fact that probably 98% of gamers would never do so, because the models were prohibitively expensive) people automatically associated anything 'Forge-World' with being overpowered, perhaps a lot of the time without ever even reading the books.

The fact is that a lot of the stuff is overpriced, and adds character to a lot of armies, I don't see the point in denying their use and most of it is from gamers who don't realise they are playing a game that is already pretty unbalanced.

The sad thing is there's a distinction within forgeworlds own books between the Apocalypse Super heavies/fliers/war titans and the standard game Warhammer 40k stuff. There's a literal seal shown next to the model in the book that tells what it can be used for!

Ignorance is the worst thing when it comes to forgeworlds stuff.

*Resets clock*

Steelmage99 wrote:*Resets clock*

lol!

gmaleron wrote:As the title of the thread says why do people have a beef with taking Forgeworld lists/models in games?

The human condition:

1. People are afraid of things they don't understand (eg. they haven't read the FW rules, therefore they don't know what it does, therefore they are scared of it).
2. People are afraid of losing.

Combine the two and you have the reason why people dislike FW.

FW's severe imbalance in what it covers.

Forgeworld offers, for example, well over 100 new options for Imperial Guard. They offer, in contrast, just 2 or 3 for Necrons or Dark Eldar.

Even assuming that ever single thing they offer was balanced (it is not), this severe imbalance heavily skews things in favour of the "favoured" armies like IG and against those that are not, because you have so much more to pick and choose building your list.

What is worse, FW tends to favour those armies that are "favorites" of GW-main in the first place, so rather than mitigating the problem, they are aggravating it. As such, 40K without FW is by definition the more balanced and thus the better version 40K.

Yes there is an imbalance in terms of what it covers, but that doesn't affect the balance of the game too much (which is the important thing). I for one would absolutely love to play against a DKoK or Elysian army, or some other special list, it makes it that much more interesting. I really, really can't understand the mindset that having less options to play the game, less variety for painting and modelling, less campaign setting and padding out of the game universe, can somehow be a bad thing for 40k.

I think the human-focus (and the imbalance in that regard) is more to do with the way the books are written - more like a historical account of something, and certainly closer to the 'World at War' than something like the SM codex describing battles where Marneus Calgar holds a pass against orks for 3 days and 3 nights, or Draigo bestriding the realms of the warp hunting Primarchs (which is firmly in fantasy/comic book territory). I think when they have attempted to apply the same kind of detail to races such as Orcs, with po-faced descriptions of the rather comical ork vehicles ("Pictured: Ork Fighta Bomba, as pictographed by Imperial Recon teams during the seige of Gethema. 'Smash da hoomiez' can be clearly seen written on the side of the vehicle, above the vehicles starboard exhaust port'"), it comes across as contrived and I don't think the two concepts, of 'science fantasy' and detailed military description (where those faults are highlighted) sit well together.

On the other hand, I think books such as number 3 (The Talos, IG/Tau campaign) works well, and is indeed one of the more popular books, because the whole concept of how the Tau and IG fight wars is that much more realistic. There is less of a suspension of disbelief which occurs with the Ork focus book, and to a lesser extent the Vraks, chaos themed, books.

While the units themselves may not be ridiculously overpowered, they allow you to cover holes in your codex that are there for a reason. Chaos has crappy fast attack choices. But forgeworld has blight drones. Chaos doesn't have a lot of spammable str 8 firepower. Forgeworld has dual butcher cannon decimators.

If you take the really good stuff out of the chaos codex, and add blight drones and butcher cannons

While these choices in a vacuum may not be super powerful, adding them in the right amount to an already solid list will make it unbeatable.

2 demon princes
9 obliterators
3 decimators w/dual butcher cannons
3 blight drones
a bunch of plague marines and berzerkers

Its a lot scarier than anything the standard codex can put out. Decimators are ridiculously more powerful than regular chaos dreads. And blight drones are land speeders with battle cannons.

Decimators are also a hell lot more expensive and inaccurate.

CthuluIsSpy wrote:Decimators are also a hell lot more expensive and inaccurate.

They are a little more expensive, but they repair and ignore damage, and have ridiculous firepower. BS3 with 8 crack missiles is still a lot better than a regular dread, and they are much better in close combat than a regular dread with no dccw.

Fear is the main reason.

Fear of the unknown
Fear of losing
Fear of having their cookie-cutter meta upset.

I find Forgeworld units bring some fresh air at amore frequent rate than codex releases.

Models are awesome-looking and if you respect the actual rules, there is no problem.

I DO believe that you need opponents permission to play a model with experimental rules. Fully approved stuff is fine

I was under the impression that anything produced by Forgeworld that did not have "experimental rules" were allowed in any sort of game of 40k.

If I look at a forgeworld unit and it has its rules listed as "approved" (which I can only assume means GW says so), then it is allowed in the game whether I agree with it or not. I suppose that would be akin to saying "I don't agree with Draigo's rules, you're not allowed to field him."

In friendly games, a point could be made that you can say this. But in a tournament, tough nuts.

gpfunk wrote:I was under the impression that anything produced by Forgeworld that did not have "experimental rules" were allowed in any sort of game of 40k.

If I look at a forgeworld unit and it has its rules listed as "approved" (which I can only assume means GW says so), then it is allowed in the game whether I agree with it or not. I suppose that would be akin to saying "I don't agree with Draigo's rules, you're not allowed to field him."

In friendly games, a point could be made that you can say this. But in a tournament, tough nuts.

A tournament has tournament rules. If tournament rules say no FW, it'll be no FW. If tournament rules say no Draigo, it'll be no Draigo. If tournament rules say everyone not wearing a pink dress is disqualified, that'll be the rule. So the point is rather mute.

For one-off pick-up games (or games with your friends, or clubs), as you've said, one can choose to refuse anything. One does not have to fight GKs, or FW, or unpainted armies, or whatever one does not want to waste his spare time on.

This aside, most people (in my parts at least) don't "expect" an expansion/FW game if they "meet to play 40K". Whether its FW, Spearhead or Cities of Death. In my area, the "normal" practice would be to meet "to play 40K", or it would be to "play 40K, but lets mix it up and do Spearhead/Cities of Death/FW/etc..). Just a way of communication really. If one faces a guy across the table and suddenly he lets me know at the last minute that he's (or she's) fielding a "Spearhead-formation", I'd find it odd. Same for a FW unit.

I think there's a time and place for Forge World stuff. Also, it depends on the model. If someone challanged me to a 1500 point game and slapped down a Baneblade, I'd be a little reluctant to accept the challenge. On that same note, if he challanged me to a 2000 pointer with said Baneblade, then maybe I'd me more apt to playing.

Aside from stuff like that, if someone wants to play FW stuff in a game against me, I'm usually ok with it as long as they allow me to familiarlize myself with that units rules so I know they're playing fair. I once witnessed a game where player was trying to take advantage of his opponent by using a FW model incorrectly. He said it had wargear that it didn't actually have and the opponent was none the wiser. Eventually I grabbed the IA book and looked it up as I was suspicious of Tom Foolery and showed the player.

As long as my opponent is willing to show me the model's profile, I'll let him/her field it against me.

Kevlar wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:Decimators are also a hell lot more expensive and inaccurate.

They are a little more expensive, but they repair and ignore damage, and have ridiculous firepower. BS3 with 8 crack missiles is still a lot better than a regular dread, and they are much better in close combat than a regular dread with no dccw.

They are also experimental. If and when they get included in an IA book, chances are that these imbalances will have been ironed out.

As for your 'holes in codex' argument, that's a crap argument. The holes in the CSM book aren't there for a reason, they're there because it's a badly written book. No army book should have purposeful holes, every book should have good units available for every slot, and saying that since CSM don't have good FA, therefore they should never have good FA, is BS. What about Eldar? They have even worse FA, does that mean they shouldn't get Wasps or Hornets or Shadow Spectres, despite them being balanced units?

A lot of other books have good units available for all slots, do you mean to say that Chaos and Eldar are not allowed this luxury (and are therefore being put an an unfair disadvantage) purely because they are badly written or old respectively?

As long as someone isn't trying to wedge a Super Heavy or Gargantuan Creature into a normal game, I don't see a problem.

but as far as things go, looking at the appocolypse books they have rules that allow them in normal games such as the vulture, it says "this model sounds as a fast attack in a imperial guard army" o.o so my mate lets me use them, but he wont (for good reason) my baneblade for the simple fact its part of a war machine rather than fit into any normal section of FOC, so aslong as it follows the rules of the FOC it shouldnt really matter should it? aslong as it states clearly under which section it is allowed

gpfunk wrote:I was under the impression that anything produced by Forgeworld that did not have "experimental rules" were allowed in any sort of game of 40k.

What do you base that impression on?

If I look at a forgeworld unit and it has its rules listed as "approved" (which I can only assume means GW says so),

That is just odd. If a Forgeworld unit in a Forgeworld book is said to be "approved", surely that means that Forgeworld says so, not GW.

some people look for any advantage, and denying FW units is a good way to throw an opposing player off balance before the game even starts since most of the time they will pull out non FW units and play anyway. Some people fear of the unknown since those are units they might not be familiar with. Some people are jealous you spent money on FW, And of course, some people are just jerks or honestly beleive the game is totally balanced within the codexs. To be fair though, Forgeworld did have a bit of a reputation, seems it still does.

even throwing out warmachines and fliers (back when there were minimal rules for fliers) Forgeworld used to be very unbalanced: rules were mostly arbitrary, and points costs varied from insanely overpriced to decently priced depending on the army, for the armies that had FW offerings.

Looking at the lists now, this forgeworld is a whole lot more balanced then it was a decade ago. Units are still over priced, but seem to be more consistently over priced across the board with a rare few exceptions. Rules fit within the main game and are fairly consistent. Yes they do fill some roles not addressed in the codex's, but I fall in the codex's are inconsistently written anyway category, so don't mind that. Honestly, if they didn't fill certain niches, why even make rules for them?

I Have no problem with an opponent running FW, I used to run VDR (now THAT was controversial, even if it was insanely overpriced) and FW, returning to the game most of my really want list is FW. Admittedly, I would take a couple of lists to open play just in case opponents objected, but most once they looked over the rules and stats didn't have objections recognizing I was more giving them a handicap in points then gaining an advantage beyond extra flexability.

FW is GW and the intro to IA 11 says it all to me:
"Warhammer 40,000 unit: This unit is intended to be used in "standard" games of warhammer 40k, within the usual limitations of codex selection and force org charts. as with all our models these should be considered official, but owing to the fact they may be unknown to your opponent, its best to make sure they are happy to play the game before using forge world models before you start. "

In another words, as always the game is played by common consent and your opponent has the right to refuse to play you if you have units he objects to. In theory, he could object to a codex unit in your army and threaten to not play you if you include it. Hopefully there are other opponents you can play instead.

I can understand a few things such as that the Imperial Guard and Space Marines have more options, but @ the same time those are the two most popular armies in the game and FW (which is GW) is going to put more into the armies that sell the best plain and simple. I also realize that the Forgeworld books may fill slots in codexs but @ the same time they take away from them to. For example, the Elysian drop troop list in Raid of Kastofore book has NO ACCESS to any leman russ variants or artillery pieces, which is a big part in IG armies today. We get to spam Vendettas, Valkyries and drop sentinels along with Taurus' but the army has no armor 14 @ all whatsover and almost no big blast template weapons, so there are drawbacks to playing such a list (also their troops are way more expensive then other guard). In references to the mention of Super Heavies those vehicles where designed for apocalypse not friendly/normal Warhammer 40k games. I can understand the fear of the unknown but as Brother SRM said, a good general can fight anything, especially now since FW has gotten better with balance, but even then 40k is an unbalanced game anyways so its not exactly completely changing the look of the game

Clumpski wrote:but as far as things go, looking at the appocolypse books they have rules that allow them in normal games such as the vulture, it says "this model sounds as a fast attack in a imperial guard army" o.o so my mate lets me use them, but he wont (for good reason) my baneblade for the simple fact its part of a war machine rather than fit into any normal section of FOC, so aslong as it follows the rules of the FOC it shouldnt really matter should it? aslong as it states clearly under which section it is allowed

Could you write that again in English? I think I sort of get the gist of what you're writing but your grammar, emoticons, punctuation and so on are REALLY making that hard to read.

I think the best way to treat Forgeworld units is the same way you'd treat any expansion of the game. If you two agree to play with Forgeworld rules, then go for it. The more recent Imperial Armour books have said to use superheavies only in Apocalypse level games though, and for good reason. My gaming group is happy to use Forgeworld rules whenever and wherever, so it's a bit of a different environment than some of your stodgier groups.

Brother SRM wrote:

Spoiler:

Clumpski wrote:but as far as things go, looking at the appocolypse books they have rules that allow them in normal games such as the vulture, it says "this model sounds as a fast attack in a imperial guard army" o.o so my mate lets me use them, but he wont (for good reason) my baneblade for the simple fact its part of a war machine rather than fit into any normal section of FOC, so aslong as it follows the rules of the FOC it shouldnt really matter should it? aslong as it states clearly under which section it is allowed

Could you write that again in English? I think I sort of get the gist of what you're writing but your grammar, emoticons, punctuation and so on are REALLY making that hard to read.

I think the best way to treat Forgeworld units is the same way you'd treat any expansion of the game. If you two agree to play with Forgeworld rules, then go for it. The more recent Imperial Armour books have said to use superheavies only in Apocalypse level games though, and for good reason. My gaming group is happy to use Forgeworld rules whenever and wherever, so it's a bit of a different environment than some of your stodgier groups.

yes just excuse my dyslexia, no one is perfect but here you go.

But as far as things go, looking at the Apocalypse book(s), (rulebook/expansions etc) they have rules that allow the use of forgeworld (For the most part) models to be used within a normal games.

An example of such would be the vulture gunship, it states as of "Imperial Armour - Apocalypse II (2010)" page number 24 under the Imperial Navy section that:
----- a) "The Vulture counts as a fast skimmer in non-Apocalypse games"
----- b) "A Vulture Gunship is a fast attack choice for an imperial Army."
This is model that is only sold by Forgeworld.

So an example, while playing a game with my mate he lets me use the Vulture Gunship, but another example would be a Baneblade, naturally since a it cannot be classed under a normal FOC chart using a Baneblade is out of strictly out of the question along with wanting to use other models such as the Lightning and Tau Manta, so as long as it fits within the normal chart AND you can provide the rules (as proven above) such things like the Death-storm Drop pod (pg 28) and the Chaplin Dreadnought (pg 29) both which have rules stating they can be used Heavy Support and Elites with a Space Marine/Black Templar/Dark Angels army respectively so I personally cannot see why they cannot be used in there respective places within a normal game so long as the correct rules are provided, and it states something along the lines of what has been said above.

gmaleron wrote:Hello eveyone, this is a question that has sparked some serious debate (and a little drama) @ my local gaming store recently and wanted to take it up with the community of Dakka. As the title of the thread says why do people have a beef with taking Forgeworld lists/models in games? I really see no point to it, especially since Forgeworld is part of GW. The most common complaint that I have seen is that "oh Forgeworld lists are totally OP and cheessy" however when actually playtested and using them we have found this to be hugely exaggerated. People can make the argument that the lists are "unbalanced" but with the playing field of 40k in particular already unbalanced I find it to be an empty argument. Seriously what is the point of GW tempting us to buy these amazing models to only be told we cant use them in games, there is nothing in the books that says they are illegal to run in tournaments or friendly games and I think is taking away alot of the diversity of the game. This all started when the local store owner gave no real or good reason as to why you cant run forgeworld lists (we basically have come to the opinion that its because he doesnt know how to power game against them) and it has now forced us to possibly play a tournament @ another game store so we actually can use the books and minitures. So I want to know guys, what are your reasons for and against running/using Forgeworld books and lists in tournaments and friendly games?

the game is unbalanced enough as it is without it. if you like the model that's fine, use your "contemptor" as a normal dread. doesnt forgeworld have a drop pod that you can assault out of? that right there is fricken stupid and enough for me not to want to play against any forgeworld rules.

it's also not fair if your opponent isnt fielding any forgeworld stuff. if you and your friends wanna load up on forgeworld and go at it against eachother, that's fine. but dont try to spring all these new rules and crap onto unsuspecting people.

doesn't forgeworld have a drop pod that you can assault out of? that right there is fricken stupid and enough for me not to want to play against any forgeworld rules.

It's also a fast attack choice, costs about 60 points, and has a chance of immobilizing your dread on assault.

I'm not so sure why that's not okay but drop pod sternguard with full out melta able to combat squad and hit two vehicles is A-okay. At least they'd do far more vehicle damage, and it'd make ironclads more useful.

it's also not fair if your opponent isnt fielding any forgeworld stuff. if you and your friends wanna load up on forgeworld and go at it against eachother, that's fine. but dont try to spring all these new rules and crap onto unsuspecting people.

Ahh jealousy, least your honest about it rather than trying for the overpowered rules bit.