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.

 blackmage wrote:
EVERY tournament lists play with that limitation, never seen those faboulous 9 leman russes for example, i play Dg+Ts+N demons and i played same way before and after the FAQ, never played more than 3x and had similar results, so it s not the rule of 3 is the player, if you are unable to win without spamming 7 flyrants well impriove your skill playing more, what else i can say. Lists which aren't competitive now wasn't before the FAQ too (maybe GK are the exception).
If you take a look at actual players standing who won before FAQ keep winning also after faq... ask yourself why, if were just cause they could spam they should lost now but they dont so...

But the problem is not for people who play tournaments. It is a problem that don't play tournaments, but still get hit by the rules. If someone has enough money to drive around to tournaments, they probablly have enough of it to update lists. And to be honest, the difference between 3 and 6 tyrants people played against me before the faq, is that with 6 I got tabled one turn fast.

If reaper and tyrants were the problem, why didn't GW deal with them the same way they delt with tau commanders? 0-1 hive tyrant with wings, 0-1 unit of reapers per army. Stuff fixed, other people army not nerfed what it aint needed.

jcd386 wrote:
I understand what you're saying, but I also think it's a bit much to expect players to foresee nerfs before they happen or to expect GW to allow one thing for 3 editions and then suddenly change their mind halfway through the edition. A lot of people started the game in 6th, 7th, and 8th, so it's not improbable they weren't able to see this coming
Again, I don't think you'll find a stronger proponent of the rule of three than I am, but it's still possible to have some empathy for players affected and encourage GW to avoid these situations in the first place.

Adding to this, not everyone is spamming units for WAAC reasons and it is pretty intellectually dishonest to claim otherwise. The people who have the means to “chase the meta” by spamming the latest cheese are not the ones who get burned the worst. Its people who are stuck with one off meta army and were using spamming one of their few viable units just to have a chance. Most tau players were running crisis suits as a legal proxy for Commanders strictly because that was the only list that even remotely worked.

I mean, if someone wants to go out and buy six more hive tyrants for their army that’s all on them. GW has made it clear that they are actively managing game balance in this edition through FAQs, errata, and CA. Maybe you can’t predict what will be changed and how, but if you’re going out and assembling the dirtiest of dirty lists like Tyrantspam or Malefic Lord spam, you should expect there’s at least a risk of change.

Karol wrote:

 blackmage wrote:
EVERY tournament lists play with that limitation, never seen those faboulous 9 leman russes for example, i play Dg+Ts+N demons and i played same way before and after the FAQ, never played more than 3x and had similar results, so it s not the rule of 3 is the player, if you are unable to win without spamming 7 flyrants well impriove your skill playing more, what else i can say. Lists which aren't competitive now wasn't before the FAQ too (maybe GK are the exception).
If you take a look at actual players standing who won before FAQ keep winning also after faq... ask yourself why, if were just cause they could spam they should lost now but they dont so...

But the problem is not for people who play tournaments. It is a problem that don't play tournaments, but still get hit by the rules. If someone has enough money to drive around to tournaments, they probablly have enough of it to update lists. And to be honest, the difference between 3 and 6 tyrants people played against me before the faq, is that with 6 I got tabled one turn fast.

If reaper and tyrants were the problem, why didn't GW deal with them the same way they delt with tau commanders? 0-1 hive tyrant with wings, 0-1 unit of reapers per army. Stuff fixed, other people army not nerfed what it aint needed.

c'mon outside matched play ( to be honest outside tournaments) i dont you have any problem , agree with your opponenst what you can play or not, the rule of 3 is made for tournaments mainly, with a friend also if i use matched rules i can easily agree about what we are going to play, so no tournaments no rule of 3 to bother about, i play both ways and i can tell it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

meleti wrote:
I mean, if someone wants to go out and buy six more hive tyrants for their army that’s all on them. GW has made it clear that they are actively managing game balance in this edition through FAQs, errata, and CA. Maybe you can’t predict what will be changed and how, but if you’re going out and assembling the dirtiest of dirty lists like Tyrantspam or Malefic Lord spam, you should expect there’s at least a risk of change.

is what im saying... and honestly wasn't all the major nerfs predictable? who really though malefic lord could be spammed forever in 10x, same for brimstones at 3 pts save 4++, 7 flyrants and so on... you buy is your choice but expect the nerf bat and dont complain, this is the new Gw politic, you can like it or not but this is what you must take into account now when you assemble an army if you refuse to do is your choice, is like drive at 100mph in city center and then complain cause you hit another car.

c'mon outside matched play ( to be honest outside tournaments) i dont you have any problem , agree with your opponenst what you can play or not, the rule of 3 is made for tournaments mainly, with a friend also if i use matched rules i can easily agree about what we are going to play, so no tournaments no rule of 3 to bother about, i play both ways and i can tell it.

Agree to what? I am not an event orgeniser, so I can't invent my own rules. Neither am I the store owner or his friend. All other games are played here with normal rules, and the official FAQ/errata. I mean, I may as well start asking people to not play some units or even make them buy bad units to use against my army. there is zero chance of that happening. I don't think even the store owner could force someone to buy bad units, and he owns the only place to play in town.

I don't know what you mean by the outside of matched play comment. What else is there to play. No one sane plays open, and I don't know who narrative is for, as it takes more or less a multi thousand dollar model collection to even start optimising a list to play it.

Karol wrote:

c'mon outside matched play ( to be honest outside tournaments) i dont you have any problem , agree with your opponenst what you can play or not, the rule of 3 is made for tournaments mainly, with a friend also if i use matched rules i can easily agree about what we are going to play, so no tournaments no rule of 3 to bother about, i play both ways and i can tell it.

Agree to what? I am not an event orgeniser, so I can't invent my own rules. Neither am I the store owner or his friend. All other games are played here with normal rules, and the official FAQ/errata. I mean, I may as well start asking people to not play some units or even make them buy bad units to use against my army. there is zero chance of that happening. I don't think even the store owner could force someone to buy bad units, and he owns the only place to play in town.

I don't know what you mean by the outside of matched play comment. What else is there to play. No one sane plays open, and I don't know who narrative is for, as it takes more or less a multi thousand dollar model collection to even start optimising a list to play it.

Just because you don’t know open type players or narrative type players doesn’t mean they don’t exist and great numbers, this game and company was started by narrative gamers and story tellers and grew because of them. That’s why there’s more than just rules in all the books. Sorry you haven’t found any people like that near you because you are missing out on a huge part of the hobby.

Karol wrote:
Your army unit choices have to be really good, or it has access to stuff that gets around the rule of 3 like vehicle squadrons.

My army got a lot worse by the addition of rule 3. Someone else gave the example of his army he liked to play which is not illegal, because he can only take 3 units of kommandos.

When you can still take 3 of the best unit in the codex (interceptors, GMNDks, whatever) and it'll very nearly get you to 1750 points, your army isn't overly affected by the Rule of 3.

But that is not what my army is made out of, and what I have. If I have to buy all that stuff, then I may as well pay the same money and buy something like eldar.Investing in to GK would make three times stupid. First because I listened to my friends, second because I let myself be convinced to buy a GK army and third, because investing more money in to a bad army.

Andykp wrote:

Karol wrote:

c'mon outside matched play ( to be honest outside tournaments) i dont you have any problem , agree with your opponenst what you can play or not, the rule of 3 is made for tournaments mainly, with a friend also if i use matched rules i can easily agree about what we are going to play, so no tournaments no rule of 3 to bother about, i play both ways and i can tell it.

Agree to what? I am not an event orgeniser, so I can't invent my own rules. Neither am I the store owner or his friend. All other games are played here with normal rules, and the official FAQ/errata. I mean, I may as well start asking people to not play some units or even make them buy bad units to use against my army. there is zero chance of that happening. I don't think even the store owner could force someone to buy bad units, and he owns the only place to play in town.

I don't know what you mean by the outside of matched play comment. What else is there to play. No one sane plays open, and I don't know who narrative is for, as it takes more or less a multi thousand dollar model collection to even start optimising a list to play it.

Just because you don’t know open type players or narrative type players doesn’t mean they don’t exist and great numbers, this game and company was started by narrative gamers and story tellers and grew because of them. That’s why there’s more than just rules in all the books. Sorry you haven’t found any people like that near you because you are missing out on a huge part of the hobby.

They do not exist in numbers in Poland. It really doesn't help me if there is a huge open community in mozambik. Plus narrative and open, are even worse then matched play. As I said, I was losing faster vs armies with more tyrants. Under open "rules" my opponent could take not just 6 tyrants, but an army made 100% of them, and just back it up with something stupid like that this is his army fluff. Plus Poland or not, your not going to tell me that in other countries, open or narrative is the dominant way to play. It does not look like it. There I close to 0 open/narrative lists put to review in other forums list sections. You may as well tell people with armies that got hurt by the FAQ to be happy, because they can do something stupid like painting or writing fanfiction for their armies.

I don’t know the dominant way to play and don’t even think GW has that info, maybe of the survey they did. I’m just saying it exists and it tends to be fun if you play with the right people. I can’t help you if you feel let down by GW, my only advice for you in the future is pick an army that you connect with and sparks your passion, not what’s best. That changes a lot and is very subjective, as you said an army is an investment in time and money so you have to care about it. If you find an army you love then I might want to right fiction for it and you might enjoy it. I myself love ORKS and have for 30 years and they have been bad and good, and I’ve enjoyed playing good and bad units and armies. But they are my first love in 40k and always will be even if I never win a game. Maybe you should sell up your grey knights and start again, maybe when kill team comes out start a small force of something that you love.

Also I don’t know if anyone got “hurt” by the faq but they should be happy and write some fluff. I think it’s good advice. It is a game at the end of the day. No point sulking.