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.

I always find these threads amusing.
Side A: Thinks the rules need major work. Doesn't like seeing Riptide Spam, Flyer Spam, or Screamer Stars because it hurts the meta and variety of armies both competitively and in friendly games.

Side B: Side A: Thinks the rules need major work. Doesn't like seeing Riptide Spam, Flyer Spam, or Screamer Stars because it hurts the meta and variety of armies in friendly games. But everything is fine, or as good as it can be. So long as you make up a bunch of house rules, limit heavily what options you're allowed to take, and even ban entire units/models from play.

That's how I always see this argument boil down. Side B, generally the "friendly and fun" side, never realizes how they actually limit their meta so much more heavily than the actual competitive meta is. Both sides have problems with the same things and would both benefit from an actual attempt at balance, however one side insists that things are just fine after naming off all the problems and their "fixes" to them.

 Swastakowey wrote:

Im the opposite, I love the way the game is now. SO many options, so much material and heaps releases.

But my friends and I play the game in ways that minimizes the problems that come with 40k.

What way do you play that both gives you so many options
and yet reduces the problems with spam lists and various deathstar builds?
I have a feeling it's a way that cuts out those "SO" many options.

I don't know why you assume that competitive players don't try to have fun or don't want to have fun for some reason.

And I thought you were loving the options available, but now you're saying how taking crazy allies and Inquisitors ins't such a great idea. And why the low point values? To cut out certain death star and power builds? How is that tons of options? I can barely field a decent army in under 1k, anything below 1.5K feels pressured. That doesn't feel like options.

Here's a quick question though. Who does a fair and balanced codex and rule set hurt more, competitive players or non-competitive players more?

So everything is fine
as long as you're playing without using all units available
or all the rules available like allies, data slates and supplements,
or allies in general
and playing at such a low point value outside of what the game developers intended.
So low that most normal units and SC would be impossible to utilize

unless you're trying to tell me that a 375 point model was expressly intended for 500 point games for the maximum amount of options available?

Seriously stop and think what you're saying. Your group isn't playing at all what the standard is or using even the majority of units available. Yet you're here telling everyone that everything is fine because for your small group it happens to work with all those restrictions.

You can't really be serious, can you? It's like the car example earlier. The car is advertised and shown in commercials to be able to drive across town no problem. In actuality it breaks down if you travel further than a couple miles. But you're suggesting that the car is perfectly fine because you only use it to go around the block.

To quote the old robot saying "That does not compute."

You're saying it's fine then telling us to cut out allies, data slates, formations, the newest codex, and all the while suggesting the smallest game possible with huge amounts of terrain.

And that is somehow what GW advertises? They advertise not playing with the IK, inquisitors, and allies? They advertise not purchasing their data slates? I kind of missed that. I guess the price tag on some of them was a clue they didn't want me to buy them.

You're saying 40K is fine because Kill teams is fun and saying the problem is we aren't happy with a bad product.

Honestly the only advertisements I ever see is the "Hey, we have something coming out next week. Better hurry up and pay us now for it" style of advertisement.

Do you honestly think that we aren't trying to make the game fun? The problem is that without major house ruling and over all reworking of major core concepts then it is terribly unbalanced and often times the rules are non-sense.

But that doesn't make it a good product. Us fixing it does not make it a good product. Selling a car in pieces with several of them broken and needing replacement from out side sources does not make it a good car because a mechanic can build one from scratch.

I was thinking of that too. MtG even brought in side decks to give you the ability to swap out for some versatility.

My biggest issue with 40K, outside of the hard counter armies, is the overwhelming amount of random tables. Psyker powers should not be random, it leaves too many times when a cheap psyker gets a powerful spell or expensive psyker Hqs getting nothing worth a damn, like MoT sorcerers.

Warlord traits that either give an entire army stealth in ruins or lets you re-roll your reserve roll on an army that has no reserves or even something as stupidly good as letting a knight warlord and d3 buddies outflank. Seriously, outflank? Like they would have issues moving down field or need to remove any threat from drop pod melta at all.

I can't help but laugh every time I see someone suggest "just make your own rules."
In general people are pretty terrible at it. Look at GW, they're bad at it and they're professionals with decades of experience.

If you ever think a solution is "just make rules that work" then I invite you to go check out the Proposed Rules section and look at all the entries for the Emperor or anime inspired special characters.

If GW is a model company above being a rule company, then why do they sell two army books that contain the exact same models but only slightly different rules? GW does not get to use the excuse of being a model company first, since they started shelling out supplements and data slates. The army release should be all the incentive to buy models for that army. I shouldn't need a data slate on top of that to get me to purchase Broadsides and a Riptide.

Football has equal sides and equal rules on players. Broncos don't get 5 seconds of invincibility after each successful pass. The deciding factor is physical ability and skill. Which is how it should be.

Monopoly is indeed about luck, but all characters start off with the same amount and have the exact same odds, aside from one person going first.

40K is unbalanced in that the rules favor shooting over cc. Then each army is unbalanced against the others such as IK having no air defense, nids having very little answers to IK and cover ignoring armies, CSM having the short end of the stick on the allies matrix. The allies matrix itself is another major issue of imbalance. Data slates and supplements that can ally with their parent codex to give another insane level of imbalance. Then throw in random charts on everything to top it all off. The warp storm table is the bane of my existence. No chart should offer those results every turn with no possible ability to predict, prepare, or save against.

SO what you're saying is that they are selling rules independent of model releases?

But don't you remember? The unbalance of 40K lets you have so many amazing options provided you don't take the following units: Imperial Knights, Riptides, Wave Serpents, Inquisitors, Deamons of Tzeentch, Wraithknight, Wraithguard with D-scythes, Khorne dogs, anything with Mark of Nurgle, Broadsides, XV-8 Commanders, Anything in Codex: Tau Empire, Escalation, Stronghold Assault, or anything you decide on the spot that you don't want to bring in games of only 1k or less.

Look at all the options that leaves open!

Hunam0001 wrote:
Play at 1500 points, with a 500 point sideboard (sideboard must consist of full squads), single standard FOC (no allies, fortifications, lords of war etc), best 2 out of 3, or 3 out of 5 games.

This wouldn't work out as easily as you think. Most squads aren't just interchangeable. For example I couldn't swap out a Riptide, Crisis suit squad, or Stealth suit squad with one of the others if they were properly kitted out. The points just don't match up that easily. Same thing with Broadsides and the vehicles in Heavy support. You could try a 1,000 point list with multiple 500 point allies available, but even then it's tough to work out on the fly like a side board.

I still don't understand how someone can claim GW is a model company. I don't remember them making a limited edition Riptide with a special dust cover. Even with Imperial Knights they sold both the regular codex and the special edition. It is a game company. You can't have one without the other. Rules and models go hand in hand. You can't honestly look at the new Astra Militarium Taurox Soccer Van and say that it excuses every one of the numerous mistakes and errors in the rules.

And with more than enough space for an Imperial Mommisar and her entire squad to fit comfortably along with all the groceries.

Okay, here's something. Even if we conceded that GW is a model company first and that rules are just there to sell models... Then how does that justify a complete mess of a rule system?
If I sold pen and paper, but claimed I'm just a paper salesman and that the pens are just complimenting the paper. How can I justify leaky pens that make messes and dry up too quickly? How could I justify selling deluxe limited edition pens while still offering only the basic paper?

Exactly. So why do some people try to push the blame off GW's shoddy rules by saying they produce models as well? How does producing two things excuse one of them being almost worthless but charged a premium price for it? With limited collectors editions none the less.

I'm having expecting an Imperial Knights supplement dedicated to GW's loyalist apologetics. Codex: White Knights "In the grim dark future, everything is fine."

I'm tempted to start a Proposed Rules thread now.

All White Knight models get Unending Optimism: If a White Knight's last HP would be removed, put it into ongoing reserves as it waits for another thread to speak out in.

I would like to give GW some credit though, with their limited abilities. Fleshing out... what... 15 armies now? Fleshing out over a dozen armies with the limitations of a d6 and a 10 point stat system is a bit harder than Starcraft having 3 races with computer controlled stats/damages.

I do agree. Having every of marine attempted to be fully fleshed out does stretch the limits thin and puts an imbalance on the special rules. For example I have no idea what chapters are in the C:SM because I only see White Scars, Ultramarines, Iron Hands, and I hear people crying over the Black Templar thing. I know I haven't seen Dark Angels in months.

Having multiple marine armies really does press the rules to try and make them feel special. Honestly I don't know why. Tau list off several regions and worlds where different armies come from and their differences, but Tau don't get home world tactics. And honestly I think it would put a deserved smile on the face of CSM players to see the loyalists reduced to a few elite founding chapter units.

But that's the problem. Tau would now be neutered thanks to Fog of War along with armies that rely on actually being able to stay at a distance, like IG.

IK would be impossible to use since they only have two units.

It's not a simple fix that can just be tacked on.

Oh my... You think Kroot and Vespid are CC units. I think there is a fundamental misunderstanding on your part.

The only times I've played larger games have been 3 vs. 3 team games and up, which generally took forever and we called every game early. I mean it does sound easy on paper to get a large game going. Only 5 hours! One day on the weekend! Easy. It's like going to dinner and a movie and hanging out with some friends.

Only problem is you have to find the people, get them all agreed on a time, and make sure everyone shows up or it's all thrown off balance and takes time to fix. This is also back in the other area I played, in the new area and after 6th hit people spend more time worrying about their painting and collecting than they do about actual games. So finding enough people that want to play a huge game, where they may end up playing only a small part in, is not an easy task.

Honestly I don't even like team games that big. Trying to coordinate 6k+ worth of firepower between 3-4 people.

It's also partly because I had no motivation what so ever to collect more than 2k points since my main army was Tau and at 2K I have everything maxed out comfortably. Going above that just seemed like a waste because forgeworld didn't, and probably never will, have any unit that's really worth the cost of getting. Just look at Heavy Gun Drones and tell me that is the product of an intelligent and benevolent being.

One thing I'm starting to wonder is if everything actually was planned out. When CSM first released I thought the Maulerfiend was odd that it was extra good at hitting fortifications since only two existed. Now Stronghold Assault. Broadsides got reduced to a S8 AP1 HRR, which is pointless compared to the HYMP. Until the Knight atleast, which now there is actually a benefit to the HRR.

I still don't think that by the end of 6th things will work themselves out. I don't think the DA or tau aircraft will ever make sense. Honestly who even remembers DA now? I haven't seen them get used outside of a few dedicated players.