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.

Green Blow Fly wrote:It's not really that big of a deal.

G

Then why bother writing a normally illegal codex mashup list and a legal backup list and then asking for permission from the TO and every person you face at the tournament?
Just play the DA codex... or play a different codex if you don't like the DA codex anymore.

dont feel bad dude.. blood angels have 4+ storm shields too

I say no.
And to use this post as an excuse to get on my soapbox:
I have been a devoted DA player since early 2nd ED. Through thick or thin I have shown utter loyalty. If your codex is bad, it is a true sign of devotion that you play with the bad rules; suck it up!
I also take exception to players using other codices for their armies. “I play World Eaters with the Space Wolves rules” To me, that is ridiculous! Play your army with your army’s rules! If you are handicapped because of it and can’t win then take some pride in siding with the underdog and not compromising your integrity! The Spartans knew they were going to lose at Thermopylae, and they didn’t whine about it!

If someone is playing World Eaters using the SW codex then more power to them. It's all about counts as and building beautiful armies. I don't get some of you people. If the DA codex had been released after the SM codex there would be no issues. Even with 3+ storm shields and 2 shot cyclone missile launchers Deathwing is still not an uber army by any means. Five man squads of terminators die to focused small arms firepower.

G

Pika_power wrote:The rule is "If your opponent says you can", which is the guideline for everything, so I see no more reason to say "Yes" to this than to say "Yes" to allowing a guard player to have T4.

6 edition, you wait... we are going to start juicing on steroids.

Also, no you can't use new rules with your old DA codex unless your opponent says so. Now if I was playing my friend who plays DA, I would probably let him hybrid rules for things that don't exist anymore... like if he had smoke lauchers, those rules have been updated. On the other hand, I certainly wouldn't let him dip into the new SM armory, each chapter was balanced to work with itself... and only itself.

That's laughable, you will make your friend use the newer smoke launchers which aren't as good as the DA version but you won't let him use the new storm shields or cyclone missile launcher. I laughed so hard when I read that my stomach hurt.

G

Green Blow Fly wrote:That's laughable, you will make your friend use the newer smoke launchers which aren't as good as the DA version but you won't let him use the new storm shields or cyclone missile launcher. I laughed so hard when I read that my stomach hurt.

G

That's laughable, you will make your friend play you using the new storm shields or cyclone missile launcher, but you won't give up your old special rules/army list choices.
I laughed so hard when I read that my stomach hurt.

G

The point with smoke was specifically that it is in the 5th ed codex and the rules for how smoke works has been specifically updated. It would be the same thing for obscured. It doesn't cause glancing anymore, it causes 4+ cover saves. So if he had something that was going to cause obscured... You can't be playing with two different sets of core rules.

Also you hypocrisy amused me.

Green Blow Fly wrote:It's all about counts as and building beautiful armies.

G

Really? If it was all about building beautiful armies, then it would not matter if the codex rules were good or bad, I have seen some gorgeous Dark Eldar armies that couldn't fight thier way out of a wet sack! If were all about counts as, then there would only be ONE codex and then everyone would be on an even footing with different looking models.
When you choose an army for looks, you may have to accept less than great rules. When you choose an army for fluff, same deal. When you pick an army for great rules...well then you get the look and the fluff with that. The exception is when you make your own army; you choose fluff look and rules. But at my table, I will not tolerate World Eaters as Space Wolves, Dark Angels as Ultramarines or Guard with Necron rules. I'm just a jerk I guess..

tsadkiel wrote:

Green Blow Fly wrote:It's all about counts as and building beautiful armies.

G

Really? If it was all about building beautiful armies, then it would not matter if the codex rules were good or bad, I have seen some gorgeous Dark Eldar armies that couldn't fight thier way out of a wet sack! If were all about counts as, then there would only be ONE codex and then everyone would be on an even footing with different looking models.
When you choose an army for looks, you may have to accept less than great rules. When you choose an army for fluff, same deal. When you pick an army for great rules...well then you get the look and the fluff with that. The exception is when you make your own army; you choose fluff look and rules. But at my table, I will not tolerate World Eaters as Space Wolves, Dark Angels as Ultramarines or Guard with Necron rules. I'm just a jerk I guess..

I agree completely, except with that last part. WYSIWYG is impossible in this game, between GW not supplying us with all the models and bitz we need, to people having different painting and modeling skill levels... no one can expect an army to look exactly like its written. Beyond this, I am certainly not going to model a new army every time I change my list. I feel like proxying models is a core and necessary part of this hobby/game. And frankly if someone is VERY VERY clear and explicit about his Guard army proxying as Necrons, maybe giving me a list of what equals what... I wouldn't care.

Lt. Lathrop, let me clearify my position.
I maintain a difference between “proxy” and “counts as”.
If someone wants to try out a new unit, or even a whole army before committing to the outrageous cost of purchase, I am down with that. But it shouldn’t be “I like the fluff and look of army A, but I want the rules and winny-ness of Army B, so I am using army B’s rules” then my blood pressure rises.
As far as WYSIWYG, I am flexible. Though I hold myself to a high standard, I don’t expect every grenade modeled or everything perfect; as long I it’s clear, I am happy. Bolt pistols are not boltguns and flamers are not meltaguns! I’ll judge that on a case by case basis.

Biased poll is biased.

Anyway, I think I'm in the "use one or the other" camp. If you want SM gear use SM, if you want Deathwing/Ravenwing then use DA. I'd rather not start the cherry-picking BS.

I think this poll has been a smashing success as despite the poorly written choices and blatant bias, the OP has pretty much gone down in flames...

There's a DA player in our local group, and I think he's basically fine with the army selection. Sure, he'd love to have all the fancy new gear, but I'd love to have scoring Terminators and better psychic hoods...

The points about smoke seem like good, subtle points though. That's definitely a different discussion from the rest of it.

Lt Lathrop wrote:

I agree completely, except with that last part. WYSIWYG is impossible in this game

No it isn't. I have been 100% WYSIWYG for over 15 years. It is not impossible.

between GW not supplying us with all the models and bitz we need,

GW has no obligation to provide you with a bit or a model for every unit. In fact, for years they have explicitly packed boxes and blisters with inferior wargear/weapons to promote multiple purchases and swapping of bitz conversions. This doesn't make WYSIWYG impossible, just expensive. I can hardly think of a single weapon or wargear item that doesn't exist 'somewhere' on 'some' kit that can't be transplanted reasonably. It just takes effort and money.

to people having different painting and modeling skill levels...

GW has always given explicit advantage to those who model or at least attempt to do basic or medium level conversions.

no one can expect an army to look exactly like its written.

Yes I can. My Army is... if I can do it, so can others. Now they may have reasons why they choose not to and far be it from me to judge them for it, but it is not because it is 'impossible'.

Beyond this, I am certainly not going to model a new army every time I change my list.

Then you buy more models, or learn to magnetize models to swap kep weapons and wargear. If I want to include Rokkit Launchas, then I should invest in a rokkit launcha model in addition to my Big Shoota model. Luckily for that option, it is reasonably cheap to have 2 models and sit one on the shelf. More expensive models like walkers, TMCs and ICs, you either model him with what your most frequent config is and suck it up, buy multiple models or magnetize him. Those options show it is not impossible... just take effort, money or motivation to carry it out.

I feel like proxying models is a core and necessary part of this hobby/game.

Nope. There is no requirement for people to Proxy for the game to be playable. While it is a nice option for people to handle some situations like armies in progress, playtesting and such, it is no means a requirement of the game that has to be accepted in order for the game to be played. Every weapon option and unit is capable of being modeled WYSIWYG even if it means advanced conversions or custom models.

And frankly if someone is VERY VERY clear and explicit about his Guard army proxying as Necrons, maybe giving me a list of what equals what... I wouldn't care.

Lots of people would. It is very annoying to constantly have to ask what *EVERY UNIT* or *EVERY WEAPON* in a whole army is over and over because it is not even close to being close to WYSIWYG. At least in Everymarine armies, a majority of the weapons and units are similar if not the same as thier powered armor bretheren. There are no similarities between necrons and I guard so using Guard as necrons is basically like using pennies and quarters and soda cans as necrons to me.

WYSIWYG is not impossible, Proxying is not a core aspect of the game and should not be treated as such. If you can;t meet WYSIWYG then ask your opponent to tolerate it, don't lay this "WYSIWYG is impossible and you are a jive turkey for expecting it" stuff on him.

Gorkamorka wrote:

Green Blow Fly wrote:That's laughable, you will make your friend use the newer smoke launchers which aren't as good as the DA version but you won't let him use the new storm shields or cyclone missile launcher. I laughed so hard when I read that my stomach hurt.

G

That's laughable, you will make your friend play you using the new storm shields or cyclone missile launcher, but you won't give up your old special rules/army list choices.
I cried so hard when I read that my eyes bled dry. :(

G

I never said I would mix & match. That's what you said you would try to force your opponent to do to gain an underhanded advantage.

G

Green Blow Fly wrote:

Gorkamorka wrote:

Green Blow Fly wrote:That's laughable, you will make your friend use the newer smoke launchers which aren't as good as the DA version but you won't let him use the new storm shields or cyclone missile launcher. I laughed so hard when I read that my stomach hurt.

G

That's laughable, you will make your friend play you using the new storm shields or cyclone missile launcher, but you won't give up your old special rules/army list choices.
I cried so hard when I read that my eyes bled dry. :(

G

I never said I would mix & match. That's what you said you would try to force your opponent to do to gain an underhanded advantage.

G

Actually you were talking to me, and you mistook my meaning... and then said something foolish that Gorka picked up on and tore you up for. Gorka never endorsed mixing and matching... or anything actually, he never said anything till after you did. Nor did I, I simply stated that gear that has had its rules changed should probably use the updated 5th ed rules... instead of outdated rules. My examples were glancing weapons, and smoke grenades. You should probably read posts more carefully before you accuse people of cheating. And make sure you actually know who you are talking to as well. Cause no one here suggested cheating, except you.

@nkelsch
I simply have to disagree with you. I am glad you have the money/time/modeling skill... and 15 years of models and bits... at your disposal. But I can safely say that the majority of people I know can't afford buying hundreds/thousands of dollars of models, let alone has the time to model WYSIWYG for everything they do. I try to get a close as I can... but simply enough, the average 40k player doesn't... and it is unfair to hold everyone to such a standard considering things like finances, and that for most people this is just a casual hobby... not a all consuming passion. I have other things to spend my money on (rent, girlfriend) and other things I do with my time besides modeling every night. I am sure I might have a WYSIWYG army in 15 years... but after 2 years I don't... and I really don't think anyone should be forced to that standard. So long as players are clear on what they have, who cares? This is coming from someone who scratch built 6 bunkers and 3 feet of walls and a pulsa rokkit (for apoc) and all the terrain I use for gaming... so don't assume I don't try. I simply think it unreasonable to not play with people who don't have the means to be perfectionists.

But GBF, you -are- advocating mixing and matching. You want updated wargear from C:SM while maintaining the special rules and characters from the DA codex.

Sounds like you've taken bits from both to me...

And if that's not what you're advocating, then you're in agreement with me, that either you play your marines out of C:SM or CA.

The DA codex doesn't say "See C:SM for wargear options", you're meant to be using either all the rules from the DA codex or none at all.

The inquisition codex got screwed the same way because they don't get half the stuff that's in the new IG codex, you just got to roll with the punches, or pick up a different codex to play your marines with.

If I'm misunderstanding something in this, I apologize.

No.

So, if this was a tournament, would you let your opponent use the new transport capacities for his vehicles?

Especially not this. Because the "newest" transport capacity is the Space Wolves transport capacity. Which is less then the transports in the Space Marine Codex. So should Space Wolves go with the Space Marine transports? Or, should the Space Marines go with the Space Wolves transports?

So you are suddenly subject to all kinds of idiotic problems. So, I choose no because that is what the rules say, and it is the best answer for everyone involved.

technically my vote was no because the reason you have your own codex is because your not a 'standard' chapter.

Here is my position:

If I play against a Dark Angels player and he wants to use the newer wargear from the Space Marine codex that is fine. He can use the 3+ storm shield and 2 shot cyclone missile launcher but he would also have to use the new smoke launchers. So it's fine by me to use the new wargear but that includes everything. So no to mixing & matching.

G


Automatically Appended Next Post:
We know that Space Wolves got the 3+ stormshield and 2 shot cyclone missile launcher. The stats for the CML are not presented in the BA PDF codex so they can use the new 2 shot version. To say that DA can't use the newer wargear because they are not standard issue codex is bunk.

G

Green Blow Fly wrote:The stats for the CML are not presented in the BA PDF codex so they can use the new 2 shot version.

Errm... What? No, the BA cannot use CML at all, because there are no rules for them.

They should just use the SM codex for their DA, unless they hate all Space Marines except DA.

Green Blow Fly wrote:Here is my position:

If I play against a Dark Angels player and he wants to use the newer wargear from the Space Marine codex that is fine. He can use the 3+ storm shield and 2 shot cyclone missile launcher but he would also have to use the new smoke launchers. So it's fine by me to use the new wargear but that includes everything. So no to mixing & matching.

G


Automatically Appended Next Post:
We know that Space Wolves got the 3+ stormshield and 2 shot cyclone missile launcher. The stats for the CML are not presented in the BA PDF codex so they can use the new 2 shot version. To say that DA can't use the newer wargear because they are not standard issue codex is bunk.

G

Is the DA player using his codex still for all the things like "can take Terminators as troops" and THEN getting the SM armory? If so, that's mixing and matching... and is what everyone is telling you is very very broken.

Wow Gwar you are really showing your densenity... The BA terminator entry clearly lists the CML as an option. I am putting you back on hte IGNORE mode.

G


Automatically Appended Next Post:
DW is not broken with the new wargear. I actually play the army so I should know. Just because some people on the Internet says otherwises does not make it not so.

G

Green Blow Fly wrote:Wow Gwar you are really showing your densenity... The BA terminator entry clearly lists the CML as an option. I am putting you back on hte IGNORE mode.

Look, just because it is an option does not mean that option will do anything. There are no rules in the BA "Codex" saying what a CML does, so it doesn't do anything. Period.

Green Blow Fly wrote:DW is not broken with the new wargear. I actually play the army so I should know. Just because some people on the Internet says otherwises does not make it not so.

G

If everyone who played an army automatically knew all the rules... and was an expert on their army... there would be no need for any of these discussions or even this sub forum.

And coincidentally, you saying that your cheating isn't broken or cheating doesn't make that so either.