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.

 Reecius wrote:
Not everyone is an old grognard in the game and has the depth of experience to draw on that the older dudes, do.

Well, I blame the lack of grognardian features in your youthful youtube appearance for not recognizing your experience... or is it photoshop and surgery like the Kardashians!?!

bagtagger wrote:
The majority of people voted no to lords of war which are basically FW units so how does that interact with you allowing FW units?

Lol, what?

Hahaha, are you being serious or are you just flame baiting?

How do you possibly correlate 40K approved FW units to Titans?

@Dozer Blades

Next I am going to change you into frog, and you will have to wait for your Prince Charming to come along and kiss yo to turn you back into a pretty princess!

@Warboss

Yeah, hahaha, I am in my 30's, the fellas at the shop call me Grey Bush!

It's all in good fun though and I don't mind.

I will be the most bad ass frog you ever know. So be careful.

 Dozer Blades wrote:
I will be the most bad ass frog you ever know. So be careful.

Hahaha, I know you would!

Blackmoor wrote:

You still should have re-visited it. There have been a lot of events with FW and now that people have had more knowledge and experience with it their view might have changed. When was the last time you even had a FW poll?

And do you still have the link to the results of your last poll? I was looking for them and could not find them. All I remember was the poll you asked after the BAO where you asked people what they thought of FW after it and them saying it was not that bad (when really only a few players showed up with it).

You should have asked:

I would like:
Unrestriced access to FW
I would like FW limited to (0-1)
I would like to see FW banned

That's a strange choice of options, like it's designed to ban as much Forge World as possible....

Option 1 - Everything from the smallest IG figure to the largest Titan with all the stamped and non stamped stuff to include APOC....(Unrestriced access to FW) (In reality no one would ever chose this for 40K since it would include Apocalypse stuff)
Option 2 - All Forge World Banned except perhaps one model....(0-1)
Option 3 - All Forge World Banned, period....(FW banned)

Your only real two choices are none and 1, but I guess that is to be expected. I did read your signature line....



A more honest survey would have been like this:

Option 1 - Everything from the smallest IG figure to the largest Titan with all the stamped and non stamped stuff to include APOC.... (In reality no one would ever chose this for 40K since it would include Apocalypse stuff)

Option 2 - All Approved for 40K stamped equipment and All Approved for 40K stamped Armies like Elysian Drop Troops, Death Korps of Krieg, etc..

Option 3 - All Approved for 40K stamped equipment , no Approved for 40K stamped Armies

Option 4 - (0-1) for Approved for 40K stamped equipment

Option 5 - All Forge World Banned, period....(FW banned)

See, this actually gives the voter a choice.....See the difference?

@Needle

Don't pay the old boy any mind, he got his ass handed to him by Jouglas Dohnson's FW heavy Hobby Killer list and has never been right since!

He isn't actually interested in everyone's opinion on the topic, he is interested in getting his way and seeing FW gone for what I think are irrational reasons at this point, haha

 Reecius wrote:
@Needle

He isn't actually interested in everyone's opinion on the topic, he is interested in getting his way and seeing FW gone for what I think are irrational reasons at this point, haha

Just the opposite.

I am always interested in FW polls because I have no idea where the tournament players truly stand on the matter. It might be that I am out of step with the tournament community and if that was the case then I can just go along with the majority. There are so many people here like Needle who shout about how great FW is, but they are not tournament players so it is hard to tell where they are on the matter. The only data we have is the Adepticon poll.

Also I would be perfectly happy to compromise and limit forge world to a 0-1 choice. I think that the vast majority of tournament players either want no FW or want it limited to a 0-1 choice,

And FYI I never liked FW, and my game with Dugg was a perfect example of why.

reecius, there is merit to people thinking FW is to much for competitive play as well, lots of people think that way.

FW has units that are just as over the top as titans... sabres, artillery carridges at a huge undercosting compared to stuff from the codex, but with much better stats....

Its just as "not fun" and "not fair" when my opponent can field 1-9 str 9ap3 barrage sniping templates for 75 pts a pop, when the same template cost 125 out of codex IG, al because they shelled out more money for models with better rules.

same with super heavies, most of its ok, but D weapons ruin it for the rest of it.


according to your own poll right now in the other thread, only 8% of people want FW.. 7% want everything...

thats not really clear majority for approving FW in tournaments.. GW did the same thing with FW that they are doing with SH's right now, taking stuff balanced for 2K+ games and shoving it into the "basic" 40k rulset.

@Blackmoor

You keep saying compromise when our folks have not asked for it, haha, YOU ask for it. Loudly and often.

You just bang that drum so often dude, it gets old. Maybe just space out your condemnations a bit to make it more palatable.

@easysauce

I am well aware of the arguments. I don't mean to sound short but I have gone round and round this merry-go-round so many times.

FW isn't even in debate for our specific event this year. We asked, it was overwhelmingly approved, and that is that. Blackmoor keeps, very annoyingly, demanding a recount or whatever when there is no need because it's already been done.

If, in the future, people want to change that we will listen. We aren't trying to force anything on anyone, we always wait until we have support for anything, especially something new, before moving forward with it.

The poll here represents a really wide swathe of people, many of whom don't even go to tournaments I would be willing to bet. The data is still really interesting and useful, but that is the one, large variance from our polls for our events which I have shown in the past.

The data I have gotten from our attendees has been positive, over and over again. We waited until we had a big chunk of people say they wanted FW before we let it in. It took a long time, well over a year. But now, it is widely accepted here.

And yes, the FW artillery is really good. No argument from me here on that. And, only Pajama Pants has finished in a high ranking using it. We've had people bring a ton of the things and only throw up a 500 record.

As for the money argument, we allow conversions so long as they are close in size and shape, so that doesn't apply to our events.

It really isn't a big deal in our experience. As a matter of fact, it has been dramatically underwhelming compared to the hand wringing you see online.

Do you guys have a list of FAQ that you will be abiding by? Such as things GW hasent bothered to care enough to explain, like do grav guns ignore cover on vehicles. RAW says yes, but people complain a lot. Personally I feel a weapon that can only effect a vehicle on a 6 in the first place would be pretty poor to use against it if 1/3 or more of the time that 6 was ignored. You would need 12 grav shots on average to score a glance.

As I am reading it, its going to be one main army and one ally. So if you are running ultramarines, and have white scars backup, that's it right? No ultras, white scars, and say inquisition, even though marines are in the same book. seems perfectly reasonable.

Just curious why you dident implement say a 0-2 ruling on anything outside troops? It cuts down drastically on spamming, and is fair across the board. Max 2 of anything in any army aside from troops. 2 helldrakes or 2 riptides or wraithknigts aren't bordering on stupid, like the 3 to 5 lists can be.

Its tired and im late, sorry for edits!

I think where the FW debate really breaks down is that it does not matter even what a "majority" or tournament players want. Rather it matters what a Majority of players attending said tournament want.

 Blackmoor wrote:

 Reecius wrote:
@Needle

He isn't actually interested in everyone's opinion on the topic, he is interested in getting his way and seeing FW gone for what I think are irrational reasons at this point, haha

Just the opposite.

I am always interested in FW polls because I have no idea where the tournament players truly stand on the matter. It might be that I am out of step with the tournament community and if that was the case then I can just go along with the majority. There are so many people here like Needle who shout about how great FW is, but they are not tournament players so it is hard to tell where they are on the matter.

Just for for your information I do play in local tournaments and sometimes further out. I do not claim to be a tactics master and even trust my opponent to know his army. Sometimes I get lucky, I even placed second a qualifier for Ard Boyz (2011, had to look it up) but gave up the ticket to advance since I knew I would not be able to make the trip for the next level. I just did not not get to use my Elysian army. My IG army was more non fluffier and definitely less unfair to opponents.

But thanks again for making unfounded assumptions about me...

 Reecius wrote:
He isn't actually interested in everyone's opinion on the topic, he is interested in getting his way and seeing FW ... for what I think are irrational reasons at this point, haha

Pot, meet kettle

You're both as intractible as each other on the issue- might as well admit it!

You even said as much- you campaigned for FW allowance, and by now the people who are attending your event are in favor of allowance. To turn around and use the polling data of that select group in favor of the decision would be a bit circular. It's great that you've got folks who are totally into FW now, but it is most certainly a case of your "getting your way" in that regard, swimming against the current of what most players / areas / events allow.

Which is totally your right, it is your event and I think what you're doing is awesome . But, you should own it- you very much "got your way" on the issue with regards to your GTs, and so far that trend has not extended to other TOs / events for the most part (unlike, for instance, the spread of the Nova format that was picked up by many). Blackmoor is just unique in that he has thick skin and continues to butt heads with you about it, while others don't. Again Hulksmash comes to mind there... not everyone who disagrees with you is going to confront you on it at every turn like Blackmoor, but that's just because he's more persistent than the rest

One day I'd love to see a thread where you would genuinely discuss and consider a limited FW option (rather than "all or nothing"). Hey, a man can dream!

Yeah, hahaha, I am in my 30's, the fellas at the shop call me Grey Bush!

You don't count as a grognard yet. You need to be in the club of those of us who got into the game when it was rogue trader, and played with 5 level 25 psykers...

Breng77 wrote:
I think where the FW debate really breaks down is that it does not matter even what a "majority" or tournament players want. Rather it matters what a Majority of players attending said tournament want.

Boom. You said it better than I did.

While the community at large may still be apprehensive, our specific events have shown an overwhelming majority in favor of FW. So we stick with it.

It is a funny situation, on two other forums I am basically getting called a wimp because we didn't allow Super Heavies at the LVO despite a majority opposition, and here we're too radical because we allow FW, hahaha, it's just one of the things that comes with being a TO. It sometimes feels like the goal is to piss the least amount of people off, and that is victory! haha

The poll I put up here on Dakka was just out of curiosity and to practice asking questions. I screwed up the first question which skewed the data, but it was still interesting to see what people said. However, I never had any intention of using that to form our policy. We, for obvious reasons, care about what the people who paid to come to our event think.

The thing to bear in mind too, is what you are getting going to LVO:

Friends
40K
Booze
Vegas

That only adds up to a great time in my mind.

@Orock

Fair questions. First, yes, we do have a tournament FAQ, youc an find it on our site, www.FrontlineGaming.org It is the same used by WargamesCon, Da Boyz, FoB, Adepticon, etc.

If we started doing anything, why stop where we did? Because we really do not want to change any rules at all. We HATE doing it as it causes a gak storm that we have to then deal with and we want to play 40K, not some other version of it.

However, at this point in time we were not willing to take the risk of playing unedited 40K as it is so crazy and new to us with all the supplements, Escalation, Stronghold Assault, etc. We believe in giving people the freedom to play what they want, but now in this current version of the rules that doesn't mean what it used to. That freedom now means that the game devolves into an almost unplayable state with invincible Super Heavies that erase several units a turn. Perhaps that isn't true, but there isn't enough time to test it for certain so our attendees chose to be conservative and skip it this time.

We had to make a call on how many factions could be in a list as you can now essentially go unlimited. I think people feared seeing crazy mash-up lists with cherry picked units from 3-5 different armies and that it wouldn't be fun. I agree, personally.

The only push back we've gotten on that topic has been from people wanting to play Primary+Ally+Inquisition. I get it that it is frustrating to have a list in mind and then get the rug pulled out from under you. But in the interest of fairness we can't say, everyone gets 2 armies, except the Inquisition. Then, everyone with a Formation (assuming those didn't get voted down, we had no way of knowing before the vote was cast that they would) would have been mad because it would have seemed unfair. And I can tell you from conversations with other TOs, this is likely to be a fairly common ruling to limit the amount of factions you can have in a single list.

So, with 2, you can still take what you want, you just can't take it all. Honestly this is what I would have voted for too, as I don't want to see Coteaz in every, single army on a personal note! haha

As for restricting units 0-2? A lot of people feel the way you do. A lot, actually, but a lot of people viscerally hate that type of thing. That is an incredibly divisive topic. We don't want to deviate from the rules any further than we have for a general event. We felt the few changes we made, will make the game more enjoyable and we don't want to go any further. This was, we felt, the best compromise based on player feedback and our own feelings on the matter.

Now, in the future, we are open to ideas like multiple formats where you can have an event with all the toys and some with more restrictions. That may be super fun and appeal to more people. Time will tell!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 The Everliving wrote:

Yeah, hahaha, I am in my 30's, the fellas at the shop call me Grey Bush!

You don't count as a grognard yet. You need to be in the club of those of us who got into the game when it was rogue trader, and played with 5 level 25 psykers...

Hahaha, ok, you got me there, I will settle for Junior Grognard status, then!

I just missed Rogue Trader =)

@RiTides

Fair enough, I am sure it comes across that way at times.

 Reecius wrote:
While the community at large may still be apprehensive, our specific events have shown an overwhelming majority in favor of FW. So we stick with it.

It is a funny situation, on two other forums I am basically getting called a wimp because we didn't allow Super Heavies at the LVO despite a majority opposition, and here we're too radical because we allow FW, hahaha, it's just one of the things that comes with being a TO. It sometimes feels like the goal is to piss the least amount of people off, and that is victory! haha

Actually you're getting called both here depending on who you listen to. I really appreciate your sticking your neck out to try to make these changes, as I think 40k really needed them! (regarding the new releases and how to deal with them for very close / upcoming events)

But again, you campaigned for FW allowance so of course the attendees of your events are now acclimated to it... this doesn't really speak to the general acceptance level in any other area. Some high profile players (again, Hulksmash) who were in your area weren't onboard, but you end up kind of downselecting to those who are in favor of it, or will at least tolerate it. So at this point polling data from your events will obviously show support.

I still really appreciate the polls, though, and look forward to seeing the numbers . Hopefully other events will follow suit and publish theirs!!

Hey Reecius, I'm going to echo others here:

Well done sir! Can't please all the people all the time, but you guys are both pleasing the majority and taking some long overdue steps to reign in the craziness. I know you'll do what you always do and tweak your tourneys as they and the rules develope, but thank you for this precedent setting call to sanity. This equips us smaller TOs to do similar things and once this line was crossed by FLG and FoB it more acceptable by us all.

Well played and God Bless

 Lobukia wrote:
Can't please all the people all the time, but you guys are both pleasing the majority and taking some long overdue steps to reign in the craziness. I know you'll do what you always do and tweak your tourneys as they and the rules develope, but thank you for this precedent setting call to sanity. This equips us smaller TOs to do similar things and once this line was crossed by FLG and FoB it more acceptable by us all.

Heartily agreed, Lobukia

Ah, well, thanks fellas! That was nice of you all to say.

@Lobukia

It definitely goes up the food chain, haha, I was on the phone with other TOs asking for guidance, too. In the end we did what we thought was best.

Some folks got mad, of course, one guys said he didn't want to come anymore which stinks. He was very polite about it, but that is always a bummer.

But, a ton of folks have told us thanks. Ben Mohlie wrote me to say he agrees with 100% of our rulings, Goatboy did, too, although he thought going to 1500pts would be good. Anonymou5 is a Daemon player and he said he thought everything was reasonable, HippestHippo and Hulk both agreed with the calls made, etc. That was nice to get that support from some dedicated tournament players AND to hear the casual players say that this made them want to come because it wasn't so crazy.

Trying to thread that needle! haha

@RiTides

Thanks, dude! I think transparency is really important and we always post our data, even when it is negative about us. It helps us grow, I think, and hopefully helps others to avoid mistakes we made or to emulate things that worked.

I certainly fall into the casual player who likes attending tournament categories and I echo the sentiments of the big names like Ben, Brad, and Thomas. I plan to bring Daemons or Eldar to the LVO and I still think the 2++ reroll change was necessary to the over all health of the game. I also don't want to bring a Revenant Titan and ruin all my opponents days.

There is nothing "wimpy" about recognizing a need for for change. It is actually more courageous to recognize a need for change, and work for that change than to blindly stick to the status quo for the sake of maintaining your own world view no matter how skewed or erroneous it has become.

Again I say well done on this Reece. I was considering cancelling my rooms and LVO attendance with Escalations release. I was really happy with the results of the poll.

In another thread I asked someone if the tournaments started making sensible changes like these, and GW sent a cease and desist letter threatening them with legal action if they ban their precious new books citing revenue lost, what would tournament organizers do?

Would you cave, and let all the stupid back in, the only other alternative being going to expensive court and possibly having an injunction put on your tournament till the date passed and it dident matter anymore anyway, or would you say feth this, and close down shop on the tournament ideas.

Personally I think if GW tried that on one I was a part of, after all their indifference up to this point about fair gaming and caring what the actual players may want rather then their pocketbook, I would just close down rather than cave in to their stupid rules.

I'm pretty sure they would be unable to send such a letter, and it woudl hurt their pocket books more to do so than not. Furthermore, their own rulebook allows for this type of thing...so they don't really have a leg to stand on.

 Orock wrote:
In another thread I asked someone if the tournaments started making sensible changes like these, and GW sent a cease and desist letter threatening them with legal action if they ban their precious new books citing revenue lost, what would tournament organizers do?

Would you cave, and let all the stupid back in, the only other alternative being going to expensive court and possibly having an injunction put on your tournament till the date passed and it dident matter anymore anyway, or would you say feth this, and close down shop on the tournament ideas.

Personally I think if GW tried that on one I was a part of, after all their indifference up to this point about fair gaming and caring what the actual players may want rather then their pocketbook, I would just close down rather than cave in to their stupid rules.

You assume that your question wasn't completely absurd. Tournament organizers are under no obligation to use anything unless they sign a contract (likely for prize support) with GW. To my admittedly limited knowledge, GW has stopped providing that kind of support a few years ago.

 warboss wrote:

 Orock wrote:
In another thread I asked someone if the tournaments started making sensible changes like these, and GW sent a cease and desist letter threatening them with legal action if they ban their precious new books citing revenue lost, what would tournament organizers do?

Would you cave, and let all the stupid back in, the only other alternative being going to expensive court and possibly having an injunction put on your tournament till the date passed and it dident matter anymore anyway, or would you say feth this, and close down shop on the tournament ideas.

Personally I think if GW tried that on one I was a part of, after all their indifference up to this point about fair gaming and caring what the actual players may want rather then their pocketbook, I would just close down rather than cave in to their stupid rules.

You assume that your question wasn't completely absurd. Tournament organizers are under no obligation to use anything unless they sign a contract (likely for prize support) with GW. To my admittedly limited knowledge, GW has stopped providing that kind of support a few years ago.

This. GW has nothing at all to do with the Tournament scene any longer. They would have very little, if anything, to stand on to make such a legal threat. Plus they go out of their way to pretend tournaments and the internet don't exist.

 Orock wrote:
In another thread I asked someone if the tournaments started making sensible changes like these, and GW sent a cease and desist letter threatening them with legal action if they ban their precious new books citing revenue lost, what would tournament organizers do?

Please stop posting this insanity in every thread even remotely related to tournament rules. There is absolutely no chance that GW will send C&D letters over tournament rules, and if they were stupid enough to do it they'd be laughed out of court.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Orock wrote:
In another thread I asked someone if the tournaments started making sensible changes like these, and GW sent a cease and desist letter threatening them with legal action if they ban their precious new books citing revenue lost, what would tournament organizers do?

Please stop posting this insanity in every thread even remotely related to tournament rules. There is absolutely no chance that GW will send C&D letters over tournament rules, and if they were stupid enough to do it they'd be laughed out of court.

I agree with Peregrine. It drives me crazy when that happens, so for my own sanity's sake stop.