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.
2015/01/06 21:51:44
Subject: How do you, personally, feel about the use of FW units in tabletop?
Yeah, this needs to be emphasized: all of the current Apocalypse/LoW rules were written by "main" GW. The original FW rules for those units were much weaker, and you'd have virtually no chance of winning if you used them in the current game. No 7"/10" blasts, no D-weapons, superheavies had to move and pivot like flyers, etc. For example, the Warhound's double turbolaser (STR D, 5" blast in the current rules) was STR 9 AP 2 with only a 3" blast and a Warhound with two of them would cost almost 150 points more than the current one. The Baneblade had only a 5" blast for its main gun (same stats otherwise) and cost about 200 points more.
Also, not forgetting, that FW toned down Str D weapons in their Horus Heresy books to make them more sane
2015/01/06 21:54:34
Subject: How do you, personally, feel about the use of FW units in tabletop?
Recently ran into a FW Land Raider with Flamestorm Cannons. Wasn't extremely terrible, though the Ceramite plating rule was fairly annoying. Overall, it was a great battle, I avoided his Land Raider rather than fight it outright.
I think the point value for FW is broken and that is it. Really What makes me laugh is taking a FW stompa compared to a GW stompa. You can literally field two stompas with the FW and give them void shields. While if you do the GW stompa you can only have one with no void shields.
That is my beef and its whats for dinner.
First rule of Avatars in a room is: you never call the mods. Second rule of Avatars in a room is: you never call the mods. -Tyler Durden
0055/01/06 22:29:04
Subject: Re:How do you, personally, feel about the use of FW units in tabletop?
zombiekila707 wrote: I think the point value for FW is broken and that is it. Really What makes me laugh is taking a FW stompa compared to a GW stompa. You can literally field two stompas with the FW and give them void shields. While if you do the GW stompa you can only have one with no void shields.
That is my beef and its whats for dinner.
That's a *very* unique outlier which they've stated was intended to be "+700" instead of "+300" in emails and on on their FB page back when they still had one. They haven't updated the PDF for whatever reason, but GW as a whole seems to have a standing policy against fixing things like that
IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.
New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights! The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.
2015/01/06 23:08:59
Subject: How do you, personally, feel about the use of FW units in tabletop?
My problem with fw is ever time i played them rules the had seemed wrong just some printed page the found on line if people got the really rules and not some sheet they typed up to look legal i be fine with fw..
2015/01/06 23:10:45
Subject: Re:How do you, personally, feel about the use of FW units in tabletop?
zombiekila707 wrote: I think the point value for FW is broken and that is it. Really What makes me laugh is taking a FW stompa compared to a GW stompa. You can literally field two stompas with the FW and give them void shields. While if you do the GW stompa you can only have one with no void shields.
That is my beef and its whats for dinner.
I assume you mean the Klaw Stompa, and those are cheap because they really don't have anything except a really big scorcha or two and two close-combat D weapons. One on its own isn't as versatile as the GW standard Stompa.
Also the only reason the Klaw Stompa gets a power-field is because the only way to actually have a Klaw Stompa is to build it using the Kustom Stompa rules, which includes the option for power fields. GW won't update the Klaw Stompa's original profile so the FW variant is the one you have to go with if you want your close-combat ork stompa.
2015/01/26 07:29:17
Subject: How do you, personally, feel about the use of FW units in tabletop?
Okay so to clarify things I do not play pickup games.
As for my friends circle:
Given the open ended mess that 7th edition is, when wanting to play a battle we usually clarify things the following way:
1 FoC for main army (no need to tell what army youre bringing)
upto 1 allied detachment (no need to tell which allies youre bringing)
FW units only after telling the opponent what you'll be bringing and if he is ok with it
Formations: the amount of formations you will be bringing should be disclosed prior to the battle
Ravenous D wrote: 40K is like a beloved grandparent that is slowly falling into dementia and the rest of the family is in denial about how bad it is.
squidhills wrote: GW is scared of girls. Why do you think they have so much trouble sculpting attractive female models? Because girls have cooties and the staff at GW don't like looking at them for too long because it makes them feel funny in their naughty place.
2015/01/06 23:56:42
Subject: How do you, personally, feel about the use of FW units in tabletop?
I like bringing contemptor mortis dreads as anti-air for my DA, I really would rather not bring in flyers for anti-air and I just dont like putting in the aegis defense line. At about the same points as a land raider each not many people seem to have a problem with them.
Blood for the bloo... wait no, I meant for Sanguinius!
2015/01/07 00:37:45
Subject: Re:How do you, personally, feel about the use of FW units in tabletop?
zombiekila707 wrote: I think the point value for FW is broken and that is it. Really What makes me laugh is taking a FW stompa compared to a GW stompa. You can literally field two stompas with the FW and give them void shields. While if you do the GW stompa you can only have one with no void shields.
That is my beef and its whats for dinner.
I assume you mean the Klaw Stompa, and those are cheap because they really don't have anything except a really big scorcha or two and two close-combat D weapons. One on its own isn't as versatile as the GW standard Stompa.
Also the only reason the Klaw Stompa gets a power-field is because the only way to actually have a Klaw Stompa is to build it using the Kustom Stompa rules, which includes the option for power fields. GW won't update the Klaw Stompa's original profile so the FW variant is the one you have to go with if you want your close-combat ork stompa.
No man talking about just a normal FW stompa looking at it right now it has same HP, attacks, AV, EVERYTHING! You can get better weapons and other things with the FW stompa as well.
First rule of Avatars in a room is: you never call the mods. Second rule of Avatars in a room is: you never call the mods. -Tyler Durden
2015/01/07 00:50:23
Subject: Re:How do you, personally, feel about the use of FW units in tabletop?
zombiekila707 wrote: I think the point value for FW is broken and that is it. Really What makes me laugh is taking a FW stompa compared to a GW stompa. You can literally field two stompas with the FW and give them void shields. While if you do the GW stompa you can only have one with no void shields.
That is my beef and its whats for dinner.
I assume you mean the Klaw Stompa, and those are cheap because they really don't have anything except a really big scorcha or two and two close-combat D weapons. One on its own isn't as versatile as the GW standard Stompa.
Also the only reason the Klaw Stompa gets a power-field is because the only way to actually have a Klaw Stompa is to build it using the Kustom Stompa rules, which includes the option for power fields. GW won't update the Klaw Stompa's original profile so the FW variant is the one you have to go with if you want your close-combat ork stompa.
No man talking about just a normal FW stompa looking at it right now it has same HP, attacks, AV, EVERYTHING! You can get better weapons and other things with the FW stompa as well.
The only Stompa forgeworld makes is the Bigmek Stompa. However Imperial Armor 8 has rules for building your own stompa which has a lot of weapons options.
2015/01/07 00:57:20
Subject: Re:How do you, personally, feel about the use of FW units in tabletop?
hellpato wrote: Those who doesn't like FW are those guys who bring a knife in a gun fight.
Yep that described me! For 6 years I played without the aid of Forge World models. They have some powerful stuff and the analogy should be, "Those who doesn't like FW are those guys who bring a tooth pick in a battle tank fight." I used my GW only army and fought these other armies with 1 or 2 forge world units and they just wreck my army in 1 turn and I proceed to lose. The only way to fight this cheese is to spend more money to buy FW books and buy FW models. How are you going to argue that FW are on the same level as GW units? If you own a FW model its because a.) it looked better or b.) you wanted something that wins!
They write these rules for Forge World so much better because they want you buy these obscenely exorbitant plastic models over expensive GW models.
Its all about $$$!
2015/01/07 00:58:38
Subject: How do you, personally, feel about the use of FW units in tabletop?
zilka86 wrote: My problem with fw is ever time i played them rules the had seemed wrong just some printed page the found on line if people got the really rules and not some sheet they typed up to look legal i be fine with fw..
The problem is that sometimes the most current rules are in FWFAQs or edition updates that don't come in big $100 bound hardcovers and don't have much in the way of fancy formatting. Could I ask what seemed wrong with the rules your opponent had?
The Imperial Answer wrote: I assume you mean the Klaw Stompa, and those are cheap because they really don't have anything except a really big scorcha or two and two close-combat D weapons. One on its own isn't as versatile as the GW standard Stompa.
No, it was a special character that was updated in one of the 6th edition pdfs to be able to take his personal Stompa as a "dedicated transport". There was a typo in the rules that made the cost way too cheap, but playing it by RAW is like playing by the RAW in 6th edition that models wearing helmets can't shoot (they have no eyes to draw LOS from).
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Filch wrote: The only way to fight this cheese is to spend more money to buy FW books and buy FW models.
This is just laughably wrong. FW units have their balance issues, but codex units are just as bad and very few FW rules can even compete with the cheesiest codex armies.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/01/07 01:59:33
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
2015/01/07 02:02:33
Subject: Re:How do you, personally, feel about the use of FW units in tabletop?
The Imperial Answer wrote: I assume you mean the Klaw Stompa, and those are cheap because they really don't have anything except a really big scorcha or two and two close-combat D weapons. One on its own isn't as versatile as the GW standard Stompa.
No, it was a special character that was updated in one of the 6th edition pdfs to be able to take his personal Stompa as a "dedicated transport". There was a typo in the rules that made the cost way too cheap, but playing it by RAW is like playing by the RAW in 6th edition that models wearing helmets can't shoot (they have no eyes to draw LOS from)..
You mean Buzzgob then. I thought the low points cost was because he could only be taken with the stompa in apoc games back then.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/01/07 02:03:17
2015/01/07 02:05:05
Subject: Re:How do you, personally, feel about the use of FW units in tabletop?
I whole heartedly endorse the use of alternate rules and nice models. I use a Sicarian tank myself.
Thought for the day: Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.
30k Ultramarines: 2000 pts
Bolt Action Germans: ~1200 pts
AOS Stormcast: Just starting.
The Empire : ~60-70 models.
1500 pts
: My Salamanders painting blog 16 Infantry and 2 Vehicles done so far!
2015/01/07 02:05:42
Subject: Re:How do you, personally, feel about the use of FW units in tabletop?
hellpato wrote: Those who doesn't like FW are those guys who bring a knife in a gun fight.
Yep that described me! For 6 years I played without the aid of Forge World models. They have some powerful stuff and the analogy should be, "Those who doesn't like FW are those guys who bring a tooth pick in a battle tank fight." I used my GW only army and fought these other armies with 1 or 2 forge world units and they just wreck my army in 1 turn and I proceed to lose.
Care to provide an example?
The only way to fight this cheese is to spend more money to buy FW books and buy FW models. How are you going to argue that FW are on the same level as GW units?
Because most are?
If you own a FW model its because a.) it looked better or b.) you wanted something that wins!
And your reasoning for this is...?
They write these rules for Forge World so much better because they want you buy these obscenely exorbitant plastic models over expensive GW models.
Except...usually they're pretty mediocre, and GW's models are commonly coming out at the exact same price as many FW models now...
Its all about $$$!
I'm not entirely sure you really have much of an idea of what you're talking about here...
IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.
New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights! The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.
2015/01/07 02:07:26
Subject: Re:How do you, personally, feel about the use of FW units in tabletop?
The Imperial Answer wrote: You mean Buzzgob then. I thought the low points cost was because he could only be taken with the stompa in apoc games back then.
In the 6th edition update to IA8 it can be taken in normal games. IIRC the problem was that originally he got the custom Stompa rules that started really cheap but didn't include any weapons or upgrades, so once you finished building your Stompa you were paying full price for it. Then in the 6th edition update some unit names got changed around but point costs didn't change to match, and suddenly he gets a fully-equipped stompa for the price of an unarmed one.
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
2015/01/07 02:11:26
Subject: How do you, personally, feel about the use of FW units in tabletop?
FW adds more rules and more units, which are mostly imperial.
many of the units are ok, some are outright bad, and some are obviously much better than codex equivalents.
The main issues for me for FW are this:
1.) If your not imperial they add little to the game.
--- after imperial orks, tau, nids, eldar, necrons see the most from FW, with all of those factions combined having about 1/2 to 1/3rd of the amount of entries that imperial have, not even counting 30k stuff.
2.) Most people that want FW inclusive things don't want it for the mediocre or bad things, they want it for the things that are better than codex equivalents like the special riptides, hornets, special dreadnauts, stompa that costs 400pts less for no reason, big trakks, the gun battery things imperial players seem to love, etc. Its pretty much a list of about 1-4 things per faction that you will see over and over when FW is allowed, so it adds very little to the game for all the supposed variety it can give. **of course the FW specific army lists are different and have a lot of variety beyond the standard codexes**
3.) FW is worse than GW for rules. no faqs, little updates, and they are more of a model company than GW. ie they do not put out rules unless there is a model, whereas GW may put out rules for things that has no model which allows more variety because they can create rules for models they haven't/don't intend to make anytime soon to give options to players. FW has never done this, and probably never will. Their priority is making imperial walkers>imperial tanks>imperial dreadnaughts>imperial infantry>other races. If you play imperial theres so many units to pick from in FW that some are obviously going to be better than anything you can get in the codexes, for other races the pond is much smaller, and sometimes dry (here's looking at you dark eldar)
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/01/07 02:17:44
2015/01/07 02:16:16
Subject: Re:How do you, personally, feel about the use of FW units in tabletop?
hellpato wrote: Those who doesn't like FW are those guys who bring a knife in a gun fight.
Or you know, don't have the kinds of money needed to field such models.
That being said, I don't really care much about the Forge World stuff. Some of it looks really nice, but it's so grossly overcosted to make me care. If people want to field their more expensive toys, sure. *shrug*
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/01/07 02:17:12
2015/01/07 02:29:19
Subject: Re:How do you, personally, feel about the use of FW units in tabletop?
zombiekila707 wrote: I think the point value for FW is broken and that is it. Really What makes me laugh is taking a FW stompa compared to a GW stompa. You can literally field two stompas with the FW and give them void shields. While if you do the GW stompa you can only have one with no void shields.
That is my beef and its whats for dinner.
I assume you mean the Klaw Stompa, and those are cheap because they really don't have anything except a really big scorcha or two and two close-combat D weapons. One on its own isn't as versatile as the GW standard Stompa.
Also the only reason the Klaw Stompa gets a power-field is because the only way to actually have a Klaw Stompa is to build it using the Kustom Stompa rules, which includes the option for power fields. GW won't update the Klaw Stompa's original profile so the FW variant is the one you have to go with if you want your close-combat ork stompa.
No man talking about just a normal FW stompa looking at it right now it has same HP, attacks, AV, EVERYTHING! You can get better weapons and other things with the FW stompa as well.
See this sort of stomp foot, bury head mentally is half of what holds back Forgeworld. The other half is the combination of TFGs who use outdated rules and opponents who don't make people have rules in hand for them. Of course we just saw the whole issue at a GT where somehow no competitive players for a day knew that Loth couldn't be a WSHQ. Just come on people.
FW units are better balanced than Waveserpents or half our formations. Even the discount stompa being whined about is no worse than a "core rules" IK in an AL formation.
DO:70S++G++M+B++I+Pw40k93/f#++D++++A++++/eWD-R++++T(D)DM+ Note: Records since 2010, lists kept current (W-D-L) Blue DP Crusade 126-11-6 Biel-Tan Aspect Waves 2-0-2 Looted Green Horde smash your face in 32-7-8 Broadside/Shield Drone/Kroot blitz goodness 23-3-4 Grey Hunters galore 17-5-5 Khan Bikes Win 63-1-1 Tanith with Pardus Armor 11-0-0 Crimson Tide 59-4-0 Green/Raven/Deathwing 18-0-0 Jumping GK force with Inq. 4-0-0 BTemplars w LRs 7-1-2 IH Legion with Automata 8-0-0 RG Legion w Adepticon medal 6-0-0 Primaris and Little Buddies 7-0-0
QM Templates here, HH army builder app for both v1 and v2 One Page 40k Ruleset for Game Beginners
2015/01/07 02:36:59
Subject: How do you, personally, feel about the use of FW units in tabletop?
I'm just happy to see that FW is generally accepted. As one person said above, ultimately, it's toys vs toys. Absolutely nothing to get bent out of shape over in 40k tabletop, to include where the models come from.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/01/07 02:37:29
"The enemies of the Emperor fear many things. They fear discovery, defeat, despair, and death. Yet there is one thing they fear above all others. They fear the wrath of the Space Marines!"
7883pts
2000pts
Harlequins 2000pts
Your paints are not thin enough. Needs more wash.
2015/01/07 02:38:43
Subject: How do you, personally, feel about the use of FW units in tabletop?
blaktoof wrote: FW adds more rules and more units, which are mostly imperial.
many of the units are ok, some are outright bad, and some are obviously much better than codex equivalents.
The main issues for me for FW are this:
1.) If your not imperial they add little to the game.
--- after imperial orks, tau, nids, eldar, necrons see the most from FW, with all of those factions combined having about 1/2 to 1/3rd of the amount of entries that imperial have, not even counting 30k stuff.
Why is this an issue for FW but not for GW? GW has published *eleven* different Space Marine specific books over the past two years. Half the armies and most supplements are Space Marines. FW offers a lot for other armies, and whole new army lists for Necrons, Orks, and Eldar.
3.) FW is worse than GW for rules. no faqs, little updates, and they are more of a model company than GW. ie they do not put out rules unless there is a model, whereas GW may put out rules for things that has no model which allows more variety because they can create rules for models they haven't/don't intend to make anytime soon to give options to players. FW has never done this, and probably never will. Their priority is making imperial walkers>imperial tanks>imperial dreadnaughts>imperial infantry>other races. If you play imperial theres so many units to pick from in FW that some are obviously going to be better than anything you can get in the codexes, for other races the pond is much smaller, and sometimes dry (here's looking at you dark eldar)
They've been updating a lot of their rules, and they often do public playtest rules and change them based on feedback. Their updates are about as frequent as GW's, everything gets an update about once every other edition, some more, some less.
Also, GW no longer puts out rules for something that doesn't have a model. Haven't for a couple of years now. They axes a *HUGE* number of units from several books (most notably IG and Dark Eldar) specifically because they didn't have plastic line models. Hell, they dropped the Tyranid's drop pod from the codex because it didn't have a model, only to come out with new rules and a new name once they did.
hellpato wrote: Those who doesn't like FW are those guys who bring a knife in a gun fight.
Or you know, don't have the kinds of money needed to field such models.
That being said, I don't really care much about the Forge World stuff. Some of it looks really nice, but it's so grossly overcosted to make me care. If people want to field their more expensive toys, sure. *shrug*
Except, increasingly it isn't any more expensive. Sure the big impressive things like Titans are expensive, but GW's new plastic Terminator Librarian isn't any cheaper than most of FW's Terminator armored characters. LIkewise, the new plastic Scions are the same price per model as FW's Death Korps Grenadiers (which are functionally the same unit).
IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.
New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights! The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.
2015/01/07 02:40:43
Subject: Re:How do you, personally, feel about the use of FW units in tabletop?
zombiekila707 wrote: I think the point value for FW is broken and that is it. Really What makes me laugh is taking a FW stompa compared to a GW stompa. You can literally field two stompas with the FW and give them void shields. While if you do the GW stompa you can only have one with no void shields.
That is my beef and its whats for dinner.
I assume you mean the Klaw Stompa, and those are cheap because they really don't have anything except a really big scorcha or two and two close-combat D weapons. One on its own isn't as versatile as the GW standard Stompa.
Also the only reason the Klaw Stompa gets a power-field is because the only way to actually have a Klaw Stompa is to build it using the Kustom Stompa rules, which includes the option for power fields. GW won't update the Klaw Stompa's original profile so the FW variant is the one you have to go with if you want your close-combat ork stompa.
No man talking about just a normal FW stompa looking at it right now it has same HP, attacks, AV, EVERYTHING! You can get better weapons and other things with the FW stompa as well.
See this sort of stomp foot, bury head mentally is half of what holds back Forgeworld. The other half is the combination of TFGs who use outdated rules and opponents who don't make people have rules in hand for them. Of course we just saw the whole issue at a GT where somehow no competitive players for a day knew that Loth couldn't be a WSHQ. Just come on people.
FW units are better balanced than Waveserpents or half our formations. Even the discount stompa being whined about is no worse than a "core rules" IK in an AL formation.
Most of what holds FW back is their prices. GW is already pricey, and FW adds to that cost. How much does a Primarch run?
blaktoof wrote: FW adds more rules and more units, which are mostly imperial.
many of the units are ok, some are outright bad, and some are obviously much better than codex equivalents.
The main issues for me for FW are this:
1.) If your not imperial they add little to the game.
--- after imperial orks, tau, nids, eldar, necrons see the most from FW, with all of those factions combined having about 1/2 to 1/3rd of the amount of entries that imperial have, not even counting 30k stuff.
Why is this an issue for FW but not for GW? GW has published *eleven* different Space Marine specific books over the past two years. Half the armies and most supplements are Space Marines. FW offers a lot for other armies, and whole new army lists for Necrons, Orks, and Eldar.
3.) FW is worse than GW for rules. no faqs, little updates, and they are more of a model company than GW. ie they do not put out rules unless there is a model, whereas GW may put out rules for things that has no model which allows more variety because they can create rules for models they haven't/don't intend to make anytime soon to give options to players. FW has never done this, and probably never will. Their priority is making imperial walkers>imperial tanks>imperial dreadnaughts>imperial infantry>other races. If you play imperial theres so many units to pick from in FW that some are obviously going to be better than anything you can get in the codexes, for other races the pond is much smaller, and sometimes dry (here's looking at you dark eldar)
They've been updating a lot of their rules, and they often do public playtest rules and change them based on feedback. Their updates are about as frequent as GW's, everything gets an update about once every other edition, some more, some less.
Also, GW no longer puts out rules for something that doesn't have a model. Haven't for a couple of years now. They axes a *HUGE* number of units from several books (most notably IG and Dark Eldar) specifically because they didn't have plastic line models. Hell, they dropped the Tyranid's drop pod from the codex because it didn't have a model, only to come out with new rules and a new name once they did.
hellpato wrote: Those who doesn't like FW are those guys who bring a knife in a gun fight.
Or you know, don't have the kinds of money needed to field such models.
That being said, I don't really care much about the Forge World stuff. Some of it looks really nice, but it's so grossly overcosted to make me care. If people want to field their more expensive toys, sure. *shrug*
Except, increasingly it isn't any more expensive. Sure the big impressive things like Titans are expensive, but GW's new plastic Terminator Librarian isn't any cheaper than most of FW's Terminator armored characters. LIkewise, the new plastic Scions are the same price per model as FW's Death Korps Grenadiers (which are functionally the same unit).
In most cases, the items are more expensive. even if it isn't by a large amount. And as an Ork player, the models are grossly costed. A biker boss is so easy to convert, but you want an actual model? 80 bucks. How about nooooooo. I'll suffer with a 'crappy' AOBR boss cut at the waist and glued onto a normal bike. Problem solved for quantify-ably less money.
I get that FW tries to make stuff that might not have a model or a very good model by GW, but the prices are silly on most of their items. A large Squiggoth (Don't get me started on the Gargantuan one) and their Stompa/Mega Dread for Orks are stupidly priced. But if people want to buy them, more power to them.
Commando CONVERSION kit is almost 30 fricken dollars! A CONVERSION KIT! I'd rather just buy the damn Kommando models from GW.
And Ork flying transport? 100 bucks.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/01/07 02:55:12
2015/01/07 02:47:07
Subject: Re:How do you, personally, feel about the use of FW units in tabletop?
zombiekila707 wrote: I think the point value for FW is broken and that is it. Really What makes me laugh is taking a FW stompa compared to a GW stompa. You can literally field two stompas with the FW and give them void shields. While if you do the GW stompa you can only have one with no void shields.
That is my beef and its whats for dinner.
I assume you mean the Klaw Stompa, and those are cheap because they really don't have anything except a really big scorcha or two and two close-combat D weapons. One on its own isn't as versatile as the GW standard Stompa.
Also the only reason the Klaw Stompa gets a power-field is because the only way to actually have a Klaw Stompa is to build it using the Kustom Stompa rules, which includes the option for power fields. GW won't update the Klaw Stompa's original profile so the FW variant is the one you have to go with if you want your close-combat ork stompa.
No man talking about just a normal FW stompa looking at it right now it has same HP, attacks, AV, EVERYTHING! You can get better weapons and other things with the FW stompa as well.
See this sort of stomp foot, bury head mentally is half of what holds back Forgeworld. The other half is the combination of TFGs who use outdated rules and opponents who don't make people have rules in hand for them. Of course we just saw the whole issue at a GT where somehow no competitive players for a day knew that Loth couldn't be a WSHQ. Just come on people.
FW units are better balanced than Waveserpents or half our formations. Even the discount stompa being whined about is no worse than a "core rules" IK in an AL formation.
Most of what holds FW back is their prices. GW is already pricey, and FW adds to that cost. How much does a Primarch run?
All of them are mostly 57 quid, except for logar who is 52 quid, and Horus is who is 62 quid.
2015/01/07 03:12:48
Subject: Re:How do you, personally, feel about the use of FW units in tabletop?
zombiekila707 wrote: I think the point value for FW is broken and that is it. Really What makes me laugh is taking a FW stompa compared to a GW stompa. You can literally field two stompas with the FW and give them void shields. While if you do the GW stompa you can only have one with no void shields.
That is my beef and its whats for dinner.
I assume you mean the Klaw Stompa, and those are cheap because they really don't have anything except a really big scorcha or two and two close-combat D weapons. One on its own isn't as versatile as the GW standard Stompa.
Also the only reason the Klaw Stompa gets a power-field is because the only way to actually have a Klaw Stompa is to build it using the Kustom Stompa rules, which includes the option for power fields. GW won't update the Klaw Stompa's original profile so the FW variant is the one you have to go with if you want your close-combat ork stompa.
No man talking about just a normal FW stompa looking at it right now it has same HP, attacks, AV, EVERYTHING! You can get better weapons and other things with the FW stompa as well.
See this sort of stomp foot, bury head mentally is half of what holds back Forgeworld. The other half is the combination of TFGs who use outdated rules and opponents who don't make people have rules in hand for them. Of course we just saw the whole issue at a GT where somehow no competitive players for a day knew that Loth couldn't be a WSHQ. Just come on people.
FW units are better balanced than Waveserpents or half our formations. Even the discount stompa being whined about is no worse than a "core rules" IK in an AL formation.
Most of what holds FW back is their prices. GW is already pricey, and FW adds to that cost. How much does a Primarch run?
All of them are mostly 57 quid, except for logar who is 52 quid, and Horus is who is 62 quid.
For a single model, albeit of good quality, that's about $60. A Primarch is one of the few models I would buy just because of their details, but its still expensive. A FW Land Raider is about $25 more than one from GW.
Because some things in ForgeWorld are broken, we shouldn't be able to take them. Lets follow that logic.
Goodbye Eldar. (Wave Serpents, entire Bound armies of T5+ models)
Goodbye Grey Knights.(Cheaper Dreadknights)
Goodbye Imperial Guard (Cheaper Russes, LRHQ's)
Goodbye Tyranids (So many Monsters)
Goodbye Tau (Riptide Spam, Broadsides)
Goodbye Orks (So so much awesome)
Goodbye Necrons (Do I even have to say?)
So in your hypothetical leagues, the only army allowed is Sisters of Battle. Good. Let's all buy in and maybe they'll make some plastics!
~1.5k
2000 l 
2000 l 
2000 l 
1500 l 
1000 l 
1000 l 
Blood Ravens (using Ravenguard CT) 1500 l 
1500 l
The Empire 
1500 pts
: 
Blue DP Crusade 126-11-6 
Biel-Tan Aspect Waves 2-0-2 
Looted Green Horde smash your face in 32-7-8 
Broadside/Shield Drone/Kroot blitz goodness 23-3-4 
Grey Hunters galore 17-5-5 
Khan Bikes Win 63-1-1 
Tanith with Pardus Armor 11-0-0 
Crimson Tide 59-4-0 
Green/Raven/Deathwing 18-0-0 
Jumping GK force with Inq. 4-0-0 
IH Legion with Automata 8-0-0 
RG Legion w Adepticon medal 6-0-0 
2000pts
Son of Dorn 
