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.

It doesn't matter where its played. The fact remains that many people play at 1850, it is popular enough to be considered a fairly standard and common point level, and what GW plays at warhammer world is irrelevant.

*Edit* 28 secs! Deal with it Geek.

I think 1850 is usual in the UK too. The vast majority of tournaments are nothing to do with GW, even in the UK. They might play 1500 at WHW, but anywhere else I think 1850 is the norm.

Edit: you got me that time Blacksails.

So what you're saying is, that the point levels that the guys making the rules usually play, is not relevant to how they make the rules?

We know for a fact that 40k is unbalanced and touted as a "beer and pretzels" game rather than competitive. It's fair to say that's because GW tend to play narrative games rather than competitively. And you now want to believe that the preferred points levels that these non-competitive players use ISN'T going to influence how they write the rules?

 ImAGeek wrote:
I think 1850 is usual in the UK too. The vast majority of tournaments are nothing to do with GW, even in the UK. They might play 1500 at WHW, but anywhere else I think 1850 is the norm.

Edit: you got me that time Blacksails.

Don't think so. 1850 is the high end of what you see, but I've never played it. Most tourneys in the UK are well smaller. 1000 pts and 1500 pts are the ones I usually play.

Birmingham Games Expo, which is arguably the largest non-WHW to do 40K tournaments, usually does 1650 pts.

Looking on Cerebros, 1850 exists, but most upcoming tournaments are smaller (http://wargames.cerebros.net/)

- Stockport (May 30) - 1500 pts.
- Bristol (May 31st) - 1650 pts.
- Norwich (May 31st) - 1750 pts.
- Huddersfield (June 1st) - 500 pts.
- London St. Mary (June 6th) - 1250 pts.
- Warhammer World BB (June 6th/7th) - 800 pts each (1600 pts total)
- Leicester BB (June 13th) - 750 pts each (1500 total)
- Stirling (June 14th) - 1850 pts.
- Orford (June 14th) - 1500 pts.
- Milton Keynes (June 20th) - 1000 pts.
- Salisbury (June 20th) - 1750 pts.
- St. Helens (June 20th) - 1000 pts.

I think larger games (1750 pts. to 2000+ pts.) might just be a bit too unwieldy and long to get through multiple games in a day and be more common in casual games (one game/day).

Sudowoodo1 wrote:
So what you're saying is, that the point levels that the guys making the rules usually play, is not relevant to how they make the rules?

Yes, because they should play a variety of point levels, not consistently playing the same one and claiming its some sort of standard. There are many popular point levels; 1000, 1500, 1750, 1850, and 2000 all spring to mind. What Warhammer World plays doesn't change the fact that a very significant portion of the 40k player base plays different point levels than 1500 regularly.

In otherwords, yes, its entirely irrelevant what is played at warhammer world for what I play in my basement or for discussing things on the internet.

We know for a fact that 40k is unbalanced and touted as a "beer and pretzels" game rather than competitive. It's fair to say that's because GW tend to play narrative games rather than competitively. And you now want to believe that the preferred points levels that these non-competitive players use ISN'T going to influence how they write the rules?

40k isn't even beer and pretzels game.

No, because I know the studio doesn't ONLY play at 1500pts. So once again, what is the norm at warhammer world is entirely irrelevant to this discussion, further discussions, and what other people choose to play on their own.

Lets be honest here
The formation removes Gets Hot! So you will be putting as many Plasma weapons in it as possible

Wonderwolf wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:
I think 1850 is usual in the UK too. The vast majority of tournaments are nothing to do with GW, even in the UK. They might play 1500 at WHW, but anywhere else I think 1850 is the norm.

Edit: you got me that time Blacksails.

Don't think so. 1850 is the high end of what you see, but I've never played it. Most tourneys in the UK are well smaller. 1000 pts and 1500 pts are the ones I usually play.

Birmingham Games Expo, which is arguably the largest non-WHW to do 40K tournaments, usually does 1650 pts.

Looking on Cerebros, 1850 exists, but most upcoming tournaments are smaller (http://wargames.cerebros.net/)

- Stockport (May 30) - 1500 pts.
- Bristol (May 31st) - 1650 pts.
- Norwich (May 31st) - 1750 pts.
- Huddersfield (June 1st) - 500 pts.
- London St. Mary (June 6th) - 1250 pts.
- Warhammer World BB (June 6th/7th) - 800 pts each (1600 pts total)
- Leicester BB (June 13th) - 750 pts each (1500 total)
- Stirling (June 14th) - 1850 pts.
- Orford (June 14th) - 1500 pts.
- Milton Keynes (June 20th) - 1000 pts.
- Salisbury (June 20th) - 1750 pts.
- St. Helens (June 20th) - 1000 pts.

I think larger games (1750 pts. to 2000+ pts.) might just be a bit too unwieldy and long to get through multiple games in a day and be more common in casual games (one game/day).

Fair enough. I've always assumed 1850 was the standard everywhere.

In my area 1850 pts is the competitive standard. In my club people tend to play smaller games (ranging from 300pts boarding missions to 2000 points game for club nights). The game is played at a lot of different points levels and should work with all of them.

Even if rules writers played the game at 1500 the rules allow for larger games so they have to efing work for larger games. If theres a magic points number where the game is supposed to be balanced why exactly wouldnt they write it into the rules?

 Mywik wrote:
In my area 1850 pts is the competitive standard. In my club people tend to play smaller games. The game is played at a lot of different points levels and should work with all of them.

Even if rules writers played the game at 1500 the rules allow for larger games so they have to efing work for larger games. If theres a magic points number where the game is supposed to be balanced why exactly wouldnt they write it into the rules?

Well, they also presented plenty of formations that clearly don't work for 1500 pts. The Champions of Fenris can't really be fielded below 2000 pts. The Blood Oath formations likewise. If you're building a Decurion or Eldar Warhost with some of the more higher-minimum formations, you're quickly beyond 1500 pts. Presumably these would've been playtested at higher pts. (except this being GW and all).

 Blacksails wrote:

Sudowoodo1 wrote:
So what you're saying is, that the point levels that the guys making the rules usually play, is not relevant to how they make the rules?

Yes, because they should play a variety of point levels, not consistently playing the same one and claiming its some sort of standard. There are many popular point levels; 1000, 1500, 1750, 1850, and 2000 all spring to mind. What Warhammer World plays doesn't change the fact that a very significant portion of the 40k player base plays different point levels than 1500 regularly.

In otherwords, yes, its entirely irrelevant what is played at warhammer world for what I play in my basement or for discussing things on the internet.

We know for a fact that 40k is unbalanced and touted as a "beer and pretzels" game rather than competitive. It's fair to say that's because GW tend to play narrative games rather than competitively. And you now want to believe that the preferred points levels that these non-competitive players use ISN'T going to influence how they write the rules?

40k isn't even beer and pretzels game.

No, because I know the studio doesn't ONLY play at 1500pts. So once again, what is the norm at warhammer world is entirely irrelevant to this discussion, further discussions, and what other people choose to play on their own.

You're right man, the studio obviously playtest thoroughly at all points levels, keep up to date with tournament results, popular army composition, and player desires and questions. That's why it's such a paragon of balance with no bad choices anywhere...

Sudowoodo1 wrote:

You're right man, the studio obviously playtest thoroughly at all points levels, keep up to date with tournament results, popular army composition, and player desires and questions. That's why it's such a paragon of balance with no bad choices anywhere...

Can you point out anywhere in any of my posts that I claimed they a) do playtesting of any kind, and b) keep up to date with anything the players do.

Remember your original post in this thread? Remember when I explained that 1850 is a common point level and then stated that what Warhammer world plays is irrelevant to the discussion? I'm still saying that, and its still true.

For the record, I'm aware GW doesn't playtest (or at least not well), and I know the game is poorly balanced. That doesn't change the simple fact that, once again because you seem to have a hard time understanding me, the studio plays at point levels other than 1500, and what warhammer world plays regularly is entirely, 100% irrelevant to this discussion, further discussions, and what levels other people play at.

I think he was being sarky Blacksails.

 Ratius wrote:
I think he was being sarky Blacksails.

Yeah, I got that. I just wanted to be crystal clear in case there was a nugget of not-snark in that response.

And at no point have I disputed that what point level is played at warhammer world is any sort of indicator of the rules. You're the one that fixated on that, which was merely my experience. My point is, and always has been, that 1850 is simply not a common standard of play in the UK, where it just so happens, the designers live and play. This being the case, 1850 is unlikely (not definitely) to be their main focus for basing the game around, much like competitive play is not likely to be their main focus. Now, they may indeed play at different point levels to test, but if they've been brought up with the concept of 1500 points as a benchmark, then that is fairly likely to be what they have in mind when they're developing the rules. But I can see we're not going to agree with this, and we're fairly unlikely to get an answer from the studio, so I'm just gonna bow out now.

And once again, 1850 being popular in the studio or not is irrelevant to this discussion and other balance discussions.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Naw wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Naw wrote:
I hate to complain but my armies just got their makeover and they are nowhere near this power level. This is just ridiculous

What armies would those be?

The Bloody Taxi Service and the Green Tide. I only have three pods and not nearly enough boys (or will to paint them) to field the tide

The first one tells me nothing. Are you talking about Khorne Daemonkin? Daemons? Chaos Space Marines? Because if you're talking about Daemonkin, I can tell you that Daemonkin does fairly well against Skitarii.

And Orks can do fairly nasty things to Skitarii and Cult Mechanicus. Knights fare better against Orks--until they can get large numbers into CC.

The Taxi Service is Dark Eldar. The name comes from the fact that they've basically been relegated to being webway portal vehicle caddies for Eldar thanks to the power disparity between the armies (ie, Taxi drivers).

Wasn't the last Throne of Skulls at 1875 points? That was a GW event (they don't call them tournaments anymore).

SJ

commander dante wrote:
Lets be honest here
The formation removes Gets Hot! So you will be putting as many Plasma weapons in it as possible

Of the things in the foramtion, rangers and vanguard can take plasma. So can destroyers, but even plasma with no gets hot is worse than grav.

im still not sure you would put plasma on rangers. I think aquebuses are better on them.

So one unit gets it. Removing gets hot isnt what makes the fomration

 Exergy wrote:
Removing gets hot isnt what makes the fomration

Agreed. It's all the free upgrades

This formation is a lot like Angel's Fury, I think. It will scale nicely in bigger games, and be not so useful in 1850. Which, frankly, is just fine by me for both.

Sudowoodo1 wrote:
I dunno man, I always thought that 1850 was a US thing. I've never seen anyone playing 1850 in the UK (granted I've been out for a couple of years). Even when playing at warhammer world, and against GW employees, 1500 has been the standard. I'm not saying that the rest of the world is wrong, just that maybe GW hasn't got with the times. It'd hardly be the first time they've been wilfully ignorant.

Well the U.S. are the most powerful country in the world.

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:

Sudowoodo1 wrote:
I dunno man, I always thought that 1850 was a US thing. I've never seen anyone playing 1850 in the UK (granted I've been out for a couple of years). Even when playing at warhammer world, and against GW employees, 1500 has been the standard. I'm not saying that the rest of the world is wrong, just that maybe GW hasn't got with the times. It'd hardly be the first time they've been wilfully ignorant.

Well the U.S. are the most powerful country in the world.

Lets not open this political can of worms shall we?

I think the point people ought to take away from this is that if you play 1850, and your opponent wants to play the Battle Cong. formation and you aren't prepared for it, just ask them to build a different list.

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:

Sudowoodo1 wrote:
I dunno man, I always thought that 1850 was a US thing. I've never seen anyone playing 1850 in the UK (granted I've been out for a couple of years). Even when playing at warhammer world, and against GW employees, 1500 has been the standard. I'm not saying that the rest of the world is wrong, just that maybe GW hasn't got with the times. It'd hardly be the first time they've been wilfully ignorant.

Well the U.S. are the most powerful country in the world.

How profoundly relevant to the discussion.

Guys, play 1850 or Obama will attack your country.

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:

Sudowoodo1 wrote:
I dunno man, I always thought that 1850 was a US thing. I've never seen anyone playing 1850 in the UK (granted I've been out for a couple of years). Even when playing at warhammer world, and against GW employees, 1500 has been the standard. I'm not saying that the rest of the world is wrong, just that maybe GW hasn't got with the times. It'd hardly be the first time they've been wilfully ignorant.

Well the U.S. are the most powerful country in the world.

Ughhh....

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:

Sudowoodo1 wrote:
I dunno man, I always thought that 1850 was a US thing. I've never seen anyone playing 1850 in the UK (granted I've been out for a couple of years). Even when playing at warhammer world, and against GW employees, 1500 has been the standard. I'm not saying that the rest of the world is wrong, just that maybe GW hasn't got with the times. It'd hardly be the first time they've been wilfully ignorant.

Well the U.S. are the most powerful country in the world.

Incorrect. The USA believes that they're powerful when in fact they're just like the Tau Empire

Best just move on from this particular tangent.

Yeah... lets not go down the trail of national pride wars and just agree to disagree.


Honestly I really like the formation. It's 'cool' and you can feel good about having a fluffy army that gets more powerful the more points you have available.

Do I think it should see tournament use? Probably not. I'd relegate this formation, along with other similar ones, to use in 2000 + games. Basically old apocalypse.

 Exergy wrote:

commander dante wrote:
Lets be honest here
The formation removes Gets Hot! So you will be putting as many Plasma weapons in it as possible

Of the things in the foramtion, rangers and vanguard can take plasma. So can destroyers, but even plasma with no gets hot is worse than grav.

im still not sure you would put plasma on rangers. I think aquebuses are better on them.

So one unit gets it. Removing gets hot isnt what makes the fomration

Yeah, a Skitarii Battle Maniple getting free upgrades and no gets hot on Plasma Calivers isn't a huge deal. It's free upgrades on effectively three or four units(Rangers, Vanguard, Dragoons or Ironstriders, Onagers) of the six units that make up the formation.

If we were talking a War Cohort(which consists of 3 Battle Maniples), that would be a VERY different story.

Spam deleted.

Reds8n

Spam deleted.

Reds8n