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.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 davou wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:


Well yeah. Would you expect Scipio Africanus to rally the Carthaginians? Details matter. Magnus is not the right primarch for this sort of thing.

How about the detail that none of those other primarchs are released?

True, but Abby is out, isn't he? Why not have him in the list, instead of magnus? Or instead of one of the knights? Abbadon would be fluffy.

Abigail told those forces to strike somewhere else. Abigail doesn't HAVE to be there, he just has to command.

fe40k wrote:...
Chill the fetch out.
...

The purpose of the game is to try to win. You are given points to buy your army, and need to use these points effectively in order to build an army that you enjoy, that can also compete in the game at large. Each unit has it's strengths and weaknesses. If someone likes knights, and knights aren't obviously broken, then how does taking knights make them a bad person?

If going by odds of a certain thing happening by fluff is colouring your army decisions, than 90% of all games would be Imperial Guard Vs. Orks/Nids/Renegades, and no one would even get to play Space Marines. There are only like a million of them after all.

The one thing that stood out was that no one enjoyed playing them.

If you play wargames or games. You have to enjoy the experience.

Since no one voted for them it 'might' have something to do with the list but even with a nasty list, if you are fun players they can get the opponents to give them a thumbs up.

it seems these GW guys don't know how to represent

Magnus did nothing wrong.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/07/17/warhammer-40000-doubles-event-report-magnus-did-nothing-wrong/


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 XT-1984 wrote:


Also the Nurgle knight's obviously wearnt finished, just based green and some trim was painted.

In the article it is very clear that this is incredibly false.

I mean, if it wasn't a doubles tournament I would have a problem with the list. Ala nurgle vs tzeench. Its a small very tough army, but to be totally fair, Index Chaos is far from the strongest index. Not very fluffy, but personally I would love to play against this army. Plus i'm sure it was a beaut on the table.

For anyone now who's saying the list is unfluffy - they have two separate armies, as confirmed by the article. One Tzeentch one, and a Nurgle one. That's completely permitted in a Double Tournament - I mean, in that article alone, there's an Astra Militarum/Eldar/Grey Knight* alliance. How is that any worse than this?

Yes, they won all their games, but they weren't the only ones to do so. I really don't see what the issue is.
It's not unfluffy, they didn't steamroll everything, with two games coming down to luck and chance, and they were painted and based appropriately.

*Just a singular Dreadknight, in fact