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.
2019/12/19 18:59:19
Subject: GW does NOT test their products in a competitive environment, i repeat
Desubot wrote: Mate that isnt a GW thing thats your local or regional tournament rule as THEY decided that WYSIWYG is in effect.
You're right, GW tournaments are even stricter.
Having played at WHW a few times - that is not really the case at all. I have some seriously kitbashed and converted stuff and the most they ever asked was that I provide a model guide for my opponent so they would not be confused. They are totally cool with even quite extreme modeling conversions.
Now if you turn up with some lazy rubbish like blue-painted lasguns claimed to be plasma then you deserve all that you get.
2019/12/19 19:02:30
Subject: GW does NOT test their products in a competitive environment, i repeat
Sim-Life wrote: My 40k armies are Sisters, Tyranids, Necrons, Grey Knights, AdMech and IG, the least played army is IG because they aren't painted so I'm fairly familiar with the bottom of the barrel thanks. And btw, I've won a majority of my 8th Ed games.
My bs detector just started smoking ...
2019/12/19 19:02:42
Subject: GW does NOT test their products in a competitive environment, i repeat
AnomanderRake wrote: The competitive environment isn't the problem. It's loaded with plenty of people who are happy to go to a lot of time and energy shaving edges off GW's square peg to make it fit in their round hole, and the players are perfectly happy to buy stuff just because it's powerful.
The casual narrative scene isn't the problem. Those people are perfectly happy to fiddle with things, build their own scenarios, and otherwise disregard GW's mistakes.
The problem is and always has been with pick-up games. If I go down to a game store and play a game on the fly with someone I haven't met before I have to negotiate the fine details of what I can and can't use or one of us is going to steamroll the other one because GW can't be bothered to make two armies of equal points be roughly similar in power.
This. This 100%.
Do none of you have social media?
Does nobody post ahead of time asking for a game and say roughly what sort of game they are after?
Like "Anyone up for a tournament practice game at 1750 this club night?" or alternatively "I'm free for a game, want to keep it casual if possible. Any takers?". You know, communicate online because i know you are all online because you are on Dakka.
2019/12/19 19:04:33
Subject: GW does NOT test their products in a competitive environment, i repeat
Sim-Life wrote: Maybe swing that pendulum back the other way and think about what you said from the fluff-bunny perspective. Why do competitive players keep jumping into discussions about why unit X is marginally worse than unit Y and therefore worthless then start throwing maths and theoryhammer around like its the Be All and End All of the game.
Do we invite you to those threads? Do you feel you have something productive to add to such discussions of rules minutiae? Then why do you participate? I don't jump in on threads about why Magnus should be red and not green, I don't comment on why Roboute would never get coffee with Dante, because I DON'T fething CARE. Dakka has a whole forum for discussing fluff-bunny issues, I'm sure they'd happily put one up for modeling if you asked.
Calm it down. You're showing exactly why people get a negative impression of the competitive base. Sim-Life is as entitled to post about how balanced the game feels to them, in any thread they like.
I don't really care what ratio of tip 4 placements IH have in ITC tourneys in the US, but if it bothers other people it's worth consideration. Just like narrative players need to be considered.
2019/12/19 19:07:18
Subject: GW does NOT test their products in a competitive environment, i repeat
Dudeface wrote: Sim-Life is as entitled to post about how balanced the game feels to them, in any thread they like.
Absolutely, and is welcome to be held accountable for said feelings. When he comes back with some fluff-bunny canonical reason why model X is 'supposed to suck' we can questions the validity of said contributions to such discussions.
"In relating the circumstances which have led to my confinement in this refuge for the demented, I am aware that my present position will create a natural doubt of the authenticity of my narrative."
2019/12/19 19:08:14
Subject: GW does NOT test their products in a competitive environment, i repeat
Fajita Fan wrote: GW games are competitive they’re just not very well balanced as such.
Most games are inherently competitive.
Its just not GWs primary focus to full balance it.
i forget who it was but in a AMA on reddit one of the big names stated that they dont care to get it to 99% perfect.
there is diminishing returns from 75% to 90% to 95%.
(but this might of been kirby era)
Pretty much. It’s not worth their time to play test it because there’s no money in it while game companies who make DotA, Overwatch, or Starcraft see big returns on their competitive scene so they spend the effort.
The points values in AoS look like pure guesses. /shrug It’s still fun to play given some semblance of balance or fairness.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/12/19 19:08:52
2019/12/19 19:08:58
Subject: GW does NOT test their products in a competitive environment, i repeat
Dudeface wrote: Sim-Life is as entitled to post about how balanced the game feels to them, in any thread they like.
Absolutely, and is welcome to be held accountable for said feelings. When he comes back with some fluff-bunny canonical reason why model X is 'supposed to suck' we can questions the validity of said contributions to such discussions.
Bingo! Fluff bunnies are the last people that should be allowed to have any thoughts on game balance because, as shown, they don't actually care.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
2019/12/19 19:09:14
Subject: GW does NOT test their products in a competitive environment, i repeat
Sim-Life wrote: Its a mystery to me as to why people keep trying to force something so staunchly not a competitive game into that niche. If GW wanted to make the game Warmachine levels of competitive they easily could but they don't for a reason.
It's the customers who are wrong!
I hate to break it too you but the competitive scene is probably not the majority of the customer base.
I am genuinely amazed by the number of people I've seen who argue from the assumption that they and they alone represent the customer base and who GW ought be appealing to.
See also: "GW should get rid of the useless trophy racks on CSM terminators and give us something we can USE like more combi-plasma" as though there's no such thing as people who's focus is on painting and aesthetics…
Boy you sure do love to not get things on purpose. Lemme tell you the problem and I'll make it REALLY slow and easy to understand.
You. Cannot. Make. The. Default. Unit. From. The. Damn. Box. And. The. Useless. Decorative. Bitz. Are. Part. Of. The. Problem. If. You. Want. Decorative. Bitz. Make. Them. Yourselves.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
2019/12/19 19:16:03
Subject: GW does NOT test their products in a competitive environment, i repeat
nataliereed1984 wrote: No, I was arguing the game is relatively balanced and has a competent set of rules for a game that doesn't prioritize competition. That was the conversation we were having.
Maybe that was the conversation you were having, but that's not what you said. I quoted you, twice.
nataliereed1984 wrote: Anyway, seriously, this thread is waaaaayyyyy too negative for me, so in terms of me, at least, can we please just leave it at you being welcome to hate the game and me being welcome to think it's mostly fine for what it is?
Sure, nuke SpikeyBits and the complaint sub forum - that should nip things in the bud.
2019/12/19 19:16:39
Subject: GW does NOT test their products in a competitive environment, i repeat
Sim-Life wrote: Why can't people like collecting and painting but also game occasionally? I put a lot of time into painting and re-basing my nids and don't want to yank the arms off my monsters every codex update because GW decided to change their options to keep the WYSIWYG/competitive pedants happy.
But I forget that the general opinion of the game on dakka is is "I had my fun and thats all that matters."
The exodus of options is not the fault of "competitive pedants", but rather Game Workshop's "no models, no rules" policy after the Chapter House case. GW's flagrant use of it's legal team to bully 3rd party bit makers rather than just actually making kits with enough options for everyone finally caught up to them, and now they're slashing anything they don't support directly. Balance is just tangentially related and might be being used as a scapegoat at worse.
AnomanderRake wrote: The competitive environment isn't the problem. It's loaded with plenty of people who are happy to go to a lot of time and energy shaving edges off GW's square peg to make it fit in their round hole, and the players are perfectly happy to buy stuff just because it's powerful.
The casual narrative scene isn't the problem. Those people are perfectly happy to fiddle with things, build their own scenarios, and otherwise disregard GW's mistakes.
The problem is and always has been with pick-up games. If I go down to a game store and play a game on the fly with someone I haven't met before I have to negotiate the fine details of what I can and can't use or one of us is going to steamroll the other one because GW can't be bothered to make two armies of equal points be roughly similar in power.
This. This 100%.
Do none of you have social media?
Does nobody post ahead of time asking for a game and say roughly what sort of game they are after?
Like "Anyone up for a tournament practice game at 1750 this club night?" or alternatively "I'm free for a game, want to keep it casual if possible. Any takers?". You know, communicate online because i know you are all online because you are on Dakka.
"I want to bring an Imperial Knight, is that okay?"
"No, that's cheesy!"
"It's an Errant, and it's supporting my Grey Knights..."
"Nope, I refuse to play an IK."
Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne!
2019/12/19 19:20:11
Subject: GW does NOT test their products in a competitive environment, i repeat
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Boy you sure do love to not get things on purpose. Lemme tell you the problem and I'll make it REALLY slow and easy to understand. You. Cannot. Make. The. Default. Unit. From. The. Damn. Box. And. The. Useless. Decorative. Bitz. Are. Part. Of. The. Problem. If. You. Want. Decorative. Bitz. Make. Them. Yourselves.
It would be a lot easier to understand if you didn't make your points with dot-dash sentence shenanigans.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/12/19 19:20:30
2019/12/19 19:25:41
Subject: GW does NOT test their products in a competitive environment, i repeat
Dudeface wrote: Sim-Life is as entitled to post about how balanced the game feels to them, in any thread they like.
Absolutely, and is welcome to be held accountable for said feelings. When he comes back with some fluff-bunny canonical reason why model X is 'supposed to suck' we can questions the validity of said contributions to such discussions.
Cool but some units should suck? They should just suck fairly. Grots should be cheap and terrible as per the fluff. Terminators should be wading through small arms fire and butchering standard infantry, as per the fluff.
Just point them to match those fluff descriptions, it's not a hard concept.
2019/12/19 19:26:25
Subject: GW does NOT test their products in a competitive environment, i repeat
Boy you sure do love to not get things on purpose. Lemme tell you the problem and I'll make it REALLY slow and easy to understand.
You. Cannot. Make. The. Default. Unit. From. The. Damn. Box. And. The. Useless. Decorative. Bitz. Are. Part. Of. The. Problem. If. You. Want. Decorative. Bitz. Make. Them. Yourselves.
The decorative bits are not useless. They serve the purpose of making the models look cool, which is the main purpose of said models. Otherwise we could play with cardboard tokens. And sure, it would be nice if there were more weapons, but there isn't. It's not a huge deal, but if you need them for your min-maxing you can make them yourself.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Boy you sure do love to not get things on purpose. Lemme tell you the problem and I'll make it REALLY slow and easy to understand. You. Cannot. Make. The. Default. Unit. From. The. Damn. Box. And. The. Useless. Decorative. Bitz. Are. Part. Of. The. Problem. If. You. Want. Decorative. Bitz. Make. Them. Yourselves.
It would be a lot easier to understand if you didn't make your points with dot-dash sentence shenanigans.
Some of the white knights didn't understand it the first time, so separating every word for them to be able to grasp might help.
Boy you sure do love to not get things on purpose. Lemme tell you the problem and I'll make it REALLY slow and easy to understand.
You. Cannot. Make. The. Default. Unit. From. The. Damn. Box. And. The. Useless. Decorative. Bitz. Are. Part. Of. The. Problem. If. You. Want. Decorative. Bitz. Make. Them. Yourselves.
The decorative bits are not useless. They serve the purpose of making the models look cool, which is the main purpose of said models. Otherwise we could play with cardboard tokens. And sure, it would be nice if there were more weapons, but there isn't. It's not a huge deal, but if you need them for your min-maxing you can make them yourself.
No, you can make the trophy racks yourself. They have no in game impact, so they don't matter. Period. If you want stuff that looks cool, maybe you should ask your ever loving GW to make upgrade kits instead of taking up space in a kit so you can't even build a default unit.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/12/19 19:30:55
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
2019/12/19 19:32:32
Subject: GW does NOT test their products in a competitive environment, i repeat
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Boy you sure do love to not get things on purpose. Lemme tell you the problem and I'll make it REALLY slow and easy to understand. You. Cannot. Make. The. Default. Unit. From. The. Damn. Box. And. The. Useless. Decorative. Bitz. Are. Part. Of. The. Problem. If. You. Want. Decorative. Bitz. Make. Them. Yourselves.
It would be a lot easier to understand if you didn't make your points with dot-dash sentence shenanigans.
Some of the white knights didn't understand it the first time, so separating every word for them to be able to grasp might help.
Boy you sure do love to not get things on purpose. Lemme tell you the problem and I'll make it REALLY slow and easy to understand.
You. Cannot. Make. The. Default. Unit. From. The. Damn. Box. And. The. Useless. Decorative. Bitz. Are. Part. Of. The. Problem. If. You. Want. Decorative. Bitz. Make. Them. Yourselves.
The decorative bits are not useless. They serve the purpose of making the models look cool, which is the main purpose of said models. Otherwise we could play with cardboard tokens. And sure, it would be nice if there were more weapons, but there isn't. It's not a huge deal, but if you need them for your min-maxing you can make them yourself.
No, you can make the trophy racks yourself. They have no in game impact, so they don't matter. Period. If you want stuff that looks cool, maybe you should ask your ever loving GW to make upgrade kits instead of taking up space in a kit so you can't even build a default unit.
If you hate GW so much, don't buy it? I agree you should have all options out of the box, but being a douche to people who don't care isn't helping.
2019/12/19 19:34:39
Subject: GW does NOT test their products in a competitive environment, i repeat
"It's an Errant, and it's supporting my Grey Knights..."
"Nope, I refuse to play an IK."
I'm so glad Central FL has a good community, my local club has a mix of competitive and casual players of all ages (we have senior citizens and teenagers) and i've never run into one of these neck beards (i use that term lovingly).
2019/12/19 19:36:21
Subject: GW does NOT test their products in a competitive environment, i repeat
"It's an Errant, and it's supporting my Grey Knights..."
"Nope, I refuse to play an IK."
I'm so glad Central FL has a good community, my local club has a mix of competitive and casual players of all ages (we have senior citizens and teenagers) and i've never run into one of these neck beards (i use that term lovingly).
The point is that there's a lot more to be said than just "I want to play a casual/tournament/whatever game, at X points."
Hell, it's EASIER to arrange for tournament practice, since you can just say "Bring your hardest list."
Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne!
2019/12/19 19:36:52
Subject: GW does NOT test their products in a competitive environment, i repeat
Dudeface wrote: Sim-Life is as entitled to post about how balanced the game feels to them, in any thread they like.
Absolutely, and is welcome to be held accountable for said feelings. When he comes back with some fluff-bunny canonical reason why model X is 'supposed to suck' we can questions the validity of said contributions to such discussions.
Bingo! Fluff bunnies are the last people that should be allowed to have any thoughts on game balance because, as shown, they don't actually care.
No, we don't "not care" we just have an ability to be able to enjoy the game in a different way to you. Balance is good for everyone regardless of if they're fluff-bunnies or competitive. If the game isn't perfectly balanced (and what game is?) thats not an issue, but it is tiring seeing people make sweeping generalisations about armies and the state of the game based on only the top 1% of players and how they win tournaments.
2019/12/19 19:38:10
Subject: GW does NOT test their products in a competitive environment, i repeat
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Boy you sure do love to not get things on purpose. Lemme tell you the problem and I'll make it REALLY slow and easy to understand. You. Cannot. Make. The. Default. Unit. From. The. Damn. Box. And. The. Useless. Decorative. Bitz. Are. Part. Of. The. Problem. If. You. Want. Decorative. Bitz. Make. Them. Yourselves.
It would be a lot easier to understand if you didn't make your points with dot-dash sentence shenanigans.
Some of the white knights didn't understand it the first time, so separating every word for them to be able to grasp might help.
Boy you sure do love to not get things on purpose. Lemme tell you the problem and I'll make it REALLY slow and easy to understand.
You. Cannot. Make. The. Default. Unit. From. The. Damn. Box. And. The. Useless. Decorative. Bitz. Are. Part. Of. The. Problem. If. You. Want. Decorative. Bitz. Make. Them. Yourselves.
The decorative bits are not useless. They serve the purpose of making the models look cool, which is the main purpose of said models. Otherwise we could play with cardboard tokens. And sure, it would be nice if there were more weapons, but there isn't. It's not a huge deal, but if you need them for your min-maxing you can make them yourself.
No, you can make the trophy racks yourself. They have no in game impact, so they don't matter. Period. If you want stuff that looks cool, maybe you should ask your ever loving GW to make upgrade kits instead of taking up space in a kit so you can't even build a default unit.
If you hate GW so much, don't buy it? I agree you should have all options out of the box, but being a douche to people who don't care isn't helping.
I actually don't buy their printed materials anymore, especially after the insult towards us that was the Chaos Knights "codex", and I buy only minimal of what I need. I procured enough Calth and Prospero boxes that I'm able to just buy the odd kit here and there. Mostly just FW gets money for their Legion helmets and weapons sprues GW can't be bothered to do themselves. Not a bad thing because a lot of the stuff has been overly blinged as of late.
Dudeface wrote: Sim-Life is as entitled to post about how balanced the game feels to them, in any thread they like.
Absolutely, and is welcome to be held accountable for said feelings. When he comes back with some fluff-bunny canonical reason why model X is 'supposed to suck' we can questions the validity of said contributions to such discussions.
Bingo! Fluff bunnies are the last people that should be allowed to have any thoughts on game balance because, as shown, they don't actually care.
No, we don't "not care" we just have an ability to be able to enjoy the game in a different way to you. Balance is good for everyone regardless of if they're fluff-bunnies or competitive. If the game isn't perfectly balanced (and what game is?) thats not an issue, but it is tiring seeing people make sweeping generalisations about armies and the state of the game based on only the top 1% of players and how they win tournaments.
I love you go straight for the heart of every fluff bunnies thought process: no game is perfectly balanced, so don't bother trying that's okay. Give daddy GW more money!
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/12/19 19:39:42
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
2019/12/19 19:40:08
Subject: GW does NOT test their products in a competitive environment, i repeat
No, you can make the trophy racks yourself. They have no in game impact, so they don't matter. Period.
Frankly, you do not understand the point of Warhammer. Cool looking models are the thing the whole bloody thing hinges on. As you surely agree, the game itself is not exactly a masterpiece; if the modles would not capture the attention of people GW would have been dead a long time ago. So yes, the aesthetics matter, they matter way more than your inane desire to min-max everything in a silly game of toy soldiers. And if you do not care about aesthetics, then just glue a empty paint pot on a 40mm base, and write 'terminator with p.axe and combi-plasma' on it.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: No, you can make the trophy racks yourself. They have no in game impact, so they don't matter. Period. If you want stuff that looks cool, maybe you should ask your ever loving GW to make upgrade kits instead of taking up space in a kit so you can't even build a default unit.
I'm a competitive player and that's total crap man. It might not have an impact for you, or me, but to someone who just wanted to paint a cool looking model?
I know for a fact i truly enjoy the customization options this game gives you and i love making themed armies, all my IKs have a theme, i have BA knight (example) with a bunch of custom 3d printed parts and i prob wouldn't have even started some of these armies if i didn't already have the whole theme planned out ahead of time.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/12/19 19:42:11
2019/12/19 19:41:39
Subject: GW does NOT test their products in a competitive environment, i repeat
No, you can make the trophy racks yourself. They have no in game impact, so they don't matter. Period.
Frankly, you do not understand the point of Warhammer. Cool looking models are the thing the whole bloody thing hinges on. As you surely agree, the game itself is not exactly a masterpiece; if the modles would not capture the attention of people GW would have been dead a long time ago. So yes, the aesthetics matter, they matter way more than your inane desire to min-max everything in a silly game of toy soldiers. And if you do not care about aesthetics, then just glue a empty paint pot on a 40mm base, and write 'terminator with p.axe and combi-plasma' on it.
It's your job to make the mods eye catching. It's GW's job to make a kit so that you can properly put units together. You seem to forget that in your constant white knighting.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: No, you can make the trophy racks yourself. They have no in game impact, so they don't matter. Period. If you want stuff that looks cool, maybe you should ask your ever loving GW to make upgrade kits instead of taking up space in a kit so you can't even build a default unit.
I'm a competitive player and that's total crap man. It might not have an impact for you, or me, but to someone who just wanted to paint a cool looking model?
I know for a fact i truly enjoy the customization options this game gives you and i love making themed armies, all my IKs have a theme, i have BA knight (example) with a bunch of custom 3d printed parts and i prob wouldn't have even started some of these armies if i didn't already have the whole theme planned out ahead of time.
Yeah see the below post. It isn't total crap. GW created a terrible kit, period, and people are going to be called out on defending it.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/12/19 19:42:57
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
2019/12/19 19:44:56
Subject: GW does NOT test their products in a competitive environment, i repeat
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Boy you sure do love to not get things on purpose. Lemme tell you the problem and I'll make it REALLY slow and easy to understand. You. Cannot. Make. The. Default. Unit. From. The. Damn. Box. And. The. Useless. Decorative. Bitz. Are. Part. Of. The. Problem. If. You. Want. Decorative. Bitz. Make. Them. Yourselves.
It would be a lot easier to understand if you didn't make your points with dot-dash sentence shenanigans.
Some of the white knights didn't understand it the first time, so separating every word for them to be able to grasp might help.
Boy you sure do love to not get things on purpose. Lemme tell you the problem and I'll make it REALLY slow and easy to understand.
You. Cannot. Make. The. Default. Unit. From. The. Damn. Box. And. The. Useless. Decorative. Bitz. Are. Part. Of. The. Problem. If. You. Want. Decorative. Bitz. Make. Them. Yourselves.
The decorative bits are not useless. They serve the purpose of making the models look cool, which is the main purpose of said models. Otherwise we could play with cardboard tokens. And sure, it would be nice if there were more weapons, but there isn't. It's not a huge deal, but if you need them for your min-maxing you can make them yourself.
No, you can make the trophy racks yourself. They have no in game impact, so they don't matter. Period. If you want stuff that looks cool, maybe you should ask your ever loving GW to make upgrade kits instead of taking up space in a kit so you can't even build a default unit.
If you hate GW so much, don't buy it? I agree you should have all options out of the box, but being a douche to people who don't care isn't helping.
I actually don't buy their printed materials anymore, especially after the insult towards us that was the Chaos Knights "codex", and I buy only minimal of what I need. I procured enough Calth and Prospero boxes that I'm able to just buy the odd kit here and there. Mostly just FW gets money for their Legion helmets and weapons sprues GW can't be bothered to do themselves. Not a bad thing because a lot of the stuff has been overly blinged as of late.
Dudeface wrote: Sim-Life is as entitled to post about how balanced the game feels to them, in any thread they like.
Absolutely, and is welcome to be held accountable for said feelings. When he comes back with some fluff-bunny canonical reason why model X is 'supposed to suck' we can questions the validity of said contributions to such discussions.
Bingo! Fluff bunnies are the last people that should be allowed to have any thoughts on game balance because, as shown, they don't actually care.
No, we don't "not care" we just have an ability to be able to enjoy the game in a different way to you. Balance is good for everyone regardless of if they're fluff-bunnies or competitive. If the game isn't perfectly balanced (and what game is?) thats not an issue, but it is tiring seeing people make sweeping generalisations about armies and the state of the game based on only the top 1% of players and how they win tournaments.
I love you go straight for the heart of every fluff bunnies thought process: no game is perfectly balanced, so don't bother trying that's okay. Give daddy GW more money!
They literally said that balance is good and wanted, stop acting defensive that it's a lower priority for someone else despite them acknowledging it needs to happen.
Edit: slinging white knight at people actually makes your argument of less value as it kinda suggests your being petty.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/12/19 19:46:12
2019/12/19 19:47:55
Subject: GW does NOT test their products in a competitive environment, i repeat
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Boy you sure do love to not get things on purpose. Lemme tell you the problem and I'll make it REALLY slow and easy to understand. You. Cannot. Make. The. Default. Unit. From. The. Damn. Box. And. The. Useless. Decorative. Bitz. Are. Part. Of. The. Problem. If. You. Want. Decorative. Bitz. Make. Them. Yourselves.
It would be a lot easier to understand if you didn't make your points with dot-dash sentence shenanigans.
Some of the white knights didn't understand it the first time, so separating every word for them to be able to grasp might help.
Boy you sure do love to not get things on purpose. Lemme tell you the problem and I'll make it REALLY slow and easy to understand.
You. Cannot. Make. The. Default. Unit. From. The. Damn. Box. And. The. Useless. Decorative. Bitz. Are. Part. Of. The. Problem. If. You. Want. Decorative. Bitz. Make. Them. Yourselves.
The decorative bits are not useless. They serve the purpose of making the models look cool, which is the main purpose of said models. Otherwise we could play with cardboard tokens. And sure, it would be nice if there were more weapons, but there isn't. It's not a huge deal, but if you need them for your min-maxing you can make them yourself.
No, you can make the trophy racks yourself. They have no in game impact, so they don't matter. Period. If you want stuff that looks cool, maybe you should ask your ever loving GW to make upgrade kits instead of taking up space in a kit so you can't even build a default unit.
If you hate GW so much, don't buy it? I agree you should have all options out of the box, but being a douche to people who don't care isn't helping.
I actually don't buy their printed materials anymore, especially after the insult towards us that was the Chaos Knights "codex", and I buy only minimal of what I need. I procured enough Calth and Prospero boxes that I'm able to just buy the odd kit here and there. Mostly just FW gets money for their Legion helmets and weapons sprues GW can't be bothered to do themselves. Not a bad thing because a lot of the stuff has been overly blinged as of late.
Dudeface wrote: Sim-Life is as entitled to post about how balanced the game feels to them, in any thread they like.
Absolutely, and is welcome to be held accountable for said feelings. When he comes back with some fluff-bunny canonical reason why model X is 'supposed to suck' we can questions the validity of said contributions to such discussions.
Bingo! Fluff bunnies are the last people that should be allowed to have any thoughts on game balance because, as shown, they don't actually care.
No, we don't "not care" we just have an ability to be able to enjoy the game in a different way to you. Balance is good for everyone regardless of if they're fluff-bunnies or competitive. If the game isn't perfectly balanced (and what game is?) thats not an issue, but it is tiring seeing people make sweeping generalisations about armies and the state of the game based on only the top 1% of players and how they win tournaments.
I love you go straight for the heart of every fluff bunnies thought process: no game is perfectly balanced, so don't bother trying that's okay. Give daddy GW more money!
I love that you went straight to as many fallacies as you could fit in a single sentence.
2019/12/19 19:49:33
Subject: GW does NOT test their products in a competitive environment, i repeat
Crimson wrote: So yes, the aesthetics matter, they matter way more than your inane desire to min-max everything in a silly game of toy soldiers.
Why, why, why oh why does it have to be one or the other? If this isn't a why not both what is?
I can't have a great looking game of miniatures that doesn't suck? Are those two things mutually exclusive?
It's always the casuals vs the competitive players here, i seriously think a lot of us are on the same page. I enjoy the hobby aspects of this game at least as much as i do actually playing it.
This is like politics in the states, i gotta be on one team or the other?
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/12/19 19:51:09
2019/12/19 19:50:25
Subject: GW does NOT test their products in a competitive environment, i repeat
Crimson wrote: So yes, the aesthetics matter, they matter way more than your inane desire to min-max everything in a silly game of toy soldiers.
Why, why, why oh why does it have to be one or the other? If this isn't a why not both what is?
I can't have a great looking game of miniatures that doesn't suck? Are those two things mutually exclusive?
It's always the casuals vs the competitive players here, i seriously think a lot of us are on the same page. I enjoy the hobby aspects of this game at least as much as i do actually playing it.
This is like politics in the states, i gotta be on one team or the other?
Well, you get my vote if it is, why not have both.
2019/12/19 19:56:44
Subject: GW does NOT test their products in a competitive environment, i repeat
And I will. But GW needs to produce kits that come with bits that make that possible. Making awesome looking models is literally their main priority.
It's GW's job to make a kit so that you can properly put units together.
And you can. You can build the Chaos Terminators in several differnt ways. Sure, you cannot build all possible permutations that the rules allow from a single box. This is often the case with units that have a lot of options. Deathwatch Veterans sprue for example has only one stalker bolter even though the rules allows giving one to every guy. Now due the whiners like you GW has recently started to just remove the options from the rules. So when in the next edition of CSM codex the Terminators come with powerfist as a default and only one of them can take a power axe we know who we can thank.
You seem to forget that in your constant white knighting.
I am not white knighting, I am just trying to explain to your poor robot brain how a human being with aesthetic sensibilities and not hell bent on winning in a beer and pretzels game might approach things. Because trust me, the GW guys are much more like me than they're like you.
No, you can make the trophy racks yourself. They have no in game impact, so they don't matter. Period.
Frankly, you do not understand the point of Warhammer. Cool looking models are the thing the whole bloody thing hinges on. As you surely agree, the game itself is not exactly a masterpiece; if the modles would not capture the attention of people GW would have been dead a long time ago. So yes, the aesthetics matter, they matter way more than your inane desire to min-max everything in a silly game of toy soldiers. And if you do not care about aesthetics, then just glue a empty paint pot on a 40mm base, and write 'terminator with p.axe and combi-plasma' on it.
Despite playing the game competitively and absolutely loathing some of the weapon options in the recent boxes (chaos havocs and terminators), I definitely agree the Warhammer is carried by the aesthetics of the models and that alone. 40k's rules does not have a leg to stand on without the support of its fantastic range of models and lore.
But I gotta disagree with the reductive attitude of calling 40k a "silly game of toy soldiers" to dismiss people's concerns with rules and gameplay, especially since you guys are all about "inclusiveness and positivity". Why poison the well like that? They are trying to enjoy the hobby just like you are, why do you care so much about some plastic trophy. racks in a silly game of toy soldiers? See how anti-discussion and pointless this argument is?
Bonespitta's Badmoons 1441 pts. 
