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.

As I'm sure many of you know, this game of ours can get a little competitive.

Personally I stopped playing for a few years because of the win at all costs opponents ruining my experience. I would build an army that i would try to balance between fun, fluff, and competativness (words... ) , but would be consistently disappointed by some of the more underwhelming "fluffy" rules or by some of the cooler models.

Most of my gaming experience is from 4th and 5th edition. When i would play in tournaments then, out of 3 rounds, 2 of them would be Imperial Gaurd (astra militarum for the detailed). Every list would be essentially the same; its been awhile i don"t remember the list exactly, but every WALC player would bring it (i remember 1-2 Valkyries with veterans and a LOT of firepower).

This ruined competitive play for me. It got to the point where i stopped the hobby altogether because i was so fed up. I don't claim to be a great player, but i enjoy every part of this hobby, including beating someone else and, of course, getting beat. However, when anybody (young and old) could just bring a list that systematically annihilates their opponent with little thought, it basically becomes "well, lets get this over with". During this time i remember beating this list only once in a tournament, and that was when I brought Belial and 35 assault terminators. My victory was empty though, my opponent was in such disbelief that he was beat he accused me of having loaded die and a cheasy list. Typical... I do admit, that list was a little cheasy, but coming from a gaurd player (particulary this Gaurd player who i knew well) was the last straw

I have since come back to the hobby since 8th edition came out. I played a demo game at a local comic book store and enjoyed it enough to start the hobby again.

Looking at some of the competitive lists that have been posted on this forum and the results of the first few tournaments, it seems that it is the same thing all over again; 2 of the 3 winning lists are basically the same. I know 8th edition is still young, and many rules for many armies have not come out yet, however it seems once again there is one dominant list that simply has no weakness.

Now, i don't mean to pout. If you don't want them celebrating, don't let them in the end zone, right? I understood not everybody was committed balancing fun and competition, and i prepared to see one of these lists in a tournament. But you cannot prepare luck, and you needed it to beat these lists. Much of 40k is about managing risk, and these lists would make you take massive risks early in the game.

As i stated earlier i enjoy all aspects of the hobby, so i am committed to 8th edition, but i was hoping someone could convince me competitive play won't be the same thing over and over again.

You were hoping that competitive play wouldn't be competitive?

I'm afraid tournaments will be full of people playing what happens to be strongest at the moment. That's gonna be a little more fluid now, if GW does as they have said and does constant balancing, but you'll still have people that follow the trends and anything that pops up as strong is going to go into tournaments a lot.

 Purifier wrote:
You were hoping that competitive play wouldn't be competitive?

I'm afraid tournaments will be full of people playing what happens to be strongest at the moment. That's gonna be a little more fluid now, if GW does as they have said and does constant balancing, but you'll still have people that follow the trends and anything that pops up as strong is going to go into tournaments a lot.

That depends on how well they balance things and how often they tweak the balance. If FAQs are changing things as frequently as they are right now you may see people less likely to follow trends because they know it won't last.

As to the OP, they key is what you see locally (unless you intend to go to big GTs), if your local players aren't running all the same lists you won't have an issue.

You were hoping that competitive play wouldn't be competitive?



I get it, im whining. I dont mind getting my soundly beaten three times in a row, its happened before and its all part of the hobby. Its just disheartening to get soundly beaten three times in a row by the exact same army by people who will become Buzz Killington when they get unlucky. All i want is some variety and humility in defeat... i realize now i'm asking a lot LOL

I'd say there's a difference between competitive play, and being difficult about it.

I love a tough game - even more so when we fight each other to a standstill. Having to stretch things for the smallest advantage on the field is a good mental exercise.

But, that's not WAAC. WAAC to me is someone who places their win above all other considerations. Sure their army be no fun to fight - but when the player is no fun, you're looking at WAAC. Dubious rules interpretations. Constant bemoaning stuff. Slow play. A distractedness when it's your turn. That's what puts me off.

I've been to a handful of tournaments, and of course Mr WAAC is the minority. But, I find them of such detriment to my enjoyment, I just stick to club and home gaming, where I have more control over just who is about to beat me like a redheaded stepchild.

@Mad Doc Grotsnik

Precisely...play a video game if you want immediate rewards and an inability to lose

@Breng77

DISCLAIMER: This may be going too far.

Local tournaments should have at least a sense of whats going to be brought, maybe they could restrict certain builds on lists, not necessarily the armies themselves. Example 'Gaurd can only bring 5 heavy support if they also bring "insert unit here"'

I am all for more FAQ's if it makes the competitive atmosphere for fluid and variate

I am an army builder and collector modeler first and can't understand people driven to spam the next new hotness so that they can dominate some petty meta. Even paying someone else to assemble and paint for them. I just do not get it.

So you expect me to, in a competitive situation, not be competitive?

In a tournament, I will absolutely bring the nastiest thing I can cook up. That's the point of a tournament. I will bring my Win-At-All-Costs list, and I expect to see yours. It's a tournament.

I won't be upset if you show up with a substantially sub-par list by your chosen factions' standards, because it's your entry fee, not mine, but, in general I do feel a little insulted if someone shows up to play me with something that doesn't even make an attempt to win.

Same as it ever was. They are just moving the "mark" at a faster pace to facilitate more sales.

What tournaments are you talking about? Small local tournaments tend to bring out people with big fish in small pond syndrome hence the pouting when someone has the temerity to beat them.

Bigger tournaments tend to attract the more serious competitive players who are, mostly, a much nicer bunch.

Competitive play in every game based on one player versus another player is always going to be the same forever and ever. At any tournaments or anything where money/something worth money is at stake, people will take what is considered the best. If a game is ever 100% completely balanced (which will never ever happen), people will still find what works the best. They will use it and it will show up more than anything else. That's just the nature of the beast. If you ever show up to something where there is a "winner", expect that you will probably lose if you aren't bringing the best of the best you can. Fluff doesn't come into play with winning a competitive game. It's only for friendly games.

 jeff white wrote:
I am an army builder and collector modeler first and can't understand people driven to spam the next new hotness so that they can dominate some petty meta. Even paying someone else to assemble and paint for them. I just do not get it.

This is the type of mindless hobbying I'm talking about. I brought my fair share of cheasy lists, but i dont appreciate people that run something without really putting in the thought. The internet does its job and creates an army that does your thinking for you. If you bring a "nasty" list more power to you, but dont put in minimal effort for maximum reward and expect to make friends

@Scott-S6: I played in a pretty serious gaming club that ran tournaments for GW and attracted other gaming clubs. I dont mean to sound contrite, im just confident with my gaming experience. Im pretty sure you are aware of some of the overpowered and overplayed lists i am speaking of.

It just seems like GW could do more to reward decision making on the board. Dont get me wrong, I love the game and i love competition, but i dont like seeing 8 of the same army in a tournament. Changing rules and points values is free from a business standpoint (isnt it?), so why can't they change things when something gets too overpowered. When they keep releasing new rules with new models it seems their spending money to make money, when they could change rules and points to (prepare yourself...) level the playing field. The community is clever, they will come up with a new list every so often that is overpowered, sales would go up, and everybody wins. Then they change the rules, someone else comes up with a clever idea and the process continues. Basically the same process they have now, only you wouldn't have to field an army whose rules were written 5 years ago against one whose rules are new and meant to sell things... I love what they did with 8th edition when they released all of the new rules at once in those 5 books. I don't know why they don't do that more often,

@Hoodwink: I dont believe in complacency. I agree it is unrealistic to have 100% level playing field, but with regular monitoring and maintenance i believe they can at least simulate the sense that people and their decisions will determine the winner not the internet

A good way to have a fun, fluffy, and competitive game mode is something like this:

Max points: 2000
Command Points: 6 (3 base, 3 battalion)
Maximum wounds: 100
Maximum power level per unit: 31
No unit other than troop choices may be duplicated.
Every player is limited to 1 Battalion.

For instance, you cannot have 2 squads of Wraithguards, you cannot have 2 predator tanks.

You'll still see competitive stuff, but you won't see 5 Culexus Assasins, or 300 small units running around clogging the field.

armypainter wrote:

 jeff white wrote:
I am an army builder and collector modeler first and can't understand people driven to spam the next new hotness so that they can dominate some petty meta. Even paying someone else to assemble and paint for them. I just do not get it.

It just seems like GW could do more to reward decision making on the board. Dont get me wrong, I love the game and i love competition, but i dont like seeing 8 of the same army in a tournament. Changing rules and points values is free from a business standpoint (isnt it?), so why can't they change things when something gets too overpowered. When they keep releasing new rules with new models it seems their spending money to make money, when they could change rules and points to (prepare yourself...) level the playing field.

Is this not exactly what we've been seeing since 8th dropped?

In terms of "spammy army whack-a-mole":

-We saw a whole bunch of stormravens with basically nothing on the board. GW then changed the rules so flyers don't count towards "a model on the board" for the purpose of sudden-death tabling. People were still taking tons of flyers. So now flyers can't hold objectives.

-Dark Eldar players (or, sorry, """"Dark Eldar"""" players) were taking nothing but Razorwing flocks and running an army of just birds instead of actually playing DE. Their points got doubled in an FAQ, that build died.

-Daemon players were spamming Brimstone Horrors for highly effective, durable smite-spam. Brims just had their cost increased by 50%, and their smite damage reduced to 1 unless the unit is 10 or more Pink horrors (so not brims). Build gone.

-Guard players were running eight billion 4-plasma scion command squads with 1 officer per 2 squads. That's gone, now you can only have 1 command squad per commander in your army.

Conscript spam is still a problem. Orks teleporting tons of boyz into close combat appears to still be a problem. Guilliman buffing things out the wazoo is a problem. But that's the thing with balance whack-a-mole: New problems keep popping up, that's why you call it whack-a-mole. If you want to say "they should be doing this more/why haven't they fixed this one thing that I have to deal with" that's one thing, but saying "theyre not doing this" is patently false.

The most important thing GW is doing in my eyes is making it super risky to drop a whole ton of money and time getting a spammed unit and painting up a whole bunch of them. Any time someone puts 500$+ into a spammy competitive army that they get to use for 2 weeks and it gets nerfed, I'm happy, because it means I won't have to see that guy again until he can get his hands on the next strong thing. That turnaround times was months to years in previous editions, weeks to months is a huge improvement.

 Marmatag wrote:
A good way to have a fun, fluffy, and competitive game mode is something like this:

Max points: 2000
Command Points: 6 (3 base, 3 battalion)
Maximum wounds: 100
Maximum power level per unit: 31
No unit other than troop choices may be duplicated.
Every player is limited to 1 Battalion.

For instance, you cannot have 2 squads of Wraithguards, you cannot have 2 predator tanks.

You'll still see competitive stuff, but you won't see 5 Culexus Assasins, or 300 small units running around clogging the field.

That's crap. Unit redundancy is an important part of strategy, and some armies *cough*mine*cough* have literally 2 options for each slot and only 1 troop choice.

Also, I hate playing games against armies full one one-of-a-kind units. I feel like I'm facing a D&D party, not an army.


Important things being unique is my one least favorite thing about this edition. Things being 1 of a kind absolutely wrecks any kind of diverse strategy.


Second, a limit on woulds only works if you're playing Marines. I'm going to point out that, even if I don't run a ton of Conscripts, I have more than 100 wounds before I reach 1k points [Easy: 50 Guardsmen for 200 points, then 2 Manticores, 2 Wyverns, and a Leman Russ Tank Commander, and Company Commander]

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
A good way to have a fun, fluffy, and competitive game mode is something like this:

Max points: 2000
Command Points: 6 (3 base, 3 battalion)
Maximum wounds: 100
Maximum power level per unit: 31
No unit other than troop choices may be duplicated.
Every player is limited to 1 Battalion.

For instance, you cannot have 2 squads of Wraithguards, you cannot have 2 predator tanks.

You'll still see competitive stuff, but you won't see 5 Culexus Assasins, or 300 small units running around clogging the field.

That's crap. Unit redundancy is an important part of strategy, and some armies *cough*mine*cough* have literally 2 options for each slot and only 1 troop choice.

Also, I hate playing games against armies full one one-of-a-kind units. I feel like I'm facing a D&D party, not an army.


Important things being unique is my one least favorite thing about this edition. Things being 1 of a kind absolutely wrecks any kind of diverse strategy.

You have more unit options than Grey Knights, which is my primary army. I could field a list with these restrictions.

Just try it some time if you're bored. Highlander is fun.

Tournaments will be dominated by cheesy lists that exploits undercosted units for any competetive advantage. That's the way of it, also in 8th edition which after all is MUCH better balanced than the broken abomination that was 7th.

And right now the strongest build seems to be Lots of Conscripts + Lots of Plasma scions + A third element

The third element tends to be a mix of earthshaker-cannons, heavy weapons teams, buff characters like Girlyman, Celestine or Azrael, flyers (stormravens or Vultures), las predators, and assault cannon razorbacks.

There you go. Make an army to beat this, and you might change the meta, or at least cause a rage-quit or two.

 Marmatag wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
A good way to have a fun, fluffy, and competitive game mode is something like this:

Max points: 2000
Command Points: 6 (3 base, 3 battalion)
Maximum wounds: 100
Maximum power level per unit: 31
No unit other than troop choices may be duplicated.
Every player is limited to 1 Battalion.

For instance, you cannot have 2 squads of Wraithguards, you cannot have 2 predator tanks.

You'll still see competitive stuff, but you won't see 5 Culexus Assasins, or 300 small units running around clogging the field.

That's crap. Unit redundancy is an important part of strategy, and some armies *cough*mine*cough* have literally 2 options for each slot and only 1 troop choice.

Also, I hate playing games against armies full one one-of-a-kind units. I feel like I'm facing a D&D party, not an army.


Important things being unique is my one least favorite thing about this edition. Things being 1 of a kind absolutely wrecks any kind of diverse strategy.

You have more unit options than Grey Knights, which is my primary army. I could field a list with these restrictions.

Just try it some time if you're bored. Highlander is fun.

Your units also cost a metric crap-ton of points.

At 1k points of IG I've surpassed the 100 wounds mark, and at 2k points of Sisters of Battle I've both run out of unique units and fielded a large number of units that are absolute garbage and wouldn't touch with a 10-foot pole otherwise.


And then what do you do when some armies have crappy troops, and some have really good ones. You can just spam Genestealers or Conscripts/Guardsmen to win, because they're troops.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
A good way to have a fun, fluffy, and competitive game mode is something like this:

Max points: 2000
Command Points: 6 (3 base, 3 battalion)
Maximum wounds: 100
Maximum power level per unit: 31
No unit other than troop choices may be duplicated.
Every player is limited to 1 Battalion.

For instance, you cannot have 2 squads of Wraithguards, you cannot have 2 predator tanks.

You'll still see competitive stuff, but you won't see 5 Culexus Assasins, or 300 small units running around clogging the field.

That's crap. Unit redundancy is an important part of strategy, and some armies *cough*mine*cough* have literally 2 options for each slot and only 1 troop choice.

Also, I hate playing games against armies full one one-of-a-kind units. I feel like I'm facing a D&D party, not an army.


Important things being unique is my one least favorite thing about this edition. Things being 1 of a kind absolutely wrecks any kind of diverse strategy.

You have more unit options than Grey Knights, which is my primary army. I could field a list with these restrictions.

Just try it some time if you're bored. Highlander is fun.

Your units also cost a metric crap-ton of points.

At 1k points of IG I've surpassed the 100 wounds mark, and at 2k points of Sisters of Battle I've both run out of unique units and fielded a large number of units that are absolute garbage and wouldn't touch with a 10-foot pole otherwise.


And then what do you do when some armies have crappy troops, and some have really good ones. You can just spam Genestealers or Conscripts/Guardsmen to win, because they're troops.

In reality you'd need to field probably more than 1 faction. This is true for most.

The entire game shouldn't be balanced around Sisters of Battle...

 Marmatag wrote:

Spoiler:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
A good way to have a fun, fluffy, and competitive game mode is something like this:

Max points: 2000
Command Points: 6 (3 base, 3 battalion)
Maximum wounds: 100
Maximum power level per unit: 31
No unit other than troop choices may be duplicated.
Every player is limited to 1 Battalion.

For instance, you cannot have 2 squads of Wraithguards, you cannot have 2 predator tanks.

You'll still see competitive stuff, but you won't see 5 Culexus Assasins, or 300 small units running around clogging the field.

That's crap. Unit redundancy is an important part of strategy, and some armies *cough*mine*cough* have literally 2 options for each slot and only 1 troop choice.

Also, I hate playing games against armies full one one-of-a-kind units. I feel like I'm facing a D&D party, not an army.


Important things being unique is my one least favorite thing about this edition. Things being 1 of a kind absolutely wrecks any kind of diverse strategy.

You have more unit options than Grey Knights, which is my primary army. I could field a list with these restrictions.

Just try it some time if you're bored. Highlander is fun.

Your units also cost a metric crap-ton of points.

At 1k points of IG I've surpassed the 100 wounds mark, and at 2k points of Sisters of Battle I've both run out of unique units and fielded a large number of units that are absolute garbage and wouldn't touch with a 10-foot pole otherwise.


And then what do you do when some armies have crappy troops, and some have really good ones. You can just spam Genestealers or Conscripts/Guardsmen to win, because they're troops.

In reality you'd need to field probably more than 1 faction. This is true for most.

The entire game shouldn't be balanced around Sisters of Battle...

Why should it be balanced around Space Marines?

As I pointed out, IG hits the 100-wound limit at 1k points. IG also doesn't work if you don't bring 2 or 3 of the same support option.

In fact, while a third of the game is Space Marines, the other two thirds of the game isn't. Tau, Guard, Tyranids, Genestealer Cults, Renegades, Daemons, Eldar, Dark Eldar, Harlequins, Orks, Necrons, etc. all choke on those restrictions and come up with sub-par lists, while Space Marines still come up with effective and versatile ones.

Tau, IG, Tyranids, Daemons, Cults, Renegades, and Orks all hit the 100 wounds counter before they hit 2000 points. 100 wounds places a maximum tank count around 10, which suddenly makes armored-anything non-viable. If you bring few tanks, Infantry is really cheap, and you'll end up hitting the 100 wounds counter very, very fast with infantry.

 Scott-S6 wrote:
What tournaments are you talking about? Small local tournaments tend to bring out people with big fish in small pond syndrome hence the pouting when someone has the temerity to beat them.

Bigger tournaments tend to attract the more serious competitive players who are, mostly, a much nicer bunch.

This.

Most people you run into at bigger GT's know that they're facing stiff competition, and are mentally prepared to take a loss, mainly because they've suffered enough of them to know it's not the end of the world.

I'm MUCH more wary of rando locals that might have a big head because they played Joe the newbie for their last 10 games and are 10 for 10. That's where you'll usually find the salt when they lose.

 Marmatag wrote:
A good way to have a fun, fluffy, and competitive game mode is something like this:

Max points: 2000
Command Points: 6 (3 base, 3 battalion)
Maximum wounds: 100
Maximum power level per unit: 31
No unit other than troop choices may be duplicated.
Every player is limited to 1 Battalion.

For instance, you cannot have 2 squads of Wraithguards, you cannot have 2 predator tanks.

You'll still see competitive stuff, but you won't see 5 Culexus Assasins, or 300 small units running around clogging the field.

There are SO many things wrong with that kind of setup.
It kills hordes. As an Ork player, I routinely have 100+ wounds, just in my Troops section. That's not a lot of points, either - 100 Wounds worth of Ork Boyz is less than 100 points.
Doing that, you can't take a squadron of Predators or Vindicators.
You can't run transport-based lists, or really any kind of armored lists.
You can't run Deathwing or Ravenwing.
You can't bring fortifications.
You can't play Imperial Knights at all, or for that matter bring any kind of Lord of War choice.
It actually kills MOST fluffy lists, because most armies in fluff have more than one of at least one kind of choice - If you want to run an Armored Company, you can't. If you want to run a Space Marine Company, you can't. If you want to run anything other than troop spam, you can't.

What this does is reward armies that have overtly powerful, low-model-count Troops Choices, or else armies with just craptons of similar choices. Space Marines will do really well, because they have so many varieties of every kind of unit. (I will bring one unit of Terminators, one unit of Cataphractii Terminators, and one unit of Tartaros Terminators, for example. Or I'll bring a Dreadnought, a Venerable Dreadnought, a Contemptor Dreadnought, a Mortis Dreadnought, and a Contemptor Mortis dreadnought. I can bring a Land Raider Excelsior, Land Raider, a Land Raider Crusader, and a Land Raider Redeemer, or swap those last three out for any combination of the following: A Land Raider Achilles, a Land Raider Helios, a Land Raider Prometheus, a Relic Land Raider Proteus.)
Meanwhile, my Orks can bring... Meganobz. A single Deff Dread. A single Battlewagon.
As an Imperial player, if I want Psykers, I have dozens of options and can bring five or six in a single list easily without duplicates.
As an Ork, I have a single Weirdboy.

Those restrictions are terrible and not fun at all to work with unless players are also agreeing not to try and cheese anything - But if players are trying not to cheese anything, then why exactly do you need the restrictions?

Waaaghpower wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
A good way to have a fun, fluffy, and competitive game mode is something like this:

Max points: 2000
Command Points: 6 (3 base, 3 battalion)
Maximum wounds: 100
Maximum power level per unit: 31
No unit other than troop choices may be duplicated.
Every player is limited to 1 Battalion.

For instance, you cannot have 2 squads of Wraithguards, you cannot have 2 predator tanks.

You'll still see competitive stuff, but you won't see 5 Culexus Assasins, or 300 small units running around clogging the field.

There are SO many things wrong with that kind of setup.
It kills hordes. As an Ork player, I routinely have 100+ wounds, just in my Troops section. That's not a lot of points, either - 100 Wounds worth of Ork Boyz is less than 100 points.
Doing that, you can't take a squadron of Predators or Vindicators.
You can't run transport-based lists, or really any kind of armored lists.
You can't run Deathwing or Ravenwing.
You can't bring fortifications.
You can't play Imperial Knights at all, or for that matter bring any kind of Lord of War choice.
It actually kills MOST fluffy lists, because most armies in fluff have more than one of at least one kind of choice - If you want to run an Armored Company, you can't. If you want to run a Space Marine Company, you can't. If you want to run anything other than troop spam, you can't.

What this does is reward armies that have overtly powerful, low-model-count Troops Choices, or else armies with just craptons of similar choices. Space Marines will do really well, because they have so many varieties of every kind of unit. (I will bring one unit of Terminators, one unit of Cataphractii Terminators, and one unit of Tartaros Terminators, for example. Or I'll bring a Dreadnought, a Venerable Dreadnought, a Contemptor Dreadnought, a Mortis Dreadnought, and a Contemptor Mortis dreadnought. I can bring a Land Raider Excelsior, Land Raider, a Land Raider Crusader, and a Land Raider Redeemer, or swap those last three out for any combination of the following: A Land Raider Achilles, a Land Raider Helios, a Land Raider Prometheus, a Relic Land Raider Proteus.)
Meanwhile, my Orks can bring... Meganobz. A single Deff Dread. A single Battlewagon.
As an Imperial player, if I want Psykers, I have dozens of options and can bring five or six in a single list easily without duplicates.
As an Ork, I have a single Weirdboy.

Those restrictions are terrible and not fun at all to work with unless players are also agreeing not to try and cheese anything - But if players are trying not to cheese anything, then why exactly do you need the restrictions?

This.

I've seen, and twice played, different "try these restrictions to make the game more fun!" They never are more fun. The only good one so far has been "no allies".

I'd rather bring my WAAC list and face your WAAC list, even if your WAAC list was Scatterbikes and Wraithknights and I was facing it with Exorcists, Dominions, and Celestine. That's more fun than playing with some strange restrictions to supposedly limit cheesiness.

@OP

Spam is as prevalent as it was in previous editions. The only thing that changed is that Games Workshop is making more of an effort to cut it out than in previous editions, where they either let players house rule, gave an FAQ once, or brought out something else that was insanely powerful to counter last months power.

and 100 wounds worth of boyz is less than 100 pts...

There is a very good reason why I almost always play by points, rather than wounds or power levels.

Boy this thread really took off when i went to my FGS. LOL

They informed me that every codex is scheduled to be released before the end of the year. This was terrific news for me.

Being a 5th ed player used to releases one by one, i am very eager to see how the meta game looks in February. But i still think they should monitor and maintain their intellectual product

MORE IDEAS!!!!!! (thanks for the contribution Marmatag)

armypainter wrote:
Boy this thread really took off when i went to my FGS. LOL

They informed me that every codex is scheduled to be released before the end of the year. This was terrific news for me.

Being a 5th ed player used to releases one by one, i am very eager to see how the meta game looks in February. But i still think they should monitor and maintain their intellectual product

MORE IDEAS!!!!!! (thanks for the contribution Marmatag)

Sorry but every codex won't be released by the end of the year. GW has stated themselves that they are shooting for "around 10 codexes" by the end of this year. That still leaves over half of the armies codex-less. I'm pretty sure they will almost certainly be released by the end of NEXT year. But very very doubtful for this year.

The core idea behind highlander is fun. It completely kills a lot of things, including all assassin armies, which is a really solid list, too.

Don't like the 100 wounds? Change it to suit your needs. I don't work for GW and this suggestion wasn't written in blood.

 Marmatag wrote:
The core idea behind highlander is fun. It completely kills a lot of things, including all assassin armies, which is a really solid list, too.

Don't like the 100 wounds? Change it to suit your needs. I don't work for GW and this suggestion wasn't written in blood.

Worse, it was written on the interwebz

GW's approach has been much better than this idea. GW is putting restrictions on things that were being used unintentionally where you can still run them, but you have to account for a few extra rules. I can still spam all flyers but now I have to account for units on the ground. I can still spam Razorwings but I have to account for their increased cost and won't be able to run as many. I can still run Brimstones, but they aren't quite as effective. This is how you balance the game in a healthy way rather than putting unnecessary broad-sweeping restrictions on how you can create your armies that will inevitably affect everyone.

100 wounds in a 2000pts army is 20 points a wound. What a joke of a proposal.
A land raider is barely more expensive than that.
A dreadnought is usually cheaper than 20pts/wound.
And a 10 man Tactical squad with lascannon, plasmagun and powerfist comes in at 180. And those are the only dudes you are allowed to take multiple of.

If Space marines already have those problems to get below 100 wounds (they should be able to.) have you even done the math for armies like SoB, orks or AM?