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.

There is no way that the people at GW play 40k.

Look at this list that they advertised today on the Warhammer Community site:

Battalion Detachment
HQs
Captain in Phobos Armour
Librarian in Phobos Armour

Troops
10 Infiltrators
5 Scouts
5 Scouts
5 Scouts

Fast Attack
3 Land Speeders

Heavy Support
3 Eliminators

Vanguard Detachment
HQ
Lieutenant in Phobos Armour

Elite
10 Reivers
10 Reivers
10 Reivers

Fast Attack
3 Suppressors

Now, I ask you - what could this list possibly beat? I think this might actually be the weakest 40k army I have ever seen.

This army has laughably poor anti tank and anti elite shooting. It has basically zero close combat efficacy. It would have pretty good board control, up until your opponent actually started shooting and cleared out your poor model count in 1-2 turns.

I think a single Knight Castellan, by itself, might be able to defeat this entire 2k point army.

How can GW put this pile of trash forward as a suggested army list? They must not be playing their own game. It's the only thing that makes any sense.

Have you always mistaken advertisements as game play advice or, is it a new thing?

I'm sure they do, just in a way completely different to the rest of the world.

It's called "Shadowspear Focus"...wtf did you expect? A soup list?

 Kanluwen wrote:
It's called "Shadowspear Focus"...wtf did you expect? A soup list?

I expected them to make the new Shadowspear units actually viable. Maybe have them fill some weaknesses of the existing SM line.

Instead we just got more guys with STR4 AP0 gak bolters. Yay.

 beir wrote:
There is no way that the people at GW play 40k.

Look at this list that they advertised today on the Warhammer Community site:

Battalion Detachment
HQs
Captain in Phobos Armour
Librarian in Phobos Armour

Troops
10 Infiltrators
5 Scouts
5 Scouts
5 Scouts

Fast Attack
3 Land Speeders

Heavy Support
3 Eliminators

Vanguard Detachment
HQ
Lieutenant in Phobos Armour

Elite
10 Reivers
10 Reivers
10 Reivers

Fast Attack
3 Suppressors

Now, I ask you - what could this list possibly beat? I think this might actually be the weakest 40k army I have ever seen.

This army has laughably poor anti tank and anti elite shooting. It has basically zero close combat efficacy. It would have pretty good board control, up until your opponent actually started shooting and cleared out your poor model count in 1-2 turns.

I think a single Knight Castellan, by itself, might be able to defeat this entire 2k point army.

How can GW put this pile of trash forward as a suggested army list? They must not be playing their own game. It's the only thing that makes any sense.

Or, crazy idea, it played out like this

*wigglyscreen cut to GW HQ, 3:45 in the afternoon on a friday. Here we see Steve Johnson, trying to get his coat on and leave a little early*

"Steeeeeeve!"

"Oh, gosh, Jervis, I was just uh, getting ready to....head...."

"Listen Steve I know you probably want to get home but i need you to get together something for me really quick. We're writing an article for matched play with the new game box, and we need you to come up with a list people could build this box into."

"Oh...fine...I'll get it done before I leave."

*Walks into room with case full of studio models*

"Alright, what do we have here....sniper looking guys. Throw in the scouts. Put the landspeeders in there too, those are scouting things. The new reiver armor troops. Throw some reivers in there. Ok...that's got to be about a whole army. Let me snap a picture."

 beir wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
It's called "Shadowspear Focus"...wtf did you expect? A soup list?

I expected them to make the new Shadowspear units actually viable. Maybe have them fill some weaknesses of the existing SM line.

Instead we just got more guys with STR4 AP0 gak bolters. Yay.

Then don't play them?

Seriously, wtf are people expecting? Primaris stuff hasn't been an "OMG MUST HAVE!" from the outset.

the_scotsman wrote:


Or, crazy idea, it played out like this

*wigglyscreen cut to GW HQ, 3:45 in the afternoon on a friday. Here we see Steve Johnson, trying to get his coat on and leave a little early*

"Steeeeeeve!"

"Oh, gosh, Jervis, I was just uh, getting ready to....head...."

"Listen Steve I know you probably want to get home but i need you to get together something for me really quick. We're writing an article for matched play with the new game box, and we need you to come up with a list people could build this box into."

"Oh...fine...I'll get it done before I leave."

*Walks into room with case full of studio models*

"Alright, what do we have here....sniper looking guys. Throw in the scouts. Put the landspeeders in there too, those are scouting things. The new reiver armor troops. Throw some reivers in there. Ok...that's got to be about a whole army. Let me snap a picture."

Yeah, and that is my point. They weren't thinking at all about how these new models could fit into any SM armies to make them good. They just decided "dudes with ponchos and tacticool mall ninja gear look sweet!" and left it there. No creativity in the actual profiles or rules. No thought about how these units would actually play in a game of 40k.

Have they not learned yet that good rules sell models? I don't understand this company.

it looks like a perfectly good themed list to me. not every game has to have the current strongest net list or the most optimized units.

the theme looks liek fast/ stealthy mostly on foot. looks fun to play an open war mission with against somebody also wanting a fun game. Def looks like the attacker, maybe they are infiltrating and attacking a tau base under cover of darkness, or eliminating a high value target being protected by a chaos warband that is protecting them while they work on a ritual spell to aid the conquest of some planet.

 G00fySmiley wrote:
it looks like a perfectly good themed list to me. not every game has to have the current strongest net list or the most optimized units.

the theme looks liek fast/ stealthy mostly on foot. looks fun to play an open war mission with against somebody also wanting a fun game. Def looks like the attacker, maybe they are infiltrating and attacking a tau base under cover of darkness, or eliminating a high value target being protected by a chaos warband that is protecting them while they work on a ritual spell to aid the conquest of some planet.

I think what the OP was implying underneath is that it would have been better if the list included some of the existing primaris line to show how the contents of Shadowspear augmented an all primaris army.

 beir wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:


Or, crazy idea, it played out like this

*wigglyscreen cut to GW HQ, 3:45 in the afternoon on a friday. Here we see Steve Johnson, trying to get his coat on and leave a little early*

"Steeeeeeve!"

"Oh, gosh, Jervis, I was just uh, getting ready to....head...."

"Listen Steve I know you probably want to get home but i need you to get together something for me really quick. We're writing an article for matched play with the new game box, and we need you to come up with a list people could build this box into."

"Oh...fine...I'll get it done before I leave."

*Walks into room with case full of studio models*

"Alright, what do we have here....sniper looking guys. Throw in the scouts. Put the landspeeders in there too, those are scouting things. The new reiver armor troops. Throw some reivers in there. Ok...that's got to be about a whole army. Let me snap a picture."

Yeah, and that is my point. They weren't thinking at all about how these new models could fit into any SM armies to make them good. They just decided "dudes with ponchos and tacticool mall ninja gear look sweet!" and left it there. No creativity in the actual profiles or rules. No thought about how these units would actually play in a game of 40k.

Have they not learned yet that good rules sell models? I don't understand this company.

Yeah, no. They were.

Hmmm, what models could we put in to compliment a vanguard scouting force in light armour? Oh, I know! Anyone? You, over there- what other scouting and recon units do SMs have?

The competitive nature of the list was secondary.

 G00fySmiley wrote:
it looks like a perfectly good themed list to me. not every game has to have the current strongest net list or the most optimized units.

the theme looks liek fast/ stealthy mostly on foot. looks fun to play an open war mission with against somebody also wanting a fun game. Def looks like the attacker, maybe they are infiltrating and attacking a tau base under cover of darkness, or eliminating a high value target being protected by a chaos warband that is protecting them while they work on a ritual spell to aid the conquest of some planet.

Not every list has to be the strongest net list... but they say it's a matched play list example. This will get taken apart by literally any semi-competent matched play army. You could randomly pick units from the Guard codex and crush this.

If they want to bill it as a Narrative Play list for a SM Infiltrator force, that's one thing. Calling it a matched play list is deceptive to new players.

Kanluwen wrote:

 beir wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
It's called "Shadowspear Focus"...wtf did you expect? A soup list?

I expected them to make the new Shadowspear units actually viable. Maybe have them fill some weaknesses of the existing SM line.

Instead we just got more guys with STR4 AP0 gak bolters. Yay.

Then don't play them?

Seriously, wtf are people expecting? Primaris stuff hasn't been an "OMG MUST HAVE!" from the outset.

Why does everyone automatically think any unit GW puts out has to smash all other units turn 1.

G00fySmiley wrote:it looks like a perfectly good themed list to me. not every game has to have the current strongest net list or the most optimized units.

the theme looks liek fast/ stealthy mostly on foot. looks fun to play an open war mission with against somebody also wanting a fun game. Def looks like the attacker, maybe they are infiltrating and attacking a tau base under cover of darkness, or eliminating a high value target being protected by a chaos warband that is protecting them while they work on a ritual spell to aid the conquest of some planet.

some people have no imagination. at least that list makes more sense (fluff)than the loyal 32 + Castellan or BA smash capt.

 G00fySmiley wrote:
it looks like a perfectly good themed list to me. not every game has to have the current strongest net list or the most optimized units.

the theme looks liek fast/ stealthy mostly on foot. looks fun to play an open war mission with against somebody also wanting a fun game. Def looks like the attacker, maybe they are infiltrating and attacking a tau base under cover of darkness, or eliminating a high value target being protected by a chaos warband that is protecting them while they work on a ritual spell to aid the conquest of some planet.

Yes, and the problem with GW's rules design is that you can't take a fluffy, thematic list like this without first having a half hour long meeting with your opponent before the game to design their list in order to actually be able to have a fun and close game of 40k.

Let's say that my opponent thought it would be fun and fluffy to bring an armored column to that game with a land raider crusader, a couple of predators, and maybe 2-3 razorbacks. That game would be terribly one sided.

I play casually more often than not and you actually end up with more one-sided blowouts in casual play than in hardcore tourney play because the variance in power level is so great. I can't just take the units that I think are cool or thematic and expect to have a close game.

Some new player is going to get this box, build this list, and get accidentally rolled by just about everyone they play because GW can't create balanced rules.

I'm not looking for a tourney winning netlist, I just want rules that aren't ridiculously bad so I can play with some cool new toy soldiers.

 beir wrote:

Have they not learned yet that good rules sell models? I don't understand this company.

They've been doing this for 30 years, in an industry where most companies don't last 5. So it's quite likely that they actually have learnt what sells models, and equally likely (given the evidence of those 30 years) that what actually sells models is good models, and rules are really a secondary consideration.


Here's the thing: while it's easy to look at the way you personally play the game, and the way competitive players talk about it on the internet, and assume that's the norm, the simple fact is that the vast majority of players collect the models they like and write their lists based on that, with very little consideration for what actually makes a good list. And that's the style of play that GW have always encouraged. While they have at various times supported tournament play with varying levels of enthusiasm, it's never been their primary focus. So yes, GW plays their own game. It's competitive players who are playing something different.

The list you posted is about selling particular models, and will be appealing to people who like those shiny new models because it includes those models, regardless of how powerful a list it is.

I think more evidence shows that they ran the Infiltrators as a squad of 10 with an addition 3 squads of 5 scouts each, and 3 squads of 10 CSM's.

I don't think I, or anyone I know, would do that. Unless a unit is expecting psychic or stratagem buffs, which troops by and large aren't, then there doesn't seem to me to be a compelling reason to have squads of ten when you could have squads of 5 and get better special/heavy density in the combined unit.

They also apparently think way more highly of reviers than anyone else does.

 skchsan wrote:

 G00fySmiley wrote:
it looks like a perfectly good themed list to me. not every game has to have the current strongest net list or the most optimized units.

the theme looks liek fast/ stealthy mostly on foot. looks fun to play an open war mission with against somebody also wanting a fun game. Def looks like the attacker, maybe they are infiltrating and attacking a tau base under cover of darkness, or eliminating a high value target being protected by a chaos warband that is protecting them while they work on a ritual spell to aid the conquest of some planet.

I think what the OP was implying underneath is that it would have been better if the list included some of the existing primaris line to show how the contents of Shadowspear augmented an all primaris army.

maybe but i am just trying to answer the actual questions not implied ones

"Now, I ask you - what could this list possibly beat? I think this might actually be the weakest 40k army I have ever seen.

This army has laughably poor anti tank and anti elite shooting. It has basically zero close combat efficacy. It would have pretty good board control, up until your opponent actually started shooting and cleared out your poor model count in 1-2 turns. "

he doesn't really mention Primaris, though I would actual point out to all the people thinking normal marines are going away that GW just put out a list like this instead of just spotlighting pure Primaris.

could the list be stronger... sure from a power perspective and hell blasters and a primaris tank/dread might help a lot to round it out as a fighting force, but would not be a themed list then, I personally prefer beer and pretzels games of fun themed lists, but to each their own.

 beir wrote:

 G00fySmiley wrote:
it looks like a perfectly good themed list to me. not every game has to have the current strongest net list or the most optimized units.

the theme looks liek fast/ stealthy mostly on foot. looks fun to play an open war mission with against somebody also wanting a fun game. Def looks like the attacker, maybe they are infiltrating and attacking a tau base under cover of darkness, or eliminating a high value target being protected by a chaos warband that is protecting them while they work on a ritual spell to aid the conquest of some planet.

Yes, and the problem with GW's rules design is that you can't take a fluffy, thematic list like this without first having a half hour long meeting with your opponent before the game to design their list in order to actually be able to have a fun and close game of 40k.

Oh really? Because I've just literally come back from playing a 40k game with a themed DG list of Typhus' personal guard, where the bulk of the list is Blightlords and didn't have to have this discuioon with my opponent who was running a pretty run of the mill competitive DE list.

You can make themes without sacrificing competitiveness, I've noticed you've said nothing about the CSM list in the same article.

I don't want to make the list stronger by adding units we already have that are strong.

I want them to make the new units actually fill a role that a list might need.

Nobody likes playing games that are over in 1 turn because your fun fluffy list doesn't play on the table.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grimtuff wrote:

Oh really? Because I've just literally come back from playing a 40k game with a themed DG list of Typhus' personal guard, where the bulk of the list is Blightlords and didn't have to have this discuioon with my opponent who was running a pretty run of the mill competitive DE list.

You can make themes without sacrificing competitiveness, I've noticed you've said nothing about the CSM list in the same article.

You should go out and buy a lottery ticket, sounds like you got lucky.

I didn't say anything about the CSM list because I don't play them and have no idea how good it is.

 beir wrote:

 G00fySmiley wrote:
it looks like a perfectly good themed list to me. not every game has to have the current strongest net list or the most optimized units.

the theme looks liek fast/ stealthy mostly on foot. looks fun to play an open war mission with against somebody also wanting a fun game. Def looks like the attacker, maybe they are infiltrating and attacking a tau base under cover of darkness, or eliminating a high value target being protected by a chaos warband that is protecting them while they work on a ritual spell to aid the conquest of some planet.

Yes, and the problem with GW's rules design is that you can't take a fluffy, thematic list like this without first having a half hour long meeting with your opponent before the game to design their list in order to actually be able to have a fun and close game of 40k.

Let's say that my opponent thought it would be fun and fluffy to bring an armored column to that game with a land raider crusader, a couple of predators, and maybe 2-3 razorbacks. That game would be terribly one sided.

I play casually more often than not and you actually end up with more one-sided blowouts in casual play than in hardcore tourney play because the variance in power level is so great. I can't just take the units that I think are cool or thematic and expect to have a close game.

Some new player is going to get this box, build this list, and get accidentally rolled by just about everyone they play because GW can't create balanced rules.

I'm not looking for a tourney winning netlist, I just want rules that aren't ridiculously bad so I can play with some cool new toy soldiers.

that is fair, it is def not a competitive list, though on the use of matched rules even in casual games most players want points over power level. If a enw player built this army they would probably not enjoy taking it against competitive players. Against the right players though If i had my themed list and saw my opponent put this down I would look at ti and offer to change my list. then again if I go all armor and the open war cards have objectives or we are playing with cards drawing objectives they might pull it off.

 beir wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grimtuff wrote:

Oh really? Because I've just literally come back from playing a 40k game with a themed DG list of Typhus' personal guard, where the bulk of the list is Blightlords and didn't have to have this discuioon with my opponent who was running a pretty run of the mill competitive DE list.

You can make themes without sacrificing competitiveness, I've noticed you've said nothing about the CSM list in the same article.

You should go out and buy a lottery ticket, sounds like you got lucky.

I didn't say anything about the CSM list because I don't play them and have no idea how good it is.

Says he doesn't play CSM yet immediately critiques my list....

Blightlords are good, albeit very slow. Every DG player knows this.

 G00fySmiley wrote:

that is fair, it is def not a competitive list, though on the use of matched rules even in casual games most players want points over power level. If a enw player built this army they would probably not enjoy taking it against competitive players. Against the right players though If i had my themed list and saw my opponent put this down I would look at ti and offer to change my list. then again if I go all armor and the open war cards have objectives or we are playing with cards drawing objectives they might pull it off.

Yeah, this is a good point. I think GW tries to "balance" casual games by introducing variance in the mission (i.e. the open war cards). I do think that can allow a much weaker list to win a game, but I don't think that's particularly fun.

I want to win or lose because I played well or not, not because I drew the right card at random or because my army happened to be much stronger or weaker than my opponent's.

A. Never take list advice from GW directly. They give advice to sell models. The lists they wrote were fun to a theme, but would get tabled turn 1 by any concerted effort of actual list-writing.

B. GW is trying to showcase the kinds of themes that you can push with your collection. At the end of the day, it's your army and nobody can tell you how to do it right or wrong. An army full of scout and infiltration specialists is pretty badass and would probably look really cool on someone's shelf. Would it play well? Nah. But it's fun to have a theme.

C. GW doesn't cater exclusively to competitive players. I dare say that the majority of 40k players actually play casual games in their own homes or hobby stores and unless they peruse online, never hear the acronym 'ITC'. Would a competitive list stomp the lists they showed off? There's no question. Does everyone in the world play with a Castellan, Smash Captains, and the loyal 32? No. Of course they don't. GW isn't trying to sell this product to the people that have those lists or that endeavor to build lists like that. They're selling this to the larger majority of their customer base that likes to collect, build, and play casually.

 Grimtuff wrote:

Says he doesn't play CSM yet immediately critiques my list....

Blightlords are good, albeit very slow. Every DG player knows this.

I'm not critiquing your list at all, i have no idea how good your DG stuff is. I'm saying you were lucky that you got a close game without pregaming with your opponent.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

drbored wrote:
A. Never take list advice from GW directly. They give advice to sell models. The lists they wrote were fun to a theme, but would get tabled turn 1 by any concerted effort of actual list-writing.

B. GW is trying to showcase the kinds of themes that you can push with your collection. At the end of the day, it's your army and nobody can tell you how to do it right or wrong. An army full of scout and infiltration specialists is pretty badass and would probably look really cool on someone's shelf. Would it play well? Nah. But it's fun to have a theme.

C. GW doesn't cater exclusively to competitive players. I dare say that the majority of 40k players actually play casual games in their own homes or hobby stores and unless they peruse online, never hear the acronym 'ITC'. Would a competitive list stomp the lists they showed off? There's no question. Does everyone in the world play with a Castellan, Smash Captains, and the loyal 32? No. Of course they don't. GW isn't trying to sell this product to the people that have those lists or that endeavor to build lists like that. They're selling this to the larger majority of their customer base that likes to collect, build, and play casually.

My point is that a fluffy, cool theme list like this SHOULD be able to win against a reasonable opposing list.

Yeah, "viability" is completely subjective. There "competitive viability", which is probably the most commonly assumed on Dakka, even though that's still debatable. And then you have "can my models function/roll dice with the system viability and be fun" which has always seemed to be GW concern (even if they haven't succeeded in some cases)

Also remember that while online forums and tourneys are a large part of the demographic, there is a possibility that most sales GW sees have nothing to do with rule and more to do with collectors/painters. If the models look good, they will sell. Rules don't make a dent in the bottomline in most cases (with some very select exceptions)

-

 beir wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:


Or, crazy idea, it played out like this

*wigglyscreen cut to GW HQ, 3:45 in the afternoon on a friday. Here we see Steve Johnson, trying to get his coat on and leave a little early*

"Steeeeeeve!"

"Oh, gosh, Jervis, I was just uh, getting ready to....head...."

"Listen Steve I know you probably want to get home but i need you to get together something for me really quick. We're writing an article for matched play with the new game box, and we need you to come up with a list people could build this box into."

"Oh...fine...I'll get it done before I leave."

*Walks into room with case full of studio models*

"Alright, what do we have here....sniper looking guys. Throw in the scouts. Put the landspeeders in there too, those are scouting things. The new reiver armor troops. Throw some reivers in there. Ok...that's got to be about a whole army. Let me snap a picture."

Yeah, and that is my point. They weren't thinking at all about how these new models could fit into any SM armies to make them good. They just decided "dudes with ponchos and tacticool mall ninja gear look sweet!" and left it there. No creativity in the actual profiles or rules. No thought about how these units would actually play in a game of 40k.

Have they not learned yet that good rules sell models? I don't understand this company.

Well, they have when they make models that are too good, then GW is an evil conniving mastermind company that secretly makes the rules for all their new models OP broken so they can sell them.

Apparently, we can have it both ways. They can be SIMULTANEOUSLY lazy no-effort slobs who make super bad boring rules AND evil genius conspirators out to force you to buy the new hotness.

All at the same time.

it's just incredible.

Scotsman- I think you need to repost your Cabin in the Woods analogy again. Seems apt here.

I regularly visit Warhammer world, and I know many of the faces that work at HQ. They are often in the gaming hall at the end of the working day.

Remember when GW got all kinds of flak for only caring about competitive play when they ran a Castellan and the 32 boyos in their WD batrep like two weeks ago?

Good times.

 Galef wrote:
Yeah, "viability" is completely subjective. There "competitive viability", which is probably the most commonly assumed on Dakka, even though that's still debatable. And then you have "can my models function/roll dice with the system viability and be fun" which has always seemed to be GW concern (even if they haven't succeeded in some cases)

Also remember that while online forums and tourneys are a large part of the demographic, there is a possibility that most sales GW sees have nothing to do with rule and more to do with collectors/painters. If the models look good, they will sell. Rules don't make a dent in the bottomline in most cases (with some very select exceptions)

-

The list is GK tier. I class it below the function and be fun level. I mean the army is what 3 boxs of scouts and 3 boxs of reavers, 3 landspeeders and the new starter set. That is a ton of money. Even a Star collecting army is a lot, but this is enough money to buy a real money. I can imagine how someone would feel, if they bought the list and then tried to play it. They would not be very happy.