Switch Theme:

If GW actually went full in on PL would it actually change the ammount of 40k you play?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Storm Trooper with Maglight



Cadia

 Jidmah wrote:
You have repeatedly shown that you have no clue how either system works, so please stop changing the meaning of my posts by taking sentences out of context.

If you are unable to respond to posts as a whole, keep your unfounded opinion that is completely devoid of any arguments to yourself.


Here, let me quote your entire post if that's what makes you happy. You're still wrong. I understand exactly how both systems work and nothing is being taken out of context. You're simply wrong and defending an indefensible system.

THE PLANET BROKE BEFORE THE GUARD! 
   
Made in gb
Gore-Drenched Khorne Chaos Lord




CadianSgtBob wrote:
 Jidmah wrote:
You have repeatedly shown that you have no clue how either system works, so please stop changing the meaning of my posts by taking sentences out of context.

If you are unable to respond to posts as a whole, keep your unfounded opinion that is completely devoid of any arguments to yourself.


Here, let me quote your entire post if that's what makes you happy. You're still wrong. I understand exactly how both systems work and nothing is being taken out of context. You're simply wrong and defending an indefensible system.


If it's indefensible, how have there been 12+ pages of people defending it? It sounds that like all of the "remove PL" people, you're projecting your opinion as fact.
   
Made in us
Storm Trooper with Maglight



Cadia

Here's a nice little example to consider:

Cheapest (reasonable) crisis suit: BC/BC/flamer/TL at 60 points.

Most expensive crisis suit: CIB/CIB/CIB/shield at 100 points.

PL tells us that for 18 points (nominal equivalent in the normal system: 360 points) you can have four of the cheap option, equivalent to 240 points in the normal system. Or for the same 18 points you can take six of the expensive version, equivalent to 600 points. Please do explain to me how the Tau player getting to take crisis suits at almost double the nominal equivalent rate is somehow balanced out by the marine player getting to take a free power fist on their primaris marines.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dudeface wrote:
If it's indefensible, how have there been 12+ pages of people defending it? It sounds that like all of the "remove PL" people, you're projecting your opinion as fact.


Because "casual" players have made using a bad system part of their identity. Even if every practical question is decisively answered in favor of the normal point system they'll still insist on the need for PL because it's symbolic of "casual" play and opposed to the "competitive" system.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/07/02 08:23:10


THE PLANET BROKE BEFORE THE GUARD! 
   
Made in ca
Discriminating Deathmark Assassin





Stasis

I prefer PL because after almost 20yrs, I don't need the granularity.

I play Necrons, and Kroot. So I've never really had to deal with squad leaders, or large wargear selections.

I'm only just dipping my toes into Imperium forces with SoS, maybe an Inquisition force. But I'm capping my non primary armies at 25PL.

Just wanted to give background for my experiences with the game to help explain my position. I only have so much time and energy to devote to the hobby, not just playing. I've found that, with 40k at the scale it is, the abstraction of PL, the coarser granularity makes the entire process of planning, setting up, and playing the game easier to manage.

213PL 60PL 12PL 9-17PL
(she/her) 
   
Made in gb
Gore-Drenched Khorne Chaos Lord




CadianSgtBob wrote:
Here's a nice little example to consider:

Cheapest (reasonable) crisis suit: BC/BC/flamer/TL at 60 points.

Most expensive crisis suit: CIB/CIB/CIB/shield at 100 points.

PL tells us that for 18 points (nominal equivalent in the normal system: 360 points) you can have four of the cheap option, equivalent to 240 points in the normal system. Or for the same 18 points you can take six of the expensive version, equivalent to 600 points. Please do explain to me how the Tau player getting to take crisis suits at almost double the nominal equivalent rate is somehow balanced out by the marine player getting to take a free power fist on their primaris marines.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dudeface wrote:
If it's indefensible, how have there been 12+ pages of people defending it? It sounds that like all of the "remove PL" people, you're projecting your opinion as fact.


Because "casual" players have made using a bad system part of their identity. Even if every practical question is decisively answered in favor of the normal point system they'll still insist on the need for PL because it's symbolic of "casual" play and opposed to the "competitive" system.


I don't know but death company (unsure if battlescribe have the points updated yet) are 14 pl (280) for 6 guys with bolt pistol and chainsword at 108 points, or 10 guys with thunderhammers for 330. Every army has some units with that level of wonky, they're also not realistic to see in the tabletop.

But then again I never denied that would happen sometimes, simply that usually both armies can benefit by the same level of wobble if you're an a-hole abusing it.

But I don't think anyone has ever branded themselves a die hard casual who wrap their identity up into it and would use PL to prove that's who they are, you seem to have some identity issues yourself.
   
Made in us
Storm Trooper with Maglight



Cadia

Dudeface wrote:
if you're an a-hole abusing it.


Cool, so now we're insulting people for optimizing their lists "too much"?

But I don't think anyone has ever branded themselves a die hard casual who wrap their identity up into it and would use PL to prove that's who they are, you seem to have some identity issues yourself.


Have they said the exact words? No. Have they made it very clear with their hyperbolic statements about how the loss of PL would ruin their games, constant talk about how "PL players" play the game differently, and flimsy rationalizations for how important it is to save a minute or two in list construction (and then spend twice that writing a post defending PL)? Absolutely. It's very clear that PL has become an identity thing in a way that other mechanics and other possible changes have not.

THE PLANET BROKE BEFORE THE GUARD! 
   
Made in gb
Incorporating Wet-Blending




U.k

Most of yours that are saying we prefer power levels, not saying anyone else should, have been playing some time. It’s it like we have no experience of points. I have been using army lists based on points for over 30 years. And like blndmage said, after that time and our style of hobbying we don’t the granularity.

After that amount of time using points I am well aware of the granularity and potential balance opportunities. I remember having 1/2 points for Christs sake. We just don’t need it. This whole thread has been nearly 30 pages of people stating opinions and a few ass hats ranting about how those opinions are wrong.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/07/02 10:12:32


 
   
Made in us
Storm Trooper with Maglight



Cadia

Andykp wrote:
I have been using army lists based on points for over 30 years.


You continue to use points. PL is a point system, it's just one with more errors. And that's why I don't take your claims seriously. You protest about how you don't like points, but then instead of using a genuinely different system for playing your games you play the same old matched play with points-based list construction. It's completely redundant and if/when GW finally puts PL out of its misery you'll go right back to playing with normal points again and hardly even notice the difference.

(And no, the fact that it takes 70 minutes to make a list with PL vs. 71 minutes to make a list with normal points does not make PL a genuinely different approach.)

THE PLANET BROKE BEFORE THE GUARD! 
   
Made in ca
Discriminating Deathmark Assassin





Stasis

What part of "I enjoy PL and prefer the lower granularity." Are you finding fault with. When I say "PL makes building my lists easier." I'm not trying to woo you over to only PL. I'm not even saying I'm only playing PL forever. But, for my standard games, I find PL makes the game more manageable.

Points only players use PL all the time. It's part of the main rules.

213PL 60PL 12PL 9-17PL
(she/her) 
   
Made in us
Storm Trooper with Maglight



Cadia

 Blndmage wrote:
What part of "I enjoy PL and prefer the lower granularity." Are you finding fault with. When I say "PL makes building my lists easier." I'm not trying to woo you over to only PL. I'm not even saying I'm only playing PL forever. But, for my standard games, I find PL makes the game more manageable.


I find fault with the idea that saving a minute or two in a list construction process that takes an hour or more (or even weeks/months if you have to paint new models for it) means GW should keep an entire separate point system that functions exactly like the normal point system but with more errors. If you totaled up all the time you've spent on this forum defending the need to "save time" I'm pretty sure that number would vastly exceed the amount of additional time involved in using the normal point system, especially when you're talking about playing 1-200 point games with only a couple of units in your list.

Points only players use PL all the time. It's part of the main rules.


Which is yet another reason why PL needs to go. PL advocates talk about "why can't we just have our separate game" but in reality PL also intrudes into the normal game.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/07/02 09:38:32


THE PLANET BROKE BEFORE THE GUARD! 
   
Made in gb
Incorporating Wet-Blending




U.k

 Blndmage wrote:
What part of "I enjoy PL and prefer the lower granularity." Are you finding fault with. When I say "PL makes building my lists easier." I'm not trying to woo you over to only PL. I'm not even saying I'm only playing PL forever. But, for my standard games, I find PL makes the game more manageable.

Points only players use PL all the time. It's part of the main rules.


They don’t seem to be willing to admit that you or I want different things from our gaming experience than they do. I am sure they see it but they won’t dare admit it for some reason. Maybe because it would mean admitting that they have been acting like tools for 30 odd pages.
   
Made in it
Waaagh! Ork Warboss




Italy

Hecaton wrote:


I've used PL. I like balance.



So do any player that uses PL. No one wants a completely unbalanced system. For those who use and appreciate PL, that system is balanced enough to enjoy it and to prefer it to the more granular and accurate system. Simple.

I just hate the mentality of those who want options that are useful for someone to be removed even if those options had zero (or close to zero) impact on them, they wanted them to go just because they don't like them or by principle. If such "bad" mechanics had a significant impact on their experience I'd respect that wish.

 
   
Made in gb
Gore-Drenched Khorne Chaos Lord




CadianSgtBob wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
if you're an a-hole abusing it.


Cool, so now we're insulting people for optimizing their lists "too much"?

But I don't think anyone has ever branded themselves a die hard casual who wrap their identity up into it and would use PL to prove that's who they are, you seem to have some identity issues yourself.


Have they said the exact words? No. Have they made it very clear with their hyperbolic statements about how the loss of PL would ruin their games, constant talk about how "PL players" play the game differently, and flimsy rationalizations for how important it is to save a minute or two in list construction (and then spend twice that writing a post defending PL)? Absolutely. It's very clear that PL has become an identity thing in a way that other mechanics and other possible changes have not.


Yeah I will insult people that push the game system to a level that is basically unsporting. I expect you'll then go "but that shows why PL is bad!" Except the exact same is still possible via points, I can still make sub optimal choices while you max out a competitively viable list because neither is very good at making a balanced game. The difference is with PL you're just saying you don't care about the minutiae of whether a units upgrades is worth 5 more points than not having them. Its also only used for narrative gaming where being "optimised" is at best secondary to the players immersion.

Regards the identity issue, if that's their identity then yours as "points player" is oddly threatened sufficiently by anything none normative enough for you to demand it's removal.

Just for context, I'm a points player and PL isn't really my thing but I'm certainly not against it existing or being better integrated for those it helps.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Springfield, VA

This thread is gradually coming to the conclusion that the 40k rulesystem and army building specifically are crap...

...but who wants to bet that people won't transition off of it to some of the other game systems that aren't thicc points vs thin points, and is even easier than PL to use?

GW could make a balanced army building system easier even than PL to use. They would have to strip out some options, though.
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Chaplain with Hate to Spare






 Blndmage wrote:

I'm only just dipping my toes into Imperium forces with SoS, maybe an Inquisition force. But I'm capping my non primary armies at 25PL.


Can I just say that with all the cultural stuff I've been reading recently, I read that as "non binary" and thought you were making a really funny Necron/robot joke.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/07/02 12:44:21


And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Blackie wrote:

So do any player that uses PL. No one wants a completely unbalanced system. For those who use and appreciate PL, that system is balanced enough to enjoy it and to prefer it to the more granular and accurate system. Simple.


No. The quote I replied to was someone claiming that PL makes balance a non-issue. It does not. It's more imbalanced than points, by far, and PL proponents are very much in debial of that fact.

 Blackie wrote:

I just hate the mentality of those who want options that are useful for someone to be removed even if those options had zero (or close to zero) impact on them, they wanted them to go just because they don't like them or by principle. If such "bad" mechanics had a significant impact on their experience I'd respect that wish.


It *does* have a significant effect on my gameplay; it makes Crusade suck.
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka




NE Ohio, USA

CadianSgtBob wrote:
Andykp wrote:
I have been using army lists based on points for over 30 years.


You continue to use points. PL is a point system, it's just one with more errors. And that's why I don't take your claims seriously. You protest about how you don't like points, but then instead of using a genuinely different system for playing your games you play the same old matched play with points-based list construction. It's completely redundant and if/when GW finally puts PL out of its misery you'll go right back to playing with normal points again and hardly even notice the difference.


Yeah, so?
And if 40k goes all PL, or goes to set pts costs like Sigmar (or Guard squads now)? You'll hop right in line too. In fact some of you howling about PL will even switch your tunes & sing it's praises.



   
Made in gb
Incorporating Wet-Blending




U.k

CadianSgtBob wrote:
Andykp wrote:
I have been using army lists based on points for over 30 years.


You continue to use points. PL is a point system, it's just one with more errors. And that's why I don't take your claims seriously. You protest about how you don't like points, but then instead of using a genuinely different system for playing your games you play the same old matched play with points-based list construction. It's completely redundant and if/when GW finally puts PL out of its misery you'll go right back to playing with normal points again and hardly even notice the difference.

(And no, the fact that it takes 70 minutes to make a list with PL vs. 71 minutes to make a list with normal points does not make PL a genuinely different approach.)


What’s up with you. Why can’t you just accept that some people like different things. You keep using points, I don’t mind at all. Power level isn’t anything to do with identity, it’s just a system that suits me better. I was a casual/narrative gamer long before power level was a thing, before competitive 40k was a thing the fact I use power levels over points has nothing to do with you and no impact on you at all.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And for the record, I don’t mind points, used them for years, I just prefer power levels.

If power level went away I would go back to points but I would change them ever 3 months, I would just use the ones in the codex. Can’t be arsed chasing constant change in the name of balance.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
ccs wrote:
CadianSgtBob wrote:
Andykp wrote:
I have been using army lists based on points for over 30 years.


You continue to use points. PL is a point system, it's just one with more errors. And that's why I don't take your claims seriously. You protest about how you don't like points, but then instead of using a genuinely different system for playing your games you play the same old matched play with points-based list construction. It's completely redundant and if/when GW finally puts PL out of its misery you'll go right back to playing with normal points again and hardly even notice the difference.


Yeah, so?
And if 40k goes all PL, or goes to set pts costs like Sigmar (or Guard squads now)? You'll hop right in line too. In fact some of you howling about PL will even switch your tunes & sing it's praises.

Exactly. ^^^^^^^



This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2022/07/02 18:55:07


 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




Dudeface wrote:
CadianSgtBob wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
if you're an a-hole abusing it.


Cool, so now we're insulting people for optimizing their lists "too much"?

But I don't think anyone has ever branded themselves a die hard casual who wrap their identity up into it and would use PL to prove that's who they are, you seem to have some identity issues yourself.


Have they said the exact words? No. Have they made it very clear with their hyperbolic statements about how the loss of PL would ruin their games, constant talk about how "PL players" play the game differently, and flimsy rationalizations for how important it is to save a minute or two in list construction (and then spend twice that writing a post defending PL)? Absolutely. It's very clear that PL has become an identity thing in a way that other mechanics and other possible changes have not.


Yeah I will insult people that push the game system to a level that is basically unsporting.

So now we found the CAAC player. Even slight optimizing makes the PL system broken.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
ccs wrote:
CadianSgtBob wrote:
Andykp wrote:
I have been using army lists based on points for over 30 years.


You continue to use points. PL is a point system, it's just one with more errors. And that's why I don't take your claims seriously. You protest about how you don't like points, but then instead of using a genuinely different system for playing your games you play the same old matched play with points-based list construction. It's completely redundant and if/when GW finally puts PL out of its misery you'll go right back to playing with normal points again and hardly even notice the difference.


Yeah, so?
And if 40k goes all PL, or goes to set pts costs like Sigmar (or Guard squads now)? You'll hop right in line too. In fact some of you howling about PL will even switch your tunes & sing it's praises.

Fine, name one person that will do that. I'll wait.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Blndmage wrote:
I prefer PL because after almost 20yrs, I don't need the granularity.

I play Necrons, and Kroot. So I've never really had to deal with squad leaders, or large wargear selections.

I'm only just dipping my toes into Imperium forces with SoS, maybe an Inquisition force. But I'm capping my non primary armies at 25PL.

Just wanted to give background for my experiences with the game to help explain my position. I only have so much time and energy to devote to the hobby, not just playing. I've found that, with 40k at the scale it is, the abstraction of PL, the coarser granularity makes the entire process of planning, setting up, and playing the game easier to manage.

Kroot and Necrons aren't the only armies in the game.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2022/07/02 19:25:42


 
   
Made in gb
Gore-Drenched Khorne Chaos Lord




EviscerationPlague wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
CadianSgtBob wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
if you're an a-hole abusing it.


Cool, so now we're insulting people for optimizing their lists "too much"?

But I don't think anyone has ever branded themselves a die hard casual who wrap their identity up into it and would use PL to prove that's who they are, you seem to have some identity issues yourself.


Have they said the exact words? No. Have they made it very clear with their hyperbolic statements about how the loss of PL would ruin their games, constant talk about how "PL players" play the game differently, and flimsy rationalizations for how important it is to save a minute or two in list construction (and then spend twice that writing a post defending PL)? Absolutely. It's very clear that PL has become an identity thing in a way that other mechanics and other possible changes have not.


Yeah I will insult people that push the game system to a level that is basically unsporting.

So now we found the CAAC player. Even slight optimizing makes the PL system broken.


Yes, because taking literally every possible upgrade on a unit to max out its perceived value = slight optimisation and if you don't like that you're casual at all costs, because obviously we operate on angsty teenage cliques and persona here and it's impossible to comprehend a mid ground because either we rotate our models making pew pew noises in open play to recreate historic games, or we must take op broken combos and passionately curbstomp our opponents in 24/7 tournament play.
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka




NE Ohio, USA

EviscerationPlague wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
CadianSgtBob wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
if you're an a-hole abusing it.


Cool, so now we're insulting people for optimizing their lists "too much"?

But I don't think anyone has ever branded themselves a die hard casual who wrap their identity up into it and would use PL to prove that's who they are, you seem to have some identity issues yourself.


Have they said the exact words? No. Have they made it very clear with their hyperbolic statements about how the loss of PL would ruin their games, constant talk about how "PL players" play the game differently, and flimsy rationalizations for how important it is to save a minute or two in list construction (and then spend twice that writing a post defending PL)? Absolutely. It's very clear that PL has become an identity thing in a way that other mechanics and other possible changes have not.


Yeah I will insult people that push the game system to a level that is basically unsporting.

So now we found the CAAC player. Even slight optimizing makes the PL system broken.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
ccs wrote:
CadianSgtBob wrote:
Andykp wrote:
I have been using army lists based on points for over 30 years.


You continue to use points. PL is a point system, it's just one with more errors. And that's why I don't take your claims seriously. You protest about how you don't like points, but then instead of using a genuinely different system for playing your games you play the same old matched play with points-based list construction. It's completely redundant and if/when GW finally puts PL out of its misery you'll go right back to playing with normal points again and hardly even notice the difference.


Yeah, so?
And if 40k goes all PL, or goes to set pts costs like Sigmar (or Guard squads now)? You'll hop right in line too. In fact some of you howling about PL will even switch your tunes & sing it's praises.

Fine, name one person that will do that. I'll wait.


YOU will.
Will you be one of the ones suddenly changing your tune? Or will you just grumble & bitch about it? That I don't know*. But I am certain that either way, you'll be playing it.

*I strongly suspect though that you'll be one of the tune changers. At least on-line. Time will prove one of us correct.
   
Made in us
Storm Trooper with Maglight



Cadia

Andykp wrote:
They don’t seem to be willing to admit that you or I want different things from our gaming experience than they do.


I admit that you want different things. I reject the claim that matched play with points-based list building meets your stated needs just because it takes 70 minutes instead of 71 minutes to make a list.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dudeface wrote:
Yeah I will insult people that push the game system to a level that is basically unsporting.


PL advocates: "we're always polite, only you are being rude."

Also PL advocates: "I will insult competitive players because I don't enjoy that kind of game."

Except the exact same is still possible via points, I can still make sub optimal choices while you max out a competitively viable list because neither is very good at making a balanced game. The difference is with PL you're just saying you don't care about the minutiae of whether a units upgrades is worth 5 more points than not having them.


No, the difference is that PL by design can not ever be accurate. Normal points only fail to provide balance because of individual point cost errors, the system is conceptually fine and can in theory reach a state of balance. The only rational decision by GW is to dump the failed system that can not ever improve and focus their efforts on improving the system that has the potential to do better.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dudeface wrote:
Yes, because taking literally every possible upgrade on a unit to max out its perceived value = slight optimisation and if you don't like that you're casual at all costs, because obviously we operate on angsty teenage cliques and persona here and it's impossible to comprehend a mid ground because either we rotate our models making pew pew noises in open play to recreate historic games, or we must take op broken combos and passionately curbstomp our opponents in 24/7 tournament play.


You aren't CAAC because you decide to take a less-optimized list. You're CAAC because you feel the need to insult competitive players for optimizing "too much" and playing the game in a way that you don't enjoy.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2022/07/02 20:03:01


THE PLANET BROKE BEFORE THE GUARD! 
   
Made in gb
Gore-Drenched Khorne Chaos Lord




CadianSgtBob wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
Yeah I will insult people that push the game system to a level that is basically unsporting.


PL advocates: "we're always polite, only you are being rude."

Also PL advocates: "I will insult competitive players because I don't enjoy that kind of game."


Dudeface wrote:
Yes, because taking literally every possible upgrade on a unit to max out its perceived value = slight optimisation and if you don't like that you're casual at all costs, because obviously we operate on angsty teenage cliques and persona here and it's impossible to comprehend a mid ground because either we rotate our models making pew pew noises in open play to recreate historic games, or we must take op broken combos and passionately curbstomp our opponents in 24/7 tournament play.


You aren't CAAC because you decide to take a less-optimized list. You're CAAC because you feel the need to insult competitive players for optimizing "too much" and playing the game in a way that you don't enjoy.


I'm sorry that I undermine your definition of what the game is to the point I need branding with a label you find derivative, despite having no personal knowledge of how or what I play, simply because it's not in line with your expectations of normality.

Congrats on grossly missing the point, I'm out, you continue on your path to destroy other peoples fun in the name of the one true way to play.
   
Made in gb
Incorporating Wet-Blending




U.k

Dudeface wrote:
CadianSgtBob wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
Yeah I will insult people that push the game system to a level that is basically unsporting.


PL advocates: "we're always polite, only you are being rude."

Also PL advocates: "I will insult competitive players because I don't enjoy that kind of game."


Dudeface wrote:
Yes, because taking literally every possible upgrade on a unit to max out its perceived value = slight optimisation and if you don't like that you're casual at all costs, because obviously we operate on angsty teenage cliques and persona here and it's impossible to comprehend a mid ground because either we rotate our models making pew pew noises in open play to recreate historic games, or we must take op broken combos and passionately curbstomp our opponents in 24/7 tournament play.


You aren't CAAC because you decide to take a less-optimized list. You're CAAC because you feel the need to insult competitive players for optimizing "too much" and playing the game in a way that you don't enjoy.


I'm sorry that I undermine your definition of what the game is to the point I need branding with a label you find derivative, despite having no personal knowledge of how or what I play, simply because it's not in line with your expectations of normality.

Congrats on grossly missing the point, I'm out, you continue on your path to destroy other peoples fun in the name of the one true way to play.


Dudeface, I envy your way with words. I am sorry got sucked back into the gak show of discussion but glad I did just to have read this concise summary of this lots stance.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




And I've noticed that every time someone brings up the very real fact that different codexes are even more unbalanced with respect to each other under PL than points, the PL advocates try to refuse engaging with the question because they know that fact makes them look bad.
   
Made in us
Fresh-Faced New User




CadianSgtBob wrote:
 Jidmah wrote:
You have repeatedly shown that you have no clue how either system works, so please stop changing the meaning of my posts by taking sentences out of context.

If you are unable to respond to posts as a whole, keep your unfounded opinion that is completely devoid of any arguments to yourself.


Here, let me quote your entire post if that's what makes you happy. You're still wrong. I understand exactly how both systems work and nothing is being taken out of context. You're simply wrong and defending an indefensible system.


You're wrong, I'm right, isn't an argument.
   
Made in us
Storm Trooper with Maglight



Cadia

Andykp wrote:
Dudeface, I envy your way with words. I am sorry got sucked back into the gak show of discussion but glad I did just to have read this concise summary of this lots stance.


You: "PL advocates are always polite, everyone else is being rude and attacking us".

Also you: "I envy your way with words as you insult competitive players for playing the game in a way I don't enjoy".

You are such a hypocrite.

THE PLANET BROKE BEFORE THE GUARD! 
   
Made in us
Fresh-Faced New User




PL is fine.

Also, it's better to be a hypocrite than a Communist radical.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




RealAndTrue wrote:
CadianSgtBob wrote:
 Jidmah wrote:
You have repeatedly shown that you have no clue how either system works, so please stop changing the meaning of my posts by taking sentences out of context.

If you are unable to respond to posts as a whole, keep your unfounded opinion that is completely devoid of any arguments to yourself.


Here, let me quote your entire post if that's what makes you happy. You're still wrong. I understand exactly how both systems work and nothing is being taken out of context. You're simply wrong and defending an indefensible system.


You're wrong, I'm right, isn't an argument.


Luckily he included more than that.
   
Made in ca
Discriminating Deathmark Assassin





Stasis

 Insectum7 wrote:
 Blndmage wrote:

I'm only just dipping my toes into Imperium forces with SoS, maybe an Inquisition force. But I'm capping my non primary armies at 25PL.


Can I just say that with all the cultural stuff I've been reading recently, I read that as "non binary" and thought you were making a really funny Necron/robot joke.


My non binary spouse thought that was hilarious!

213PL 60PL 12PL 9-17PL
(she/her) 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: