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.

Noisy_Marine wrote:

wash-away wrote:

GW walks all over their customers but no one cares enough to really, really try stop them.

Step number one is stop buying GW products and start writing letters.

I all but have, who would I write to and what adress?

Noisy_Marine wrote:If GW is promoting their games for tourney play, they need to make the effort to balance them. Or stop promoting tourney play.

GW has come a long way from Tournament play being The One True Way. I applaud this.

Thanks for that insight Redbeard.

Its been said before. GW has re-defined the word "Tournament" for their uses. It doesn't represent anything near what springs to mind in the majority of people it is mentioned to. If you asked someone off the street what "Tournament winner" would mean to them, I mean "A person that through luck, timing, probability, random personal bias and army viability managed to not lose more points than the other guys" is what springs directly to mind (SARCASM). Sure there will always be variables but to suspend any credence to the claim of "Tournament winner" you'd actually have to aim at some sort of level playing field, no?

Apparently not, and so I give you a quote for people who take pride in anything 40k related.

"When will people learn that 40k isn’t a competitive game? It’s a probability based narrative."

If you aren't happy with being involved in a mechanic that enables variable simple stories, change game

I'll be totally boning up for the Choose Your Own Adventure 40k Tournament this year (Creative SARCASM).

As far as the raging Loota-spam goes...
I've wanted to do a Bad Moons army since second ed, and now I just can't because it's apparently a bowl of cheese spaghetti.

I was waiting for the rules to catch up with the concept of super-dakka orks, but will people now think I'm a bad sportsman or whatever?

Boooo.

I just wish people would realize that not all ork armies are Loota spam armies, or that every entry in the ork codex is dripping with cheese. I can quite easily make an ork army that will never win a game, no matter how good the general is.

I'm really disheartened when people ask what army I play and roll their eyes when I say orks. 95% of my ork models are 8-10 years old. I don't even have a single loota model. Nor does my army even want any. There are good, non-cheese ork players out there.

wash-away wrote:

Noisy_Marine wrote:

wash-away wrote:

GW walks all over their customers but no one cares enough to really, really try stop them.

Step number one is stop buying GW products and start writing letters.

I all but have, who would I write to and what adress?

Games Workshop Group PLC
Willow Road
Lenton
Nottingham
NG7 2WS
United Kingdom

I'm not really sure who though I wouldn't address it to Jervis. Perhaps head of game design or 'design team'.

Jayden63 wrote:I just wish people would realize that not all ork armies are Loota spam armies, or that every entry in the ork codex is dripping with cheese. I can quite easily make an ork army that will never win a game, no matter how good the general is.

I don't think most people are making that statement, however such armies are extremely difficult to deal with, as its not hard to make an Ork army thats horrendously shooty, ridiculously numerous (and hard to kill with ubiquitious 4+ cover saves) and still extremely killy, and Orks currently have the most cost effective basic troops in the game by far (shoota boyz match guardsmen for firepower when in rapid fire range, but can do so at 18" while moving, and still get 3A on the charge at S4 and WS4 and are T4, even those wonderful CSM's can't compete in efficiency in the same way)

Honestly I like the Ork codex very much, however I think in terms of power, its still currently on top in terms of abuse potential, just ahead of lash spam and replacing Holofield skimmer spam with the advent of 4E. That said, most Ork armies aren't that gross and are actually rather fun to play against.

I'm really disheartened when people ask what army I play and roll their eyes when I say orks. 95% of my ork models are 8-10 years old. I don't even have a single loota model. Nor does my army even want any. There are good, non-cheese ork players out there.

I would agree with you here again, and I would lump the vast majority of Ork players in with people like you, however facing an Ork army with a raw firepower ability (in terms of number of shots and likely hits, if not necessarily AP and utility) almost on par with that of an IG army coupled with a 200+ model count army can really turn people off to playing against Orks if they have to face such armies. I honestly have only seen such an army a couple times, most of the Ork players don't play anything that gross, but it does have the potential to make orks seems hideously OP.

BeefyG wrote:

"When will people learn that 40k isn’t a competitive game? It’s a probability based narrative."

So nobody actually wins/loses the game, eh?

Seriously, you guys want a competitive game that you can play in tournaments ?

Go play the Privateer Press games.

Calle wrote:Seriously, you guys want a competitive game that you can play in tournaments ?

Go play the Privateer Press games.

I do.

And want am I supposed to do with all the thousands of dollars of warhammer stuff that I have? Throw it away even though I still like the background and models?

Maybe GW should make a Paint By Numbers Golden Demon competition.

Kilkrazy wrote:
Maybe GW should make a Paint By Numbers Golden Demon competition.

Oh snap, I might actually have a chance at a Golden Demon then!

Noisy_Marine wrote:

wash-away wrote:

Noisy_Marine wrote:

wash-away wrote:

GW walks all over their customers but no one cares enough to really, really try stop them.

Step number one is stop buying GW products and start writing letters.

I all but have, who would I write to and what adress?

Games Workshop Group PLC
Willow Road
Lenton
Nottingham
NG7 2WS
United Kingdom

I'm not really sure who though I wouldn't address it to Jervis. Perhaps head of game design or 'design team'.

thank you,

I played in a 8 week league at my local store, and the ork armies didn't even get into the top 5, 1 made it into top 10. The top 5 were - Nids 1st, Daemons tied with necrons for 2nd and Daemons tied with Marines for 4th.

Noisy_Marine wrote:

Calle wrote:Seriously, you guys want a competitive game that you can play in tournaments ?

Go play the Privateer Press games.

I do.

And want am I supposed to do with all the thousands of dollars of warhammer stuff that I have? Throw it away even though I still like the background and models?

I'd save them for when you realise that playing an extremely dull, power gaming encouraging game of depressingly little depth starts to feel childish, THEN come back to 40k and Fantasy where it's about having some fun with some friends, and not an immature waving contest where you hope to stomp some stranger into the ground so you can brag to your fellow geeks about how win you are.

Low opinion of PP? Me? Never!

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

Noisy_Marine wrote:

Calle wrote:Seriously, you guys want a competitive game that you can play in tournaments ?

Go play the Privateer Press games.

I do.

And want am I supposed to do with all the thousands of dollars of warhammer stuff that I have? Throw it away even though I still like the background and models?

I'd save them for when you realise that playing an extremely dull, power gaming encouraging game of depressingly little depth starts to feel childish, THEN come back to 40k and Fantasy where it's about having some fun with some friends, and not an immature waving contest where you hope to stomp some stranger into the ground so you can brag to your fellow geeks about how win you are.

Low opinion of PP? Me? Never!

Those people are no fun no matter what game you play.

Just a shame Warmachine etc act as both rallying beacon and nursery to their kind.

And frankly, the Tournament Scene. it right in the ear. You are a minority. A tiny one. The game is not written purely for your benefit, but for those gamers less obesessed with winning and having something to show for it.

I really do think it was the people you were playing MDG. I've never met a 'that guy' player in Warmachine that wasn't a 'that guy' in every game he played. The flavour of toy soldiers doesn't turn people bad, they started out that way.

'Play Like You Got a Pair'

'Unstoppable Combo O' Doom' being the whole point.

Next to background or motivation for the 'factions'.

Variation on a single theme (Big Metal Roboty Things)

Yup. Powergamers paradise.

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:'Play Like You Got a Pair'

I always took those a bit of a joke; I suppose anyone who takes them seriously would take lots of things in life a little too seriously whatever they were doing.

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:'Unstoppable Combo O' Doom' being the whole point.

Hardly, the structure of the game is centred on co-operation between different elements. Conversely no element no matter how powerful is unstoppable.

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:Next to background or motivation for the 'factions'.

Is this a typo, what does this mean?

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:Variation on a single theme (Big Metal Roboty Things)

...Dragons, trolls werewolves and so on. Hordes is part of the same game the Hordes factions have widened Warmachine considerably over the last few years.

I also dislike tournaments, I was put off by a cheating 'that guy' playing an all Wolfguard army back in 40k second edition. Looking back though I do think that he should have been allowed to play an all Wolfguard army and the game should provide for that. I play an all carapace Imperial Guard army and the game should provide for that too.

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
And frankly, the Tournament Scene. it right in the ear. You are a minority. A tiny one. The game is not written purely for your benefit, but for those gamers less obesessed with winning and having something to show for it.

As much as I'd like to agree with you, my experience has been that even if people aren't GT tournament players, they often play by whatever is "tournament legal" and little else in their area. The vast majority of pickup games I see are done using the local tournament points level, with the same missions and list restrictions.

I'm sorry, but there is absolutely nothing wrong with powergaming, as long as you are not also a dill weed. If you're going to a tournament, why are you expecting a "friendly play" level of list? It's a competative game. Just because it's competative doesn't mean it isn't also friendly, and a great way to meet new players, ogle nicely painted armies and generally have a good time playing more games than you usually would against forces outside your home group.
For that reason, the game should be balanced to some degree to support tournament play. In my opinion, as long as you play one of the newer codices, it is relatively balanced. The biggest problem I have with GW isn't the balance within codices, it's the balance across codices. They really, really need to shake up the release schedule and get all the armies on a level playing field.
As for loota spam: It should be easy enough to deal with. Here's some examples:
Space Marines: 3 Tactical squads in drop pods are cheaper than 3 loota units and can drop on them on turn one and gut them.
Chaos Marines: Plague Marines laugh at your puny AP4 weapons. Berserkers in a landraider will happily cruise into you and lay the smack down. Deep Striking obliterators or generic daemons can either flame or close combat you to death. All for less points.
Tyranids: Scouting genestealers make short work of lootas. For less points.
and so on. The problem isn't the lootas, it's that you haven't brought something capable of taking down an enemy firebase.

What Jervis said is depressing. It's basically "We're incompetant morons who don't do our jobs properly, and we're proud of it too!"

As for the privateer press bashing: I never liked the "play like you've got a pair" page five nonsense, it seemed pretty juvenile to me. But hey, at least the setting doesn't practically scream "SKULLZ R KEWL! GRIMDARK!"
The factions are actually well differentiated and have very different playstyles and builds. Much moreso than the multitude of imperial armies out there.
The unstoppable combo of doom doesn't exist, it can always be stopped by killing one of the links in the chain.
And I have never had a game of warmachine or hordes with a rules issue, or any kind of cheating. This may be because it's new over here, and only played by a smallish group of dedicated lads who are all sound out though.

Jayden63 wrote:I just wish people would realize that not all ork armies are Loota spam armies, or that every entry in the ork codex is dripping with cheese. I can quite easily make an ork army that will never win a game, no matter how good the general is.

I'm really disheartened when people ask what army I play and roll their eyes when I say orks. 95% of my ork models are 8-10 years old. I don't even have a single loota model. Nor does my army even want any. There are good, non-cheese ork players out there.

When faced with loota spam a player should make damn sure that all those lootas are checking LOS, remembering that those footslogging orks 30" in front of the loots probably block LOS.

olympia wrote:
When faced with loota spam a player should make damn sure that all those lootas are checking LOS, remembering that those footslogging orks 30" in front of the loots probably block LOS.

This is true. While you are allowed to shoot between gaps in models, you cannot draw line-of-sight completely through models, you must be able to see the target. Sometimes the lootas get a little elevation that helps them with this, but if they're in a forest, behind a wave of models advancing, they're not shooting.

Isn't the real problem just a feeling that tournament play is not balanced?

Casual gamers are fine with the game and even tournament players have no problem with 40k fundamentally (or I'm asuming they'd play something else?).

Could the problems not be solved by having tournaments that through a mixture of carefully crafted missions, good terrain layout and army list options (for example - being allowed a sideboard, limiting total PV to make spamming more difficult, or other such restrictions) provide a more level playing field?

This surely is not beyond the wit of man to acheive...

Definitely terrain is the most important thing for tournaments. It's absolutely vital to have it balanced.
That's a discussion worth having on these boards actually.

Chimera_Calvin wrote:Isn't the real problem just a feeling that tournament play is not balanced?

Casual gamers are fine with the game and even tournament players have no problem with 40k fundamentally (or I'm asuming they'd play something else?).

Could the problems not be solved by having tournaments that through a mixture of carefully crafted missions, good terrain layout and army list options (for example - being allowed a sideboard, limiting total PV to make spamming more difficult, or other such restrictions) provide a more level playing field?

This surely is not beyond the wit of man to acheive...

I think that the real problem is that you have a group of players that take the tournament circle extremely seriously - tune and playtest builds to win the tournaments - and are coming with their A game. These guys (often) are not so much into the fluff and pagentry of the game - but treat it as a tournament to win. They run into players who are opposites. Those spending years converting and painting armies that are beautiful to look at and have a huge story line/fluff behind them - but usually not overly competitive on the game table. Then you have those who are casual players - sometimes with an over-inflated ego of their abilities and skills - that get their feelings hurt when they lose and instead of being man enough to just say - I got beat - blame the army builds. Then you have the casual gamers - who may have nice armies - but play what they like - and will take the win/losses as they come.

Simply put - the game works on the tournament circle - BUT - you have to play, play, play your army against as many different builds as you can face off against. You have to take it seriously - maybe go to a couple of tourney's to feel them out before thinking you should win it all. Oh yeah - and it has to be a GOOD build that fits your playing style - AND - it's a game of luck - sometimes it goes bad. Marc is as good as they get at the game - but I'm sure he'd tell you about losing games he should have won - and winning games he should have lost - purely on lucky dice rolling. It happens - and it's the way the game is played.

BTW - I've had the pleasure of playing against quite a few of the top end players in tournaments over the years. Some games I've won - some I've lost. Y'know what though - if you beat one of the top tier guys - I have yet to hear them whine or complain about losing - as a matter of fact - most of them have the best laughs during losing. I've also found that the games I've learned the most from tactically have been against top end players - win or loss.

If you want to be competitive - take the time to do it. If not, then don't be competitive - just go have fun - drink a lot of beer - and MAYBE get lucky and win a few sportsmanship awards (my personal favorite).

Da Boss wrote:I'm sorry, but there is absolutely nothing wrong with powergaming, as long as you are not also a dill weed. If you're going to a tournament, why are you expecting a "friendly play" level of list? It's a competative game. Just because it's competative doesn't mean it isn't also friendly, and a great way to meet new players, ogle nicely painted armies and generally have a good time playing more games than you usually would against forces outside your home group.
For that reason, the game should be balanced to some degree to support tournament play. In my opinion, as long as you play one of the newer codices, it is relatively balanced. The biggest problem I have with GW isn't the balance within codices, it's the balance across codices. They really, really need to shake up the release schedule and get all the armies on a level playing field.
As for loota spam: It should be easy enough to deal with. Here's some examples:
Space Marines: 3 Tactical squads in drop pods are cheaper than 3 loota units and can drop on them on turn one and gut them.
Chaos Marines: Plague Marines laugh at your puny AP4 weapons. Berserkers in a landraider will happily cruise into you and lay the smack down. Deep Striking obliterators or generic daemons can either flame or close combat you to death. All for less points.
Tyranids: Scouting genestealers make short work of lootas. For less points.
and so on. The problem isn't the lootas, it's that you haven't brought something capable of taking down an enemy firebase.

What Jervis said is depressing. It's basically "We're incompetant morons who don't do our jobs properly, and we're proud of it too!"

As for the privateer press bashing: I never liked the "play like you've got a pair" page five nonsense, it seemed pretty juvenile to me. But hey, at least the setting doesn't practically scream "SKULLZ R KEWL! GRIMDARK!"
The factions are actually well differentiated and have very different playstyles and builds. Much moreso than the multitude of imperial armies out there.
The unstoppable combo of doom doesn't exist, it can always be stopped by killing one of the links in the chain.
And I have never had a game of warmachine or hordes with a rules issue, or any kind of cheating. This may be because it's new over here, and only played by a smallish group of dedicated lads who are all sound out though.

So, by that rational, because *Some* Car Owners enjoy street racing, all Manufacturers should design their car with that in mind? Or is it down the owner to tinker and messa bout with said car until he is happy with it's performance in a role it was never designed for?

I don't think it's the same at all MDG.

OF course it is.

Games Workshop sell games designed for friendly play. The original idea was to provide rules for peoples models. Only the way a few gamers do it has changed, so the analogy is a good one.

You soup up a car when you intend to race, to make it faster, improve handling etc.

You soup up your Army List when you go to a Tournament.

Absolutely no difference in the application.