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.

Frazzled wrote:

biccat wrote:

Worglock wrote:Ok. So we're back to the mythical "Forge World is Overpowered". So, I'm going to set my "surprised face" to the side for a moment and take you at your word that you honestly believe that somehow, somewhere, sometime they made a non-Apoc unit that really is "overpowered".

So, what is it? I need a few of them. Because somehow, in buying every Forge World book ever made, I missed it.

Some of the units may be overpowered. I don't know, because I'm not interested in running 50-100 games to playtest FW just to determine if it's appropriate in scale to GW's official rules. And I'm not interested in running through your "codex" to figure out what I think is OP and having to argue for half an hour on every point.

FW requires permission, I choose to withhold it.

Worglock wrote:This is my amazed face.

It looks a lot like your not-surprised face, tbh.

Worglock wrote:Remember: Since we're talking about Tournament play (which is just bad, but that's another thread) the difficulty level is "No Apocalypse". So that means, no super heavies, no Tyranid Giant Gribblies of Doom and (I think), no flyers.

We're talking Tournament play?

krazynadechukr wrote:What is your opinion on FW models &/or lists in 2k or less (no superheavies) games?

Nope, guess we're not.

Worglock wrote:And btw: if you're playing Thousand Sons, you should do pretty good against the average Speds Mahreenz player.

Er...right. Unless they happen to bring some long-range firepower, rhinos, assault troops, dreadnoughts, or just about anything else that either a) avoids my AP3 or b) can stay out of 24" range.

Wait, so you have these issues in NON tournament gaming? Really?

This is my "dumbfounded face".

We've gone through the Schadenfreude Looking Glass to the land of bad Warhams players being bad to each other because they've found and esoteric line in a book to run with while getting their troll face on.

People occasionally ask me why I don't ever really play at all and just stick to painting. I may have to just point them at this thread.

my local club allows FW stuff to be used in tournaments (apart from flyers and super heavies which require apocalypse rules to be in play- for that we have super heavy tournament). Nobody seems to have a problem with that. FW units are actually very often overpriced for what they do (grot tanks anybody?). FW items also add some variety to otherwise all samey-samey builds and boring you to death with playing continously against same army lists.

Manchu wrote:I'm not even slightly surprised that UK locations carry IA books. One wonders why only a few of them do, actually. (Well, not really.) Here in the states, however, FW is very nearly mythical.

Umm. No. My GW carries all currently available Imperial Armor books, and as far as I know, so does every store in Maryland at least.

Forge World is -not- mythical. It's -not- overpowered. And it's -not- the game-breaking buggaboo that people that desperately need to win claim that it is.

Anyone that claims that Forge World has balance issues in Warhammer 40K needs to have their head examined, their models repossessed and then a summary drumming out of the hobby.

It's pretty fething sad that this hobby has so many "communities" that try to claim some form of "don't be a " while the people in the "communities" look for new cute and subtle ways to be s

Worglock wrote:

Manchu wrote:I'm not even slightly surprised that UK locations carry IA books. One wonders why only a few of them do, actually. (Well, not really.) Here in the states, however, FW is very nearly mythical.

Umm. No. My GW carries all currently available Imperial Armor books, and as far as I know, so does every store in Maryland at least.

Forge World is -not- mythical. It's -not- overpowered. And it's -not- the game-breaking buggaboo that people that desperately need to win claim that it is.

Anyone that claims that Forge World has balance issues in Warhammer 40K needs to have their head examined, their models repossessed and then a summary drumming out of the hobby.

It's pretty fething sad that this hobby has so many "communities" that try to claim some form of "don't be a " while the people in the "communities" look for new cut and subtle ways to be s

Well, they're mythical where I am. I guess Maryland is a gaming meca.

KamikazeCanuck wrote:

Worglock wrote:

Manchu wrote:I'm not even slightly surprised that UK locations carry IA books. One wonders why only a few of them do, actually. (Well, not really.) Here in the states, however, FW is very nearly mythical.

Umm. No. My GW carries all currently available Imperial Armor books, and as far as I know, so does every store in Maryland at least.

Well, they're mythical where I am. I guess Maryland is a gaming meca.

I can tell you the Olney, MD store has no forgeworld books or products.

The only one that ever did in my experience was GWHQ in Glen Burnie. Being the Battle Bunker and US HQ for a while I would expect them to carry forgeworld stuff.

KamikazeCanuck wrote:

Worglock wrote:

Manchu wrote:I'm not even slightly surprised that UK locations carry IA books. One wonders why only a few of them do, actually. (Well, not really.) Here in the states, however, FW is very nearly mythical.

Umm. No. My GW carries all currently available Imperial Armor books, and as far as I know, so does every store in Maryland at least.

Forge World is -not- mythical. It's -not- overpowered. And it's -not- the game-breaking buggaboo that people that desperately need to win claim that it is.

Anyone that claims that Forge World has balance issues in Warhammer 40K needs to have their head examined, their models repossessed and then a summary drumming out of the hobby.

It's pretty fething sad that this hobby has so many "communities" that try to claim some form of "don't be a " while the people in the "communities" look for new cut and subtle ways to be s

Well, they're mythical where I am. I guess Maryland is a gaming meca.

Not really. We've got so many GW stores that they border on feeding on each others territory and most of our not-GW gaming stores died when the economy went into the tank. The ones that are left are generally (IMNSHO) terrible or too far out of my travel range.

Manchu wrote:Hmm, yes -- you definitely declare that what biccat said was "nonsense." Yes, yes -- don't rush me now -- ah ha, and you did explain why! "That's a thin argument." Marvelously done!

Pointing out the absurdities in someone else's argument is what I did. His claims,which remain unsupported, are nonsense. I used equally as absurd examples (eg. no one here plays DE, so DE isn't 'normally expected', so I should, by his reasoning, be able to refuse to play that just as much as he can refuse to play someone's Krieg list or Marine Siege list) to show this. If you'd cut the unnecessary snark and the need to taunt me, you'd get that.

Manchu wrote:Look, everyone agrees that if you have a group of friends who are okay with you using FW stuff -- well, that's okay. Also, people are in agreement that if a person gives you permission to use FW stuff in a game then that's okay, too. So what kind of situations remain: random pick-up games (which are not necessarily "friendly") and tournament play. So, between you and Frazzled, please explain to me how using FW rules in those situations is anything except what is NOT 'normally expected.' I mean, I know it's bloody nonsense (remember, I took your advice and read your post) so just humor me, I guess.

You're still attaching a stigma to FW units. You're giving them this mythical place above 'regular' GW units where they will somehow change the game dramatically and be 'unfair' for your opponent. This is an absurd and - yes - a nonsense point of view because it makes the inherent claim that everything else in 40K is perfectly fine with no issues. If you treat FW as the 'other', then you blindly ignore all the problems that exist within 40K if you just use the regular Codices. In fact, the very idea that there's this 'other' group of 40K units that shouldn't be allowed unless the other person is told beforehand just on the off chance the other person considers it 'unfair' is a load of crap.

They are 40K units. They add more variety to the game. Most of them suck. A few are terribly overpowered. This is true of all 40K. Why must they be set aside?

But let's use a few examples:

1. You show up at a store for a game. Opponent is playing Chaos. He's got a normal Chaos army, and a Blight Drone (forgive me if they count as flyers - I'm assuming they're just skimmers). He also has the IA book with the rules on him. Are you going to refuse to play him on account of a single unit?
2. You show up at a store. Opponent is packing a tank-heavy Guard army, and in that army is a Leman Russ Annihilator. Again, he has the IA book with the rules. Gonna call him 'unfair' for doing something that isn't 'normally expected'. He is, after all, swapping out his Battlecannon for a TL-Lascannon (the fiend!!!).
3. You show up at a store for a game. Opponent is using the new DE Codex. You've never played against DE before. He doesn't have his Codex with him.

Which of these three examples is the most likely to be 'unfair'?

Manchu wrote:I'm not even slightly surprised that UK locations carry IA books. One wonders why only a few of them do, actually. (Well, not really.) Here in the states, however, FW is very nearly mythical.

2 stores in Las Vegas carry them.

vhwolf wrote:

Manchu wrote:I'm not even slightly surprised that UK locations carry IA books. One wonders why only a few of them do, actually. (Well, not really.) Here in the states, however, FW is very nearly mythical.

2 stores in Las Vegas carry them.

And there are 4 LGS in Vegas that do Warhams in some amount correct? Plus the Comic Store in Henderson. I was out in Vegas last year and made my friend drag me around town to all the game stores to see what the local scene there was like. I remember one store to be pretty nice, one good the other two not so great and then the store in Henderson was ok but nothing to write home about.

H.B.M.C. wrote: This is true of all 40K. Why must they be set aside?

Because GW tells us to so they become 'opponents consent'. If you want to use them then ask extra nicely. If you demand them, expect resistance. If your opponent doesn't consent then use the core codex rules approximations.

It is pretty simple. Some people can't seem to ask permission... Like asking permission is a big deal? I don't know why it is so hard for some people.

nkelsch wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote: This is true of all 40K. Why must they be set aside?

Because GW tells us to so they become 'opponents consent'. If you want to use them then ask extra nicely. If you demand them, expect resistance. If your opponent doesn't consent then use the core codex rules approximations.

It is pretty simple. Some people can't seem to ask permission... Like asking permission is a big deal? I don't know why it is so hard for some people.

Isn't the point that all games of 40k are opponent's consent?

i.e.
Guy A: I have Eldar, want a game?
Guy B: Sure!

Consent given! Hooray!

scenario 2:

Guy A: I have Space Wolves, want a game?
Guy B: Nah, I think Space Wolves are cheezy.

Consent not given, game doesn't happen

scenario 3:

Guy A: I have a guard army with some FW mixed in, want a game?
Guy B: Sure!

Consent given!

I don't see how any of those three scenarios are different, and all are asking permission to use a specific army and units. If someone doesn't want to play, they don't play, regardless of FW or not.

Worglock wrote:

vhwolf wrote:

Manchu wrote:I'm not even slightly surprised that UK locations carry IA books. One wonders why only a few of them do, actually. (Well, not really.) Here in the states, however, FW is very nearly mythical.

2 stores in Las Vegas carry them.

And there are 4 LGS in Vegas that do Warhams in some amount correct? Plus the Comic Store in Henderson. I was out in Vegas last year and made my friend drag me around town to all the game stores to see what the local scene there was like. I remember one store to be pretty nice, one good the other two not so great and then the store in Henderson was ok but nothing to write home about.

Actually 3 including the one in Henderson. It is the one that does not have Imperial Armor on the shelf but they will get it for you if you ask.

Snarky wrote:

I don't see how any of those three scenarios are different, and all are asking permission to use a specific army and units. If someone doesn't want to play, they don't play, regardless of FW or not.

Then what is the problem? You ask permission and if everyone refuses FW armies then that is how it is. If everyone accepts them, then huzzah for you. No magical permission slip is going to force everyone everywhere to accept FW units.

H.B.M.C. wrote:If you'd cut the unnecessary snark and the need to taunt me, you'd get that.

The utter irony. It's like you've never read a single one of your own posts before.

H.B.M.C. wrote:You're still attaching a stigma to FW units. You're giving them this mythical place above 'regular' GW units where they will somehow change the game dramatically and be 'unfair' for your opponent.

The idea that FW is "mythical" is not to say that it's any good. It simply doesn't exist anywhere I've been. Now, that's where Frazzled's point comes in -- maybe it's everywhere you've been and why are my experiences privileged anyway, get of my lawn, etc, etc. So we turn to the objective standard set by the company that makes all this stuff -- do they use it in their own tournaments? Nope.

And it's no mystery why not. I don't think it unbalances 40k. As everyone knows, 40k is hardly precision balanced for maximum competitiveness. Adding in a few more units isn't going to make it much worse (for those that think it's bad) than it already is. That's not the reason FW rules aren't used in 40k tournaments. The truth is, you're a smart guy with tons of experience with this franchise. Epic internet argument aside, you know as plain as the avatar next to my post that the FW is a different product line. It's an expansion to 40k, not a part of 40k. I mean, someone already posted the current "get permission" equivalent that GW itself prints.

You show up at a store for a game. Opponent is playing Chaos. He's got a normal Chaos army, and a Blight Drone (forgive me if they count as flyers - I'm assuming they're just skimmers). He also has the IA book with the rules on him. Are you going to refuse to play him on account of a single unit?

Nope. But I'm a non-competitive gamer interested in the 40k h o b b y (I'm using the term as expansively as possible) and not 40k the game. I can understand why some people would not want to play against a blight drone and I wouldn't declare their position "nonsense."

You show up at a store. Opponent is packing a tank-heavy Guard army, and in that army is a Leman Russ Annihilator. Again, he has the IA book with the rules. Gonna call him 'unfair' for doing something that isn't 'normally expected'. He is, after all, swapping out his Battlecannon for a TL-Lascannon (the fiend!!!).

You're riding the "normally expected" hobbyhorese right into the ground. Mikhaila already explained what was meant: almost no one is familar with IA books and no one expects that they need any familiarity with IA books to play a game of 40k. Plenty of people expect that they'd need some level of familiarity with all the codices.

3. You show up at a store for a game. Opponent is using the new DE Codex. You've never played against DE before. He doesn't have his Codex with him.

This seems to stand for a set of problems that are unrelated to IA books.

nkelsch wrote:

Snarky wrote:

I don't see how any of those three scenarios are different, and all are asking permission to use a specific army and units. If someone doesn't want to play, they don't play, regardless of FW or not.

Then what is the problem? You ask permission and if everyone refuses FW armies then that is how it is. If everyone accepts them, then huzzah for you. No magical permission slip is going to force everyone everywhere to accept FW units.

Exactly! If someone doesn't want to play against my FW army simply because it's FW, I simply take them out or proxy them as a different unit and ask again. If they still don't want to play, it's probably because I smell bad or something.

My post was simply demonstrating how all games of 40K are opponent permission, FW or not.

Whoops, hit the wrong quote button by accident...

I'm more than likely okay with them in a friendly game, as long as my opponent lets me take a look at what the FW units are and what their rules are. I have no interest in playing a bunch of Land Raider Achilles or Lucius Drop Pods and I don't want to be going into the game with some mystery unit that I don't know what to do about.

H.B.M.C. wrote:They are 40K units. They add more variety to the game. Most of them suck. A few are terribly overpowered. This is true of all 40K. Why must they be set aside?

The same could be said for some/most of the units posted in the Proposed Rules section. Would you just as vehemently defend KillKrazy using his regimental heros in a standard game?

Mr.Church13 wrote:I would allow for forgeowrld model simply because I loathe the GW "baby-sized" Avatar.

My friends wont allow me to use the FW one.

LMAO!

If you hate the one they have now, you would absolutly LOVE the old- old one. As a matter of fact, you should get one of these and throw that down on the table and enforce the eldar heavy duty discipline.

Manchu wrote:The utter irony. It's like you've never read a single one of your own posts before.

Hardly. I know full well what I do, so it can’t be irony. I'll plead hypocritical perhaps, but when the argument comes down to:

Poster makes Point X = I'll argue him!
vs
HBMC makes Point X = He's mean so he's wrong!

... can I really be blamed for asking others to shut up, stop looking at who posted the post, and look at what's actually written.

Manchu wrote:It simply doesn't exist anywhere I've been.

And? So? But? Therefore? Sisters and DE don't exist anywhere I've been. I don't see them any differently to other 40K units. Why? Because they are no different to any other 40K units.

Manchu wrote:So we turn to the objective standard set by the company that makes all this stuff -- do they use it in their own tournaments? Nope.

1. That’s hardly objective.
2. It’s a terrible litmus test.

I have always said that what tournaments do is the business of those organising the tournaments. They can just as easily ban Space Marines or Orks as they can FW items – that is and has always been the prerogative of the TO. Outside of a tournament though there shouldn’t be a distinction and, to top it off, those bitching about FW in this thread have almost invariably cited ‘unbalanced’, ‘unfair’, and ‘over powered’ as their reasons – meaning that their only reason for being against these models is that they are afraid of losing. The sooner people can get over their own egos and admit that, hey, no likes to lose, then we can move on and start playing the h o b b y (to borrow your terminology).

Manchu wrote:And it's no mystery why not. I don't think it unbalances 40k. As everyone knows, 40k is hardly precision balanced for maximum competitiveness. Adding in a few more units isn't going to make it much worse (for those that think it's bad) than it already is. That's not the reason FW rules aren't used in 40k tournaments. The truth is, you're a smart guy with tons of experience with this franchise. Epic internet argument aside, you know as plain as the avatar next to my post that the FW is a different product line. It's an expansion to 40k, not a part of 40k. I mean, someone already posted the current "get permission" equivalent that GW itself prints.

I don’t see them as a different product line. The Vulture is as much a part of the Imperial Guard to me as the Valkyrie. The Leman Russ Annihilator is as much a part of the Guard to me as the Leman Russ Executioner. Putting up barriers and dividing lines of what ‘is’ and what ‘isn’t’ 40K is just silly. It achieves nothing beyond bitterness and resentment (feth – just look at this thread!).

I see 40K as all inclusive. In a perfect world that would mean the core rulebook rule, Cities of Death rules, Planetstrike rules and Apoc rules would be rolled into a singular rule set, but setting that aside, I don’t see how FW can be treated – no, ostracised – because of... what? I can’t see a VALID reason for this. All I read is “it’s unfair!!!” or the even more silly “I can’t afford it!” (not to imply that simply being able to afford FW is justification enough to use it) or perhaps the more baffling “I don’t face it very often”, and I’m sorry, but none of these constitute valid reasons because:

1. ‘Unfair’ is relative, and is as prevalent in ‘regular’ 40K as it is with FW rules.
2. The cost shouldn’t factor into whether or not someone can use it (otherwise Blood Knights would be banned) – not that you’ve been arguing that, but I’m covering the three reasons that keep coming up.
3. Not having encountered it before (or often) doesn’t make any sense because, like with the balance issue, the same can be said of anything in 40K. As I said, I’ve never encountered a DE or Sister army before in my life. I wouldn’t dream of backing out of a game because of it though, just like someone throwing a Wraithseer or Blight Drone at me is likely to see me respond with “Cool!” rather than than “I’ve never seen that before... I won’t play it!”.

They are part of 40K because if they’re not part of 40K, then are they part of? Without 40K they’re just models.

Nope. But I'm a non-competitive gamer interested in the 40k h o b b y (I'm using the term as expansively as possible) and not 40k the game. I can understand why some people would not want to play against a blight drone and I wouldn't declare their position "nonsense."

I would. And will continue to do so until they can give a good reason. “It’s unfair” isn’t a good reason. “I’ve not faced one before” is not a good reasons. Both these reasons are nonsense reasons.

You're riding the "normally expected" hobbyhorese right into the ground.

How else should I respond to it? If someone’s going to try to bring up “not faced one before/not normal to face it” as a reason, then I’m going to show how absurd it is with as many equally as absurd examples as I can.

Mikhaila already explained what was meant: almost no one is familar with IA books and no one expects that they need any familiarity with IA books to play a game of 40k. Plenty of people expect that they'd need some level of familiarity with all the codices.

And if the opponent brought the rules with them? What’s the issue? I don’t own every Codex, and I can’t say I’m familiar with every force. I don’t know how Sisters or DE work. I’m not familiar with them. Not gonna stop someone from using them, but I would hope that they brought their rules so I could see them.

This seems to stand for a set of problems that are unrelated to IA books.

Directly related to the IA books, because the same problem results whenever someone has rules that someone isn’t familiar with. It doesn’t matter whether they’re IA, a Codex, Apocalypse or whatever. If someone is using rules they don’t have ready access to, it’s a problem. If they do have the rules right there, there can’t be a problem – because the rules are right there.

RustyKnight wrote:The same could be said for some/most of the units posted in the Proposed Rules section. Would you just as vehemently defend KillKrazy using his regimental heros in a standard game?

Except it can't be. It's not just apples and organges you're attempting to compare, it's apples and WWII British fighter craft. One is a set of rules published by GW, the other is a fan's set of rules in the internet.

Oh, and for my answer?


I think FW is just another symptom of the bullgak that GW's mutated thier games into by being a fat, overinflated conglomerate of indecision, where all you have to do to make a decision is to roll a D6, and that will make everything FUN again.

Back in the day, it was perfectly fine to scratchbuild a Gobsmasha, Spleenrippa, or any other assorted shampoo bottle death dealing tank, WYSIWYG vehicles, or any other imagination based stuff that was there to HAVE FUN WITH.

NOW? !@#$ me running, how have times changed.

It took me a bit to go back and fourth over this thing and all I can say is if GW can't see the bullgak that they have turned the game into over this sort of an issue, they have no business selling you anything.


Back in the day? We didn't have "Forgeworld". We had Epicast, Armorcast, and a couple of others out there. Hell, you ended up making yourown if it wasn't around. Troops too.

Here's Epicasts Spleenrippa, A Ork truck with a battlecannon on it.

http://www.epicast.com/lostbanned/EpicastSpleenrippa.jpg

Heres a Gobsmasha, A Ork truck with a battlecannon on it.

http://www.epicast.com/lostbanned/EpicastGobsmasha.jpg

Heres a Gobsmasha, from FW that was the same one from Armorcast, Epicast, or the same scratch build thing out of the White Dwarf.

Yes... White Dwarf.

http://www.epicast.com/lostbanned/FW%20Gobsmasha.jpg

The page that I got it from with a nice little history about the resin vehicle .... thing for 40K.

http://www.epicast.com/index.php?mode=page&page=lostandbanned

Heres a page about the resin models for 40k.

http://www.collecting-citadel-miniatures.com/wiki/index.php/Resin_Vehicles_&_Titans


That 40K has come so far, and to take such a step backwards really tells how far they have fallen.

I remember when the game was fun, we didn't need to worry about squabbling for scraps and thinking we were getting a feast.

At the end of the day, we're talking about playing a game, with miniatures specificly designed and made for the game.

Too bad there has to be all sorts of gak in between.


There and back again.


non wargaming attachment removed, please don't attach images like this directly to Dakka, you need to use off site hosting/similar.

thanks

reds8n

@Grot 6L Then why the feth are you still in the hobby if all it does is make you miserable and hate everything about it?

Toy soldiers are not something to develop a martyr complex over.

ForgeWorld is part of Games Workshop.
Deal with it.
A Tombstalker doesn't need more permission than a Land Raider Phobos or Wolf Guard.

Both sides of the argument have their valid points.

Unfortunately just like the much heated debates we see in YMDC , this case is not so far different either.

If FW clearly considered creating their new units , and their new unit rules with normal GW codex game play in mind ( not just as a supplement with their own intended extra unique rules )
half of this discussion wont even have to happen. They would state it clearly that FW units are as legal as our warhammer GW counter part.

This isnt about how over costed some tanks are , or how over powered the titans are , that argument just cancels each other out, because its inconsistent.

This isnt about a "game needs 2 player's agreement anyways" it is , but thats irrelevant here. We are seeking something concrete, in the sense of balance , and fair game play.
Not through agreement or random dice roll off , but rather , trust that such FW units has been created , and tested for 100% compatibility with GW codex in mind.

This isnt about count as , it isnt about proxing DKOK for IG Cadians no. We know it easily fits with everything WYSIWYG.
This isnt about people not been able to afford FW and not able to produce FW units to counter FW units.

If anything , this whole issue is pretty similar to having different weight class in competitive sports.

LunaHound wrote:Both sides of the argument have their valid points.

No, they really don't.

One side says; "I feel that I am entitled to X because of Y", with Y being the more ridiculous. This is usually followed by the further arguments correctly presented by you as being irrelevant. This is the point of the "I can use my Forgeworld units where- and whenever I like, and don't have to seek my opponents consent"-side.

The other side says; "Imperial Armour is a 100% official Expansion to Warhammer 40K and should be treated as such".
This is the point of the "You have to agree with your opponent before using Forgeworld units beforehand", as you always have to agree with your opponent that you are playing an expansion game.

Steelmage99 wrote:

LunaHound wrote:Both sides of the argument have their valid points.

No, they really don't.

One side says; "I feel that I am entitled to X because of Y", with Y being the more ridiculous. This is usually followed by the further arguments correctly presented by you as being irrelevant.

The other side says; "Imperial Armour is a 100% official Expansion to Warhammer 40K and should be treated as such".

But , is Expansion 100% valid and tuned to be played in None Expansion games ( aka normal 40k Games ) ?
For example, Apocalypse is 100% official expansion, but we sure cant use their formations in a normal game.

No, which also happens to be my point.

No Expansion can be used in a "normal" game. Once you agree with your opponent to play with an Expansion, it seizes to be a "normal" game and is now an "Expansion" game.

This, and especially the "agree" part, applies to all Expansions, be it Spearhead, Cities of Death, Apocalypse, Planetstrike.....and Imperial Armour.

The thing is, we had a solid 10 years of ways to make things 'official' play.

Chapter Approved. If a ruleset is Chapter Approved, it becomes legal with the core rulebook and Codexes. If it is an expansion then it is not part of the core rules. Many people want to play the core rules and not always mess around with expansions.

If FW wanted to make those units or armylists in IA 'official' for all levels of play, they could have simply made a chapter approved section in the book and say 'the following datasheets are chapter approved.'

They didn't. They aren't.

No matter how supposedly fair, balanced, good for the game, neat models, intended to be used for core play, the simple fact is right now they are not and people see them as an optional expansion. No amount of revisionist history is going to go back and time and make those publications official or convince people they are.

If you want to use them, ask nicley... most times it is not a big deal, but don't stomp around demanding compliance and when someone resists, browbeat them about how stupid they are and how these books are legal and they have to let you use them. Asking nicely seems to go over better.

And FW are never the default for tourney play... which means your FW units and armies are only welcome in expanded play tourneys with special rules that explicitly allow them, not the other way around.

[2 pennies]

If you've paid for the model, paid for the book and have covered the cost in points in your army, I'm happy to play it. So long as you have a)The model b) the book with the relevant rules in and c) an army list with the vehicle/unit in question listed I am over the moon to play you with no further questions. Well, maybe questions like 'Oooh, that's pretty, what is it?' But then again I would love to play against a Krieg side, the Astral claws, Charcaradons or any side that adds something different and new to the game instead of the same old bland tournament type lists.

If however you are proposing a new type of unit/IC/vehicle not covered in any book that does not have the GW logo on, then we'll have a good chat about it before we even start setting up the board to see how I feel about it.

*shrugs*

[/2 pennies]

Manchu wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:There's a difference between declaring something 'nonsense' and declaring something 'nonsense' and explaining why it's nonsense. Try reading.

Try reading? What a brilliant suggestion! I'll do that right away:

H.B.M.C. wrote:Again with this 'normally expected' nonsense. That's a thin argument. Who determines what's normal? Is normal a location thing? No one in my group plays DE, so should I refuse to play them because it's not what I'd 'normally expect' to play against? I've played with and against FW Armoured Companies, and people consider them 'normal' in our group.

Hmm, yes -- you definitely declare that what biccat said was "nonsense." Yes, yes -- don't rush me now -- ah ha, and you did explain why! "That's a thin argument." Marvelously done!

Look, everyone agrees that if you have a group of friends who are okay with you using FW stuff -- well, that's okay. Also, people are in agreement that if a person gives you permission to use FW stuff in a game then that's okay, too. So what kind of situations remain: random pick-up games (which are not necessarily "friendly") and tournament play. So, between you and Frazzled, please explain to me how using FW rules in those situations is anything except what is NOT 'normally expected.' I mean, I know it's bloody nonsense (remember, I took your advice and read your post) so just humor me, I guess.

We're or at least I, am coming from the perspective that FW rules are no worse than general GW rules. After the Powerleap/joke that is the BA and GK codexes, supporters of the GW only argument don't have much of a leg to stand on. Under the Frazzled doctrine, a TO may review for efficaciousness.

In a non tourney situation, lets get real. Its toy soldiers and barely a step beyond rolling dice and making pew pew noises at this point.
The advantages of including FW far exceed the disadvantages. With FW you get a plethora of more varied lists -Krieg, full drop troop Elysians (just like IG USED TO HAVE), eldar raiders with new vehicles and aspect warriors, even Lost and the Damned type forces again. For those of us sick to death of the endless conga line of color of the month marines and 'everyoneelse" its refreshing. I've played repeatedly against multiple FW IG variants and never found them to be a particular problem. Indeed, with their limitations I'd proffer Elysians are strictly a tier 2 list vs. the current dexes.

Steelmage99 wrote:One side says; "I feel that I am entitled to X because of Y", with Y being the more ridiculous. This is usually followed by the further arguments correctly presented by you as being irrelevant.

That is the "I am entitled to play against you in a normal 40k game because I bought the models."

Sorry, that doesn't fly in my world. If you want to play against me either have a 40k list or work it out with me in advance.

Same goes for homemade codices.

Steelmage99 wrote:The other side says; "Imperial Armour is a 100% official Expansion to Warhammer 40K and should be treated as such".

And that side is wrong.

Apocalypse is a "100% offiicial Expansion", but I'm not required to allow you to field a 2000 point titan against my 2000 point army.

Grot 6 wrote:

Mr.Church13 wrote:I would allow for forgeowrld model simply because I loathe the GW "baby-sized" Avatar.

My friends wont allow me to use the FW one.

LMAO!

If you hate the one they have now, you would absolutly LOVE the old- old one. As a matter of fact, you should get one of these and throw that down on the table and enforce the eldar heavy duty discipline.

Whats funny is they make excellent EPIC scale avatars. I have two of them.