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.

FW is fun to play against, it just seems no one took the time to study up on other forge world units or armies a regular army me and my group plays against is Corsairs true they are fast and loose and the warp hunter gets annoying however it is still fun to play its a new army to tangle with and structure your list to combat and adapt to. And super heavies are fine if one reads the battle missions book there is a mission that allows one to drop three bane blades down and say come and get me.

basically play it have fun with it

or if you still feel emasculated in the presence of forge world at the local club just have all night fighting for 4 turns or make something up to make the game more enjoyable

nomotog wrote:(I don't think people would lug the imperial armor book with them, or would they.)

I plan to when I get my Hornets and Warp Hunter built. If it means there's more of a chance that people will let me use them then i'm perfectly willing to take it with me; I expect people to have their army's codex and army list on them, why should they not expect the same of me? It's also a good way of reassuring people that you aren't hiding anything, and allowing people to have a flick through it before you start asking for games is also going to ease more of their worries; if I plan to drop a bombshell and slap an overpowered unit on the table, i'd do it when we're just about set up with a casual "Oh, by the way, is it okay if I use this?", not by letting people know what it was first.

jgehunter wrote:

Steelmage99 wrote: *A lot of stuff*

I play Eldars so I'm not affected in a good way by any of those units, however I do not feel that. "the big five" are as OP as you make them seem, they are insanely good and not that cheap.

In my experience many of the anti-FW are GK players that fear that some armies can put a better fight.

The relative/real/perceived brokenness of the various units are not really relevant.
The fact that those are the ones that is constantly brought up as complaints is.

Simply be removing/not playing them a lot of the complaints would fall away, and IA units would be played more. This in turn could lead to "The Big Five" eventually having a chance to be played as IAs inclusion would be seen as more "normal".

And as "The Big Five" are often presented as not being broken/overpowered we can surely do without them, right? Right?
I mean, it is everything but "The Big Five" that are used as "poster boys" for the fairness of IA....so it is those units that people want to use, and not "The Big Five", right?

Forgive me for being out of the loop on the stuff, but what the heck are the "Big Five"?

AegisGrimm wrote:Forgive me for being out of the loop on the stuff, but what the heck are the "Big Five"?

Lucius Pattern Drop Pod, Deathstorm Drop Pod, Hades Breaching Drill, Land Raider Achilles and the Caestus Assault Ram.

Avatar 720 wrote:

nomotog wrote:(I don't think people would lug the imperial armor book with them, or would they.)

I plan to when I get my Hornets and Warp Hunter built. If it means there's more of a chance that people will let me use them then i'm perfectly willing to take it with me; I expect people to have their army's codex and army list on them, why should they not expect the same of me? It's also a good way of reassuring people that you aren't hiding anything, and allowing people to have a flick through it before you start asking for games is also going to ease more of their worries; if I plan to drop a bombshell and slap an overpowered unit on the table, i'd do it when we're just about set up with a casual "Oh, by the way, is it okay if I use this?", not by letting people know what it was first.

Ya that makes sense and when I think about it, your already lugging a car full of stuff so whats one more book.

Steelmage99 wrote:

jgehunter wrote:

Steelmage99 wrote: *A lot of stuff*

I play Eldars so I'm not affected in a good way by any of those units, however I do not feel that. "the big five" are as OP as you make them seem, they are insanely good and not that cheap.

In my experience many of the anti-FW are GK players that fear that some armies can put a better fight.

The relative/real/perceived brokenness of the various units are not really relevant.
The fact that those are the ones that is constantly brought up as complaints is.

Simply be removing/not playing them a lot of the complaints would fall away, and IA units would be played more. This in turn could lead to "The Big Five" eventually having a chance to be played as IAs inclusion would be seen as more "normal".

And as "The Big Five" are often presented as not being broken/overpowered we can surely do without them, right? Right?
I mean, it is everything but "The Big Five" that are used as "poster boys" for the fairness of IA....so it is those units that people want to use, and not "The Big Five", right?

Fair enough, if it helps people feel better for FW I'm happy with it.

Zweischneid wrote:

AegisGrimm wrote:Forgive me for being out of the loop on the stuff, but what the heck are the "Big Five"?

Lucius Pattern Drop Pod, Deathstorm Drop Pod, Hades Breaching Drill, Land Raider Achilles and the Caestus Assault Ram.

People actually hate the Deathstorm drop pod? You're kidding, really?

Doubt most people have ever actually fought these units before, most of them have quite a few issues..

Joey wrote:Forgeworld stuff is stupidly over-powered.

Spoken like someone who's never read a FW book...

ZebioLizard2 wrote:
People actually hate the Deathstorm drop pod? You're kidding, really?

Doubt most people have ever actually fought these units before, most of them have quite a few issues..

Just requoting what people posted earlier in the thread. I only learned about the "Big Five" in this thread too.

I do however find the ideas floated here to "sneak" FW acceptance on the "unsuspecting nay-sayers" by temporarily removing the (by some accounts) "broken FW stuff" to proof that "FW stuff isn't broken" rather hilarious. Go get em boyz!

Zweischneid wrote:

AegisGrimm wrote:Forgive me for being out of the loop on the stuff, but what the heck are the "Big Five"?

Lucius Pattern Drop Pod, Deathstorm Drop Pod, Hades Breaching Drill, Land Raider Achilles and the Caestus Assault Ram.

Lucius Pattern Drop Pod, I understand the fear but how many more attacks do you expect on the charge? 2-3? And it as to be on the same target. Blood Talons are not allowed to take it.

Deathstorm Drop Pod: I think I actually missed this one. Is it in IA: Apoc 2nd ed?

Hades Breaching Drill is restricted to DKoK only if I recall and whatever tunnel it creates can be blocked simply parking an empty transport over it.

Land Raider Achilles: Yes it's quite a brick. An expensive brick which will have trouble making back it's points. It's over 300 pts if I recall. Sorry but give me 300 points worth of unit and I will slap that thing off the board. Many many ways to to put the hurt on it but you have the step out of the usual metagame and diversify your army. You don't even have to wreck it. A single roll of weapon destroyed will cut back it's effective range by roughly 58%-60%?

Caestus Assault Ram: Slightly sturdier version of the Stormraven without the ability to transport a Dreadnought. Has an invul save but only from the front and worse one than a SS. Honestly I don't see much of a problem. Can't be worse than someone running multiple stormravens.

I still think people should try first hand before passing judgement.

Zweischneid wrote:

Lobukia wrote:
Wow... I hit a nerve. Page one: 7 comments on FW not being used because people were ignorant of how to counter it, unexposed to the unit, or worried FW would make them lose (not including the OPs referance to the same). Scared of the unknown some said.

I cannot find them. Maybe I am just blind, but there isn't a single post on page one with someone saying something along the lines of "I do not know FW, I thus deny them to others out of fear of losing". Every single post that raises this argument, without exception, is written by a "FW-fan" who makes this sort of condescending "mind-reading" about people he encountered, presuming this to be the reason, just as you did. Which bears pointing out I believe.

I'm not mind reading. Every time, anyone has a problem with FW I ask them why? Almost all have said, because its OP. Of probably 40+ people I've asked that across the past 2 years, I can't recall one that didn't say its because they felt FW stuff was OP or because they were intimidated by it because they didn't know it (which is a valid reason, IMO). When I try to explain that it's not, some get very angry and say things that, to me, show little if any experience with more than one unit from the FW line. These have been face to face conversations (I'm not basing my views on the anti-FW crowd on one little internet thread). I might I add that I do not use FW stuff on a regular basis. Twice in every how many games are in my sig, I have included a single FW unit in an army list. I own no FW units (other than some doors and torsos for models and the like).

Lobukia wrote:
In my local scene, we made a nice rule that has shown FW to hardly be game breaking... seemed relevant to the discussion, thought I'd post it.

That is commendable. But you sadly draw the wrong conclusions. Rather than finding that, as you did, other local scenes should be free to find their rules to best enjoy the game, you deduce from it that FW cannot be "reasonably" rejected because "your group's" experience has provided the proof of sorts. That's what I critizised; your assumption of having taken the "burden" of finding how the game is the most fun from other people, rather than letting others find their own "fun" in each their own way.

So, YOU think I was saying all people should use our local rules? Or that people MUST include FW units to have fun? Really? This isn't windmills, its straw men, and you seem to enjoy propping them up to knock them down.

Lobukia wrote:
I made the comparison to how people freak out about new codices, because its the same thing (IMO). Half of the unbeatable, OP units in each new codex, turn out to be easily manageable and not that bad.

Again, windmills. It's not the same, because lack of familiarity or "unbeatable" isn't the issue in the first place (except for pro-FW-posters who keep claiming it is in evident denial of reality).

I have never ever in the real world gaming scene met the person who disliked FW and then played any other card other than the OP or unfamiliar one. I've been around since RT was in its third printing, and this is all I've ever heard since FW came into existance. Several people in this thread have had similar experiences. I have no vested interest. I don't run a Krieg list or the like (though that would be very cool if I could). Why would I emulate your bigots and try to force FW on someone? Why would I fabricate what others have said about FW models? Me, and others, are just trying to inform others that IF they want to included FW units in their local scene, that they need to keep other informed as to what those units do, and I thought my personal experience that they were not OP was relevant to the discussion (because it is).

Lobukia wrote:
I'm all for people being able to buy and use a greater variety of models for their games, you clearly aren't.

I am all for people playing the game in ways that they have the most fun, you clearly aren't.

Besides, if "greater variety of models" is the sole goal, why stop at FW? Why not add some fantasy regiments and characters? Why not include Warmachine? Some infinity stuff? Random homemade stuff? Just throw it all in and lets throw some dice?

Do you truly see no "line" where the inclusion of "more, no matter what, just for the sake of "more", would have diminishing returns, even detrimental effects overall? None at all?

The straw men are marching. Including GW owned models, made for the specific GW game they were made for, is hardly a Katie-bar-the-door, throw the rules to wind line to draw. For you to equate that to allowing anything goes, just completes the logical fallacy that is your entire argument.

If you want to hate on FW, go for it. If its not fun to play against them, that's your call. The OP wanted to know why people hate FW, and the majority of us have found that the majority of people we have encountered find it OP.

I guess that's not you, congrats, you are a unique and special flower. But your denial of our experiences doesn't make them any less true, and your hypocritical attack on perceived logical fallacies in our posts while you spawn them in your own is just odd and reaks of trolling.

It's probably due to some of the bad balancing of the rules.

Lobukia wrote:

The straw men are marching. Including GW owned models, made for the specific GW game they were made for, is hardly a Katie-bar-the-door, throw the rules to wind line to draw. For you to equate that to allowing anything goes, just completes the logical fallacy that is your entire argument.

If you want to hate on FW, go for it. If its not fun to play against them, that's your call. The OP wanted to know why people hate FW, and the majority of us have found that the majority of people we have encountered find it OP.

I guess that's not you, congrats, you are a unique and special flower. But your denial of our experiences doesn't make them any less true, and your hypocritical attack on perceived logical fallacies in our posts while you spawn them in your own is just odd and reaks of trolling.

Hey. You were the one arguing that "I am all for people using a greater variety of models". I just took your word for it!

But, as you may have noticed, my response to that was already framed in hyperbole. Like everyone, you do infact "draw a line". Your line happens to include FW and, I presume, excludes units from Zweischneid's Happy Garage Studio. Other people's line inclues GW-main stuff, but excludes FW's stuff. Again others just include really 40K-basic, but exclude Spearhead, Cities of Death, etc.. even though its actually by (non-FW) GW. Different people, different things that make them happy.

If you can just get past those condescending double standards of "my line is legitmate" and "other people's line is not" (irrepsective of the reasons you or others may have), we'd be getting somewhere.

Of course lest we forget that forgeworld started as an IG only company. I have a DKOK and I will admit we have a unit that is a bit OP, the hades breaching drill, hands down, no competition the best weapon in non apoc 40k. Without question. It will not stop me from using it in tourneys that allow FW because ive had it done to me before, but in a friendly game I would never use it. Im not an a$$hat. I have had someone take the plasma syphon against me while playing tau, needless to say I never play with that guy anymore so I know how it feels in a non tourney game.

I love FW and I really dont mind fighting there unuts, even the braching drill

Zweischneid wrote:

...Hey. You were the one arguing that "I am all for people using a greater variety of models". I just took your word for it!...

If you can just get past those condescending double standards of "my line is legitmate" and "other people's line is not" (irrepsective of the reasons you or others may have), we'd be getting somewhere.

What!? So if I had said, "I'm all for people using a greater variety of GW approved models" (which we all know is what I meant), you would have had no problems? This isn't my line. The line you are referring to is IN THE RULES made by GW for FW models. If anything I added a line against FW stuff when I made the rule for my club restricting FW models. So your soapbox is over syntax! And you equated me to arrogant, outdated bigots, over what I said instead of what we know I meant to say, while talking about plastic toys!!!

...Nothing to see here folks, Go away silly little troll.

Lobukia wrote:

Zweischneid wrote:

...Hey. You were the one arguing that "I am all for people using a greater variety of models". I just took your word for it!...

If you can just get past those condescending double standards of "my line is legitmate" and "other people's line is not" (irrepsective of the reasons you or others may have), we'd be getting somewhere.

What!? So if I had said, "I'm all for people using a greater variety of GW approved models" (which we all know is what I meant), you would have had no problems? This isn't my line. The line you are referring to is IN THE RULES made by GW for FW models. If anything I added a line against FW stuff when I made the rule for my club restricting FW models. So your soapbox is over syntax! And you equated me to arrogant, outdated bigots, over what I said instead of what we know I meant to say, while talking about plastic toys!!!

...Nothing to see here folks, Go away silly little troll.

Ahh. Attempts to brand other people as trolls. The refuge of the desperate who lack sound arguments.

Again, yes, the line you use is in (drum rolls) THE RULES. The other lines is (drum rolls) IN THE COMPANY NAMES, which after all do happen to distinguish between FW and GW, just in case you haven't noticed. Again, you expect to accept the former as "reasonable" but slander others who point out the latter as "afraid of loosing", "childish", "inconsiderate of the hobby", "naive" and what-else. Worse, you expect to "educate" them to come around to "your enlightend side of things" if shown the "truth" of the matter that FW isn't OP or whatever (I tend to forget). So yes, that reminded my of certain misguided, historical dispositions and I used them as analogy to point out to you the intrinsic arrogance of your argument, which you might not have been aware of.

In the end, it is not about "plastic toys", certainly not about "syntax". It is about a lack of respect for the choices other people have made on how they would like to enjoy the hobby for which they have poured money, time and dedication into their "plastic toys".

Seriously, at this point and time stop abusing the quotation marks by using them to air quote things, it's just pretty bad.

I don't know if it's standard for GW to stock IA or what, but I bought my copy of IA 9 from my local GW store, not the FW website. With that in mind, I'd have an issue with an opponent refusing to challenge my Astral Claws army.

Erik_Morkai wrote:Lucius Pattern Drop Pod, I understand the fear but how many more attacks do you expect on the charge? 2-3? And it as to be on the same target. Blood Talons are not allowed to take it.

The big fear people have is being on the receiving end of a turn 1 Blood Talon charge. As you said, you said, they can't. Blood Angels can't take them. A turn 1 charge from a normal dreadnought can be annoying, but it's not crippling.

Erik_Morkai wrote:Land Raider Achilles: Yes it's quite a brick. An expensive brick which will have trouble making back it's points. It's over 300 pts if I recall. Sorry but give me 300 points worth of unit and I will slap that thing off the board. Many many ways to to put the hurt on it but you have the step out of the usual metagame and diversify your army. You don't even have to wreck it. A single roll of weapon destroyed will cut back it's effective range by roughly 58%-60%?

The problem is it's easy to ignore for some armies and not only impossible to ignore, but nearly impossible to kill for others. The worst hit are Tyranids - they can't ignore that Thunderfire, and short of a pod of Zoanthropes or an MC getting lucky and getting int assault with it (and short of Carnifexes, that's still a close call) they won't be killing it. Other armies have a tough time dealing with it as well, like Dark Eldar (since it's immune to lance and melta - Zoanthropes are less affected since their lance is still S10, AP1). The Achilles issue is its durability in regular games of 40k. it should be an Apocalypse unit.

Erik_Morkai wrote:Caestus Assault Ram: Slightly sturdier version of the Stormraven without the ability to transport a Dreadnought. Has an invul save but only from the front and worse one than a SS. Honestly I don't see much of a problem. Can't be worse than someone running multiple stormravens.

The problem is its weaponry on top of its durability (For a skimmer). It's downright lethal. As you said, can't be worse than someone running multiple Stormravens. That's for a single assault ram.

Those 3 are the 3 I'd put at the top of the FW power curve. One is absurd (the Achilles), one is powerful (the Caestus) and one has been slightly neutered (the Lucius). Those 3 give FW a bad name, though only 2 of them deservedly.

I wouldn't call it deservedly at all.

Due to one or two sets of rules that may be powerful all of FW is condemned? Apply that same logic to any GW Codex. There are usually one or two things in most Codices that range far and above everything else in terms of power, yet no one makes such a fuss about those.

no hate hear on FW i would play against a model(s) as long as i had the rules in front of me or my opponent showed me the rules before we started playing

Forgive me for being out of the loop on the stuff, but what the heck are the "Big Five"?

--Lucius Pattern Drop Pod, Deathstorm Drop Pod, Hades Breaching Drill, Land Raider Achilles and the Caestus Assault Ram.

Well. I know now, lol. Now of course, my experience is probably telling, as for all but two of those I had to go to the FW site to even know what they even were. So supposedly just these "5" models are breaking the game so bad that all the rest of Forgeworlds stuff needs to be shunned from friendly games? 5 models and their OP rules spoil the pot for several hundred others?

How many of us gamers even see these 5 things hit the table? Is there some gang of gamers traveling across the country, fielding multiple Land raider Achilles' and Assault rams that obliterate everyone that tries to game against them?

If there's just a few models that are deemed by everyone to be so overpowered, just agree not to use those few in your gaming club. It's not like any one gamer out there is going to see very many Forgeworld models at all, anyway, and I can't see how the few of those that actually hit the table are going to "ruin the game'.

I'm betting most of us are a lot like me, where you might go up against an army with a random Forgeworld tank that the player thinks is cool, or something like that. Ohhh, a marine army with a Contemptor...I'm shaking in my boots.

Hell the most FW stuff I have is a single Wave Serpent with a twin-Starcannon turret, from way before they even came out in plastic. Aside from my buddy, who has some SM stuff, I'll bet I'm the only gamer in about a 30 mile radius that has anything FW.

Due to one or two sets of rules that may be powerful all of FW is condemned? Apply that same logic to any GW Codex. There are usually one or two things in most Codices that range far and above everything else in terms of power, yet no one makes such a fuss about those.

My thoughts exactly.

H.B.M.C. wrote:I wouldn't call it deservedly at all.

Due to one or two sets of rules that may be powerful all of FW is condemned? Apply that same logic to any GW Codex. There are usually one or two things in most Codices that range far and above everything else in terms of power, yet no one makes such a fuss about those.

Eh, I worded that poorly. I didn't mean FW should be condemned for them, just that those two units do deserve their reputation.

-Loki- wrote:

Erik_Morkai wrote:Lucius Pattern Drop Pod, I understand the fear but how many more attacks do you expect on the charge? 2-3? And it as to be on the same target. Blood Talons are not allowed to take it.

The big fear people have is being on the receiving end of a turn 1 Blood Talon charge. As you said, you said, they can't. Blood Angels can't take them. A turn 1 charge from a normal dreadnought can be annoying, but it's not crippling.

Erik_Morkai wrote:Land Raider Achilles: Yes it's quite a brick. An expensive brick which will have trouble making back it's points. It's over 300 pts if I recall. Sorry but give me 300 points worth of unit and I will slap that thing off the board. Many many ways to to put the hurt on it but you have the step out of the usual metagame and diversify your army. You don't even have to wreck it. A single roll of weapon destroyed will cut back it's effective range by roughly 58%-60%?

The problem is it's easy to ignore for some armies and not only impossible to ignore, but nearly impossible to kill for others. The worst hit are Tyranids - they can't ignore that Thunderfire, and short of a pod of Zoanthropes or an MC getting lucky and getting int assault with it (and short of Carnifexes, that's still a close call) they won't be killing it. Other armies have a tough time dealing with it as well, like Dark Eldar (since it's immune to lance and melta - Zoanthropes are less affected since their lance is still S10, AP1). The Achilles issue is its durability in regular games of 40k. it should be an Apocalypse unit.

Erik_Morkai wrote:Caestus Assault Ram: Slightly sturdier version of the Stormraven without the ability to transport a Dreadnought. Has an invul save but only from the front and worse one than a SS. Honestly I don't see much of a problem. Can't be worse than someone running multiple stormravens.

The problem is its weaponry on top of its durability (For a skimmer). It's downright lethal. As you said, can't be worse than someone running multiple Stormravens. That's for a single assault ram.

Those 3 are the 3 I'd put at the top of the FW power curve. One is absurd (the Achilles), one is powerful (the Caestus) and one has been slightly neutered (the Lucius). Those 3 give FW a bad name, though only 2 of them deservedly.

Dark Eldar have haywire grenades and haywire weapons which will bypass the lance and melta immunity.

I agree that the Achilles could be classified as Apocalypse but I will abide by the rules if someone fields one against me.

A Stormraven with the Shrouding is freakin' annoying to kill. Probably waaay more than a Caestus. Not saying it's not powerful but the for the price of a Caestus assault ram I can field two squads of Long Fangs that will make mincemeat out of it in 1 turn. Plenty of other things that can take it down. I do agree with you...It IS powerful...but it will take more than that to scare me out of a game.

As for the Lucius assault drop pod, I think it is simply misunderstood. Nothing crippling there a transport busted and maybe two or three guys dead. Annoying sure, crippling? Meh not any worse than some bad rolls. (Lost a Rhino once...lost 7 SW inside it by failing armor saves.)

Despite the fact that those units are powerful you can't say they are a bargain at that price. How many psyflemen dread can you take for the price of an Achilles? How many full squads of Long Fangs? How many terminators with TH or chainfists?

There are plenty of OP units in regular codexes here and there and no one is forbidding the whole codex on the account of 1 or 2 unit.

Anyways I have said pretty much all I had to say, still open for debate or questions if done in a civil manner.

Dark Eldar have haywire grenades and haywire weapons which will bypass the lance and melta immunity.

And the Talos (And the chronos if you want to risk it) , MC's still gain their 2D6 against it. So nids are fine, they can send Flyrants, Carnifex, Trygon, Mawloc, even the Tyrannofex!

The issue with wyches taking out armor is that they will most likely need 4's, 6's if the opponent sees what you are trying to do, and they are sitting ducks afterwards. Nearly any shooting should wipe them. It would be worth it for an achilles, but by no means easy.

And even if that was dependable (it isn't), you are asking for every player of the army to swap out their dependable and good AT weapons for worse AT weapons, which are often mounted on worse units to boot.

Hardly fair.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ZebioLizard2 wrote:And the Talos (And the chronos if you want to risk it) , MC's still gain their 2D6 against it. So nids are fine, they can send Flyrants, Carnifex, Trygon, Mawloc, even the Tyrannofex!

Have you ever played Warhammer 40k in real life? Do you really think that your proposed solutions are good?

Ouze wrote:

IcedAnimals wrote:@ouze I am not attempting to insult anyone personally. Nor do I care if they disagree with me. Some people have very valid reasons why they feel forgeworld stuff should not be allowed. But once again "I can't have it so you can't either" is a very childish and selfish reason.

Do you understand you're simultaneously saying you're not trying to insult anyone personally, while calling the people who disagree with you childish? How exactly do you reconcile that in your head as you type it?

Anyway, let me try an analogy, although analogies are always suspect. Lets say you and your friend are having drawing contests with a coloring book and crayons, each from your local store (faction). Your store's box of crayons has 12 colors. Your friend's box has 64 colors. Who is more likely to produce better work? Obviously, the person who is the better artist is more likely to produce better work. However, assuming you're both on an even keel, can you honest say that the person who has significantly more options available to them has strategies and abilities and synergy available that you simply do not?

I don't really have much desire to spend any more time carrying the banner for a cause I don't particularly believe in, as I literally type this in between breaks painting a Kill Bursta. I'd like to see FW allowed all over the place and I don't see a problem with their rules. That being said, I'm willing to assume good faith in the people who don't agree with that stance, because I think their argument has at least some legitimacy, and I don't find it necessary to belittle them to not wish to play a game of chess in which they perceive they only get pawns.

Since you still don't seem to understand. I am not saying any PERSON is childish. I am saying that an ARGUMENT is. People using it could be super awesome amazing folk who are upstanding citizens of society. That doesn't stop that particular reason for disliking forgeworld from coming across as selfish. There are other completely valid reasons for not liking forgeworld. The one I mentioned just isn't one of them.

Since you used an analogy let me throw one out too. During war soldiers are sometimes accused of war crimes. A very common excuse is "I was just following orders" This is a pathetic "REASON" for doing what they did. It does not make the people themselves pathetic. Had they used a reason instead such as "If I didn't do it they would kill me and my family." At least that is a better more understandable reason for doing whatever they did.

Or here, lets use your own analogy but tweaked slightly. Me and a friend both have to paint something. I have 12 colors vs his 64. Am I at any actual disadvantage because he has a jar that has light grey and dark grey or pink? Of course not, because I can still get all those colors simply by mixing the paints I have. Its the same for warhammer. Am I at a disadvantage because he can field some anti tank unit that forgeworld made? Not in the least bit because I can simply field something to fill that same purpose using the units I have available to me.

Now if someone has specific reasons for disliking FW that is fine. My own gaming group allows FW with the exception of the drop pod that allows dreadnaughts to assault as we all feel it too powerful. Having something that comes in turn 1, is near immune to deepstrike mishaps, and can then assault before you have a chance to stop it and is quite powerful in melee is more power than people in my gaming group want to see on the table. Especially since its only weakness is "If it tries to assault it has a 16% chance of immobilizing itself." We have quite a few people who enjoy playing the softer shooty based armies and everyone including our marine players felt that such a unit would change our stores metagame too drastically and possibly push some players away. But even with that rule we have a blood angel player who really really loves dreadnaughts and so he will ask if he can use those drop pods. I have only seen one person turn him down and not play a casual game. The rest of us usually accept it so that we can find out weaknesses, get in more experience against it and possibly at a later date lift the ban on said unit once there is a majority agreement that we feel it isn't as game changing as once thought.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

ZebioLizard2 wrote:And the Talos (And the chronos if you want to risk it) , MC's still gain their 2D6 against it. So nids are fine, they can send Flyrants, Carnifex, Trygon, Mawloc, even the Tyrannofex!

Have you ever played Warhammer 40k in real life? Do you really think that your proposed solutions are good?