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.

frozenwastes wrote:

pretre wrote:Yeah, but that's part of the game. Editions and codexes change and models go in an out of style. A broad collection is the best defense.

The best defense is simply not to have anything to do with rules that change to sell more miniatures. 6 editions and they still can't get the points cost/balance right for ork boyz with two different weapon load outs?

It's part of the game because the commercial interest is corrupting the game design to sell models. Or incompetence in game design after 25 years of GW failing to get things right.

I'm beginning to see the wisdom more and more in having miniatures from one company and rules from another. No conflicts of interest in game design that way.

I'm also a non-tournament player, who's never really gotten the desire for things to be "legal" or "official." If I did happen to find myself in a 40k tournament and an Ork player told me his slugga boyz had shootas, I'd be like "Cool. Let's play."

I feel you on that, my Sanguinary Guard sport the weapons out of the box and WYSIWYG in 5th ed was fine for Power weapons, now those axes do not function was I intended them to upon construction. Now when I use them I always tell my opponent "This whole squad is power weapons" they were intended to be that way until rules changed what power weapons were and I'd really rather not destroy models just to put a different weapon in their hand. Haven't had any complaints about that squad yet.

frozenwastes wrote:

pretre wrote:Yeah, but that's part of the game. Editions and codexes change and models go in an out of style. A broad collection is the best defense.

The best defense is simply not to have anything to do with rules that change to sell more miniatures. 6 editions and they still can't get the points cost/balance right for ork boyz with two different weapon load outs?

It's part of the game because the commercial interest is corrupting the game design to sell models. Or incompetence in game design after 25 years of GW failing to get things right.

I'm beginning to see the wisdom more and more in having miniatures from one company and rules from another. No conflicts of interest in game design that way.

You're coming at it like these changes are a flaw and incompetence. SOME of the changes are legitimate errors, but the general idea of a new rules release changing what the best units and combinations of units are is not a terrible thing. 6th has massively shaken up the play environment and "metagame", refreshing a game which for many had grown a bit stale. Right now when I sit to make lists I'm struck with a torrent of ideas and considerations and guesses about what kinds of armies I'll be facing. The three lists I faced Saturday at the FoB qualifier were all new and different. The week before the tournament I found myself breaking out my Farseer, some Defenders who hadn't seen the table in quite some time, and painting a whole squad of Harlequins!

If you look at painting and modeling as a chore and a hurdle and a tax you have to pay before you get to do the fun part (playing the game), and if you don't want that fun part refreshed and thrown into upheaval ever four years, I can definitely see how you'd read it as a fundamental flaw of the game. instead, I think it's part of why the game has lasted so long, and the company been successful. Each release changes things and freshens the waters and encourages buying and painting new stuff, which is also a legitimate and enjoyable part of the hobby.

frozenwastes wrote:I'm also a non-tournament player, who's never really gotten the desire for things to be "legal" or "official." If I did happen to find myself in a 40k tournament and an Ork player told me his slugga boyz had shootas, I'd be like "Cool. Let's play."

Essentially its in contradiction to the point of miniatures wargaming- which is the unique and compelling experience of having a tactical game with these awesome minis which provide a direct and clear visual reference for the units in the game. There are historicals wargamers out there who have never played a tournament in their life who will refuse out of pride to ever field an unpainted model. Folks who don't want to field a unit if it's painted with the wrong historical unit markings. From a traditional standpoint, even wanting to field a unit that's not as representative/WYSIWYG as you can make it is weird. Part of the joy is modeling it right and the pride you take in your army.

I don't mind a re-balancing to freshen things up, Mann... but it seems to me that when GW "rebalances" they make common units non-competitive, and others must-haves.

One example that still bothers me are hive guard (the shooty elite option). Sooooooooooooooooooooo good rules-wise that you absolutely must take them. For a while, hormagaunts seemed almost non-viable... now I guess they are again, but who wanted to just keep a closet-full of hormagaunts around for when that day came?

I think they go beyond re-balancing... another example is DoA blood angel armies, which can no longer function as intended (must start on the board). You can still do a hybrid, starting some things on the board and some off, and as such they'd still be plenty competitive... but if someone was playing only that style list, I can see it bothering them that they can no longer field the army they'd intended. Also since that's not an old codex, so GW had to know the change was coming when they put it out...

I'd rather have painted sluggas counting as shootas on the table than unpainted shootas.

Mannahnin wrote:
You're coming at it like these changes are a flaw and incompetence. SOME of the changes are legitimate errors, but the general idea of a new rules release changing what the best units and combinations of units are is not a terrible thing. 6th has massively shaken up the play environment and "metagame", refreshing a game which for many had grown a bit stale.

What about if they actually got things right so every option in a codex was viable and you had more variety all the time, rather than just when the edition changes to sell different models?

Right now when I sit to make lists I'm struck with a torrent of ideas and considerations and guesses about what kinds of armies I'll be facing.

And then it will coalesce as people figure out what works and what got the shaft with the latest update and things will get predictable again. Then GW will re-release either the codex or the game itself and everyone who wants to stick with it will get the honour of buying again.

If you look at painting and modeling as a chore and a hurdle and a tax you have to pay before you get to do the fun part (playing the game), and if you don't want that fun part refreshed and thrown into upheaval ever four years, I can definitely see how you'd read it as a fundamental flaw of the game.

No, painting is my favorite part of the hobby. It's a problem with the game because it's a form of intentional obsolecense designed to drive those who stick with GW's games longer than GW expects them to stay to buy more miniatures.

Professional game designers given 25 years of time should have been able to get it right-- since they haven't, I'm guessing the motivation for this game design approach is commercial-- it's been corrupted by interests outside of making the best game possible.

instead, I think it's part of why the game has lasted so long, and the company been successful. Each release changes things and freshens the waters and encourages buying and painting new stuff, which is also a legitimate and enjoyable part of the hobby.

It's their demo sales process and ability to market their product that has allowed it to last so long. Jervis has said that more than half their customers never play their games. They're interested in painting, modeling and collecting and don't get negatively effected by these types of changes. These changes are here for marketing purposes-- the hype of a new edition and the churning of armies among those who stick around longer than the two years or so GW expects their customers to stick around.

frozenwastes wrote:I'm also a non-tournament player, who's never really gotten the desire for things to be "legal" or "official." If I did happen to find myself in a 40k tournament and an Ork player told me his slugga boyz had shootas, I'd be like "Cool. Let's play."

Essentially its in contradiction to the point of miniatures wargaming- which is the unique and compelling experience of having a tactical game with these awesome minis which provide a direct and clear visual reference for the units in the game.

No, it's being an understanding dude who doesn't expect someone to replace 100+ miniatures (or hack them apart and repaint) just because GW is churning purchasing by changing the new hotness to something else.

There are historicals wargamers out there who have never played a tournament in their life who will refuse out of pride to ever field an unpainted model. Folks who don't want to field a unit if it's painted with the wrong historical unit markings. From a traditional standpoint, even wanting to field a unit that's not as representative/WYSIWYG as you can make it is weird. Part of the joy is modeling it right and the pride you take in your army.

Completely agree here. But the strength of not having your figure manufacturer be your rules publisher is that whatever set up of equipment your model has needs to be properly represented in the rules. If some publisher puts out a rules set where the standard weapon of the day is garbage and there's no reason to use it, either it will get errataed, house ruled or people will pick other rules sets. Historical players also have more of the DIY spirit where they are often collecting both sides of the game and running it for others, so they're willing to make changes or get a different set of rules as needed.

RiTides wrote:I don't mind a re-balancing to freshen things up, Mann... but it seems to me that when GW "rebalances" they make common units non-competitive, and others must-haves.

One example that still bothers me are hive guard (the shooty elite option). Sooooooooooooooooooooo good rules-wise that you absolutely must take them. For a while, hormagaunts seemed almost non-viable... now I guess they are again, but who wanted to just keep a closet-full of hormagaunts around for when that day came?

I think they go beyond re-balancing... another example is DoA blood angel armies, which can no longer function as intended (must start on the board). You can still do a hybrid, starting some things on the board and some off, and as such they'd still be plenty competitive... but if someone was playing only that style list, I can see it bothering them that they can no longer field the army they'd intended. Also since that's not an old codex, so GW had to know the change was coming when they put it out...

Again, it comes down to broad collections versus one list armies. If you collect only one list worth of an army, yes when things change you will be in trouble. Heck, if the players in your area learn how to deal with your one list you will probably be in trouble, outside of an edition change. As trite as it sounds, 40k is a hobby and you're not meant to collect exactly 2000 points and be done with it. I don't believe that GW has ever supported a list, but has always supported the armies that the list comes from (with a few exceptions). DOA may not be viable, but Blood Angels are.

frozenwastes wrote:What about if they actually got things right so every option in a codex was viable and you had more variety all the time, rather than just when the edition changes to sell different models?

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. People get bored with the same game. If they didn't mix things up, people would be complaining about how they face the same armies all the time and nothing ever changes.

And then it will coalesce as people figure out what works and what got the shaft with the latest update and things will get predictable again. Then GW will re-release either the codex or the game itself and everyone who wants to stick with it will get the honour of buying again.

In 4 years, sure. For the amount of play that I get out of the rulebook and codex for my army, I don't mind paying every four years. Just like D&D and a number of other hobbies, I play the gak out of my games and get my money's worth. I don't begrudge GW a rulebook and a codex every 4 years. As for the list changing, I collect broad collections to insulate myself against army change and so that I have variety on the tabletop when I want it. This is the best approach to dealing with edition changes.

No, painting is my favorite part of the hobby. It's a problem with the game because it's a form of intentional obsolecense designed to drive those who stick with GW's games longer than GW expects them to stay to buy more miniatures.

Wait a second! A miniature company wants us to buy miniatures? No way! To be serious though, I think that GW's motivation behind new editions is to energize the base. They produce new kits to get people to buy new miniatures, but new editions are just ways of getting people who fell to the wayside back in the game. Similar tactic to big patches and expansions for MMOs or DLC for other games. It gets people back in when they might have gotten bored. People who come back to a game often spend money and bring friends who spend money. Winwin.

Professional game designers given 25 years of time should have been able to get it right-- since they haven't, I'm guessing the motivation for this game design approach is commercial-- it's been corrupted by interests outside of making the best game possible.

You're missing the point. They have had it right 6 times now. People enjoyed their game and there wasn't really a reason to change it beyond people like change. You want to play 2nd edition? Guess what, it is still there. Want to stay in 5th? Go for it. Want to enjoy a new experience and new game? Play 6th. For every person who complains about a new edition, there are two who are excited to see what new things are available and someone who comes back because they got bored of the old one. There's a reason no rpg/miniature gaming company puts out one edition and then sells it for 25 years. Even if it was the most perfect system ever designed, people would get bored.

No, it's being an understanding dude who doesn't expect someone to replace 100+ miniatures (or hack them apart and repaint) just because GW is churning purchasing by changing the new hotness to something else.

We don't expect or require him to do so. He would do fine in a tournament with 120 slugga/choppas. If he wants to field shootas though, he needs to replace them. This has nothing to do with GW and everything to do with HIS preference, as he said earlier in the thread. He just doesn't like slugga/choppas and feels like he should just proxy them for shootas. Not the edition change, not the codex change, not the metagame change, his preference.

helium42 wrote:
I'm just saddened to hear that you decided to stay away from tourneys as a whole. For me, tournaments are a great way to meet and play people outside of my normal gaming circle. You get to see armies you don't see during your usual game nights, and you generally will run into stronger lists which is challenging and fun.

I think you are hearing a very vocal minority in this thread. I can't recall a tournament I have played in where I didn't come up against somebody with a WYSIWYG issue, but beyond playing one bizarre entire counts-as army, I never had a problem with it. I don't think you would have any problems in your case with either tournament organizers or players. And if a TO did have an issue, you can always simply decline to play.

I appreciate that you are showing empathy for my situation, and yes, it's a bit of a bummer. However, considering that the invitational is $75 and the big prize is a 1500pt army, I'm not inclined to put myself in the "line of fire" for people who might just see my slugga boyz as an opportunity to call WYSIWYG rules for a free win, and a chance to put a player out of the running. What would suck more than anything would be to go to the tourney, pay my fee, and then not get to play because of this issue. Maybe some day, in the future, if someone hands me a bag full of shoota boys, I'll consider it again.

RiTides wrote:matphat- A number of us have suggested slinging sluggas on their backs. Have you considered this? Wouldn't require taking a knife to your painted models.

I actually have about 90 of the old shootas that came separate from the boyz arms for just such a project, but I've been told repeatedly that this is considered "over modeling" and even more confusing than just proxying.

The longer this discussion continues, the happier I am that I decided not to go. Sounds like a lot of people would be happy to bring the WYSIWYG hammer down, as I suspected. Which is totally their right, and I'd have no option but to respect the ruling, and pack up, and go home.
It's just much, MUCH easier, in every regard, to just stay home, save my $75, continue to proxy my boyz wargear, and play friendly games.

Well, I'd still have no problem playing you in a tourney, fwiw. It's less confusing than many things I've faced in tournies.

Paste bolters to their bases.

matphat wrote:

helium42 wrote:
I'm just saddened to hear that you decided to stay away from tourneys as a whole. For me, tournaments are a great way to meet and play people outside of my normal gaming circle. You get to see armies you don't see during your usual game nights, and you generally will run into stronger lists which is challenging and fun.

I think you are hearing a very vocal minority in this thread. I can't recall a tournament I have played in where I didn't come up against somebody with a WYSIWYG issue, but beyond playing one bizarre entire counts-as army, I never had a problem with it. I don't think you would have any problems in your case with either tournament organizers or players. And if a TO did have an issue, you can always simply decline to play.

I appreciate that you are showing empathy for my situation, and yes, it's a bit of a bummer. However, considering that the invitational is $75 and the big prize is a 1500pt army, I'm not inclined to put myself in the "line of fire" for people who might just see my slugga boyz as an opportunity to call WYSIWYG rules for a free win, and a chance to put a player out of the running. What would suck more than anything would be to go to the tourney, pay my fee, and then not get to play because of this issue. Maybe some day, in the future, if someone hands me a bag full of shoota boys, I'll consider it again.

RiTides wrote:matphat- A number of us have suggested slinging sluggas on their backs. Have you considered this? Wouldn't require taking a knife to your painted models.

I actually have about 90 of the old shootas that came separate from the boyz arms for just such a project, but I've been told repeatedly that this is considered "over modeling" and even more confusing than just proxying.

The longer this discussion continues, the happier I am that I decided not to go. Sounds like a lot of people would be happy to bring the WYSIWYG hammer down, as I suspected. Which is totally their right, and I'd have no option but to respect the ruling, and pack up, and go home.
It's just much, MUCH easier, in every regard, to just stay home, save my $75, continue to proxy my boyz wargear, and play friendly games.

Or just avoid the whole situation by playing slugga boyz, as slugga boyz, and not invoke the wysiwyg hammer by trying to make your army more competitive without actually changing the models. No one should have to "hand you a bag of shoota boys", do it yourself, or live with what you have.

This thread has turned into whether or not you should or shouldnt be allowed to use them as shoota boyz, and how to best do that to accommodate you. And I get it, you want shoota boyz because you feel they're currently better. But tough crap. Maybe the solution is just for you to run your sluggas, as sluggas, and play by the rules like everyone else.

Hell there's lots of armies I'd LIKE to run but I don't have the models or the time/inclination to buy/build/paint them, my response isn't "can i just use my current models as different ones? no? well then I wont play". I just use things that aren't totally optimal, and you know what - it all works out just fine in the end.

Even in a competitive event winning isn't everything, nor do 99% of the players who play in said event feel that it is. They wouldn't be bringing the "wysywig hammer" down on you for a free win, they'd be bringing it down because you were breaking the tournament rules that you signed up for, acknowledging you would follow, and then didnt. I like that you state "which is totally their right", but I sense you, though you may feel it is their right, are placing some sort of negative connotation on them exercising it, as is they're doing it just to be mean to you/gain an advantage. Any player you play in a tournament SHOULD bring it up to the TO if their opponent is so blatantly not following the rules.

In the future, just play sluggas, as sluggas, and love them for who they are in all of their sluggay goodness. Then you wouldn't have gotten into any of these debates/arguments/etc. over whether or not you could break the tournament rules and still play.

My .02, because at the end of the day, even in a tournament setting - this is a game we all play for fun, you shouldn't feel so pressed to gain a bit more of an advantage through running sluggas as shootas that not being allowed to keeps you from participating in a day/weekend full of games with your peers.

Over-WYSIWYG (i.e shootas on the backs of the orks) is rarely frowned at and should be perfectly fine.

Target wrote: Iget it, you want shoota boyz because you feel they're currently better. But tough crap. Maybe the solution is just for you to run your sluggas, as sluggas, and play by the rules like everyone else.

Actually, I've always run my AoBR slugga boyz as shootas in friendly the games I've played. But you would know that if you had been reading the thread.
I also don't play for competitive edge (I play Orks), nor have I ever been to a competitive event (hence this issue just coming up), so, your argument that I'm trying to squeeze out additional advantage is pointless and seems more intended to insult me than offer anything constructive.
I started this thread to try and find a consensus on what people think of the challenge I was facing, and what my options are, not to get reamed by people like you.
You might even have a opinion worthy of considering, but I'll never know, because your response is obviously meant as inflammatory, and an attack, and that forces me to dismiss everything you say.
Welcome to ignore.

Target wrote:
My .02, because at the end of the day, even in a tournament setting - this is a game we all play for fun, you shouldn't feel so pressed to have to go out and purchase/paint 120 new shootas just because a few obsessive-compulsive people feel that it the only way to play the game.

Fixed that for you.

Helium, if you can't express your opinion without insulting people, maybe you need to take a break from the discussion?

pretre wrote:
Damned if you do, damned if you don't. People get bored with the same game. If they didn't mix things up, people would be complaining about how they face the same armies all the time and nothing ever changes.

They can mix things up with new releases. If shoota boys are awesome now and sluggas will slowly dwindle away, how is that better than them balancing the game, getting it right and you seeing an equal variety of both shootas and sluggas? If they stopped intentionally botching the balance and actually got it so everything was really worth its points, you'd see greater variety and more mixing things up, not less.

Wait a second! A miniature company wants us to buy miniatures? No way!

I have this crazy idea that miniatures should be able to stand on their own merit without a rules set artificially devaluing some purchases and increasing the value of others.

I collect broad collections to insulate myself against army change and so that I have variety on the tabletop when I want it. This is the best approach to dealing with edition changes.

40k and WFB already have such a high figure count that most of their customers quit before ever getting to a full sized game (if they play the rules at all, because according to Jervis, most don't bother). If the game is designed such that getting an optimal use of it as a product requires "collecting broadly" and buying even more miniatures than you would use in a game, something is wrong. Very wrong.

For every person who complains about a new edition, there are two who are excited to see what new things are available and someone who comes back because they got bored of the old one.

Made up statistics are fun!

GW's core customer base are what Jervis called "craft hobbyists" who don't play their rules. I'm one such individual. And I can see I've made the right decision as I have never felt the need to replace up to 120 models in my army like the OP because the rules suddenly change and make a different equipment load out way, way better.

matphat wrote:However, considering that the invitational is $75 and the big prize is a 1500pt army, I'm not inclined to put myself in the "line of fire" for people who might just see my slugga boyz as an opportunity to call WYSIWYG rules for a free win, and a chance to put a player out of the running. What would suck more than anything would be to go to the tourney, pay my fee, and then not get to play because of this issue. Maybe some day, in the future, if someone hands me a bag full of shoota boys, I'll consider it again.

Here's the thing. Due to your lack of experience, you are guessing about what would actually happen, and making inaccurate suppositions about the nature of these events.

1. In literally scores of tournaments (maybe over a hundred, at this point) over more than a decade, I cannot remember the last time I actually saw a person DQ'd for failure to be WYSIWYG. I have seen a bunch of people break the modeling rules, but have rarely met a TO firm enough to actually kick someone out over it. While they theoretically could, in practice what happens 99%+ of the time is that people are unhappy about it, they resent it, and they may complain to one another, but no one wants to be the bad guy, kick a player out and ruin his day or his weekend. Despite the fact that the non-WYSIYWG guy is the one breaking the rules, and imposing on everyone else's tolerance of his failure to model properly. It's an issue of courtesy and respect, for the game and our opponents. It's a fundamentally social exercise, and the vast majority of gamers are too friendly and insufficiently confrontational to call a person on it, unless perhaps the non-WYSIWYF player compounds the issue by being nasty, cheating, or other antisocial behaviors.

2. As you said, the cost of playing at a big event is usually $50-$100, and the prizes we're talking about are not poker prizes. No one is trying to make a living as a tournament 40k player. It costs way more in time and money to get an army, get it ready, travel to and play in an event than you're going to win back in cash prizes. No one's really there for the prizes. They're there to play games, hang out with other gamers, ooh and aah over great armies they haven't seen before, and compete for bragging rights and the respect of their peers in the toy army men community. You shouldn't be worried about some hyper-competitive guy just waiting to NAIL you and give you a forfeit for breaking the rules, because his whole focus is the win at any price. Those guys are rare. Vanishingly so at big events, because, again, the prizes aren't worth the effort. Guys who act like that become pariahs in the community and lose out on all the social enjoyment of these events. 1 guy out of 50 or 100 or 200 will win overall. So it's a sucker's game to compete with your enjoyment dependent on winning the whole thing. If you're participating with the right attitude, you win just by attending, because the social and gaming experience of playing that many games, against great-looking armies, on great terrain, with other dedicated hobbyists, and admiring each other's armies, is the point. And that doesn't depend on whether you win or lose.

matphat wrote:

RiTides wrote:matphat- A number of us have suggested slinging sluggas on their backs. Have you considered this? Wouldn't require taking a knife to your painted models.

I actually have about 90 of the old shootas that came separate from the boyz arms for just such a project,

If you have 90 shootas, you could certainly re-model many of your existing boys with fairly minimal effort. Yes, painting 90 shootas and cutting and repairing 90 boys is a good bit of work, but certainly not as much work as starting a second army; and many folks do that just about every year. If fielding the shootas is that important to you, then it's worth the effort. If it's not important, why stress about it? Sluggas may well still be good, particularly given the improvements to Fearless in the current edition.

matphat wrote:The longer this discussion continues, the happier I am that I decided not to go. Sounds like a lot of people would be happy to bring the WYSIWYG hammer down, as I suspected. Which is totally their right, and I'd have no option but to respect the ruling, and pack up, and go home.
It's just much, MUCH easier, in every regard, to just stay home, save my $75, continue to proxy my boyz wargear, and play friendly games.

The reason I'm still discussing this is because I really don't want folks who have no experience of tournaments to draw the wrong conclusions through misunderstandings, as you're doing. The reason not to bring a non-WYSIWYG army isn't fear of being DQ'd. The real reason is because you don't want to be rude and impose on your opponents. Because you have too much pride as a modeler and a gamer, and you respect your army and your opponents too much to do that.

And these same reasons really should apply to friendly games, too. While most of us are more than happy to be understanding about playing with a friend (or even a stranger) who is working on his army over time, and doesn't have the time or inclination to do a major modeling revamp like this all at once, that understanding ideally shouldn't be used as an excuse to just never do the modeling. If you've always fielded them as Shootas, it kind of mystifies me why you haven't been working on them over time and getting them converted over to be modeled properly. The only reason I can think of is that everyone you play with either has been reluctant to push the point and ask you to, or just genuinely doesn't care (perhaps a mix of the two). So you haven't had reason or motivation to do the work and get the models WYSIWYG. I can understand that; veteran procrastinator that I am. I'm the kind of guy who puts off working on my stuff, then rushes to do a ton of painting and modeling work in the week or two prior to a big event, because I am lazy and do put off the work, but I refuse to field non-WYSIWYG or unpainted stuff, so I push myself hard and do the work fast before the event.

If I have been pushy about it, please take it as a friendly attempt from one player to another to share my experience and knowledge of the tournament scene and the players in it, to try to help you enjoy it if and when you do choose to participate. In my experience you will find a LOT of guys who are nice and are reluctant or completely unwilling to raise the issue of WYSIWYG with you, but you will find very few if any folks who genuinely don't care about WYSIWYG at all. The nature of the work and time they've invested themselves into getting ready for a big event and making sure their stuff is properly modeled, makes it more likely that they'll be disappointed (if not annoyed) if they come up against an opponent who has chosen not to return the favor.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

frozenwastes wrote:

pretre wrote:Damned if you do, damned if you don't. People get bored with the same game. If they didn't mix things up, people would be complaining about how they face the same armies all the time and nothing ever changes.

They can mix things up with new releases. If shoota boys are awesome now and sluggas will slowly dwindle away, how is that better than them balancing the game, getting it right and you seeing an equal variety of both shootas and sluggas? If they stopped intentionally botching the balance and actually got it so everything was really worth its points, you'd see greater variety and more mixing things up, not less.

Maybe Shootas and Sluggas are fairly well balanced, and people on the internet over-dramatize and exaggerate the difference? Maybe one genuinely is a bit better than the other at any given time depending on whether the current core rules put more emphasis on shooting or on assault, and what particular books are prevalent in a particular local scene or tournament environment, and that's something which fluctuates a bit literally every time a new codex comes out?

frozenwastes wrote:GW's core customer base are what Jervis called "craft hobbyists" who don't play their rules. I'm one such individual. And I can see I've made the right decision as I have never felt the need to replace up to 120 models in my army like the OP because the rules suddenly change and make a different equipment load out way, way better.

Since you don't play their rules, how can you feel comfortable expressing such definitive opinions about them?

Mannahnin, I really appreciate your response. It's thoughtful, and it does shed a lot of light on the subject. You are right, I have been assuming a lot of things about tourney goers. Some of that has been reinforced by the responses I have been getting in thread, but it doesn't mean it's true.

I really never expected anyone to put up with my lazy modeling. I also never expected anyone to accept me breaking the rules. I was really just wondering what the options were. Once I had a solid response of "Proxying sluggas for shootas is not generally a good idea, so you shouldn't do it." I was happy to accept it and just drop the whole idea. The crap hit the fan afterwards, and in my opinion really has nothing to do with my original question or final decision.

I have no plans to go play at a tourney now, nor do I plan on remodeling my boyz because I have tried it, and AoBR boyz just look terrible when converted.

I have the impression that my friends don't mind my proxying because they are the type to tell me whatever is on their minds, and because they also proxy a lot of stuff in their armies.

This is the last time I'll be posting here, because I think it's gone from my original topic to being more of a general topic on the two camps of WYSIWYG people. And that has very little to do with me anymore. I've also started answering people who actually have no idea what my original question was, and are getting angry and mean when they have no idea what I was actually asking.

Thanks all one last time for all the input. I've made my decision. I wont be playing in the tourney because I don't want to impose. I wont be converting my sluggas because they just look bad when you do it. I wont be purchasing another 120 shoota boyz because it's too expensive and time consuming.

I really never expected anyone to put up with my lazy modeling. I also never expected anyone to accept me breaking the rules. I was really just wondering what the options were. Once I had a solid response of "Proxying sluggas for shootas is not generally a good idea, so you shouldn't do it." I was happy to accept it and just drop the whole idea. The crap hit the fan afterwards, and in my opinion really has nothing to do with my original question or final decision.

Once again, I affirm my respect for you and your honest self-evaluation and weighing of priorities, and your choice not to impose on others.

I do hope at some point you do get a chance to try a tournament with an army you ARE comfortable and confident fielding. As I may have (over) communicated, I really enjoy them and I find that a lot of casual players really enjoy them to, for all the reasons I've belabored.

Alkasyn wrote:Over-WYSIWYG (i.e shootas on the backs of the orks) is rarely frowned at and should be perfectly fine.

This, but even more so, what Mann said. People post about this but it would be Very unlikely for you to be DQ'ed based on wysiwyg. What you do should be based on coolness and courtesy (making it clear what it is). But it's highly likely, even if you did nothing, you could play most tournies fine.

Imo, gluing those shootas on the back is a great middle ground, and would be acceptable to the vast majority of "real" opponents. Even those posting vociferously here would likely say nothing in person, although it is good to do them (and yourself!) the courtesy of having the right gun visible. Hence, backstraps, real life problem solved! Despite what folks on the internet may or may not say.

matphat wrote:

Target wrote: Iget it, you want shoota boyz because you feel they're currently better. But tough crap. Maybe the solution is just for you to run your sluggas, as sluggas, and play by the rules like everyone else.

Actually, I've always run my AoBR slugga boyz as shootas in friendly the games I've played. But you would know that if you had been reading the thread.
I also don't play for competitive edge (I play Orks), nor have I ever been to a competitive event (hence this issue just coming up), so, your argument that I'm trying to squeeze out additional advantage is pointless and seems more intended to insult me than offer anything constructive.
I started this thread to try and find a consensus on what people think of the challenge I was facing, and what my options are, not to get reamed by people like you.
You might even have a opinion worthy of considering, but I'll never know, because your response is obviously meant as inflammatory, and an attack, and that forces me to dismiss everything you say.
Welcome to ignore.

What you see as inflammatory, I see as honest. You seem to expect everyone to go out of their way to coddle you with their responses, I don't feel that is necessary. You're an adult presumably, act like one. You've stated repeatedly how you want to use shootas because they're better - you are trying to squeeze out an additional advantage.

Sadly, I personally feel my post was more constructive than 99% of what was on here, if your other post on this same topic I responded all sweetly with a bunch of possible solutions for you, and your response was there and has been here "I'm glad im not playing with those tournament players because I like friendly games" implying that tournament players aren't friendly, and aren't interested in friendly games, where the reality is that you want to be given special treatment, and are mad that everyone didn't jump to do so. Sometimes, the hard truth is what you need to hear, because take a step back and look at your situation. You have a perfectly, 100% serviceable ork army you could go and PLAY in a gaming event with a bunch of peers, but because they won't let you break the rules in order to use what you feel are more powerful models (shootas) you have decided to not go PLAY at all with your friends/peers. Opting out of a fun social activity which would probably be a very good time and a weekend you'd remember because you can't have your way on some silly issue like "I want to run shootas but don't own shootas"? Bizarre.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

helium42 wrote:

Target wrote:
My .02, because at the end of the day, even in a tournament setting - this is a game we all play for fun, you shouldn't feel so pressed to have to go out and purchase/paint 120 new shootas just because a few obsessive-compulsive people feel that it the only way to play the game.

Fixed that for you.

While I like how you commonly deride others peoples arguments and result to name calling (obsessive-compulsive people) through that old internet mechanism of "fixed that for you", you should try to contribute something meaningful to the discussion. The OP is signing (or was going to) sign up for an event with a rules packet that stated he MUST be wysiwyg, with an intentionally non-wysiwyg army, to gain an advantage he didn't feel he should have to work for (by painting/building shootas, rather, just by proxying).

And esp, changing a statement I've begun with "My. 02" would imply it's my opinion, you can't really fix that, just disagree with it.

The gaming event would have been fun regardless of whether the OP was using 120 sluggas, or 120 shootas, is my point, why miss out on a fun opportunity?

Target wrote:The gaming event would have been fun regardless of whether the OP was using 120 sluggas, or 120 shootas, is my point, why miss out on a fun opportunity?

Because, as he's stated numerous times, he likes playing shoota orks and has always run them as shootas.

Personally, I think you're being a little too black and white. A lot of people gave better solutions of ways to convert them / etc, rather than "tough crap" and "play by the rules like everyone else". Imo, those comments are not helpful, and there's no way you could have considered them constructive when you typed them.

Regardless of what the packet says, any regular tourney goer knows they've seen worse than this on the table in a tourney, and he could've attended just fine. But that's not the point, there are myriad compromise ways he could make his sluggas better represent shootas (gluing the shoota on the back, cutting off the slugga barrel and replacing it with a shoota one). Imo, "tough crap" "play by the rules like everyone else" is the least constructive comment and solution to this, and does nothing to lessen the OP's (imo unfounded) impression of tournies / tourney players.

People, from what I've seen, don't talk like that in-person nearly as quickly as on the internet. If you just put that slugga on them SOMEWHERE, most folks are going to be Totally fine playing against this army.

It is Not a black and white issue. With a very small amount of effort, he could get this army ready for a tourney, and imo that's the path that he should take if he ever changes his mind...

RiTides wrote:

Target wrote:The gaming event would have been fun regardless of whether the OP was using 120 sluggas, or 120 shootas, is my point, why miss out on a fun opportunity?

Because, as he's stated numerous times, he likes playing shoota orks and has always run them as shootas.

Personally, I think you're being a little too black and white. A lot of people gave better solutions of ways to convert them / etc, rather than "tough crap" and "play by the rules like everyone else". Imo, those comments are not helpful, and there's no way you could have considered them constructive when you typed them.

Regardless of what the packet says, any regular tourney goer knows they've seen worse than this on the table in a tourney, and he could've attended just fine. But that's not the point, there are myriad compromise ways he could make his sluggas better represent shootas (gluing the shoota on the back, cutting off the slugga barrel and replacing it with a shoota one). Imo, "tough crap" "play by the rules like everyone else" is the least constructive comment and solution to this, and does nothing to lessen the OP's (imo unfounded) impression of tournies / tourney players.

People, from what I've seen, don't talk like that in-person nearly as quickly as on the internet. If you just put that slugga on them SOMEWHERE, most folks are going to be Totally fine playing against this army.

It is Not a black and white issue. With a very small amount of effort, he could get this army ready for a tourney, and imo that's the path that he should take if he ever changes his mind...

Yes, and in his previous couple pages on this in the feast of blades thread - I was one of those people who gave converting/etc. advice and suggestions on other ways he could go about this. But he has consistently maintained a position of:

I won't:
-Buy shootas (unless somehands me a bag of them)
-Convert shootas
-Cut up my original models

IE - It is black and white, he isn't willing to change his current models - but he wants everyone to take them as something else. I talk almost exactly like this in person, and am proud to. I'll be as helpful and coddling as can be if it seems that any of it may be making it through to the person, but if at the end of it it's clear they aren't willing to accept any of those, my answer is the same as it is here - tough crap, just deal with it then. This is a game, there's no point in big internet threads and stressing over whether you can break the rules when you have a perfectly acceptable solution - not breaking the rules,. You'll notice at no point was I against sluggas on the back or converting shootas, I'm against his position of not changing anything, but still wanting them to be shootas.

And as a tourney goer, I'd prefer not to use the reasoning of "well I've seen worse" as a justification. And remember, he's talking about a GT - not just a shop tourney.

The main thing is he will be seen as someone who either was totally unprepared for a tourney or someone who explicitly showed up to a tourney with the intention to not follow the rules.

Someone who shows up to a wysiwyg tourney with proxies is like people who didn't bring printed lists and give you chicken scratch on a napkin or didn't bring their codex or dice or templates. Same goes for people who show up with unpainted models at a tourney that requires painting.

Being a social event, when 200+ people managed to follow the rules and show up with everything required, showing up knowing you are not following the rules and feeling entitled to exceptions will isolate you. At these events you often meet new people, exchange emails or blogs, keep in touch and maybe hang out. If you show up and my first experience with you is "here is why I feel I didn't need to follow the rules everyone else is" then after the game, I have 200 other people I would rather interact with. More than once have I heard about "watch out for this guy using proxies" or "that guy had an unpainted greater daemon" and the response is " how lame, I hope I don't have to play him."

Can you show up and force your rule exception on the event? Maybe you wont be DQ, but people will see you as rude regardless of the rest of your actions and you may find a highly social event less social for you because of it.

Target wrote:Yes, and in his previous couple pages on this in the feast of blades thread - I was one of those people who gave converting/etc. advice and suggestions on other ways he could go about this. But he has consistently maintained a position of:

I won't:
-Buy shootas (unless somehands me a bag of them)
-Convert shootas
-Cut up my original models

IE - It is black and white, he isn't willing to change his current models

The underlined part isn't true... see here:

matphat wrote:

RiTides wrote:matphat- A number of us have suggested slinging sluggas on their backs. Have you considered this? Wouldn't require taking a knife to your painted models.

I actually have about 90 of the old shootas that came separate from the boyz arms for just such a project, but I've been told repeatedly that this is considered "over modeling" and even more confusing than just proxying.

I can see him not wanting to cut up his models. Imo, gluing the shootas on the back IS the middle ground. You guys keep ignoring that possibility, hence my saying you are making it a black and white issue when it is not and, imo, taking a bit of the internet tough guy stand.

It's fine if you talk that way in person, but really I doubt it... not with someone you don't know. I believe I've seen you at a few events (I'm also in MD) and you seem like a good guy / player. But no one goes up to someone they don't know, and after the end of a conversation, says "Tough crap, you'll have to play by the rules like everyone else" about their well painted models. Or, at least, I have yet to see it.

The point remains that:

1) He probably COULD go to the event as-is, and probably have no one say anything to him about it, although it would NOT be courteous to do so with no converting, and I am not advocating it.
2) If he puts shootas on them SOMEWHERE... he'll have his models better represented than a decent percentage of the armies seen at tournies, and would be extremely likely to face 0 problems at all in using them.

That's my point... there IS a grey area. At least now we've gotten the conversation to the point where, obviously, he would not be DQ'ed. On the internet, it sounds like there is a WYSIWYG police officer walking the aisles of tournaments. It's just not the case. The reason, even though I go out of my way to use alternate models, I convert every single weapon with the actual GW one is simple: I want to be courteous to my opponent, and have it be clear what everything is armed with. NOT because I couldn't go and use it in a tournament otherwise, because in all likelihood, I could.

As Mann eloquently pointed out, the reasons to represent the models correctly are not that he would not be allowed to play in a tournament. In my own words, I think it is for coolness (they're shootas! so they need a shoota on them somewhere, even if slung on the back) and for courtesy (so your opponent knows what they're armed with).

As another poster pointed out, and I quoted above but has been passed over by you guys, over-modelling is rarely frowned upon and, in a real, live tournament, he would seriously be fine using them as shootas if he were to ADD the shoota to them, thus avoiding him cutting his painted models up, and it's a solution he seemed open to.

Sorry for going on at length a bit, but it bothers me the disconnect between what people say is OK on the internet, and what actual opponents are OK with facing in games. Again, Target I know you Definitely know what the heck you're talking about... but are you telling me that you, personally, would have a problem with his gluing shootas on their backs and you playing against them in a tournament?

RiTides wrote:

Target wrote:Yes, and in his previous couple pages on this in the feast of blades thread - I was one of those people who gave converting/etc. advice and suggestions on other ways he could go about this. But he has consistently maintained a position of:

I won't:
-Buy shootas (unless somehands me a bag of them)
-Convert shootas
-Cut up my original models

IE - It is black and white, he isn't willing to change his current models

The underlined part isn't true... see here:

I personally don't feel gluing another gun to the back of a model is converting a shoota, however I'll acknowledge I'd be more likely to put up with sluggas = shootas if he put some effort into it by doing something of that sort. If I glue a bolter to the back of my Grey Knight, can I play him as a blood angel, dark angel, etc., at a tournament?

RiTides wrote:

matphat wrote:

RiTides wrote:matphat- A number of us have suggested slinging sluggas on their backs. Have you considered this? Wouldn't require taking a knife to your painted models.

I actually have about 90 of the old shootas that came separate from the boyz arms for just such a project, but I've been told repeatedly that this is considered "over modeling" and even more confusing than just proxying.

I can see him not wanting to cut up his models. Imo, gluing the shootas on the back IS the middle ground. You guys keep ignoring that possibility, hence my saying you are making it a black and white issue when it is not and, imo, taking a bit of the internet tough guy stand.

RiTides wrote:
It's fine if you talk that way in person, but really I doubt it... not with someone you don't know. I believe I've seen you at a few events (I'm also in MD) and you seem like a good guy / player. But no one goes up to someone they don't know, and after the end of a conversation, says "Tough crap, you'll have to play by the rules like everyone else" about their well painted models. Or, at least, I have yet to see it.

Yup, we've interacted in person and had a good time, I think I may have been one of the guys who tried to protect one of your valk/vendettas from the leaky-roof incident at the Bowie-opening. I also wouldn't go up to someone I don't know and at the end of the conversation say it like that, however if there was someone at an event making a stink about how he couldn't break the rules, and after he'd been given suggestions on easy fixes refused - I would tell him he just has to live with it and play by the rules. Maybe that's all in the delivery of said sentence though.

RiTides wrote:
The point remains that:

1) He probably COULD go to the event as-is, and probably have no one say anything to him about it, although it would NOT be courteous to do so with no converting, and I am not advocating it.
2) If he puts shootas on them SOMEWHERE... he'll have his models better represented than a decent percentage of the armies seen at tournies, and would be extremely likely to face 0 problems at all in using them.

I would disagree with #2, he'll be less-likely to have problems, but from my experience, it still isn't that unheard of for people to have problems with that sort of thing at a big GT with a size similar to FoB

RiTides wrote:That's my point... there IS a grey area. At least now we've gotten the conversation to the point where, obviously, he would not be DQ'ed. On the internet, it sounds like there is a WYSIWYG police officer walking the aisles of tournaments. It's just not the case. The reason, even though I go out of my way to use alternate models, I convert every single weapon with the actual GW one is simple: I want to be courteous to my opponent, and have it be clear what everything is armed with. NOT because I couldn't go and use it in a tournament otherwise, because in all likelihood, I could.

Agreed, in all likelihood you could. But you shouldn't EXPECT to be able to or be surprised if you get told "those aren't legal". Because they aren't, and you went in knowing it. (In reference to using unconverted models, models with shootas on them still aren't "legal" but they're closer - if thats a thing? because shootas don't have sluggas/choppas, which his still would have).

RiTides wrote:As Mann eloquently pointed out, the reasons to represent the models correctly are not that he would not be allowed to play in a tournament. In my own words, I think it is for coolness (they're shootas! so they need a shoota on them somewhere, even if slung on the back) and for courtesy (so your opponent knows what they're armed with).

By the rules, he would not be allowed to play them at a tournament, and he knows it (he made this thread afterall). What you're saying is he could likely get away with it, and I'd agree. I've seen unpainted models at GT's, I've seen not fully assembled models at a GT, however, some of those times I saw those people get DQ'd, and some not. It just depended. As long as he's willing to roll the dice on that, go for it. But I don't think this is the example to strive for.

RiTides wrote:
As another poster pointed out, and I quoted above but has been passed over by you guys, over-modelling is rarely frowned upon and, in a real, live tournament, he would seriously be fine using them as shootas if he were to ADD the shoota to them, thus avoiding him cutting his painted models up, and it's a solution he seemed open to.

Agreed, he would probably be fine breaking the rules as such, but he would still be breaking the rules, and if he did get called out on it, he'd have to live with that. Is it likely? Heck no, but could it happen? Yup. And it wouldn't be a "jerk" opponent to blame as this thread keeps hinting at (which bugs me fwiw), it'd just be someone who enjoys the game differently and wanted to see shootas as shootas, and felt you were being rude by trying to circumvent the rules and/or slide by with something you knew was incorrect. IMO, he didn't seem open to that solution - he only seemed open to it (and this is drawing on him in the FOB thread a bit) - if there was an official call saying what he was doing was legal by the TO/other. He quickly didn't want to put shootas on their back as soon as he realized that there would be a chance it still wouldn't be accepted.

RiTides wrote:
Sorry for going on at length a bit, but it bothers me the disconnect between what people say is OK on the internet, and what actual opponents are OK with facing in games. Again, Target I know you Definitely know what the heck you're talking about... but are you telling me that you, personally, would have a problem with his gluing shootas on their backs and you playing against them in a tournament?

Me personally? I'll say 100% honestly, that at a GT:

-> If he didn't convert anything: yes, I have a problem, and I'd tell him that respectfully (and I do mean respectfully) and ask a TO to make a ruling, if the TO said it was okay, I'd shrug and play with a smile on my face, their word is final, whether I like it or not.
-> If he glued shootas to their backs, but left on the sluggas/choppas: I'd likely not saying anything since he put in some effort to making his models wysiwyg, I wouldn't like it because I'd know he did it purely to circumvent the wysiwyg ruling and run his models in a more advantageous way, but I'd accept it. Mind you, this would put a bad taste in my mouth from the start of the game and while I'd still be friendly and cordial, our newfound relationship wouldn't be off to a good start.

As I said - Do you think I'd realistically be allowed to glue bolters to my GKs and then use them as any marine variant? With the ally system now, they can be in my army, is this okay? (From a tourney perspective, I can say that I'd 100% expect to not be allowed to do this).


In summary - I respect your opinion RITides and enjoy the discussion, none of that was meant to come off as rude if it did, apologies in advance. However I do realistically feel that although yes, he probably 95% of the time would have no issue running them at a tournament with a shoota on their back, it's still a poor way to enter into an event, esp. when there's no need to do so. It's not as if the edition change removed slugga boyz from the codex, and he now has models with no legal entry - he just has models he doesn't feel are as good/play how he would want them to anymore.

I suck at manipulating the quoting system, so I'll give it a shot but it may need an edit...

I appreciate the thorough response! Although, I am not the guy with the valk/vendettas but that sounds like a nice thing you did!

Just to respond to the last part:

Target wrote:-> If he glued shootas to their backs, but left on the sluggas/choppas: I'd likely not saying anything since he put in some effort to making his models wysiwyg, I wouldn't like it because I'd know he did it purely to circumvent the wysiwyg ruling and run his models in a more advantageous way, but I'd accept it. Mind you, this would put a bad taste in my mouth from the start of the game and while I'd still be friendly and cordial, our newfound relationship wouldn't be off to a good start.

The reason I don't feel this way, and don't like this view, is that it is assigning motive to him based on his models. To me, that's the same as saying "My opponent must be a WAAC player!" based on his taking a well optimized list, typical netlist, etc. I have found that one doesn't equal the other, of course, and neither should it for a case of over-modelling.

The explanation could be much simpler, and I think is: he doesn't want to cut up painted models, and has always played them as shootas- he's not starting to now in the new edition, he's just considering going to his first tournament, so it's only now just come up.

Target wrote:As I said - Do you think I'd realistically be allowed to glue bolters to my GKs and then use them as any marine variant? With the ally system now, they can be in my army, is this okay? (From a tourney perspective, I can say that I'd 100% expect to not be allowed to do this).

I would say that this is not the same situation at all. While you would have the right weapon shown, you would have the incorrect model/armor- unlike the situation with the boyz, which use the same model with different weapons.

Target wrote:In summary - I respect your opinion RITides and enjoy the discussion, none of that was meant to come off as rude if it did, apologies in advance. However I do realistically feel that although yes, he probably 95% of the time would have no issue running them at a tournament with a shoota on their back, it's still a poor way to enter into an event, esp. when there's no need to do so. It's not as if the edition change removed slugga boyz from the codex, and he now has models with no legal entry - he just has models he doesn't feel are as good/play how he would want them to anymore.

I also have enjoyed the discussion, it's nice to talk to people with lots of actual experience and, as we're getting to now, a more realistic take on things imo.

I will say this- I did not look at any of his posts from the FoB thread, so perhaps there is prior background that has effected the discussion but not me. I have only seen the posts in this thread, and the basic question of how to run 120 sluggas as shootas... and I thought gluing the guns on their backs would be a good solution.

I do think it's key to not necessarily assign motive to that (although it may be there, I don't know...) as there are less nefarious motives possible, such as just not wanting to cut the models he's already painted. I agree that changing the barrels would be the best solution, but also likely more work... and that could be the reason to glue them on their backs, instead.

RiTides wrote:I appreciate the thorough response! Although, I am not the guy with the valk/vendettas but that sounds like a nice thing you did!

Just to respond to the last part:

Target wrote:-> If he glued shootas to their backs, but left on the sluggas/choppas: I'd likely not saying anything since he put in some effort to making his models wysiwyg, I wouldn't like it because I'd know he did it purely to circumvent the wysiwyg ruling and run his models in a more advantageous way, but I'd accept it. Mind you, this would put a bad taste in my mouth from the start of the game and while I'd still be friendly and cordial, our newfound relationship wouldn't be off to a good start.

The reason I don't feel this way, and don't like this view, is that it is assigning motive to him based on his models. To me, that's the same as saying "My opponent must be a WAAC player!" based on his taking a well optimized list, typical netlist, etc. I have found that one doesn't equal the other, of course, and neither should it for a case of over-modelling.

The explanation could be much simpler, and I think is: he doesn't want to cut up painted models, and has always played them as shootas- he's not starting to now in the new edition, he's just considering going to his first tournament, so it's only now just come up.

Target wrote:As I said - Do you think I'd realistically be allowed to glue bolters to my GKs and then use them as any marine variant? With the ally system now, they can be in my army, is this okay? (From a tourney perspective, I can say that I'd 100% expect to not be allowed to do this).

I would say that this is not the same situation at all. While you would have the right weapon shown, you would have the incorrect model/armor- unlike the situation with the boyz, which use the same model with different weapons.

Target wrote:In summary - I respect your opinion RITides and enjoy the discussion, none of that was meant to come off as rude if it did, apologies in advance. However I do realistically feel that although yes, he probably 95% of the time would have no issue running them at a tournament with a shoota on their back, it's still a poor way to enter into an event, esp. when there's no need to do so. It's not as if the edition change removed slugga boyz from the codex, and he now has models with no legal entry - he just has models he doesn't feel are as good/play how he would want them to anymore.

I also have enjoyed the discussion, it's nice to talk to people with lots of actual experience and, as we're getting to now, a more realistic take on things imo.

I will say this- I did not look at any of his posts from the FoB thread, so perhaps there is prior background that has effected the discussion but not me. I have only seen the posts in this thread, and the basic question of how to run 120 sluggas as shootas... and I thought gluing the guns on their backs would be a good solution.

I do think it's key to not necessarily assign motive to that (although it may be there, I don't know...) as there are less nefarious motives possible, such as just not wanting to cut the models he's already painted. I agree that changing the barrels would be the best solution, but also likely more work... and that could be the reason to glue them on their backs, instead.

I'll agree it's key not to assign motive, and I'll apologize if I have - It truly seemed to me as if the reason he wanted shootas over sluggas is because they're better now. I was basing that on his response in this thread:

MatPhat wrote:Well, I can't really explain why in all that crazy metagame lingo that all the pro players can wrangle up, but I can say this.
Sacrificing a single CC attack per boy, to get two ranged attacks at 18" and one additional str than the slugga just makes sense.
The sense is that your boy is more flexible.

However, I'd also like to point out that there has been motive assigned to those people he feel are "bringing out the wyswyig hammer on him" - that motive being that they want to knock another player out of the event in a grab for the cash (prize). I probably shouldn't be drawing on the other thread as others won't have read it,but the ideas just sort of merged in my head and I've been responding as if they're one and the same. Here is an example from this thread:

matphat wrote:However, considering that the invitational is $75 and the big prize is a 1500pt army, I'm not inclined to put myself in the "line of fire" for people who might just see my slugga boyz as an opportunity to call WYSIWYG rules for a free win, and a chance to put a player out of the running. What would suck more than anything would be to go to the tourney, pay my fee, and then not get to play because of this issue. Maybe some day, in the future, if someone hands me a bag full of shoota boys, I'll consider it again.

-I think the bolter on the GK situation is actually the same - both have power armor, one may be stylized differently, but both are completely legal - except for the guns. I know I've seen a heck of a lot of bright red space wolves, and while I may not like it, it's totally legal - the models are wysiwyg. Following this train of thought - providing I make my silver fellas have a bolter in addition to their storm bolter, they're now just an overmodeled blood angel/dark angel/space wolf/etc.

I think part of what it boils down to is whether gluing guns to backs is really a "good" solution, or is a compromise which is still less than ideal, and will still leave some opponents disappointed.

As a somewhat lazy person and inveterate procrastinator, I completely sympathize with people who are staring at their army after a codex or edition change and realize they have a lot of work to do if they want to redo their army to make it the most competitive they can. I've got a dozen painted vehicles for my BA, and now my usual lists are using 1-3 of them, and I'm having to build paint up a bunch more dudes to replace them. Do I HAVE to retire the vehicles? Absolutely not; I could keep using them just fine and still have a good time. But if I choose to use different army composition, that's my choice and I have to do the work.

In real life, you're right, people give some slack with WYSIWYG, and gamers are nonconfrontational and unlikely to actually kick someone out of an event for it. No one wants to send the guy home on the day. However that doesn't make overmodeling or not being WYSIWYG a "good" solution. It makes it a tolerable one, which is still imposing on the patience and goodwill of one's fellow gamers.

If we have the opportunity before an event to encourage "best practices" in modeling and how to behave at an event, then it's in everyone's best interest to do so. No one's being forced to back up his models and drive home after getting a precious Saturday free. The situation that raised the question is that a gamer asked about an event which was two months away; plenty of time to get this done if they really want to.

RiTides wrote:I don't mind a re-balancing to freshen things up, Mann... but it seems to me that when GW "rebalances" they make common units non-competitive, and others must-haves.

One example that still bothers me are hive guard (the shooty elite option). Sooooooooooooooooooooo good rules-wise that you absolutely must take them. For a while, hormagaunts seemed almost non-viable... now I guess they are again, but who wanted to just keep a closet-full of hormagaunts around for when that day came?

I think they go beyond re-balancing... another example is DoA blood angel armies, which can no longer function as intended (must start on the board). You can still do a hybrid, starting some things on the board and some off, and as such they'd still be plenty competitive... but if someone was playing only that style list, I can see it bothering them that they can no longer field the army they'd intended. Also since that's not an old codex, so GW had to know the change was coming when they put it out...

I agree with this point. I play Imperial Guard, my primary army at 1000pts is 2 vets, 1 command squad, 3 Vendettas (upgrades across all of the units and so on). Sometimes I'd toss in an adviser or two to make my reserve rolls better and/or hurt my opponents. My army was an outflank army and I used the Vendettas as a) gunships and b) to get my veterans to key objectives or targets. With the way the game is now I cannot do that anymore and while I am glad there cannot be 100% in reserve armies anymore (unless they are drop pods or something similar) it does still suck for the more recent codeces that contain units/army list specifically designed to be in reserves. My biggest issue with this is that my list is now forced to change and adapt, ok fine, however not everyone has the monetary funds to simply re-build their list/army because the rules were poorly changed.

Mann/Target- Agreed with both of you guys. I actually think the OP's problem started where a lot of casual players first thinking of going to tournaments started, myself included- painting the "other side" with a large brush.

No one wants to "bring the wysiwyg hammer" down on anyone. I just want to see people put love into their models. Personally, putting a shoota on the backs of well painted models would do it for me, but I respect that that line's going to be different for everyone.

However, as someone who uses alternate models but takes pains to make them as clearly represented as possible, I guess these things hit a little close to home . Luckily, most of my modelling liberties cause disadvantages, but it bothers me when people try to hold others to the letter of the rule (instead of rule of cool) IF an effort has clearly been made, and things like base size, weapons, etc are correct and clear.

I think the key issue here is whether or not an effort would be made, and what that would entail... but having the right attitude (certainly Not that tourney players are out to get you, and also not to assume someone's trying to get by with the minimum because of modelling) goes a long way to making it a non-issue for all sides in this kind of thing.