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.
I'm assuming your speaking of what army's competitively give me a challange. It might come off in a negative way but I really don't fear any army or player. A lot of people have this mentality before a game where they beat themselves before they even roll dice and that's a poor mentality. I've lost to army's and the. When I played them again I learned me lesson the first time so the second game I have a better idea of what worked and what didn't and 9/10 times my out come is better.
Dman137 wrote: Didn't want to quote the post because it's already long enough but for that person wondering I got perfect sportsmenship scores in doubles and singles. And someone comment saying that competitive players have there army's painted for them or just have primed models and what not, well I paint my own models and took home best appearance (judges choice) so yeah. I no that eldar have there strong builds but there are counters to eldar and good generals no how to play against them. But when you implement house rules it's like giving the eldar players a double nerf, people already know how to beat them and now they have rules in place to help them even further. If events want to nerf eldar that's fine but they need to look at all the other army's and what they can do and nerf them (or the rules) so that everyone is back on the same playing field.
"I am an awesome sportsman, look at my sportsmanship scores!" doesn't come across as sportsmanlike as you seem to think it does.
If you act at all at a tournament like I've seen you act on dakka, I have a hard time believing you about it.
as soon as the event results are up I'll be more then happy to post up the picture
It's very clear by this response that you missed the point entirely.
A 9mm is a nonlethal weapon because a 45 can kill a person with one shot.
See how bad that logic is?
I'm expecting an Imperial Knights supplement dedicated to GW's loyalist apologetics. Codex: White Knights "In the grim dark future, everything is fine."
"The argument is that we have to do this or we will, bit by bit,
lose everything that we hold dear, everything that keeps the business going. Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky."
-Tom Kirby
Dman137 wrote: Didn't want to quote the post because it's already long enough but for that person wondering I got perfect sportsmenship scores in doubles and singles. And someone comment saying that competitive players have there army's painted for them or just have primed models and what not, well I paint my own models and took home best appearance (judges choice) so yeah. I no that eldar have there strong builds but there are counters to eldar and good generals no how to play against them. But when you implement house rules it's like giving the eldar players a double nerf, people already know how to beat them and now they have rules in place to help them even further. If events want to nerf eldar that's fine but they need to look at all the other army's and what they can do and nerf them (or the rules) so that everyone is back on the same playing field.
"I am an awesome sportsman, look at my sportsmanship scores!" doesn't come across as sportsmanlike as you seem to think it does.
If you act at all at a tournament like I've seen you act on dakka, I have a hard time believing you about it.
as soon as the event results are up I'll be more then happy to post up the picture
It's very clear by this response that you missed the point entirely.
I think it's rather obvious that Dman137 currently suffers from a distinct lack of self-awareness. People who win sportsmanship awards are the same people who don't brag about them.
Yeah, there are a lot of things that need to be changed about the game. Thing is, Eldar are the problem that sticks out the most. Without any sort of balancing house rules, they are the most broken army in the game, bar none. It's not like these house rules are things like "No Wraithknights" or "No Scatbikers" or "Only one Aspect Warrior Squad", where they nerf Eldar specifically. It's things like "no Gargantuan Creatures" or "2+ re-rollable becomes 2+/4+" or "Invisibility gets changed to BS1 and clarified".It still offers plenty of room for equally OP and broken things, like Thunderdome and allies shenanigans. I'd go a bit farther with my own house rules, but part of the tournament scene is the expectation that no gloves are on and no one's holding their punches. The lists are meant to be as OP and nasty as possible, even if the players themselves are perfectly cool dudes.
You listed a few specific army builds that can give you trouble. What's everybody else supposed to do? Are they just out of luck, and shouldn't bother showing up? Should they just "suck it up" and "get good"? I'd say the lists and players that can beat you do so because your list is so one-dimensional and predictable that they have already built their counter into their list.
People don't just play to win tournaments, you know. Some people just like to play for fun, and enjoy using otherwise sub-optimal units. Their way of playing is just as legitimate as your own, and they struggle with Eldar even in that environment. There's more room for improvement on an individual level here, but the fact remains that Eldar outclass all but a few armies at the moment. Eldar can be toned-down to be brought in line with most of the other 7th edition codexes, but that still leaves plenty of armies high and dry, and leaves a bad taste in the mouths of many players.
You play at very competitive tournaments. You want to get around Thunderdome? Why don't you build a counter to that in your army? Take some different units; it's not like Eldar don't have the tools for the job. If you're playing at that high a level in terms of competitiveness, there shouldn't be any complaints about a list, merely "what can I do/take/use to counter X/Y/Z?" If you want to complain about a list as OP as Thunderdome, do it when you're playing casual games at your FLGS and someone decides to stomp all over everyone with a tournament-grade list.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Savageconvoy wrote: A 9mm is a nonlethal weapon because a 45 can kill a person with one shot.
See how bad that logic is?
Technically neither of those statements is totally true, but this is not the time and place to go into a detailed discussion of various calibers' terminal ballistics.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/09/22 02:34:34
I'm assuming your speaking of what army's competitively give me a challange. It might come off in a negative way but I really don't fear any army or player. A lot of people have this mentality before a game where they beat themselves before they even roll dice and that's a poor mentality. I've lost to army's and the. When I played them again I learned me lesson the first time so the second game I have a better idea of what worked and what didn't and 9/10 times my out come is better.
It's still somewhat hypocritical to claim that the so called 'Thunder Dome' list is an 'Easy Button' army, yet Eldar aren't... ALL of the top half dozen'ish main power builds are equally 'Easy Mode 40k' when it comes right down to it - that's one of the main reasons why those are considered top tier lists.
What grinds people in general so much about Eldar, (and the other super powered lists), is having them constantly shoved down their throats outside of 'Tournament' play. And yes, plenty of Eldar, (and Marine, and Necrons, etc...), players will indeed run these types of lists against opponents who have 0 interest in hyper competitive 'pros only' 40k. And when asked politely to dial things back a bit, instead of showing a shred of sportsmanship, the power player insists that their opponent only needs to 'git gud'/L2P.
Dman137 wrote: Didn't want to quote the post because it's already long enough but for that person wondering I got perfect sportsmenship scores in doubles and singles. And someone comment saying that competitive players have there army's painted for them or just have primed models and what not, well I paint my own models and took home best appearance (judges choice) so yeah. I no that eldar have there strong builds but there are counters to eldar and good generals no how to play against them. But when you implement house rules it's like giving the eldar players a double nerf, people already know how to beat them and now they have rules in place to help them even further. If events want to nerf eldar that's fine but they need to look at all the other army's and what they can do and nerf them (or the rules) so that everyone is back on the same playing field.
"I am an awesome sportsman, look at my sportsmanship scores!" doesn't come across as sportsmanlike as you seem to think it does.
If you act at all at a tournament like I've seen you act on dakka, I have a hard time believing you about it.
as soon as the event results are up I'll be more then happy to post up the picture
It's very clear by this response that you missed the point entirely.
TheNewBlood wrote: ack and I see how much my army cost me. breathing does not help. In fact I think I had real fun with it for around more then a year.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I sense a hint of sarcasm in your post.
So an Eldar player having fun is wrong and bad because that army is so OP no other army has any effective counters? This makes him "WAAC" and "TFG"? Meanwhile the IG player, having no effective units in 7th edition whatsoever, is in the right for refusing to play against Eldar?
No sarcasm. Fun is subjective. Some people like to be whiped, now talk with such person and tell him that getting whiped is bad or unfun to the extrem. I was talkin aboug expiriance of a group. Eldar players were top tier since the begining of the game. They were , at worse, good. It didn't matter if an edition was bloated with rules or streamlined, they were always like that. So people playing them new and old players always had fun with the army. They didn't have to deal, on a scale of other faction players, with stuff like spending 600$ on stuff that is borderline unplayable in a few months, and even if they did, they still could jump to the new good build. There is no wasted money, no wins making the game unfun for them. In fact there is also feeling of achivment. You can win tournaments with them and play against the best armies or play with a lower tier armiy and still win. That is fun.. for the eldar player. Eldar don't have to worry about game mechanics, theirs are always the best. Edition change nerfing this or that unit doesn't bother them, because either they can replace the falcon with a serpent, or the new rule won't hinder them at all or very little. For other factions it is never so, and not across so many editions.
So playing eldar puts one in a minds set, where one constantly thinks what crap are other people talking about the game. I mean here they are having fun, playing armies that are maxed out or not maxed out, and everything works. For an eldar player there is no TFG or WAAC, because there is almost never such things. In their codex. Well WK can be killed, what is wrong with swooping hawks they die like flies, those reaper I took are not used in any tournament list, ergo they are weak, why are you having problems with me taking them etc.
As the refusing games question, we don't do that. We do drop games turn 2-3, and in super rare occasions turn , but I can't remember not playing anyway. Besides If I wouldn't play against eldar I would lose 2 out 3 people I play most offten.
I don't think you got it right there. It just seems to me that often eldar players think they are excellent generals because they usually win. It helps to switch armies for a single game.
Dman137 wrote: Didn't want to quote the post because it's already long enough but for that person wondering I got perfect sportsmenship scores in doubles and singles. And someone comment saying that competitive players have there army's painted for them or just have primed models and what not, well I paint my own models and took home best appearance (judges choice) so yeah. I no that eldar have there strong builds but there are counters to eldar and good generals no how to play against them. But when you implement house rules it's like giving the eldar players a double nerf, people already know how to beat them and now they have rules in place to help them even further. If events want to nerf eldar that's fine but they need to look at all the other army's and what they can do and nerf them (or the rules) so that everyone is back on the same playing field.
"I am an awesome sportsman, look at my sportsmanship scores!" doesn't come across as sportsmanlike as you seem to think it does.
If you act at all at a tournament like I've seen you act on dakka, I have a hard time believing you about it.
as soon as the event results are up I'll be more then happy to post up the picture
It's very clear by this response that you missed the point entirely.
He seems to be impenetrable.
You all do realize you were the ones who asked about his sportsmanship score correct? Maybe you didn't specifically but you in a collective sense. You then go on to attack him for defending himself.
Dman, it's not so much what you are saying as how you are saying it. I've yet to really see anything like a coherent, thoughtful argument to your claims of Eldar average-ness, yet act as if you have already won the debate.
Have you ever played Militarum Tempestus? And I mean with the army. It's not easy. One mistake and you have suddenly lost the game and any hope of winning. Some armies are just inherently strong, and others are inherently weak. It's unfortunate but that' how this game works. Some players face an uphill battle the entire game while others point at things and roll dice until they win. In the current "era" of the game, one of those inherently strong armies is Eldar (and it has been for a long time, but that's not important). Recognizing that you have it good doesn't mean you can't claim to be a good general as you seem to suggest.
I also agree with you regarding the attitude of some players about the matchups they get. I don't think I've ever declined a game based on someone else's army. There is way too much complaining going on today, which I'll add, you have managed to achieve just by making this thread.
Dman137 wrote: Didn't want to quote the post because it's already long enough but for that person wondering I got perfect sportsmenship scores in doubles and singles. And someone comment saying that competitive players have there army's painted for them or just have primed models and what not, well I paint my own models and took home best appearance (judges choice) so yeah. I no that eldar have there strong builds but there are counters to eldar and good generals no how to play against them. But when you implement house rules it's like giving the eldar players a double nerf, people already know how to beat them and now they have rules in place to help them even further. If events want to nerf eldar that's fine but they need to look at all the other army's and what they can do and nerf them (or the rules) so that everyone is back on the same playing field.
"I am an awesome sportsman, look at my sportsmanship scores!" doesn't come across as sportsmanlike as you seem to think it does.
If you act at all at a tournament like I've seen you act on dakka, I have a hard time believing you about it.
as soon as the event results are up I'll be more then happy to post up the picture
It's very clear by this response that you missed the point entirely.
He seems to be impenetrable.
You all do realize you were the ones who asked about his sportsmanship score correct? Maybe you didn't specifically but you in a collective sense. You then go on to attack him for defending himself.
Dman, it's not so much what you are saying as how you are saying it. I've yet to really see anything like a coherent, thoughtful argument to your claims of Eldar average-ness, yet act as if you have already won the debate.
Have you ever played Militarum Tempestus? And I mean with the army. It's not easy. One mistake and you have suddenly lost the game and any hope of winning. Some armies are just inherently strong, and others are inherently weak. It's unfortunate but that' how this game works. Some players face an uphill battle the entire game while others point at things and roll dice until they win. In the current "era" of the game, one of those inherently strong armies is Eldar (and it has been for a long time, but that's not important). Recognizing that you have it good doesn't mean you can't claim to be a good general as you seem to suggest.
I also agree with you regarding the attitude of some players about the matchups they get. I don't think I've ever declined a game based on someone else's army. There is way too much complaining going on today, which I'll add, you have managed to achieve just by making this thread.
I've been playing 40k for about 15, and in ever edition of the game I have had many different army's (just not sisters because I'm not spending that much on metal lol) people keep saying that if you play eldar your not a good general and I think that's wrong every army has its own style of play and if you know how to build a well structured army list then your already a good general, tactics start right when your writing your list. So people can say what they want but at the end of the day if you play with a army that isent really that good in the current meta then you can't blame eldar or others or nerf them so that your special army doesn't get beat up, adapt to the current meta, but and paint a new army (isn't this a hobby where we buy,paint and play) if your still usin your 4-5th or some people even 3ed army's then I don't feel bad for you. Either get with the times or just stop complaning.
This whole thread is about events nerf eldar but let other cheesy army's fly under the radar. You want a balanced game.? Then balance everything.
Dman, I don't think anyone has said that the status quo is fine.
They are seeking to balance everything, and the fact that they missed some things is attributable to human error rather than some anti-Eldar, pro-Thunderdome conspiracy.
Yeah cause it's so cheap and easy to just buy build and paint a new army. Damn why don't more people just stop eating, paying bills and trying to pay for everything they have to, and buy a new army. While we're at it, how dare they spend time doing other things and not spend paint their new armies they've been forced into buying.
People get annoyed with things like Eldar and codex creep, largely because of the large costs involved in playing GW games. Stop acting like people are fools for wanting to not have to plunge a few thousand back into the company that routinely bends them over
Unit1126PLL wrote: Dman, I don't think anyone has said that the status quo is fine.
They are seeking to balance everything, and the fact that they missed some things is attributable to human error rather than some anti-Eldar, pro-Thunderdome conspiracy.
Exactly. It is more likely that when efforts to attain balance are attempted, one or two things slip through the cracks. Some people go out of their way to read into rules and find abuses, it's going to happen no matter how thorough you are in your efforts to balance everything.
I don't think anyone here is for the nerf of Eldar and no one else, it can just seem that way because they are top dogs now, and so of course are going to be the target of everyone's frustration. Just like a nation's current leader will generally be the target of anger at problems occurring in the country today, whether or not they were necessarily responsible for it.
That said, I believe the absolute wrong attitude to have regarding this game is simply "build and paint another army if yours sucks". And again, it's not that everyone has a problem with Eldar being good, they have a problem of some armies- which are 6th edition armies mind you- being utterly unplayable against Eldar and other top armies. I can tell you right now my Militarum Tempestus would have zero chance of winning a game against the list you brought to that tournament.
Dman137 wrote: Didn't want to quote the post because it's already long enough but for that person wondering I got perfect sportsmenship scores in doubles and singles. And someone comment saying that competitive players have there army's painted for them or just have primed models and what not, well I paint my own models and took home best appearance (judges choice) so yeah. I no that eldar have there strong builds but there are counters to eldar and good generals no how to play against them. But when you implement house rules it's like giving the eldar players a double nerf, people already know how to beat them and now they have rules in place to help them even further. If events want to nerf eldar that's fine but they need to look at all the other army's and what they can do and nerf them (or the rules) so that everyone is back on the same playing field.
"I am an awesome sportsman, look at my sportsmanship scores!" doesn't come across as sportsmanlike as you seem to think it does.
If you act at all at a tournament like I've seen you act on dakka, I have a hard time believing you about it.
as soon as the event results are up I'll be more then happy to post up the picture
It's very clear by this response that you missed the point entirely.
He seems to be impenetrable.
You all do realize you were the ones who asked about his sportsmanship score correct? Maybe you didn't specifically but you in a collective sense. You then go on to attack him for defending himself.
Dman, it's not so much what you are saying as how you are saying it. I've yet to really see anything like a coherent, thoughtful argument to your claims of Eldar average-ness, yet act as if you have already won the debate.
Have you ever played Militarum Tempestus? And I mean with the army. It's not easy. One mistake and you have suddenly lost the game and any hope of winning. Some armies are just inherently strong, and others are inherently weak. It's unfortunate but that' how this game works. Some players face an uphill battle the entire game while others point at things and roll dice until they win. In the current "era" of the game, one of those inherently strong armies is Eldar (and it has been for a long time, but that's not important). Recognizing that you have it good doesn't mean you can't claim to be a good general as you seem to suggest.
I also agree with you regarding the attitude of some players about the matchups they get. I don't think I've ever declined a game based on someone else's army. There is way too much complaining going on today, which I'll add, you have managed to achieve just by making this thread.
I've been playing 40k for about 15, and in ever edition of the game I have had many different army's (just not sisters because I'm not spending that much on metal lol) people keep saying that if you play eldar your not a good general and I think that's wrong every army has its own style of play and if you know how to build a well structured army list then your already a good general, tactics start right when your writing your list. So people can say what they want but at the end of the day if you play with a army that isent really that good in the current meta then you can't blame eldar or others or nerf them so that your special army doesn't get beat up, adapt to the current meta, but and paint a new army (isn't this a hobby where we buy,paint and play) if your still usin your 4-5th or some people even 3ed army's then I don't feel bad for you. Either get with the times or just stop complaning.
This whole thread is about events nerf eldar but let other cheesy army's fly under the radar. You want a balanced game.? Then balance everything.
I'm sorry, but this is the absolute pinnacle of 40k elitism right here. Effectively, all you're demanding of everyone else is to suck it up, 'pay-to-win', 'L2P' & 'git gud.'
Your attitude is no different to that of the equally repulsive 'Fluff at all Costs' players who decry anything that can kill one of their precious little Muhreens as OP/broken.
Tournament players who believe in only ever fielding the most optimised & powerful combinations need to accept that while your kind of fun is all well and good, it is in fact very much among the minority of players in this hobby.
At our old GW store for example, the hyper competitive players who took over the 40k gaming nights through their 'winning is the only point of the game' mentality and only ever fielding the most obnoxious power lists, caused our 40k nights to dwindle down to just those same 4-6 guys. Once the staff finally put their foot down and told them off for driving away business and sent them packing however, the 40k nights ballooned to the point that we needed 3 nights/week just ensure everyone would get a chance to play!
Dman137 wrote: Didn't want to quote the post because it's already long enough but for that person wondering I got perfect sportsmenship scores in doubles and singles. And someone comment saying that competitive players have there army's painted for them or just have primed models and what not, well I paint my own models and took home best appearance (judges choice) so yeah. I no that eldar have there strong builds but there are counters to eldar and good generals no how to play against them. But when you implement house rules it's like giving the eldar players a double nerf, people already know how to beat them and now they have rules in place to help them even further. If events want to nerf eldar that's fine but they need to look at all the other army's and what they can do and nerf them (or the rules) so that everyone is back on the same playing field.
"I am an awesome sportsman, look at my sportsmanship scores!" doesn't come across as sportsmanlike as you seem to think it does.
If you act at all at a tournament like I've seen you act on dakka, I have a hard time believing you about it.
as soon as the event results are up I'll be more then happy to post up the picture
It's very clear by this response that you missed the point entirely.
He seems to be impenetrable.
You all do realize you were the ones who asked about his sportsmanship score correct? Maybe you didn't specifically but you in a collective sense. You then go on to attack him for defending himself.
Dman, it's not so much what you are saying as how you are saying it. I've yet to really see anything like a coherent, thoughtful argument to your claims of Eldar average-ness, yet act as if you have already won the debate.
Have you ever played Militarum Tempestus? And I mean with the army. It's not easy. One mistake and you have suddenly lost the game and any hope of winning. Some armies are just inherently strong, and others are inherently weak. It's unfortunate but that' how this game works. Some players face an uphill battle the entire game while others point at things and roll dice until they win. In the current "era" of the game, one of those inherently strong armies is Eldar (and it has been for a long time, but that's not important). Recognizing that you have it good doesn't mean you can't claim to be a good general as you seem to suggest.
I also agree with you regarding the attitude of some players about the matchups they get. I don't think I've ever declined a game based on someone else's army. There is way too much complaining going on today, which I'll add, you have managed to achieve just by making this thread.
I've been playing 40k for about 15, and in ever edition of the game I have had many different army's (just not sisters because I'm not spending that much on metal lol) people keep saying that if you play eldar your not a good general and I think that's wrong every army has its own style of play and if you know how to build a well structured army list then your already a good general, tactics start right when your writing your list. So people can say what they want but at the end of the day if you play with a army that isent really that good in the current meta then you can't blame eldar or others or nerf them so that your special army doesn't get beat up, adapt to the current meta, but and paint a new army (isn't this a hobby where we buy,paint and play) if your still usin your 4-5th or some people even 3ed army's then I don't feel bad for you. Either get with the times or just stop complaning.
This whole thread is about events nerf eldar but let other cheesy army's fly under the radar. You want a balanced game.? Then balance everything.
I'm sorry, but this is the absolute pinnacle of 40k elitism right here. Effectively, all you're demanding of everyone else is to suck it up, 'pay-to-win', 'L2P' & 'git gud.'
Your attitude is no different to that of the equally repulsive 'Fluff at all Costs' players who decry anything that can kill one of their precious little Muhreens as OP/broken.
Tournament players who believe in only ever fielding the most optimised & powerful combinations need to accept that while your kind of fun is all well and good, it is in fact very much among the minority of players in this hobby.
At our old GW store for example, the hyper competitive players who took over the 40k gaming nights through their 'winning is the only point of the game' mentality and only ever fielding the most obnoxious power lists, caused our 40k nights to dwindle down to just those same 4-6 guys. Once the staff finally put their foot down and told them off for driving away business and sent them packing however, the 40k nights ballooned to the point that we needed 3 nights/week just ensure everyone would get a chance to play!
so they told off players because they play competitively and basically made them not want to come back to the store, so you drove sales away either way lol you think GW wants people that just don't buy anything new and just play with there old stuff, sorry to burst your bubble but it's people like you that are the reason GW has no growth. I buy 1000$ dollar army's at a time, usually 3 or 4 army's a year not to meantion all the other stuff I pic up, and I'm a competitive player and guess what GW would never get rid of me because I'm a real hobbyist
Dman137 wrote: so they told off players because they play competitively and basically made them not want to come back to the store, so you drove sales away either way lol you think GW wants people that just don't buy anything new and just play with there old stuff, sorry to burst your bubble but it's people like you that are the reason GW has no growth. I buy 1000$ dollar army's at a time, usually 3 or 4 army's a year not to meantion all the other stuff I pic up, and I'm a competitive player and guess what GW would never get rid of me because I'm a real hobbyist
So who is better to cater for from a business perspective, 4-6 guys who play competitively but just need one night or the players that needed three nights to accommodate them?
Dman137 wrote: Didn't want to quote the post because it's already long enough but for that person wondering I got perfect sportsmenship scores in doubles and singles. And someone comment saying that competitive players have there army's painted for them or just have primed models and what not, well I paint my own models and took home best appearance (judges choice) so yeah. I no that eldar have there strong builds but there are counters to eldar and good generals no how to play against them. But when you implement house rules it's like giving the eldar players a double nerf, people already know how to beat them and now they have rules in place to help them even further. If events want to nerf eldar that's fine but they need to look at all the other army's and what they can do and nerf them (or the rules) so that everyone is back on the same playing field.
"I am an awesome sportsman, look at my sportsmanship scores!" doesn't come across as sportsmanlike as you seem to think it does.
If you act at all at a tournament like I've seen you act on dakka, I have a hard time believing you about it.
as soon as the event results are up I'll be more then happy to post up the picture
It's very clear by this response that you missed the point entirely.
He seems to be impenetrable.
You all do realize you were the ones who asked about his sportsmanship score correct? Maybe you didn't specifically but you in a collective sense. You then go on to attack him for defending himself.
Dman, it's not so much what you are saying as how you are saying it. I've yet to really see anything like a coherent, thoughtful argument to your claims of Eldar average-ness, yet act as if you have already won the debate.
Have you ever played Militarum Tempestus? And I mean with the army. It's not easy. One mistake and you have suddenly lost the game and any hope of winning. Some armies are just inherently strong, and others are inherently weak. It's unfortunate but that' how this game works. Some players face an uphill battle the entire game while others point at things and roll dice until they win. In the current "era" of the game, one of those inherently strong armies is Eldar (and it has been for a long time, but that's not important). Recognizing that you have it good doesn't mean you can't claim to be a good general as you seem to suggest.
I also agree with you regarding the attitude of some players about the matchups they get. I don't think I've ever declined a game based on someone else's army. There is way too much complaining going on today, which I'll add, you have managed to achieve just by making this thread.
I've been playing 40k for about 15, and in ever edition of the game I have had many different army's (just not sisters because I'm not spending that much on metal lol) people keep saying that if you play eldar your not a good general and I think that's wrong every army has its own style of play and if you know how to build a well structured army list then your already a good general, tactics start right when your writing your list. So people can say what they want but at the end of the day if you play with a army that isent really that good in the current meta then you can't blame eldar or others or nerf them so that your special army doesn't get beat up, adapt to the current meta, but and paint a new army (isn't this a hobby where we buy,paint and play) if your still usin your 4-5th or some people even 3ed army's then I don't feel bad for you. Either get with the times or just stop complaning.
This whole thread is about events nerf eldar but let other cheesy army's fly under the radar. You want a balanced game.? Then balance everything.
I'm sorry, but this is the absolute pinnacle of 40k elitism right here. Effectively, all you're demanding of everyone else is to suck it up, 'pay-to-win', 'L2P' & 'git gud.'
Your attitude is no different to that of the equally repulsive 'Fluff at all Costs' players who decry anything that can kill one of their precious little Muhreens as OP/broken.
Tournament players who believe in only ever fielding the most optimised & powerful combinations need to accept that while your kind of fun is all well and good, it is in fact very much among the minority of players in this hobby.
At our old GW store for example, the hyper competitive players who took over the 40k gaming nights through their 'winning is the only point of the game' mentality and only ever fielding the most obnoxious power lists, caused our 40k nights to dwindle down to just those same 4-6 guys. Once the staff finally put their foot down and told them off for driving away business and sent them packing however, the 40k nights ballooned to the point that we needed 3 nights/week just ensure everyone would get a chance to play!
so they told off players because they play competitively and basically made them not want to come back to the store, so you drove sales away either way lol you think GW wants people that just don't buy anything new and just play with there old stuff, sorry to burst your bubble but it's people like you that are the reason GW has no growth. I buy 1000$ dollar army's at a time, usually 3 or 4 army's a year not to meantion all the other stuff I pic up, and I'm a competitive player and guess what GW would never get rid of me because I'm a real hobbyist
Yeah, we drove away the all of an occasional paint pot these problem players would ever buy from the store... What we got in return was around a couple dozen returning players/fresh faces who would actually buy the bulk of their stuff from the store.
Maybe you do support your local store quite well, but in my experiences, the overwhelming majority of the "Tournament" crowd, don't support the local GW stores especially, and instead build their armies through on-line retailers in order to continually keep pace with the competitive meta at a good to sizable discount.
Dman137 wrote: so they told off players because they play competitively and basically made them not want to come back to the store, so you drove sales away either way lol you think GW wants people that just don't buy anything new and just play with there old stuff, sorry to burst your bubble but it's people like you that are the reason GW has no growth. I buy 1000$ dollar army's at a time, usually 3 or 4 army's a year not to meantion all the other stuff I pic up, and I'm a competitive player and guess what GW would never get rid of me because I'm a real hobbyist
So who is better to cater for from a business perspective, 4-6 guys who play competitively but just need one night or the players that needed three nights to accommodate them?
You cater to both, you make a night where Tournament players test their armies and make another night for the kids table, it can have juice boxes and crackers too.
Rick Priestley said it best:
Bryan always said that if the studio ever had to mix with the manufacturing and sales part of the business it would destroy the studio. And I have to say – he wasn’t wrong there! The modern studio isn’t a studio in the same way; it isn’t a collection of artists and creatives sharing ideas and driving each other on. It’s become the promotions department of a toy company – things move on!
Dman137 wrote: so they told off players because they play competitively and basically made them not want to come back to the store, so you drove sales away either way lol you think GW wants people that just don't buy anything new and just play with there old stuff, sorry to burst your bubble but it's people like you that are the reason GW has no growth. I buy 1000$ dollar army's at a time, usually 3 or 4 army's a year not to meantion all the other stuff I pic up, and I'm a competitive player and guess what GW would never get rid of me because I'm a real hobbyist
So who is better to cater for from a business perspective, 4-6 guys who play competitively but just need one night or the players that needed three nights to accommodate them?
A lion does not care about the opinion of the sheep
Dman137 wrote: so they told off players because they play competitively and basically made them not want to come back to the store, so you drove sales away either way lol you think GW wants people that just don't buy anything new and just play with there old stuff, sorry to burst your bubble but it's people like you that are the reason GW has no growth. I buy 1000$ dollar army's at a time, usually 3 or 4 army's a year not to meantion all the other stuff I pic up, and I'm a competitive player and guess what GW would never get rid of me because I'm a real hobbyist
So who is better to cater for from a business perspective, 4-6 guys who play competitively but just need one night or the players that needed three nights to accommodate them?
You cater to both, you make a night where Tournament players test their armies and make another night for the kids table, it can have juice boxes and crackers too.
Of course, that way you would get both target audiences buying from you and therefore more money. My local GW do this brilliantly, they;ve got enough staff and space to cater for AOS, 40k and even HH, with links to other clubs for Hobbit/LotR gaming. Competitive gamers and beginners alike have their own night.
But if the aforementioned competitive group is taking up all the nights with their competitive lists and the larger group doesn't want to play because of them, as was my previous GW, which group would be better for business is my point.
I have enough BA models to field pretty much anything in the codex. Care to suggest a build that works against the tourney field?
Sure, go drop pod heavy with characters with auspexes stack up on a pile of melta and heavy flamers with some frag cannon dreads. Auspexs stack so you slam jetbike eldar and thunderdome to the face. After that practice 3 to 4 times a week and you're fine.
if you're still having problems slip a libby conclave in there focusing on prescience and telepathy.
Fliers will give you a hard time, but prescience and ignores cover should make up for that.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2015/09/22 13:42:49
Rick Priestley said it best:
Bryan always said that if the studio ever had to mix with the manufacturing and sales part of the business it would destroy the studio. And I have to say – he wasn’t wrong there! The modern studio isn’t a studio in the same way; it isn’t a collection of artists and creatives sharing ideas and driving each other on. It’s become the promotions department of a toy company – things move on!
You all do realize you were the ones who asked about his sportsmanship score correct? Maybe you didn't specifically but you in a collective sense. You then go on to attack him for defending himself.
I did not and do not care about his sportsmanship score. I'm merely reacting to Dman's inability to have a two sided conversation.
Dman137 wrote: A lion does not care about the opinion of the sheep
I'm reminded of a description of George W. Bush; He was born on 3rd base and acts like he hit a triple.
Dman137 wrote: A lion does not care about the opinion of the sheep
Please stop giving tournament players a bad name with things like this.
Just to clarify for anyone else reading this, this is NOT the typical attitude of a tournament player. At least none of the ones I've ever run into. The rest of us value the casual game at the same time as the competitive version, and enjoy both, and value (most of) the players of both.
Dman137 wrote: A lion does not care about the opinion of the sheep
Please stop giving tournament players a bad name with things like this.
Just to clarify for anyone else reading this, this is NOT the typical attitude of a tournament player. At least none of the ones I've ever run into. The rest of us value the casual game at the same time as the competitive version, and enjoy both, and value (most of) the players of both.
so then if it's none of the ones you've have run into the both my statement and yours are the same