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.

 Inevitable_Faith wrote:
Traditio you sound like a doomsayer standing on the street corner shouting at people that the end is nigh. You constantly make these threads with very inflammatory remarks (and in this case downright insulting, really stop shaming people for buying a model they like, they didn't write the rules, GW did) and you're railing against a model that isn't released and we have no confirmation of it's points cost and abilities beyond rumours and hearsay. Every thread you make you end up with almost the entirety of the thread speaking against your opinion and even showing very valid points as to why your logic is flawed (or in some cases you were outright wrong about the rules you spoke out against) and you just make up new and ever morphing reasons to try and justify yourself. At a certain point can't you just ever admit you were wrong, that the majority of posters confronting your theories and fearmongering aren't all wrong. I feel you need to take some time away from the internet and do some self reflection on your relationship with this game and its players (many of whom you insult regularly even though they have truly done you no harm). If 40k is causing you this much stress and anger might I sugest going on hiatus from it? I hear infinity or Malifaux are both very fun games with mostly (if not all) infantry and don't suffer from the scale problems 40k does currently. Perhaps when 8th edition (hopefully) hits next year it may be a more pleasant environment for you to return to. At the very least I agree with you on one thing: 40K does have some balance problems, it'll never be perfect but currently it is very out of sync. I still thoroughly enjoy the game however as I have a great group I play with and we always strive to make each match fun and enjoyable, even the ones I brought a wraithknight to (by the way I have never won any match I brought my wraithknight in, just a funny side note).

To address your original post: The problem is not players buying OP models, it's GW writing imbalanced rules. Don't blame the players for something that GW did. Secondly you don't know the final rules for magnus, no one except a select few do, so how about you wait till after he releases to rail against him if he deserves it then. Lastly regardless of his rules if he costs a lot of points he can be balanced, he's still one model and in larger games you will always outnumber him and his forces, even if you can't kill him reliably you can focus his more vulnerable units and win the game on objectives.

The players cannot directly be blamed for the fact that GW writes bad rules and has a poorly balanced game.

The players are not responsible for the rules writing.

That said, nobody forced you to buy a wraithknight. Nobody forced you to play eldar.

That decision was on you.

That's the thing about the free market.

You can't pick and choose what does and doesn't get offered for sale.

However, you can indirectly influence marketing and sales decisions based on what purchases you do and do not make.

If Barbara's Best Burgers (a made up restaurant) decides to stop offering burgers and instead decides to offer fish heads, the whole fish heads and nothing but the fish heads, then no amount of customer complaining can force them to start offering burgers again.

But if nobody buys those fish heads, then BBB is forced to make a decision: offer what the customer wants, or else, go out of business.

So no, you aren't responsible for GW's bad rules writing. You are, however, indirectly responsible for, literally, buying into it.

You can't, in one and the same breath, complain about 40k being broken, GW writing bad rules, scale creep, power creep, etc. and then tell me that you think it's a good idea to buy a model like Magnus, a Wraithknight, an Imperial Knight, etc.

Either power creep and scale creep are a problem or not.

If they're a problem, then why are you monetarily encouraging GW to make these problems worse?

And, a forteriori, if you are a CSM player who has been complaining about power creep and scale creep for the last 2 editions, and you intend to buy that Magnus?

Shame.

Shame.

Shame.

What's wrong with fishheads?

If you played Eldar before and had the OP stuff pushed on you from an update, then how would it be the player's fault for having an existing army like that before it? It's not entirely the players fault or entirely GW's fault, it's a mix and it's GW who ultimately have balance control over the game and could have kept it creeping along tamer.

Can we rename the thread Why you should never hit "Show This Post " ?

Dude, he is not overpowered.

He isn't perfect but I fail to see the issue here.

This entire post is four pages of everybody disagreeing with you.

Drop it.

 n0t_u wrote:
If you played Eldar before and had the OP stuff pushed on you from an update, then how would it be the player's fault for having an existing army like that before it? It's not entirely the players fault or entirely GW's fault, it's a mix and it's GW who ultimately have balance control over the game and could have kept it creeping along tamer.

Even then, the responsibility partly and indirectly falls on the consumers.

Your decision to purchase, say, 5th edition eldar indirectly contributed to GW's decision to make future Eldar releases.

Understand, I don't mean by this that 5th edition eldar players are somehow responsible for wraithknights and scatter bikes.

But yes, by making 5th edition eldar purchases, you sent GW a message with your wallet: "MORE ELDAR!!!!"

 Traditio wrote:

 n0t_u wrote:
If you played Eldar before and had the OP stuff pushed on you from an update, then how would it be the player's fault for having an existing army like that before it? It's not entirely the players fault or entirely GW's fault, it's a mix and it's GW who ultimately have balance control over the game and could have kept it creeping along tamer.

Even then, the responsibility partly and indirectly falls on the consumers.

Your decision to purchase, say, 5th edition eldar indirectly contributed to Eldar's decision to make future Eldar releases.

Understand, I don't mean by this that 5th edition eldar players are somehow responsible for wraithknights and scatter bikes.

But yes, by making 5th edition eldar purchases, you send GW a message with your wallet: "MORE ELDAR!!!!"

So buy running foot eldar in early 5th/late 4th and getting a bunch of wraithguard later cause I thought they were cool, I encouraged GW to make me shelve a 4-5k army when I later decided to get a pre-gmc wraithknight to centerpiece it?

Pretty sure you're overreacting quite a lot with this thread.

n0t_u wrote:So buy running foot eldar in early 5th/late 4th and getting a bunch of wraithguard later cause I thought they were cool, I encouraged GW to make me shelve a 4-5k army when I later decided to get a pre-gmc wraithknight to centerpiece it?

Pretty sure you're overreacting quite a lot with this thread.

The circumstances are much clearer here. GW is basically advertising Magnus as: "HEY! LOOK AT HOW OP THIS MODEL IS! TOTALLY AWESOME, RIGHT?"

They're advertising outright that they are selling a bad product.

It's on the consumer either to encourage it or not.

Except it's not. It has less than half the warp charges of 56 less points of Tzeentch daemons, it's killable by less than 200 points of Skitarii in one turn, it's mediocre, point for point, in CC...

 Traditio wrote:

n0t_u wrote:So buy running foot eldar in early 5th/late 4th and getting a bunch of wraithguard later cause I thought they were cool, I encouraged GW to make me shelve a 4-5k army when I later decided to get a pre-gmc wraithknight to centerpiece it?

Pretty sure you're overreacting quite a lot with this thread.

The circumstances are much clearer here. GW is basically advertising Magnus as: "HEY! LOOK AT HOW OP THIS MODEL IS! TOTALLY AWESOME, RIGHT?"

They're advertising outright that they are selling a bad product.

It's on the consumer either to encourage it or not.

Boycotts have been a traditionally kneejerk overreaction to GW stuff that have never actually worked anyway. Don't worry your grav shots still mess up a crapton more of the game instead.

 Traditio wrote:

n0t_u wrote:So buy running foot eldar in early 5th/late 4th and getting a bunch of wraithguard later cause I thought they were cool, I encouraged GW to make me shelve a 4-5k army when I later decided to get a pre-gmc wraithknight to centerpiece it?

Pretty sure you're overreacting quite a lot with this thread.

The circumstances are much clearer here. GW is basically advertising Magnus as: "HEY! LOOK AT HOW OP THIS MODEL IS! TOTALLY AWESOME, RIGHT?"

They're advertising outright that they are selling a bad product.

It's on the consumer either to encourage it or not.

The website brags about how awesome every unit is. Just please stop.

Traditio even you have to know that that's not even a remotely possible comparison to make. I'm not even going to insult this threads intelligence by trying to explain to you why a burger joint swapping to fish heads is a pointless example.

What's rule number one when buying an army? It's to buy what appeals to you. Knowing nothing about how to build an Eldar force I bought rangers, some jetbikes a vyper and a farseer. I loved the models, there was no other reason behind my purchase. I bought the codex later. I read the fluff first and loved the story of the Eldar, who they are, what they do, the side irony of their fall. Everything about the army appealed to me, no single unit seemed silly or weird (like the way I feel about the chaos heldrake). I painstakingly painted it, converted models and based everything because I wanted to make it look as good on the table as I imagined it in my mind. At no point did I purchase any of my models and think "I'm sure glad this model is OP so I can dominate my opponents on the tabletop". The thought didn't even cross my mind once. I bought them cause I loved them. I bought a WK long after it came out, I knew the rules for it were good but I didn't care, I wasn't ready to build and paint one yet. When I did buy it though I didn't buy it to win games, I bought it because I legitimately feel it is one of the most beautiful models GW has ever created. It's a brilliant centrepiece even on display.

The crux of this story is that I got my army because I loved the lore, the models and I found it fun to play on the tabletop because it had such flavour. I had no control over the rules my force was given when GW swapped my codex to the new 7th editon dex (I started my eldar in 6th), I already owned the models and I wasn't going to stop playing them just because GW let a couple OP units through in the new dex. What did I do? I refused to field scatbikes in my lists and if I did put special weapons on my bikes it was using the 1 in 3 can be upgraded rule just like the 6th edition dex had. I never use warp spider spam and I only own one WK and I only bring it into games of 1850 or more. I self governed myself to not abuse rules that I didn't agree with that would give me, what I felt, were unfair advantages. I still get to play the army I love and none of the local players hate me for playing Eldar despite bringing the occasional WK to a match.

It NOT my responsibility to stop playing/collecting an army I love just because GW writes some bad rules. I will NOT take responsibility for GW writing bad rules and no one else should either, not the Tau riptide/stormsurge users, not the vanilla marines free ride users and not the SW/DA superfriends users. It's not unreasonable to ask GW to write better, more balanced rules but it is absolutely unreasonable to ask people to stop buying/playing the army they love under ANY circumstances.

Traditio in this matter you are without a doubt, unequivocally, indisputably wrong.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Traditio wrote:

n0t_u wrote:So buy running foot eldar in early 5th/late 4th and getting a bunch of wraithguard later cause I thought they were cool, I encouraged GW to make me shelve a 4-5k army when I later decided to get a pre-gmc wraithknight to centerpiece it?

Pretty sure you're overreacting quite a lot with this thread.

The circumstances are much clearer here. GW is basically advertising Magnus as: "HEY! LOOK AT HOW OP THIS MODEL IS! TOTALLY AWESOME, RIGHT?"

They're advertising outright that they are selling a bad product.

It's on the consumer either to encourage it or not.

The website brags about how awesome every unit is. Just please stop.

An example to support this.

Smaller and physically weaker than their cousins the Orruks, Grots make up for their diminutive stature with pure nastiness. An individual Grot makes for an unimposing warrior. However, when gathered into Gitmobs, they can drag down even the largest of creatures. As befits their wicked nature, Grots prefer to pick on enemies they outnumber or who are at a disadvantage, making them especially fond of ambushes.

 Traditio wrote:
Even then, the responsibility partly and indirectly falls on the consumers.

Then by that standard you are just as guilty. You buy 40k stuff, you post about 40k, you contribute to the idea that the current direction is worth continuing. GW doesn't see "well, this guy deliberately avoided Eldar and only bought tactical marines", they just see that 40k is continuing to sell. Either stop buying, playing, and discussing 40k or drop this ridiculous attempt to blame the customers for GW's actions.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Except it's not. It has less than half the warp charges of 56 less points of Tzeentch daemons, it's killable by less than 200 points of Skitarii in one turn, it's mediocre, point for point, in CC...

This happens in literally every thread that anyone has ever made about about any 40k model being OP.

Model x has A, B and C problems which make it OP.

A vocal number of dissenters: but it won't literally ensure that you win 100 percent of your games, table your opponent on turn 1 or literally be unable to be removed from play. It's not able to dominate every single phase of the game and have every USR from the BRB plus 5 more.

Seriously. Go back and read threads from back when 7th ed. Eldar codex was about to be released.

People defended wraithknights. People defended scatter bikes. People defended wraithguard.

People defended storm surges. People defended riptides.

They still do.

People probably defended Heldrakes when they first dropped.

People defended IG back in 5th edition.

You get the point.

The simple fact is, I can tell you right now what's going to happen:

Magnus is regularly going to be played in such a way as to give him a 2++ to 3++ rerollable invuln.

If you are playing all kinds of OP cheese yourself, or else, if you play with a codex and an army which just so happens to be good against things like Magnus, you'll likely have decent games.

If you play a non-optimized to semi-optimized TAC list with most armies, Magnus is going to be essentially impossible to kill, unless you just so happened to bring that 1 special snowflake unit, piece of wargear or combination thereof. Magnus is going to be similar to the flyrant, except he's going to be more durable and have potentially equal to better fire power.

Of course, he'll be more expensive. But then, he'll be stronger, more durable, etc.

So yes, if I run an optimized, tailored cheese list, Magnus has a decent chance at going down.

If I run leeman russes, a whole army of leeman russes and nothing but the leeman russes, then I'm not going to have a fun game. At all.

And if I run assault marines, devastators and tactical marines in a CAD, well, so much for killing Magnus.

If that comes to pass, I will be thrilled. Orks will finally be able to break out in that meta, as Magnus is so easy to kill.

That's what happens when you run Tactical Marines, a unit that was good in maybe 1 edition.

And once again Traditio also cherry picks which posts he wants to answer...

It was nice having a break from his nonsensical threads, I guess he woke up from hibernation.

If that comes to pass, I will be thrilled. Orks will finally be able to break out in that meta, as Magnus is so easy to kill.

I like how he hasn't addressed this either. Orks are oddly enough one of the factions best suited to taking him out with traktor kannons followed by mass loota or tankbusta support. Does this make Orks OP too by comparison since we can take out Magnus?

Is it a boycott if I wasn't going to buy him anyways and didn't remember what you were talking about?

Also, isn't Magnus the Red a Primarch? Are there Primarchs in WH40k now?

Grimskul wrote:I like how he hasn't addressed this either. Orks are oddly enough one of the factions best suited to taking him out with traktor kannons followed by mass loota or tankbusta support. Does this make Orks OP too by comparison since we can take out Magnus?

No.

I mean, I don't really have any comment on this. If orks just so happen to be particularly good against Magnus, then that's interesting, I suppose, but it doesn't really affect my points.

If tactical marines with bolters had a special rule: "wound wraithknights on 2s, have a range of 72 inches against wraithknights, have AP 2 against wraithknights, do not require line of sight against wraithknights, ignore invulns against wraithknights, have the instant death special rule against wraithknights, always are able to rapid fire against wraithknights, regardless of range, and ignore cover against wraithknights," that would make tactical marines really, really good against wraithknights.

Wraithknights would still be OP.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Pouncey wrote:
Is it a boycott if I wasn't going to buy him anyways and didn't remember what you were talking about?

Also, isn't Magnus the Red a Primarch? Are there Primarchs in WH40k now?

He's a fething daemon primarch.

 Traditio wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Pouncey wrote:
Is it a boycott if I wasn't going to buy him anyways and didn't remember what you were talking about?

Also, isn't Magnus the Red a Primarch? Are there Primarchs in WH40k now?

He's a fething daemon primarch.

So yes, he's a Primarch.

Also, my level of ignorance only sounds weird until you realize I don't care enough about Space Marine lore to even learn the names of all the Legions or Primarchs.

 Pouncey wrote:

 Traditio wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Pouncey wrote:
Is it a boycott if I wasn't going to buy him anyways and didn't remember what you were talking about?

Also, isn't Magnus the Red a Primarch? Are there Primarchs in WH40k now?

He's a fething daemon primarch.

So yes, he's a Primarch.

Also, my level of ignorance only sounds weird until you realize I don't care enough about Space Marine lore to even learn the names of all the Legions or Primarchs.

4 of them are alive as daemon primarchs but in lore have been too lazy doing whatever on their own planets in the eye of terror.

Seems everyone forgot about the Cullexus.

 Traditio wrote:

Grimskul wrote:I like how he hasn't addressed this either. Orks are oddly enough one of the factions best suited to taking him out with traktor kannons followed by mass loota or tankbusta support. Does this make Orks OP too by comparison since we can take out Magnus?

No.

I mean, I don't really have any comment on this. If orks just so happen to be particularly good against Magnus, then that's interesting, I suppose, but it doesn't really affect my points.

If tactical marines with bolters had a special rule: "wound wraithknights on 2s, have a range of 72 inches against wraithknights, have AP 2 against wraithknights, do not require line of sight against wraithknights, ignore invulns against wraithknights, have the instant death special rule against wraithknights, always are able to rapid fire against wraithknights, regardless of range, and ignore cover against wraithknights," that would make tactical marines really, really good against wraithknights.

Wraithknights would still be OP.

Exactly. If there is only 1 unit that can harm him, that would not be enough. But Orks have 4 units that will outright kill him, or whittle him down. Fething Orks! Tau will erase him (note you haven't even acknowledge that Tau is a faction in this discussion) Necrons will ignore him Space marines will Drop Pod him Eldar will do any of 10 things to him Dark Eldar will poison him Knights will stomp him and Wulfen will eat him alive. Grey knights will Nova/shriek him, Deamons will out-dice him and chaos will....Magnus him.

Not sure yet what sisters will do...they might have to wait until January, and then they will probaby out-pray him.

Every army has a counter. It is not one unit that hurts him, but dozens.

That's why the people have risen up against you (haven't you noticed? Or are you oblivious to that, too?)

HE IS A GOOD UNIT FOR HIS POINTS.

HE IS NOT OP, like a Wraithknight, Riptide, Canoptek Harvest or Scatbikes. There is a clear difference.

BTW, what army do you play? You seem to be having so much trouble with him, maybe we can help you.

 JimOnMars wrote:

 Traditio wrote:

Grimskul wrote:I like how he hasn't addressed this either. Orks are oddly enough one of the factions best suited to taking him out with traktor kannons followed by mass loota or tankbusta support. Does this make Orks OP too by comparison since we can take out Magnus?

No.

I mean, I don't really have any comment on this. If orks just so happen to be particularly good against Magnus, then that's interesting, I suppose, but it doesn't really affect my points.

If tactical marines with bolters had a special rule: "wound wraithknights on 2s, have a range of 72 inches against wraithknights, have AP 2 against wraithknights, do not require line of sight against wraithknights, ignore invulns against wraithknights, have the instant death special rule against wraithknights, always are able to rapid fire against wraithknights, regardless of range, and ignore cover against wraithknights," that would make tactical marines really, really good against wraithknights.

Wraithknights would still be OP.

Exactly. If there is only 1 unit that can harm him, that would not be enough. But Orks have 4 units that will outright kill him, or whittle him down. Fething Orks! Tau will erase him (note you haven't even acknowledge that Tau is a faction in this discussion) Necrons will ignore him Space marines will Drop Pod him Eldar will do any of 10 things to him Dark Eldar will poison him Knights will stomp him and Wulfen will eat him alive. Grey knights will Nova/shriek him, Deamons will out-dice him and chaos will....Magnus him.

Not sure yet what sisters will do...they might have to wait until January, and then they will probaby out-pray him.

Every army has a counter. It is not one unit that hurts him, but dozens.

That's why the people have risen up against you (haven't you noticed? Or are you oblivious to that, too?)

HE IS A GOOD UNIT FOR HIS POINTS.

HE IS NOT OP, like a Wraithknight, Riptide, Canoptek Harvest or Scatbikes. There is a clear difference.

BTW, what army do you play? You seem to be having so much trouble with him, maybe we can help you.

He plays vanilla marines, but refuses to use anything people advise him to try out, instead wanting to shift the entire meta on his preconceived and frankly antiquated notions of what marine armies should look like (which is basically a 5th ed list with tacs and devastators). Notice how he deliberately omits drop pods out of the equation in the previous part of the thread for no good reasons as to why "marines are screwed" even though even sternguard would have an easy time against magnus with hellfire rounds once he's grounded (again not that hard with if you're using your own flyers/AA).

Really folks, this is the person whose last thread was that flying creatures shouldn't have armor better than 4+. This thing shows up and he knowingly and willingly moves the goalposts.

 Stormonu wrote:
Really folks, this is the person whose last thread was that flying creatures shouldn't have armor better than 4+. This thing shows up and he knowingly and willingly moves the goalposts.

Magnus only has a 4+. GW listened!

This guy complains a lot. I'm playing with dark eldar. Whenever i face against Tau it's a freaking nightmare (i may need to do the coven list but i don't know that i want to). Marine, eldar, tau and other top tier problems are very nearly like First World Problems.

I can only hope dark eldar get attention. Maybe.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Except it's not. It has less than half the warp charges of 56 less points of Tzeentch daemons, it's killable by less than 200 points of Skitarii in one turn, it's mediocre, point for point, in CC...

I am so sick of these posts. As stupid as a boycott is, and it is stupid, the idea that Magnus WON'T be crazy powerful off of what we've seen so far is asinine. If you don't think he's gamebreaking that's fine, if you have good reasoning for why he's not broken, such as 'The army around him will be easy to kill because it's only 1200 points' or 'You have to run Tsons to unlock him so not all strats will work with him' you'd have a reasonable argument, and probably be right. If you're just not good enough at theoryhammer or 40k in general to see the ridiculous combo potential Magnus has, especially because it's already been confirmed that the Tsons detachment will up his Invul anyway, please don't spout useless 'in a vacuum' stats as if that's representative of real 40k.

I remember once when Tau players (on dakka) complained that stormsurge would suck. A guy at my store runs 2 with 2 ghostkeels, a riptide and stealth suits. Almost nobody plays him now because he's such a power gamer with em.

Anyway give it time. Don't shout OP or UP until the rules are on hand and some months of game playing.