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.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I have it on good information (friend of a friend, so perhaps not so good) that the Forge World team were given hardly any time at all to write their 8th Edition rules and they were not playtested by Games Workshop at all before release.

With that in mind, I'm impressed they're as good as they are. Truly, there are some units (especially compared with the Index lists) that are downright balanced - e.g. Macharius tanks, Malcadors, Stormhammers, Thunderbolts, Marauder planes - just a few examples from the Imperial Armour I am most familiar with.

Now that the codex has arrived, the problem isn't even that the units in question are too good - essentially, the entirety of Codex: IG has been buffed so much that the FW stuff is far far less good.

Half of those aren't even good, the basic Macharius sports identical firepower to an LRBT (two shot battlecannon woooo), it's just twice as much with ten extra HP and no ability to receive orders and harder to benefit from Doctrines

That's what I mean by "before the codex." After the codex dropped, yeah. LOL.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
This bothers me almost as much as a no-LOW ban.

"These select few units are a problem! Let's ban the entire category!"

"But if conscripts are a problem, shouldn't you ban all Troops, by the same logic?"

It's not necessarily about attempting to ban OP units. It's just a different framework to operate in.

Yes, but why? I mean, it being a "different framework" doesn't make it automatically good. Playing a game of 40k where all troops are banned is also a "different framework".

Just because it's different, doesn't make it good. In fact in this case it makes it far far worse.

Superheavies or FW? Either way 'better' or 'worse' is pretty subjective in this case. IE, just because it's different doesn't automatically make it worse either.

I understand you normally do a three superheavy army. I don't personally have a problem with that, but you gotta admit it forces a particular type of game.

Admittedly, 200 conscripts probably forces another type of game. But then 'highlander' would effect that, too.

Both.

If you ban FW or superheavies, you're forcing a "competition" that doesn't include crucial components of the game, like playing baseball without a shortstop or football without an offensive line. Sure, you could do it, but what's the point? All it does is harm people that want to have fun within the rules published by the publisher.

As for forcing a certain type of game: Yes, yes it does. That's rather the point. It's a skew list, much like 200 conscripts is a skew list or all-reserve drop pod marines was a skew list in 5th.

Skew is fine, and imo makes competition even more challenging and fun.

Imo you're taking this too harshly. "All it does is harm people that want to have fun..." can be the opinion of narrative players who come up against WAAC types too. Tournaments already ban things like superheavies over a certain power value, and run their own mission types. Terrain is a huge issue that can skew results or faction favorability. No FW or no LOW is just a line drawn in a different place and to try and encourage different results, and it's completely valid.

Skew is fine, and obviously a part of entering any tournament. But attempting to curttail that skew, or types of skew is also perfectly acceptable. There's nothing inherently wrong with it.

As for sports analogies, my understanding is that the rules for sports change all the time. Likewise the 'house rules' for home sports, or minor league sports, or college sports, they can all have variations too in order to adapt to their needs. The whole reason it evolves is to produce different results.

1) Why are narrative players at a tournament?

2) Yeah, running their own mission types is something I actually kind of have issue with; I tabled an opponent at NOVA and lost on objectives - I'd've been 5/3 otherwise, but Tabling was never a mission victory condition. So, that's neat.

3) No FW or no LOW doesn't encourage different results. The lists that have been winning have no LOW and no FW, save a few, and the ones that do have FW (malefic lords) will easily find something else to do (e.g. a Tzeench Daemon herald).

4) Yes there is? Because it doesn't accomplish anything except keeping players with armies they love from participating? The winning lists aren't skew lists.

5) The type of changes that sports leagues go through are tiny. To use the same analogy: banning FW or LOW is like banning shortstops in baseball. The types of changes that baseball leagues actually do is more like +/- 5pts on a given model. It's a matter of scale.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
1) Why are narrative players at a tournament?

2) Yeah, running their own mission types is something I actually kind of have issue with; I tabled an opponent at NOVA and lost on objectives - I'd've been 5/3 otherwise, but Tabling was never a mission victory condition. So, that's neat.

3) No FW or no LOW doesn't encourage different results. The lists that have been winning have no LOW and no FW, save a few, and the ones that do have FW (malefic lords) will easily find something else to do (e.g. a Tzeench Daemon herald).

4) Yes there is? Because it doesn't accomplish anything except keeping players with armies they love from participating? The winning lists aren't skew lists.

5) The type of changes that sports leagues go through are tiny. To use the same analogy: banning FW or LOW is like banning shortstops in baseball. The types of changes that baseball leagues actually do is more like +/- 5pts on a given model. It's a matter of scale.

1) I think you missed the point. Everyone has their own type of fun. Its the right of the TO to encourage certain types of fun if they want to.

2) agree

3) 'results' in this case does not mean final placement in a given tournament, but rather types of play within a tournament

4) You're going to have to do better. One example of a skew list winning is the skew list of spamming Stormravens in early 8th edition. Even if the skew lists are not winning, they still have a right to limit what units are taken to encourage certain types of play. If they want to run an all ingantry tournament, they can, and there's nothing wrong with that either.

5) scale of change doesn't matter. The principle is the same.

 Peregrine wrote:
And of course implicit in this talk of moving FW units/models into the codices and GW retail stores is a concession that it's about nitpicking irrelevant details instead of any substantial balance or quality of play issues. If simply changing what name is on the cover of the book would satisfy you then you don't have a valid point.

This is a very good point. Changing the name in this case make everything A-okay, and that's stupid.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
1) Why are narrative players at a tournament?

2) Yeah, running their own mission types is something I actually kind of have issue with; I tabled an opponent at NOVA and lost on objectives - I'd've been 5/3 otherwise, but Tabling was never a mission victory condition. So, that's neat.

3) No FW or no LOW doesn't encourage different results. The lists that have been winning have no LOW and no FW, save a few, and the ones that do have FW (malefic lords) will easily find something else to do (e.g. a Tzeench Daemon herald).

4) Yes there is? Because it doesn't accomplish anything except keeping players with armies they love from participating? The winning lists aren't skew lists.

5) The type of changes that sports leagues go through are tiny. To use the same analogy: banning FW or LOW is like banning shortstops in baseball. The types of changes that baseball leagues actually do is more like +/- 5pts on a given model. It's a matter of scale.

#3 this is the my entire point. FW isn't making headlines in tournament play so why ban it?

pismakron wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Imo any TO is free to ban anything they want as long as it's consistent. Banning FW seems totally fine to me.

So it's ok to ban Tyranids as long as you're consistent and ban all Tyranid players?

A TO can ban anything he wants, obviously. But no one wants a ban on Tyranids, whereas quite a lot of people wants a ban on Forgeworld it seems. Probably because of Forgeworlds sad history of shoddy rulemaking.

If shoddy rulemaking is reason for ban all GW codexes should be banned.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Overread wrote:
It's not just that, FW is models and rules that are non-standard. An expansion of the core codex releases and thus presents units and models that otherwise players might well not encounter in regular games at all clubs. Heck some groups might well not have any players with access or purchase of FW models.

People get really irate about this, but honestly if you dislike a tournament ruling then organise your own; many tournaments allow FW just as many also have house rules of their own.

Who doesn't have access to FW models and has access to GW? Somebody in backwater village middle of Africann forest?

How many worlds FW DOESN'T deliver to? Not many. North Korea is probably one of the few but frankly I suspect GW models aren't exactly common there either.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Formosa wrote:

pismakron wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
FW is no worse rules wise that GW

Yes they are. Significantly so in my opinion. Regards

Eldar 7th

Tau 3rd. 7th

Chaos 3.5, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th

Nids 3rd

Space marines 4th, Guilliman 8th

thats just off the top of my head, what we have from FW, a few UNITS here and there, not whole Codex's (unless you consider book 7 HH....), but rather than single line comments, explain why you think they are?

Ork 7th ed, 8th ed(yes being crappy useless piece of junk is also sign of bad rules).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xenomancers wrote:
TO can do whatever he wants. Don't like the rules - don't play in the tournament. All it does is change the competitive parameters. I would actually love if more tournments did this because despite what the forge world defenders say - the biggest culprits of imbalance are almost always forge world.

Evidence says otherwise.

pismakron wrote:

 Formosa wrote:

pismakron wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
FW is no worse rules wise that GW

Yes they are. Significantly so in my opinion. Regards

Eldar 7th

Tau 3rd. 7th

Chaos 3.5, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th

Nids 3rd

Space marines 4th, Guilliman 8th

thats just off the top of my head, what we have from FW, a few UNITS here and there, not whole Codex's (unless you consider book 7 HH....), but rather than single line comments, explain why you think they are?

Yeah, read the Imperial Armor Index:Xenos. There is hardly a single unit entry without editing or typing errors in it. It reads like a youtube comment section. My only regret was that I was dumb enough to buy that rush-job abortion of a rulebook. I guess I'll never learn when it comes to ForgeWorld manure.

Anyone claiming that the rulemaking quality from ForgeWorld is not well below GW standards clearly needs a full frontal lobotomy. With a shotgun. But it is still very uplifting that GW has decided to include FW entries into Chapter Approved. Maybe GW should just discontinue their stillborn resin-casting daughter company and roll the ForgeWorld stuff into the proper codices, and sell the ForgeWorld models from the GW website under the GW brand. Then this eternal discussion can finally be put to rest.

To your first point, you have buyers regret, thats fine, you want a quality product mistake free.

"Anyone claiming that the rulemaking quality from ForgeWorld is not well below GW standards clearly needs a full frontal lobotomy."

That is demonstrably untrue, we have a decade of FW to draw from to show this to be false, GW is not taking over the rules writing in CA, they are just changing the cost of several units, there is nothing to indicate that thay have brought FW units into the main studio. FW is not a seperate company, yet again the irrational anti FW crown needs to get this through there heads, and still born... hardly its massively popular, as to bringing it into the main site, its already there, there is a link for FW on the main site, under the GW brand...

 MrMoustaffa wrote:

 Blackie wrote:


If you're willing to buy 200 guardsmen you're a WAAC player, not an average one. An average player will buy the miniatures he/she prefers in order to collect an army that can work in games (maybe, sometimes they don't even care) but it's also good looking. Tournaments players are far from being the average ones, they're actually a minority.

FW hate also comes because not everyone likes the concept of centerpiece models, I can't stand them for example. I consider land raiders but also rhinos and dreads big models. Unfortunately even GW new releases are following this path, to provide huge vehicles/monters/superheroes to everyone, but this is a trend that was inherited by FW. Hence the FW hate.

FW prices are very very high for a standard player/collector. And we can have a 30% price cut on the GW catalogue here, while we can't have it on FW stuff.

To ban FW is wrong IMHO, but don't say that FW stuff is accessible to anyone, moneywise speaking, just because some WAAC player has collected an army with 200+ guardsmen.

So I take it my 300 guardsmen collection that I've been building since 5th edition where infantry armies have sucked for a good 4 years makes me a WAAC player then? Good to know I was psychic and predicted the meta shift 4 years ago so I could crush all the casuals.

I clearly meant to say that buying 200 guardsmen in a single time or in a short period makes that player a WAAC one. The comparison was between a super expensive single (or a few) product sold by FW and tons of cheaper boxes sold by GW. Of course 10+ years of collecting miniatures doesn't make the comparison fair.

Oh dear, this old chestnut has raised its ugly head again.

IMHO - if you are playing in a tournament you are participating in order to win. End of story. My view is that you use any GW and FW ruleset available to make the most obnoxious legal list possible. If you table little Jimmy on turn one and he runs off crying all the better!

In a local/flgs environment it is just polite to give people a heads-up you are using FW and/or a LoW.

 NoiseMarine with Tinnitus wrote:
In a local/flgs environment it is just polite to give people a heads-up you are using FW and/or a LoW.

Not really. This expectation needs to die, it isn't 3rd edition anymore. FW rules and LoW are part of the standard game and you should expect the possibility of them every time you play. If you don't have a TAC list and aren't prepared to deal with those threats then it's your fault for poor list building, your opponent doesn't owe you advance warning so you can tailor your list to beat them.

 Peregrine wrote:

 NoiseMarine with Tinnitus wrote:
In a local/flgs environment it is just polite to give people a heads-up you are using FW and/or a LoW.

Not really. This expectation needs to die, it isn't 3rd edition anymore. FW rules and LoW are part of the standard game and you should expect the possibility of them every time you play. If you don't have a TAC list and aren't prepared to deal with those threats then it's your fault for poor list building, your opponent doesn't owe you advance warning so you can tailor your list to beat them.

I don't disagree as such, I just said it was polite - not mandatory.

If you want to rock up unannounced and drop Y'Vhara and Tau'Nar (however you spell them) spam and curbstomp opponents that is your perogative.

Personally, I prefer games where I am chalenged so happy to give a heads-up so people can optomise their list if so inclined.

 NoiseMarine with Tinnitus wrote:
I don't disagree as such, I just said it was polite - not mandatory.

There's really very little difference when being impolite is a bad thing and gets you shunned from the community. Being polite is the basic standard that everyone is expected to live up to. Telling your opponent what you're about to bring so they can tailor against it is an exceptional thing that goes way beyond mere politeness, and it should not be treated the same way.

Superheavies where a thing that should be noted before a game in 7th because many armies, without list-tailoring, couldn't literally do anything agaisn't them.

In 8th thats isn't the case anymore. A TAC list or a list with a good amount of Anti-Tank can deal with every kind of super heavy just like it can deal with a bunch of Leman Russes or Land Raiders.

I am of the mindset that things like superheavies don't belong in the "normal" game of 40k, they belong in Apocalypse (there was a reason they were never ported over from Epic for a long time; they didn't fit the scale of 40k). However that brought up the drawback of, since Apocalpse games were rare, it was rare to be able to field them.

That's not an issue with Forgeworld, though, that's an issue with GW losing sight of the scale of 40k and refusing to properly address it to scale up (see how Mantic did with Warpath; there is a "Firefight" which is for smaller size individual model movement combat and then the larger game uses movement trays and more abstracted rules for big fights). Forgeworld does have some dubious rules and tend to err on the side of being too strong/too cheap, but GW also has their share of dubious rules (GW seems to err more on the side of not strong enough/too expensive though).

 NoiseMarine with Tinnitus wrote:
Oh dear, this old chestnut has raised its ugly head again.

IMHO - if you are playing in a tournament you are participating in order to win. End of story. My view is that you use any GW and FW ruleset available to make the most obnoxious legal list possible. If you table little Jimmy on turn one and he runs off crying all the better!

In a local/flgs environment it is just polite to give people a heads-up you are using FW and/or a LoW.

I agree with this guy. In addition, for whatever army you are playing, buy and bring the fething book. Digital is fine, if available. Even in a friendly game, I might want to read about stuff I am not familiar with for myself.

Wha-? FW is considered OP nowadays?

Excuse me while I pick up my sides. Apart from some truly outline units (which in all honesty there are considered about <10?) FW is as good as our in most cases worse than GW stuff.

Take my Autocannon chimera turrets. In a competitive sense, they are worse than the heavy bolter. But look baller as feth. But I've already had TWO members of my FLGS drop hints that I wouldn't get many games in if I use them. LOLWUT?

Those guys are considered idiots though (by the store owner himself!) Lots of the 40k crowd use FW, it's a part of it now and banning it is simply sour grapes and jealousy.

I can't wait to show them my Armageddon pattern Medusa arty and thunderbolt fighters. They mat have an aneurysm!

Wayniac wrote:
I am of the mindset that things like superheavies don't belong in the "normal" game of 40k, they belong in Apocalypse (there was a reason they were never ported over from Epic for a long time; they didn't fit the scale of 40k). However that brought up the drawback of, since Apocalpse games were rare, it was rare to be able to field them.

That's not an issue with Forgeworld, though, that's an issue with GW losing sight of the scale of 40k and refusing to properly address it to scale up (see how Mantic did with Warpath; there is a "Firefight" which is for smaller size individual model movement combat and then the larger game uses movement trays and more abstracted rules for big fights). Forgeworld does have some dubious rules and tend to err on the side of being too strong/too cheap, but GW also has their share of dubious rules (GW seems to err more on the side of not strong enough/too expensive though).

Not ported over from epic for a long time?

Baneblades could be played in 2nd, 3rd, 4th, Baneblade companies in 5th, back to single tanks in 6th, and baneblade companies in 7th and 8th...

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Not ported over from epic for a long time?

Baneblades could be played in 2nd, 3rd, 4th, Baneblade companies in 5th, back to single tanks in 6th, and baneblade companies in 7th and 8th...

Yeah, let's be honest here, if big models weren't "ported over from Epic" for a long time it's only because GW's model-making technology didn't allow larger kits to be practical. Once they started doing big kits, especially in plastic, they were put into the standard game fairly quickly.

After reading all this and speaking to the TO it definitely seems like sour grapes and jealousy. He seems to want to make an attempted problem unit free tournament. Which would include both GW and FW stuff. Hard ban on FW and soft on some GW stuff.

 chimeara wrote:
After reading all this and speaking to the TO it definitely seems like sour grapes and jealousy. He seems to want to make an attempted problem unit free tournament. Which would include both GW and FW stuff. Hard ban on FW and soft on some GW stuff.

Ugh... I really hate it when TO's do that. Yeah, the game has problems, but random Joe Blow TO isn't going to have a better idea on how to balance the game himself then GW does.

Wayniac wrote:
Forgeworld does have some dubious rules and tend to err on the side of being too strong/too cheap, but GW also has their share of dubious rules (GW seems to err more on the side of not strong enough/too expensive though).

Compared to gw they err on side of weak units. Generally what they sell gw codex does it better

I can't believe this still happens in 8th. Chapter Approved is coming out Dec. 2 and has balance changes for both GW and Forgeworld. Forgeworld is obviously part of the standard line up.

This isn't 5th anymore. Expect Imperial Knight armies and Malefic Lord's (except maybe not after the points).

Dr. Mills wrote:Wha-? FW is considered OP nowadays?

Excuse me while I pick up my sides. Apart from some truly outline units (which in all honesty there are considered about <10?) FW is as good as our in most cases worse than GW stuff.

Take my Autocannon chimera turrets. In a competitive sense, they are worse than the heavy bolter. But look baller as feth. But I've already had TWO members of my FLGS drop hints that I wouldn't get many games in if I use them. LOLWUT?

Those guys are considered idiots though (by the store owner himself!) Lots of the 40k crowd use FW, it's a part of it now and banning it is simply sour grapes and jealousy.

I can't wait to show them my Armageddon pattern Medusa arty and thunderbolt fighters. They mat have an aneurysm!

I envy your autocannon turret! Forgeworld has stopped producing them (and the Aquila lander!).

M.

 Peregrine wrote:

 NoiseMarine with Tinnitus wrote:
I don't disagree as such, I just said it was polite - not mandatory.

There's really very little difference when being impolite is a bad thing and gets you shunned from the community. Being polite is the basic standard that everyone is expected to live up to. Telling your opponent what you're about to bring so they can tailor against it is an exceptional thing that goes way beyond mere politeness, and it should not be treated the same way.

Again, not that I disagree as such but when you get the likes of a vehicle/walker heavy list e.g. Astra or Iron Hands vs a list very light on anti-vehicle it is not much fun. Sure, in 8th anyone can chip away wounds but spending an entire game trying to take down one, let's say a Landraider, really is not fun in my books.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sorry, to address OP.

Renegades & Heretics, love that army and it is FW. Permissible in tournaments? Better be as it is one of the weaker factions available. Bit of a one trick pony at the moment as the minute someone says "I play R&H" you know your are going to be facing Malefic Lord/Marauder spam.

Its FW and it is way way off being overpowered - if anyone has a problem with that then I despair. I am assuming overpowerrd is what OP was alluding to; TL;DR.

Also, I get the feeling Chapter Approved will put the nail in the coffin of Malefic Lord shenanigans anyhoo.

To the guys it's apparently anything made by FW. As if by being made by the same company make it all op or somehow a nuisance to play against.

FWIW the Chapter Approved points leaks show in many cases massive price hikes to forgeworld things. So maybe GW thinks FW doesn't belong in normal games after all

Wayniac wrote:
FWIW the Chapter Approved points leaks show in many cases massive price hikes to forgeworld things. So maybe GW thinks FW doesn't belong in normal games after all

By this logic, maybe they don't want Assault Cannon Razorbacks in the game either...

You're extrapolating something that doesn't exist based on your own biases.

If they didn't think FW belonged in normal games, they'd have straight up said so.

FW stuff belongs in normal games, there's no reason to expect otherwise. But Chapter Approved has done a good job of ensuring that they have no place in them. Or any games. Because good god, they went way off the deep end this time.

Wayniac wrote:
Forgeworld does have some dubious rules and tend to err on the side of being too strong/too cheap, but GW also has their share of dubious rules (GW seems to err more on the side of not strong enough/too expensive though).

I have to assume you haven't actually read the FW indexes because I do not see how someone who has could possibly form that opinion.

The vast majority of FW units are under powered, over priced or both.

On the occasions when they let something OP through they generally nerf it into oblivion at it's next update which seems to be exactly what's happening with CA.

Well, it looks like GW swung the nerf-bat quite happily at FW in chapter approved. I wonder if this will fix things a bit. I suspect not.