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.

Darkwynn wrote:
Saying that major tournaments refuse to use the actual rules of 40k is false.

No, it's indisputable truth. Removing FW is just like how tournaments often refuse to allow double FOCs (and no, that 1999+1 idiocy isn't fooling anyone) or certain fortifications. The clearly stated rules of the game as published by GW say something is legal, TOs feel that it shouldn't be there and add house rules to remove it.

There are other people in the community that view them as not part of the 40k core rule set but as a supplement.

I don't care what the community thinks. The only people who have an opinion that matters work for GW, and they have made it perfectly clear that FW rules are part of the 40k core rule set. Any ruling otherwise is a house rule.

If you go to a tournament that only uses the core rule set and does not allow Forgeworld what options do you have? very little to zero.

Then tell the TO you're not going to attend the tournament until they stop having house rules that remove your AA options. It's not GW's fault that you're willing to play in a tournament where the options they gave you are house ruled away, just like it's not GW's fault if you can't handle Land Raiders because you're playing in a tournament where melta guns are banned.

GW has not pushed enough units to handle flyers across the core sets or books. By saying using Forgeworld is the only answer proves that the basic rule mechanic and how flyers work are broken till GW releases updated books to the core armies.

The Imperial Armour books are core rules. Should GW put them elsewhere as well? Sure. But that doesn't mean you can just throw out certain elements of the core rules and "prove" that there isn't enough AA.

 TheCaptain wrote:

Darkwynn wrote:

Easy there princess; play nice.

I don't know if I have to when the person calls out the following:

Ignorance of math but is claiming he is right
no understanding of the rules that is going on, then says you are incorrect
Is being foolish and is clearly fault of their own.

That actually is the definition of please avoid negative characterizations of other posters. -Mannahnin

Darkwynn wrote:
GW has not pushed enough units to handle flyers across the core sets or books. By saying using Forgeworld is the only answer proves that the basic rule mechanic and how flyers work are broken till GW releases updated books to the core armies.

Forgeworld is a subsidiary company of GW.

Their books say they should be considered official with the usual limitations of codices, and are for use in standard 40k play.



>MFW people still don't understand this as GW telling them "you can use this in 40k."

Saying otherwise is like telling people they can't use their White Dwarf list because "Hur, the BRB doesn't say anything about magazines."

Part of GW. Endorsed by GW. Says you can use it.

Suuuuuper simple.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Darkwynn wrote:

 TheCaptain wrote:


Easy there princess; play nice.

I don't know if I have to when...

Yeah, yeah, you still have to.

 Peregrine wrote:

Darkwynn wrote:
Saying that major tournaments refuse to use the actual rules of 40k is false.

No, it's indisputable truth. Removing FW is just like how tournaments often refuse to allow double FOCs (and no, that 1999+1 idiocy isn't fooling anyone) or certain fortifications. The clearly stated rules of the game as published by GW say something is legal, TOs feel that it shouldn't be there and add house rules to remove it.

There are other people in the community that view them as not part of the 40k core rule set but as a supplement.

I don't care what the community thinks. The only people who have an opinion that matters work for GW, and they have made it perfectly clear that FW rules are part of the 40k core rule set. Any ruling otherwise is a house rule.

If you go to a tournament that only uses the core rule set and does not allow Forgeworld what options do you have? very little to zero.

Then tell the TO you're not going to attend the tournament until they stop having house rules that remove your AA options. It's not GW's fault that you're willing to play in a tournament where the options they gave you are house ruled away, just like it's not GW's fault if you can't handle Land Raiders because you're playing in a tournament where melta guns are banned.

GW has not pushed enough units to handle flyers across the core sets or books. By saying using Forgeworld is the only answer proves that the basic rule mechanic and how flyers work are broken till GW releases updated books to the core armies.

The Imperial Armour books are core rules. Should GW put them elsewhere as well? Sure. But that doesn't mean you can just throw out certain elements of the core rules and "prove" that there isn't enough AA.

so by your same logic I should just ignore you because your opinion doesn't matter as you are part of the community and have no authority in the matter. As for these rules of the game please tell me in what section of the rulebook does it say how to run a tournament? Or Forgeworld is part of the core rule set? Or as a TO how I should setup my tournament to run because there isn't any rules in that book that state that. Also as a TO GW has walked away from the tournament scene with no support. So to say they even support, have comments on the tournament scene or what is what is absurd. The community defines the tournament scene in North America period. The only section Forge world mentions in the BRB is about adding it to Campaigns and its an advertisement in the back of the book.

Darkwynn wrote:

As for these rules of the game please tell me in what section of the rulebook does it say how to run a tournament? Or Forgeworld is part of the core rule set?

Rulebook says codices override rulebook.

FW Books say their entries are to be treated with the same rules as codices.

Codices override rulebook.

FW Books override rulebook.

FW books count as codices.

Logic. Words. Facts. Boom.

That is incorrect its still the choice of the TO to use it. Next we are going to have people say Horus Hersey should be allowed and we have people stating that its supposed to be used. Forgeworld has even said its a supplement to the 40k universe like their other books. Forgeworld is like a hot debate in the poltical campaign and no matter what you say GW still hasn't come out and said you can use it because they don't draw the line. The book still says with opponents permission and your example with the White dwarf calls out as a supplement and a official update to the core rule set books which actual spreads the gap.


Standard play of 40k right now is defined by the TO's and their tournament that they run.

Darkwynn wrote:
so by your same logic I should just ignore you because your opinion doesn't matter as you are part of the community and have no authority in the matter.

You're right, you should ignore my opinion. Fortunately my personal opinion here isn't the issue, and I'm simply reporting the facts as stated by GW.

As for these rules of the game please tell me in what section of the rulebook does it say how to run a tournament?

It doesn't, therefore games of 40k played in a tournament are no different than games of 40k played anywhere else. If you choose to change the core rules of the game (removing double FOC or FW, etc) then you're playing the game with house rules.

Or Forgeworld is part of the core rule set?

At the beginning of every single Imperial Armour book since IA:Apocalypse 2.

The community defines the tournament scene in North America period.

And the community has chosen to define the tournament scene as "40k with house rules". That doesn't make their house rules part of 40k.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Darkwynn wrote:
That is incorrect its still the choice of the TO to use it.

Of course it is, but the fact that the TO has a choice to impose or not impose a particular house rule doesn't make it any less of a house rule.

Next we are going to have people say Horus Hersey should be allowed and we have people stating that its supposed to be used. Forgeworld has even said its a supplement to the 40k universe like their other books.

Absolutely false. FW has explicitly stated that Heresy rules are NOT part of standard 40k and are meant to be played as a separate Heresy vs. Heresy game.

Forgeworld is like a hot debate in the poltical campaign and no matter what you say GW still hasn't come out and said you can use it because they don't draw the line.

Except for the times that GW has come out and said you can use it. Pretending that they haven't doesn't change the facts.

The book still says with opponents permission

No it doesn't.

Standard play of 40k right now is defined by the TO's and their tournament that they run.

No it isn't.

FW is legal, Pregrine and The Captain are right. Darkwynn, which IA do you own that you are pulling your ideas from? I tend to find that people opposed to FW being legal haven't actually read FW books.

Darkwynn wrote:


That is incorrect its still the choice of the TO to use it.

Yes, and if you choose to change the rules of the game you are playing with houserules

FW rules with the 40k stamp ARE official rules for use in standard games. If you change those rules you are de facto playing with houserules - even if that is that standard it does not alter that.

Also, you missed the title - "sans nerd rage". You calling people idiots, for pointing out that you are evading everytime and including that in your maths, is priceless, nerd rage

The more recent Forgeworld books still contain a statement, along with the statement that the units are intended to be used in standard games, that you should make sure your opponent is comfortable playing against them.

For many players, this is taken as a statement that opponent's consent should still be obtained, though GW is encouraging their use.

The last few months have seen a rise in interest in using Forgeworld stuff in regular games, for multiple reasons. There are good and legimate reasons both for and against its inclusion, as well as bad and spurious arguments on both sides. Brow-beating people is not going to win friends or influence people in either direction.

As a reminder, keep it polite, folks.

 60mm wrote:
FW is legal, Pregrine and The Captain are right. Darkwynn, which IA do you own that you are pulling your ideas from? I tend to find that people opposed to FW being legal haven't actually read FW books.

I actually own all of them. We have a large library for Wargames con. I also won gladiator and other tournaments using forgeworld so I am very familiar with them. If you even look at the Horus heresy book it also has rules straight out of the warhammer 30,000 series that we put out 5 years ago.

I also still get a chance to keep in touch with the studio from time to time because of it. If you ask the. About Forgeworld or even playing the game they are going to look at you funny and just say play the game.

 Mannahnin wrote:
For many players, this is taken as a statement that opponent's consent should still be obtained, though GW is encouraging their use.

Many players might take it that way, but that's not what it says. I've noticed that when people quote the "make sure your opponent is happy" line they don't quote the adjacent statement about Apocalypse units where it explicitly says that you need your opponent's permission to use them in a special non-standard game of 40k. The language about 40k units is very different, and clearly a deliberate choice to avoid "must have permission" while still recognizing that some people dislike FW and won't play against it.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Mannahnin wrote:
For many players, this is taken as a statement that opponent's consent should still be obtained, though GW is encouraging their use.

Many players might take it that way, but that's not what it says. I've noticed that when people quote the "make sure your opponent is happy" line they don't quote the adjacent statement about Apocalypse units where it explicitly says that you need your opponent's permission to use them in a special non-standard game of 40k. The language about 40k units is very different, and clearly a deliberate choice to avoid "must have permission" while still recognizing that some people dislike FW and won't play against it.

You mean a picture such as this?

https://www.google.com/search?um=1&hl=en&client=safari&tbo=d&biw=1024&bih=672&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=forgeworld+approve+for+40k&oq=forgeworld+approve+for+40k&gs_l=img.3...10153.14160.0.14805.17.17.0.0.0.0.144.1242.16j1.17.0.cpsugrpq1..0.0...1.1.hbPmkrTtUiA#biv=i|39;d|qOH_sAv7SdAUeM:


Sadly, you share that same picture with 50 people your going to get 25 people for and 25 people against. It's just like it was before with opponents permission. Nothing never made them unofficial for 40k but people still didn't know about it so they have a section with permission which breaks down anything about it being used I. Standard games of 40k also doesn't help when they say "standard" in quotes. It still goes to the TO that is running the event if they will allow forgeworld. Now for the sake of argument what do people do with out access to Forgeworld which is the real discussion here that still has not been answered on any level.

It also doesn't help that GW release Whitedwarf updates which even confuses the player base even more as those make it seem errata changes to the forge world books are just new units. If they wanted them to be official rule changes they could just put updates in forgeworld books such as the latest Daemon update.

I'm assuming the "picture" in your broken link is the statement from the beginning of the book about FW rules being official.

Darkwynn wrote:
Sadly, you share that same picture with 50 people your going to get 25 people for and 25 people against.

You mean you're going to get 25 people who can read, and 25 people who think that "I don't like FW" magically makes the words mean something different.

Nothing never made them unofficial for 40k but people still didn't know about it so they have a section with permission which breaks down anything about it being used I.

Nothing except the official statement from GW that you had to have special permission to use FW stuff, a policy which no longer exists.

It still goes to the TO that is running the event if they will allow forgeworld.

Of course it does. Nobody is disputing that TOs have the right to allow or not allow FW. GW isn't going to send someone to hold a gun to your head and make you play 40k "the right way". However, that doesn't change the fact that any TO who removes FW is adding their own house rules to the game.

Now for the sake of argument what do people do with out access to Forgeworld which is the real discussion here that still has not been answered on any level.

The same thing that people without access to a particular codex do.

(And I don't see why there's any access problem when the rules and models are available for sale just like any other GW product.)

Darkwynn wrote:

https://www.google.com/search?um=1&hl=en&client=safari&tbo=d&biw=1024&bih=672&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=forgeworld+approve+for+40k&oq=forgeworld+approve+for+40k&gs_l=img.3...10153.14160.0.14805.17.17.0.0.0.0.144.1242.16j1.17.0.cpsugrpq1..0.0...1.1.hbPmkrTtUiA#biv=i|39;d|qOH_sAv7SdAUeM:

Link doesn't work.

Now for the sake of argument what do people do with out access to Forgeworld which is the real discussion here that still has not been answered on any level.

They use allies. Or purchase forgeworld books and units, remedying the whole "without access to Forgeworld" thing.

You're welcome.

So in short you have no response that is valid or realstic and you are trolling at this point?

Darkwynn wrote:
So in short you have no response that is valid or realstic and you are trolling at this point?

"You won't answer my ridiculous questions! TROLLLLL!!!!"

No.

I'm merely highlighting the ridiculousness of your stance.

Resources available for solid AA are:

-Play as a codex with solid AA
-Ally with a codex with solid AA
-Use FW Units

You asking "How do I AA without using FW" is like me asking "How do I play IG competitively without Vehicles?" It's a needless handicap whose only substantiation is that a large portion of the community doesn't accept FW rules because of an outdated, obsolete GW policy that has since been redacted.

Telling Peregrine and I, as well as Dakka itself, that "FW isn't fair play because some people don't like it and some TO's don't either" is just as absurd. Some people refuse to play games with special characters. It was a common practice in older editions. Similarly, in older editions, FW was treated as an expansion. Both things are now falling out of practice.

To the TO's thing, some tournaments don't allow double force-org, and that IS in your precious rulebook. So it really doesn't validate anything.

Calling someone a troll because they've proved you wrong looks ridiculous; I suggest resorting to something a little...classier in the future.

Nope, I see one troll and one only

Using allies is a realistic answer, and valid. Using FW is a realistic and valid answer.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Nope, I see one troll and one only

Using allies is a realistic answer, and valid. Using FW is a realistic and valid answer.

This. I like this. A lot.

 TheCaptain wrote:

Darkwynn wrote:
So in short you have no response that is valid or realstic and you are trolling at this point?

"You won't answer my ridiculous questions! TROLLLLL!!!!"

No.

I'm merely highlighting the ridiculousness of your stance.

Resources available for solid AA are:

-Play as a codex with solid AA
-Ally with a codex with solid AA
-Use FW Units

You asking "How do I AA without using FW" is like me asking "How do I play IG competitively without Vehicles?" It's a needless handicap whose only substantiation is that a large portion of the community doesn't accept FW rules because of an outdated, obsolete GW policy that has since been redacted.

Telling Peregrine and I, as well as Dakka itself, that "FW isn't fair play because some people don't like it and some TO's don't either" is just as absurd. Some people refuse to play games with special characters. It was a common practice in older editions. Similarly, in older editions, FW was treated as an expansion. Both things are now falling out of practice.

To the TO's thing, some tournaments don't allow double force-org, and that IS in your precious rulebook. So it really doesn't validate anything.

Calling someone a troll because they've proved you wrong looks ridiculous; I suggest resorting to something a little...classier in the future.

Which your avoiding my question entirely no codex out there has solid AA and that is my point. You keep going back to forgeworld which hasnt been allowed in the 5 largest GT's. You still haven't disproving my fact about proving what is solid AA in any codex because there isn't any. All you keep doing is brow beating the idea of forgeworld,which isn't reality nor has become norm. Either provide the argument with facts or,your trolling.

 60mm wrote:
I tend to find that people opposed to FW being legal haven't actually read FW books.

There's several reasons for me to be wary if someone wants to field FW, or someone tells me to buy FW stuff.

Firstly the books and FW units cost a fair bit of money. When I've already bought a 40K rulebook, a Codex and an army to go with it I kind of hope all the things needed for a working army would be present. Telling me to buy FW AA units if my army can't deal with a flying circus - that certain base armies can field easily enough - is IMO very odd. Why should I have to plug the holes in the basic Codex with FW stuff?

That's just a part of the bigger problem ofc, the money-hungry hobby this is. Our Necron player easily dropped the money on seven Doom/Nightscythe kits. He might make enough money that 252€ doesn't hurt him, many of us don't. FW Hydras (not that I'm interested in playing IG) cost more apiece than a 'scythe, and I'd need an extra book to use it too!

And ofc, seeing how people can hardly bother bringing FAQs for their rulebook/Codex there's no reason to assume they'll bring one for their FW stuff either. So I'll have to keep track of even more stuff and print even more documents if I want to be sure all the stuff is being used correctly.

Forgeworld has not yet come into wide acceptance for competitive play. At least in the US.

I suspect that we'll see it coming increasingly to be seen as a more normal part of 40k, but that position is still clearly in the minority in terms of the general crowd of tournament-goers and tournament organizers.

Which your avoiding my question entirely no codex out there has solid AA and that is my point. You keep going back to forgeworld which hasnt been allowed in the 5 largest GT's. You still haven't disproving my fact about proving what is solid AA in any codex because there isn't any.

The main kind of AA we've got so far is taking our own aircraft, and/or high-volume, twin-linked shooting. Allying in a couple of Night Scythes and an Annhilation Barge will certainly help some armies. Or a Vendetta and taking a Quad Gun. For Eldar, the combination I've seen recently is a Bastion with Quad gun, manned by a Fire Dragon Exarch with Crack Shot and Tank Hunter. Pretty nasty.

One of my friends is running Grey Knights with SW allies, and his AA is a couple of psyflemans, an aegis with quad gun, and a stormraven of his own.

 Mannahnin wrote:
Forgeworld has not yet come into wide acceptance for competitive play. At least in the US.

I suspect that we'll see it coming increasingly to be seen as a more normal part of 40k, but that position is still clearly in the minority in terms of the general crowd of tournament-goers and tournament organizers.

Hasn't even Europe, I know the Polish hate even the idea of Forgeworld. Majority of the British don't use it either and from my knowledge was not allowed in the heats.

 Mannahnin wrote:
Forgeworld has not yet come into wide acceptance for competitive play. At least in the US.

I suspect that we'll see it coming increasingly to be seen as a more normal part of 40k, but that position is still clearly in the minority in terms of the general crowd of tournament-goers and tournament organizers.

Which your avoiding my question entirely no codex out there has solid AA and that is my point. You keep going back to forgeworld which hasnt been allowed in the 5 largest GT's. You still haven't disproving my fact about proving what is solid AA in any codex because there isn't any.

The main kind of AA we've got so far is taking our own aircraft, and/or high-volume, twin-linked shooting. Allying in a couple of Night Scythes and an Annhilation Barge will certainly help some armies. Or a Vendetta and taking a Quad Gun. For Eldar, the combination I've seen recently is a Bastion with Quad gun, manned by a Fire Dragon Exarch with Crack Shot and Tank Hunter. Pretty nasty.

One of my friends is running Grey Knights with SW allies, and his AA is a couple of psyflemans, an aegis with quad gun, and a stormraven of his own.

But Ragnar that isn't enough against a Necron flyer spam army which is the problem. You can only take small limited units of those and in a competitive game among the top tables it isn't enough. Quad guns with fire dragon exarch has a 50% chance and will most likely cause glancing hits on it instead. The other flyers will go for the AA gun and tear it apart. I have done plenty of test games and even took a list similar like that to Feast. Played a Necron list and brought down zero flyers with it.

Had 6 war walkers, reapers with quad to leverage crack and unit of broadsides. Quad only put a two glances, war walkers got damaged down to a single unit and three doom scythes dropped the death arrays on the broad sides till there was one guy left. The thing is even if the units were up and running they still only had a small chance to bring down one flyer. The problem is the needing to hit a flyer with a 6 on top of having to follow up,with a high roll it doesn't work out.

I look at chaos they have the Helldrake, it can come in on the second turn after the flyers come on but it will get shredded hp from Telsea because of the twin link and they will cause enough glances to bring it down. It has one turn till three night scythes tear it apart. GW has to either errata more units to have sky fire at a correct point cost otherwise we are not going to see a answer or response to the Necron flyer problem.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 TheCaptain wrote:

Darkwynn wrote:
your trolling.

Poor spelling and accusations of trolling are both against Dakka's rules.

and IG has awesome AA, princess.

Which is? Because I don't know if your playing the same game I am. I think I have enough creditability to know what IG has and doesn't have.

Darkwynn wrote:
Because I don't know if your playing the same game I am.

Or I'm doing it differently. (Possibly better? Possibly?)

I think I have enough creditability to know what IG has and doesn't have.

Uh no. No, evidently not.

Because Camo-net hydras.

and

Vendettas.

Darkwynn wrote:

 Mannahnin wrote:
Forgeworld has not yet come into wide acceptance for competitive play. At least in the US.

I suspect that we'll see it coming increasingly to be seen as a more normal part of 40k, but that position is still clearly in the minority in terms of the general crowd of tournament-goers and tournament organizers.

Hasn't even Europe, I know the Polish hate even the idea of Forgeworld. Majority of the British don't use it either and from my knowledge was not allowed in the heats.

You're assuming everything has to be in the context of tournaments as well. That isnt the whole game, not by a long shot

It is becoming much more widely used in the UK, and not quite sure what you mean about "the heats"? what tourney has heats any more?

Necron flyers are definitely an issue at the moment. Thankfully GW FAQing the Doomscythe to not be able to hit other flyers has reined those in a little.

I agree that right now Skyfire options are a bit too few and usually too expensive (like Flakk missile havocs). I do think that we're at the high-water mark for how powerful flyers can be, and that as more codices come out with more AA options, they'll get reined in further and become less and less of an issue.

For now, the big counter-flyer tactic seems to be spamming durable units, blocking portions of the board and absorbing the hits. Like Tony's, Nick's, and Alex F's armies all did at at NOVA, and like the recent Tyranid psychic swarm armies we've been seeing do.

Perhaps it's because I remember the days of the 3rd ed Siren Prince, the Ulthwe Seer Council, and the 4th edition Falcon/Harlequin spam, that this level of unbalance doesn't freak me out too much. Of course, back then here in the US we also used Composition scoring to control those at a lot of events.

 TheCaptain wrote:

Darkwynn wrote:

 Mannahnin wrote:

Which is? Because I don't know if your playing the same game I am. I think I have enough creditability to know what IG has and doesn't have.

Uh no. No, evidently not.

Because Camo-net hydras.

and

Vendettas.

Sigh and you have proven my point. Hydras won't hold up to the numbers and you won't get pass an opponent who doesn't have flyers with that point sink. You also can't get enough vendettas in a list to counter the number of night scythes. So do you have another great idea?

I am the guy who created leaf blower and has won at least 6 major GT's in the US with IG....


Grr stupid phone wrecking the format of the post.

 Mannahnin wrote:
Forgeworld has not yet come into wide acceptance for competitive play. At least in the US.

My FLGS is 100% accepting of all FW, including in hosted tournaments.

But then again, I guess Pittsburgh is just culturally forward like that. (It's not culturally forward.)



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Darkwynn wrote:


Hydras won't hold up to the numbers and you won't get pass an opponent who doesn't have flyers with that point sink. You also can't get enough vendettas in a list to counter the number of night scythes. So do you have another great idea?

Hydras with camo nets in ruins or behind an aegis get a 3+ cover save.

A vendetta costs 130 points.
And 9 vendettas costs 1170 points. I'm sure you can squeeze a few in. Vendettas will outshoot those scythes big guy. Try it before you knock it.

I am the guy who created leaf blower and has won at least 6 major GT's in the US with IG....

Awesome dude, awesome. Except that was 5th. IG is different now. Oh yeah, and, you know, I'm the lost 2nd Legion's Primarch, and has won at least 5 crusades in the US with C:SM

It's not a lie. Of course, quoting one's resume runs the risk of the Argument from Authority, but I can't point fingers too strenuously in that regard. Of course, I've only got one GT overall win, but I have the poor taste to put it in my signature.

Hydras are also not always going to get cover from a flyer using an Aegis, depending on terrain and relative positioning.