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.

GK's forced every Tyranid & Daemon player to quite their armies and shelve them...

As a Tyranid player, I would much prefer you be angry at Phil Kelly on my behalf.

If you'll allow me to rant for a moment...

Frickin' Jaws of the World Wolf and frickin' Venom Spam made for the worst frickin' games in Fifth Edition.

I don't see why everyone has such a hard-on for C: DE. They owed their brief flirtation with tournament respectability to a favorable matchup with the power build du jour (they could wipe a couple Long Fang squads off the board on turn 1 with massed Venoms), and their day in the sun was over long before the edition change, with their pathetic anti-tank capability unable to overcame vehicle-mounted, stun-resistant fire support. The fact is they couldn't kill psyfledreads, psybacks, night scythes, or annihilation barges, and thanks to Fortitude/Living Metal they couldn't shake or stun them, and their stupid paper planes got blown out of the sky and their stupid T3/5+ troops got gunned down like the pansies they were. And now that it's 6th edition and glances don't shake/stun anymore, it happens against all the armies and not just Necrons/GKs. Glass cannon? More like glass pea shooter, amirite!?

And you know what, I laughed! Because the only thing worse than playing against DE with a foot army in 5th was playing against DE in 5th with a foot army where some of your units - and all of the anti-tank ones! - were T6. They literally just sat 36" away and rolled dice. At least sometimes a Rune Priest would Perils before casting Jaws.

On the topic of fluff, I enjoyed Inquisitor Valeria's. And Trazyn the Infinite's. I like that the new Necrons are more customizable, but hate that the Deceiver is dead now. And I will say that I wish Cruddace would have taken a page out of Ward's book and had the Tyranids win a battle or two in their own 'dex.

I have a hard time being angry about 40k fluff. It is, by design, nay, by definition, stupid. I mean, come on. Just look at the names of the Primarchs. This is a universe where there's a guy named Angron, and, (spoiler!), he's angry! A guy named Ferrus Manus who (hurr!) has hands made out of metal! A guy named Conrad Kurze with a heart of darkness (okay, maybe this one's a little more obscure). A guy named Lion El'Jonson (this one's not so much obvious as remarkable in that they managed, by adding spaces and punctuation, to turn the name of a British poet into something that sounds like a Mexican-American porn star's nom de guerre). This is a universe where the supposed precognitive genius balancing the survival of humanity on a knife-edge not only failed to spot the seeds of betrayal in Kor Phaeron with his massive telepathic POWAH (but totally figured out that Magnus made a bargain with Tzeentch using same), but somehow managed to make the much larger, macro-scale mistake of entrusting his Paradise of Atheist Rationality to a bunch of psychopathically violent prima donnas, tradition-obsessed to the point of religiosity (putative disbelief in Gods notwithstanding), that he apparently designed to be that way.

40k fluff regularly sacrifices intelligence on the altar of the Rule of Cool, and, you know what, Draigo and Mephiston sound like pretty raw mother-F-ers.

Experiment 626 wrote:
What pisses people off most about Ward is his 'couldn't-care-less' style attitude towards the community.

This is by far his most endearing quality.

"So why did you make Daemons so powerful?"
"It'd be a shame if they weren't."

You uh. You really have a hard-on for that quote, don't ya.

 JbR of the Endless Spire wrote:


@ Zweischneid
GK have a Psyker level system as well as rules that function better in 6th than in 5th, all implemented in 6th edition, and Necrons have special rules in the codex not even in 5th edition rule book.

Dark Eldar were probably finished when work started on the GK and 6th Edition development probably started around that time too, so things could easily be carried into 6th from GK. In other words it was done with 6th in mind not based on 6th.

In your mind CSM isn't a 6th edition codex? But its the only actual codex released since 6th came out... that points to Ward's codexes being OP (yes, I know, GK aren't as OP as they were) as his codexes are still top tiers while an actual 6th codex enters at a mid-tier level. So either his codexes are OP, or they were geared with 6th in mind so as to maintain their life span into 6th.

Still a question of cause and effect. If Grey Knights had a brilliant new take on psykers, it might as much have inspired the 6th Edition rules as vice versa, especially if, as noted, the release difference between Dark Eldar and Grey Knights was around 12 weeks or so, including Christmas. I doubt they launched major rule effort in that time.

And GK never were half as "OP" as.. for example, Space Wolves or pre-GK Imperial Guard, even if a few units might've been underpriced (e.g. Psyflemen). But by nicking IG+Daemonhunter allies shenanigans alone, GK made the game about a gazillion times more balanced.

ClockworkZion wrote:
*lots of stuff*

...I know I didn't play in 7th, so I don't have all the rules available, nor do I have the ones for 6th, but the more I look the more it looks like Ward did an okay job making Daemons a force that wasn't a wash to take while making them a little more balanced overall. But again, I'm an outsider on this so maybe I just have the little extra room to see it that way.

If you didn't play the game AND you don't know the rules and how they interacted, then you can have no actual concept of how broken Daemons were.

For example, comparing the damage output of 6th vs 7th edition Bloodletters against Empire Swordsmen?! Empire were a gunline army - you rarely saw units like halberdiers or swordsmen outside of detachments because spearmen were better suited to how the game played.
Try looking at a more common combat, like Bloodletters vs heavy cav of any flavour, or Bloodletters vs Greatswords/Blackguard/Swordmasters/White Lions/etc... since those units were far more common.

For their cost, Bloodletters are still one of the best Core units in the game. All Daemonic Core was likely at least a point or two undercosted in 7th.


As for Flamers?! No one took Bloodcrushers after a few months because the unit was too unwieldy to manouver properly at the time and they were insanely expensive. Beasts were over-costed and Fiends couldn't reach the sheer killing power of Flamers.
Being M6 Skirmishers, (ie: basically no movement restrictions, can march and fire!), made them arguably the best unit in the game. You could have 2 units of them at 2000pts, thus giving you a max of 12 per army. (most Tournaments after a short while either limited you to 0-1 or else placed a restriction on the total number you could take)

Other Skirmishing units overall were very, very weak in combat with the main exceptions of VC Wraiths (who were a combat unit), and DE Shades (who became a Deathstar of sorts since they could take great weapons + BSB w/ASF banner!), but Flamers?!
*IF* you survived their 'Stand and Shoot' reaction, you then suddenly ended up facing WS2/S5/T4/W2/A2 nasties! So unless you were charging with a WS5 unit, they'd typically hit you back as hard as you hit them! And with two wounds apiece, it was very, very difficult to remove more than a couple, meaning they'd almost certainly get some swings in return.

And consider what you'd normally send after Skirmishers; Fast Cav, small units of heavy cav, your own skirmishers, warbeasts like dogs/eagles, etc... In other words, lighter units because they were either speedy and/or easier to manouver than your main blocks.
Flamers could fight most of that, or else blow if off the board with their insane shooting.



Daemons in 7th turned the game on its head in a bad way. No game against Daemons was fun, and most armies couldn't even begin to compete, especially against the 'Tournament' lists Daemons could put up.
Filth like;
- Dark Insanity 'Thirster + max Flamers
- 20+ power dice Tzeentch armies.
- Slaanesh 'Ld-bomb'
- Anything with max Flamers!

 Zweischneid wrote:

Still a question of cause and effect. If Grey Knights had a brilliant new take on psykers, it might as much have inspired the 6th Edition rules as vice versa, especially if, as noted, the release difference between Dark Eldar and Grey Knights was around 12 weeks or so, including Christmas. I doubt they launched major rule effort in that time.

And GK never were half as "OP" as.. for example, Space Wolves or pre-GK Imperial Guard, even if a few units might've been underpriced (e.g. Psyflemen). But by nicking IG+Daemonhunter allies shenanigans alone, GK made the game about a gazillion times more balanced.

GW are constantly working out the kinks of their games, and as I had said it may have been done with 6th in mind. Just because they work on projects at one time doesn't mean they are constantly on them. Projects can be picked up and put down as the market requires them. Development likely started quite a long time ago, but it doesn't have to be a 'major' effort by that I mean the whole studio doesn't get involved until the ground work is already laid out.

If the game is designed around having fun, tell me whats fun about warp quaking the entire battlefield in turn 1? Fun for either player?
And again one codex with one under priced unit (longfangs) vs an entire codex of under priced units (dreadknights, psyflemen dreads, Draigo, Brotherhood Champion, Purifiers... need I continue?) with some ridiculous abilities added into the mix like S5 Storm Bolters... thats heavy weapon equivilant in other armies... take a psyker test when I die and kill your 350pt DP outright... or take a psyker test and I can shoot anything in range even if I can't see it.... Its just ridiculous

Experiment 626 wrote:

ClockworkZion wrote:
*lots of stuff*

...I know I didn't play in 7th, so I don't have all the rules available, nor do I have the ones for 6th, but the more I look the more it looks like Ward did an okay job making Daemons a force that wasn't a wash to take while making them a little more balanced overall. But again, I'm an outsider on this so maybe I just have the little extra room to see it that way.

If you didn't play the game AND you don't know the rules and how they interacted, then you can have no actual concept of how broken Daemons were.

For example, comparing the damage output of 6th vs 7th edition Bloodletters against Empire Swordsmen?! Empire were a gunline army - you rarely saw units like halberdiers or swordsmen outside of detachments because spearmen were better suited to how the game played.
Try looking at a more common combat, like Bloodletters vs heavy cav of any flavour, or Bloodletters vs Greatswords/Blackguard/Swordmasters/White Lions/etc... since those units were far more common.

I used Swordsmen because they have pretty much the most middle of the road statline (being mostly 3s, as it was pointed out that that 3s are the baseline of Fantasy), making them about the closest thing to a yardstick we got. And if we want to look at heavy armour, fine, the point still remains that the 6th Edition Bloodletters would do more attacks on the charge and generate more wounds. The newer ones would just manage to get 1-2 extra ones through thanks to killing blow to make up for the lost of Frenzy since the charge makes or breaks the unit.

Honestly I could have done this with any unit and the result would have been about the same. Having double the number of attacks gave the 6th Edition ones more chances to wound in that first round of combat.

And you're right, I didn't play then so I can't really know, but at the same time I'm also not tied down by my feelings about these books allowing me to be a little more objective than most.

Experiment 626 wrote:
For their cost, Bloodletters are still one of the best Core units in the game. All Daemonic Core was likely at least a point or two undercosted in 7th.

You might be right, but 1-2 points undercosting doesn't make or break the game. And with the complaints I usually see you'd think that they were 5-10 points undercosted.

Experiment 626 wrote:
As for Flamers?! No one took Bloodcrushers after a few months because the unit was too unwieldy to manouver properly at the time and they were insanely expensive. Beasts were over-costed and Fiends couldn't reach the sheer killing power of Flamers.

Maybe they only came back in 8th, but I remember seeing people advocate Bloodcrushers. And let's not start generalizing by saing "no one". Someone will always take that unit that "no one" takes because of theme or personal interest.

Experiment 626 wrote:
Being M6 Skirmishers, (ie: basically no movement restrictions, can march and fire!), made them arguably the best unit in the game. You could have 2 units of them at 2000pts, thus giving you a max of 12 per army. (most Tournaments after a short while either limited you to 0-1 or else placed a restriction on the total number you could take)

I've got their rulebook in my hands, and you're right, at 2k you could take 2 units of them, but seeing as the golden standard I've seen for Fantasy has always been upheld as 1,500-1,750 due to the size of the games and the model count, that seems less of an issue for your average player. And even if it was, there were still ways to deal with them as the other players also had the same number of slots to work with and would be taking what they wanted out of the codex.

Experiment 626 wrote:
Other Skirmishing units overall were very, very weak in combat with the main exceptions of VC Wraiths (who were a combat unit), and DE Shades (who became a Deathstar of sorts since they could take great weapons + BSB w/ASF banner!), but Flamers?!
*IF* you survived their 'Stand and Shoot' reaction, you then suddenly ended up facing WS2/S5/T4/W2/A2 nasties! So unless you were charging with a WS5 unit, they'd typically hit you back as hard as you hit them! And with two wounds apiece, it was very, very difficult to remove more than a couple, meaning they'd almost certainly get some swings in return.

I don't play a lot of fantasy, but honestly it sounds like people where aiming the wrong things at Flamers if this was a regular problem. Having access to slightly worse, but more numerous archers means most armies can engage them at a longer range, and those who can't (Dwarves, Skaven) have Warmachines that help.

And if Fantasy is supposibly the more tactical game (as I've heard claimed in the past many, many times) then shouldn't the concept of charging with a cheap squishy unit and then hitting the side or rear arc of the Flamers with something else that's harder do the job if they're that bad?

Experiment 626 wrote:
And consider what you'd normally send after Skirmishers; Fast Cav, small units of heavy cav, your own skirmishers, warbeasts like dogs/eagles, etc... In other words, lighter units because they were either speedy and/or easier to manouver than your main blocks.
Flamers could fight most of that, or else blow if off the board with their insane shooting.

So what your saying is people adapted poorly too the Daemons book and blame it instead a lack of flexibility and adjusting of tactics? Seriously what it sounds like to me. In a game where there are changes occurring all the time to who is "best". This is common, it's up to the player base to learn to adapt.

And as I pointed out before, a Magic Resistance banner helps those heavy cav units (as most can get one) since the shots are magical it gives you a ward save to help reduce those wounds a little more (3+ Heavy Cav save becomes 4+, stack with MR 2 gets you a 4+ followed by a 5+ ward to survive the S4 shots, unless your dice were gak you'd survive the shooting pretty well).

Wargames are about adapting, learning and growing. If you can't do that then you really need to sit back and look at what's really wrong with the game and then see if maybe the problem is yourself.

Experiment 626 wrote:
Daemons in 7th turned the game on its head in a bad way. No game against Daemons was fun, and most armies couldn't even begin to compete, especially against the 'Tournament' lists Daemons could put up.
Filth like;
- Dark Insanity 'Thirster + max Flamers
- 20+ power dice Tzeentch armies.
- Slaanesh 'Ld-bomb'
- Anything with max Flamers!

You obviously have too much emotion and negative nostalgia invested into this to truly be objective about the Daemons. I admit I've got about as much invested in Daemons as a banana (thus making my points basically worthless because "I wasn't there" and "I couldn't know") but there are a lot of problems with people who fail to step back, put their emotions aside and really look at what's being brought to the table.

As I pointed out before, 9 Flamers costed 315 points. 18 (or max flamers) cost 650. Are you honestly saying that something that's nearly a third of the army list's total cost at 2,000 points (32.5%) shouldn't be somewhat durable, and a little good? On paper a unit of Flamers looks fine, maybe your anger should be focused more on the kinds of people who ran the lists you call "filth", because if they where cheesy-neckbreads then it didn't matter what the army book was, they'd eskew fun for wins almost everytime.

This post illustrates two problems I've had trying to get into Fantasy:
1. The online community in general for Fantasy frankly sucks. Most of the folks who I run into who've been around "for a minute" dismisses the statements of newer players, or people less familiar with the rules. Just because I don't have copy of the 6th and 7th edition core rulebooks sitting in my hands right now it doesn't mean that I'm wrong. I can still sit down with the books and look at them and see the differences and even understand why the changes worked the way they did. But you write off my ability to think clearly, rationally and even evaluatively based on my level of experience with the game. That's no bueno.
2. You can't even look at half the armies in Fantasy without someone getting pissed off. Heaven forbid that you might want to play Daemons because you like Chaos and you didn't know about their nonsense, or that you like Skaven or whatever it is people are bitching about this month. Some of us want to play to have fun, to enjoy a game with their friends. It's not all about crushing our opponent's armies with super-optimized builds.

And that goes for 40k too. We can sit here all day blaming an army, but at the end of the day it's a book and some plastic. It didn't play itself and grind your army off the table. Bad dice rolls, an opponent who knows how to super-optimize his options, or just plays better than you, or a hundred other things did. But the army itself is just an army. It's just a means of playing a game.

And that's my problem with a lot of the Ward hate. We've got people jumping up and down and daemonizing the man for doing his job. Doing his job so well apparently that he updated both Fantasy and 40k since he's starting working there, and released over half of the 40k codex books in the last edition alone. GW likes what he does, and thinks it's fine. Hell, there isn't anything that goes to print that doesn't get approved first. It's not like Ward sneaks into where the printing is done and changes the books before they are started for crying out loud.

So here's where I stand at the end of this:
1. Ward may not be the most social guy (apparently), but he gets gak done. And at the end of the day he does an okay job at it. He's one of the stronger writers GW's had in the last decade I think and his books aren't any more prone to power-building BS than anyone else's (see Chaos Marines 3.5, Eldar during 4th, Leafblower during 5th, Venom Spam Dark Eldar during 5th, Longfang Spam during 5th.....seriously, these are all things people have bitch about that -aren't- Ward's fault).
2. While people don't like his fluff, I don't think it's the worst thing ever. If anyone wants Blood Angels fluff that makes Ward look good, go read James Swallows Blood Angels books. He's gotten better since then, but his early work was rough. And really, as a rule of thumb, the fluff can -always- be better.
3. The internet takes things way to personally, way to seriously and doesn't like accepting that maybe their just to inflexible and refusing to change. Like I said before: everyone wants better rules until it somehow hurts them. This goes for your army shifting to a different dynamic because of an edition change, to the other guy's army getting less gak with an update.
4. If Ward really broke the game with Daemons in 7th GW would have fixed it. And I mean for much cheaper than writing a new edition to unfuck the mess (seen that claim) or randomly upgrading all the other armies (seen that claim too). Obviously though they didn't think Daemons were off the mark, and had written the VC who came out before, and the books that came out after based on where they were looking at taking the game at the time. Now they're looking at taking the game elsewhere, starting with toning down the armies who can go "lulz, magic".
5. I refuse to agree with anyone who feels that they need to try and act like someone is basically Hitler because of the work they've done to a game system. This stuff isn't that serious, even with a monetary investment in it, and honestly if you're getting this bent out of shape about things you might need to learn some perspective. And maybe how to step back and look at the strengths and weaknesses of other armies so you can adapt your army a bit. The game is constantly changing, and honestly that means that sometimes your army will have to change too. If you don't like it, I heard that checkers has a good ruleset that hasn't changed in basically forever.

And so I'm out. I'm not going to keep trying to talk to people who are going to be this angry about everything just because someone's name is attached to it. You all have fun arguing. I'm going to go find something that better fills my time.

Oh, and just for the record: I play Sisters of Battle. My little WD codex curb-stomps those supposed "Marine+1" Blood Angels (and just about every other flavour of Marine). Where does it suffer? Versus horde armies like Orks, Nids and Foot Guard. All Cruddace and Kelly books. So there you go, I'm not defending Ward because of the army I play, but because the accusations being levelled at him have reached the point of being too unreasonable.

EDIT: I hit post and saw this so I just wanted to address these points really quick:

 JbR of the Endless Spire wrote:

If the game is designed around having fun, tell me whats fun about warp quaking the entire battlefield in turn 1? Fun for either player?
And again one codex with one under priced unit (longfangs) vs an entire codex of under priced units (dreadknights, psyflemen dreads, Draigo, Brotherhood Champion, Purifiers... need I continue?) with some ridiculous abilities added into the mix like S5 Storm Bolters... thats heavy weapon equivilant in other armies... take a psyker test when I die and kill your 350pt DP outright... or take a psyker test and I can shoot anything in range even if I can't see it.... Its just ridiculous

Can you tell me where the game tells you that you should Warp Quake the entire battlefield? And the units that have Warp Quake are PA Marines with no Invunerable Save. Are you saying your list has now way to kill standard Marines at range? Seriously, fun is left up to the players, it's up to us how to use the things we're given to play the game in a way that's fun for us, not up to GW to make us do it.
Grey Knights are not really underpriced. They have access to very little in their entire book that works outside of 24", have to get across the board without dying, can't reserve more than half their army due to the new reserve rules (no Drop Pods!), and have very little that can handle heavy tanks. Their lower than you'd expect points cost is to balance out the negatives they have. Yes they have strong points, but things like the Psycannon cause things to get pretty expensive (Terminator with a Psycannon costs 65 points for a 1 wound model that can now be sniped out of the unit).
Tau have S5 on almost all of their basic weapons. They can make these BS5 with Markerlights. They can also bring a LOT more of these to the game than Grey Knights can bring Storm Bolters, and have better range on their Pulse Rifle. S5, BS4 doesn't seem that unreasonable when you consider that in a 10 Terminator squad you'd tacking it on for 2 points a piece (this is assuming everyone has Storm Bolters, if they don't then it's more like 2.5 points per model). And if you just take a small unit of 5 that cost becomes 4 points a model. So 42-44 points for a Terminator with an S5 gun?
And that psychic test to shoot things grants an automatic 4+ cover save. That's now better than the basic cover save. And how many people really take those guys over Psyrifle Dreads (aka the army's only real anti-tank option outside of some of the Henchmen options and allies)?
Oh and even the Power Armoured Grey Knights will be outnumbered by everyone else as it costs them 200 points to field a 10 man unit -before- they start taking options.

Yeah.....-really- broken by itself. Grey Knights are a well rounded force with serious strengths (that they pay out the nose for) and weaknesses (that can outright cripple them). Quit blaming a book for your inability to cope with changes and opponents who where cheesing it up for the sake of trolling people.

Seriously, perspective people. A book and some plastic didn't kill your dog so stop acting like it did.

ClockworkZion wrote:

I used Swordsmen because they have pretty much the most middle of the road statline (being mostly 3s, as it was pointed out that that 3s are the baseline of Fantasy), making them about the closest thing to a yardstick we got. And if we want to look at heavy armour, fine, the point still remains that the 6th Edition Bloodletters would do more attacks on the charge and generate more wounds. The newer ones would just manage to get 1-2 extra ones through thanks to killing blow to make up for the lost of Frenzy since the charge makes or breaks the unit.

Honestly I could have done this with any unit and the result would have been about the same. Having double the number of attacks gave the 6th Edition ones more chances to wound in that first round of combat.

And you're right, I didn't play then so I can't really know, but at the same time I'm also not tied down by my feelings about these books allowing me to be a little more objective than most.

You might be right, but 1-2 points undercosting doesn't make or break the game. And with the complaints I usually see you'd think that they were 5-10 points undercosted.

You're forgetting to consider how bad Frenzy was in 6th; If an enemy unit was within charge range of the Frenzied unit, it MUST declare a charge.
So what ended up happening was, the M4 Bloodletters would be pulled out into the open by something like Fast Cav or a throw-away unit like Hounds who would chose 'Flee' as their charge reaction. Those 'Letters would then sit around like idiots and get charged in return, thus reducing the number of the them who eveh get to strike and almost certainly lose the combat.

Bloodletteres were poop in 6th just like every other non-M6 or better Frenzied unit.
7th they became OTT because not only did they lose the double-edged Frenzy rule, but gained +1M (giving them the charge more often) and Killing Blow AND dropped in cost.

Most Daemons players who actually played 7th would agree that Bloodletters should have been costed around 14-16pts/model for their abilities. (inlcuding the game-breaking Fear mechanic) Bloodletters in 7th were pretty much on par with basic Chaos Warriors in terms of their abilities, since you traded better armour for a ward save and initiative-striking S5. (most units with S5 either lost out on shields and/or required Great Weapons which struck last, or needed 'must charge' bonuses from the likes of Lances. S5 in Fantasy is the 'magical strength')

Now in 8th with the basic changes to charging & combat itself, Bloodletters might be just a point or so undercosted. There's a damn good reason that units of 40 still eyerape most enemies!

ClockworkZion wrote:
I've got their rulebook in my hands, and you're right, at 2k you could take 2 units of them, but seeing as the golden standard I've seen for Fantasy has always been upheld as 1,500-1,750 due to the size of the games and the model count, that seems less of an issue for your average player. And even if it was, there were still ways to deal with them as the other players also had the same number of slots to work with and would be taking what they wanted out of the codex.

I don't play a lot of fantasy, but honestly it sounds like people where aiming the wrong things at Flamers if this was a regular problem. Having access to slightly worse, but more numerous archers means most armies can engage them at a longer range, and those who can't (Dwarves, Skaven) have Warmachines that help.

And if Fantasy is supposibly the more tactical game (as I've heard claimed in the past many, many times) then shouldn't the concept of charging with a cheap squishy unit and then hitting the side or rear arc of the Flamers with something else that's harder do the job if they're that bad?

Spoken like someone who never actually played a game of 7th...

Most Tournaments were 2k standard, so yes, you routinely saw multiple units of Flamers. (And outside of 'Ard Boyz, most Tournaments put additional limits on the buggers)

Aiming the wrong things at Flamers?! You do realise that it was almost impossible to charge Flamers with your block units, yes? Perhaps if you somehow managed to trap them with 2-3 of your own blocks you might get the charge on them... (and in the meantime open yourself up to multiple flank/rear charges in return! )
Flamers are Skirmish type units. They get infinite 'free' reforms as they move (ie: they don't sacrifice any movement). This allowed them to pretty much work like a 40k unit in a game of squares, allowing them to easily slip between opponents' blocked units and thus remain out of sight. They can 'March and Fire', meaning they could move 12" and shoot to full effect. Being in the lose 'skirmish formation' also ment they were harder to hit in return with missile fire. War Machines like cannons or bolt throwers sucked against them because you'd hit only 1-2 models. (and Elven repeater bolt throwers simply missed most of their shots outright!)

In 6th & 7th, you delt with Skirmishers by chasing them with Fast Cavalry (who enjoyed the same movement/shooting perks as Skirmishers), or hitting them Magic Missiles, or sending small units of Heavy Cav to grind them down, or a flying Hero to chop them up, or your own Skirmishers or harder-hitting cheap units like Warhounds/Harpies.
Skirmishers by design were ment to avoid and harrasse full on blocks. You didn't want to ever bring your main blocks into combat with Skirmishers, because it left you wide open to a flank charge in return. (or else sent your unit running off in the wrong direction...)

Most Skirmishers weren't a huge problem because the available counters worked... Except with Flamers!
They could fight off most anything you'd normally counter a similar unit with, and they could even take on a high portion of Core units because their stats were insane. Not to mention, their 'Stand and Shoot' charge reaction could cripple even full unit blocks! (and simply outright explode most things that would want to charge them...)
And shooting them instead? Sure, if you wanted waste all your archers who'd on average be trying to hit them at a -2 to-hit penalty... (BS4 Elves for needed on average 5's to-hit then 5's to-wound. Sure, that'll work. )
And keep in mind not every army has missile fire. VC's, Beastmen & WoC have little to no shooting.

ClockworkZion wrote:
So what your saying is people adapted poorly too the Daemons book and blame it instead a lack of flexibility and adjusting of tactics? Seriously what it sounds like to me. In a game where there are changes occurring all the time to who is "best". This is common, it's up to the player base to learn to adapt.

And as I pointed out before, a Magic Resistance banner helps those heavy cav units (as most can get one) since the shots are magical it gives you a ward save to help reduce those wounds a little more (3+ Heavy Cav save becomes 4+, stack with MR 2 gets you a 4+ followed by a 5+ ward to survive the S4 shots, unless your dice were gak you'd survive the shooting pretty well).

Wargames are about adapting, learning and growing. If you can't do that then you really need to sit back and look at what's really wrong with the game and then see if maybe the problem is yourself.

Magic Resistance works on Magic Spells - not shooting! Just because a close combat attack or shooting attack has the "Magical Attacks" rule, does not make it Magic Spell!
So no, having MR does piss-all against Flamers because they're not chucking spells at you, their Flames of Tzeentch is simply a shooting attack that can also for example hurt 'Ethereal' models.

So far you're saying that pretty much every single non-Daemon player just sucked or wasn't that good at Fantasy. In truth, the few armies that could *almost* compete with Daemons required tailored lists of their own filthiest cheese to do so;
- VC's played pts denial with their token 'Drakenhof Guard' Deathstar and hid behind masses of Invo-spamming. And all their Etereal units are 100% useless vs Daemons.
- Skaven went back into their SAD mode and tried to blast everything to bits. (including those poor Slaves!)
- DE's turned to double Hydras + 'Unkillable Dreadlord' build + Shade-spam.
- WoC brought out their Tzeentch Chosenstar and again, went for the pts denial game. (MoT+Eye of the Gods + double Warshrine to try and get the Stubborn + Ward save result, then add Festus for added Regen!)
- Lizzies went into their own Deathstar mode with a pimped-out Slaan in his large Temple Guard block + max Skirmishing Skinks.

Everyone else cried!!!
Daemons in 7th were best because every single unit was OTT. Then they got insane upgrades to go along with undercosted units and godly stats.

Or look at it this way, so far you're the only one trying to say 7th ed Daemons were not an OP pile of the steamiest cheddar!
Seriously, go ask to play a game of 7th against a 'typical' 2k Daemon list and just see how much 'fun' and how 'tactical' a game it really wasn't...

 JbR of the Endless Spire wrote:
And again one codex with one under priced unit (longfangs) vs an entire codex of under priced units (dreadknights, psyflemen dreads, Draigo, Brotherhood Champion, Purifiers... need I continue?) with some ridiculous abilities added into the mix like S5 Storm Bolters... thats heavy weapon equivilant in other armies... take a psyker test when I die and kill your 350pt DP outright... or take a psyker test and I can shoot anything in range even if I can't see it.... Its just ridiculous

How are Purifiers, Draigo and, of all things, Brotherhood Champions undercosted? How are Purgation Squads, that hardly anyone uses, "ridiculous"?

Also, Grey Hunters and (arguably) Rune Priests most certainly are underpriced as well, so it's not just one unit.

Oh god, this will not end well...

Anyway, I believe it came from the apparently abstract work in some recent codexes, i.e. Grey Knights, Blood Angels.

ClockworkZion wrote:
And that's my problem with a lot of the Ward hate. We've got people jumping up and down and daemonizing the man for doing his job. Doing his job so well apparently that he updated both Fantasy and 40k since he's starting working there, and released over half of the 40k codex books in the last edition alone. GW likes what he does, and thinks it's fine.

That says exactly nothing about the quality of his rules or fluff.

ClockworkZion wrote:
Seriously, perspective people. A book and some plastic didn't kill your dog so stop acting like it did.

Nice fallacy there, "your complaints are not valid because the subject is not important". The game is expensive and time consuming, people invested thousands of dollars/ quid/ sth, the guy spoils it or at times even breaks it and is boorish enough to be shameless about it, seriously perspective.

 JbR of the Endless Spire wrote:

If the game is designed around having fun, tell me whats fun about warp quaking the entire battlefield in turn 1? Fun for either player?
And again one codex with one under priced unit (longfangs) vs an entire codex of under priced units (dreadknights, psyflemen dreads, Draigo, Brotherhood Champion, Purifiers... need I continue?) with some ridiculous abilities added into the mix like S5 Storm Bolters... thats heavy weapon equivilant in other armies... take a psyker test when I die and kill your 350pt DP outright... or take a psyker test and I can shoot anything in range even if I can't see it.... Its just ridiculous

Sorry, but playing against Grey Knights is fun. They tend to move up mid-field, there is (Draigo-Wing excluded, which is mainly a low-model starters-army that GW's been missing for a long, long time) a great variety of different units that respond differently to different attacks. There's shooting, cc and generally a fun scrap to be had in ever single game I ever played against Grey Knights.

Not so with Space Wolves. They don't play the "game", they play the "meta-game", which is always boring (as it was true for 5th Edition Eldar null-deployment or Ork-Nob Wound-Allocation-Abuse-lists). Wolves hog the far table-edge and spam an endless repetition of Long-Fangs, JoTWW and Las-Plas Razorbacks. Never has any Space Wolves opponent I played even cared about positioning, as it's no difference to them whether the charge or get charged (again, making them the most passive of armies CC-wise, which seems like an incredibly stupid game-design-decision for .. Space Wolves!).

If the goal is to have "fun", I play against a Grey Knight army over a Space Wolves army any day.

And again one codex with one under priced unit (longfangs) vs an entire codex of under priced units (dreadknights, psyflemen dreads, Draigo, Brotherhood Champion, Purifiers... need I continue?)

One under priced unit? Space wolves has a whole swath of underpriced units as well as cheap wargear. Purifiers are actually costed okay, it's their wargear that's undercosted (same with the psyflemen), and the brotherhood champion is useless, not sure why you mentioned it, and the dreadknight is okay priced with some expensive wargear, Draigo is also priced right, it's just the paladins were perfect at the points denial of the 5th edition system.

Sorry, but playing against Grey Knights is fun. They tend to move up mid-field, there is (Draigo-Wing excluded, which is mainly a low-model starters-army that GW's been missing for a long, long time) a great variety of different units that respond differently to different attacks. There's shooting, cc and generally a fun scrap to be had in ever single game I ever played against Grey Knights.

Not so with Space Wolves. They don't play the "game", they play the "meta-game", which is always boring (as it was true for 5th Edition Eldar null-deployment or Ork-Nob Wound-Allocation-Abuse-lists). Wolves hog the far table-edge and spam an endless repetition of Long-Fangs, JoTWW and Las-Plas Razorbacks. Never has any Space Wolves opponent I played even cared about positioning, as it's no difference to them whether the charge or get charged (again, making them the most passive of armies CC-wise, which seems like an incredibly stupid game-design-decision for .. Space Wolves!).

Have to disagree.From my experience,space wolves were considered a top tier army just because they could control the mid field due to the sheer amounts of grey hunters(and ofc longfangs who got nerfed in this edition).If your opponents were static players thats not the codex problem and spamming the best units is what makes a competitive list.Gk are no exception to that rule.My regular opponent was spamming psydreads and purifiers, just because they were the best units in the codex and he didnt want to spam something as boring as three henchmen in a psyback ,and i always found our games to be fun ,but claiming that Gks dont play the meta-game is just bs(always talking about 5th ed,in 6th there is no actual meta right now).

I am gonna agree though that the gk codex in 6th does not have under priced units.Imo it is very balanced right now,probably the worse of tier 1 armies.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

And again one codex with one under priced unit (longfangs) vs an entire codex of under priced units (dreadknights, psyflemen dreads, Draigo, Brotherhood Champion, Purifiers... need I continue?)

One under priced unit? Space wolves has a whole swath of underpriced units as well as cheap wargear. Purifiers are actually costed okay, it's their wargear that's undercosted (same with the psyflemen), and the brotherhood champion is useless, not sure why you mentioned it, and the dreadknight is okay priced with some expensive wargear, Draigo is also priced right, it's just the paladins were perfect at the points denial of the 5th edition system.

Have to agree here. Space Wolves have several undercosted units, which cases a plethora of issues.

Draigowing, was also heavily favored in 5th, because it pretty much Auto-won 1/3rd of the missions. This has been rectified in 6th.

GK were OP for their time, but now in 6th they are not any more, it actually looks like a planned decision to make them fit better into 6th at the cost of being OTT in 5th.
These days they sure are powerful, but they are fair. (unless you are demons and they you are ed, and that was actually not even a mistake-he did it on purpose!.)
Their fluff is still pathetic though.


I will display my main rant towards necrons then:
That book is absurd both in 5th and in 6th.
Every unit in the codex is both very hard-hitting and hard to kill compared to it's cost (with the exception of the flayed ones)-for a single point more then a space marine you get the same stats with better guns and reanimation protocols, for the mere "cos"t of having lower initiative. (who is in turn again re-balanced by having more attacks, so unless you got overwhelmed out you still do similar damage in melee.)

Some things there are outright absurdly priced, for example the wraiths having a 3+ invul and two wounds at 35 points a piece, piled on jump infantry frame with some mobility boost, AND great combat stats, or the night scythe costing a mere 100 points (was sane in 5th, but considering when it came out they sure as hell knew it will be aircraft in 6th and the rules for it!)

Then you got a long list of units that are designed to directly buff one another, cover each other's only weaknesses, provide insane flexibility and preform game-braking combos that there is no way a person writing that book could miss.

Add on top of that the unique ability to control the existence of night fighting, alter the enemy/s own units and remove their ability's, make the enemy's units attack each other (or even kill themselves in a challenge), deep strike in your opponent's turn, deep strike from within the field as movement, being borderline unkillable and the list goes on.

Its almost as if the design process was:
1-Make a core of the army with option to play both as hard-to-kill SM base or hard-to-kill Xeno base.
2-Make some cool special characters and units based on the concepts of either "undying army" or "we can change the rules of the game"
3-Check what unit N's weakness is.
4-Add another unit that is perfect answer the resolve said weakness/edit unit N to no longer have said weakness.
5-Repeat steps 3 and 4 until no weaknesses found.
6-Add a signature underwhelming unit to resemble fair play (flayed ones)

There is nothing that codex does not excel at, not a single "trick" another codex has and they don't, not a single unit they got no direct counter to, not a single weapon type they lack at least an alternative equivalent to, and even their most basic troop can threat every single unit type in the game from a distance.

That's why ward annoys me. he is under some sort of belief that the army who's codex he write has to be perfect and able to do every single thing the best way possible, with no drawbacks what-so-ever, and even beat the specialist armies at their own field.

will display my main rant towards necrons then:
That book is absurd both in 5th and in 6th.
Every unit in the codex is both very hard-hitting and hard to kill compared to it's cost (with the exception of the flayed ones)-for a single point more then a space marine you get the same stats with better guns and reanimation protocols, for the mere "cos"t of having lower initiative. (who is in turn again re-balanced by having more attacks, so unless you got overwhelmed out you still do similar damage in melee.)

They also do not have ATSKNF/Combat Squads/Combat Tactics, and an upgradable sgt, which comes standard in a Space Marine Squad. In addition to the lower I. The I is pretty huge, it's pretty easy to fold Necron Troop unit in CC, then sweep them. The balance is Superior Firepower/Resilency to a very big weakness in CC. I don't know where you get that they have more attacks, they only have 1 base. Immortals are pretty balanced for their point cost and so are Warriors.

Some things there are outright absurdly priced, for example the wraiths having a 3+ invul and two wounds at 35 points a piece, piled on jump infantry frame with some mobility boost, AND great combat stats, or the night scythe costing a mere 100 points (was sane in 5th, but considering when it came out they sure as hell knew it will be aircraft in 6th and the rules for it!)

Wraiths are a bit undercosted, I think everyone will agree with that. As far as the NIght Scythe costing 100 points, I think this will balance itself out as more books get Anti-flyer measures and Flyers of their own.

Then you got a long list of units that are designed to directly buff one another, cover each other's only weaknesses, provide insane flexibility and preform game-braking combos that there is no way a person writing that book could miss.

To me, this reads like the book has great synergy, and a large amount of competitive builds. There are really no Game-breaking combos.

Add on top of that the unique ability to control the existence of night fighting, alter the enemy/s own units and remove their ability's, make the enemy's units attack each other (or even kill themselves in a challenge), deep strike in your opponent's turn, deep strike from within the field as movement, being borderline unkillable and the list goes on.

It's really easy to take things out of context like you are doing, and make things Seem bad, so I'll recap real quick.

control the existence of night fighting,

You have one speceail charater that does this, and he causes it on his side as well, and the Ability to take 2 solar pulses. Solar pulses require A minimum 100 point Overlord, a 35 Cryptek, and then a 20 point solar pulse. It's not exactly cheap. There are also plenty of rules out there to deal with Nightfighting, such as Searchlights and Night vision.

alter the enemy/s own units and remove their ability's

We have one Special character than can do this, and it requires LOS to the enemy unit.

make the enemy's units attack each other (or even kill themselves in a challenge),

While MSS may be a bit undercosted, it is not prevalent. You can only take it on Lords and Overlords, so generally at most you'll run into 1-2 MODELS in the entire board with it. If the person is taking expensive Lords with MSS and other wargear in most of his units, then he is sacrifciing a lot of points to do it.

deep strike in your opponent's turn

When has this every been an issue?

deep strike from within the field as movement,

Which requries a 100 point overlord, two if you want to take two, and a sixty point cryptek, that is vulnerable to precision shots, and sniping. The Veil of Darkness is not a gamebreaker by any thought of the imagination.

being borderline unkillable and the list goes on

No unit in the Necron codex is even close to unkillable, you just need to learn how to deal with them properly.

You seem to have missed my point.

The vast majority of necron things are totally fine on their own, annoying at time-but usually fair, the problem resides in the fact that codex does EVERYTHING, and often even better then the codex that is supposed to be specialized in!

And then you get to mix-and-match the silly crypteks who can be equipped with a large array of special abilities who are in turn used to totally invalidate anything the unit was not good at beforehard.

The problem is that a necron army never needs to make any concessions. there is no effect of risk-reward, only reward, only improvements and only attempts to turn every unit more and more over-the-top with stacking modifiers and abilities who each in turn make the other modifiers even more empowering.

If you look at non-ward armies though, there is always a glaring "flaw" in the codex, something that codex just cannot preform well, some sort of ability they lack or some sort of concession that effects you no matter the army list, like tau being bad a combat, eldar got no "all-purpose" units, dark eldar got no serious armor, IG can't get heavy infantry, demons have deployment issues, chaos are a bit unpredictable at times, etc, etc.
The only codex I can think of that is non-ward and can do everything perfectly fine is SW, and the guy admitted its too good in retroprespective!

I NEVER said playing against GK isn't fun, but the book is filled with cheese. I never said that it was the games fault if its not fun, that entirely depends on the player your up against. What I don't like is that fact that these possible combinations are available. With the months of play testing out the rules surely someone saw that and went hang on, you don't think thats a little too much?

But that aside, 24" S5 BS4 Assault 2 is way better than 30" S5 BS3 Rapid Fire.... 'nuff said about that.

And Draigo is under costed, compare his stats and abilities to Abaddon... end of discussion about him.

Ok I'll give it that SW GH upgrades are undercosted, but they lose the ability to break into combat squads and have no heavy weapon options. Yes given that Long Fangs more than make up for that, but Rune Priests are no different from a Librarian other than spell selection, and sure enough sooner or later they will get random selection just like all the rest of us. But again that depends on the player as to whether its fun I guess...

But anyway back to my question, are GK and Necrons still currently a top tier codex because of being OP or because they were geared towards 6th ed?

@Clockworkzion please refrain from making comments directed about other people's opinions, such as books and plastic and dogs...

You seem to have missed my point.

I guess you missed mine, which is that just about everything you posted, is hyperbole, or just incorrect.

The vast majority of necron things are totally fine on their own, annoying at time-but usually fair, the problem resides in the fact that codex does EVERYTHING, and often even better then the codex that is supposed to be specialized in!

Most Codexs can cover every phase of the game well, with the right selection of Units. Space Wolves, Grey Knights, Orks, Blood Angels, and Space Marines can all do "Everything"

And then you get to mix-and-match the silly crypteks who can be equipped with a large array of special abilities who are in turn used to totally invalidate anything the unit was not good at beforehard.

Really? Crypteks somehow make units Necron Units good at close combat? Make them Immune to sweeping? Necrons don't have any heavy or special weapons available to them, in any of their Infantry. Crypteks help this, and come with a high pricetag.
There are certain types of Crypteks you won't even see fielded. As your last post, your stance on this is completely baseless.

f you look at non-ward armies though, there is always a glaring "flaw" in the codex, something that codex just cannot preform well, some sort of ability they lack or some sort of concession that effects you no matter the army list, like tau being bad a combat, eldar got no "all-purpose" units, dark eldar got no serious armor, IG can't get heavy infantry, demons have deployment issues, chaos are a bit unpredictable at times, etc, etc.

There is a serious flaw and Weakness in the Necron codex, and that is Their Across the board I2, and WS/BS 4. I fail to see how you cannot see that as weakness, or are you just choosing to Ignore it? They also have to pay out the nose to get any kind of Upgrades, like lords or Crypteks into squads.

The only codex I can think of that is non-ward and can do everything perfectly fine is SW, and the guy admitted its too good in retroprespective!

Source?

I NEVER said playing against GK isn't fun, but the book is filled with cheese. I never said that it was the games fault if its not fun, that entirely depends on the player your up against. What I don't like is that fact that these possible combinations are available. With the months of play testing out the rules surely someone saw that and went hang on, you don't think thats a little too much?

GK, while a terror in 5th, are pretty balanced now.

And Draigo is under costed, compare his stats and abilities to Abaddon... end of discussion about him.

Abbadon is way better than Draigo, I don't know what you're missing here.

Ok I'll give it that SW GH upgrades are undercosted, but they lose the ability to break into combat squads and have no heavy weapon options. Yes given that Long Fangs more than make up for that, but Rune Priests are no different from a Librarian other than spell selection, and sure enough sooner or later they will get random selection just like all the rest of us. But again that depends on the player as to whether its fun I guess...

It's not just that GH upgrades are undercosted, GHs themselves are undercosted themselves by at least 2 PPM. They have ATSKNF, Acute Senses, counter attack and a BP/Chainsword for less than the cost of a Standard Marine.
Rune Priests also are different from a Libby, as they get all of those special rules that GH get, game breaking powers, and Runic weapons, for the same cost a standard libby.

And Draigo is under costed, compare his stats and abilities to Abaddon... end of discussion about him.

Not even close to an end of discussion.

For 275 you get get termie, storm bolter, titansword, frag/krak/psyke out and stormshield, who is more kitted to fighting daemons and psykers, with a bit of utility with grand mastery.

Abbadon is 265 points of Termie, Drach'nyen, talon, champion of chaos, and VOTLL, who is more kitted to beating anything and everythings face that gets in the unlucky range of Abbadon.

Against each other, Abbadon will be getting an extra attack on draigo's charge, and +2 if he does charge first, abbadon will strike first and penetrate his armor compared to draigo who is unable to penetrate Abbadon's. Abbadon will be wounding on 4+, and have at least A5 attacks, A10 potentially each round, all rerolled hits because of VOTLL (Hatred Space Marines). All draigo has there is a stormshield and master-crafted force sword.

I love his beard, but seriously he can't be the scumbag that most people make him out to be, I understand some people don't like the rules he may have written. But come on the dudes living the life! He plays 40k and rights the rules for a living if I had any feelings that were negative towards our buddy Matt it would be Jealousy.

 BrotherGnaeus wrote:
I love his beard

This is by far his most detestable quality.

 BrotherGnaeus wrote:
I love his beard, but seriously he can't be the scumbag that most people make him out to be, I understand some people don't like the rules he may have written. But come on the dudes living the life! He plays 40k and rights the rules for a living if I had any feelings that were negative towards our buddy Matt it would be Jealousy.

As I pointed out on page 1 of the thread, he dresses like a giggalo. Please see exhibit one on Introduction pages 15 and 17 of the BRB for proof. I mean, I personally love to wear a nice vest and dress with some class....but I think it's the lack of a tie and the hair that keep it from being a well constructed ensemble. Truth is, he's a cheap fedora away from being the guy at every community college that carries all his gaming stuff with him everywhere, walks with a cane/walking stick, and wears denim shorts from February until December.

Truth is, I think if I actually knew him in person, we'd be friends...but I'd still criticize his clothes and call him a cheesefarmer.

 Void__Dragon wrote:

 BrotherGnaeus wrote:
I love his beard

This is by far his most detestable quality.

Sorry, but the choice of waistcoat and white shirt without either a tie or jacket is his most detestable quailty.

I'll bet he's got jeans on with that combo as well.

 BrotherGnaeus wrote:
I love his beard, but seriously he can't be the scumbag that most people make him out to be, I understand some people don't like the rules he may have written. But come on the dudes living the life! He plays 40k and rights the rules for a living if I had any feelings that were negative towards our buddy Matt it would be Jealousy.

I can normally adapt to things other authors have done, like undercosted Grey Hunters + Longfangs, or the Skaven mess in Fantasy.
My armies still work against these things, I just have to be a bit more on-the-ball and play a decent game to compensate for the fact my opponent's list has given them a slight advantage.

BUT!

How the f am I supposed to compete when for example, my opponent's OP codex doesn't even let me put one god damn model on the fething table?!!



Say all you want about the others, my Daemons will shrug their shoulders and get on with the buisness of competing. (and I'm talking pre-WD update Daemons)
Grey Knights on the other hand? F-my-life. Thanks for making me shelve my entire army Ward!

In order to completely bone a daemon player with GK, you have to do strike spam. If you do strike spam, don't you almost auto-lose against any non-daemon player. I don't think you're going to run into that problem competitively.

Experiment 626 wrote:
How the f am I supposed to compete when for example, my opponent's OP codex doesn't even let me put one god damn model on the fething table?!!

Say all you want about the others, my Daemons will shrug their shoulders and get on with the buisness of competing. (and I'm talking pre-WD update Daemons)
Grey Knights on the other hand? F-my-life. Thanks for making me shelve my entire army Ward!

I've seen you make similar complaints before and I just don't get them. I've been playing Daemons for a few years now, and I have never lost a game to Grey Knights. The closest I've come was a draw in my very first game against that army. I've faced Draigowing, Henchmen and Dreadaught spam, IG with GK allies and I generally win easily.

Granted, I've never played someone that spammed Warp Quake enough to cover the table, but I don't think I'm likely to either. I play in tournaments, and if someone brought a list like that they'd get tabled by any other type of army. If it's a friendly game, the other player shouldn't be bringing that crap.

Honestly, how many times have you actually played a GK army that covered the board in Warp Quake? I know it's possible in theory, but have you ever actually seen it in person? I haven't.

Experiment 626 wrote:

 BrotherGnaeus wrote:
I love his beard, but seriously he can't be the scumbag that most people make him out to be, I understand some people don't like the rules he may have written. But come on the dudes living the life! He plays 40k and rights the rules for a living if I had any feelings that were negative towards our buddy Matt it would be Jealousy.

I can normally adapt to things other authors have done, like undercosted Grey Hunters + Longfangs, or the Skaven mess in Fantasy.
My armies still work against these things, I just have to be a bit more on-the-ball and play a decent game to compensate for the fact my opponent's list has given them a slight advantage.

BUT!

How the f am I supposed to compete when for example, my opponent's OP codex doesn't even let me put one god damn model on the fething table?!!



Say all you want about the others, my Daemons will shrug their shoulders and get on with the buisness of competing. (and I'm talking pre-WD update Daemons)
Grey Knights on the other hand? F-my-life. Thanks for making me shelve my entire army Ward!

Strike Spam against Daemons is no worse than something like Venom Spam or GH spam Against Tyranids. Except the fact that Strike Spam like that is not going to be a real TAC list.

 BrotherGnaeus wrote:
I love his beard, but seriously he can't be the scumbag that most people make him out to be, I understand some people don't like the rules he may have written. But come on the dudes living the life! He plays 40k and rights the rules for a living if I had any feelings that were negative towards our buddy Matt it would be Jealousy.

While I don't have a problem with the Dude, since it's just a game I have one think to say. His beard sucks, it sucks hard. My beard is far superior.