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.

Ummm.... The link you provided is stamped experimental, and has point costs blacked out.

 Dozer Blades wrote:
It is up to date. And is from the Forge World website. Dude don't lie to make your point. * Sad face *

1. I'm not lying. Watch your mouth (er, fingers).
2. That is not up to date. The contemptor was updated in both the HH book, the Aeronautica book (mortis pattern), and IA: Apocalypse II, second edition (which is no longer on the FW site).
3. It's incomplete.

What point are you trying to make posting out-dated, experimental, incomplete pdfs?

Edit: I'm not trying to pick on you, Dozer. But the only thing that FW puts up on their download pages now are the experimental rules, which can change when they go into print.

Yes, you can still get an idea of what a unit does that way, but not every unit get that. Not even 1 in 5.

 BryllCream wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
And this is different from a new codex/White Dwarf units how?

I will browse through a codex, and it will be discussed online -

Are FW units/armies not also discussed online? I think I've seen them in the General Discussion and Tactics forums with some frequency (even if not routine). We just had several threads on the IA12 book.

Furthermore, how does one browse something like, say, the SoB codex if you didn't pick it up during the month that WD was for sale?

I'll have a fair idea of what i'm playing against. I don't know anything about any forgeworld, as do most 40k gamers. Why should we have to face an army we know literally nothing about when in all likelihood they'll know our codex off by heart.

Same thing applies to a new codex, most people don't have armies memorized the first few months they are out. Hell people are still getting used to DA's much less Tau. And most FW stuff isn't spectacularly far off the mark of what you'd normally see. If you know how a Leman Russ Battle Tank works you know how a Leman Russ Annihilator works.

They'll know what strategy we're going for and what the weak point in our list is. We will have no such luxury against FW armies

You should be able to request an opponents rules and overview them ahead of time no matter what they're playing, that's simply a common assumption at events.

One could also....buy the books. Before the inevitable cost argument arise, if you're already shelling out for multiple $50 codex books each year to keep up on the tournament scene and are updating armies to keep up with the meta, it's a marginal extra cost for magnificient books, and some are roughly codex cost (IA Aeronautica is actually cheaper...).

even if you could browse the rules that doesn't really tell you how the army plays.

so...browsing a codex you can tell how it plays, but browsing an IA list organized in the same manner you can't. I don't follow how this is so much more difficult.

 Blackmoor wrote:
If that demon army gets blown off the table by the forge world units like it should have it would have changed the whole FW narrative.

Why? Does it "change the whole narrative" every time a codex list wins a tournament decisively? Or are we going back to the ridiculous double standard where FW rules are only allowed as long as nobody would ever use them in a winning list?

The cost is also a barrier to entry. That IG army had $800.00 worth of Forge World in it.

And this doesn't apply to codex armies? You're going to be spending hundreds of dollars on making a codex IG army, on top of all the travel/hotel/etc expenses for attending a major tournament.

 BryllCream wrote:
I will browse through a codex, and it will be discussed online - I'll have a fair idea of what i'm playing against. I don't know anything about any forgeworld, as do most 40k gamers. Why should we have to face an army we know literally nothing about when in all likelihood they'll know our codex off by heart. They'll know what strategy we're going for and what the weak point in our list is. We will have no such luxury against FW armies, even if you could browse the rules that doesn't really tell you how the army plays.

So what? If you don't do the research of course you'll be surprised. But we wouldn't have any sympathy for someone who didn't do the research on a codex army, so why should it be acceptable to remain ignorant of FW rules and then complain that you don't know about them?

 Vaktathi wrote:

 BryllCream wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
And this is different from a new codex/White Dwarf units how?

I will browse through a codex, and it will be discussed online -

Are FW units/armies not also discussed online? I think I've seen them in the General Discussion and Tactics forums with some frequency (even if not routine). We just had several threads on the IA12 book.

Furthermore, how does one browse something like, say, the SoB codex if you didn't pick it up during the month that WD was for sale?

I'll have a fair idea of what i'm playing against. I don't know anything about any forgeworld, as do most 40k gamers. Why should we have to face an army we know literally nothing about when in all likelihood they'll know our codex off by heart.

Same thing applies to a new codex, most people don't have armies memorized the first few months they are out. Hell people are still getting used to DA's much less Tau. And most FW stuff isn't spectacularly far off the mark of what you'd normally see. If you know how a Leman Russ Battle Tank works you know how a Leman Russ Annihilator works.

They'll know what strategy we're going for and what the weak point in our list is. We will have no such luxury against FW armies

You should be able to request an opponents rules and overview them ahead of time no matter what they're playing, that's simply a common assumption at events.

One could also....buy the books. Before the inevitable cost argument arise, if you're already shelling out for multiple $50 codex books each year to keep up on the tournament scene and are updating armies to keep up with the meta, it's a marginal extra cost for magnificient books, and some are roughly codex cost (IA Aeronautica is actually cheaper...).

even if you could browse the rules that doesn't really tell you how the army plays.

so...browsing a codex you can tell how it plays, but browsing an IA list organized in the same manner you can't. I don't follow how this is so much more difficult.

/thread. People who don't want variation in the game only want to win. People who want variation in the game are in it for the hobby of painting and modeling.

Which has nothing to do with fw, if anything fw will see less variation a tournaments than its exclusion. In fact most anti-fw people are ok with it so long as the worst abused units are not included. There are plenty of painting and modeling opporunities without forge world.

Breng77 wrote:
Which has nothing to do with fw, if anything fw will see less variation a tournaments than its exclusion. In fact most anti-fw people are ok with it so long as the worst abused units are not included.

This is often highly subjective and contentious, and many of which certainly are no worse than anything found in a codex, and if FW units are being banned, why aren't codex units of the same power level?

 Vaktathi wrote:

Breng77 wrote:
Which has nothing to do with fw, if anything fw will see less variation a tournaments than its exclusion. In fact most anti-fw people are ok with it so long as the worst abused units are not included.

This is often highly subjective and contentious, and many of which certainly are no worse than anything found in a codex, and if FW units are being banned, why aren't codex units of the same power level?

Because the latter is part of the group of units labled "featured in codexes", that is universally accepted. The former is in the group "not featured in codexes", variations of which are found wherever you play.

 BryllCream wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

Breng77 wrote:
Which has nothing to do with fw, if anything fw will see less variation a tournaments than its exclusion. In fact most anti-fw people are ok with it so long as the worst abused units are not included.

This is often highly subjective and contentious, and many of which certainly are no worse than anything found in a codex, and if FW units are being banned, why aren't codex units of the same power level?

Because the latter is part of the group of units labled "featured in codexes", that is universally accepted. The former is in the group "not featured in codexes", variations of which are found wherever you play.

And here's where we come to the rub...why is that distinction relevant?

 Vaktathi wrote:

 BryllCream wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

Breng77 wrote:
Which has nothing to do with fw, if anything fw will see less variation a tournaments than its exclusion. In fact most anti-fw people are ok with it so long as the worst abused units are not included.

This is often highly subjective and contentious, and many of which certainly are no worse than anything found in a codex, and if FW units are being banned, why aren't codex units of the same power level?

Because the latter is part of the group of units labled "featured in codexes", that is universally accepted. The former is in the group "not featured in codexes", variations of which are found wherever you play.

And here's where we come to the rub...why is that distinction relevant?

Why is any distinction relevent? Nevertheless, it's there. Codex is the default, FW is an add-on.

 Vaktathi wrote:

Breng77 wrote:
Which has nothing to do with fw, if anything fw will see less variation a tournaments than its exclusion. In fact most anti-fw people are ok with it so long as the worst abused units are not included.

This is often highly subjective and contentious, and many of which certainly are no worse than anything found in a codex, and if FW units are being banned, why aren't codex units of the same power level?

Vaktathi, its been explained so many times in this thread even a quick perusal would of netted your answer. You love to expound on your arguments but always distill the other sides down to its lowest common denominator. The reason why is that broken FW units almost exclusively benefit IG and Marines. You will see less diversification in tournaments as player gravitate towards the powerful FW units. The current meta is actually fairly healthy as two new codex are showing promise against the Necron dominance and Eldar are just getting started. FW will reverse those trends all skewing towards IG.

Another thing I dislike about FW is why they always seem to improve on weapons and units at have been working fine in 40k. Kheres Assault Cannon is the prime example. 4 shots on the assault cannon not enough for you? Buy now and we'll give you 6 shots! Its hilarious.

 BryllCream wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 BryllCream wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

Breng77 wrote:
Which has nothing to do with fw, if anything fw will see less variation a tournaments than its exclusion. In fact most anti-fw people are ok with it so long as the worst abused units are not included.

This is often highly subjective and contentious, and many of which certainly are no worse than anything found in a codex, and if FW units are being banned, why aren't codex units of the same power level?

Because the latter is part of the group of units labled "featured in codexes", that is universally accepted. The former is in the group "not featured in codexes", variations of which are found wherever you play.

And here's where we come to the rub...why is that distinction relevant?

Why is any distinction relevent? Nevertheless, it's there. Codex is the default, FW is an add-on.

FW is an "add-on" in as much as WD SoB is an "add-on", or any other Codex for that matter. FW is officially part of the game system as much as Codices are. An "add-on" would be Apocalypse, which fundamentally changes how the game is played.

Glocknall wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

Breng77 wrote:
Which has nothing to do with fw, if anything fw will see less variation a tournaments than its exclusion. In fact most anti-fw people are ok with it so long as the worst abused units are not included.

This is often highly subjective and contentious, and many of which certainly are no worse than anything found in a codex, and if FW units are being banned, why aren't codex units of the same power level?

Vaktathi, its been explained so many times in this thread even a quick perusal would of netted your answer. You love to expound on your arguments but always distill the other sides down to its lowest common denominator. The reason why is that broken FW units almost exclusively benefit IG and Marines.

The Eldar get an entirely new army list, a new aspect, a new type of wraithlord, multiple new flyers and hovertanks, etc. Tau get a new suit class, new flyers, skimmer units like tetras and additional hammerhead options and more. Necrons get their own artillery units, a new skimmer tank and a heavy bomber. Orks get all sorts of wacky walkers and tanks. There's a lot of stuff that isn't just IG/Imperial. Yet nobody wants to talk about that because "zomg sabres and thudd guns!" despite that many of these units are very characterful and likely would see lots of use if allowed.

You will see less diversification in tournaments as player gravitate towards the powerful FW units. The current meta is actually fairly healthy as two new codex are showing promise against the Necron dominance and Eldar are just getting started. FW will reverse those trends all skewing towards IG.

There's a lot of stuff for IG yes, there's also a good amount of stuff for Tau, Orks, Eldar, and now Necrons are getting stuff as well. This is especially true in the Flyer/anti-flyer department. I know I've been seeing lots of Barracudas, Hornets, Tetras, Warp Hunter and Nightwings of late, I don't get why it'd only be IG stuff that would overrun events.

And since when was controlling the direction of the metagame away from or towards certain armies an aim or responsibility of tournaments, as opposed to being large events where people take their toy soldiers and compete to see who can use their toys the best?

Another thing I dislike about FW is why they always seem to improve on weapons and units at have been working fine in 40k. Kheres Assault Cannon is the prime example. 4 shots on the assault cannon not enough for you? Buy now and we'll give you 6 shots! Its hilarious.

While I can understand the conceptual issue and can agree with it, GW's core design studio does the same thing (look at the new Eldar codex and all the monofilament/distort weapons), and it's not like the Contemptor with Kheres AC's is a huge balance issue being a 200something point walker.

 Enigwolf wrote:

 BryllCream wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 BryllCream wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

Breng77 wrote:
Which has nothing to do with fw, if anything fw will see less variation a tournaments than its exclusion. In fact most anti-fw people are ok with it so long as the worst abused units are not included.

This is often highly subjective and contentious, and many of which certainly are no worse than anything found in a codex, and if FW units are being banned, why aren't codex units of the same power level?

Because the latter is part of the group of units labled "featured in codexes", that is universally accepted. The former is in the group "not featured in codexes", variations of which are found wherever you play.

And here's where we come to the rub...why is that distinction relevant?

Why is any distinction relevent? Nevertheless, it's there. Codex is the default, FW is an add-on.

FW is an "add-on" in as much as WD SoB is an "add-on", or any other Codex for that matter. FW is officially part of the game system as much as Codices are. An "add-on" would be Apocalypse, which fundamentally changes how the game is played.

Not true at all FW is a self admitted "expansion" to the game, not part of the base game. Saying it is on the same level as a codex is akin to saying that dlc missions for a video game are the same as the base game. This does not make them un-official, but they are not at all the same. Lets put it this way the 40k BRB contains statlines for ever non special character that existed in the base game prior to the edition, release, it includes no previously published FW statlines. So stating that FW is the same as any base game model is false. Again this does not make them un-official but they are obviously on a different level. Perhaps think of it this way, games (including 40k) often contain basic rules, and then advanced rules. Standard 40k is the basic with no add ons, FW 40k is the advanced with all the bells and whistles.

 Enigwolf wrote:

FW is an "add-on" in as much as WD SoB is an "add-on", or any other Codex for that matter. FW is officially part of the game system as much as Codices are. An "add-on" would be Apocalypse, which fundamentally changes how the game is played.

This is simply untrue. SoB is published and printed directly by Games Workshop LTD, a subsidiary owned by Games Workshop Group PLC. Forge World is another subsidiary of Games Workshop Group PLC but otherwise unrelated to Games Workshop LTD - they have a different work force, different stores, different warehouses and produce different products. Forge World are licensed to be able to produce items for GW LTD trademarks and use their copyrights. That does not and will never make them "the same". They do not even use the same printing - Forge World books are printed in England, GWs in China. Forge World's self proclaimed officiousness is about as valid as Transformers saying they're valid for use in MTG because both are subsidiaries of Hasbro. It's marketed as "an expansion" because they are not allowed by the main company to produce additional models for the GW subsidiary and claim them to be normally usable units for any game. Please stop spreading this because it is wrong.

As to why ig perhaps because they have maybe twice as many units available as the rest of the not imperial Maine armies? Maybe because they contribute most of the perceived broken units? Which means that is what top tournament players will gravitate toward.

Eyjio wrote:

 Enigwolf wrote:

FW is an "add-on" in as much as WD SoB is an "add-on", or any other Codex for that matter. FW is officially part of the game system as much as Codices are. An "add-on" would be Apocalypse, which fundamentally changes how the game is played.

This is simply untrue. SoB is published and printed directly by Games Workshop LTD, a subsidiary owned by Games Workshop Group PLC. Forge World is another subsidiary of Games Workshop Group PLC but otherwise unrelated to Games Workshop LTD - they have a different work force, different stores, different warehouses and produce different products. Forge World are licensed to be able to produce items for GW LTD trademarks and use their copyrights. That does not and will never make them "the same". They do not even use the same printing - Forge World books are printed in England, GWs in China. Forge World's self proclaimed officiousness is about as valid as Transformers saying they're valid for use in MTG because both are subsidiaries of Hasbro. It's marketed as "an expansion" because they are not allowed by the main company to produce additional models for the GW subsidiary and claim them to be normally usable units for any game. Please stop spreading this because it is wrong.

Forgeworld is not a subsidiary at all actually, they're just another department at GW no different than IT or Accounting. They aren't a distinct organization, they're not even a licensed reseller, they're GW through and through. It says right on their website that they are part of Games Workshop, they aren't a subsidiary company. Their offices are in the same place everyone elses is. Their email systems are all "@gamesworkshop.co.uk" and not "@forgeworld.co.uk".

Eyjio wrote:
It's marketed as "an expansion" because they are not allowed by the main company to produce additional models for the GW subsidiary and claim them to be normally usable units for any game.

Sorry, wrong again. FW books explicitly say "these rules are official and part of standard 40k". You can nitpick all you like about how GW structures their company for accounting/legal reasons, but the simple fact is that if GW did not approve of FW's "these are official" claim it would be removed from the books.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Breng77 wrote:
As to why ig perhaps because they have maybe twice as many units available as the rest of the not imperial Maine armies?

Except that most of them are redundant. Who cares if IG get the Lightning and Thunderbolt, I'm not taking either of them because I have Vendettas. Meanwhile Tau might only get the Barracuda, but it will almost always replace the weak codex flyers. And that's not even counting the "fluff" units that will never appear in a competitive game, like the Sentinel cargo loader.

 Vaktathi wrote:

Eyjio wrote:

 Enigwolf wrote:

FW is an "add-on" in as much as WD SoB is an "add-on", or any other Codex for that matter. FW is officially part of the game system as much as Codices are. An "add-on" would be Apocalypse, which fundamentally changes how the game is played.

This is simply untrue. SoB is published and printed directly by Games Workshop LTD, a subsidiary owned by Games Workshop Group PLC. Forge World is another subsidiary of Games Workshop Group PLC but otherwise unrelated to Games Workshop LTD - they have a different work force, different stores, different warehouses and produce different products. Forge World are licensed to be able to produce items for GW LTD trademarks and use their copyrights. That does not and will never make them "the same". They do not even use the same printing - Forge World books are printed in England, GWs in China. Forge World's self proclaimed officiousness is about as valid as Transformers saying they're valid for use in MTG because both are subsidiaries of Hasbro. It's marketed as "an expansion" because they are not allowed by the main company to produce additional models for the GW subsidiary and claim them to be normally usable units for any game. Please stop spreading this because it is wrong.

Forgeworld is not a subsidiary at all actually, they're just another department at GW no different than IT or Accounting. They aren't a distinct organization, they're not even a licensed reseller, they're GW through and through.

Again, that's not true. GW LTD has nothing to do with Forge World. They do not link them on their website and they do not own them. GW PLC owns FW. Again, they do not share a workforce, nor offices, nor production. This is why not even GW's own stores can order FW to them - it is not the same company and the profits do not go to GW LTD.

 Peregrine wrote:

Eyjio wrote:
It's marketed as "an expansion" because they are not allowed by the main company to produce additional models for the GW subsidiary and claim them to be normally usable units for any game.

Sorry, wrong again. FW books explicitly say "these rules are official and part of standard 40k". You can nitpick all you like about how GW structures their company for accounting/legal reasons, but the simple fact is that if GW did not approve of FW's "these are official" claim it would be removed from the books.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Breng77 wrote:
As to why ig perhaps because they have maybe twice as many units available as the rest of the not imperial Maine armies?

Except that most of them are redundant. Who cares if IG get the Lightning and Thunderbolt, I'm not taking either of them because I have Vendettas. Meanwhile Tau might only get the Barracuda, but it will almost always replace the weak codex flyers. And that's not even counting the "fluff" units that will never appear in a competitive game, like the Sentinel cargo loader.

And the more abundant broken units it provides?

Eyjio wrote:

 Enigwolf wrote:

FW is an "add-on" in as much as WD SoB is an "add-on", or any other Codex for that matter. FW is officially part of the game system as much as Codices are. An "add-on" would be Apocalypse, which fundamentally changes how the game is played.

This is simply untrue. SoB is published and printed directly by Games Workshop LTD, a subsidiary owned by Games Workshop Group PLC. Forge World is another subsidiary of Games Workshop Group PLC but otherwise unrelated to Games Workshop LTD - they have a different work force, different stores, different warehouses and produce different products. Forge World are licensed to be able to produce items for GW LTD trademarks and use their copyrights. That does not and will never make them "the same". They do not even use the same printing - Forge World books are printed in England, GWs in China. Forge World's self proclaimed officiousness is about as valid as Transformers saying they're valid for use in MTG because both are subsidiaries of Hasbro. It's marketed as "an expansion" because they are not allowed by the main company to produce additional models for the GW subsidiary and claim them to be normally usable units for any game. Please stop spreading this because it is wrong.

Breng77 wrote:

 Enigwolf wrote:

 BryllCream wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 BryllCream wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

Breng77 wrote:
Which has nothing to do with fw, if anything fw will see less variation a tournaments than its exclusion. In fact most anti-fw people are ok with it so long as the worst abused units are not included.

This is often highly subjective and contentious, and many of which certainly are no worse than anything found in a codex, and if FW units are being banned, why aren't codex units of the same power level?

Because the latter is part of the group of units labled "featured in codexes", that is universally accepted. The former is in the group "not featured in codexes", variations of which are found wherever you play.

And here's where we come to the rub...why is that distinction relevant?

Why is any distinction relevent? Nevertheless, it's there. Codex is the default, FW is an add-on.

FW is an "add-on" in as much as WD SoB is an "add-on", or any other Codex for that matter. FW is officially part of the game system as much as Codices are. An "add-on" would be Apocalypse, which fundamentally changes how the game is played.

Not true at all FW is a self admitted "expansion" to the game, not part of the base game. Saying it is on the same level as a codex is akin to saying that dlc missions for a video game are the same as the base game. This does not make them un-official, but they are not at all the same. Lets put it this way the 40k BRB contains statlines for ever non special character that existed in the base game prior to the edition, release, it includes no previously published FW statlines. So stating that FW is the same as any base game model is false. Again this does not make them un-official but they are obviously on a different level. Perhaps think of it this way, games (including 40k) often contain basic rules, and then advanced rules. Standard 40k is the basic with no add ons, FW 40k is the advanced with all the bells and whistles.

Wrong and wrong. Please prove to me where Forge World has been "self admitted" as an "expansion". On the Forge World website, the only mention of "expansion" is the Horus Heresy line, while 40k and Fantasy are mentioned apart from that. Other than that, other recognized expansions are as follows: Cities of Death, Apocalypse, Planetstrike, Planetary Empires, Death from the Skies (source: http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/landing.jsp?catId=cat440311a&rootCatGameStyle=wh40k)

For those who say that FW events have less variation, my experience is the exact opposite. Its easy to see why this would be: more options mean your army both has more possibilities and has to account for more possibilities across the table. In fact, the abundance of diverse armies seems to imply that FW is really not as bad as the picture some detractors would like to paint.

 Enigwolf wrote:

Wrong and wrong. Please prove to me where Forge World has been "self admitted" as an "expansion". On the Forge World website, the only mention of "expansion" is the Horus Heresy line, while 40k and Fantasy are mentioned apart from that. Other than that, other recognized expansions are as follows: Cities of Death, Apocalypse, Planetstrike, Planetary Empires, Death from the Skies (source: http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/landing.jsp?catId=cat440311a&rootCatGameStyle=wh40k)

Are you seriously using the GW LTD website to show FW isn't an expansion? Okay, let's play this absurd denail game then. Find the Forge World link: http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/home.jsp It's not obvious, because it's not the same company. Why would they list it as an expansion to their game on their website when it isn't made by them and they don't share in the profits? FW and Black Library are at the bottom in small print because they are owned by the same parent company. Is this really so hard? Are you going to say BL and GW are the same next?

So lets just say each codex has a broken unit or 2 that are generally accepted. (I'm not saying these units are broken or the worst, heck I'm going out on a limb say each codex even has an op unit)

Ig= vendetta
Wolves = long fangs
Grey knights = paladins
Sisters = Celestine
Csm = heldrake
Tau = riptide
Dark angels = salvo banner in land raider
Space marines = thunder fire
Blood angels = blood talon furioso
Dark eldar = beast pack
Eldar = eldrad (in the old book who knows in the new one yet)
Ork = nob bikers
Nids = tervigon
Daemons = daemon prince kitted out.
Crons = wraiths
Templars = really nothing

So I'm having trouble even coming up with one in most books and adding FW adds (at least by perception) 4 ish more to IG (who I could have added more to prior to adding any to some books)

This is why you will see tons of ig, throw in that they can ally with damn near everyone....sand tournaments (at the top become non stop ig Fest, allowing the barracuda (that no Tau player will bother running makes no difference)

Please cite tournaments that use FW and see an overabundance both of IG and the units seen as abusive.

I'd like some evidence that the sky is falling, we're not going to just believe you 'cause you can yell it loudly.

Eyjio wrote:

 Enigwolf wrote:

Wrong and wrong. Please prove to me where Forge World has been "self admitted" as an "expansion". On the Forge World website, the only mention of "expansion" is the Horus Heresy line, while 40k and Fantasy are mentioned apart from that. Other than that, other recognized expansions are as follows: Cities of Death, Apocalypse, Planetstrike, Planetary Empires, Death from the Skies (source: http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/landing.jsp?catId=cat440311a&rootCatGameStyle=wh40k)

Are you seriously using the GW LTD website to show FW isn't an expansion? Okay, let's play this absurd denail game then. Find the Forge World link: http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/home.jsp It's not obvious, because it's not the same company. Why would they list it as an expansion to their game on their website when it isn't made by them and they don't share in the profits? FW and Black Library are at the bottom in small print because they are owned by the same parent company. Is this really so hard? Are you going to say BL and GW are the same next?

I'm laughing at the concept that you're even using the GW company organizational structure to prove your point. So you're saying that if a video game company releases a game, and hands all the post-launch patch work off to another subsidiary (in this case, another studio, which frequently happens) to take care of, all post-launch patches are to be considered "unofficial expansions"? Come on. I listed half a dozen business reasons five or six pages ago as to why Forge World is a subsidiary company contributing to the same game system - did you even read the thread, or just the first and last page?

Eyjio wrote:

 Enigwolf wrote:

Wrong and wrong. Please prove to me where Forge World has been "self admitted" as an "expansion". On the Forge World website, the only mention of "expansion" is the Horus Heresy line, while 40k and Fantasy are mentioned apart from that. Other than that, other recognized expansions are as follows: Cities of Death, Apocalypse, Planetstrike, Planetary Empires, Death from the Skies (source: http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/landing.jsp?catId=cat440311a&rootCatGameStyle=wh40k)

Are you seriously using the GW LTD website to show FW isn't an expansion? Okay, let's play this absurd denail game then. Find the Forge World link: http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/home.jsp It's not obvious, because it's not the same company. Why would they list it as an expansion to their game on their website when it isn't made by them and they don't share in the profits? FW and Black Library are at the bottom in small print because they are owned by the same parent company. Is this really so hard? Are you going to say BL and GW are the same next?

I found the link quite easily, in under 30 seconds as fate would have it, not only that but I couldn't even select my country without my cursor passing over the link to Forge World.

Look at the top tables of bao and adepticon team events...if FW were allowed consistently trickle down would happen. Asking for evidence to be provided from an up to this point limited sample is obtuse. You can also listen to top players and look at their lists for these events to see a trend. I.e. people don't buy armies for single events. Wait till after Wgc and we'll see how things look there.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also an expansion is anything that expands the base game hence FW = expansion.

 Enigwolf wrote:

I'm laughing at the concept that you're even using the GW company organizational structure to prove your point. So you're saying that if a video game company releases a game, and hands all the post-launch patch work off to another subsidiary (in this case, another studio, which frequently happens) to take care of, all post-launch patches are to be considered "unofficial expansions"? Come on. I listed half a dozen business reasons five or six pages ago as to why Forge World is a subsidiary company contributing to the same game system - did you even read the thread, or just the first and last page?

You're laughing because you're wrong? It's not in any way like that analogy. It's most like if EA Sports made a new Madden, then Bioware released paid DLC that added more stuff into the game but was arguably poorly done. They're both owned by EA, sure, but that DLC is not part of the main game and so most players would have neither heard of it nor downloaded it. Just because one company says it's "official" doesn't make it so.

Also an expansion is anything that expands the base game hence Codices = expansion.