Do we still need forge world in tournament play?

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.

**Relic07**

RiTides wrote:
*Sigh* This was actually a useful thread. Unfortunately, Relic, your flamebaiting is making it much less so. Again, posts like the above few only weaken whatever argument you were trying to make.

It's unfortunate that you're unwilling to stop with the text-based barbs and engage in a meaningful discussion. I tried asking nicely... but I'll stop feeding you, now.

I am not arguing about anything. Just telling things the way they are.
I am like that. I get to the heart of the matter and dissect things down to the smallest detail.

You can believe me or not. Bitch and throw a tantrum. Bottom line is Forge World will be staying legal in
a lot of tournament play, and will be expanding to additional tournaments as Games Workshop and Forge World expand.

It is just how things are going to be. Guaranteed.

**RiTides**

I'm not referring to your comments about Forgeworld. I'm referring to your sarcastic and flamebaiting comments about Blackmoor.

Really, anything you have to say about FW at this point is completely drowned out by your immaturity in posting. I've hit mod alert on your posts, but unfortunately I don't know if a mod is on right now and you've succeed in dragging this thread completely off-topic.

**Manchu**

@thread

This is a website about discussing toy soldiers. Take it easy or take a walk. Some fresh air can do wonders for one's perspective on internet battling.

**RiTides**

So getting back to the pre-derailment discussion:

Blackmoor wrote:
I am all for choices. I also think it is a great compromise to have apocalypse events and narrative events that allow FW to run concurrently with tournaments that do not allow FW. Whatever floats your boat, go ahead and get your hobby on.

I am also not as hard line about FW as some seem to think. If Carl wants to bring Zhufor or some of the other choices I am all for it.

The problem is that most tournament players do not worry about whether or not their opponent is having fun. They are there to compete, and to them their winning is fun. So they will not take the Wraithseers, the Plague Drones, and the other interesting units to play with, but they will just load up on IG artillery and Vultures.

In a perfect world I would like to see tournaments with a banned list, but here is the problem.
#1. Tournaments all seem to be all 40k approved FW or no FW.
#2. There is a loud minority who oppose any banned list and do not want to compromise.
#3. No one can agree on what should, or should not be banned.

Because of those problems above my pragmatic response is to campaign for no FW. Since all there is right now is black or white I have to choose a side .

I think this is interesting, but as I said I also think there's more room to compromise than I thought before this thread came about (in it's most recent incarnation

) given AdeptiCon and Nova's stances on some FW allowance in major events. I was unaware of Nova's stance before, at least in regards to the Trios (a close equivalent to AdeptiCon's team tournament).

Cheers for the discussion, lads!

**Dozer Blades**

There should be banned units but most TOs simply find life easier to sweepingly approve everything under the sun.

**Relic07**

See mod warning above.

**Manchu**

As Blackmoor pointed out, the problem with discriminatory banning is you have to supply an argument for your choices and it's hard to imagine that not creating even more argument.

What I don't understand about Blackmoor's stance is why disallowing all FW is more practical than allowing all (40k-labeled) FW.

**Blackmoor**

Dozer Blades wrote:
There should be banned units but most TOs simply find life easier to sweepingly approve everything under the sun.

I was about to say that TOs are motivated by money, so one way or another they will do whatever will make them the most of it (either allowing FW or not).

This also influences their modeling policy. They might write something strict, but when it comes time to turnimg someone away because of their poor "counts-as" it will not happen.

**Dozer Blades**

I don't see any problem with banning units such as Hades breaching drills and Lucius drop pods.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Blackmoor wrote:
Dozer Blades wrote:
There should be banned units but most TOs simply find life easier to sweepingly approve everything under the sun.

I was about to say that TOs are motivated by money, so one way or another they will do whatever will make them the most of it (either allowing FW or not).

This also influences their modeling policy. They might write something strict, but when it comes time to turnimg someone away because of their poor "counts-as" it will not happen.

It doesn't have to be that way though.

**Blackmoor**

RiTides wrote:
*Sigh* This was actually a useful thread. Unfortunately, Relic, your flamebaiting is making it much less so. Again, posts like the above few only weaken whatever argument you were trying to make.

It's unfortunate that you're unwilling to stop with the text-based barbs and engage in a meaningful discussion. I tried asking nicely... but I'll stop feeding you, now.

I have no idea what Relic07 is talking about since he knows nothing about me and he is wrong in all of his assumptions.

**Enigwolf**

Blackmoor wrote:
Dozer Blades wrote:
There should be banned units but most TOs simply find life easier to sweepingly approve everything under the sun.

I was about to say that TOs are motivated by money, so one way or another they will do whatever will make them the most of it (either allowing FW or not).

This also influences their modeling policy. They might write something strict, but when it comes time to turnimg someone away because of their poor "counts-as" it will not happen.

There's an itch that I can't quite scratch about that statement. While I'm sure that there are TOs out there who do it for the money, I don't think every TO does it for that reason. Most TOs themselves are volunteers, IIRC, I believe all the Adepticon staff were, I think (Vaguely recall this from an old episode of The Independent Characters)? Not sure about NOVA, but I think Mike can share with us about that. It's a lot of time, effort, and stress, and even if they are getting paid, I doubt it's a lot of money at all.

If you're referring to money drawn at the event, then the counter-point I have to this is that, would they risk upsetting the 90% of their community for the 10% that are unhappy? Sometimes it's not about the crowd you draw but also the satisfaction of helping build your community and keep it going.

**RiTides**

I agree, I think TOs do it for the love of the game in large part... I have a feeling muwhe / MVBrandt could tell us that this is not a money-making idea

However, they do have to keep in mind what will help the event to (mostly) break even, and thus what would draw in the most attendees, be the most popular, etc. So that may be what was in mind with the above statement.

**Enigwolf**

Correct, that's why I defended the sweeping decision list. It's not only just easier rather than playtesting a hundred different builds looking for "broken" ones, but also helps to explain why one unit was banned versus another. This prevents an on-site debate, like we're having here, of "omg you banned this but you didn't ban heldrake!!11oneeleven11!one1".

Having this headache is something that TOs don't need on the day itself. Heck, there may be a build that surfaces the day before a tournament that no one had ever seen before, which can completely table any list. What then? Make a hasty decision to ban it? Ban one unit? What's the implications of that. It's more fair to either ban all, allow all, or limit. This is why I don't think a ban list will not work out.

**rigeld2**

Ban lists can work.
They just need to not be knee jerk reactions.
A specific unit wins one tourney. Great. Who cares?
A specific unit consistently wins every tourney. Now there's an issue to investigate.

Of course, this only works with a very organized tournament atmosphere and lots of data (not just the GT circuit).

**Enigwolf**

rigeld2 wrote:
Ban lists can work.
They just need to not be knee jerk reactions.
A specific unit wins one tourney. Great. Who cares?
A specific unit consistently wins every tourney. Now there's an issue to investigate.

Of course, this only works with a very organized tournament atmosphere and lots of data (not just the GT circuit).

Now, I don't know the global tourney scene, but has any 40k tourney, historically, had a unit ban list? (Let's not drag Fantasy or other games into this either, just plain 40k)

**rigeld2**

I doubt it (Virus Grenades aside).

**Hulksmash**

I think making FW units unique would do the trick honestly. I'm just not a fan of gates wide open. Granted if I lived in SoCal still I'd probably have fully embraced it since that's all they seem to offer there anymore

Silly rich west coasters and their silly amount of FW due to having a bunker in one of the largest metros in the country.

Granted a lot of the units that I would feel bad about using would actually fit my army extremely well thematically.

**RiTides**

Enigwolf wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
Ban lists can work.
They just need to not be knee jerk reactions.
A specific unit wins one tourney. Great. Who cares?
A specific unit consistently wins every tourney. Now there's an issue to investigate.

Of course, this only works with a very organized tournament atmosphere and lots of data (not just the GT circuit).

Now, I don't know the global tourney scene, but has any 40k tourney, historically, had a unit ban list? (Let's not drag Fantasy or other games into this either, just plain 40k)

Why can't we drag fantasy into this? Unit bans I have not seen commonly... but certain character and item bans are absolutely common.

I also agree about not having knee jerk reaction bans, which I think is part of the reason why muwhe doesn't want any- that what is OP comes and goes rather frequently. But, I think you can have some idea based on just the statistics of a unit alone, and of course discussion with the tournament community like is happening here.

@Hulk- I think making FW units unique, a la AdeptiCon / Nova, is a good idea... it's just unfortunate that folks are then unable to run themed lists with lots of FW. Some sacrifice has to be made if you want to limit things, though, and in this case folks could still take any FW unit... just not spam it. Whereas with a ban list, some units couldn't be taken at all, but more of the others... that's why on paper it's preferable to me, but I can see why a 0-1 restriction is much easier to implement. It certainly involves less arguments

**Enigwolf**

RiTides wrote:
Enigwolf wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
Ban lists can work.
They just need to not be knee jerk reactions.
A specific unit wins one tourney. Great. Who cares?
A specific unit consistently wins every tourney. Now there's an issue to investigate.

Of course, this only works with a very organized tournament atmosphere and lots of data (not just the GT circuit).

Now, I don't know the global tourney scene, but has any 40k tourney, historically, had a unit ban list? (Let's not drag Fantasy or other games into this either, just plain 40k)

Why can't we drag fantasy into this? Unit bans I have not seen commonly... but certain character and item bans are absolutely common.

Two reasons for this, actually. Firstly, this discussion is centered around Forge World inclusion, not Warhammer Forge in Fantasy, as titled by the thread! Secondly and most importantly, the meta in 40k is, from my understanding, far more balanced than it is in Fantasy, where the differential between the most OP unit and the average unit is incredibly bigger compared to 40k, to a point where there are serious amounts of comp that 40k's meta doesn't see.

**Vaktathi**

Hulksmash wrote:
I think making FW units unique would do the trick honestly. I'm just not a fan of gates wide open. Granted if I lived in SoCal still I'd probably have fully embraced it since that's all they seem to offer there anymore

Silly rich west coasters and their silly amount of FW due to having a bunker in one of the largest metros in the country.

Granted a lot of the units that I would feel bad about using would actually fit my army extremely well thematically.

The LA battle bunker no longer exists and didn't sell FW through it for the last couple years, we aren't getting it any easier than anyone else, and honestly, looking at the price on GW's stuff of late, FW isn't too bad anymore. My DKoK Grenadiers are cheaper than Dire Avengers are, while FW's character models are about the same price as GW's character models are now, or within a fairly close range (5-15%)

Besides, we're talking a very small number of units that are twisting peoples knickers, Lascannon Sabres, Thudd guns apparently, Vultures (but for some reason not Vendettas) and maybe a couple other units, limiting all FW units (while at the same time limiting zero codex units/allies combos) just because of the potential of a couple units seems rather heavy handed.

**Dozer Blades**

Placing some limitations on choices would help to make FW more accepted. Players then would have a much lesser number of units to contend with in terms of preparation. I think this is the right approach.

**Brothererekose**

Hulksmash wrote:
Silly rich west coasters and their silly amount of FW due to having a bunker in one of the largest metros in the country.

Best gaming stores too, like both Game Empires. Heh, better weather, too.

And according to the Beach Boys, the prettiest girls in the world.

Oh, and staying on topic, 1 FW per, 'unique' is a good balancer.

**Enigwolf**

Brothererekose wrote:
Hulksmash wrote:
Silly rich west coasters and their silly amount of FW due to having a bunker in one of the largest metros in the country.
Best gaming stores too, like both Game Empires. Heh, better weather, too.

And according to the Beach Boys, the prettiest girls in the world.

Oh, and staying on topic, 1 FW per, 'unique' is a good balancer.

What then happens to FW army lists? Such as Siege Vanguard, DKoK, Elysians?

**OverwatchCNC**

Enigwolf wrote:
Brothererekose wrote:
Hulksmash wrote:
Silly rich west coasters and their silly amount of FW due to having a bunker in one of the largest metros in the country.
Best gaming stores too, like both Game Empires. Heh, better weather, too.

And according to the Beach Boys, the prettiest girls in the world.

Oh, and staying on topic, 1 FW per, 'unique' is a good balancer.

What then happens to FW army lists? Such as Siege Vanguard, DKoK, Elysians?

You can't use them.

**Unit1126PLL**

OverwatchCNC wrote:
Enigwolf wrote:
Brothererekose wrote:
Hulksmash wrote:
Silly rich west coasters and their silly amount of FW due to having a bunker in one of the largest metros in the country.
Best gaming stores too, like both Game Empires. Heh, better weather, too.

And according to the Beach Boys, the prettiest girls in the world.

Oh, and staying on topic, 1 FW per, 'unique' is a good balancer.

What then happens to FW army lists? Such as Siege Vanguard, DKoK, Elysians?

You can't use them.

Some of us have lovingly put together entire armies based around those lists, and even from before ForgeWorld picked up the list and when it was publised by GW.

Are you saying we can't play our armies because Thudd Guns, Vultures, and Sabres? The Armored Battlegroup list only has access to Vultures out of those 3, and it's 0-1 IIRC.

**Blackmoor**

Enigwolf wrote:
rigeld2 wrote:
Ban lists can work.
They just need to not be knee jerk reactions.
A specific unit wins one tourney. Great. Who cares?
A specific unit consistently wins every tourney. Now there's an issue to investigate.

Of course, this only works with a very organized tournament atmosphere and lots of data (not just the GT circuit).

Now, I don't know the global tourney scene, but has any 40k tourney, historically, had a unit ban list? (Let's not drag Fantasy or other games into this either, just plain 40k)

Fantasy has, but 40k hasn't.

That being said, 40k has had many types of comp which does almost the same thing.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Unit1126PLL wrote:

Some of us have lovingly put together entire armies based around those lists, and even from before ForgeWorld picked up the list and when it was publised by GW.

Are you saying we can't play our armies because Thudd Guns, Vultures, and Sabres? The Armored Battlegroup list only has access to Vultures out of those 3, and it's 0-1 IIRC.

You know that you can't play them in almost all tournaments now right, even in ones that allow FW?

**Vaktathi**

OverwatchCNC wrote:
Enigwolf wrote:
Brothererekose wrote:
Hulksmash wrote:
Silly rich west coasters and their silly amount of FW due to having a bunker in one of the largest metros in the country.
Best gaming stores too, like both Game Empires. Heh, better weather, too.

And according to the Beach Boys, the prettiest girls in the world.

Oh, and staying on topic, 1 FW per, 'unique' is a good balancer.

What then happens to FW army lists? Such as Siege Vanguard, DKoK, Elysians?

You can't use them.

Which, as noted earlier, is very odd given that they're typically less abuseable than allowing the codex army with FW stuff (i.e. DKoK get lots of thudd guns, but no valkyries/vendettas, what flyers they do get access to arre HS, can't take sabres, etc Elysians meanwhile can't take thudd guns or sabres even though they can take lots of Valkyries)

**Bobthehero**

On the other hand you can pile up Thudd guns and Heavy Arty carriages and give them FNP with the Quartermaster

**Breng77**

I think my biggest issue with the fw army lists is that they are allowed to ally with basically their own codex. Which can lead to spamming and abuse. Were I to allow them in an event I was running it might very well be with a rule disallowing allying with their parent dex.

**Unit1126PLL**

Breng77 wrote:
I think my biggest issue with the fw army lists is that they are allowed to ally with basically their own codex. Which can lead to spamming and abuse. Were I to allow them in an event I was running it might very well be with a rule disallowing allying with their parent dex.

As long as you keep different Space Marine books (BT, DA, BA, etc) from allying with Codex: Space Marines, then that follows I guess. But if you aren't going to keep Codex: Blood Angels from allying with Codex: Space Marines (lists which are identical in all but very few ways) then I don't understand why allying between the Forge World list and it's closest relative is.

By the way, they aren't "parent dexes." The Forge World army lists stand alone.