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.

 TheCustomLime wrote:
@Peregrine

I think what would really solve that issue is if Forgeworld had a greater presence in the FLGS and GW stores. At least sell their books or something. So far they are just an enigmatic presence that players have been told let people take "OP" combos that utterly break the game. At least that's the gist of it.

If the rumor mill is correct that will be solved by summer 2014.

 TheCustomLime wrote:
I think what would really solve that issue is if Forgeworld had a greater presence in the FLGS and GW stores. At least sell their books or something. So far they are just an enigmatic presence that players have been told let people take "OP" combos that utterly break the game. At least that's the gist of it.

This has been proposed, and it all comes down to production volume. FW's methods don't scale up very well to the level of production required to put their stuff in every store, and most of what they produce is "collector's" items with low sales volume that would just collect dust on the shelves of the average store. The only way to make FW work as a business is to have everything produced and sold from one central location and only through the internet.

(And we see the same effect with direct-only items even from the "main" GW product lines.)

 ClockworkZion wrote:
If the rumor mill is correct that will be solved by summer 2014.

7th Edition will drop early, and suddenly people will be able to make a single army comprised of a Space Marine Librarian, Eldar Guardians, Brettonian Knights, a Battlewagon, 3 Warhound Titans, a Bastion, a Mysterious Forest, a Strike Cruiser, Optimus Prime, and a discarded boot?

 insaniak wrote:
7th Edition will drop early, and suddenly people will be able to make a single army comprised of a Space Marine Librarian, Eldar Guardians, Brettonian Knights, a Battlewagon, 3 Warhound Titans, a Bastion, a Mysterious Forest, a Strike Cruiser, Optimus Prime, and a discarded boot?

You forgot all the associated supplements and e-books for those things, but that's still a pretty easy exalt.

 insaniak wrote:
7th Edition will drop early, and suddenly people will be able to make a single army comprised of a Space Marine Librarian, Eldar Guardians, Brettonian Knights, a Battlewagon, 3 Warhound Titans, a Bastion, a Mysterious Forest, a Strike Cruiser, Optimus Prime, and a discarded boot?

Nonsense. GW will never allow you to play with a discarded boot. It will have to be a Citadel™ Finecast™ Boot™ to be allowed in the Games™ Workshop™ Hobby™.

 Peregrine wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:
I think what would really solve that issue is if Forgeworld had a greater presence in the FLGS and GW stores. At least sell their books or something. So far they are just an enigmatic presence that players have been told let people take "OP" combos that utterly break the game. At least that's the gist of it.

This has been proposed, and it all comes down to production volume. FW's methods don't scale up very well to the level of production required to put their stuff in every store, and most of what they produce is "collector's" items with low sales volume that would just collect dust on the shelves of the average store. The only way to make FW work as a business is to have everything produced and sold from one central location and only through the internet.

(And we see the same effect with direct-only items even from the "main" GW product lines.)

For the minis I agree.
There's no reason to treat the books that way though. Not the 40k books - the leather 30k gold leaf etc books sure, but I don't see a reason to make the IA* books order from England only.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
1) Other people ban it, so you will too.
2) You've heard it is overpowered, and you don't like playing overpowered gak, so you ban it.
3) You've never tried it, and it is new and confusing, so you ban it.

Those reasons make you feel slighted and like they're insulting your army personally?
But if I say "I refuse to play Armored Company because it turns every objective game into a race to see who tables who." You're okay with that?

Dude, first of all I'm not sure why you think you get to judge the legitimacy of my feelings but even ignoring that, those reasons are...
Would you take your time to inform the person declining the game for those reasons about why they're "illegitimate" and hurt your feelings?

rigeld2 wrote:
There's no reason to treat the books that way though. Not the 40k books - the leather 30k gold leaf etc books sure, but I don't see a reason to make the IA* books order from England only.

Depends on the sales volume. Remember, GW tried having the basic IA books in stores and abandoned the experiment (though the closest store here still has their copies collecting dust). Presumably the sales volume from local stores didn't justify printing and keeping an inventory everywhere.

But if I say "I refuse to play Armored Company because it turns every objective game into a race to see who tables who." You're okay with that?

I would be, if you've actually played the game and found that it isn't enjoyable instead of just speculating about it, and if you are consistent and refuse to play against codex-only lists with a similar strategy of all guns and minimum troops (for example, Tau Riptide spam, or a codex IG list with lots of tanks and a couple token veteran squads).

 insaniak wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
If the rumor mill is correct that will be solved by summer 2014.

7th Edition will drop early, and suddenly people will be able to make a single army comprised of a Space Marine Librarian, Eldar Guardians, Brettonian Knights, a Battlewagon, 3 Warhound Titans, a Bastion, a Mysterious Forest, a Strike Cruiser, Optimus Prime, and a discarded boot?

Actually I meant the rumors of FW taking over the metal and finecast models that aren't transfered to plastic or dropped by then and it's entire line being moved to the main site. But good guess.

rigeld2 wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:
I think what would really solve that issue is if Forgeworld had a greater presence in the FLGS and GW stores. At least sell their books or something. So far they are just an enigmatic presence that players have been told let people take "OP" combos that utterly break the game. At least that's the gist of it.

This has been proposed, and it all comes down to production volume. FW's methods don't scale up very well to the level of production required to put their stuff in every store, and most of what they produce is "collector's" items with low sales volume that would just collect dust on the shelves of the average store. The only way to make FW work as a business is to have everything produced and sold from one central location and only through the internet.

(And we see the same effect with direct-only items even from the "main" GW product lines.)

For the minis I agree.
There's no reason to treat the books that way though. Not the 40k books - the leather 30k gold leaf etc books sure, but I don't see a reason to make the IA* books order from England only.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
1) Other people ban it, so you will too.
2) You've heard it is overpowered, and you don't like playing overpowered gak, so you ban it.
3) You've never tried it, and it is new and confusing, so you ban it.

Those reasons make you feel slighted and like they're insulting your army personally?
But if I say "I refuse to play Armored Company because it turns every objective game into a race to see who tables who." You're okay with that?

Dude, first of all I'm not sure why you think you get to judge the legitimacy of my feelings but even ignoring that, those reasons are...
Would you take your time to inform the person declining the game for those reasons about why they're "illegitimate" and hurt your feelings?

Actually you'd be surprised on the books. There was the entire siege of vraks at gw for over a year and a half. Only 3, never replaced. I bought a single one.... about a year later there are only the two I didn't purchase.

Also the reason he is fine with rejecting your Armored Company because it seems like you are basing it upon the list itself (tons and tons of tanks) rather than it being FW. At that point, it feels like you are rejecting the list for the same reason you would reject a riptide spam list, or a screamerstar list.

 insaniak wrote:
Quite simply, the fact that Forgeworld rules are produced by Forgeworld, rather than by the GW Studio, and that no Studio publication makes any mention of Forgeworld being a legal part of the game.

All of the statements about Forgeworld being legal are made by Forgeworld. Which only counts for anything if you accept that Forgeworld has the authority to actually make that claim. There is no evidence to prove that they do have that authority.

You're acting as if Forgeworld was Batlefront, claiming that their new 28mm Panzergrenadiers were 40k legal. If GW wasn't okay with what Forgeworld was saying, they'd sue the crap out of them for it. (and yes I know, they're the same company, that's the point)

This is going nowhere.The only people who could answer this questions of legitimacy is GW themselves.Ask them for an offical response.I'am sure they could put an end to this issue once and for all.

eldar 1 wrote:
This is going nowhere.The only people who could answer this questions of legitimacy is GW themselves.Ask them for an offical response.I'am sure they could put an end to this issue once and for all.

GW have given an official response, many times. This argument just keeps happening because certain people refuse to accept that response.

I learned about this in psychology class. When listening to a message people will either pay attention to the message itself or how it's presented. When it comes to the FW argument there are those who won't accept the message because they find fault with the messenger. It's a strange fault, I admit, but it's there.

The short of it is you can't get someone who to accept a message until you can get them to get over the fault they had with the presentation.

rigeld2 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
1) Other people ban it, so you will too.
2) You've heard it is overpowered, and you don't like playing overpowered gak, so you ban it.
3) You've never tried it, and it is new and confusing, so you ban it.

Those reasons make you feel slighted and like they're insulting your army personally?
But if I say "I refuse to play Armored Company because it turns every objective game into a race to see who tables who." You're okay with that?

Dude, first of all I'm not sure why you think you get to judge the legitimacy of my feelings but even ignoring that, those reasons are...
Would you take your time to inform the person declining the game for those reasons about why they're "illegitimate" and hurt your feelings?

I wouldn't have a problem with that. Because rather than saying "your army isn't worth my time based on some irrational refusal to play Forgeworld" you're saying "After some consideration, I've decided that I would not enjoy a game against your army because of the army composition you use." Which is just fine with me - it's the same thing as turning down games against CronAir or Riptide spam.

 TheCustomLime wrote:
I learned about this in psychology class. When listening to a message people will either pay attention to the message itself or how it's presented. When it comes to the FW argument there are those who won't accept the message because they find fault with the messenger. It's a strange fault, I admit, but it's there.

The short of it is you can't get someone who to accept a message until you can get them to get over the fault they had with the presentation.

And that goes back to the "Appeal to Authority" fallacy. They give authority for GW to think and choose things for themselves despite GW showing that they're likely not even paying attention to the question that keeps getting raised. They may not even know it's there because as far as they're concerned the game doesn't work that way.

From the rulebook the intentions of the game seem to be rather clear regarding what limits the game has and how it's up to the players, but from the internet's perspective, apparently, the entire game should be left to being dictated to a select few who have already mentioned they don't understand the limits we put on the game, much less each other (Jervis) and have put in the rulebook that we're not to be bound to the rules, but use them as a framework for an enjoyable experience.

Basically we have a group who wants GW to definitely say that there is or isn't a barrier of "legality" and/or "officialness" that GW doesn't see because as far as GW is concerned this barrier of "legality" and "officialness" doesn't exist.

In other words we're building our own walls and then trying to get GW to put a gate in.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Naw wrote:
First you want to legalize Forge World, next you will try to legalize cannabis. Where do you stop???

When we run out of things to "legalize" in a game that already says you can bring homebrew?

Seriously, in a game that says your job isn't to "just follow the rules" (Spirit of the Game, page 8) why do we need to argue "legality" about anything in this game?

Really it's my only sticking point in this game, that somethings are somehow less "legal' than others. You don't want to play? Fine, I'm cool with that. I'll spend time painting models instead or working on some homebrew. But if you want to tell me my stuff "isn't legal" and we're not playing in a tournament, then I take offense, even if it is just a little. To claim someone's army choice is less "legal" is a slap in the face to that player and really and insult the game can do better without.

Don't hide behind legality, and be up front on what you look for in a game, or is that so hard to do when the FW crowd is being told the same exact thing?

Sarcasm does not work well in the forums, does it?

Naw wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Naw wrote:
First you want to legalize Forge World, next you will try to legalize cannabis. Where do you stop???

When we run out of things to "legalize" in a game that already says you can bring homebrew?

Seriously, in a game that says your job isn't to "just follow the rules" (Spirit of the Game, page 8) why do we need to argue "legality" about anything in this game?

Really it's my only sticking point in this game, that somethings are somehow less "legal' than others. You don't want to play? Fine, I'm cool with that. I'll spend time painting models instead or working on some homebrew. But if you want to tell me my stuff "isn't legal" and we're not playing in a tournament, then I take offense, even if it is just a little. To claim someone's army choice is less "legal" is a slap in the face to that player and really and insult the game can do better without.

Don't hide behind legality, and be up front on what you look for in a game, or is that so hard to do when the FW crowd is being told the same exact thing?

Sarcasm does not work well in the forums, does it?

Oh I know you were joking. Guess I should have put a wink emoticon after that first sentence because I was joking back. The stuff after "Seriously" was me getting more on topic again.

 dracpanzer wrote:
You're acting as if Forgeworld was Batlefront, claiming that their new 28mm Panzergrenadiers were 40k legal. If GW wasn't okay with what Forgeworld was saying, they'd sue the crap out of them for it. (and yes I know, they're the same company, that's the point)

I'm not acting as if anything. Again, I don't have a problem with people using Forgeworld stuff.

They have multiple units in books that carry over. The grey knights book has rules for inquisitors, and so does the new dex. So there should be no problem reprinting imperial armor units into new codexes as official units for your army, especially if there 40k approved. Why has this not been the case. Most recently, why has the contemptor dreadnaught not been included in the space marine book, since its a good example of what I would call meant to be included, but not for some reason.

Why not just add these units to the core codexes they belong to. They are deliberately not adding them. And I doubt its because they think forgeworld wouldn't be able to meet this new sudden demand for its models. And you cant say its because everything in the codex has to have a readily available model from GW to be included in that either, because the tyranid spore pod (up till soon anyway) hasent had a model, and I know there are other examples Im too tired to recall at the moment.

 Orock wrote:
Why not just add these units to the core codexes they belong to. They are deliberately not adding them. And I doubt its because they think forgeworld wouldn't be able to meet this new sudden demand for its models. And you cant say its because everything in the codex has to have a readily available model from GW to be included in that either, because the tyranid spore pod (up till soon anyway) hasent had a model, and I know there are other examples Im too tired to recall at the moment.

They don't want Forgeworld to be mainstream, is why. They're supposed to be boutique models for those who want something a little special, and are happy to pay for it.

Although here in Oz, where buying from Forgeworld has become in many cases cheaper than buying equivalent models from GW, that may change...

 Orock wrote:
They have multiple units in books that carry over. The grey knights book has rules for inquisitors, and so does the new dex. So there should be no problem reprinting imperial armor units into new codexes as official units for your army, especially if there 40k approved. Why has this not been the case. Most recently, why has the contemptor dreadnaught not been included in the space marine book, since its a good example of what I would call meant to be included, but not for some reason.

Why not just add these units to the core codexes they belong to. They are deliberately not adding them. And I doubt its because they think forgeworld wouldn't be able to meet this new sudden demand for its models. And you cant say its because everything in the codex has to have a readily available model from GW to be included in that either, because the tyranid spore pod (up till soon anyway) hasent had a model, and I know there are other examples Im too tired to recall at the moment.

Actually they have done this before. Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that Vendettas, several Nid variants, etc were originally FW or still only are. That being said, that would require a lot of work and it would cut out a lot of interesting parts of it. Have fun shoving the unique armies for DKoK, Elysians, ABG, and all the extra possible units that forgeworld produces into the IG codex! Oh and have fun adding the Tau forgeworld units into Tau (etc etc). Well.... where do we put this group that is obviously a chaos force but is based upon IG units with certain exceptions? Ummmmm quick scott dance on that table! Simply put, the books would start to become pretty darn big and would require the incorporation of more fluff. Also the demand would probably not really rise that much. They are fenise, elegance, usually built for the fans that like the game to the point they are willing to toss extra money (except when in Ozzie where the opposite is true) to get some fluffy niche bits to add to their reportau. Oh, and it's arguably because GW automatically assumed that it would be accepted. Heck, the fact that from IA 1 to IA 2 they went from make sure your opponent is okay with it to It's a legal part of the game just bring the book to show them seems to imply something dramatic.

Oh, and by this argument why not just add the supplements to the codices to begin with? They are deliberately not adding them (yeah to make you pay for more stuff). Also not everything in the codex has an available model. Hi I'm chaos daemons where is my Greater Daemon named character model? Oh and where is my inquisitor Valieria (whom will probably be whiped out for good because too lazy to make a model).

@Orock: About half the current IG tanks are originally from the Imperial Armor books (plus the Valkyrie/Vendetta). They all got buffed when they went into the codex by the way.

@StarTrotter: I'd argue the supplements are also a way to extend the life of the edition and to make it possible to inject new things into the codexes at later dates without needing to write a new one. I wouldn't be very surprised if we didn't eventually start seeing new options added in via supplements (or perhaps Dataslates like Be'Lakor).

If the game is going the way of datasheets like the very competitively priced belakor, or the ridiculous free tank hunters and preferred enemy space marines in my tau army I was going to take anway, the game is in serious trouble.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
@Orock: About half the current IG tanks are originally from the Imperial Armor books (plus the Valkyrie/Vendetta). They all got buffed when they went into the codex by the way.

@StarTrotter: I'd argue the supplements are also a way to extend the life of the edition and to make it possible to inject new things into the codexes at later dates without needing to write a new one. I wouldn't be very surprised if we didn't eventually start seeing new options added in via supplements (or perhaps Dataslates like Be'Lakor).

Oh I have no actual problem with the supplements. I'm waiting for my traitor guardsman and Tzeentch supplement though! (finally a way to not feel like a dunce for deploying csm that are tzeentch) (oh and if they do.... please also the steel legion, sob, and maybe even some unique inquisitors) Now do I admit I feel a bit cautious to the supplements, dataslates, and the sorts. To some extent, yes. I hardly noticed the second SM supplement (Iron Warrios clan raakan or something), Black legion is vastly inferior to both the eldar and tau supplement, and be'lakor is arguably a most take as well as inquisitor being arguably a possible game breaking cheese system. It also feels like they might opt for taking bits out of the codex to sell at a later date as well as most of it being overpriced (and the declared overpriced forgeworld books arguably give you more bang for your buck with 2-3 armies, massive sections of fluff, and unique play stiles). For all these things though, I like the option of some subtle tweaks to make a unique faction that truly specializes in wraiths (I've always wanted to make a list that is really just psykers, wraith, and shadow spectres), a tau supplement for somebody that had almost tau (and the one part of tau I enjoy battlesuits led by a guy that says eh clsoe combat has its times), the fluff for the Black Legion seemed pretty decent, and rumour has it the changes will become bigger as time progresses (cross my fingers on CSM tzeentch). Along with that, options like Be'lakor seem awesome as although maybe not the most balanced and easy to understand, it can bring back some cool units and possibly even release some really amazing new things (and maybe just maybe some new fluff). Then you have Inquisitor, whilst I must say it arguably breaks the game, I also must admit I have always wanted to build an Inquisitorial force but only held back because I'd have to take GK or Coteaz. Now I can build a inquisitorial fluff, and ally it with some friends for some of our campaigns and then our standard pick up games in a much easier manner (and I'm a sucker for fluff making and that nonsense)

What I meant from it was more of the why not have the FW stuff in the codex? My counterpoint is why not just shove the other things into the codex and keep them there rather than releasing supplements and new single purchase rules.

 Orock wrote:
So there should be no problem reprinting imperial armor units into new codexes as official units for your army, especially if there 40k approved. Why has this not been the case. Most recently, why has the contemptor dreadnaught not been included in the space marine book, since its a good example of what I would call meant to be included, but not for some reason

They didn't reprint them because there's no need to. The rules are already printed, so why include them in a separate book? The question only even exists if you assume a hierarchy of "officialness" with codex units at the top and every new unit working its way up until it is printed in a codex.

Why not just add these units to the core codexes they belong to. They are deliberately not adding them. And I doubt its because they think forgeworld wouldn't be able to meet this new sudden demand for its models.

For two reasons:

1) Cannibalizing FW products just means you move those FW sales to a different brand within the company. Inventing entirely new rules/models means you get to keep the existing FW sales and then add on sales of the new stuff as well. Why put the Barracuda in the Tau codex when you can keep selling Barracudas and their FW rules and just invent a whole new flyer for the codex? And remember, making a new plastic kit from a FW model takes almost as much work as making a new kit from scratch (and possibly more work), and writing new rules for a GW book takes a few minutes at most.

2) FW model kits are meant for "veteran" hobbyists and not appropriate for GW's core market of kids buying space marine battleforces. Keeping FW rules within FW books and selling everything through the FW store keeps some poor kid from getting a Thunderhawk for christmas because their parents don't understand what that means, and keeps the brand image of FW kits being a "prestige" thing.

And you cant say its because everything in the codex has to have a readily available model from GW to be included in that either, because the tyranid spore pod (up till soon anyway) hasent had a model, and I know there are other examples Im too tired to recall at the moment.

That's because Tyranids were released before the "no rules without a Citadel kit" policy went into effect (in response to GW's legal problems and third-party companies making those models). This doesn't happen anymore.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Orock wrote:
So there should be no problem reprinting imperial armor units into new codexes as official units for your army, especially if there 40k approved. Why has this not been the case. Most recently, why has the contemptor dreadnaught not been included in the space marine book, since its a good example of what I would call meant to be included, but not for some reason

They didn't reprint them because there's no need to. The rules are already printed, so why include them in a separate book? The question only even exists if you assume a hierarchy of "officialness" with codex units at the top and every new unit working its way up until it is printed in a codex.

Why not just add these units to the core codexes they belong to. They are deliberately not adding them. And I doubt its because they think forgeworld wouldn't be able to meet this new sudden demand for its models.

For two reasons:

1) Cannibalizing FW products just means you move those FW sales to a different brand within the company. Inventing entirely new rules/models means you get to keep the existing FW sales and then add on sales of the new stuff as well. Why put the Barracuda in the Tau codex when you can keep selling Barracudas and their FW rules and just invent a whole new flyer for the codex? And remember, making a new plastic kit from a FW model takes almost as much work as making a new kit from scratch (and possibly more work), and writing new rules for a GW book takes a few minutes at most.

2) FW model kits are meant for "veteran" hobbyists and not appropriate for GW's core market of kids buying space marine battleforces. Keeping FW rules within FW books and selling everything through the FW store keeps some poor kid from getting a Thunderhawk for christmas because their parents don't understand what that means, and keeps the brand image of FW kits being a "prestige" thing.

And you cant say its because everything in the codex has to have a readily available model from GW to be included in that either, because the tyranid spore pod (up till soon anyway) hasent had a model, and I know there are other examples Im too tired to recall at the moment.

That's because Tyranids were released before the "no rules without a Citadel kit" policy went into effect (in response to GW's legal problems and third-party companies making those models). This doesn't happen anymore.

Didn't they even remove FW units that don't have models to represent them? (Forgive me if I have forgotten this part)

Oh, ignore me...wrong necromancer post

*Peers head though the bush* Psst looky 'ere! 'Ere we 'ave a tribe of grots known as da "key-bord worriaz", a sure fire way to separate them from da other forum users is da rage. Ya see, the they get da more dey type 'n' quote uva posts.

Dis is Mork grylz 'n; you been watching da diskovery channel

Sorry but that is all I could think of reading half this dribble. The answer has been said over and over and over and over and...you get the point. Yes they are legal, however some TO will disallow them, which is TO's decision and is final. But you should explain the unit's rules to your opponent (both friendly and allowed tournaments) as it will help the game speed along and, at least for me, for the sake of good sportsmanship.

Anyway someone please stop this thread!!!!!!!! Will no-one think of the children?!

Blueworm.

Lets not stop this thread.
We'll only have a new one up and running within a week - and it'll be the same circle of arguments from the same people

If you like FW use it.
If you don't, then don't.
Don't be a dick to the other side, either by forcing people to play against it (something I've never seen irl) or by blanket banning everything you don't like (something else I've never seen irl)

I don't believe anyone is going to come up with the ultimate argument to solve this till GW gives everybody who plays a free fw unit of their choice...

 PredaKhaine wrote:
Don't be a dick to the other side, either by forcing people to play against it (something I've never seen irl) or by blanket banning everything you don't like (something else I've never seen irl)

I've personally experienced the bolded statement. He asked to play and mentioned his FW list (don't remember what it was). I wasn't feeling well and had come to play against a friend so I declined. He took that as "FW IS OVERPOWERED!" and went on a 15 minute rant (where I essentially ignored him) until my friend showed up. We started to deploy and my friend put his Contemptor out (proxied for a normal dread, his choice not mine) which is where $otherdude started yelling at me.

I'm not saying that anyone in this thread would be "that guy". I'm saying "that guy" exists and is really, REALLY damaging the way people look at FW.