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.

You guys do know the rumor has the random table as a choice right? at which point it is not randomness or game balance design but a calculated risk on the part of the player.

 mwnciboo wrote:
The universe has become so muddy and sullied, and retconned to hell you can prove just about anything is fluffy with a reference, just because it's written down doesn't mean it isn't a load of Balls. The last decade has spawned a awful lot of crap fluff.

I would like to subscribe to your newsletter


In all seriousness I agree whole heartedly. Allies has fundamentally amplified untold levels of stupidity when it comes to what you see on the board.

 Leth wrote:
You guys do know the rumor has the random table as a choice right? at which point it is not randomness or game balance design but a calculated risk on the part of the player.

Here I was thinking a few weapon or wargear options would be reasonable to expect in a codex containing the rules for one model.

 insaniak wrote:

bodazoka wrote:
Your saying one of your mates puts that much effort into a conversion and your not going to let him play it?

Glad you are not in my gaming group!.

I suspect that you would find quite a few gaming groups scattered around who would be reluctant to accept 'But I built it, and that was hard!' as a valid reason for ignoring the rules...

I know, there are a lot of pedantic, boring people in the world aren't there?

Seriously though, if "the rules" are your focus, why on earth would you be playing 40K?

 Crablezworth wrote:

Apocalypse was fine, it was there for the fluffy/fun/borderline personality crowd to enjoy, now apparently we all have to play your game or we're whiners or horrible people.

You do not get to stand there and label an entire section of the community as having mental health problems and then whinge like a wee girl that's scraped her knee that the nasty wasty fluff gamers are bullywing oo!

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

bodazoka wrote:
Please understand I don't mean bringing a "codex grey" painted model slapping it on the table next to your Tyranid's and going "lets play". But if someone converts that bad boy to look like a Magus is piloting it with a bunch of rippers crawling around it leading some units of purestrains then yes he is allowed to play it. And he get's some respect points from me for doing it!

Yeah, but that's changing the rules even more. "I made a really cool conversion" isn't a justifiable reason to start changing the rules.

Out of interest, why not? It's sufficient justification for "counts-as", it's sufficient justification for moving away from strict and literal WYSIWYG, so why not in the case of the example given? People "change the rules" all the time, for any number of reasons, so why draw the line here and not there, unless in the back of your(plural) minds you(plural) know full well that rubbishing a lot of effort one of your(plural) mates has put into something is a move and you(plural) want to justify that to yourselves and everyone else. "Oh I'm not treating a buddy like crap, I'm just following the rules innit guv, them's the breaks, more than my job's worth etc etc".

EDIT:

 Crablezworth wrote:
My group has chosen warlord traits from the get go, the only time I have to roll randomly is tournaments and everytime I do it's a reminder of just how terrible the random mechanic really is.

But ERMAHGERD that's changing the rules!

So just to clarify:

Disliking random mechanics = changing the rules is cool beans.
Rewarding the substantial effort of your friend = no dice bub, the Word is the Law, praise Geedub.

Got it.

 Yodhrin wrote:
People "change the rules" all the time, for any number of reasons, so why draw the line here and not there,...

Because people draw that line in different places, for different reasons.

You may not see any difference between 'We're agreeing to change this rule because we don't like it' and 'I want to use a model that isn't allowed by my codex because I wasn't paying any attention to the rules when I built it'... but other players do.

And when you're in less informal situations with people you don't know (as a lot of people here tend to be, playing pick up games at stores rather than games in a living room with friends), going "Oh hey, I'm playing 'Nids with this awesome Knight conversion" isn't going to go down well.

I'm sorry, but saying "the game has rules" isn't a cop-out. It's the truth. The game has rules. To play the game you follow those rules. Without those rules you might as well be playing with plastic army men, going "pew pew" as you fight, and then arguing over who shot who first.

 Yodhrin wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

bodazoka wrote:
Your saying one of your mates puts that much effort into a conversion and your not going to let him play it?

Glad you are not in my gaming group!.

I suspect that you would find quite a few gaming groups scattered around who would be reluctant to accept 'But I built it, and that was hard!' as a valid reason for ignoring the rules...

I know, there are a lot of pedantic, boring people in the world aren't there?

Seriously though, if "the rules" are your focus, why on earth would you be playing 40K?

 Crablezworth wrote:

Apocalypse was fine, it was there for the fluffy/fun/borderline personality crowd to enjoy, now apparently we all have to play your game or we're whiners or horrible people.

You do not get to stand there and label an entire section of the community as having mental health problems and then whinge like a wee girl that's scraped her knee that the nasty wasty fluff gamers are bullywing oo!

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

bodazoka wrote:
Please understand I don't mean bringing a "codex grey" painted model slapping it on the table next to your Tyranid's and going "lets play". But if someone converts that bad boy to look like a Magus is piloting it with a bunch of rippers crawling around it leading some units of purestrains then yes he is allowed to play it. And he get's some respect points from me for doing it!

Yeah, but that's changing the rules even more. "I made a really cool conversion" isn't a justifiable reason to start changing the rules.

Out of interest, why not? It's sufficient justification for "counts-as", it's sufficient justification for moving away from strict and literal WYSIWYG, so why not in the case of the example given? People "change the rules" all the time, for any number of reasons, so why draw the line here and not there, unless in the back of your(plural) minds you(plural) know full well that rubbishing a lot of effort one of your(plural) mates has put into something is a move and you(plural) want to justify that to yourselves and everyone else. "Oh I'm not treating a buddy like crap, I'm just following the rules innit guv, them's the breaks, more than my job's worth etc etc".

EDIT:

 Crablezworth wrote:
My group has chosen warlord traits from the get go, the only time I have to roll randomly is tournaments and everytime I do it's a reminder of just how terrible the random mechanic really is.

But ERMAHGERD that's changing the rules!

So just to clarify:

Disliking random mechanics = changing the rules is cool beans.
Rewarding the substantial effort of your friend = no dice bub, the Word is the Law, praise Geedub.

Got it.

I made a distinction between fluffy, fun and those with borderline personality disorders with the all importan " / ", all sorts enjoy apocalypse it seems. I appreciate you highlighting attributes of the latter. My issue isn't with fluff gamers, my issue is with GW. But thankyou for exhibiting what a nasty fluff gamer might look like with how you conduct yourself. Fluff gamers are generally bullying eachother from what it seems.

Forgeworld really is going to be our only hope for a 'real' and/or 'true' Army with Knights in it.

That will mean purchasing an even more expensive book to field it, but it will probably/hopefully be worth it!

 Alpharius wrote:
Forgeworld really is going to be our only hope for a 'real' and/or 'true' Army with Knights in it.

Then we're faced with the hilarious position where people are ok with 360 point 6 HP Strength D-toting scoring super-heavy walkers, but cry "needs permission/FW is cheese" when you want to use an alternate weapon made by FW.

At this point, I'll take that as opposed to what we (apparently) have now via the 'official' 40K Codex.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Alpharius wrote:
Forgeworld really is going to be our only hope for a 'real' and/or 'true' Army with Knights in it.

Then we're faced with the hilarious position where people are ok with 360 point 6 HP Strength D-toting scoring super-heavy walkers, but cry "needs permission/FW is cheese" when you want to use an alternate weapon made by FW.

Meh, I don't see much problem with it. Bringing more imbalance into the game doesn't fix it. Adding more broken stuff doesn't suddenly allow me to magically field my dark eldar wych army. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Its like saying "there's too much crazy in this asylum. Lets bring more insane people in here. That'll make the place more sane!"

Goresaw wrote:
Its like saying "there's too much crazy in this asylum. Lets bring more insane people in here. That'll make the place more sane!"

Oddly enough, that does seem to be GW's modus operandi lately...

Got me beat...

So GW wants me to shell out $181 to field the first one and an additional $140 for each additional Knight I want to field? In addition, CSM can't field them, even though by fluff, IG and the Titan Legions are second to demons as the most allied force (traitor guard). Once I field the model, I may have to roll on a random table to see if I am going to waste or gain points based on a single die roll, which may result in my opponent just concede if I roll a 6.

W ... T ... F?

Goresaw wrote:
Meh, I don't see much problem with it. Bringing more imbalance into the game doesn't fix it. Adding more broken stuff doesn't suddenly allow me to magically field my dark eldar wych army. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Its like saying "there's too much crazy in this asylum. Lets bring more insane people in here. That'll make the place more sane!"

That wasn't really what I was getting at. I was more lampooning the existing crowd that doesn't want FW units involved in "regular" 40K because of imbalance, yet seem to be totally fine with 40k's inherent Codex-based imbalances. The presence of Knights simply amplifies just how silly this point of view is, because now we have a super-duper super-heavy - Codex legal, can ally with half a dozen armies, scores and so on - yet these people baulk at the idea of an Autocannon Chimera Turret, or a Krieg Quad-Cannon.

So no Knights for Chaos... damn.

Lets see those brand new Helbrutes fly off the shelves now...

Yeah... really flying...

"Sets up barricade in case of people shouting hate."

I like the allies chart, i think it gives you more ability to, well, do more with the game. In relation to the allies for the IMPERIAL knights and it's allies, they all make sense in a way. I mean they are, and i repeat, IMPERIAL knights. Not Chaos knights, why would IMPERIAL knights, work with chaos? Necrons would have no need for a silly man-made machine and why would demons or orks want something like that. Orks have stompas! GK are AoC as the GK would like them, but they already have dreadknights, and eldar have titans of their own. The man SM armies don't have HUGE walkers. Yes, i know there are dreadnaughts, and penitent engines, etc but there is nothing like a knight for them. I realise that the DE don't have a big MC or walker, so that's prob why they are desperate allies, and for Nids. Hmm, let me think, do nids need a big walker that can destroy things, when a 'fex or something else will do? Yeah, the allies system isn't perfect, but it is fun to use, and like Columbo, one more thing, yes GW something can do things right, and others wrong, but were you really expecting other models in a book about IMPERIAL KNIGHTS. It's like expecting Dark Angels in a Space Wolves book. GW are like a well-known company with a famous tag-line: Does what it says on the tin.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Goresaw wrote:
Meh, I don't see much problem with it. Bringing more imbalance into the game doesn't fix it. Adding more broken stuff doesn't suddenly allow me to magically field my dark eldar wych army. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Its like saying "there's too much crazy in this asylum. Lets bring more insane people in here. That'll make the place more sane!"

That wasn't really what I was getting at. I was more lampooning the existing crowd that doesn't want FW units involved in "regular" 40K because of imbalance, yet seem to be totally fine with 40k's inherent Codex-based imbalances. The presence of Knights simply amplifies just how silly this point of view is, because now we have a super-duper super-heavy - Codex legal, can ally with half a dozen armies, scores and so on - yet these people baulk at the idea of an Autocannon Chimera Turret, or a Krieg Quad-Cannon.

Yeah, I know. Rationally, no one has any problem with the underpowered, overcosted FW stuff. Its just the thud-guns, punisher vultures, etc... etc... that people has a problem with. Although, last time I checked, no 'competitive' gamer (and I hate to use the term like some sort of stigma) fields autocannon chimeras.




Also in regards to no chaos knights. Its easy to see why. Four months down the line when chaos players have already bought and converted their own knights, GW will release a CHAOS knight kit for $160 (its got a sprue with SPIKES ON IT). Then they will release a Chaos knight codex for $42, another CHAOS transfer sheet for $20.00 and a limited edition CHAOS art book for knights for $110.00.

Barfolomew wrote:
So GW wants me to shell out $181 to field the first one and an additional $140 for each additional Knight I want to field? In addition, CSM can't field them, even though by fluff, IG and the Titan Legions are second to demons as the most allied force (traitor guard). Once I field the model, I may have to roll on a random table to see if I am going to waste or gain points based on a single die roll, which may result in my opponent just concede if I roll a 6.

W ... T ... F?

Only if you have it as a primary detachment, aka, Pure Knight Army.

..Which is something people have been complaining about anyways. I dunno anymore, reading news is depressing me lately.

Left Hand of the Pheonix wrote:
"Sets up barricade in case of people shouting hate."

I like the allies chart, i think it gives you more ability to, well, do more with the game. In relation to the allies for the IMPERIAL knights and it's allies, they all make sense in a way. I mean they are, and i repeat, IMPERIAL knights. Not Chaos knights, why would IMPERIAL knights, work with chaos?

I'll bite for the CSM case.

First, CSM are Allies of Convenience in the BRB with IG, so the precedent is set that CSM and IG call ally. The Knight is part of the Titan Legions and IMO are basically the same as IG from a "can be corrupted" stand point.

From a fluff stand point, when the CSM defected, a large number of IG and several Titan Legions also defected with them. I'd be willing to bet that some "imperial" knights were part of that defection. Even if they weren't the CSM fluff is built such that people are continually "falling" to Chaos, especially the weaker minded, such as Titan pilots, IG and even the mighty SMs. It's not that the imperial unit is still loyal to the Emperor and fighting with Chaos for convenience, it's that they are corrupted and fallen to Chaos and thus are supporting the CSM in battle.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:


That wasn't really what I was getting at. I was more lampooning the existing crowd that doesn't want FW units involved in "regular" 40K because of imbalance, yet seem to be totally fine with 40k's inherent Codex-based imbalances.

Always building strawmen, are we

People might (on occasion) opt out of Forge World, but not because it is (any more or less) imbalanced, but because it is Forge World. There is a separation of brands, and some people like it that way. That's all.

If there will be separate Chaos Knight kit in the future, then it makes sense that Chaos cannot take the Imperial ones.

Goresaw wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Goresaw wrote:
Meh, I don't see much problem with it. Bringing more imbalance into the game doesn't fix it. Adding more broken stuff doesn't suddenly allow me to magically field my dark eldar wych army. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Its like saying "there's too much crazy in this asylum. Lets bring more insane people in here. That'll make the place more sane!"

That wasn't really what I was getting at. I was more lampooning the existing crowd that doesn't want FW units involved in "regular" 40K because of imbalance, yet seem to be totally fine with 40k's inherent Codex-based imbalances. The presence of Knights simply amplifies just how silly this point of view is, because now we have a super-duper super-heavy - Codex legal, can ally with half a dozen armies, scores and so on - yet these people baulk at the idea of an Autocannon Chimera Turret, or a Krieg Quad-Cannon.

Yeah, I know. Rationally, no one has any problem with the underpowered, overcosted FW stuff. Its just the thud-guns, punisher vultures, etc... etc... that people has a problem with. Although, last time I checked, no 'competitive' gamer (and I hate to use the term like some sort of stigma) fields autocannon chimeras.

What in the world is the problem with the Punisher Vulture?

It's a Punisher Gatling Cannon. It uses up both hardpoint slots meaning you're just using Punisher Gatling Cannons and the nose mounted Heavy Bolter for the Vulture.

I had hope for this Codex. I kept telling everyone "maybe they will give us houses and let us use IG models". Now I just feel like I have battered spouse syndrome and I keep on trying to convince people that my abusive spouse has redeeming qualities...

Think the point is that THESE specific ones are Imperial Knights and that the traitor ones will be separate.

 d-usa wrote:
I had hope for this Codex. I kept telling everyone "maybe they will give us houses and let us use IG models". Now I just feel like I have battered spouse syndrome and I keep on trying to convince people that my abusive spouse has redeeming qualities...

Actually, having some IG:ish infantry would have been pretty pointless, you can already ally with IG (or the Inquisition) if that's what you want.

 Siberiandreamer wrote:
Think the point is that THESE specific ones are Imperial Knights and that the traitor ones will be separate.

I tend to agree. There's precedent for this in Epic as well. People need to wait for the chaos knights before they get all up-in-arms about not being able to use them with Chaos.

If the kit looks this good, (and I've heard very few people saying they didn't like the look and aesthetic of the kit in general) imagine what the design studio will give us for chaos knights.

Just my thoughts on that. Wait and see, everyone. Wait and see.

-RT-

The knights houses are known for their mechs of course - but do they also have infantry units? Would be kinda odd for any force not to have some form of standing troop force...

ncshooter426 wrote:
The knights houses are known for their mechs of course - but do they also have infantry units? Would be kinda odd for any force not to have some form of standing troop force...

That is what your Guard Allies are for.

 Anpu42 wrote:

ncshooter426 wrote:
The knights houses are known for their mechs of course - but do they also have infantry units? Would be kinda odd for any force not to have some form of standing troop force...

That is what your Guard Allies are for.

Anyone else thinking about converting Bretonnian Men-at-arms to Imperial Guard? thinking they may look nice in a Imperial Knights House colours....

 Red__Thirst wrote:

 Siberiandreamer wrote:
Think the point is that THESE specific ones are Imperial Knights and that the traitor ones will be separate.

I tend to agree. There's precedent for this in Epic as well. People need to wait for the chaos knights before they get all up-in-arms about not being able to use them with Chaos.

If the kit looks this good, (and I've heard very few people saying they didn't like the look and aesthetic of the kit in general) imagine what the design studio will give us for chaos knights.

Just my thoughts on that. Wait and see, everyone. Wait and see.

-RT-

It's like people WANT to be upset about everything. It seems fairly straight forward to me and fluffy. The codex is a bit baffling to me; but really so many mountains out of molehills.

 Anpu42 wrote:

ncshooter426 wrote:
The knights houses are known for their mechs of course - but do they also have infantry units? Would be kinda odd for any force not to have some form of standing troop force...

That is what your Guard Allies are for.

But knights are independent of the imperium - not all of them would have IG ties. So how would they get their mechs from once play to another? who services them? Who polices their worlds? They've got to have some standing army