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.

 ashcroft wrote:

And then theres TFG that just invalidated your arguments, the rules "proper" rules are needed so you can have enjoyable games with strangers with minimum fuzz, because not all of them is going to be nice persons...

I think this point actually makes my argument. GW can't fix the community, and the rules set will never be so airtight that TFG will not be able to find loopholes to use to his advantage.

They can reduce the loopholes from 80/20 to 60/40 win ratio to minimise the impact of TFG. When new loopholes are found, they can balance them a month later - not 2-6 years later.

Do you really think it was IG players to blame for spamming vendettas when they were good? Or was it GWs fault for not patching them to 170 point 6 model capacity once the problem became clear, rather than waiting for a new codex? If that resulted in IG being uncompetitive, they could have buffed the other fast attack slot units to bring them up to parity. That's how balance works. A frequent series on minor changes to bring the game closer to balanced all the time.

yeah , but if they did that , it would mean that their hobby isn't perfect . And from what they say it is .

Makumba wrote:
yeah , but if they did that , it would mean that their hobby isn't perfect . And from what they say it is .

Not to mention the fact all that readproofing and playtesting (aka doing their goddamn job) will totally get in the way of their furiously forging a narrative during work hours.

 Galorian wrote:

Makumba wrote:
yeah , but if they did that , it would mean that their hobby isn't perfect . And from what they say it is .

Not to mention the fact all that readproofing and playtesting (aka doing their goddamn job) will totally get in the way of their furiously forging a narrative during work hours.

I want to know what kind of narrative forged involves Eldrad not knowing what he's good at every time he shows up to a battle, the Swarmlord being a wuss in assault for his cost, no girls being allowed into the Imperial knights club, and rough riders existing in the same game as the screamer star.

Forging the narrative between your wallets and their pockets, of course.

 Ashiraya wrote:
Forging the narrative between your wallets and their pockets, of course.

That's quite the smutty narrative.

 Kain wrote:

 Galorian wrote:

Makumba wrote:
yeah , but if they did that , it would mean that their hobby isn't perfect . And from what they say it is .

Not to mention the fact all that readproofing and playtesting (aka doing their goddamn job) will totally get in the way of their furiously forging a narrative during work hours.

I want to know what kind of narrative forged involves Eldrad not knowing what he's good at every time he shows up to a battle, the Swarmlord being a wuss in assault for his cost, no girls being allowed into the Imperial knights club, and rough riders existing in the same game as the screamer star.

The kind of narrative that gets furiously forged between their hand of choice and their favorite game piece before ending up published in bold font all over a wad of tissue paper.

 Galorian wrote:

 Kain wrote:

 Galorian wrote:

Makumba wrote:
yeah , but if they did that , it would mean that their hobby isn't perfect . And from what they say it is .

Not to mention the fact all that readproofing and playtesting (aka doing their goddamn job) will totally get in the way of their furiously forging a narrative during work hours.

I want to know what kind of narrative forged involves Eldrad not knowing what he's good at every time he shows up to a battle, the Swarmlord being a wuss in assault for his cost, no girls being allowed into the Imperial knights club, and rough riders existing in the same game as the screamer star.

The kind of narrative that gets furiously forged between their hand of choice and their favorite game piece before ending up published in bold font all over a wad of tissue paper.

Let's not forget the Necrons despite being perhaps the best army to have IWND in bulk only having any from forgeworld while the Iron Hands can have Wolverine tanks and characters for free, Old One Eye forgetting he can adapt whenever any other Tyranid HQ choice is on the field, Cult chaos marines forgetting nearly all of their special abilities the moment they get on a bike, put on terminator armor, become a lord, or take up sorcery, GW not being able to agree on what electricity based weapons can do, Serpent shields which are described as ground traveling shockwaves fired as a measure of last resort being a d6+1 shooting attack with 60 inches of range spammed by everyone and their mom that can target fliers just fine, Howling Banshees getting bogged down by some rocks (apparently Jain Zar's teachings don't include parkour classes), and Abaddon's armor somehow mystically transforming from a Cataphractii terminator suit into much later patterned armor because reasons.

Let's not forget weapons that can pierce reality (warp talon claws) or a spear that can cause the collective intelligence of a thousand galaxy's worth of biomass rendered into Tyranid form agony and has the power of exploding suns (Yriel's spear) being unable to pierce Meganob armor. Or the Necrons somehow never inventing axes or maces. Or the supposedly armored up Lychguards not having better saves than Immortals.

GW has created a product that is neither fluffy nor balanced.

Amazing.

 AegisGrimm wrote:
The problem is that nerds desperately want to win. They will exploit any loophole they can find, and unfortunately GW has provided ample opportunity over the years. Even when large ones are found, they are rarely closed off.

No we want to win on our own merit. If I win because I have a cheesier list than my opponent then my list wins, not me. Ditto if I loose to a cheesy op list then I feel hollow because I lost to someothing from before the game was even played rather than battling wits with my opponent.

That said there's nothing stopping us taking Tau+Farsight with OVER9000 riptides but if we all do it it sucks. If we don't all do it then we can't compete.

I'm chiming in late and I'm sure someone has already said similar

Most Players have voiced thier opinion for a more fair and balanced game on many forums. Most also admitt that no game would be 100% balanced, that said, most agree it could be closer than it current state. So, how could it ever be a two way street when GW refuses input and does not care what alot of players think?

I still like the game and still desire to play it. Do I like the way they run thier buisness and make rules that don't work for all armies or make some army builds OP? No
I'm stuck like most, I roll my eyes at yet another set of crap coming out the doors of GW.

The only product I will buy from them this year will be a mini rule book if it will ever exist. Rumor i heard is there will never be a new mini rulebok. so we'll see.

my collection from years ago is huge so I got plenty to paint.

OP is right guys we need to balance this ourselves and not try to ruin the game for others so everyone can enjoy it.

As such I will tone down my list to only take 18 annihilation barges for my 7th edition 2000pt army.

Punisher wrote:
OP is right guys we need to balance this ourselves and not try to ruin the game for others so everyone can enjoy it.

As such I will tone down my list to only take 18 annihilation barges for my 7th edition 2000pt army.

Better yet, save $500 bucks, and just don't play Unbound.

Yeah, you can play Battle Forged and go with 9 of them.

 jasper76 wrote:

Punisher wrote:
OP is right guys we need to balance this ourselves and not try to ruin the game for others so everyone can enjoy it.

As such I will tone down my list to only take 18 annihilation barges for my 7th edition 2000pt army.

Better yet, save $500 bucks, and just don't play Unbound.

But only playing unbound lets me stop chaos demons choir lists . I can't get enough power dice per turn to stop them , not to mention casting my own powers.

rigeld2 wrote:
Yeah, you can play Battle Forged and go with 9 of them.

In any case, whether you go with 18 or 9, don't expect too many games with strangers.

 jasper76 wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
Yeah, you can play Battle Forged and go with 9 of them.

In any case, whether you go with 18 or 9, don't expect too many games with strangers.

But...but...everyone loves unbound! And...umm....Narrative!

 MWHistorian wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
Yeah, you can play Battle Forged and go with 9 of them.

In any case, whether you go with 18 or 9, don't expect too many games with strangers.

But...but...everyone loves unbound! And...umm....Narrative!

I'm sure people like the idea of playing with an unbound army, but when presented with the option of playing against a guy with a "normal" army, or a guy with 18 Annihilation Barges, well, I know what seems like a funner game to me anyways.

My personal take on the issue is that seeing as GW will not balance their game fully, it is up to the players to show some common sportsmanship. The overwhelming majority I encounter are perfectly capable of this, but not all.

I do believe there is some merit to saying that the core problem is more than just the game. There's plenty of cheesy possibilities in Bolt Action or X-Wing, they're not nearly as broken as Screamerstars or the like, but they exist, and I've never seen them played. Ever.

Meanwhile, were I to travel from my FLGS which only has two out of the ~20 40k players with TFG tendencies, and to the sole GW in my province, I'd stand an even chance of getting a) A kid with an army of tactical marines, b) a triptide list with 60 sniper kroot and 3 skyrays, c) A Necron army converted to look like Cylons, using just blocks of warriors and the combat version of the croissont.

The OP's point about the most popular game attracting more of the people with a competitive mindset isn't wrong, and thinking GW will actually improve their ruleset substantially is laughable to the extreme. Honestly, if you want a competitive game, Warmahordes is right there, it's designed around the principle of competitive powergaming and seems to function reasonably well in that framework. It holds no appeal to me whatsoever, as I find the very mentality unpleasent, but expecting GW to offer a competitive game with 25 years of past experience is laughable.

They sort-of tried with 5th, and good lord was that a boring edition. No flavour, no themed armies, just MSU in Transports all day, every day.

It's not the 9 annihilation barge army that is going to be hard to decline. It's going to be there 4 or 5 annihilation barge army, and by that I mean players will be seeking to exploit the maximum amount of cheese out of lists without simultaneously appearing cheesy.

It'll be these shades of grey people will move in to, where the apparent toolishness of an army is not immediately apparently but the list is tricked out to the absolute max.

~an idle speculation~

It's crossed my mind, and I don't mean to be offensive by saying this, that Unbound was created for children and moms.

It has to be the case that some mom has gone to a store, bought her kid this cool new tank to play with, but junior can't play, because he doesn't have an HQ or any troops. And mom just wasted her money, because she spent 80 bucks on a toy tank, she's can't afford to spend any more, and junior is hardly any closer to being able to play the game. Enough complaints like that...Unbound.

While that's possible, it's also stupid to build your game around your customers being fething morons, considering that buying the tank off the shelf is no guarantee that junior even owns the damned rulebook.

Here's a tip, GW: Stop crafting the game around 12 year olds.

 Psienesis wrote:
While that's possible, it's also stupid to build your game around your customers being fething morons, considering that buying the tank off the shelf is no guarantee that junior even owns the damned rulebook.

Here's a tip, GW: Stop crafting the game around 12 year olds.

This quote is just amazing adding it to my sig. There just seems to be so much truth to it, but I love 40k so much that even though this is the case I still play...

 Psienesis wrote:
While that's possible, it's also stupid to build your game around your customers being fething morons, considering that buying the tank off the shelf is no guarantee that junior even owns the damned rulebook.

People pre-ordered 7th edition. Believing their customers are morons may have some merit.

Here's a tip, GW: Stop crafting the game around 12 year olds.

That's exactly who they've always said their market is, who they market to, who they market for.

I know, but that doesn't mean they have to keep doing it. Though I would really challenge the "always" bit. Things were... much grimmer... twenty-some years ago in the publications, definitely targeted to a much older audience.

Honestly, I totally disagree. Its in the nature of competitive gamers to try and find the best combinations and synergies within a ruleset. If the ruleset is too open to exploitation then it is a bad ruleset, plain and simple. Im not saying it cant still be fun but IMO games are for competition and if the game isnt balanced its not the fault of the gamer... just my 2 cents

Mono-Tzeentch lists can now summon nearly 2000pts worth (or more) of stuff during the course of a game. And it's all fluffy!

Balance. Begins with the game.

Balance can't be dependent on the players, it HAS to start with the game. Without balanced rules you have to rely on a gentleman's agreement to have an enjoyable game and while that's not a bad idea, you'll always run into that one douchebag who doesn't care and abuses the rules.

Balanced games remove that person in a lot of ways.

Jervis Jhonson has been head of the GW rules department since fifth. We have a lot of information on Jervis Jhonson. For him a balanced game isn't a fun game. His ideas on game design revolve around random charts, Game Masters, and forging narratives. Jervis Jhonson doesn't want to play or thinks you should want to play a balanced game. His rules reflect his style of game design.

Jervis Jhonson makes a logical flaw with his aproach, you can still play the games he likes to play with a competent rule set. How many times have people, playing a casual game, mismatched units for fun? Ran champion vs champion battles? Tweeked rules for a different kind of game? All the time!!! Jervis doesn't have to focre us to play these types of games, we will do it on our own.

Jervis Jhonsons job is to give us a competent, tested, set of core rules to play with. We can, from there, tweek rules if we want to for these more thematic games. We can forge our own narratives. Jervis has only proven that he is incapable of producing a clear, defined, competent set of core rules. He needs to go before he finally tanks the GW games entirely.

dresnar1 wrote:
Jervis Jhonson has been head of the GW rules department since fifth. We have a lot of information on Jervis Jhonson. For him a balanced game isn't a fun game. His ideas on game design revolve around random charts, Game Masters, and forging narratives. Jervis Jhonson doesn't want to play or thinks you should want to play a balanced game. His rules reflect his style of game design.

Jervis Jhonson makes a logical flaw with his aproach, you can still play the games he likes to play with a competent rule set. How many times have people, playing a casual game, mismatched units for fun? Ran champion vs champion battles? Tweeked rules for a different kind of game? All the time!!! Jervis doesn't have to focre us to play these types of games, we will do it on our own.

Jervis Jhonsons job is to give us a competent, tested, set of core rules to play with. We can, from there, tweek rules if we want to for these more thematic games. We can forge our own narratives. Jervis has only proven that he is incapable of producing a clear, defined, competent set of core rules. He needs to go before he finally tanks the GW games entirely.

Quoted for truth and exalted.

dresnar1 wrote:
Jervis Jhonson has been head of the GW rules department since fifth. We have a lot of information on Jervis Jhonson. For him a balanced game isn't a fun game. His ideas on game design revolve around random charts, Game Masters, and forging narratives. Jervis Jhonson doesn't want to play or thinks you should want to play a balanced game. His rules reflect his style of game design.

What's really hard to believe is that someone so incredibly stupid is still employed, especially given how much his salary must be with that kind of seniority. The obvious conclusion is that he's sleeping with the CEO and major shareholders, or has some really good blackmail material on them.