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.

 Las wrote:
Tons of us are having a blast with 40k, we do this thing where we talk to our opponents and figure out what kind of game we want to play instead of freaking the feth out about everything all the time and running in circles.

And other games are balanced so that I don't have to talk to my opponent to figure out what kind of game I want to play, I can just start playing with minimal negotiations prior. I don't quite get why 40k people seem to think that having a discussion about the game you want to play before actually playing it is a good thing somehow. You should be having banter during the game, not negotiating a peace treaty prior to even playing just to make sure that both of you are going to have fun. Does this not come off as some kind of flaw with the game?

 Gunzhard wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 Gunzhard wrote:
Who said there is anything wrong with that? ...I think the point was, take a minute to talk about it. So the likes can make nice with the dislikes.

I'm confused about how this will help.

Player A doesn't want to play against fliers.
dont have enough for 1500 w/o the heldrakes?

 Las wrote:
There's something for everyone in the game, so use your social skills and play with people who have a similar attitude to your own, it's pretty sick. If this is that much of a hurdle to you then there's always Catan.

I wonder what would happen, if a car company said this is our product we sell to you , now go fix it yourself to make it run.

What if you want to play Infinity and I don't? ...how can we satisfy both parties? This is less a game issue but more a people issue it seems to me.

Only those are two different games that require different terrain and different tables. And I would like to point out that fluff vs non fluff or casual vs non casual is a problem almost non existent in other systems. The only thing coming close to it is playing mangle metal and someone bringing gorshade to summon infantry in 15 pts games.

 Las wrote:
I don't like playing with super heavies and I make that known to my opponents. Every once in a while i can compromise and play against one, again it's all discussion. I have never had the above situation happen. Being an adult is pretty easy.

And what's your point? The fact that you can play fewer games of 40k and "solve" the problem by declining to play against anyone who doesn't agree with your opinion doesn't mean that there was no problem. Better games don't suffer from this need to negotiate and refuse to play against things you don't like. A better version of 40k would have superheavy rules that are balanced and don't create such polarized opinions, and there would be no need to negotiate about using them (just like you don't have to negotiate about whether you should be allowed to take tactical squads). The fact that GW either refused to do it this way or was unable to do it this way is a clear sign of incompetence, and everyone responsible should be fired.

Makumba wrote:

 Las wrote:
There's something for everyone in the game, so use your social skills and play with people who have a similar attitude to your own, it's pretty sick. If this is that much of a hurdle to you then there's always Catan.

I wonder what would happen, if a car company said this is our product we sell to you , now go fix it yourself to make it run.

What if you want to play Infinity and I don't? ...how can we satisfy both parties? This is less a game issue but more a people issue it seems to me.

Only those are two different games that require different terrain and different tables. And I would like to point out that fluff vs non fluff or casual vs non casual is a problem almost non existent in other systems. The only thing coming close to it is playing mangle metal and someone bringing gorshade to summon infantry in 15 pts games.

It's more like if a company sold you a car and then told you you had to drive it yourself.

Makumba wrote:

 Las wrote:
There's something for everyone in the game, so use your social skills and play with people who have a similar attitude to your own, it's pretty sick. If this is that much of a hurdle to you then there's always Catan.

I wonder what would happen, if a car company said this is our product we sell to you , now go fix it yourself to make it run.

There have been plenty of cars that you could fully customize.

What if you want to play Infinity and I don't? ...how can we satisfy both parties? This is less a game issue but more a people issue it seems to me.

Only those are two different games that require different terrain and different tables. And I would like to point out that fluff vs non fluff or casual vs non casual is a problem almost non existent in other systems. The only thing coming close to it is playing mangle metal and someone bringing gorshade to summon infantry in 15 pts games.

We have Infinity tournaments here, but I've never met anyone that A) knew all of the Infinity core rules (let alone the factions) or B) knew much about the Infinity fluff.

And you can absolutely play Infinity using the same terrain and a portion of a 40k table. If we are the only 2 gamers in the area I don't see how it's any different if you want to play Infinity and I don't - or if you want flyers in 40k and I don't ...you can talk it out, or don't play.

No, when to make the mission system work I have to house rule it to make it work at all or when to make gear or unit combination I have to use out of GW FAQ like the ETC rules pack, then am not "driving" am fixing stuff GW should have fixed.


Also peregrin, this may not be a problem for people in US or UK, but if here someone said he doesn't want to play with flyers 100% of nid armies would automaticly become illegal. If I told my friend to not bring NDKS, because they more or less give him a free turn 1 win against me , then he suddenly has an under 800+pts army and can't play normal games. The refuse to play against unit X, only works in places where people own and carry with them more then normal sized armies.

And you can absolutely play Infinity using the same terrain and a portion of a 40k table. If we are the only 2 gamers in the area I don't see how it's any different if you want to play Infinity and I don't - or if you want flyers in 40k and I don't ...you can talk it out, or don't play.

I don't know how your w40k tables look like, but even if one has over 25% terrain on the table, then in infinity it would be guy who goes first dies ARO turn one. Specialy if opponents has MSV2 or HMGs.

Makumba wrote:

 Las wrote:
There's something for everyone in the game, so use your social skills and play with people who have a similar attitude to your own, it's pretty sick. If this is that much of a hurdle to you then there's always Catan.

I wonder what would happen, if a car company said this is our product we sell to you , now go fix it yourself to make it run.

What if you want to play Infinity and I don't? ...how can we satisfy both parties? This is less a game issue but more a people issue it seems to me.

Only those are two different games that require different terrain and different tables. And I would like to point out that fluff vs non fluff or casual vs non casual is a problem almost non existent in other systems. The only thing coming close to it is playing mangle metal and someone bringing gorshade to summon infantry in 15 pts games.

Well, aside from the fact that cars and board games are not good comparisons as you cannot die from bad rules, and that most cars have a utility purpose while most games are only for entertainment..... This is exactly what happens with cars. They are sold with shortcomings all the time, which companies do not fix until future model years. If it isn't a manufacturing defect, it won't be fixed even if it sucks. Likewise, GW will replace broken sprues and write errata.

Just like car companies, some cars are better than others; and some cars are better for some thing than others while being totally useless for other purposes -- like that shiny Ferrari when you need to move a couch. And you know what? When you drag race cars, it's not fair either. The guy with $3000 tires will probably win. Unless the cops come pr the guy runs into a street lamp

I remember trying a game of killteam back in 4th. I took goon squads of tactical marines, he took a fluffy killteam squad of unmodded genestealers. The game scaled perfectly for a gw game - i had no chance to win, and was just pushing models around and removing them while he played the game.

At some point you need to blame the game and not the player. 40k doesn't scale. Playing a large game or a small game is something you can do with any game, but 40k has the same glaring problems at any scale.

Just like car companies, some cars are better than others; and some cars are better for some thing than others while being totally useless for other purposes -- like that shiny Ferrari when you need to move a couch. And you know what? When you drag race cars, it's not fair either. The guy with $3000 tires will probably win. Unless the cops come pr the guy runs into a street lamp

First of all there is absolulty no card firm that adds their cars as having to be fixed when bought. Second even if not all cars are good for everything, then sports cars are for racing , transport cars are for transporting etc. Some are cheaper, some are better etc. W40k is bad for tournaments, because it creates an enviroment where top 16 are offten 50% of one army , and it is offten not a new army no one prepared. It is bad for casual games, because even if sit down and talk about fluff etc, and eldar or necron army will beat that 1ksons army 9/10 times. It is also a horrible B&P game, because it costs too much and takes too much time played, to be called that.

Talys wrote:
This is exactly what happens with cars. They are sold with shortcomings all the time, which companies do not fix until future model years. If it isn't a manufacturing defect, it won't be fixed even if it sucks. Likewise, GW will replace broken sprues and write errata.

Yes, and you know what happens when a car company does that? We criticize them for it and say "don't buy this ". Only in 40k do we see this bizarre trend of people excusing poor quality and turning it into something to be proud about.

Just like car companies, some cars are better than others; and some cars are better for some thing than others while being totally useless for other purposes -- like that shiny Ferrari when you need to move a couch. And you know what? When you drag race cars, it's not fair either. The guy with $3000 tires will probably win. Unless the cops come pr the guy runs into a street lamp

This analogy fails because 40k isn't good at anything. The things that make the game bad for competitive play aren't the result of fine-tuning 40k to be the perfect casual/narrative/whatever game at the expense of competitive play, they're inexcusable game design failures that hurt the game no matter how you try to play it. 40k only "succeeds" as a non-competitive game because those players have a higher tolerance for house ruling away the worst of the problems, not because GW is helping to support that kind of environment.

 Torga_DW wrote:
I remember trying a game of killteam back in 4th. I took goon squads of tactical marines, he took a fluffy killteam squad of unmodded genestealers. The game scaled perfectly for a gw game - i had no chance to win, and was just pushing models around and removing them while he played the game.

At some point you need to blame the game and not the player. 40k doesn't scale. Playing a large game or a small game is something you can do with any game, but 40k has the same glaring problems at any scale.

I actually love Kill Team, I think it's one of the best ways to play 40K right now.

I think it is important to make a distinction between balance and bad choices though. I wasn't playing through 4th, so I've no way of knowing whether Genestealers were really that bad, so I'm not implying anything WRT your example specifically, but not every unit needs to be brilliant all of the time in every list at every points level, it is ok for a unit to need specific support to work well, it is not ok for a unit to be an auto take or made redundant by a flat out superior choice.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Las wrote:
I don't like playing with super heavies and I make that known to my opponents. Every once in a while i can compromise and play against one, again it's all discussion. I have never had the above situation happen. Being an adult is pretty easy.

And what's your point? The fact that you can play fewer games of 40k and "solve" the problem by declining to play against anyone who doesn't agree with your opinion doesn't mean that there was no problem. Better games don't suffer from this need to negotiate and refuse to play against things you don't like. A better version of 40k would have superheavy rules that are balanced and don't create such polarized opinions, and there would be no need to negotiate about using them (just like you don't have to negotiate about whether you should be allowed to take tactical squads). The fact that GW either refused to do it this way or was unable to do it this way is a clear sign of incompetence, and everyone responsible should be fired.

You cannot compare tac squads to super heavies. Despite the hysteria over the fact their rules are in the BRB, the precedent of their being "an option" is crystal clear to people who don't swim in a sea of semantics. 40k is a whacky, kinda bloated space fantasy game where crazy gak happens and is a lot of fun for people who get what it is. You're yelling at an apple for not being an orange.

Im yelling at an Apple for being rotten.

 Azreal13 wrote:

 Torga_DW wrote:
I remember trying a game of killteam back in 4th. I took goon squads of tactical marines, he took a fluffy killteam squad of unmodded genestealers. The game scaled perfectly for a gw game - i had no chance to win, and was just pushing models around and removing them while he played the game.

At some point you need to blame the game and not the player. 40k doesn't scale. Playing a large game or a small game is something you can do with any game, but 40k has the same glaring problems at any scale.

I actually love Kill Team, I think it's one of the best ways to play 40K right now.

I think it is important to make a distinction between balance and bad choices though. I wasn't playing through 4th, so I've no way of knowing whether Genestealers were really that bad, so I'm not implying anything WRT your example specifically, but not every unit needs to be brilliant all of the time in every list at every points level, it is ok for a unit to need specific support to work well, it is not ok for a unit to be an auto take or made redundant by a flat out superior choice.

At the time tactical goon squads were all i could field as a marine player. There was really no choice to be made, and since he didn't upgrade his kill team i didn't get any upgrades for my goons. Not that it would have made a difference. He just picked a unit that was good, and the game was over at that point (although we went through the motions of deploying, rolling dice, pushing models around, etc). A unit doesn't need to be brilliant, but having a decent chance to win for both players might be nice on occasion. When the game is broken straight from out of the box, thats not a problem with the players.

 Las wrote:
You cannot compare tac squads to super heavies.

Yes I can. They're both parts of the "standard" game according to GW. The fact that you (and a lot of other players) may have created your own house rules that put additional conditions on their use does not change this. In fact, by creating your own version of how to use superheavies you're conceding the argument: the game as published by GW sucks, and you have to fix it yourself.

Despite the hysteria over the fact their rules are in the BRB, the precedent of their being "an option" is crystal clear to people who don't swim in a sea of semantics.

Why should anyone care about "precedent" from previous editions of the game? This is like demanding that we use 5th edition wound allocation because it was crystal clear back then how it was supposed to work.

You're yelling at an apple for not being an orange.

No, I'm yelling at an apple for being rotten and full of worms. See my previous post: 40k doesn't suck for competitive play because it's great for other environments, it sucks for competitive play for the same reasons that it sucks for casual/narrative/whatever play. The only difference is that non-competitive players are more frequently willing to house rule away GW's failures and play their own version of 40k. But that doesn't erase GW's failure to support non-competitive play.

 Peregrine wrote:

Talys wrote:
This is exactly what happens with cars. They are sold with shortcomings all the time, which companies do not fix until future model years. If it isn't a manufacturing defect, it won't be fixed even if it sucks. Likewise, GW will replace broken sprues and write errata.

Yes, and you know what happens when a car company does that? We criticize them for it and say "don't buy this ". Only in 40k do we see this bizarre trend of people excusing poor quality and turning it into something to be proud about.

Just like car companies, some cars are better than others; and some cars are better for some thing than others while being totally useless for other purposes -- like that shiny Ferrari when you need to move a couch. And you know what? When you drag race cars, it's not fair either. The guy with $3000 tires will probably win. Unless the cops come pr the guy runs into a street lamp

This analogy fails because 40k isn't good at anything. The things that make the game bad for competitive play aren't the result of fine-tuning 40k to be the perfect casual/narrative/whatever game at the expense of competitive play, they're inexcusable game design failures that hurt the game no matter how you try to play it. 40k only "succeeds" as a non-competitive game because those players have a higher tolerance for house ruling away the worst of the problems, not because GW is helping to support that kind of environment.

And yet Lexus owners do not go on Chrysler forums bashing Chrysler cars endlessly, it say blanket statements like "Chryslers fail at everything". Anyhow, your assertion was to imagine if car companies treated a car like a gaming company with their game, which is what I was responding to.

I, for one, think 40k is more fun (as defined by my preference to spend MY time) a game than WMH, X-wing, it Malifaux. Like the OP and several other people here, the folks who don't want to talk to me about what kind of game they want to play -- I don't want to play any type of game with, anyhow, so list stacking is not a problem for me.

 MWHistorian wrote:
Im yelling at an Apple for being rotten.

Kind of a pointless thing to do, no?

 Peregrine wrote:

 Las wrote:
You cannot compare tac squads to super heavies.

Yes I can. They're both parts of the "standard" game according to GW. The fact that you (and a lot of other players) may have created your own house rules that put additional conditions on their use does not change this. In fact, by creating your own version of how to use superheavies you're conceding the argument: the game as published by GW sucks, and you have to fix it yourself.

Despite the hysteria over the fact their rules are in the BRB, the precedent of their being "an option" is crystal clear to people who don't swim in a sea of semantics.

Why should anyone care about "precedent" from previous editions of the game? This is like demanding that we use 5th edition wound allocation because it was crystal clear back then how it was supposed to work.

You're yelling at an apple for not being an orange.

No, I'm yelling at an apple for being rotten and full of worms. See my previous post: 40k doesn't suck for competitive play because it's great for other environments, it sucks for competitive play for the same reasons that it sucks for casual/narrative/whatever play. The only difference is that non-competitive players are more frequently willing to house rule away GW's failures and play their own version of 40k. But that doesn't erase GW's failure to support non-competitive play.

I don't give a damn about how the game is "meant to be played" because quite frankly that definition does not exist explicitly and varies from person to person. People have a great time with 40k, you're countering that by saying that doesn't matter because they're not playing in a way that is less fun for them? Who would do that? 40k is a game that can require prior discussion because of how huge of a game it is. Many of us are fine with that and even see it as a positive.

It's not a problem for you, but it is an inherent problem in the game due to bad design. Good for you that you have avoided the problem, but that doesn't mean the problem doesn't exist.

Talys wrote:
This is exactly what happens with cars. They are sold with shortcomings all the time, which companies do not fix until future model years. .

But that's ok. If your new car brakes poorly in wet conditions, you can just have a discussion with the other drivers on your streets before you drive anywhere, so that they can make allowances for your car's difficiency.

 insaniak wrote:

Talys wrote:
This is exactly what happens with cars. They are sold with shortcomings all the time, which companies do not fix until future model years. .

But that's ok. If your new car brakes poorly in wet conditions, you can just have a discussion with the other drivers on your streets before you drive anywhere, so that they can make allowances for your car's difficiency.

And this is exactly why playing 40K will kill you and your family, and possibly other (drivers?) players.

Has someone let off a tortured analogy bomb while I've been having my dinner?

 Azreal13 wrote:
Has someone let off a tortured analogy bomb while I've been having my dinner?

Hah ok that made me lol Azreal...

 ImAGeek wrote:
It's not a problem for you, but it is an inherent problem in the game due to bad design. Good for you that you have avoided the problem, but that doesn't mean the problem doesn't exist.

It's only a problem at your hypothetical gaming store where everyone's a complete dick and no one will play with you if you attempt conversation.

Las shouldnt you be be telling us right now that we arent real wargamers because we dont paint?

 Mr.bacon wrote:
Las shouldnt you be be telling us right now that we arent real wargamers because we dont paint?

Grow up, dude.

 Las wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:
It's not a problem for you, but it is an inherent problem in the game due to bad design. Good for you that you have avoided the problem, but that doesn't mean the problem doesn't exist.

It's only a problem at your hypothetical gaming store where everyone's a complete dick and no one will play with you if you attempt conversation.

No, it's a problem in any situation where you have the choice of play a guy who has an army or unit you have a problem with or don't play at all because nobody else is available. Whether that's a quiet, rainy Wednesday afternoon with nobody else in the store, a club where an even number of players have turned up and all paired off or any other similar situation you wish to contrive.

Not everyone has the luxury of playing frequently in busy environments with copious opponents, sometimes one has to make do, and because of the issues within the game, that can result in a less than stellar gaming experience.

 Las wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:
It's not a problem for you, but it is an inherent problem in the game due to bad design. Good for you that you have avoided the problem, but that doesn't mean the problem doesn't exist.

It's only a problem at your hypothetical gaming store where everyone's a complete dick and no one will play with you if you attempt conversation.

Yeah places like that ONLY exist hypothetically, there aren't people like that anywhere...

The fact of the matter is this. If the game was well designed, the problem wouldn't even exist, hypothetically or no.

 ImAGeek wrote:

 Las wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:
It's not a problem for you, but it is an inherent problem in the game due to bad design. Good for you that you have avoided the problem, but that doesn't mean the problem doesn't exist.

It's only a problem at your hypothetical gaming store where everyone's a complete dick and no one will play with you if you attempt conversation.

Yeah places like that ONLY exist hypothetically, there aren't people like that anywhere...

The fact of the matter is this. If the game was well designed, the problem wouldn't even exist, hypothetically or no.

Well why the hell would you play those people in the first place?

Also, both you an azrael are missing the fact that thousands of 40k players don't even consider it to be a problem in the first place. It's just a thing that comes from having such a gigantic game.

insaniak wrote:

Talys wrote:
This is exactly what happens with cars. They are sold with shortcomings all the time, which companies do not fix until future model years. .

But that's ok. If your new car brakes poorly in wet conditions, you can just have a discussion with the other drivers on your streets before you drive anywhere, so that they can make allowances for your car's difficiency.

More likely, in our part of the world, you don't have snow tires, the roads are slippery, and you slide and get into an accident and hurt someone that is equipped properly for the weather. Could this be possibly any more off topic with 40k General Discussions?!

Hmmm. Ok, you have a bright red Corvette, so you turn around a corner and a Gargantuan Squiggoth Stomps you, just to prove that only Ork red wunz go fasta. Since you are on an open road, there is no cover save. You die instantly a horrible death. If you had just selected a librarian with invisibility for your transport, the Gargantuan Squiggoth would have instead crunched the Datsun.

See, now we have related cars and automobile safety to 40k.