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.

 Rippy wrote:

 Chosen of Malal wrote:

 Gamgee wrote:


Operation Members:
Gamgee
Orock
Torga_DW
Rippy

I just wanted to point out that after all of this, four people in total have agreed to this. Way to hit GW in the pocket, boys.

Lol calm down friend. I "signed" the agreement as any codex that is miles above the rest should be house ruled AT LEAST if they go in competitions. Doesn't mean I still won't play Eldar (unless they bring spammy cheesebeard lists, in which case I wouldn't be interested in playing that kind of person in a social fun game anyway. Challenging, yes, boring cheesespam, no.) Source: bored of playing cheesebeards.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xerics wrote:

 Chosen of Malal wrote:

 Gamgee wrote:
The only way to get a message through to the big GW that this is completely unacceptable way to make a codex is to throw up a gak storm. The biggest way to do that? Well show them we won't even play with them. I know I intend to. Many of my players in my local FLGS intend to. Though I need to convince them to ban them from tournaments all together. The more the Eldar players complain and bitch about us complaining and bitching about their so obviously broken and favoritism codex the faster we can wrap this up. It's going to get messy before the end though. These half measures and trying to be "reasonable" with GW and even a certain subset of Eldar players is clearly not working. So it's time to kick things up a notch.

Can I at least get people who will agree to no games with them?

If there are any Eldar players out there with any remorse or guilt for the entire health of the game and 40k scene I implore you to do one of two things. Cheese the ever loving gak out of your codex and get yourself loathed and banned. Or don't play at all. Thanks.

As always the bigger we make this the quicker we'll get an answer.

Thanks. Remember cause mayhem. This Eldar Codex can't be allowed to stand.

I Gamgee swear to throw up a gak storm and use any method possible to get GW attention.

Edit
Since I started this thread and including myself there are four people who will no longer play against Eldar players. All it takes is a little team work. I'll continue to update this.
If I missed your name send me a PM or let me know in the thread and I'll add it.

Operation Members:
Gamgee
Orock
Torga_DW
Rippy

I just wanted to point out that after all of this, four people in total have agreed to this. Way to hit GW in the pocket, boys.

I like how the thread is about banning Eldar from tournaments and stuff. When Imperial Knights came out I was glad someone in the store would bring 5 to a 2000 point battle... I played against that army all the time and learned how to beat it. Instead of crying about Eldar be glad there is an Eldar player near you so you will get lots of practice

You are truely a god incarnate and we are all so amazed by your heroic skill.

But that isn't what you agreed to, Rippy. You agreed to refuse to play Eldar player.

 Chosen of Malal wrote:

niv-mizzet wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Eldarain wrote:
Anyone want to hazard a guess as to what percent of Xerics posts don't mention he has over 20,000 points of Eldar?

At 20,000+ points, he's twice as invested into Eldar as I am (9,500 points at last count - likely higher now). Not that points count matters that much. I'd be pissed at the OP if I only had 5,000 pts of Eldar. Or even a mere 2,000 points. I bought it, I want the option to play it.

Telling me that my army is now banned because some scrubs can't man up? No.

What if you did have the option to play it, just toned down to reasonable levels. Like say the 6e version that already wins more 1st place spots in the ITC than any other book? Or are you just interested in playing the most OP thing in the game to beat people with so you can convince yourself that that makes you "good" in any way?

I actually plan on running Vypers for once, the majority of my army has always consisted of Guardians, and I have quite a few Falcons and Aspect Warriors. The subject of this entire thread is refusing to play against someone with an Eldar army, not refusing to play against a cheesy Eldar player. He wants you to ban the Eldar army from competitive tournaments period, not limit units or toning anything down to reasonable levels. Taudar was never banned, Leafblower was never banned, White Scars isn't banned, Drop Pod spam isn't banned, Screamerstar was never banned, Beaststar was never banned, do I need to keep going? All you whiners need to grow a pair.

No it is for banning Eldar lists in competitions, not just refusing to play them. Read the thread topic, silly billy.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Chosen of Malal wrote:

 Rippy wrote:

 Chosen of Malal wrote:

 Gamgee wrote:


Operation Members:
Gamgee
Orock
Torga_DW
Rippy

I just wanted to point out that after all of this, four people in total have agreed to this. Way to hit GW in the pocket, boys.

Lol calm down friend. I "signed" the agreement as any codex that is miles above the rest should be house ruled AT LEAST if they go in competitions. Doesn't mean I still won't play Eldar (unless they bring spammy cheesebeard lists, in which case I wouldn't be interested in playing that kind of person in a social fun game anyway. Challenging, yes, boring cheesespam, no.) Source: bored of playing cheesebeards.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xerics wrote:

 Chosen of Malal wrote:

 Gamgee wrote:
The only way to get a message through to the big GW that this is completely unacceptable way to make a codex is to throw up a gak storm. The biggest way to do that? Well show them we won't even play with them. I know I intend to. Many of my players in my local FLGS intend to. Though I need to convince them to ban them from tournaments all together. The more the Eldar players complain and bitch about us complaining and bitching about their so obviously broken and favoritism codex the faster we can wrap this up. It's going to get messy before the end though. These half measures and trying to be "reasonable" with GW and even a certain subset of Eldar players is clearly not working. So it's time to kick things up a notch.

Can I at least get people who will agree to no games with them?

If there are any Eldar players out there with any remorse or guilt for the entire health of the game and 40k scene I implore you to do one of two things. Cheese the ever loving gak out of your codex and get yourself loathed and banned. Or don't play at all. Thanks.

As always the bigger we make this the quicker we'll get an answer.

Thanks. Remember cause mayhem. This Eldar Codex can't be allowed to stand.

I Gamgee swear to throw up a gak storm and use any method possible to get GW attention.

Edit
Since I started this thread and including myself there are four people who will no longer play against Eldar players. All it takes is a little team work. I'll continue to update this.
If I missed your name send me a PM or let me know in the thread and I'll add it.

Operation Members:
Gamgee
Orock
Torga_DW
Rippy

I just wanted to point out that after all of this, four people in total have agreed to this. Way to hit GW in the pocket, boys.

I like how the thread is about banning Eldar from tournaments and stuff. When Imperial Knights came out I was glad someone in the store would bring 5 to a 2000 point battle... I played against that army all the time and learned how to beat it. Instead of crying about Eldar be glad there is an Eldar player near you so you will get lots of practice

You are truely a god incarnate and we are all so amazed by your heroic skill.

But that isn't what you agreed to, Rippy. You agreed to refuse to play Eldar player.

Lol no I didn't, and no I won't. My brother in law plays Eldar.

niv-mizzet wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Eldarain wrote:
Anyone want to hazard a guess as to what percent of Xerics posts don't mention he has over 20,000 points of Eldar?

At 20,000+ points, he's twice as invested into Eldar as I am (9,500 points at last count - likely higher now). Not that points count matters that much. I'd be pissed at the OP if I only had 5,000 pts of Eldar. Or even a mere 2,000 points. I bought it, I want the option to play it.

Telling me that my army is now banned because some scrubs can't man up? No.

What if you did have the option to play it, just toned down to reasonable levels.

Like say the 6e version that already wins more 1st place spots in the ITC than any other book? Or are you just interested in playing the most OP thing in the game to beat people with so you can convince yourself that that makes you "good" in any way?

That's not what the OP is asking for. He's demanding a blanket ban, not something "reasonable" (whatever the feth that means).

As of today, I own ZERO Wraithknights, ZERO Jetbikes and ZERO hardback Eldar Codices - I still play the 5E Eldar Codex, so I'm pretty sure I'm not "the most OP thing in the game to beat people with so you can convince yourself that that makes you "good"," as you seem to insinuate.

In fact, I'm mostly playing 5E Imperial Guard and 6E Chaos Marines, so you can tell me how OP my armies are. However, I am interested in having the option to play those things if I should choose to play the current Eldar Codex. If I want to bring spend my hard-earned money on the new Codex, a WK and some Jetbikes, I should have the option to play with my new toys. Whether I choose to do so for any given game or event is an entirely different thing. And even when they do hit the tabletop, they aren't an auto-win Easy Button.

I apologize for posting a 12x6. It was simply a random averageish density table on Bing images because I didn't want to post a photo of my home. That table wad really not that spectacular; my point was that 40k looks good with a basic paint job and basic terrain. WMH looks bare except in extraordinary examples. There is nothing on that 12x6 that is beyond the modeling capability of an everyday gamer.

I usually play on 6x4 or 8x4 (by putting 2 4x4 together).

My other point, perhaps lost, is that if the look of miniatures doesn't matter to you, getting a 40k army ready for play seems like a colossal waste if time and money to me.

 Talys wrote:
I apologize for posting a 12x6. It was simply a random averageish density table on Bing images because I didn't want to post a photo of my home. That table wad really not that spectacular; my point was that 40k looks good with a basic paint job and basic terrain. WMH looks bare except in extraordinary examples.

I usually play on 6x4 or 8x4 (by putting 2 4x4 together).

This and the theme and how the models look turn me off WM/H also.

 Rippy wrote:

This and the theme and how the models look turn me off WM/H also.

I get that a lot of people are into the pseudo-steampunk... But the guns have always bugged me. I love the 40k weaponry.

And by the way, sorry to totally get off topic. Yes, the Eldar codex is too good (just like the old Eldar codex was too good)!

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

 Chosen of Malal wrote:
That's great, all those combos sure sound alot like Magic to me.

That's...one combo.
It involves careful positioning, risk assessment, and work being done prior successfully just to launch. I can die from it. At any point, dice can fail me.
No combo in Magic works that way.

That's not a combo, it's a Rube Goldberg contraption!

Magic doesn't do combos like that, because combos intend to win once they go off. Magic prefers cluster combos with largely interchangeable parts to improve stability and speed, reducing dependence upon having a stall or surprise counter.

That said, there are a number of equally long chains possible in Magic tied to things like Storm or decking, or bulk synergy effects. If I'm going to Tendrils you to death in TPS, I might need to generate a chain of 10+ spells - that's going to take a lot of draw and mana to pull off, so making that happen is non-trivial. If you count continuous activity in which the opponent does basically nothing, the time from when I drop a Stasis to the time my opponent dies/concedes is a similarly long chain of activity.

This is actually a very easy combo relatively speaking. When I first started playing, I was a skorne player. Everyone told me to play makeda 2 and use this combo to start
I imagine combos in magic are quite complicated, I didn't know mana burn or hurting yourself is a thing. I stopped playing after the first expansion and never played at tournaments. I really didn't like the concept of boosters, and it turned me off from card games for a while. There wasn't an online community where I could pick the cards I wanted at a time.
Now it's become like LoL, where the meta seems to have too much information and I don't have the time to learn it.

To be fair, 40k has combos too. Deathstars are essentially combos nowadays. You take units and powers from a few different sources and combine them to make them unbeatable practically. It doesn't autowin the game, but it usually makes your opponent have to stop it or you will win.


When we get new players, we usually tell them the following;
WMH is the better game. It's tactically deep and requires a lot of thinking, and thinking quickly. If you aren't competitive, don't play it.
40k is the better hobby. The models are great, and if you love painting, converting, and look at amazing battles, play it. The game itself isn't nearly as much fun.
Infinity is crazy. Don't play infinity
Specialist games are cheap. If you're on a budget, join a league. If you like RPGs but want to compete, play a specialist game.

I like to think that is an honest statement.

 Talys wrote:

 Rippy wrote:

This and the theme and how the models look turn me off WM/H also.

I get that a lot of people are into the pseudo-steampunk... But the guns have always bugged me. I love the 40k weaponry.

And by the way, sorry to totally get off topic. Yes, the Eldar codex is too good (just like the old Eldar codex was too good)!

Eh, I'd have to agree with someone who mentioned that this codex is more of a lateral move, then a straight buff. Yes, it is still on the same potential power level, but in completely different areas.

I consider any "combo" with more than 4 pieces to be an unstable contraption. For something to work reliably, 3 parts should be the max.

But that's in the card world, where you need to draw into the combination in order to go off.

On the tabletop, where you simply buy your pieces and place them at the start, it's a lot easier to assemble - you just need to protect what's important.

Gaming-wise, I'm trying to finish what I own, while shifting to miniatures board games.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
I consider any "combo" with more than 4 pieces to be an unstable contraption. For something to work reliably, 3 parts should be the max.

But that's in the card world, where you need to draw into the combination in order to go off.

On the tabletop, where you simply buy your pieces and place them at the start, it's a lot easier to assemble - you just need to protect what's important.

Gaming-wise, I'm trying to finish what I own, while shifting to miniatures board games.

Fair enough. I just got into deck building games again and am finding the combos work very differently. Two different worlds.
Not many combos in WMH are as simple as 4 pieces. It's more like a fighting game and a turn based strategy game had a baby.

Have you seen Krosmaster Arena? I have played it recently and am hooked, you may enjoy it if you like tactical rpgs.

Ha! I used to play Krosmaster Arena back when it was a MMORPG called Dofus. I worked my up to join and become an Officer in one of the premier Guilds, just had a ton of fun with them.

My group is hooked into Super Dungeon Explore, which scratches a very similar itch.

If you're doing deckbuilding, I would concentrate on Magic - it's the granddaddy of cardgames, with 20 years of cards and development behind it. Great stuff!

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Ha! I used to play Krosmaster Arena back when it was a MMORPG called Dofus. I worked my up to join and become an Officer in one of the premier Guilds, just had a ton of fun with them.

My group is hooked into Super Dungeon Explore, which scratches a very similar itch.

If you're doing deckbuilding, I would concentrate on Magic - it's the granddaddy of cardgames, with 20 years of cards and development behind it. Great stuff!

Hey! I was thinking about getting into SDE. It looks like a chibi Descent. Plus angry bear.

 Talys wrote:

The average game if 40k is not 4x4. The average game is 1850 on 6x4, and at this ratio, the table looks great.

p

True, but arguably, only to an extent. We always played on a 6 by 4 for example. Then again, In gw stores, it's ususlly on a 4 by 4. Where space is an issue, a 4 by 4 is far from unusual. And Not everyone has the luxury of space. Similarly, points sizes vary wildly. Not every one plays 1850.

 Talys wrote:

If you want to commit to beautiful play environment, there is a community to do so for 40k. Such s thing does nit exist for WMH, anywhere that I've seen.

And you've seen every WMH board, and played against every WMH player I take it? Sweeping generalisations aren't nice. You want to play in a 'beautiful play environment'? Cool, and fair play. But I'd argue it's harder to find that community within the 40k community than you realise. Like I said, in my experience planet bowling ball and grey legions are far more common than not. Regarding WMH - the guy who taught me how to play back in ireland (literally, my first opponent) was one if those apparently mythical WMH players that writes custom scenarios, writes custom rules, enjoys campsigns, and awesome terrain filled boards. My. First. Opponent. They exist talys.

 Talys wrote:

I am not your average 40k player, but I started out that way, and over many years accumulated stuff. My aspiration, however, was always to play with awe-inspiring miniatures, even when I couldn't afford it. .

Don't get me wrong - I'm not criticising. Fact is, I'd love to play a game with you. You seem to be the kind of guy/opponent people hope to meet across the table.

 Talys wrote:

I would further assert that anyone who isn't into miniatures I going to have more fun with another game -- one that doesn't require you to spend tons of time to model a nice looking battleforce. Just go buy xwing, for example, and save yourself the trouble of modeling.

Hey now, I have far more fun and enjoyment painting, modelling and converting my infinity, historical and WMH stuff than I ever did with 40k. Infinity especislly - for me it's an absolute joy to paint up each and every model- they each end up being a separate project for me. Equating having more fun with other games and not being into miniatures as one and the same is a bit short sighted IMO.

Agree. Talys would make a great opponent even though I disagree with him a lot.

In case anyone was still in doubt about anything, there's a compilation PDF of the book now up on /tg/

At this rate, I think the proper thing would be to just aim operation pitchfork at getting Kelly sacked. Kelly either writes a stupidly overpowered codex, or a terribly weak codex. He either needs to shape up and stop this lulzy power creep, or simply not write codices anymore. Hell I'd take Matt Ward back over him.

 Wyzilla wrote:
At this rate, I think the proper thing would be to just aim operation pitchfork at getting Kelly sacked. Kelly either writes a stupidly overpowered codex, or a terribly weak codex. He either needs to shape up and stop this lulzy power creep, or simply not write codices anymore. Hell I'd take Matt Ward back over him.

I dont know if he worked on this, but he has stopped doing rules anyway.
Doesnt help fix whats already done though.

Szeras wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
My group is hooked into Super Dungeon Explore, which scratches a very similar itch.

Hey! I was thinking about getting into SDE. It looks like a chibi Descent. Plus angry bear.

Now is a good time - the 1E game is on discount as they transition to 2E "Forgotten King".

Go for it - it's a great tactical alternative to 40k or other such games..

 Vaktathi wrote:
In case anyone was still in doubt about anything, there's a compilation PDF of the book now up on /tg/

whats /tg/ ?

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
In case anyone was still in doubt about anything, there's a compilation PDF of the book now up on /tg/

whats /tg/ ?

Traditional games section on websites like 4chan and reddit to the best of my knowledge.

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
In case anyone was still in doubt about anything, there's a compilation PDF of the book now up on /tg/

whats /tg/ ?

4chan's "Traditional Games" board.

Deadnight wrote:

True, but arguably, only to an extent. We always played on a 6 by 4 for example. Then again, In gw stores, it's ususlly on a 4 by 4. Where space is an issue, a 4 by 4 is far from unusual. And Not everyone has the luxury of space. Similarly, points sizes vary wildly. Not every one plays 1850.

Of course. 8x4 happens when you put two 4x4 together. Almost every competition is 1850 or 2000. 40k is a lousy game at 500 points. I mean, it's fine to learn the mechanics of, or if you desperately want a quickie game -- but if you want to play with a couple of squads worth of models and a vehicle... IMO WMH just gives you a thousand times more options as to what to do with those models. 40k with a couple of squads is just move shoot move hide move shoot move assault done.

Deadnight wrote:

And you've seen every WMH board, and played against every WMH player I take it? Sweeping generalisations aren't nice. You want to play in a 'beautiful play environment'? Cool, and fair play. But I'd argue it's harder to find that community within the 40k community than you realise. Like I said, in my experience planet bowling ball and grey legions are far more common than not. Regarding WMH - the guy who taught me how to play back in ireland (literally, my first opponent) was one if those apparently mythical WMH players that writes custom scenarios, writes custom rules, enjoys campsigns, and awesome terrain filled boards. My. First. Opponent. They exist talys.

I'm not saying WMH can't have great scenarios, great rules, fantastic campaigns. I'm saying that I've never seen a really beautiful play board by anyone who plays WMH, and in my local area (in which wargaming is quite strong), though there are many (tons of!) WMH players, there is no community or group of players that enjoy playing on elaborate setups. And that's my thing. I'm sure they exist. I just haven't found one or seen one at a store, and I do chat up a lot of folks, including anyone who's playing who is chatty

Mostly, they want to play the game.

Certainly, you can't argue that 40k is a more modelling intensive hobby than WMH.

Deadnight wrote:

Don't get me wrong - I'm not criticising. Fact is, I'd love to play a game with you. You seem to be the kind of guy/opponent people hope to meet across the table.

Thanks! I take that as a real compliment.

Deadnight wrote:

Hey now, I have far more fun and enjoyment painting, modelling and converting my infinity, historical and WMH stuff than I ever did with 40k. Infinity especislly - for me it's an absolute joy to paint up each and every model- they each end up being a separate project for me. Equating having more fun with other games and not being into miniatures as one and the same is a bit short sighted IMO.

Yes, Infinity has beautiful models! Not enough of the, but they are very well crafted. I have a thing for posable plastic, simply because "size counts" for me. I know not everyone wants to model an army of PanOceana Crusader Bretheren, but if I had my way, I'd have a game where I could play 50 -- unique -- Crusader Bretheren (plus the rest of the army).

Maybe Infinity will "grow" that way, or a new derivative larger-scale game created, in which case I'd be very interested.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
In case anyone was still in doubt about anything, there's a compilation PDF of the book now up on /tg/

whats /tg/ ?

4chan's "Traditional Games" board.

ah right thanks

 Talys wrote:

Of course. 8x4 happens when you put two 4x4 together. Almost every competition is 1850 or 2000. 40k is a lousy game at 500 points. I mean, it's fine to learn the mechanics of, or if you desperately want a quickie game -- but if you want to play with a couple of squads worth of models and a vehicle... IMO WMH just gives you a thousand times more options as to what to do with those models. 40k with a couple of squads is just move shoot move hide move shoot move assault done.

Agreed.

Competitions (aka steamroller etc) might be defining of WMH, but it's not true of 40k. I'm not disagreeing with you here, judt disagreeing with the previous assertion that the average game is on a 6 by 4, 1850pts. It might be the preferred game, but it might not be the reality for folks.

 Talys wrote:

I'm not saying WMH can't have great scenarios, great rules, fantastic campaigns. I'm saying that I've never seen a really beautiful play board by anyone who plays WMH, and in my local area (in which wargaming is quite strong), though there are many (tons of!) WMH players, there is no community or group of players that enjoy playing on elaborate setups. And that's my thing. I'm sure they exist. I just haven't found one or seen one at a store, and I do chat up a lot of folks, including anyone who's playing who is chatty
Mostly, they want to play the game.

Like I said, they're there. My first opponent was one. And he had some awesome ideas - the clockwork/gear board he wanted to do still fires my imagination.

 Talys wrote:

Certainly, you can't argue that 40k is a more modelling intensive hobby than WMH.

Hmm, I dunno. It's certainly 'easier' to model in 40k (I do a lot of WMH modelling, and tend to use gw bits for it for tgr most part), but I'd argue that it is also very easy to be very lazy with your modelling in 40k, if you do any at all. It used to be that you had to model/convert half your stuff, because not everything had a kit - now, not so much. I'm personally proud of a lot of my conversions (you should see my kroot and Fire warriors) for example, but a lot of what's out there ends up being quite basic. Regarding WMH conversions and modelling - you'd be surprised. It is a thing. I do quite a few conversions for my own army. Some of them ended up being extremely labour intensive (tournament legal female fenris conversion, I'm looking at you!) I often joke that modelling in WMH is like being a warcaster, if you're gonna do it, you'd better go epic. Here are some examples.

As to a few examples (steamroller tournament legal too).
HMS griffon gun carriage to airship conversion:
http://privateerpressforums.com/showthread.php?192274-HMS-Griffon-Gun-Carraige-to-Airship-Conversion

Legion of Mechablight:
http://privateerpressforums.com/showthread.php?198539-And-now-for-something-completely-different

The Crimson Harvest (A proxy Orgoth army):
http://privateerpressforums.com/showthread.php?194308-Crimson-Harvest-the-Revenge-of-the-Orgoth

Stormhammer: the assault on Sul:
http://privateerpressforums.com/showthread.php?98-Stormhammer-the-Assault-on-Sul

RECO stormwall:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqA6nbk2zos

Baby Titan 'skorne mammoth' conversion
http://www.captainspud.com/?p=176

General customised figures:
http://privateerpressforums.com/showthread.php?144918-Show-me-your-most-heavily-customized-figures!

Now I consider each of those to be quite 'modelling intensive' if you ask me- the Crimson harvest 'orgoth' army, the legion of mechablight and stormhammer in particular. The airship conversion of a gun carriage, and baby Titans playing as a skorne mammoth are genuine genius though. Creative people will be creative. It's that simple.

 Talys wrote:

Thanks! I take that as a real compliment.

Genuine compliment is genuine. Beers are on you though!

 Talys wrote:

Yes, Infinity has beautiful models! Not enough of the, but they are very well crafted. I have a thing for posable plastic, simply because "size counts" for me. I know not everyone wants to model an army of PanOceana Crusader Bretheren, but if I had my way, I'd have a game where I could play 50 -- unique -- Crusader Bretheren (plus the rest of the army).

Maybe Infinity will "grow" that way, or a new derivative larger-scale game created, in which case I'd be very interested.

And fair play. I'm from the alternative 'less is more' school of thought. Neither of us is wrong though (what's this? Agreement on the Internet?! Sky must be falling!)

Galanur wrote:
you play with those models cause you want to, no 1 force you to do it.

The rules cost you much cause well, go to a printer company and print a codex with exactly same number of pages, paper quality, hardcover, UV varnish and all that stuff and tell me how that ´s gonna cost you, I can guarantee its gonna cost you almost twice of what you payed for that book.



About all these eldar stuff around, read this post, it can be quite fun reading and the all out so much drama for nothing people do these days anyway...



http://www.spikeybitsblog.com/2015/04/40k-meta-how-to-beat-the-new-eldar.html

That's because you're printing ONE. When you have a printer run off 20,000 of them, it doesn't cost much. From GW employees and people who have worked in the printing industry, a codex costs $3-5 to print per copy. Then they're sold for $33-50. How is it that other, smaller companies can make hardcover books of the same quality with more pages for $20-30 if they cost so much to produce? Model kits cost about 25% of their total price to produce. I know this because every year at the training in Memphis, someone asks how GW can give 50% off to employees without losing money. The answer is that even at 50% off, GW is still doubling their money on the cost of a kit. This is why the fact that they don't have sales is mind boggling. If you're a grocery store with a 3% margin, you can't afford to have sales. If your production cost on a kit is $25 and MSRP is $100, you can most definitely afford to have sales once in awhile.

WayneTheGame wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
"40k is not a competitive game and is not designed as such "

There's no such thing as a narrative game with "victory conditions". 40K IS competitive because there is a winner and loser.

And 40K is VERY easy to learn. There's not that many rules compared to actual war games.

There is no winner or loser, just people having fun. If both players have fun, than they will both have won.

There isn't much fun to getting stomped over and over and over. And yes, the rules describe a victor and loser.

If one player gets stomped all the time, you are doing something wrong. You have to work together to make sure everyone has a fun experience. Of course the rules have a winner and loser, because otherwise there would never be an end to the game and conclusion to the story.

Don't you think rules that are $85 for the basics and $50+ for army lists should do a good job of making sure everybody has a fun experience without requiring this gentleman's agreement nonsense beforehand? I don't get how people are quick to defend the idea of charging the most out of everybody else for rules for a game which they claim is secondary to figures, and on top of that still requiring player intervention to fix any problems that can cause unfun games. It's a flaw of game design to have rules and then say "Well, you shouldn't use these expensive rules verbatim, you need to work things out with your opponent to determine what rules make for the most fun"

If you're smart, rules and army lists are free.
In any case, I think you should view the 40k rulebook more as a kind of dungeonmaster's handbook from an RPG. It is a set of guidelines to give a framework that you can fill in yourself. At least, that is the direction GW seems to be going.

Akiasura wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

With the absurd range on the guns, destructive ability of the guns, and overall power level of the guns, the codex will be dangerous in anyone's hands. More than any other dex, considering the lack of bad units in the dex that a bad player would take.
The necron codex with the new formation is very strong, but is good in anyone's hand. You pretty much push the wraiths forward and hide the spyder.

Army lists tend to come in 2 varieties in most table top games. They either ask questions or answer questions. The ones that ask questions don't require nearly as much tactical work as the ones that answer questions. This is true in 40k, WMH, infinity, and most of the games I have seen.
The necron codex asks "Can you kill all my absurdly tough guys before they reach your lines?"
The SM codex asks "Can you stop my deathstar from destroying your army?"
The new Eldar codex asks "Can you withstand my shooting?"
It's easy to build this question from the army book compared to say, daemons, who are a strong army that requires a bit more work.

You make it sound so easy for someone to pick up and army and master the rules. I don't know if this is true for everyone.

It should take around 10 games. This is a pretty small learning curve compared to shooting games, fighting games, MOBAs, and other table tops.

Really? People need that many games to just master rules and a single army? Either that is a hyperbole or everyone I play with is incredibly smart. And personally I found Warmachine, FoW and Dystopian Wars all easier to learn than 40k. 40k takes more time to master due to the sheer amount of rules.

You are the first person I have ever heard to claim that.
I don't think you can claim that 10 games is a long time to master 40k's rules, then say it's a complex game, and then say WMH should take even less times. Those statements contradict each other.
In WMH, just knowing how to mitigate different feats, what pathfinder and eyeless sight can do, how weird CoC is, how annoying Menoth's Choir can be, and the crazyness of the teleport circle has can take a while to master. Learning how to utilize focus and mitigate fury and how each caster plays takes a very very long time.
You'll have a hard time asserting WMH is an easier game to master. The rules are clearer, but jacks alone can take more actions then most units do in 40k throughout the entire game.
Granted the 40k rules are written terribly. Flyers, FMC, and psykers are all confusing. But once you see it a few times it's easy to learn.

You will note that I made a difference between 'learn' and 'master'. Warmachine is far easier to learn than 40k, but harder to master.

Akiasura wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:

If that requires some kind of evidence, assume I am just a boastful jerk, consider your own experiences and go from there. I would say it's only about 3 out of every 10 players I meet really know how to use the rules to their advantage, which would correspond with the upper end of a bell curve (it's actually being a little generous.)

I think you'd have to define using the rules to their advantage. 40k isn't an indepth system, and the majority of decisions are made in the list building stages. Anyone with an ability to work the most basic of statistics can see what units are good, make sure they have threat saturation, and go from there. I would say 3 in 10 don't have the ability to do this, and depending on your meta more or less may opt not to.
Figuring out how a deathstar operates, for example, is using the rules to help you, but anyone can do that given google and a short amount of time. There is little the enemy can stop it.

It takes more than good shooting to win games.

Akiasura wrote:
Making proper use of cover, target priority, choosing the right psychic powers, knowing the AV for enemy tanks, placing fortifications, making use of buildings, understanding terrain, knowing how to take and hold strategic points, making full use of cards in Maelstrom games, good deployments, knowing your opponent's armies and special rules, making effective use of psychic dice, etc. These are some of the the fundamentals I see too many people lacking in when the bring competitive lists. They count on some tricks working with their lists and don't know what to do when something doesn't go right.

Proper use of cover requires you to just be in cover. And don't bunch up if the enemy has blast templates.
Target priority is knowing what the weapons in the enemy list do and which units can hurt which model. There are few stats in this game and they are on a small scale, this doesn't take long to master either. The spammy nature of 40k means generally there are 1-3 main threats in an enemy army and you need to destroy it. With death stars it's even easier, just difficult to do anything. You have won or list in list building.
You don't get to chose psychic powers, they are randomly generated. If you mean disciplines, there are a few good ones (about 2-3) that are always amazing for any army and the rest are pretty bad.
The next 3 points are terrain which, again, mostly just require you to be in it.
Maelstrom cards are completely random and can not be planned for. Sometimes your enemy doesn't even have fliers for example. If your army is fast, and the best ones are, it's easier to grab them. This isn't infinity.
Good deployments are somewhat difficult to master and take a few games. Maybe 5-6. People who complain against drop pod armies usually are bad at deployments.
Psychic dice are also easy and requires a basic understanding of probability. If you only need 1-2 powers it becomes even easier. How the phase works is complicated but the system itself is easy. Defense is almost completely random and you usually have one spell you must stop, so you save it for that.

I somewhat agree with this, list building is the most important aspect of winning the game. It does take more than just a good list to win though, especially with more challenging armies such as DE or Orks. Good positioning and deployment are almost as important as a good list if you want to win, and having a good understanding of your opponent's army and setting target priorities (which goes far beyond 1-3 main threats) are also important. And of course a bit of luck.

Luck isn't really a skill, it's in every dice based game. Though you think it was the way some people roll...
Deployment is an issue for some armies, which I admitted. It's not terribly hard to master, and takes about 3-4 games before you are good at it. Maybe 1-2 more if drop pods are common in your area. I am speaking from an entirely new players perspective of course. 40k doesn't attract people who play other table tops in my experience.
Nothing is as important as a good list in 40k. Nothing. Just picking DE and Orks in this meta means you picked poorly. Which sucks, but that's the game we are playing now.

No, picking DE or Orks means you made the right choice. 40k is not about winning or losing a simple game. It is about your nicely modelled and painted miniatures. It is a modelling hobby with a roleplaying game attached to it.

Akiasura wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

Akiasura wrote:
This is nothing complicated, like order of activation, when do I feat, how do I spread out my orders, memorizing an entire map, knowing how to jungle, or any other game I've played. 40k is a very tactically shallow game.

It is not the most tactical of games no, and it is also not designed to be. Yet it goes beyond just list building. If that were the case, we could just stick to mathhammer and produce results that are actually somewhat reliable.

Akiasura wrote:

The fact a good player doesn't know what a match up means is really just a statement of how tactically shallow 40k is. Any other competitive game, nearly every player would know what that term refers to.

This is where you stop making sense. 40k is not a competitive game and is not designed as such (The first pages of the rulebook clearly state it is a 'narrative game') 40k is a modelling hobby with attached tabletop RPG, not a video game MOBA with rankings, achievements etc.

The book can state what it wants. The game has been a tactical game from 3rd to 5th, and recently 40k has switched its tune in name only.
I challenge you to find a single roleplaying element in the game. Necromunda and other games have them, 40k does not.

The rulebook states flat out that your warlord represents you on the battlefield. It also has numerous hints and bits about forging a narrative and getting in character etc. The rulebook is full of roleplaying elements.

Akiasura wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

Akiasura wrote:
40k has worked that way across it's entire existence. Editions are defined by what was the most competitive list at the time, not who were the best players like you see in other games.
Again, you don't understand what a matchup is, so it's hard to have a discussion about how competitive something is when you don't have the jargon down.
Leaf blower, rhino rush, 5e grey knights, falcon spam, Siren bomb. The names of the lists have nicknames. In other games the players have nicknames, like JVM, M2K, Boss.
It shows you what players focus on when they talk about the game.

In Warmachine and FoW lists have names too. (Winter Guard deathstar anyone?)

Which is not the name of a list, it is the name of a unit. A unit that operates differently depending on if it is taken with butcher, Vlad, or another caster.
It takes about 15 points to make one, out of the 55+ points you get. So no, not a list.
That's like me saying Molik Missle is a list. It isn't, it's about 12 points in a unit taken with Makeda 2. I still have 40 points of list to make, and it will impact how I play heavily.
Tiers are an exception, but that's how they work.

5e Grey Knights is the name of a codex, not a list. The others, like the WGDS, refer to certain tactics, not to certain lists. Lists do not have names in 40k, unless they are formations.

Deadnight wrote:
Hmm, I dunno. It's certainly 'easier' to model in 40k (I do a lot of WMH modelling, and tend to use gw bits for it for tgr most part), but I'd argue that it is also very easy to be very lazy with your modelling in 40k, if you do any at all. It used to be that you had to model/convert half your stuff, because not everything had a kit - now, not so much. I'm personally proud of a lot of my conversions (you should see my kroot and Fire warriors) for example, but a lot of what's out there ends up being quite basic. Regarding WMH conversions and modelling - you'd be surprised. It is a thing. I do quite a few conversions for my own army. Some of them ended up being extremely labour intensive (tournament legal female fenris conversion, I'm looking at you!) I often joke that modelling in WMH is like being a warcaster, if you're gonna do it, you'd better go epic. Here are some examples.

Yeah, I meant modelling intensive from the perspective of, "you must make a lot of modelling to play the game", rather than, "you can do a lot of modelling with what's made".

Most 40k armies will require that you make many modelling choices (scatter cannon, or shuriken catapult?), whereas essentially all PP models only come one way. If you like to "build" your army (point the head left, or look forward? Equip jump pack or backpack?), 40k "forces" you to do it, while with PP, it's mostly arms, torso, base, assembled.

I think people who want to just get down and play without tinkering endlessly with finicky parts will prefer WM/H. Or Infinity! It certainly doesn't mean that someone who loves Warmachines fluff can't spend lots of time making cool models.

Deadnight wrote:

Genuine compliment is genuine. Beers are on you though!

Pizza too. Always on the house

Though there is a kitty that nobody ever puts coins in for chips and chocolate bars and stuff.

Deadnight wrote:

And fair play. I'm from the alternative 'less is more' school of thought. Neither of us is wrong though (what's this? Agreement on the Internet?! Sky must be falling!)

Pffftt. Liez. There cannot be consensus on the Internet. HERESY!

 Iron_Captain wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

With the absurd range on the guns, destructive ability of the guns, and overall power level of the guns, the codex will be dangerous in anyone's hands. More than any other dex, considering the lack of bad units in the dex that a bad player would take.
The necron codex with the new formation is very strong, but is good in anyone's hand. You pretty much push the wraiths forward and hide the spyder.

Army lists tend to come in 2 varieties in most table top games. They either ask questions or answer questions. The ones that ask questions don't require nearly as much tactical work as the ones that answer questions. This is true in 40k, WMH, infinity, and most of the games I have seen.
The necron codex asks "Can you kill all my absurdly tough guys before they reach your lines?"
The SM codex asks "Can you stop my deathstar from destroying your army?"
The new Eldar codex asks "Can you withstand my shooting?"
It's easy to build this question from the army book compared to say, daemons, who are a strong army that requires a bit more work.

You make it sound so easy for someone to pick up and army and master the rules. I don't know if this is true for everyone.

It should take around 10 games. This is a pretty small learning curve compared to shooting games, fighting games, MOBAs, and other table tops.

Really? People need that many games to just master rules and a single army? Either that is a hyperbole or everyone I play with is incredibly smart. And personally I found Warmachine, FoW and Dystopian Wars all easier to learn than 40k. 40k takes more time to master due to the sheer amount of rules.

You are the first person I have ever heard to claim that.
I don't think you can claim that 10 games is a long time to master 40k's rules, then say it's a complex game, and then say WMH should take even less times. Those statements contradict each other.
In WMH, just knowing how to mitigate different feats, what pathfinder and eyeless sight can do, how weird CoC is, how annoying Menoth's Choir can be, and the crazyness of the teleport circle has can take a while to master. Learning how to utilize focus and mitigate fury and how each caster plays takes a very very long time.
You'll have a hard time asserting WMH is an easier game to master. The rules are clearer, but jacks alone can take more actions then most units do in 40k throughout the entire game.
Granted the 40k rules are written terribly. Flyers, FMC, and psykers are all confusing. But once you see it a few times it's easy to learn.

You will note that I made a difference between 'learn' and 'master'. Warmachine is far easier to learn than 40k, but harder to master.

You actually did not say that. I bolded it to help you.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

 techsoldaten wrote:

If that requires some kind of evidence, assume I am just a boastful jerk, consider your own experiences and go from there. I would say it's only about 3 out of every 10 players I meet really know how to use the rules to their advantage, which would correspond with the upper end of a bell curve (it's actually being a little generous.)

I think you'd have to define using the rules to their advantage. 40k isn't an indepth system, and the majority of decisions are made in the list building stages. Anyone with an ability to work the most basic of statistics can see what units are good, make sure they have threat saturation, and go from there. I would say 3 in 10 don't have the ability to do this, and depending on your meta more or less may opt not to.
Figuring out how a deathstar operates, for example, is using the rules to help you, but anyone can do that given google and a short amount of time. There is little the enemy can stop it.

It takes more than good shooting to win games.

Akiasura wrote:
Making proper use of cover, target priority, choosing the right psychic powers, knowing the AV for enemy tanks, placing fortifications, making use of buildings, understanding terrain, knowing how to take and hold strategic points, making full use of cards in Maelstrom games, good deployments, knowing your opponent's armies and special rules, making effective use of psychic dice, etc. These are some of the the fundamentals I see too many people lacking in when the bring competitive lists. They count on some tricks working with their lists and don't know what to do when something doesn't go right.

Proper use of cover requires you to just be in cover. And don't bunch up if the enemy has blast templates.
Target priority is knowing what the weapons in the enemy list do and which units can hurt which model. There are few stats in this game and they are on a small scale, this doesn't take long to master either. The spammy nature of 40k means generally there are 1-3 main threats in an enemy army and you need to destroy it. With death stars it's even easier, just difficult to do anything. You have won or list in list building.
You don't get to chose psychic powers, they are randomly generated. If you mean disciplines, there are a few good ones (about 2-3) that are always amazing for any army and the rest are pretty bad.
The next 3 points are terrain which, again, mostly just require you to be in it.
Maelstrom cards are completely random and can not be planned for. Sometimes your enemy doesn't even have fliers for example. If your army is fast, and the best ones are, it's easier to grab them. This isn't infinity.
Good deployments are somewhat difficult to master and take a few games. Maybe 5-6. People who complain against drop pod armies usually are bad at deployments.
Psychic dice are also easy and requires a basic understanding of probability. If you only need 1-2 powers it becomes even easier. How the phase works is complicated but the system itself is easy. Defense is almost completely random and you usually have one spell you must stop, so you save it for that.

I somewhat agree with this, list building is the most important aspect of winning the game. It does take more than just a good list to win though, especially with more challenging armies such as DE or Orks. Good positioning and deployment are almost as important as a good list if you want to win, and having a good understanding of your opponent's army and setting target priorities (which goes far beyond 1-3 main threats) are also important. And of course a bit of luck.

Luck isn't really a skill, it's in every dice based game. Though you think it was the way some people roll...
Deployment is an issue for some armies, which I admitted. It's not terribly hard to master, and takes about 3-4 games before you are good at it. Maybe 1-2 more if drop pods are common in your area. I am speaking from an entirely new players perspective of course. 40k doesn't attract people who play other table tops in my experience.
Nothing is as important as a good list in 40k. Nothing. Just picking DE and Orks in this meta means you picked poorly. Which sucks, but that's the game we are playing now.

No, picking DE or Orks means you made the right choice. 40k is not about winning or losing a simple game. It is about your nicely modelled and painted miniatures. It is a modelling hobby with a roleplaying game attached to it.

If you're into modeling, 40k is fine. It has zero roleplaying elements in it.
As I said before, I challenge someone to find a roleplaying aspect to the game in the rules.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

Akiasura wrote:
This is nothing complicated, like order of activation, when do I feat, how do I spread out my orders, memorizing an entire map, knowing how to jungle, or any other game I've played. 40k is a very tactically shallow game.

It is not the most tactical of games no, and it is also not designed to be. Yet it goes beyond just list building. If that were the case, we could just stick to mathhammer and produce results that are actually somewhat reliable.

Akiasura wrote:

The fact a good player doesn't know what a match up means is really just a statement of how tactically shallow 40k is. Any other competitive game, nearly every player would know what that term refers to.

This is where you stop making sense. 40k is not a competitive game and is not designed as such (The first pages of the rulebook clearly state it is a 'narrative game') 40k is a modelling hobby with attached tabletop RPG, not a video game MOBA with rankings, achievements etc.

The book can state what it wants. The game has been a tactical game from 3rd to 5th, and recently 40k has switched its tune in name only.
I challenge you to find a single roleplaying element in the game. Necromunda and other games have them, 40k does not.

The rulebook states flat out that your warlord represents you on the battlefield. It also has numerous hints and bits about forging a narrative and getting in character etc. The rulebook is full of roleplaying elements.

My warlord represents me? Funny, I don't wake up everyday with a new set of abilities that I previously forgot
If the rulebook is full of roleplaying elements, it should be easy for someone to mention some. I see nothing about your characters growing with you, leveling up, working with a dungeon master/Gm/St or any other roleplaying elements. 40k used to have this too, but dropped it.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

Akiasura wrote:
40k has worked that way across it's entire existence. Editions are defined by what was the most competitive list at the time, not who were the best players like you see in other games.
Again, you don't understand what a matchup is, so it's hard to have a discussion about how competitive something is when you don't have the jargon down.
Leaf blower, rhino rush, 5e grey knights, falcon spam, Siren bomb. The names of the lists have nicknames. In other games the players have nicknames, like JVM, M2K, Boss.
It shows you what players focus on when they talk about the game.

In Warmachine and FoW lists have names too. (Winter Guard deathstar anyone?)

Which is not the name of a list, it is the name of a unit. A unit that operates differently depending on if it is taken with butcher, Vlad, or another caster.
It takes about 15 points to make one, out of the 55+ points you get. So no, not a list.
That's like me saying Molik Missle is a list. It isn't, it's about 12 points in a unit taken with Makeda 2. I still have 40 points of list to make, and it will impact how I play heavily.
Tiers are an exception, but that's how they work.

5e Grey Knights is the name of a codex, not a list. The others, like the WGDS, refer to certain tactics, not to certain lists. Lists do not have names in 40k, unless they are formations.

I'm not the one who said that WGDS was the name of a list, someone else did. It's not really a tactic set so much as a combo of units + solo, which a majority of casters in Khador can run.
5e grey knights had a few lists that were op, the craziest being the henchmen spam build.
But just to give a list of special names attributed to lists in 40k;
Rhino Rush
Leaf blower
The Bakery
The Flying Circus

There are a few more. Lists in 40k have names

Chad Warden wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:
At this rate, I think the proper thing would be to just aim operation pitchfork at getting Kelly sacked. Kelly either writes a stupidly overpowered codex, or a terribly weak codex. He either needs to shape up and stop this lulzy power creep, or simply not write codices anymore. Hell I'd take Matt Ward back over him.

I dont know if he worked on this, but he has stopped doing rules anyway.
Doesnt help fix whats already done though.

Oh, well that's good. Kelly is good at writing fluff, but terrible for rules. Whoever wrote this however does need to be sacked or at least slapped on the wrist and given a warning.

Also, even FAQ won't fix this debacle, The entire codex needs to be scrapped and re-done. 6th edition Codex is perfectly alright, I see no reason why Eldar players who aren't WAACers can't just use that and save themselves some money and not buy the 7th.