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.

 Jancoran wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:
No, explain it to me. Your platform is that "Players don't know the rules and will have a hard time adapting to them". Why do you assume your players know all of the units in all of the codices to the extent that they can adapt to them on the fly? If you don't assume that then your argument falls apart.

I didn't assume that so why are you suggesting I DID assume that?

I think a CLOSER restatement of my argument as i have already stated (Bricks: head. Head: bricks), is that there IS in fact a LOT for you to learn; and it's coming fast. New players already have enough on their plates as do returning ones, just trying to keep up to speed with THAT. Hell I'm a veteran of the game and I find it difficult, maybe because I have a life or something weird like that. So given that the core game includes these codeci, that's the MOST I want to inflict on them. I'm not saying that this on its own won't be challenging. I'm saying it absolutely will. That is the point. I personally lost my first eight games and the first 13 of 15 that I played. I know all about that fire hose. I've been there. Done that. Only my deep involvement with the hobby has made that less daunting, but even I cannot claim to be a master of all the codex's, and most would tell you that if there's one person who knows 40K, it's me. I certainly know it well enough to play in any tournament. =)

So THAT is closer to the mark than what you said.

So allow what you like. This discussion should have given you a lot to think about (if you were open to thinking about it and not just jumping the gun to express your own opinion) and you can take whatever parts of what I've said that makes sense and consider them. You could also be like the other sheeple and use ITC as is. Or make your own. Whatevs. I have no personal stake in your decision.

I'm going to keep growing the hobby in my area. If people like Forge World, there will be LOTS of players to play instead of the 6-8 we used to have.

Games Workshop rule releases this past year: Tau Empire, Dark Angels, Clan Raukaan, Sentinels of Terra, Space Marines, Cult Mechanicus, Imperial Knights, Craftworld Eldar, Skitarii, Khorne Daemonkin, Harlequins, Necrons, Blood Angels, Haemonculus Covens, and Dark Eldar

Forgeworld rule releases this past year: The Horus Heresy Book Five: Tempest (The Horus Heresy series is a separate game system)

This does not take into account data slates, campaign supplements, white dwarf formation, or limited time formations that GW publishes or the experimental rules that Forgeworld writes. Please stop making this point. It is wrong.

You are still capitalising random words. Please stop, It hurts to try and read.

 Vaktathi wrote:
...it's hard to respond to that with anything other than "well the reasoning used by the community is wrong for the above reasons".

And yet, yours is the more reasonable reaction that apparently is rarer than an original copy of Bloodbowl. Additionally, it should end there rather than delving into how horrible our community is for using said rules.

 Peregrine wrote:
Why would I want to join your community? From the outside it looks like you're a bunch of TFGs, and I have no more interest in fighting people just to be allowed to play with my army. I'll just take my money elsewhere if a group insists on terrible rules like yours, and warn new players to avoid you.

Trasvi wrote:

He's not talking about power. Its an example of uncommon rules, that just happen to be powerful.

(One of) You position is that forgeworld shouldn't be allowed because it is too difficult/time consuming/whatever for players to learn the rules.
Our counter is that the rules are ALREADY difficult/time consuming/whatever to learn, and adding Forgeworld doesn't add anything to the mix that doesn't already exist.

Difficulty / time to learn the rules isn't (to me) an acceptable reason for banning Forgeworld, because GW's 'core' 'codex' rules are just as hard, if not much harder, to keep up with.

Ironic that your argument is the same as mine yet we do not conclude the same thing. Isn't that interesting? We agree on the underlying truth, yet...

I ALSO think the rules are coming fast and furious and what you are in effect going to end up with by allowing both... is two fire hoses instead of one. You're going to end up with people who feel they cannot compete and cannot afford to stay in the game. That's what you will have. I heard the grumblings when we allowed forge World. We did, by the way, in case you think otherwise. We did allow it a couple of times to see what would happen. Results were predictable. LOTS of unsmiling faces at the award ceremony. It was unfortunate. It wasn't even that they won. it was just the feeling of confusion and disadvantage that came with the matches involving those units. We encountered the same thing this year. We foolishly allowed more than one super heavy when we had always capped it. Predictable results. It isn't as if you can't see the problem coming. You can.

T.O.'s absolutely must institute composition into their rules. Its absolutely necessary. I do it. The ITC does it. And so on. For good reason. And yeah some people will not come because of it. And that is, as i have said, silly. The only person suffering then is them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Arkaine wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
...it's hard to respond to that with anything other than "well the reasoning used by the community is wrong for the above reasons".

And yet, yours is the more reasonable reaction that apparently is rarer than an original copy of Bloodbowl. Additionally, it should end there rather than delving into how horrible our community is for using said rules.

 Peregrine wrote:
Why would I want to join your community? From the outside it looks like you're a bunch of TFGs, and I have no more interest in fighting people just to be allowed to play with my army. I'll just take my money elsewhere if a group insists on terrible rules like yours, and warn new players to avoid you.

Arkaine: I cant see peregrines messages. Hehehe. and he can keep his money, s can anyone whose going to dramatize what a "big deal it is" to have to use something else to fill that gap in their army. Short of someone having nothing but one army, which happens to be Forge World... this kinda falls on def ears. "Making a point" is fine. I am sure someone wants the prizes.

 Jancoran wrote:
Arkaine: I cant see peregrines messages. Hehehe. and he can keep his money, s can anyone whose going to dramatize what a "big deal it is" to have to use something else to fill that gap in their army. Short of someone having nothing but one army, which happens to be Forge World... this kinda falls on def ears. "Making a point" is fine. I am sure someone wants the prizes.

And guess what: that's exactly what I have. I CAN NOT PLAY A 1750-2000 POINT ARMY WITHOUT FW RULES. So you can try to pretend that this is just a hypothetical situation, but the simple fact is that it would cost hundreds to thousands of dollars to build a legal army just to comply with one person's version of 40k. Unless you want to buy those models for me and pay to have them commission painted to the standard of the rest of my army you can stop trying to pretend that it's no big deal to just bring a non-FW army.

 Arkaine wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
...it's hard to respond to that with anything other than "well the reasoning used by the community is wrong for the above reasons".

And yet, yours is the more reasonable reaction that apparently is rarer than an original copy of Bloodbowl. Additionally, it should end there rather than delving into how horrible our community is for using said rules.

 Peregrine wrote:
Why would I want to join your community? From the outside it looks like you're a bunch of TFGs, and I have no more interest in fighting people just to be allowed to play with my army. I'll just take my money elsewhere if a group insists on terrible rules like yours, and warn new players to avoid you.

Well, I can't speak for others, I can only speak for myself, I try not to generally come off and call an entire gaming group names and other such things, though I also realize I am by no means perfect and probably come off as a raging donkey-cave other times, but this topic also seems to rouse particularly fierce passions.

 Jancoran wrote:
So given that the core game includes these codeci, that's the MOST I want to inflict on them.

And, once again, there is no such thing as a "core game". It's a myth invented by people like you, and it has absolutely nothing to do with the game published by GW.

Indeed, the concept of a "core" game is both outdated and completely nonsensical with the way GW presents 40k at this point.

 Arkaine wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:
It doesn't invalidate my platform. It's just strange that your group singles out FW above all else. Do you ban dataslates, supplements, Sisters of Battle and web bundle formations too?

Democracy is strange. We disallow baby murder yet allow fetus abortions. It isn't your place to judge the group's decisions, only to cast your vote responsibly if you are a part of it. See pg 3 for the full list.

[

No, but I can offer criticism and why I disagree with it. I think your group unfairly discriminates against FW rules. GW units can be just as expensive and many are catching up in price so... I don't really think that banning it saves the player money in that he doesn't feel pressured to buy Resin models.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jancoran wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:
No, explain it to me. Your platform is that "Players don't know the rules and will have a hard time adapting to them". Why do you assume your players know all of the units in all of the codices to the extent that they can adapt to them on the fly? If you don't assume that then your argument falls apart.

I didn't assume that so why are you suggesting I DID assume that?

Because if you didn't your argument wouldn't have legs to stand on.

I think a CLOSER restatement of my argument as i have already stated (Bricks: head. Head: bricks), is that there IS in fact a LOT for you to learn; and it's coming fast. New players already have enough on their plates as do returning ones, just trying to keep up to speed with THAT. Hell I'm a veteran of the game and I find it difficult, maybe because I have a life or something weird like that. So given that the core game includes these codeci, that's the MOST I want to inflict on them. I'm not saying that this on its own won't be challenging. I'm saying it absolutely will. That is the point. I personally lost my first eight games and the first 13 of 15 that I played. I know all about that fire hose. I've been there. Done that. Only my deep involvement with the hobby has made that less daunting, but even I cannot claim to be a master of all the codex's, and most would tell you that if there's one person who knows 40K, it's me. I certainly know it well enough to play in any tournament. =)

There is no core game. The idea of Codices+Expansions died a long time ago. IA books are every bit a part of 40k as Codices are. 40k is a confusing mess of allies, detatchments, formations, dataslates, e-codices and more. Banning IA units won't do much to alleviate the struggle of a player who wants to know about the state of the game.

Besides, this is a self-fulfilling prophecy. By banning FW you create a paradigm where no one can learn the rules. You ban FW because people aren't familiar with the rules.

So THAT is closer to the mark than what you said.

So allow what you like. This discussion should have given you a lot to think about (if you were open to thinking about it and not just jumping the gun to express your own opinion) and you can take whatever parts of what I've said that makes sense and consider them. You could also be like the other sheeple and use ITC as is. Or make your own. Whatevs. I have no personal stake in your decision.

I'm going to keep growing the hobby in my area. If people like Forge World, there will be LOTS of players to play instead of the 6-8 we used to have.

Well, I thought that the "To FW or not to FW" debate died in 6th ed before this thread. I didn't know it was still such a contentious issue and it's made me ponder why it is so contentious.

 TheCustomLime wrote:
No, but I can offer criticism and why I disagree with it. I think your group unfairly discriminates against FW rules. GW units can be just as expensive and many are catching up in price so... I don't really think that banning it saves the player money in that he doesn't feel pressured to buy Resin models.

You're welcome to your viewpoint and it's difficult to argue whether it saves money or not, as dealing with a hypothetical can be tricky. GW+FW vs GW alone, a decision had to be made and that just happened to be the most popular one. But I would disagree with your stance that we unfairly discriminate. Indeed, we fairly discriminate against FW rules. Due process and player voting and all that! It might seem unfair to someone new, but they're welcome to proposition its reinstatement and vote on it too. The subject comes up often enough and event rules are listed well in advance if anyone wants to contest them. In fact, our recent 1000pt tourney had someone argue that Flyers should be put on the ban list for that event to cut down on the amount of AA he would have to bring in his list. The vote went up and it was 27 for, 8 against, Flyers banned for the event. We've even had a guy try to push for disallowing Eldar in tournaments. He's never succeeded in getting the vote numbers though.

Funny, couldn't take part in that 1000 pts event, since I need a flyer to hit 1k pts on my Scion army and the other army I have is a DKoK Siege/Assault Brigade list.

The Tyranid player felt it too, being unable to bring a flying Hive Tyrant. The rule that gets me the most is when special characters are banned, usually for 500 pt battles. No Ahriman means no troop choice Sons because feth being a Tzeentch sorcerer.

 Arkaine wrote:
The Tyranid player felt it too, being unable to bring a flying Hive Tyrant. The rule that gets me the most is when special characters are banned, usually for 500 pt battles. No Ahriman means no troop choice Sons because feth being a Tzeentch sorcerer.

So why do you keep including such horrible rules in your events?

 Jancoran wrote:

Trasvi wrote:

He's not talking about power. Its an example of uncommon rules, that just happen to be powerful.

(One of) You position is that forgeworld shouldn't be allowed because it is too difficult/time consuming/whatever for players to learn the rules.
Our counter is that the rules are ALREADY difficult/time consuming/whatever to learn, and adding Forgeworld doesn't add anything to the mix that doesn't already exist.

Difficulty / time to learn the rules isn't (to me) an acceptable reason for banning Forgeworld, because GW's 'core' 'codex' rules are just as hard, if not much harder, to keep up with.

Ironic that your argument is the same as mine yet we do not conclude the same thing. Isn't that interesting? We agree on the underlying truth, yet...

I ALSO think the rules are coming fast and furious and what you are in effect going to end up with by allowing both... is two fire hoses instead of one. You're going to end up with people who feel they cannot compete and cannot afford to stay in the game. That's what you will have. I heard the grumblings when we allowed forge World. We did, by the way, in case you think otherwise. We did allow it a couple of times to see what would happen. Results were predictable. LOTS of unsmiling faces at the award ceremony. It was unfortunate. It wasn't even that they won. it was just the feeling of confusion and disadvantage that came with the matches involving those units. We encountered the same thing this year. We foolishly allowed more than one super heavy when we had always capped it. Predictable results. It isn't as if you can't see the problem coming. You can.

T.O.'s absolutely must institute composition into their rules. Its absolutely necessary. I do it. The ITC does it. And so on. For good reason. And yeah some people will not come because of it. And that is, as i have said, silly. The only person suffering then is them..

Between all the different ways that GW is releasing rules, there are already 3 'Fire Hoses' on at full pressure; adding in the 'Garden Hose' of Forge World releasing a book every six months or so really shouldn't be an issue.

If people feel they 'cannot afford to stay in the game'... that isn't something restricted to Forge World, by a long shot. In fact its completely orthogonal to your inclusion of Forge World. Forge World releases new models, units and factions at a VASTLY slower pace than GW does. None of these are required models for any factions (and in fact are explicitly restricted from most formations). GW on the other hand is consistently releasing new models and formations, constantly mixing up the Force Org chart and min/max unit sizes. They're the ones that turned Imperial Knights to Lords of War (thus banning them from a lot of tournaments) and Wraithknights from plain-old MC's to LoW GMC's (thus banning them from a lot of tournaments). They're the ones that invalidate supplements and move previous Troops to Elites, invalidating people's entire armies and requiring them to essentially re-purchase the entire faction.
(and the expense argument is kind of funny as, in Australia, its cheaper to buy Death Korp minis from ForgeWorld and get them shipped from England than Cadians from GW down the road).

If people feel they 'cannot compete'... again, that's something compeltely orthogonal to your inclusion of Forge World. The majority of Forge World items are either already excluded from normal 40k games (being 'Apocalypse only', or '30k only') or have their rules published in GW Escalation already. THIS is the power argument, and it should be blindingly apparent that 95% of normal 40k units and formations are leagues ahead of any Forge World units. Even when you restrict it to 'CAD only', factions like Daemons, Necrons, Marines or Eldar perform exceptionally well with just their main codex. There are very few 'must-have' forgeworld units, and they are completely outclassed by the 'must-have' 40k units like Scatterbikes and Wraithknights in 'normal' codexes.

If people don't like multiple Super Heavies... then you could ban super heavies but allow non-super-heavies from Forge World. Or you could go have a look at the resident super-heavy-only Codex Imperial Knights, or the completely battleforged 5-Wraithknight codex.

I don't come to the same conclusion as you because all of your arguments for restricting Forge World apply better to restricting core GW rules. Everything Forgeworld does badly, GW does five times worse and five times as often.

About the only legitimate argument for banning Forgeworld is "the players who attend my events have an irrational dislike of Forgeworld, and as much as I disagree I must appease them".

 TheCustomLime wrote:


No, but I can offer criticism and why I disagree with it. I think your group unfairly discriminates against FW...

There is no core game... T

You ban FW because people aren't familiar with the rules.

Well, I thought that the "To FW or not to FW" debate died in 6th ed before this thread. I didn't know it was still such a contentious issue and it's made me ponder why it is so contentious.

All hyperbole. we dont "discriminate". Using loaded words is the sign of someone who has no argument. Gimme a break.

We dont "BAN" what you call "FW people" (if thats even a thing). We just tell them to bring something else when they show up. and they do. it's not as if no one here owns forge World et al. LOTS of them do.

and you "thought" it died in 6E for no good reason, since your "thought" ignores the evidence we have in this very thread of the continuing debate. Lol.

It is contentious only in your mind. in my mind, it is a simple matter of caring about growing the hobby more and caring about indulging this less. So as was said, no one has an enormous boner for screwing over Forge world players. That's really not the sentiment that anyone on this thread has expressed, ever. So chill with the "cries of "Dixcrimination! and "Banning!" and so on. It's done purely for the betterment of the overall tournament goers experience. And...as was said... Run tournaments if you're this keen on it. it pays great.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Arkaine wrote:

We've even had a guy try to push for disallowing Eldar in tournaments. He's never succeeded in getting the vote numbers though.

Hilarity.

 Jancoran wrote:


We dont "BAN" what you call "FW people" (if thats even a thing). We just tell them to bring something else when they show up

Its certainly a thing, personally, I'd be stuck at playing 1k points game only, with a single army.

Trasvi wrote:

Between all the different ways that GW is releasing rules, there are already 3 'Fire Hoses' on at full pressure; adding in the 'Garden Hose' of Forge World releasing a book every six months or so really shouldn't be an issue.

If people feel they 'cannot afford to stay in the game'... that isn't something restricted to Forge World, by a long shot.

If people feel they 'cannot compete'... again, that's something compeltely orthogonal to your inclusion of Forge World.

If people don't like multiple Super Heavies... then you could ban super heavies but allow non-super-heavies from Forge World. Or you could go have a look at the resident super-heavy-only Codex Imperial Knights, or the completely battleforged 5-Wraithknight codex.

I don't come to the same conclusion as you because all of your arguments for restricting Forge World apply better to restricting core GW rules. .

Hehehe. SHOULD isn't an argument. So I wont comment on this first point. Reality trumps "should" 9 times out of nine. And restricting GW units is happening IN ADDITION so I'll ignore this last point also.

Second point: it is immaterial whether its restricted to forge World or not. It is in fact a cost driver we don't wish to inflict in order to keep up with the Jones's.

Third, Competing IS an issue, so saying otherwise is...odd. But whatever. That is immaterial also because even if there were a universe in which Forge World units offered no advantages worth mentioning (which is a load of dingo's kidneys if you ask me) You still are making the game that much more difficult to anticipate and grasp. You're STILL attaching the fire hose which you cannot deny.

On your fourth point here: Your mixing debates there. the issue is simply that Super Heavies as a class MUST be limited because of two factors: unequal access to them being the most obvious (though I know your argument would of course be "and thats where Forge World steps in to fill the gap, to which I reply YES but then the people with unequal access must pay twice as much for the counter which i a big deal actually) and frankly, Super heavies are just too few points in many cases. I think the only really well pointed Super heavy I've seen is the Obelisk. that is a Super heavy that is beefy enough to earn its name but sort of sits just bout right in my opnion on cost. There is a reason someone takes three Wraith Knights though. and its not to be friendly. Its to win. Thats the case whether its Forge World or not so a limitation is appropriate regardless of source on that.

What it comes down to on this is you seem perfectly okay with banning or limiting some stuff. Yet when it HAPPENS to be your forge World, suddenly you're not. Odd that. You'd ban a War Convocation would you? If you were T.O. and you knew the War Convocation was set to WALK all over every army there with about a thousand extra points of whatevs just cause: War Convocation... You'd be okay with putting some controls on that? Yes? no? So it is with Forge World. Some is under powered. Some overpowered. No one takes the over costed ones as a rule. Just like the codex's. So basically just the really powerful ones get used. And just like the Codex's, we need composition as part of the rules to keep the parity we want in our tournaments. So we say No Forge World because no one is gonna take the weak stuff anyways (and lets not encourage a lamb to its slaughter even if they would like to very willingly) and then we say no to the overpowered Forge World all in one fell swoop which then saves everyone money, avoids the angst of spending your entire round going "What? It does WHAT? i thought you said..." and it also gives all the newer players and the returners a good experience that they will want to repeat. Lst step: put a control on the really broken regular GW stuff, understanding that is the basis of the game and cant be negated altogether.

If those don't sound like positive outcomes to you.. well.. Then...

 Jancoran wrote:
You're STILL attaching the fire hose which you cannot deny.

No, you're attaching a small trickle of additional rules to the fire hose you already have. Complaining about a few additional FW rules when no-FW 40k already has so much to keep track of is just insanity.

You'd ban a War Convocation would you? If you were T.O. and you knew the War Convocation was set to WALK all over every army there with about a thousand extra points of whatevs just cause: War Convocation... You'd be okay with putting some controls on that? Yes? no? So it is with Forge World.

That's not at all the same. Banning a single overpowered formation is a carefully-targeted rule change that minimizes the number of people who have their stuff banned. The equivalent to a blanket ban on FW rules would be declaring that, since this one formation is overpowered, ALL formations are banned.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jancoran wrote:
If those don't sound like positive outcomes to you.. well.. Then...

It only sounds like a positive outcome because you're ignoring the people who don't have legal armies for your personal version of 40k and don't show up at all. But I guess it's fine to exclude people like me from tournaments as long as your little clique doesn't have to suffer the burden of learning how the game works.

 Jancoran wrote:
[

Second point: it is immaterial whether its restricted to forge World or not. It is in fact a cost driver we don't wish to inflict in order to keep up with the Jones's.

How exactly is it a cost driver, especially one that merits this sort of treatment, particularly any moreso than a grip of other things you *don't* ban? Like dataslates, campaign books, etc.

People aren't *forced* to buy every FW book just to compete, just as they aren't *forced* to buy every codex or dataslate or supplement, just the ones they might want to use, and their opponents can get read the rules they same way they might with a codex they're not familiar with or a new datalslate.

With codex books at $50-60 now, their cost overlaps with FW books rather than being a fraction of the cost. and practically nobody buys all the books anymore the way they used to in previous editions.

This "keeping up with the joneses" idea has no merit to it, its your own invention, especially when FW books tend to come out at a relatively slow pace and stick around for a good while.

Third, Competing IS an issue, so saying otherwise is...odd. But whatever. That is immaterial also because even if there were a universe in which Forge World units offered no advantages worth mentioning (which is a load of dingo's kidneys if you ask me) You still are making the game that much more difficult to anticipate and grasp. You're STILL attaching the fire hose which you cannot deny.

And, superheavies/GC's aside, what units are going to be any bigger issues than what they're already going to face from codex books, and how are they going to require extraordinary adaptations they don't already have to anticipate in the current metagame?

Lets also not forget the many units that FW basically acts as a lifeline for, units which once were codex units that GW simply decided not to continue to produce them anymore (usually because they're metal or metal hybrid kits) like Griffons and Rapier Laser destroyers.

On your fourth point here: Your mixing debates there. the issue is simply that Super Heavies as a class MUST be limited because of two factors: unequal access to them being the most obvious (though I know your argument would of course be "and thats where Forge World steps in to fill the gap, to which I reply YES but then the people with unequal access must pay twice as much for the counter which i a big deal actually) and frankly, Super heavies are just too few points in many cases. I think the only really well pointed Super heavy I've seen is the Obelisk. that is a Super heavy that is beefy enough to earn its name but sort of sits just bout right in my opnion on cost. There is a reason someone takes three Wraith Knights though. and its not to be friendly. Its to win. Thats the case whether its Forge World or not so a limitation is appropriate regardless of source on that.

What it comes down to on this is you seem perfectly okay with banning or limiting some stuff. Yet when it HAPPENS to be your forge World, suddenly you're not. Odd that.

Because you're banning an absurdly gigantic array of things and multiple armies to boot. It's not the fact that you're drawing a line, it's that you're drawing an absurdly over-encompassing line.

Want to ban Lynxes? Tau'nars? Scorpions? Brass Scorpions? People would be fine with that. Pick out the things you think are truly egregious and most people will probably be fine with that. But when you say "no anything from Forgeworld, sorry, that includes your Leman Russ Annihilator, Decimator Daemon engine, Sonic Dread, DKoK armies, Reapiers, etc just so we can get rid of the handful of things we don't like!".

Even doing something like banning all formations doesn't prevent people from using gargantuan numbers of models or fielding entire armies.

 Jancoran wrote:

Trasvi wrote:

Between all the different ways that GW is releasing rules, there are already 3 'Fire Hoses' on at full pressure; adding in the 'Garden Hose' of Forge World releasing a book every six months or so really shouldn't be an issue.

If people feel they 'cannot afford to stay in the game'... that isn't something restricted to Forge World, by a long shot.

If people feel they 'cannot compete'... again, that's something compeltely orthogonal to your inclusion of Forge World.

If people don't like multiple Super Heavies... then you could ban super heavies but allow non-super-heavies from Forge World. Or you could go have a look at the resident super-heavy-only Codex Imperial Knights, or the completely battleforged 5-Wraithknight codex.

I don't come to the same conclusion as you because all of your arguments for restricting Forge World apply better to restricting core GW rules. .

Hehehe. SHOULD isn't an argument. So I wont comment on this first point. Reality trumps "should" 9 times out of nine. And restricting GW units is happening IN ADDITION so I'll ignore this last point also.

"LOGIC isn't an argument. So I wont comment on this first point. Stubbornness trumps "logic" 9 times out of nine. "
That's what you're saying. And its sure, if your players have an irrational dislike of Forgeworld then you might have to cater for them. But don't pretend its anything more than being irrational.

Second point: it is immaterial whether its restricted to forge World or not. It is in fact a cost driver we don't wish to inflict in order to keep up with the Jones's.

If players want to stay up-to-date with the latest-and-greatest, its going to cost them money. It isn't the case that core-GW products require less spending/keeping up with. In fact, it is far more often the case that GW stuff costs MORE. So banning Forge World on the premise that its going to save you / your players money doesn't make sense. If that were truly the reason, you'd ban GW books and keep forge world. Or you'd restrict everyone to their 3rd ed codexes and 3rd ed rulebook because that ensures that nothing will change.

Third, Competing IS an issue, so saying otherwise is...odd. But whatever. That is immaterial also because even if there were a universe in which Forge World units offered no advantages worth mentioning (which is a load of dingo's kidneys if you ask me) You still are making the game that much more difficult to anticipate and grasp. You're STILL attaching the fire hose which you cannot deny.

If your players can't grasp the special rules of Forge World units they certainly cannot grasp the core-GW rules.
You might have an argument IF every player was intimately familiar with all the current codices, dataslates, formations and campaign supplements. Given that is extremely unlikely to be the case as core-GW is releasing new rules/models with alacrity, it doesn't make sense to ban models whose rules haven't changed signficiantly/at all in 5 years on account of them being too difficult to grasp.
A new Tau codex is being released in a few short days. At even the most stringent tournaments I'm expected to be able to play against that within a month of it being released, possibly never having seen it before and having opponents have to explain a ton of quite complicated formation rules. Yet you're blanket-banning the entire of Forgeworld, the vast majority of which which can be most easily described as 'they're Guardsmen but worse' or 'its a Leman Russ with a different turret'. There's nothing along the lines of 'if you kill this unit then all of my reserves arrive on turn 2 and get relentless and can charge from deep strike. And if 3 of them are next to each other they get +1 BS and if they all fire at the same unit they get +1BS. But not THOSE 3 seemingly identical models, they get Monster Hunter instead.'
Simply put, unfamiliarity is not an excuse because EVERYONE is going to be unfamiliar with something, and GW puts out unfamiliar rules far more often than FW does.

On your fourth point here: Your mixing debates there. the issue is simply that Super Heavies as a class MUST be limited because of two factors: unequal access to them being the most obvious (though I know your argument would of course be "and thats where Forge World steps in to fill the gap, to which I reply YES but then the people with unequal access must pay twice as much for the counter which i a big deal actually) and frankly, Super heavies are just too few points in many cases. I think the only really well pointed Super heavy I've seen is the Obelisk. that is a Super heavy that is beefy enough to earn its name but sort of sits just bout right in my opnion on cost. There is a reason someone takes three Wraith Knights though. and its not to be friendly. Its to win. Thats the case whether its Forge World or not so a limitation is appropriate regardless of source on that.

Ok. So what?
That applies equally to Forge World and to GW codexes. If you don't like superheavies, then ban superheavies equally across all the ways you can take them (Forgeworld and Codex) but allow players to bring their Death Korp. Its not that hard.

What it comes down to on this is you seem perfectly okay with banning or limiting some stuff. Yet when it HAPPENS to be your forge World, suddenly you're not. Odd that.

I don't own a single Forgeworld model. I play a single-CAD Daemons list that uses absolutely NOTHING outside of the Daemons codex and the core rulebook. No dataslates, no allies, no fortifications, no nothing.

You'd ban a War Convocation would you? If you were T.O. and you knew the War Convocation was set to WALK all over every army there with about a thousand extra points of whatevs just cause: War Convocation... You'd be okay with putting some controls on that? Yes? no?

If I were TO (and I am) then I would use targetted bans and restrictions that limit known problems. Ie, the ITC style where some Forgeworld is allowed but not others, where some formations are allowed but not others, where specific psychic powers are nerfed but not others...

So it is with Forge World. Some is under powered. Some overpowered. No one takes the over costed ones as a rule. Just like the codex's. So basically just the really powerful ones get used. And just like the Codex's, we need composition as part of the rules to keep the parity we want in our tournaments. So we say No Forge World because no one is gonna take the weak stuff anyways (and lets not encourage a lamb to its slaughter even if they would like to very willingly) and then we say no to the overpowered Forge World all in one fell swoop which then saves everyone money, avoids the angst of spending your entire round going "What? It does WHAT? i thought you said..." and it also gives all the newer players and the returners a good experience that they will want to repeat. Lst step: put a control on the really broken regular GW stuff, understanding that is the basis of the game and cant be negated altogether.

...Are you listening to yourself?
Applying your logic, you should be banning EVERYTHING out of ALL codexes because people are only going to take the powerful stuff.
No hyperbole. That is literally where your reasoning leads.
If instead you're going to put targetted restrictions against known problem 'core'-40k units... why can't you use those same targetted restrictions against Forgeworld units??

I spend far more time going 'what what?' against NORMAL GW codexes, because all the new ones have formations released yesterday that I've never seen before.

We had a tournament a while back run by our local gaming club which has regular attendance of at least twenty people. For the tournament, the TO blanket banned FW.

As a result of this, only four people showed up, three of whom were the guys that ran the club.

It's admirable that people are trying to keep the competitive 40K scene going, but for me no comp is going to save that mess of a ruleset.

What is hilarious though is the banning of Forgeworld for cost/rules issues in the age of Apocalypse 40K.

Ironically the most balanced and tournament friendly ruleset that GW produces is the Forge World Horus Heresy rules. Shame more tournaments don't run that instead of trying to 'fix' 40K

 Peregrine wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:
The people who DECIDED that a Forge World restriction was a deal breaker missed out on a big haul and that's a shame.

I see. So not spending hundreds to thousands of dollars to buy a new army because my existing one isn't legal under your house rules is "deciding not to play"? No amount of trying to present it as pro-FW people voluntarily missing out on fun and prizes is going to change the fact that you are openly saying "you are not welcome here" to people who don't have armies that comply with your personal version of 40k.

This^

Wow.

I have no words for the travesty that is people banning Forge World.

I would be unable to participate in their events, as my only armies are 30k Mechanicum and Armored Battlegroup.

The fact that this is going on only reinforces to me the correlation between obstinacy and ignorance.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Wow.

I have no words for the travesty that is people banning Forge World.

I would be unable to participate in their events, as my only armies are 30k Mechanicum and Armored Battlegroup.

The fact that this is going on only reinforces to me the correlation between obstinacy and ignorance.

You realize you can't use your FW/GW army as you sadly glance over and see someone using their "core" game army list of 5 Wraith Knights.

This reminds me of TFG that I ran into back when I still played 40k sometime between 3rd and 4th edition. I've got Imperial Guard with some Imperial Armor support with a Leman Russ Vanquisher and Leman Russ Exterminator. Nothing fancy, just stuff that was previously available in the 3rd ed guard codex. He's got Tau with stuff from the Taros book including the battlesuit commander (R'ymyr?) and some sort of fast attack (Piranha/Tetra?).

Before the game starts, I call his attention to my tanks, explaining how they're different and describing the Vanquisher cannon. No complaints. Then turn 1, after my Vanquisher takes out a Hammerhead at long range and the Exterminator shreds a Fire Warrior squad, the whinging about how overpowered FW stuff is and how I shouldn't be bringing it. This is a guy who has been smack talking about how hot the Tau FW, but he brought an army built to kill Space Marines, so my army is broken because it wasn't what he built to fight against even though this was a pre-planned game.

Needless to say, I explicitly avoided playing with the guy again outside of random tournament matchups.

 Arkaine wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:
Did all of them say that reason they started playing again was because FW was banned? Did the majority? Did the majority of the people who came to vote on the matter vote on the ban?

Yes.

Arkaine,

It sounds like your group knows what it wants and is fully supporting your tournaments.

I may not agree with it, but I don't play there and it's not my business. Good for you guys. Keep on, keeping on.

 Jancoran wrote:


If it wasnt core to the game, you'd have a point. But anyone who doesnt want to do that much is probably not going to tournaments anyways. So there's that.

Define 'core to the game'.

Be sure to include a source, I am not interested in fanfiction.

 Vaktathi wrote:


Because you're banning an absurdly gigantic array of things and multiple armies to boot. It's not the fact that you're drawing a line, it's that you're drawing an absurdly over-encompassing line.

Want to ban Lynxes? Tau'nars? Scorpions? Brass Scorpions? People would be fine with that. Pick out the things you think are truly egregious and most people will probably be fine with that. But when you say "no anything from Forgeworld, sorry, that includes your Leman Russ Annihilator, Decimator Daemon engine, Sonic Dread, DKoK armies, Reapiers, etc just so we can get rid of the handful of things we don't like!".

Even doing something like banning all formations doesn't prevent people from using gargantuan numbers of models or fielding entire armies.

"People would be fine with that" is an indicator to me that you understand on some level the need for balance. yet despite your understanding of the need for it, you don't include economic balance amongst those virtues you defend. You seem to think that there should be a line. So to me its just a simple matter of a difference of opinion where.

Okay fine. We disagree where it's drawn. Cool. At least we agree that there is a need to DRAw the line. It is unfortunate that we dont agree where but thats not going to get solved here.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Trasvi wrote:


if your players have an irrational dislike of Forgeworld then you might have to cater for them. But don't pretend its anything more than being irrational.

If players want to stay up-to-date with the latest-and-greatest, its going to cost them money. It isn't the case that core-GW products require less spending/keeping up with.

If your players can't grasp the special rules of Forge World units they certainly cannot grasp the core-GW rules... Simply put, unfamiliarity is not an excuse because EVERYONE is going to be unfamiliar with something, and GW puts out unfamiliar rules far more often than FW does.

If I were TO (and I am) then I would use targetted bans and restrictions that limit known problems. Ie, the ITC style where some Forgeworld is allowed but not others, where some formations are allowed but not others, where specific psychic powers are nerfed but not others...

...Are you listening to yourself?
Applying your logic, you should be banning EVERYTHING out of ALL codexes because people are only going to take the powerful stuff.
No hyperbole. That is literally where your reasoning leads.

You are intentionally missing the point and mincing words. Let me help you with that. First, restating my point in parody isn't an argument. So we';ll just ignore that. Because what I said is what you get to argue against, Nothing else.

"Irrational" is another loaded word with no agreement behind it so we will ignore that

We agree that it costs them money to keep up with the core game, and time. This is the price of entry. There is no one on the forum who can really change that. it is a lot. We've all agreed. So you're just beating a dead horse by pointing it out, yet again.

But then you make the error Ive been trying to explain to you: you use comparative statements like "more/less than" to describe GW vs. FW. and you just dont seem to understand that its additive. You just dont seem to grasp that the amounts arent BEING compared. They are being ADDED. And when you ADD the sum total of what COULD be known about 40K and could spend on it and the amount that COULD be known about Forge World and could be spent on it... and add the time spent EXPERIENCING both being added together to get good against it... You start to see how much that really is.

If you want to argue that practicing against this stuff isnt necessary, I will just shut you down right there. If you want to argue that synergies dont exist that you must see in order to really appreciate, then we're done talking because youre full of it if thats what you're selling. But if you want to agree that those two things are true then i think its pretty damn evident that you are going to force the financial and time expenditure issues for players ot go to tourney and be effective. There is enough as it is without adding that, and that's been agreed to here again and again.

So you must stop comparing them and understand its the cumulative total of it all that just drives people away.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Frozocrone wrote:
We had a tournament a while back run by our local gaming club which has regular attendance of at least twenty people. For the tournament, the TO blanket banned FW.

As a result of this, only four people showed up, three of whom were the guys that ran the club.

Yup. That could happen when someone wants to make a point instead of have fun. Which is their call. Nothing wrong with that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DoomShakaLaka wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:
The people who DECIDED that a Forge World restriction was a deal breaker missed out on a big haul and that's a shame.

I see. So not spending hundreds to thousands of dollars to buy a new army because my existing one isn't legal under your house rules is "deciding not to play"? No amount of trying to present it as pro-FW people voluntarily missing out on fun and prizes is going to change the fact that you are openly saying "you are not welcome here" to people who don't have armies that comply with your personal version of 40k.

This^

That is as simple minded as it gets. spend your money how you like. No ones stopping you. and when you play in my tournament, you'll get to have fun with the models out of that "hundreds of thouands" that dot say Forge World. Unless you're an unplasant, unhappy prson who would rather take his ball and leave. Which suits me fine.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Wow.

I have no words for the travesty that is people banning Forge World.

I would be unable to participate in their events, as my only armies are 30k Mechanicum and Armored Battlegroup.

The fact that this is going on only reinforces to me the correlation between obstinacy and ignorance.

I looooove hyprbole.

If that's your only army then yeah. You wont have an option. You're the exception to the rule though. Most people have an army. Most are smart enough to build one without Forge World stuff. But if thats all you choose to own, then yeah. You'd be left out.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vash108 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Wow.

I have no words for the travesty that is people banning Forge World.

I would be unable to participate in their events, as my only armies are 30k Mechanicum and Armored Battlegroup.

The fact that this is going on only reinforces to me the correlation between obstinacy and ignorance.

You realize you can't use your FW/GW army as you sadly glance over and see someone using their "core" game army list of 5 Wraith Knights.

Assuming they were allowed. Sure.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ashiraya wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:


If it wasnt core to the game, you'd have a point. But anyone who doesnt want to do that much is probably not going to tournaments anyways. So there's that.

Define 'core to the game'.

Be sure to include a source, I am not interested in fanfiction.

I'm pretty sure I did this already. The codex's and the main rulebook. Thats the core. We've typically allowed the Campaign setting stuff as well, since GW uses it like Prestige Classes in 3.X D&D to sell their books. Quite annoying. I am happy that they arent doing that with the Tau Codex and are including the Campaign stuff i nthe Codex. It appears they've wised up on that? Hope to see more of that in the future.

 Jancoran wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Wow.

I have no words for the travesty that is people banning Forge World.

I would be unable to participate in their events, as my only armies are 30k Mechanicum and Armored Battlegroup.

The fact that this is going on only reinforces to me the correlation between obstinacy and ignorance.

I looooove hyprbole.

If that's your only army then yeah. You wont have an option. You're the exception to the rule though. Most people have an army. Most are smart enough to build one without Forge World stuff. But if thats all you choose to own, then yeah. You'd be left out.

What's the red part supposed to mean? That I'm stupid? That I lack the intelligence to build a list without Forge World models and rules?

Because if that's actually what you meant, then you really need to both 1) Check Rule #1 and 2) deeply consider why you believe there is a correlation between intelligence and using Forge World army lists.

If it isn't what you meant, then could you care to explain how I should interpret that phrase?

 Jancoran wrote:
I'm pretty sure I did this already. The codex's and the main rulebook. Thats the core. We've typically allowed the Campaign setting stuff as well, since GW uses it like Prestige Classes in 3.X D&D to sell their books. Quite annoying. I am happy that they arent doing that with the Tau Codex and are including the Campaign stuff i nthe Codex. It appears they've wised up on that? Hope to see more of that in the future.

There's actually another company with this diametric split of models. Privateer Press puts out Warmachine as both an individual and identical product to Hordes. As both are compatible and balanced against each other, WarmaHordes tournaments are common. However, you'll also see tourneys where only one is played (this area that one is Warmachine) and no Hordes armies are permitted entry. The armies do play differently and have their own thematic and visual style so it's not too uncommon here to see one being excluded from the event, despite PP's games being quite well balanced against each other. They are technically different games but made to be compatible with each other much like the 30k armies can be played in 40k.

But know what isn't its own game? HeroClix. Which actually has several universes blended into one, theoretically compatible with each other regardless of the set and subtype you use. Yet you wouldn't normally see Yu-Gi-Oh figures fighting Lord of the Rings characters fighting Marvel and DC heroes all on the same table because the TOs decide which sets are permitted and which aren't. Luckily the gaming company WizKids itself gives formats that can be run for more standardized play. Modern Age vs Golden Age, yet Modern HeroClix (standard competitive format) disallows any sets that aren't Marvel or DC based so even though stuff like Mage Knight Resurrection, Pacific Rim Kaiju, Yu-Gi-Oh, LOTR sets, Bioshock Infinite, Halo all exist as HeroClix sets and are balanced for play within the system (one can even argue the DC/Marvel stuff is overpowered), they can't be used in tournaments. Because reasons.

The concept of set dissemination isn't unheard of, and at least HeroClix costs more to play competitively than 40k ever will, and in both of these instances the official company chose to do it. Don't they know they're excluding all those Legolas fans who own NO OTHER ARMY but their Hobbit one? GW has never been a typical gaming company so they tend to release this amorphous blob of rules with no harmony between them, but the player communities can harvest format rules any way they'd like given that there isn't a Standard Competitive Format released by the company declaring legalities like so many other games.