why are people still so weird about forgeworld

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.

**Slayer-Fan123**

Jancoran wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
You also cannot expect some armies to reasonably compete without FW, because they're willing to plug in the holes that GW leaves.

Take the newest CSM codex for example. It sucks. Flat out simple as that. Loyalist versions are better, they lack allies, the internal balance is horrible, etc.
If you actually live in an area where people are good and not CAAC, you cannot bring stuff from the codex and expect to actually have a decent chance of winning.

SO, queue Forge World to bring in an armory for CSM's to actually have reasonable options. When Serpent Spam was big, I actually had a chance because I had Sicarans, and with the Purge FOC, I can better utilize my slots and ally in different things.

So PLEASE explain how you want CSM players to compete. I don't want your people's garbage of "Oh they do fine here". Anecdotal evidence of your LGS means little. Someone proved that earlier when they made mention that a tournament banned FW and only 4 people showed up.

Build me a winning CSM list without FW. You cannot.

I can and have. I just took my Night Lords, as mentioned to an ITC tournament brimming with Forge World. Defeated a Forge World Tyranid list, defeated the Decurion Necrons list and would have defeated the Chaos Daemon list with its flying Sorcerers had I not forgotten to score points on two different occassions ( that loss was on me, not my list. Just boned it).

So I'm really not in agreement at all. In another game most recently they fought the Iron Hands and I tied that game after killing just one Tactical Marine the entire game. My opponent was in the ard boyz finals and has a lot of tourney wins.

So I guess what Im saying is: maybe its not the codex. Maybe its the list or maybe the General. As I proved last Saturday, you can be very competitive with Chaos. I can't sit here and have an entire thread on that so feel free to pm me but I dont share this mentality on Chaos. Ill agree with you this far though: there is no doubt the codex needs an update but I also dont think its so terrible that you need Forge World to make a difference. Well let me rephrase that. I don't.

No, you didn't. If you did and actually got results at those tournaments, people would talk about a topping CSM list. So I'm calling you out on that.

For the record, ITC is house rules.

**Gordon Shumway**

You don't count. Take your artistic ability and ideas elsewhere!

**HoundsofDemos**

So what about the Vendetta. The only official model for it is a forge world one.

**Gordon Shumway**

HoundsofDemos wrote:
So what about the Vendetta. The only official model for it is a forge world one.

Buy the Valkarie and use official GW lascannons TM as a kitbash like all good soldiers do.

**HoundsofDemos**

sure you can kit bash it just like we all do and proxy it. But technically the official model is only available from forge world. Additionally the Galaxy of War book mentions forge world along side other expansions. It seems odd to allow the skyhammer or data slates but not an IA book.

**Gordon Shumway**

The official model will not be allowed because it is not official.

**HoundsofDemos**

By that logic there is not legal model for the Vendetta

**Vaktathi**

HoundsofDemos wrote:
By that logic there is not legal model for the Vendetta

Exactly...

**Jancoran**

Ashiraya wrote:
No. You repeat that rulebook + codex is 'core' but you have no source. Where did GW say they are? Quote page and paragraph.

Word play now? Sorry man. No idea what youre after. My answer is what it is.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Orock wrote:
I hear tell the tau supremacy armor is prrrreeeeettttttyyyy good for its points cost. Hope they dont start swinging back to the old "stat it so it sells" fallback.

Its good.

**TheCustomLime**

Jancoran wrote:
Ashiraya wrote:
No. You repeat that rulebook + codex is 'core' but you have no source. Where did GW say they are? Quote page and paragraph.

Word play now? Sorry man. No idea what youre after. My answer is what it is.

Where does it say that BRB+Codex is the "Core Game"? It's a simple question. You seem so adamant about the existence of this "core game" but you seem to avoiding the question of the proof of it's existence.

**Peregrine**

Jancoran wrote:
Word play now? Sorry man. No idea what youre after. My answer is what it is.

So, your answer is evasion and simply repeating your "core game" myth without ever citing any rules from GW.

**Jancoran**

nareik wrote:
I have nothing against Forgeworld at all, some of my best friends use Forgeworld! The rulebook is very 'Citadel minature' orientated though.

"An army is a collection of one or more units of Citadel miniatures"
Are Forgeworld models 'Citadel miniatures'?

It also says "The rules for your Citadel miniatures are found in a wide range of Games Workshop's publications such as codexes, codex supplements and datslates".
It doesn't explicitly mention Forgeworld rules, but they aren't excluded either; are they Games Workshop publications?

Personally I am happy to play anything*, the person I am up against is more important to me than the models we happen to be using.

That said, I don't think anyone is wrong for having their own preferences on how they like to play or creating restrictions for their events.

Spoiler:

*as long as it is form the stock chaos marine codex and nothing else

Isnt that interesting. Citadel you say. Huh. Why that would mean that...

**TheCustomLime**

Jancoran wrote:
nareik wrote:
I have nothing against Forgeworld at all, some of my best friends use Forgeworld! The rulebook is very 'Citadel minature' orientated though.

"An army is a collection of one or more units of Citadel miniatures"
Are Forgeworld models 'Citadel miniatures'?

It also says "The rules for your Citadel miniatures are found in a wide range of Games Workshop's publications such as codexes, codex supplements and datslates".
It doesn't explicitly mention Forgeworld rules, but they aren't excluded either; are they Games Workshop publications?

Personally I am happy to play anything*, the person I am up against is more important to me than the models we happen to be using.

That said, I don't think anyone is wrong for having their own preferences on how they like to play or creating restrictions for their events.

Spoiler:

*as long as it is form the stock chaos marine codex and nothing else

Isnt that interesting. Citadel you say. Huh. Why that would mean that...

There is no definition of what a Citadel miniature is, Janc. You can't use the strict letter of the BRB to enforce rules it simply doesn't work.

**Peregrine**

Jancoran wrote:
Isnt that interesting. Citadel you say. Huh. Why that would mean that...

That would mean that FW rules are ok, you just have to use Citadel miniatures to represent them on the tabletop. And of course it would mean that proxies/conversions/etc are banned, and it would be illegal to use a FW marine kit to represent a C:SM tactical squad. But somehow I doubt you're going to enforce that part of the rule.

**Vaktathi**

Jancoran wrote:
Ashiraya wrote:
No. You repeat that rulebook + codex is 'core' but you have no source. Where did GW say they are? Quote page and paragraph.

Word play now? Sorry man. No idea what youre after. My answer is what it is.

No, you were asked for a source as to what constitutes the "core game" that isn't just your say so, that defines it in anywhere int he rules or from any GW source as "codex+rulebook". That's what you were asked, and did not provide a response to other than just re-iterating what your definition was.

Your concept of "core game" is an erroneous one, something of your own creation, the concept of a "core game" is not something that has any basis in the rules of the game.

**Jancoran**

TheCustomLime wrote:
Jancoran wrote:
nareik wrote:
I have nothing against Forgeworld at all, some of my best friends use Forgeworld! The rulebook is very 'Citadel minature' orientated though.

"An army is a collection of one or more units of Citadel miniatures"
Are Forgeworld models 'Citadel miniatures'?

It also says "The rules for your Citadel miniatures are found in a wide range of Games Workshop's publications such as codexes, codex supplements and datslates".
It doesn't explicitly mention Forgeworld rules, but they aren't excluded either; are they Games Workshop publications?

Personally I am happy to play anything*, the person I am up against is more important to me than the models we happen to be using.

That said, I don't think anyone is wrong for having their own preferences on how they like to play or creating restrictions for their events.

Spoiler:

*as long as it is form the stock chaos marine codex and nothing else

Isnt that interesting. Citadel you say. Huh. Why that would mean that...

There is no definition of what a Citadel miniature is, Janc. You can't use the strict letter of the BRB to enforce rules it simply doesn't work.

Oooooh. Im not allowed, eh? Lol. Not even the main rulebook? Ok.

**Slayer-Fan123**

Vaktathi wrote:
Jancoran wrote:
Ashiraya wrote:
No. You repeat that rulebook + codex is 'core' but you have no source. Where did GW say they are? Quote page and paragraph.

Word play now? Sorry man. No idea what youre after. My answer is what it is.
No, you were asked for a source as to what constitutes the "core game" that isn't just your say so, that defines it in anywhere int he rules or from any GW source as "codex+rulebook". That's what you were asked, and did not provide a response to.

Don't bother at this point. He doesn't provide sources and apparently has a magical Night Lords list that happens to win most of its games against tournament lists which, ya know, hasn't won any tournaments.

**Arkaine**

TheCustomLime wrote:
You can't use the strict letter of the BRB to enforce rules it simply doesn't work.

Visit YMDC some time.

**Jancoran**

Wait... you think i win no tournaments? Perhaps you need to visit www.warsound.com. perhaps you can get a truer accounting. Since you are so willing to take on that tone.

**TheCustomLime**

Arkaine wrote:
TheCustomLime wrote:
You can't use the strict letter of the BRB to enforce rules it simply doesn't work.

Visit YMDC some time.

Yup. RAW 40k is weird, contradictory and downright broken.

**Arkaine**

Jancoran wrote:
Wait... you think i win no tournaments? Perhaps you need to visit www.warsound.com. perhaps you can get a truer accounting. Since you are so willing to take on that tone.

Guessing from your sig that you're Unorthodoxy.

Malifaux, Star Trek, X-wing, even Magic? All dead?? Warhammer is your only active forum.

I can get the others but Magic?? That's like the lifebread of every store.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

TheCustomLime wrote:
Arkaine wrote:
TheCustomLime wrote:
You can't use the strict letter of the BRB to enforce rules it simply doesn't work.
Visit YMDC some time.
Yup. RAW 40k is weird, contradictory and downright broken.

Which totally won't stop people attempting to use the strict letter of the BRB to enforce their position. Visit YMDC some time, it's a riot!

**Jancoran**

Arkaine wrote:
Jancoran wrote:
Wait... you think i win no tournaments? Perhaps you need to visit www.warsound.com. perhaps you can get a truer accounting. Since you are so willing to take on that tone.

Guessing from your sig that you're Unorthodoxy.

Malifaux, Star Trek, X-wing, even Magic? All dead?? Warhammer is your only active forum.

I can get the others but Magic?? That's like the lifebread of every store.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

TheCustomLime wrote:
Arkaine wrote:
TheCustomLime wrote:
You can't use the strict letter of the BRB to enforce rules it simply doesn't work.
Visit YMDC some time.
Yup. RAW 40k is weird, contradictory and downright broken.

Which totally won't stop people attempting to use the strict letter of the BRB to enforce their position. Visit YMDC some time, it's a riot!

Star trek, star wars, 40k, Magic, d&d, warmachine and flames of war are all VERY active here. The forum has a lot of casuals. But they all check in on that and the associated facebook pages

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Jancoran wrote:
Arkaine wrote:
Jancoran wrote:
Wait... you think i win no tournaments? Perhaps you need to visit www.warsound.com. perhaps you can get a truer accounting. Since you are so willing to take on that tone.

Guessing from your sig that you're Unorthodoxy.

Malifaux, Star Trek, X-wing, even Magic? All dead?? Warhammer is your only active forum.

I can get the others but Magic?? That's like the lifebread of every store.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

TheCustomLime wrote:
Arkaine wrote:
TheCustomLime wrote:
You can't use the strict letter of the BRB to enforce rules it simply doesn't work.
Visit YMDC some time.
Yup. RAW 40k is weird, contradictory and downright broken.

Which totally won't stop people attempting to use the strict letter of the BRB to enforce their position. Visit YMDC some time, it's a riot!

Star trek, star wars, 40k, Magic, d&d, warmachine and flames of war are all VERY active here. The forum has a lot of casual posters and lurkers. But they all check in on that and the associated facebook pages

**Slayer-Fan123**

Jancoran wrote:
Wait... you think i win no tournaments? Perhaps you need to visit www.warsound.com. perhaps you can get a truer accounting. Since you are so willing to take on that tone.

I'm not going to visit your bloody blog. I will read tournament reports from the sources and the top 16 lists from the same place

**Arkaine**

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Jancoran wrote:
Wait... you think i win no tournaments? Perhaps you need to visit www.warsound.com. perhaps you can get a truer accounting. Since you are so willing to take on that tone.

I'm not going to visit your bloody blog. I will read tournament reports from the sources and the top 16 lists from the same place

His blog is the website in his signature... he linked you to the tournament report source.

**TheCustomLime**

Yup. 1++ FNP (As in, a FNP you can never technically fail) is totally legal under RAW.

Other silliness:

One use only: Rule refers to something called a battle. There is something called a game in 40k but the overall event that concerns the 40k rules isn't called a battle. Therefore, the rule is meaningless.

Preferred enemy: Technically speaking, if a unit that has this rule but doesn't specify a faction then it has to reroll 1s to hit/wound if for whatever reason it commits friendly fire. The rule states that an unspecified preferred enemy applies to everyone. Not just enemy models. This can also be true if the preferred enemy specifies your own faction.

Vehicles can move up and down straight walls as long as they have enough movement to do so. You can move a Taurox up the side of the building like there were suction cups on the treads or something.

**Jancoran**

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Jancoran wrote:
Wait... you think i win no tournaments? Perhaps you need to visit www.warsound.com. perhaps you can get a truer accounting. Since you are so willing to take on that tone.

I'm not going to visit your bloody blog. I will read tournament reports from the sources and the top 16 lists from the same place

Do as you like but do not question my tournament ability again until youve looked deeper. Ive provided you access to do so. Only your own stubborn nature can stop you now.

**Trasvi**

You do realize that your ability to beat the hardcore tournament lists and ForgeWorld models you've never seen before, with an army that is generally considered bottom of the barrel, is evidence in favour of including Forgeworld, right?

**Skinnereal**

TheCustomLime wrote:
Vehicles can move up and down straight walls as long as they have enough movement to do so. You can move a Taurox up the side of the building like there were suction cups on the treads or something.

In the fluff listed for the Taurox Prime, there are...

**Jancoran**

Trasvi wrote:
You do realize that your ability to beat the hardcore tournament lists and ForgeWorld models you've never seen before, with an army that is generally considered bottom of the barrel, is evidence in favour of including Forgeworld, right?

No. I don't see that. What I see is that I had to bring my A game. THAT'S what I found out. Lol.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Arkaine wrote:

Malifaux, Star Trek, X-wing, even Magic? All dead?? Warhammer is your only active forum.

Oh... it just hit me as i re-read this and another post. Some clarity might help. Warsound.com isnt my forum by the way. it's just the local one that everyone is on here. My blog is completely separate.

**Trasvi**

Jancoran wrote:
Trasvi wrote:
You do realize that your ability to beat the hardcore tournament lists and ForgeWorld models you've never seen before, with an army that is generally considered bottom of the barrel, is evidence in favour of including Forgeworld, right?

No. I don't see that. What I see is that I had to bring my A game. THAT'S what I found out. Lol.

So? You had to bring your A-Game. Isn't that what tournaments are about? I'd hope that people in a tournament aren't going thinking they'l cruise to victory.
But bringing your A-game, with a bottom tier army, you managed to defeat some armies consisting of Forgeworld models you'd never played against before.
That invalidates your 'cumulative experience cost' argument. You could defeat those enemies regardless of having no experience against them. There is no 'cost' to learning to play against these armies, because (like pretty much everything else in 40k) once you know the archetypes you can play against anything.