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.

As much as I dislike most of Peregrine's opinions this is one of the few times I agree with him 100%.

 Xerics wrote:


You say we can'tbring Forgeworld units to your tournament games. Guess ill just have to pull out my Armorcast Revenant Titan. It has (as you put it) "official" GW rules (Escalation AND Apocalypse) and is not an apocalypse formation. Pic for reference if you need any proof.

Cool. Except as was mentioned like ten times already, We covered that base. see point 3 under list construction:

http://www.40kambassadors.com/rules.php


So maybe read the thread and then maybe make your point? Or whatever?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

"Numerous examples"? I think I saw the titans, and that's about it. .

read more. thats the only cure for that problem.

Or, you could just state one of your numerous examples. If they are really that common, they I'm sure you can name at least a few off the top of your head.

Not feeling like repeating myself one hundred times. This thread is long enough. Just read it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xerics wrote:
As much as I dislike most of Peregrine's opinions this is one of the few times I agree with him 100%.

Hehehe. Nice qualifier. And the cool thing is, everyone GETS to have their opinion, free of charge.

FW causes balance issues?
I'm guessing you have missed the countless threads about Eldar on here then ..............


Personally, I love the models they make and the rules are pretty decent.
Granted some stuff is higher tier, but that's the case with 40k as a whole anyway.



Seems more to me that people are still stuck in the past with FW being a different thing entirely.
The game has moved forward now.
All IA books are official GW items (if you think they weren't, read the liscensing in the books)
And they now have a lovely badge on them saying 40k expansion, much like the data slates.



I find it adds a ton of e tra units to the game and opens up alot more possibilities, so your less likely to see the usual spam at a tournament.

40k does have poor balance and there are numerous units that are either OTT or so bad they need to be redone to even be considered in a competitive environment.
However, that's just the state of 40k as it currently is.

I have never had an issue with playing with or against FW units or armies in the past.
I have more of an issue playing jetbike spam to be honest.



As a final note, the models look amazing to boot.
However, I likely army to look decent, I'm not one of those that will take a unit for OP rules rather than the fugly models.
So FW for me adds variety and a touch of class to an army.

 Jancoran wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

"Numerous examples"? I think I saw the titans, and that's about it. .

read more. thats the only cure for that problem.

Or, you could just state one of your numerous examples. If they are really that common, they I'm sure you can name at least a few off the top of your head.

Not feeling like repeating myself one hundred times. This thread is long enough. Just read it.

It's literally naming units. You expended the same amount of effort telling me off that it would take to name them.

About the only units I can recall people talking about were things like Dreadclaw drop pods (hardly broken at triple the price of a normal drop pod), making references to Lucius pattern drop pods from two editions ago, Titans (who's rules are written by GW at this point), and the Tau'nar (which, while undercosted, is hardly worse than any number of other SH/GC units with rules written by GW and typically won't pass muster in most tournament restrictions anyway e.g. ITC).

Unless there's something more concrete, or you just want to deflect away with another non-answer like telling people to re-read the thread, then I think it's safe to say there's no real leg to stand on here.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:


Not feeling like repeating myself one hundred times. This thread is long enough. Just read it.

It's literally naming units. You expended the same amount of effort telling me off that it would take to name them.

My thoughts exactly.

 Jancoran wrote:

 Xerics wrote:


You say we can'tbring Forgeworld units to your tournament games. Guess ill just have to pull out my Armorcast Revenant Titan. It has (as you put it) "official" GW rules (Escalation AND Apocalypse) and is not an apocalypse formation. Pic for reference if you need any proof.

Cool. Except as was mentioned like ten times already, We covered that base. see point 3 under list construction:

http://www.40kambassadors.com/rules.php


So maybe read the thread and then maybe make your point? Or whatever?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

"Numerous examples"? I think I saw the titans, and that's about it. .

read more. thats the only cure for that problem.

Or, you could just state one of your numerous examples. If they are really that common, they I'm sure you can name at least a few off the top of your head.

Not feeling like repeating myself one hundred times. This thread is long enough. Just read it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xerics wrote:
As much as I dislike most of Peregrine's opinions this is one of the few times I agree with him 100%.

Hehehe. Nice qualifier. And the cool thing is, everyone GETS to have their opinion, free of charge.

LOL the website says, and I quote, "The Ambassadorial Tournament is a 4-round bracket tournament, not for the faint of heart.". It very much is for the feint of heart if you have to put so much restrictions on it.

 Jackal wrote:


FW causes balance issues?
I'm guessing you have missed the countless threads about Eldar on here then ..............

Personally, I love the models they make and the rules are pretty decent.
Granted some stuff is higher tier, but that's the case with 40k as a whole anyway.

Seems more to me that people are still stuck in the past with FW being a different thing entirely.
The game has moved forward now.
All IA books are official GW items (if you think they weren't, read the liscensing in the books)
And they now have a lovely badge on them saying 40k expansion, much like the data slates.

I find it adds a ton of e tra units to the game and opens up alot more possibilities, so your less likely to see the usual spam at a tournament.

40k does have poor balance and there are numerous units that are either OTT or so bad they need to be redone to even be considered in a competitive environment.
However, that's just the state of 40k as it currently is.

I have never had an issue with playing with or against FW units or armies in the past.
I have more of an issue playing jetbike spam to be honest.

As a final note, the models look amazing to boot.
However, I likely army to look decent, I'm not one of those that will take a unit for OP rules rather than the fugly models.
So FW for me adds variety and a touch of class to an army.

Yup the models are pretty bad ass. No arguing that. The variety adds a lot aesthetically s well.

You start this with COMPARING Eldar to Forge World which really in the grand scheme isnt the point. And minus the Wraith Knight, I'm kinda ambivalent about the rest of the codex. Fast and strong? yup. But every army has an identity and is "good" in its own way. Take the Wraith Knight away and what I see is a darn good codex. Limit it to one Wraith Knight and its still going to create some matchup issues. It needed to be about 50 points more expensive than it is. Okay fine but are those extra 50 points the Eldar "gets" in their army beating you? meh. Its probably more than that.

So I get the sour grapes. I get it. Ive been on the receiving end of the Eldar onslaught and of course I have been on the giving end too (though I don't own a Wraith Knight because yeah). I know its good. But Im not going to add an entire universe of models and rules to keep up with and compete with just so I can do what... nerf a Wraith Knight? I mean you're saying theres no mods to the list you could make that would make as much sense?

I'll posit an example. As a measure ot deal with Wraith Knights I came up with changes to my Adepta Sororitas. It now can handle all the Wraith Knights you wanna bring. I understand going into 40K that my cheese moves like a Fast Skimmer, AV 20 that ignores all terrain! My cheese is going to move. I have to make changes to adjust. I know that going in. thus far, no unit or set of units has made it necessary to go to Forge World and say I need a Wraith Knight busta.

Reminds me of that hilarious scene from the Big Hit movie. If you haven't seen that movie, stop what you are doing and appreciate it for what it is. But especially watch that scene where the stuttering dude is talking about his "busta's". Makes you think of the escalation you're talking about. Lol.

Jancoran, I searched you up on that Warsound, and didn't find you taking best general. Best Overall, yes, several times, but not best general. Do you have a link to those results?

Also, you haven't named a broken Forgeworld unit except 'titans' (your literal word). I've just read this thing end to end.

Even on your blog, all you do is say 'Forgeworld horrors' or 'the cavalier disregard for balance for which Forgeworld is known'.

And again, you were encouraging a gaming situation where people who played lists you didn't perceive as 'fun', where no longer allowed to play.

All this seems kinda sketchy. But if you do have a link to you taking best general, I would very much like to read the report with it.

 Vaktathi wrote:
About the only units I can recall people talking about were things like Dreadclaw drop pods (hardly broken at triple the price of a normal drop pod), making references to Lucius pattern drop pods from two editions ago, Titans (who's rules are written by GW at this point), and the Tau'nar (which, while undercosted, is hardly worse than any number of other SH/GC units with rules written by GW and typically won't pass muster in most tournament restrictions anyway e.g. ITC).

Unless there's something more concrete, or you just want to deflect away with another non-answer like telling people to re-read the thread, then I think it's safe to say there's no real leg to stand on here.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:


Not feeling like repeating myself one hundred times. This thread is long enough. Just read it.

It's literally naming units. You expended the same amount of effort telling me off that it would take to name them.

My thoughts exactly.

This post illustrates how little you've absorbed of my poijt, You're STILL trying to argue power levels. even after I've said so many times that this isnt the only or main objection. One growss tired of repeating oneself so yeah. If you CARE to understand the issue, understand it by re-reading the posts. If you want me to repeat myself 100 times, Im just no longer willing. So you can "decide" whether that "means" theres a leg to stand on for your own thinking but anyone who isnt getting the point should hardly be judging the "legs" upon which this is standing. Lol.

Man, you deflected that question with a 2++ invuln save.

So power levels aren't the problem? Then what is?

 Xerics wrote:

LOL the website says, and I quote, "The Ambassadorial Tournament is a 4-round bracket tournament, not for the faint of heart.". It very much is for the feint of heart if you have to put so much restrictions on it.

Like i said: if you think so, compete in it. But you're glossing over the point, aren't you? The point was simply that we ARENT allowing titans or Escalation, so all the more reason for you to stand down on the Forge World forever Bandwagon.

Or not. That's cool too. Its not like I think you're going to change your mind and your insults aren't going to make your case any stronger so do with that information what you will.

And he totally ignored my point about his website. must not be able to think of anything to say about that. A tournament that really isn't for the fient of heart would be an anything goes tournament. All is fair in war after all, and history is written by the victors.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
So power levels aren't the problem? Then what is?

From what I understand its having too many options for people to be expected know about or something silly like that.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
So power levels aren't the problem? Then what is?

I didnt say they were not an issue in places. I said they are not the issue. And proceeded to explain those issues. Feel free to read what I wrote through that lens and not this toggle switch thinking that seems to pervade the arguments thus far.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xerics wrote:
And he totally ignored my point about his website. must not be able to think of anything to say about that. A tournament that really isn't for the fient of heart would be an anything goes tournament. All is fair in war after all, and history is written by the victors.

Your definition is certainly narrow and self serving to say the least. But whatevs. Insult it. I dont give a rip. =) We gave away $1500 to the people who came and zero to the ones who wanted to be smart ellecks about tournament flavor text

 Jancoran wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
So power levels aren't the problem? Then what is?

I didnt say they were not an issue in places. I said they are not the issue. And proceeded to explain those issues. Feel free to read what I wrote through that lens and not this toggle switch thinking that seems to pervade the arguments thus far.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xerics wrote:
And he totally ignored my point about his website. must not be able to think of anything to say about that. A tournament that really isn't for the fient of heart would be an anything goes tournament. All is fair in war after all, and history is written by the victors.

Your definition is certainly narrow and self serving to say the least. But whatevs. Insult it. I dont give a rip. =) We gave away $1500 to the people who came and zero to the ones who wanted to be smart ellecks.

Jancoran... your attitude is pretty demeaning and you talk like your the best thing since sliced bread, but Xerics is the one having an attitude problem?

I don't follow

 DoomShakaLaka wrote:

Jancoran... your attitude is pretty demeaning and you talk like your the best thing since sliced bread, but Xerics is the one having an attitude problem?

I don't follow

Demeaning or just no longer willing to suffer insult? I think the latter.

It feels like we're arguing in circles at this point. I hope the OP has gotten an idea of why people are still weird about Forge World.

 Jancoran wrote:

 Jackal wrote:


FW causes balance issues?
I'm guessing you have missed the countless threads about Eldar on here then ..............

Personally, I love the models they make and the rules are pretty decent.
Granted some stuff is higher tier, but that's the case with 40k as a whole anyway.

Seems more to me that people are still stuck in the past with FW being a different thing entirely.
The game has moved forward now.
All IA books are official GW items (if you think they weren't, read the liscensing in the books)
And they now have a lovely badge on them saying 40k expansion, much like the data slates.

I find it adds a ton of e tra units to the game and opens up alot more possibilities, so your less likely to see the usual spam at a tournament.

40k does have poor balance and there are numerous units that are either OTT or so bad they need to be redone to even be considered in a competitive environment.
However, that's just the state of 40k as it currently is.

I have never had an issue with playing with or against FW units or armies in the past.
I have more of an issue playing jetbike spam to be honest.

As a final note, the models look amazing to boot.
However, I likely army to look decent, I'm not one of those that will take a unit for OP rules rather than the fugly models.
So FW for me adds variety and a touch of class to an army.

Yup the models are pretty bad ass. No arguing that. The variety adds a lot aesthetically s well.

You start this with COMPARING Eldar to Forge World which really in the grand scheme isnt the point. And minus the Wraith Knight, I'm kinda ambivalent about the rest of the codex. Fast and strong? yup. But every army has an identity and is "good" in its own way. Take the Wraith Knight away and what I see is a darn good codex. Limit it to one Wraith Knight and its still going to create some matchup issues. It needed to be about 50 points more expensive than it is. Okay fine but are those extra 50 points the Eldar "gets" in their army beating you? meh. Its probably more than that.

So I get the sour grapes. I get it. Ive been on the receiving end of the Eldar onslaught and of course I have been on the giving end too (though I don't own a Wraith Knight because yeah). I know its good. But Im not going to add an entire universe of models and rules to keep up with and compete with just so I can do what... nerf a Wraith Knight? I mean you're saying theres no mods to the list you could make that would make as much sense?

I'll posit an example. As a measure ot deal with Wraith Knights I came up with changes to my Adepta Sororitas. It now can handle all the Wraith Knights you wanna bring. I understand going into 40K that my cheese moves like a Fast Skimmer, AV 20 that ignores all terrain! My cheese is going to move. I have to make changes to adjust. I know that going in. thus far, no unit or set of units has made it necessary to go to Forge World and say I need a Wraith Knight busta.

Reminds me of that hilarious scene from the Big Hit movie. If you haven't seen that movie, stop what you are doing and appreciate it for what it is. But especially watch that scene where the stuttering dude is talking about his "busta's". Makes you think of the escalation you're talking about. Lol.

So...Eldar as a faction gets mentioned, but you spin the Wraithknight off as its own red-herring to just focus on that (despite it not being mentioned by the previous poster), and minimize it to boot (most people would consider it closer to a hundred points undercosted, not fifty). There's a whole lot else wrong with Eldar in general. T6 35pt Fearless infantry with D weapons. BS5 "AP0" Fire Warriors, Biker squads filled to the gills with heavy weapons, astoundingly capable psychic support, and in general an army that hits hard, is blazing fast, and is hard to kill to boot, capitalizing on the trifecta of mobility, firepower, and resiliency in ways most other armies can't hope to compete with.

And again, you fail to mention any FW units that actually pose a real issue, and instead spin FW off into some absurd argument on "an entire universe of models and rules to keep up with". It's not that much more stuff, and it's not just all there to counter the Wraithknight.

 Jancoran wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
About the only units I can recall people talking about were things like Dreadclaw drop pods (hardly broken at triple the price of a normal drop pod), making references to Lucius pattern drop pods from two editions ago, Titans (who's rules are written by GW at this point), and the Tau'nar (which, while undercosted, is hardly worse than any number of other SH/GC units with rules written by GW and typically won't pass muster in most tournament restrictions anyway e.g. ITC).

Unless there's something more concrete, or you just want to deflect away with another non-answer like telling people to re-read the thread, then I think it's safe to say there's no real leg to stand on here.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:


Not feeling like repeating myself one hundred times. This thread is long enough. Just read it.

It's literally naming units. You expended the same amount of effort telling me off that it would take to name them.

My thoughts exactly.

This post illustrates how little you've absorbed of my poijt, You're STILL trying to argue power levels. even after I've said so many times that this isnt the only or main objection.

Ok, here's how I'm going to lay out my response to this.

I get that it's not your only objection, but you still maintiain it as one.

So, it's not a non -issue, you still claim power is an issue.

Yet, when people respond to that objection, you go off on this rant about how " You're STILL trying to argue power levels".

Yes, we are, because you continue making it an issue. Nobody has ever said it was the only one, but when they challenge you to provide examples, you deflect and misdirect instead of actually answering them.

If you CARE to understand the issue, understand it by re-reading the posts. If you want me to repeat myself 100 times, Im just no longer willing. So you can "decide" whether that "means" theres a leg to stand on for your own thinking but anyone who isnt getting the point should hardly be judging the "legs" upon which this is standing. Lol.

I didn, and I have responded to your posts. You claim game balance problems, then don't respond or simply deflect when you are challenged on them. You've written a lot but not actually answered the question.

As for the "economic balance" argument you've made, I've addressed that too, and you've largely chosen simply not to respond to it at all.

 TheCustomLime wrote:
It feels like we're arguing in circles at this point.

We are honestly.

I guess we should all agree to disagree no?

They can have comp'd tournaments and we can have the non restricted ones.

Some people just prefer things because...well they prefer them.

 Jancoran wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
So power levels aren't the problem? Then what is?

I didnt say they were not an issue in places. I said they are not the issue. And proceeded to explain those issues. Feel free to read what I wrote through that lens and not this toggle switch thinking that seems to pervade the arguments thus far.

So it is an issue. In that case what's wrong with discussing it?

I think until the day Jervis Johnson announces publicly that FW rules are a part of "Core 40k" (Whatever that means) and a line to that effect is written in size 72 font in every BRB then you will still have opposition to it. Maybe even after. The opposition to FW runs deeper than just any perceived balance or availability issues. Maybe it's just older gamers being used to the system being one way (That is, FW being banned/excluded) and don't change their world views easy. You can thank GW and it's poor handling of FW rules early on for it.

 Vaktathi wrote:


Ok, here's how I'm going to lay out my response to this.

I get that it's not your only objection, but you still maintiain it as one.

So, it's not a non -issue, you still claim power is an issue.

Yet, when people respond to that objection, you go off on this rant about how " You're STILL trying to argue power levels".

Yes, we are, because you continue making it an issue. Nobody has ever said it was the only one, but when they challenge you to provide examples, you deflect and misdirect instead of actually answering them.

If you CARE to understand the issue, understand it by re-reading the posts. If you want me to repeat myself 100 times, Im just no longer willing. So you can "decide" whether that "means" theres a leg to stand on for your own thinking but anyone who isnt getting the point should hardly be judging the "legs" upon which this is standing. Lol.

I didn, and I have responded to your posts. You claim game balance problems, then don't respond or simply deflect when you are challenged on them. You've written a lot but not actually answered the question.

As for the "economic balance" argument you've made, I've addressed that too, and you've largely chosen simply not to respond to it at all.

I think you want to get into an argument over which ONES are too powerful or not and thats not going to help. so no. Im not going to ENGAGE you on that level other than the couple examples I did give (Lynx and Dreadclaw for reference). But Im not stamping my feet about them as my BIG REASON. Becaue while those two are good examples, what purpoe will it serve to get into a "nuh uh"... "Uh Huh" about which ones *I* think are kinda over the top? ESPECIALLY if that REALLY isn't the main reason!

Forums are like this. If you get troll'd down that path, you never get back to whats important or relevant. While I can CERTAINLY point to things I don't want newer or returning players (for whom I champion) to have to deal with those specific examples, the issue is larger than that and I cant make that any plainer than repeating it over and over.

So if you want to get me to list a whole bunch, you'll fail because Im not going down that path with you. Thats its own thread. Start one.

DISTRACTION from the overall experience of the gamers is what this leads to. the thread was focused on why people like me just dont want it and my position is CRYSTAL clear: I dont care if you play it. I will play in tournaments that allow it. Im not like SOME of you who draw some silly line in the sand and say "my willingness to compete is limited by what toys I get to bring". I'm not that guy. But insofar s my ability extends, I lobby to disallow it on the many grounds Ive shared.

and that you dont agree is fine with me. I'm just shedding the REQUESTED light on how some of us view it. I'm not asking you to jump on board. You wont. And thats fine.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

So it is an issue. In that case what's wrong with discussing it?

Discuss it but understand that I already.. uh...agreed that some of it isnt overpowered and some are JUST like the codex's. So I would prefer to actually not beat the dead horse we already agreed on? For Feths sake, does that not make sense? Do you just LIKE beating a dead horse? I'm FINE with the power level on some and not others. that on its own isn't enough for me to ban all of them. So we can keep talking about it if you reeeealy want to but that's reaaaaaly not advancing the dialogue, is it?

Jancoran you should just quit while you are already far behind. You are only continuing to lose this race as more people on this forum are arguing against you and your crazy restrictions than for you.

If Jancoran isn't heavily involved in the pursuit and holding of public office he has really missed his calling.

The spin and deflection on display here is on a far higher level than what we've seen in the recent presidential debates.

 Xerics wrote:
Jancoran you should just quit while you are already far behind. You are only continuing to lose this race as more people on this forum are arguing against you and your crazy restrictions than for you.

He stole my thunder. idont give a crap if you fill a room full of people yelling that the moon is square. It doesnt make them right, just louder.

Except in this case the room full of people yelling that the moon is square is just full of you.

To respond to the topic at hand, I had a lot of trepidation about Forge World back in 5th edition but in the current meta of the game it seems to make less and less sense to ban those units. When the base game is basically apocalypse, it just feels kind of absurd to point a finger and say no I don't want to play against that, it's Forge World, but your GC wraithknight or storm surge are totally kosher.

I really don't understand the problem here. Back in 5th, I was also anti-FW, but things were very different. As soon as GW created god-mode Wave Serpents in 6th, there was zero reason to give a feth about FW units balance issues, for those that had them. Most of which did/do not anyway. Things have only gotten worse with GW vomiting forth the Wraithknight and scatterbikes. And TWC deathstars. I could go on. I hate the FW libby who chooses powers, but he's certainly no worse than your standard Eldar scatterbike for balance.

Did you actually say the Dreadclaw was an overpowered unit?

Also I'm glad someone else called you out on your battle reports before I could.
If you actually had something to prove with CSM's, you'd have actually done those high end tournaments. Nobody cares what happens at a comped local scene. I could give battle reports for those all I want, but it matters very little. I don't know how it gives you the ego you do have, but if anything you're one of the least qualified people to discuss the nature of the game because of your attitudes.

You were already told how the pay-to-play is lot anymore existent with FW than without (and if anything gives more armies a chance to actually compete in a REGULAR game), you have yet to actually name OP units from them (and whose rules come from the GW name anyway), and you continuously ignore multiple posters on this site and cherry pick who to quote.

The ONLY legit argument you have is about not expecting units, and even then that's not a good argument either. I have yet to face an Ad Mech army, but nobody is going to ban them because nobody has faced them. Adapt and move on. Heaven forbid your CSM's strike the Krieg on a 4+ instead of a 3+. That totally changes your strategy!

 Jancoran wrote:

 Xerics wrote:
Jancoran you should just quit while you are already far behind. You are only continuing to lose this race as more people on this forum are arguing against you and your crazy restrictions than for you.

He stole my thunder. idont give a crap if you fill a room full of people yelling that the moon is square. It doesnt make them right, just louder.

The same goes for you. You could have a room full of people yelling that FW is overpowered, too complex, too expensive or what have you and shouldn't be in the (as you put it) "core" game but it doesn't make them right, just louder.