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.

With a decade plus of 40k under my belt, I personally don't think FW is any worse than core. Whenever they put out a under costed unit it always seems to get blow out of proportion far more than when one (or three) show up in a codex.

Some folks always seen to gloss over the fact that FW has also put out units that are REALLY BAD, but they just so darn cool that how could you not want it on the table?

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:

And if half the people who rally under the anti-FW banner were being honest with themselves they'd just come right out and say it: I am jealous of other people's toys. It's that simple for them. Finding some rationale for it is human but ultimately, that's where it comes from. The others are the super WAAC types who wouldn't want their opponent to touch a decent unit that isn't 100% gak with a 10 foot pole. They just want to win some stuff and are willing to snub every player it takes to do so Okay fine. Their motivation isnt invalid but lets not make it some rational construct because the reality is, they just want access to broken stuff. Call the kettle black.


Also props to calling all FW OP in one paragraph (and labeling 1/2 the FW uses as WAAC TFG donkeycaves), even though that apparently isn't why you hate it...

Jealous? You think me incapable of having them purchased and on the table tomorrow? hehe. Anywho... I don't think "jealousy" plays much of a part.

Claiming I said it was all OP is ignoring a hundred posts from me that say otherwise, so just stop. Parodying me is cute but its not meaningful.

 Jancoran wrote:
Jealous? You think me incapable of having them purchased and on the table tomorrow? hehe. Anywho... I don't think "jealousy" plays much of a part.

Maybe it's not jealousy for you personally, but you've certainly said that's the reason behind your ban. You've said over and over again how you need to protect the poor newbies from having to face units and armies that they can't afford to use. IOW, jealousy.

I'm jealous of Eldar. And it has nothing to do with FW.

 Jancoran wrote:
Actually you are..again... misrepresenting my point. because I didn't say all of Forge World was bad. So those are actually YOUR words and NOT mine sir.

 Jancoran wrote:
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).

I did not misinterpret your point. You put forth the point that some units are overpowered and provided examples. I discussed this point.

Your continued abuse of the caps shift key disturbs me.

 Jackal wrote:
So you spin my entire point off to the wraith knight, when I was using Eldar as an example of a different power tier, impressive.

Might be missing by a long shot though.

You talk about adding a load more units, but they have always been there.
As a tournament player you should adapt and evolve around changes in armies, FW is simply that.
It causes no more problems than a new codex would.


As to the tournament scene, the one that keeps being mentioned seems pretty damn soft.
Tons of restrictions placed into it make it seem a tad bland to me.

Again: "should" isn't an argument. Ever. "Should" is fantasy. The "tournament players" need to do vry few things: know the rules and decide if they can compete by them. That's what they need to do. Even in a Comp'd tournament, ultimately there is a standard. Know it, Play to it. Failure means you're a donor. Success might mean you're still a donor but you're a donor with a darn good record and you had fun. And if you're very lucky you might just win some stuff.

What you call soft is your business. What you call bland is your business. All those are just words when the dice hit the table and you have to perform. So we can argue all day and all night about forge World but here's the thing: in the end, if you can't win without Forge World, then what are you doing at a tournament anyways? I can win against it. I can win against it with forge World and without Forge World, on a box, with a fox. You can't? Sure you can (I assume). So whether its allowed or not hs no bearing on how soft "the scene" is or isn't.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 the Signless wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:
Actually you are..again... misrepresenting my point. because I didn't say all of Forge World was bad. So those are actually YOUR words and NOT mine sir.

 Jancoran wrote:
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).

I did not misinterpret your point. You put forth the point that some units are overpowered and provided examples. I discussed this point.

Your continued abuse of the caps shift key disturbs me.

No. I used it as an example. You do understand when someone is citing examples vs. that example being the argument itself right? That's what's happening here. Hokay? It in't important that I think this or that is "underpowered" or "overpowered". It's not really the main issue for me and frankly all that is is yet another argument waiting to happen anyways! So start a new thread if you wanna talk about which things are too much and which aren't. that sounds like its own little universe of a thread to me. You can talk about Magister Sevrin Loth and how he's one of the most balanced things in 40K in that thread.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
I'm jealous of Eldar. And it has nothing to do with FW.

Good. I don't know why, but good. That's a GW issue though. It wn't be solved by adding an entire pile of new codex's, fluff, model cost and practice games just so you can end up STILL being jealous of Eldar. And you will be then even if you do all that!

Yeah, we get it, you're an awesome tournament player and anyone who can't win in your personal version of 40k fails at life and should just quit playing. Do we really need more of your bragging?

 Ir0njack wrote:


Some folks always seen to gloss over the fact that FW has also put out units that are REALLY BAD, but they just so darn cool that how could you not want it on the table?

Fortunately I was not a culprit when it comes to glossing that over as I have repeatedly mentioned it.

The cool factor is super high. having it on the table? super cool. using them as proxies for other things (like Death Korps and other such) is cool. All kinds of cool attached to them. collect em, paint em, play them against friends, whatevs. If your T.O. allows them then you're golden. if not, theres more causal games played by far than actual tournament ones so finding an outlet is as far away as calling someone and saying "yo. You. me. dice. Now". hopefully anyways.

Do you play in tournaments?

 Jancoran wrote:

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:

And if half the people who rally under the anti-FW banner were being honest with themselves they'd just come right out and say it: I am jealous of other people's toys. It's that simple for them. Finding some rationale for it is human but ultimately, that's where it comes from. The others are the super WAAC types who wouldn't want their opponent to touch a decent unit that isn't 100% gak with a 10 foot pole. They just want to win some stuff and are willing to snub every player it takes to do so Okay fine. Their motivation isnt invalid but lets not make it some rational construct because the reality is, they just want access to broken stuff. Call the kettle black.


Also props to calling all FW OP in one paragraph (and labeling 1/2 the FW uses as WAAC TFG donkeycaves), even though that apparently isn't why you hate it...

Jealous? You think me incapable of having them purchased and on the table tomorrow? hehe. Anywho... I don't think "jealousy" plays much of a part.

Claiming I said it was all OP is ignoring a hundred posts from me that say otherwise, so just stop. Parodying me is cute but its not meaningful.

Well in the post I quoted you implied it was OP by saying 1/2 of all players you support FW do so because they like broken things and want them. If that was true then WTF are they flocking in defence of FW when they could just play vanilla Eldar and be way more powerful?

And you called me cute, oh shucks thanks .

 Jancoran wrote:
The cool factor is super high. having it on the table? super cool. using them as proxies for other things (like Death Korps and other such) is cool. All kinds of cool attached to them. collect em, paint em, play them against friends, whatevs. If your T.O. allows them then you're golden. if not, theres more causal games played by far than actual tournament ones so finding an outlet is as far away as calling someone and saying "yo. You. me. dice. Now". hopefully anyways.

Ok, so you're conceding defeat on all of your arguments about complexity or cost. If it's frustrating to face something you aren't prepared for and the rules are too expensive then that should be just as true in a "casual" game as it is in a tournament. So now we see what this is really about: you're afraid of losing in tournaments.

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:

And if half the people who rally under the anti-FW banner were being honest with themselves they'd just come right out and say it: I am jealous of other people's toys. It's that simple for them. Finding some rationale for it is human but ultimately, that's where it comes from. The others are the super WAAC types who wouldn't want their opponent to touch a decent unit that isn't 100% gak with a 10 foot pole. They just want to win some stuff and are willing to snub every player it takes to do so Okay fine. Their motivation isnt invalid but lets not make it some rational construct because the reality is, they just want access to broken stuff. Call the kettle black.


Also props to calling all FW OP in one paragraph (and labeling 1/2 the FW uses as WAAC TFG donkeycaves), even though that apparently isn't why you hate it...

Jealous? You think me incapable of having them purchased and on the table tomorrow? hehe. Anywho... I don't think "jealousy" plays much of a part.

Claiming I said it was all OP is ignoring a hundred posts from me that say otherwise, so just stop. Parodying me is cute but its not meaningful.

Well in the post I quoted you implied it was OP by saying 1/2 of all players you support FW do so because they like broken things and want them. If that was true then WTF are they flocking in defence of FW when they could just play vanilla Eldar and be way more powerful?

And you called me cute, oh shucks thanks .

Its your chin I adore most.

If that was true then WTF are they flocking in defence of FW when they could just play vanilla Eldar and be way more powerful?

Because hornets, corsair stuff or the eldar titan make eldar list weaker

Hornets are hardly the epitome of broken (especially when armed with anything other than Pulse lasers) , neither is the Corsair stuff (especially any moreso than CWE). The Eldar Titans have their rules written by GW in Escalation and Apocalypse.

Makumba wrote:

If that was true then WTF are they flocking in defence of FW when they could just play vanilla Eldar and be way more powerful?

Because hornets, corsair stuff or the eldar titan make eldar list weaker

The concept of banning ForgeWorld on the concept of 'Lets not add anything to the game that makes anything better than it already is' is inconsistent. Its a non-starter.

Lets say we take that as our mantra. 'Lets not add anything to the game that makes anything better than it already is'. Adding options to armies makes them better as it opens up new army build options, regardless of if they're actually overpowered.

But tomorrow GW is releasing the Kauyon supplement which adds in a very interesting new fortification for Tau, and new rules for White Scars and Raven Guard. Are we going to ban that book using the same reasoning?
Next week they'll release a dataslate for something. And a new codex a few weeks after that. If the Tau codex is any indication of the new release style, then these new codexes are DEFINITELY going to add more power to armies. But I assume people are going to use them anyway.

Banning things on the idea that adding more makes armies more powerful is
a) inconsistent unless you want to freeze the rules EXACTLY as they are now, because otherwise you're going to be adding something every month with GW codexes/dataslates/supplements/formations/campaigns
b) inconsistent, as some things don't make armies more powerful (eg DKOK are a less powerful subset of normal IG)
c) inconsistent, as the power level being added to many of the armies who would get something new isn't going to increase their power level beyond the highest power level armies around (adding a Malcador to IG doesn't put them above Eldar)

This thread is no longer about FW, it's about Jancoran's tournament restrictions and people generalising that to multiple topics.

Also something about jealously, I dunno I stopped paying a lot of attention, but this thread needs to die.

 Jancoran wrote:

 creeping-deth87 wrote:
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.

You seem to be missing context. he's suggesting that a "bunch of people disagree" s some form of argument. Yet...e know...it isn't one. So...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Did you actually say the Dreadclaw was an overpowered unit?

You see what I mean. this guy is going to cling to THAt instead of focusing on the issue. It isnt whether I THINK that unit is stupid or not. But you, in your mind, want to narrow it to that? Meh. Exactly why I dont bother getting into a whole list of why's and wherefores on different Forge World units. this guy is why.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xerics wrote:

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.

Except... Im not the one who made this ABOUT "how many people agree". You se. So I therefore dont have to DEFEND that position... because that was never MY position. Keep up.

Youdid however say that the mass people would be shouting something ridiculous like the moon is square when it quite obviously isn't and there is proof by looking up in the sky on most nights. Not only did you use something so blatent but you used it to describe something that has NOTHING to do with forgeworld units and the discussion at hand. There is a lot of proof that there are plenty of forgeworld units that are not overpowered but you instead decide to put a blanket ban on them because "its too hard to read a few pages of rules". You still haven't given exact examples (as said by other people in the post) and continue to deflect the question when it is asked.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Letsput it this way. Many games have a ban list that the company that owns the game puts out. When you own the 40K game then you can put bans on it all you'd like. Untill then I will bring whatever I want to in my lists.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:

 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).

*snort* the Dreadclaw?



You're reaching with that one.

Nobody will mind you restricting things like D-toting superheavies however. Most people really don't have a problem with that, however, when your examples of things outside of that realm are things like Dreadclaws, it's hard to take the claim seriously.

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!

But it is a reason, and a reason you use, but one you refuse to engage on.

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.

Really what I'm looking for is if there's something other than a couple of outliers that a majority of people can get behind, and that do so on a level that's consistently as bad as things like the Eldar codex and the like, that would really merit a blanket ban. Some sort of consistent trend of overpoweredness rather than a couple of cherry-picked examples, particularly from the non-suerpheavy crowd.

But you want to deflect again, so we'll assume you really don't have an argument.

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.

TL; DR your arguments have boiled down to "it's expensive", "it's unbalanced", and "I don't know the rules" or that there's some sort of "core game" concept, and when challenged you have simply deflected.

When people counter that FW and GW pricing is nearing parity, and in many cases has matched parity, you don't respond. When the balance issue comes up, you deflect. When people say you can find out the rules the way anyone finds out the rules for new units, you don't respond.

When people challenge you to show where this concept of yours about what the "core game" is comes from and what basis it has in the rules, you don't respond.


You're basically spinning everything off to fight straw-men (most particularly with your Wraithknight example above...which you amusingly did not respond to) rather than actually straight up answering anything.


For a guy who's apparently all about "unorthodoxy", your unwillingness to allow FW seems oddly inflexible.

Vaktathi is posting lots of well written and argued stuff in this thread, and the extent that Jancoran goes to ignore and deflect is hilarious.

Jancoran 's sub-Stelek tournament bragging is also keeping me entertained.

Xerics 667942 8225466 7d546adb3f51f00ab8c71dde578144e wrote:

Youdid however say that the mass people would be shouting something ridiculous like the moon is square when it quite obviously isn't and there is proof by looking up in the sky on most nights. Not only did you use something so blatent but you used it to describe something that has NOTHING to do with forgeworld units and the discussion at hand. There is a lot of proof that there are plenty of forgeworld units that are not overpowered but you instead decide to put a blanket ban on them because "its too hard to read a few pages of rules". You still haven't given exact examples (as said by other people in the post) and continue to deflect the question when it is asked.
want to in my lists.

Hoboy. You really don't understand examples and concepts as metaphors and I am tired of trying, so like I've said: I'm a T.O. So i do "ban what I like". lol. And I've taken the time to tell you why, because the original poster wanted to know if others felt this way or had run into this reaction from players. You don't like the answer, and that's okay. But at least try to wrp your mind around the metaphor being used to explain the simple concept that a lynch mob doesnt make the mob correct. it just makes them FEEL that way.

In reality, its just humans working themselves up inot a furor over something they WANT to be true to the exclusion of any new thought to distract them into thinking twice. So if someone here wants to argue that "more people said so" I simply point to the obvious: more people said a lot of things and were wrong. So that's not an argument.

Its your assertiong that Forge World doesnt add anything to my cost? Absurd. That Forge World doesnt take time to not just learn but learn to counter? Absurd. Some even asserted that we should give the Eldar codex an entire new layer of new toys to go with their codex that they say is broken when all that does is ups the arms race and doesnt hurt the Eldar one bit. Absurd. And you think that the incluion of these things are going to go over well with the returning players ot the hobby who already have collections designed to deal with the core of 40K? Absurd. And then you want to ay that the newer players arent going to go into sticker shock when they realize that to collect a competitive army they must now pay HUNDREDS or even a THOUAND dollars to compete with the full panoply of the enemies potential arsenal and say "so what"? It's so absurd a position that to have to battle it has grown tiresome. And note that I havent even mentioned the relative power levels of certain things or the brokn synergies those not-so-broken ones create in armies that can take nasty advantage of it. That's kind of at the bottom of the pile.

So do whatever your group wants to. I really just don't care. But if you and those supporting Forge World wanted to actually know what the issue is (as if intuition and paying attention didn't already tell you), you've got your answer. Your attempts to say "yeah but" aside, those are the issues. If you are going to be dismissive of them to serve your pro-FW agenda, no problem, but pretending like they have no right to feel this way is stupid. and i say this as one who can go out tomorrow and own all of it. So this isn't about ME as much as it is the health of the hobby and in my opinion it will stay healthier with that dividing line in place. If they want these things in normal 40K, sell them as part of the codex.

Since you seem to spin words and not much else, let me rephrase it for you a bit better.

As a tournament player you must (not should) adapt as the game changes, or else you get left behind.
If you cannot adapt to something (you keep claiming your an ace, so not a problem right?) Then what are you doing at a tournament in the first place?

List building is a major factor in tournament gaming so cutting out choices from said list or capping them is just a way of hiding from adapting to other units.

Long story short, you claim how good you are on just about every page of this topic.
So if that's the case, what's the issue with FW?
You say you can still beat it, then why such an issue in the first place?

I would have thought variety makes it more fun in a tournament.







Edit: please say this isn't about new players and cost?
Anyone new to the hobby knows its not cheap to begin with as GW has somewhat of a rep for that already.
Also, what's a new player doing in a tournament?
I have never seen one as a new player would still be struggling with basic rules, let alone thinking about cost.


If you want to race, then race.
If you want competitive racing, it costs alot more.

Everything goes up in cost when competitive nature is involved.
That's just the beast of it that alot of us are willing to tolerate.

 Jackal wrote:
Since you seem to spin words and not much else, let me rephrase it for you a bit better.

As a tournament player you must (not should) adapt as the game changes, or else you get left behind.
If you cannot adapt to something (you keep claiming your an ace, so not a problem right?) Then what are you doing at a tournament in the first place?

List building is a major factor in tournament gaming so cutting out choices from said list or capping them is just a way of hiding from adapting to other units.

Long story short, you claim how good you are on just about every page of this topic.
So if that's the case, what's the issue with FW?
You say you can still beat it, then why such an issue in the first place?

I would have thought variety makes it more fun in a tournament.

I adapt fine. Pay attention to this next thing I say: This isn't about me. I'm fine at tournaments. So we're not really talking about this for my sake. I'm pretty sure I've made that clear to you.

Also, what's a new player doing in a tournament?

Probably not much, unless he trained a lot. But in the end he is going to play games vs tournaments armies under this or that systems anyway. The only difference between armies taken to tournaments and those played only at shops, is thatt hosepl ayed at shops are not painted.

Lets say we take that as our mantra. 'Lets not add anything to the game that makes anything better than it already is'. Adding options to armies makes them better as it opens up new army build options, regardless of if they're actually overpowered.

Only no one sane will buy a manta. Your logic is works only, if people buy and use bad units just as offten as good ones, which does not happen in the real world. And what does FW do to w40k games? Good armies which already unbalance the game, get even more option and unbalance the game even more, while the bad armies get either no options or options which are ok, if the opposing side doesn't use FW, which won't of course happen, because if we just agreed to use FW all players with good armies will race to get the best units to have even better armies.

Yes even my friends constantly give me crap about use FW... its pretty annoying but w/e

Mantra, not manta.
That's a whole different story.


40k is already an arms race to improve armies and take more toys.
Always has been and always will be.
Yes, FW boost armies including those that are already good, but they also boost those that are struggling.

However, I'm willing to make a bet that within the next year a codex will cause more hate towards an army than FW will.

With the current up and down power ratios of the armies GW "update" nothing FW can add would tip it over.
It's already broken so I see FW as a way to patch those breaks.


Granted, in a tournament that does not allow certain units I am more than happy to abide by that.
However, I'm also happy to take them when allowed.

I just like the flavour it adds.


Just a shame that so much is in need of updating.

Makumba wrote:

Also, what's a new player doing in a tournament?

Probably not much, unless he trained a lot. But in the end he is going to play games vs tournaments armies under this or that systems anyway. The only difference between armies taken to tournaments and those played only at shops, is thatt hosepl ayed at shops are not painted.

Lets say we take that as our mantra. 'Lets not add anything to the game that makes anything better than it already is'. Adding options to armies makes them better as it opens up new army build options, regardless of if they're actually overpowered.

Only no one sane will buy a manta. Your logic is works only, if people buy and use bad units just as offten as good ones, which does not happen in the real world. And what does FW do to w40k games? Good armies which already unbalance the game, get even more option and unbalance the game even more, while the bad armies get either no options or options which are ok, if the opposing side doesn't use FW, which won't of course happen, because if we just agreed to use FW all players with good armies will race to get the best units to have even better armies.

What's FW really adding though to those unbalanced armies? No matter what they give Space Marines, I'm still using Biker troops and Grav Centurions. No matter how many Hornets the Eldar player uses, it's the Scatterbikes and Wraithknights that carry the list. You can't punish people for wanting more options just the external balance is junk. I'm not taking away a fat kid's Snickers because they don't need it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jancoran wrote:

 Jackal wrote:
Since you seem to spin words and not much else, let me rephrase it for you a bit better.

As a tournament player you must (not should) adapt as the game changes, or else you get left behind.
If you cannot adapt to something (you keep claiming your an ace, so not a problem right?) Then what are you doing at a tournament in the first place?

List building is a major factor in tournament gaming so cutting out choices from said list or capping them is just a way of hiding from adapting to other units.

Long story short, you claim how good you are on just about every page of this topic.
So if that's the case, what's the issue with FW?
You say you can still beat it, then why such an issue in the first place?

I would have thought variety makes it more fun in a tournament.

I adapt fine. Pay attention to this next thing I say: This isn't about me. I'm fine at tournaments. So we're not really talking about this for my sake. I'm pretty sure I've made that clear to you.

No you're not, unless they neuter everyone's armies. That's winning the special Olympics basically.

And for the record, I AM going to focus on that statement about the Assault Claw, because it's too out there and you didn't explain why. If you did, actually point out the post or just copy-paste it.

Makumba wrote:
Your logic is works only, if people buy and use bad units just as offten as good ones, which does not happen in the real world.

In high end competitive tournaments, maybe, but then that's all anyone is doing anyway. In less competitive events, league play, and pickup games? There's no evidence of that. Hell, I run a Decimator in my CSM army pretty routinely, it's got absolute crap rules (205pts for to get +1 frontal AV, a 5+ invul save, Fear, and Deep Strike with a 1/6 chance to come back to life *if* it's not exploded over a Dreadnight/Helbrute at 100pts, and it's WS3/BS3/I3). My DKoK army isn't exactly brimming with power options and I've run that in events before.

And what does FW do to w40k games? Good armies which already unbalance the game, get even more option and unbalance the game even more, while the bad armies get either no options or options which are ok, if the opposing side doesn't use FW, which won't of course happen, because if we just agreed to use FW all players with good armies will race to get the best units to have even better armies.

I can tell you having lived and played in multiple different large cities and a number of varied playgroups, this simply does not happen. FW is fully allowed at my current store, and the stuff that gets brought is almost exclusively brought simply for "cool factor". Aside from my couple of Daemon engines and DKoK army, the stuff that makes appearances are things like contemptor dreads, Tantatlus skimmers, sicaran tanks, Squiggoths, remora drone fighters, hazard suits, and the like, there's hardly been anything like an overrun of Lynxes or the like.

someone should make a poll. "Do you think jancoran is right?"


Automatically Appended Next Post:
how often does jancoran troll like this?

 hanshotfirst wrote:
someone should make a poll. "Do you think jancoran is right?"

how often does jancoran troll like this?

Irony. I got a guy here whose like a dog with a bone going on about dreadclaws and power levels ten pages after I told him to use it as an example, not an argument and IM the troll? Hilarious. I'm just explaining it and (seemingly) re-explaining and rebutting. Cause thats whatcha do here. Talk to the dogs with bones around here and tell them to demand something new or interesting instead of veiled or in some cases outright insults about the meta (which they know nothing of) or me(who they've never played!) Lol.

Nobody has gone on for ten pages about the Dreadclaw, you never backed up anything about your argument, you're just expending a whole lot of effort deflecting onto strawmen to beat on and saying "I already talked about it" without having actually done so and being unwilling to point out where you think done so.

 Vaktathi wrote:
Nobody has gone on for ten pages about the Dreadclaw, you never backed up anything about your argument, you're just expending a whole lot of effort deflecting onto strawmen to beat on and saying "I already talked about it" without having actually done so and being unwilling to point out where you think done so.

What part of DREADCLAWS ARE NOT THE ARGUMENT dont you understand? Are you daft?

This thread is going nowhere. Neither side is going to concede anything. We're going in circles at this point.