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.
SideshowLucifer wrote: Locally, all Forgeworld models are banned from tournaments and only one LoW model is allowed per army.
Forgeworld is not banned because of power, but because of the lack of accessibility people have to the models and rules. Many feel it's a pay to win thing. I'm all for limiting the LoW choices to 1.
I've ordered from their website just fine. What's this lack of accessibility argument really coming from?
The fact that models cost twice or more their equivalents that are present in the GW catalogue, probably. And not only those resin models are super expensive but there's also no chance to get new FW models with a 25%-30% price cut. Not in my area at least.
That's why FW models here are extremely uncommon. FW prices is the reason why that stuff is unpopular here and we have a sort of implied agreement that bans FW stuff.
LoWs are other hated units.
You can find both GW and FW stuff for cheap in the used market... but that said, everything in 40K is "pay to play"... it's a privileged hobby. People who worry about feeding their kids and paying rent don't play Warhammer. Further Forgeworld isn't that much more expensive than GW unless we are talking about the enormous super heavy type models.
The old notion that Forgeworld's "pay to play" means you are getting better rules for a higher price, is not even remotely accurate and hasn't been so for a very long time (if ever). There are individual units that are not balanced correctly in the FW line... and SOOOO many more that are not balanced correctly in the GW line. They all need attention and GW/FW seems committed to giving them attention.
I'm so happy I don't play in such a constipated and close-minded atmosphere where folks are banning units out of uninformed fear.
It is no where near as easy to find cheap FW on the used market as it is GW, so it is somewhat disingenuous to equate the two.
Really the issue with FW right now is waiting to see if they address any balance issues. That is pretty much it.
I see FW all over eBay, certainly there is more regular GW stock but it's not impossible to find what you want. In fact it's quite possible, to get used or new Forgeworld - it's not some unpenetrable wall some folks make it out to be. And if you don't want to buy FW - don't. This is utterly besides the point and in either case should have no bearing on 'banning' units.
As for FW addressing balance - they've already done exactly what GW has - they released an FAQ for each of their 8th edition Index.
SideshowLucifer wrote: Locally, all Forgeworld models are banned from tournaments and only one LoW model is allowed per army.
Forgeworld is not banned because of power, but because of the lack of accessibility people have to the models and rules. Many feel it's a pay to win thing. I'm all for limiting the LoW choices to 1.
I've ordered from their website just fine. What's this lack of accessibility argument really coming from?
The fact that models cost twice or more their equivalents that are present in the GW catalogue, probably. And not only those resin models are super expensive but there's also no chance to get new FW models with a 25%-30% price cut. Not in my area at least.
That's why FW models here are extremely uncommon. FW prices is the reason why that stuff is unpopular here and we have a sort of implied agreement that bans FW stuff.
LoWs are other hated units.
You can find both GW and FW stuff for cheap in the used market... but that said, everything in 40K is "pay to play"... it's a privileged hobby. People who worry about feeding their kids and paying rent don't play Warhammer. Further Forgeworld isn't that much more expensive than GW unless we are talking about the enormous super heavy type models.
The old notion that Forgeworld's "pay to play" means you are getting better rules for a higher price, is not even remotely accurate and hasn't been so for a very long time (if ever). There are individual units that are not balanced correctly in the FW line... and SOOOO many more that are not balanced correctly in the GW line. They all need attention and GW/FW seems committed to giving them attention.
I'm so happy I don't play in such a constipated and close-minded atmosphere where folks are banning units out of uninformed fear.
It is no where near as easy to find cheap FW on the used market as it is GW, so it is somewhat disingenuous to equate the two.
Really the issue with FW right now is waiting to see if they address any balance issues. That is pretty much it.
I see FW all over eBay, certainly there is more regular GW stock but it's not impossible to find what you want. In fact it's quite possible, to get used or new Forgeworld - it's not some unpenetrable wall some folks make it out to be. And if you don't want to buy FW - don't. This is utterly besides the point and in either case should have no bearing on 'banning' units.
As for FW addressing balance - they've already done exactly what GW has - they released an FAQ for each of their 8th edition Index.
It being there and it being cheap are not the same thing most FW I see on ebay is at or above retail "pro painted" or Imperial stuff, but even a lot of that is expensive. SO I still dispute the as cheap and easy as GW on the used market.
They have also not release an FAQ addressing any balance issues, they issued an FAQ addressing horrible rules that didn't work at all. GW has also released multiple FAQs and changes.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/09/08 17:47:53
This argument is mental ...nothing in 40K is cheap. Yes, FW costs a little more, but you obviously have an internet connection since you're here - so you have very easy means to get Forgeworld. If you don't want FW, don't buy FW!
This should have nothing to do with 'banned' units. I can't afford a Land Raider, or Wraithknight, or Stormraven, or even to start adding Primarus right now -- so ban them all!
Gunzhard wrote: This argument is mental ...nothing in 40K is cheap. Yes, FW costs a little more, but you obviously have an internet connection since you're here - so you have very easy means to get Forgeworld. If you don't want FW, don't buy FW!
This should have nothing to do with 'banned' units. I can't afford a Land Raider, or Wraithknight, or Stormraven, or even to start adding Primarus right now -- so ban them all!
Dakka never fails to surprise me.
I think its more of someone hates FW b.c they had a bad experience with someone else using fw and now they are using any means to give them reason not to play with those models.
SideshowLucifer wrote: Locally, all Forgeworld models are banned from tournaments and only one LoW model is allowed per army.
Forgeworld is not banned because of power, but because of the lack of accessibility people have to the models and rules. Many feel it's a pay to win thing. I'm all for limiting the LoW choices to 1.
I've ordered from their website just fine. What's this lack of accessibility argument really coming from?
The fact that models cost twice or more their equivalents that are present in the GW catalogue, probably. And not only those resin models are super expensive but there's also no chance to get new FW models with a 25%-30% price cut. Not in my area at least.
That's why FW models here are extremely uncommon. FW prices is the reason why that stuff is unpopular here and we have a sort of implied agreement that bans FW stuff.
LoWs are other hated units.
That's pretty much it. Forge World is so expensive, then add in shipping costs and it gets plain stupid to order that stuff.
Gunzhard wrote: This argument is mental ...nothing in 40K is cheap. Yes, FW costs a little more, but you obviously have an internet connection since you're here - so you have very easy means to get Forgeworld. If you don't want FW, don't buy FW!
This should have nothing to do with 'banned' units. I can't afford a Land Raider, or Wraithknight, or Stormraven, or even to start adding Primarus right now -- so ban them all!
Dakka never fails to surprise me.
I think its more of someone hates FW b.c they had a bad experience with someone else using fw and now they are using any means to give them reason not to play with those models.
I don't hate the stuff. I think some of it is pretty snazzy and I've order a model or two before along with some doors for my older marines. The problem is cost plus shipping and lack of knowing the rules so feel people feel they are suffering from a gotcha moment when playing against it. We use several gentleman's rules in casual play, but competitive play tends to be stupid to a whole new level even without adding in elements from stuff like FW.
It's also a case where people rarely field the FW stuff that is bad or just ok. Usually it's spamming the crap that's obviously op, like the Mournghoul for AoS. So the people who run the events just find it's easier to get more players if they don't allow the stuff. Also, the local game stores can't sell the stuff, so why should they allow it in their events?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/09/08 18:15:11
Gunzhard wrote: This argument is mental ...nothing in 40K is cheap. Yes, FW costs a little more, but you obviously have an internet connection since you're here - so you have very easy means to get Forgeworld. If you don't want FW, don't buy FW!
This should have nothing to do with 'banned' units. I can't afford a Land Raider, or Wraithknight, or Stormraven, or even to start adding Primarus right now -- so ban them all!
Dakka never fails to surprise me.
I'm not even calling for FW bans (though Lords of War typically bother me in standard game sizes, the rest of the stuff generally doesn't, and I feel the same about GW LOW). But pro-FW people always make it seem like FW has the same accessibility as GW and that simply isn't the case. No it isn't ridiculously hard to get, but because there is at least some barrier to entry player often don't play against a lot of FW stuff and so it can be more surprising. My only issue with FW right now is concerns about how they will handle balance issues.
Also it is fairly easy to get standard 40k stuff fairly cheap (like whole armies for what I've seen FW stuff sell for on ebay).
SideshowLucifer wrote: Locally, all Forgeworld models are banned from tournaments and only one LoW model is allowed per army.
Forgeworld is not banned because of power, but because of the lack of accessibility people have to the models and rules. Many feel it's a pay to win thing. I'm all for limiting the LoW choices to 1.
I've ordered from their website just fine. What's this lack of accessibility argument really coming from?
The fact that models cost twice or more their equivalents that are present in the GW catalogue, probably. And not only those resin models are super expensive but there's also no chance to get new FW models with a 25%-30% price cut. Not in my area at least.
That's why FW models here are extremely uncommon. FW prices is the reason why that stuff is unpopular here and we have a sort of implied agreement that bans FW stuff.
LoWs are other hated units.
That's pretty much it. Forge World is so expensive, then add in shipping costs and it gets plain stupid to order that stuff.
Gunzhard wrote: This argument is mental ...nothing in 40K is cheap. Yes, FW costs a little more, but you obviously have an internet connection since you're here - so you have very easy means to get Forgeworld. If you don't want FW, don't buy FW!
This should have nothing to do with 'banned' units. I can't afford a Land Raider, or Wraithknight, or Stormraven, or even to start adding Primarus right now -- so ban them all!
Dakka never fails to surprise me.
I think its more of someone hates FW b.c they had a bad experience with someone else using fw and now they are using any means to give them reason not to play with those models.
I don't hate the stuff. I think some of it is pretty snazzy and I've order a model or two before along with some doors for my older marines. The problem is cost plus shipping and lack of knowing the rules so feel people feel they are suffering from a gotcha moment when playing against it. We use several gentleman's rules in casual play, but competitive play tends to be stupid to a whole new level even without adding in elements from stuff like FW.
It's also a case where people rarely field the FW stuff that is bad or just ok. Usually it's spamming the crap that's obviously op, like the Mournghoul for AoS. So the people who run the events just find it's easier to get more players if they don't allow the stuff. Also, the local game stores can't sell the stuff, so why should they allow it in their events?
The unfamiliarity with rules is a thing, though at least now with digital books it is a bit easier to get your hands on the rules than it used to be. Beyond that it is more common in this edition for FW stuff to have rules that seem more over the top (though you typically pay a bunch of points for those rules), than what you find in the GW books.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/09/08 18:33:21
Cost and availability are not valid excuses. This is an expensive and frivolous hobby. Complaining that something is $$$$ making it less available than $$$ isn't rational. Not to mention, the last tourney i went to there were probably 30 Earthshakers in total over various armies and not a single one was an actual FW model. Almost every person had the same $6 WW2 howitzer 'count as'. The same goes for Elysians. I've never seen an actual Elysian model in real life. Everyone proxies them. The SM codex is currently $50 and the FW index is $20. So, that must mean that SM rules are less available and familiar than FW rules, right?
All of these Anti-Forgeworld arguments are just downright silly. If cost is the barrier, and we're still talking about: Warhammer 40K, the argument is bogus - it's all expensive.
Where do we draw the ridiculous line on what's "too expensive" to be in competitive events? ...a single stormraven is $82 and arguably "OP", the Primaris Strike Force "deal" is just a Captain and 10 Primarus marines for $105! ...ban them - too expensive! ...building an army is expensive; make competitive events just Kill Team then? -- yeah it's ridiculous. This cost argument is perhaps the most ridiculous.
If we're talking about rules... FW released an FAQ for each of their new Index. A few items are still probably unbalanced - GW despite all of their efforts and several FAQ/Errata still have TONS of imbalance issues.
This entire thread is built on the idea that some units are imbalanced - but in those winning IG lists, all of the Forgeworld elements are interchangeable with comparable units in the regular GW Index. The Broken elements of the IG lists are absolutely NOT the FW elements.
If the next pathetically flimsy argument is "unfamiliarity with rules" ...well there's never been an easier time to know all of the FW rules - they are all contained within 4 books (available online as well ). The same case cannot be made for GW anymore which has Index and Codex, both available now and more coming soon. This is a lazy excuse. Applying this argument would mean that nearly every army in 7th edition should've been banned.
Gunzhard wrote: This argument is mental ...nothing in 40K is cheap. Yes, FW costs a little more, but you obviously have an internet connection since you're here - so you have very easy means to get Forgeworld. If you don't want FW, don't buy FW!
This should have nothing to do with 'banned' units. I can't afford a Land Raider, or Wraithknight, or Stormraven, or even to start adding Primarus right now -- so ban them all!
Dakka never fails to surprise me.
I'm not even calling for FW bans (though Lords of War typically bother me in standard game sizes, the rest of the stuff generally doesn't, and I feel the same about GW LOW). But pro-FW people always make it seem like FW has the same accessibility as GW and that simply isn't the case. No it isn't ridiculously hard to get, but because there is at least some barrier to entry player often don't play against a lot of FW stuff and so it can be more surprising. My only issue with FW right now is concerns about how they will handle balance issues.
Also it is fairly easy to get standard 40k stuff fairly cheap (like whole armies for what I've seen FW stuff sell for on ebay).
SideshowLucifer wrote: Locally, all Forgeworld models are banned from tournaments and only one LoW model is allowed per army.
Forgeworld is not banned because of power, but because of the lack of accessibility people have to the models and rules. Many feel it's a pay to win thing. I'm all for limiting the LoW choices to 1.
I've ordered from their website just fine. What's this lack of accessibility argument really coming from?
The fact that models cost twice or more their equivalents that are present in the GW catalogue, probably. And not only those resin models are super expensive but there's also no chance to get new FW models with a 25%-30% price cut. Not in my area at least.
That's why FW models here are extremely uncommon. FW prices is the reason why that stuff is unpopular here and we have a sort of implied agreement that bans FW stuff.
LoWs are other hated units.
That's pretty much it. Forge World is so expensive, then add in shipping costs and it gets plain stupid to order that stuff.
Gunzhard wrote: This argument is mental ...nothing in 40K is cheap. Yes, FW costs a little more, but you obviously have an internet connection since you're here - so you have very easy means to get Forgeworld. If you don't want FW, don't buy FW!
This should have nothing to do with 'banned' units. I can't afford a Land Raider, or Wraithknight, or Stormraven, or even to start adding Primarus right now -- so ban them all!
Dakka never fails to surprise me.
I think its more of someone hates FW b.c they had a bad experience with someone else using fw and now they are using any means to give them reason not to play with those models.
I don't hate the stuff. I think some of it is pretty snazzy and I've order a model or two before along with some doors for my older marines. The problem is cost plus shipping and lack of knowing the rules so feel people feel they are suffering from a gotcha moment when playing against it. We use several gentleman's rules in casual play, but competitive play tends to be stupid to a whole new level even without adding in elements from stuff like FW.
It's also a case where people rarely field the FW stuff that is bad or just ok. Usually it's spamming the crap that's obviously op, like the Mournghoul for AoS. So the people who run the events just find it's easier to get more players if they don't allow the stuff. Also, the local game stores can't sell the stuff, so why should they allow it in their events?
The unfamiliarity with rules is a thing, though at least now with digital books it is a bit easier to get your hands on the rules than it used to be. Beyond that it is more common in this edition for FW stuff to have rules that seem more over the top (though you typically pay a bunch of points for those rules), than what you find in the GW books.
It DOES have the same accessibility. Nothing outside Titans is much beyond what you regularly pay. No Sicaran variant is that much more expensive than a regular Predator.
Also unfamiliarity with rules is a fething joke of an excuse. You think I refused games when Genestealer Cults, Adeptus Mechanicus, and Deathwatch came out?
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
This edition FW rules are more poorly written and less balanced than 40k, and the chance they will be adjusted is low due to how inactive FW is as a division of GW.
That some of the FW units are bad, doesn't balance the ones that are too effective for their cost.
IIRC, while the new FW indexes are surprisingly cheap, the prior FW books were at a price point that lost my interest right away. I wasn't about to pay $70 for a book so I could use a single unit of interest to me, then have that 70$ book become obsolete after an edition change.
50$ is already more than I want to spend on a codex, but at least it's a whole army that I'm interested in.
Not that I'm against FW in tournaments, but I get some of the arguments.
That said, good on FW for bringing the price point of the Indexes to something reasonable. I probably still won't buy them, as the standard-fare GW stuff will work fine for me. But still, it's nice to see.
Insectum7 wrote: IIRC, while the new FW indexes are surprisingly cheap, the prior FW books were at a price point that lost my interest right away. I wasn't about to pay $70 for a book so I could use a single unit of interest to me, then have that 70$ book become obsolete after an edition change.
50$ is already more than I want to spend on a codex, but at least it's a whole army that I'm interested in.
Not that I'm against FW in tournaments, but I get some of the arguments.
That said, good on FW for bringing the price point of the Indexes to something reasonable. I probably still won't buy them, as the standard-fare GW stuff will work fine for me. But still, it's nice to see.
This is pretty much it. People are hating on FW because of past experiences that have nothing to do with 8th edition now. People are trying to push an agenda by any excuse they can. Anyone can get FW products online the same as GW products. Past that, many people just use proxies and counts as. The rules for a lot of units are "good" but not "broken" which is a big difference. Units that are broken are just spammed as much as possible in this edition since it's allowed. Looking at any tournaments right now, there aren't any units being spammed like previous broken units. Just because a single FW unit ends up in a winning list doesn't mean squat.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/09/08 21:58:43
Insectum7 wrote: IIRC, while the new FW indexes are surprisingly cheap, the prior FW books were at a price point that lost my interest right away. I wasn't about to pay $70 for a book so I could use a single unit of interest to me, then have that 70$ book become obsolete after an edition change.
50$ is already more than I want to spend on a codex, but at least it's a whole army that I'm interested in.
Not that I'm against FW in tournaments, but I get some of the arguments.
That said, good on FW for bringing the price point of the Indexes to something reasonable. I probably still won't buy them, as the standard-fare GW stuff will work fine for me. But still, it's nice to see.
This is pretty much it. People are hating on FW because of past experiences that have nothing to do with 8th edition now. People are trying to push an agenda by any excuse they can. Anyone can get FW products online the same as GW products. Past that, many people just use proxies and counts as. The rules for a lot of units are "good" but not "broken" which is a big difference. Units that are broken are just spammed as much as possible in this edition since it's allowed. Looking at any tournaments right now, there aren't any units being spammed like previous broken units. Just because a single FW unit ends up in a winning list doesn't mean squat.
Multiple of the top ten lists had FW units, Elysian command squads, Elysian sniper squads, and malefic lords.
FW has broken units. Elysian command squads drop 4 BS 3+ plasma for 56 pts. That is broken. Scions command squads were considered broken for similar reasons but cost 73 to do the same shots at the same BS. GW saw the issue and addressed it in the errata so you can have 1 command squad per 1 regiment officer.
FW needs to do the same. Not just elysians either, malefic lords etc are a problem.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/09/08 22:25:10
Insectum7 wrote: IIRC, while the new FW indexes are surprisingly cheap, the prior FW books were at a price point that lost my interest right away. I wasn't about to pay $70 for a book so I could use a single unit of interest to me, then have that 70$ book become obsolete after an edition change.
50$ is already more than I want to spend on a codex, but at least it's a whole army that I'm interested in.
Not that I'm against FW in tournaments, but I get some of the arguments.
That said, good on FW for bringing the price point of the Indexes to something reasonable. I probably still won't buy them, as the standard-fare GW stuff will work fine for me. But still, it's nice to see.
This is pretty much it. People are hating on FW because of past experiences that have nothing to do with 8th edition now. People are trying to push an agenda by any excuse they can. Anyone can get FW products online the same as GW products. Past that, many people just use proxies and counts as. The rules for a lot of units are "good" but not "broken" which is a big difference. Units that are broken are just spammed as much as possible in this edition since it's allowed. Looking at any tournaments right now, there aren't any units being spammed like previous broken units. Just because a single FW unit ends up in a winning list doesn't mean squat.
Multiple of the top ten lists had FW units, Elysian command squads, Elysian sniper squads, and malefic lords.
FW has broken units. Elysian command squads drop 4 BS 3+ plasma for 56 pts. That is broken. Scions command squads were considered broken for similar reasons but cost 73 to do the same shots at the same BS. GW saw the issue and addressed it in the errata so you can have 1 command squad per 1 regiment officer.
FW needs to do the same. Not just elysians either, malefic lords etc are a problem.
The Scions cost more because they have better armour. And even just a standard 10 man Scion squad (not Command squad) can take 4 Plasmaguns, and they're Troops! Though the difference in armour hardly matters when you can cover the entire board with cheap bodies (conscripts).
There's nothing wrong with Elysians right now.
Malefic Lords need an errata... but so do SOOO many more regular GW units.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/09/08 22:51:09
You're comparing a 4 man unit that can be spammed, can bring 4 plasma guns(1 per model) to a ten model unit that can bring a total of four.
One costs 56 pts, the other is 118 pts. You can literally take two of the 56 pt squads for the cost of 1 Scion squad and have points to spare.
And saying Elysians are fine because their armor save is 1 less.
You are wrong. Simple as that :(
Edit-. The elysians are literally 100% more effective than the index units they mirror per point compared to special weapons teams, or Scion squads. Both of those index units are already arguably too good. I realize you play DKOK so are defensive about FW but you are not being subjective at all on the topic.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/09/08 23:08:23
You're comparing a 4 man unit that can be spammed, can bring 4 plasma guns(1 per model) to a ten model unit that can bring a total of four.
One costs 56 pts, the other is 118 pts. You can literally take two of the 56 pt squads for the cost of 1 Scion squad and have points to spare.
And saying Elysians are fine because their armor save is 1 less.
You are wrong. Simple as that :(
Edit-. The elysians are literally 100% more effective than the index units they mirror per point compared to special weapons teams, or Scion squads. Both of those index units are already arguably too good. I realize you play DKOK so are defensive about FW but you are not being subjective at all on the topic.
So he's off base because 4 units being used are broken, and therefore blanket ban is okay?
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
You're comparing a 4 man unit that can be spammed, can bring 4 plasma guns(1 per model) to a ten model unit that can bring a total of four.
One costs 56 pts, the other is 118 pts. You can literally take two of the 56 pt squads for the cost of 1 Scion squad and have points to spare.
And saying Elysians are fine because their armor save is 1 less.
You are wrong. Simple as that :(
Edit-. The elysians are literally 100% more effective than the index units they mirror per point compared to special weapons teams, or Scion squads. Both of those index units are already arguably too good. I realize you play DKOK so are defensive about FW but you are not being subjective at all on the topic.
In the context of some WAACturd 'spamming' them, yes surely I do agree. But with an easy FAQ fix, like they did with Scions, they are totally fine. I mentioned the standard Scions because they are TROOPS and can take 4 Plasmaguns, whereas the Elysian troops can take 1... but if we are comparing Command squads with Command squads... Elysians are only "better" because they can currently be spammed, they're still less survivable.
In the winning IG list however, he only had 2 command squads, AND 2 commanders - something he could've also done with Scions. You're totally blowing off the armour save like it doesn't matter - and I'll even agree that in the context of an ocean of (actually broken) Conscript spam it really doesn't, but otherwise it most certainly will. The Elysians in that list were by far the least offensive models on the table.
Your claim that they are 100% more effective is just "wrong. Simple as that". Scions might cost a little more, but they're still better... if you're meaning hypothetically spamming Elysian Command Squads only... well again, yeah ok - but that's not what won the NOVA... it was psyker spam, taurox spam, mortar spam, Celestine and tons of Conscripts.
Anyway I don't think anyone has claimed that either FW or GW are perfectly balanced, but it was FAR and away broken GW units, and there are sooo many more of them, that won Nova and several other big events to date. To ban FW is just mental.
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2017/09/09 00:36:01
You're comparing a 4 man unit that can be spammed, can bring 4 plasma guns(1 per model) to a ten model unit that can bring a total of four.
One costs 56 pts, the other is 118 pts. You can literally take two of the 56 pt squads for the cost of 1 Scion squad and have points to spare.
And saying Elysians are fine because their armor save is 1 less.
You are wrong. Simple as that :(
Edit-. The elysians are literally 100% more effective than the index units they mirror per point compared to special weapons teams, or Scion squads. Both of those index units are already arguably too good. I realize you play DKOK so are defensive about FW but you are not being subjective at all on the topic.
In the context of some WAACturd 'spamming' them, yes surely I do agree. But with an easy FAQ fix, like they did with Scions, they are totally fine. I mentioned the standard Scions because they are TROOPS and can take 4 Plasmaguns, whereas the Elysian troops can take 1... but if we are comparing Command squads with Command squads... Elysians are only "better" because they can currently be spammed, they're still less survivable.
In the winning IG list however, he only had 2 command squads, AND 2 commanders - something he could've also done with Scions. You're totally blowing off the armour save like it doesn't matter - and I'll even agree that in the context of an ocean of (actually broken) Conscript spam it really doesn't, but otherwise it most certainly will. The Elysians in that list were by far the least offensive models on the table.
Your claim that they are 100% more effective is just "wrong. Simple as that". Scions might cost a little more, but they're still better... if you're meaning hypothetically spamming Elysian Command Squads only... well again, yeah ok - but that's not what won the NOVA... it was psyker spam, taurox spam, mortar spam, Celestine and tons of Conscripts.
Anyway I don't think anyone has claimed that either FW or GW are perfectly balanced, but it was FAR and away broken GW units, and there are sooo many more of them, that won Nova and several other big events to date. To ban FW is just mental.
This. Individual units are not dominating the scene. Being able to take the best units from a large pool (Imperium) is what is dominating the scene. Other factions that have a far more limited source of resources will not have the power to compete at that level. Just look at the winning list. There are units from, what, three or four different armies? Yet it's all Imperium. If he came with a spam of Elysians and plasma, sure I'd say it's broken. But he didn't. He won because he's able to legally cherry pick the best of the best from all the different Imperium armies.
Also REALLY? LoW and other hated units? You mean Eldar titans and then?
The LoW slot was no more broken than the Troop slot when you had Scatterbikes and 5th Edition Grey Hunters. Please cut that crap off.
No I don't mean titans, those things are not even existing for me. I mean imperial knights, wraitknights, stompas, baneblades, stormsurges, magnus.... this kind of stuff. Not everyone likes huge models in medium sized games like the 2000 points format. Imho the huge stuff should be the dreadnought, terminators and the land raider. And their equivalents of course.
It's not exclusively a matter of rules, there's not only the competitive gaming.
I've defeat an army with 3 knights and magnus but I'll never play against that list in my life, it was so boring.
I've got no problem to face a list with ONE LoW, but I hate them and I won't bring them, even if they are the most competitive units in my armies, simple.
"constipated and close-minded atmosphere"?? In my group we play with ALL the units (unless we don't have the models of course) in the indexes, not only the most performing ones. Playing competitive games is as fun as playing fluffy lists, the only important thing is to balance the two lists. The close-minded atmosphere is the one tipycal of WAAC players who only play one single list with a few variations and with only the most effective stuff. If you usually bring only 8-10 units including FW and LoWs while I alternate 20+ different choices I would not define my meta to be costipated and close minded, rather the opposite.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2017/09/09 08:01:49
I don't run the events locally and have no say in what's allowed. Was just sharing what happens here. I won't turn down a game that has FW models in them, but there are many who would. Like I said, I own a few (mostly for painting though). The only model from FW I detest playing against is from AoS outside of Lord of War choices for 40k, and those I just don't like in general unless it's just a single one. That said, I'm not a fan of playing against Conscript spam, flier spam or the G-Man either.
You're comparing a 4 man unit that can be spammed, can bring 4 plasma guns(1 per model) to a ten model unit that can bring a total of four.
One costs 56 pts, the other is 118 pts. You can literally take two of the 56 pt squads for the cost of 1 Scion squad and have points to spare.
And saying Elysians are fine because their armor save is 1 less.
You are wrong. Simple as that :(
Edit-. The elysians are literally 100% more effective than the index units they mirror per point compared to special weapons teams, or Scion squads. Both of those index units are already arguably too good. I realize you play DKOK so are defensive about FW but you are not being subjective at all on the topic.
In the context of some WAACturd 'spamming' them, yes surely I do agree. But with an easy FAQ fix, like they did with Scions, they are totally fine. I mentioned the standard Scions because they are TROOPS and can take 4 Plasmaguns, whereas the Elysian troops can take 1... but if we are comparing Command squads with Command squads... Elysians are only "better" because they can currently be spammed, they're still less survivable.
In the winning IG list however, he only had 2 command squads, AND 2 commanders - something he could've also done with Scions. You're totally blowing off the armour save like it doesn't matter - and I'll even agree that in the context of an ocean of (actually broken) Conscript spam it really doesn't, but otherwise it most certainly will. The Elysians in that list were by far the least offensive models on the table.
Your claim that they are 100% more effective is just "wrong. Simple as that". Scions might cost a little more, but they're still better... if you're meaning hypothetically spamming Elysian Command Squads only... well again, yeah ok - but that's not what won the NOVA... it was psyker spam, taurox spam, mortar spam, Celestine and tons of Conscripts.
Anyway I don't think anyone has claimed that either FW or GW are perfectly balanced, but it was FAR and away broken GW units, and there are sooo many more of them, that won Nova and several other big events to date. To ban FW is just mental.
Quick note - Scions cost 104 points for 1 commander and 4 plas command squad.
Elysian's cost 96 points for the same. (101 if you take a plasma pistol on the commander)
So, for 3 less points you get +1 plasma shot at 12" range, +1 ld and -1 armour save. You also get a pretty pointless morale re-roll rule via the commander and 2 different orders - of which you'll never be using for these squads anyway. Would you say that a +1 armour save is worth 0.75 points per model?
The really difference comes in when you compare a 10 troop squad from each. If you give each one 10 men, 1 plasma and 1 plasma pistol the Scions cost 110 points, and the Elysian's cost 62. Now, the big trade off here is the +1 BS Scions have and the hot shot lasguns vs the normal lasgun. Taking the lasguns out gives a cost of 101, so a 39 point difference, which is 3.9 points per model for +1 BS and +1 save. In this, either the Scions are arguably over costed. BUT, when you then look at a normal infantry squad, the cost is only 52 points - 10 points cheaper than the Elysian's.
The other thing to note is, obviously the Scions get access to way way way more plasma than the Elysian's. For 128 points you get 4 plasma guns and 1 plasma pistol. Total difference of 66 points. Herein lies the question. Would you pay 66 points for 3 extra deep-striking plasma guns? Is the ability to deal 18 plasma wounds from deep-strike worth it?
The difference between the 2 sets of squads works out to be 69 points, and when you set them both against each other the Tempestus "should" win every time. The tempestus would do 6.667 wounds on average to the Elysian's, while the Elysian's would do 4.32 (and that's with the commander also firing while the MT commander cant! - also not including order re-rolls or overcharging). Sure the Elysian's can do some insane tricks with grenades in the turn after they arrive from deep-strike, but, lets face it, if you're worried about 10 krak grenades, it'd be extremely easy to remove the threat of it in your own turn.
Sure, you could take an Elysian Veteran plasma squad for 96 points containing 3 plasma guns and 1 pistol in order to match the 3+ BS, but you are then 1 plasma gun down on the Scions, and don't have the hot shot. Again, taking the hot shot out and 1 plas out, the difference is 18 points. 18 points for a better save, which is then 1.8 points per model. These are also then taking up an elite slot, compared to a troop slot, in an army/game that tends to be very very very heavy on elite options.
Sure the Elysian's are cheaper - slightly - than Scions, but there are differences that make Scions better when they match up for a relatively small points cost.
Snipers. Ok, so another sticking point is the Elysian sniper squads.
For 21 points you get 3 shots, 6 wounds, 3+ BS t3 and 5+ save.
Ratlings cost 35 for 5 shots, 5 wounds, 3+ BS t2 and a 6+ save.
So, instantly there is a trade off for shots for wounds. Both have deployment tricks. However, Ratlings also get a shoot and move ability and an additional +1 save while in cover, so, both units rock a 4+ save in cover.
Unit vs unit, the Ratlings do more damage than the Elysian when shooting at each other, but the Elysian's have a better points per wound score. However, when both shooting at the same GEQ unit, their points per wound are pretty much exactly the same. There is a difference of 0.0106 between the two units, in favour of the Elysian's. Hardly what i'd call "game breaking". In addition to that - the moment each squad looses 2 wounds, the difference between the two units increases. A lot. Ratlings come out on top with a difference of 5.8773 for points per wound efficiency.
So, i guess you have to then look at the special rules for each unit. Deep strike vs setup after deployment and shoot and move. It is also worth noting that, deep-strike will also lower the BS of the Elysian's to a 4+ and thus reduce their efficiency to below the level of the Ratling squad. Both deployment setups have their advantages, but, i believe, in the current meta, the Ratlings win out, simply because they give you an additional screening unit for the first turn whilst maintaining their 3+ BS for the first turn. Deep-striking on turn 2 or 3 has it's objective advantages, but then compared to the Ratlings you've already lost 1 or 2 turns of shooting. Sure the Ratlings could be targetted first turn, but, then it is a question of overall army comparison and whether or not you have any "higher threat/higher priority targets" in your list.
So, overall, in individual comparison, Elysian command squads are of course "more efficient", but, when looked at in terms of overall requirement to field the units, Scions are arguably just as good, if not better due to the difference only being 3 points. Scion trooper squads, vs Elysian trooper squads is a no contest straight to the Scions. Snipers, again, is a tough call, but arguably Ratlings are better as well.
Now - when we then take into account the November codex, we also have to consider how things are going to work out. As it stands, both sets of units tend to be run in "soup" armies. While soup armies are strong, we will need to consider whether or not they will remain worth it for Astra Militarum after the codex. The main reasons being objective secured and "chapter tactics". As it stands, Scions will have access to every single normal Astra Militarum unit, where the Elysian's will not. This in itself, potentially, puts the Scions ahead of the Elysian's, even if it just because of conscripts.
Got a bit longer than i expected when typing, but, let me know your thoughts and feel free to add to/correct anything.
SideshowLucifer wrote: Locally, all Forgeworld models are banned from tournaments and only one LoW model is allowed per army.
Forgeworld is not banned because of power, but because of the lack of accessibility people have to the models and rules. Many feel it's a pay to win thing. I'm all for limiting the LoW choices to 1.
I've ordered from their website just fine. What's this lack of accessibility argument really coming from?
The fact that models cost twice or more their equivalents that are present in the GW catalogue, probably. And not only those resin models are super expensive but there's also no chance to get new FW models with a 25%-30% price cut. Not in my area at least.
That's why FW models here are extremely uncommon. FW prices is the reason why that stuff is unpopular here and we have a sort of implied agreement that bans FW stuff.
LoWs are other hated units.
You can find both GW and FW stuff for cheap in the used market... but that said, everything in 40K is "pay to play"... it's a privileged hobby. People who worry about feeding their kids and paying rent don't play Warhammer. Further Forgeworld isn't that much more expensive than GW unless we are talking about the enormous super heavy type models.
The old notion that Forgeworld's "pay to play" means you are getting better rules for a higher price, is not even remotely accurate and hasn't been so for a very long time (if ever). There are individual units that are not balanced correctly in the FW line... and SOOOO many more that are not balanced correctly in the GW line. They all need attention and GW/FW seems committed to giving them attention.
I'm so happy I don't play in such a constipated and close-minded atmosphere where folks are banning units out of uninformed fear.
It is no where near as easy to find cheap FW on the used market as it is GW, so it is somewhat disingenuous to equate the two.
Really the issue with FW right now is waiting to see if they address any balance issues. That is pretty much it.
I see FW all over eBay, certainly there is more regular GW stock but it's not impossible to find what you want. In fact it's quite possible, to get used or new Forgeworld - it's not some unpenetrable wall some folks make it out to be. And if you don't want to buy FW - don't. This is utterly besides the point and in either case should have no bearing on 'banning' units.
As for FW addressing balance - they've already done exactly what GW has - they released an FAQ for each of their 8th edition Index.
It being there and it being cheap are not the same thing most FW I see on ebay is at or above retail "pro painted" or Imperial stuff, but even a lot of that is expensive. SO I still dispute the as cheap and easy as GW on the used market.
They have also not release an FAQ addressing any balance issues, they issued an FAQ addressing horrible rules that didn't work at all. GW has also released multiple FAQs and changes.
From what was apparently said at Nova (according to the Frontline gaming podcast) is that the Chapter Approved book is apparently going to be including points and rules changes for BOTH GW and FW. This might be the reason why FW hasn't released any more FAQs after the initial batch. These means to me, that the GW guys are now going to be having oversight and/or input into FW rule and points creation. This, in my view, will help a lot in terms of addressing peoples concerns and ensuring -GENUINE- issues get resolved properly and centrally.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/09/09 15:32:20
Great breakdown Kdash. It's been said (to death) here but the Elysians were the least offensive units in that IG list and are indeed interchangeable with other units from the GW Index.
As for both FW and GW needing further attention to game balance - we all agree - but it does appear that they are interested in doing so; and there's no denying the GW side is by far the worst offender currently.
They've both released FAQ right out of the gate... GW released several more but they still have so many glaring balance issues left unresolved (Conscript spam, assassin spam, etc etc etc) that could've been fixed in any of those updates. Hopefully the Chapter Approved does some work.
It is just sad to see that uninformed fear is causing folks to ban "FW" of all things, at certain events - worse at events in the Northeast that I might otherwise attend.
Also REALLY? LoW and other hated units? You mean Eldar titans and then?
The LoW slot was no more broken than the Troop slot when you had Scatterbikes and 5th Edition Grey Hunters. Please cut that crap off.
No I don't mean titans, those things are not even existing for me. I mean imperial knights, wraitknights, stompas, baneblades, stormsurges, magnus.... this kind of stuff. Not everyone likes huge models in medium sized games like the 2000 points format. Imho the huge stuff should be the dreadnought, terminators and the land raider. And their equivalents of course.
It's not exclusively a matter of rules, there's not only the competitive gaming.
I've defeat an army with 3 knights and magnus but I'll never play against that list in my life, it was so boring.
I've got no problem to face a list with ONE LoW, but I hate them and I won't bring them, even if they are the most competitive units in my armies, simple.
"constipated and close-minded atmosphere"?? In my group we play with ALL the units (unless we don't have the models of course) in the indexes, not only the most performing ones. Playing competitive games is as fun as playing fluffy lists, the only important thing is to balance the two lists. The close-minded atmosphere is the one tipycal of WAAC players who only play one single list with a few variations and with only the most effective stuff. If you usually bring only 8-10 units including FW and LoWs while I alternate 20+ different choices I would not define my meta to be costipated and close minded, rather the opposite.
Wraithknights were the only unit you listed that was busted in any way. So basically you don't like them "out of principle", which is arguably pretty ignorant to be honest.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
I've got no problem to face a list with ONE LoW, but I hate them and I won't bring them, even if they are the most competitive units in my armies, simple.
"constipated and close-minded atmosphere"?? In my group we play with ALL the units (unless we don't have the models of course) in the indexes, not only the most performing ones. Playing competitive games is as fun as playing fluffy lists, the only important thing is to balance the two lists. The close-minded atmosphere is the one tipycal of WAAC players who only play one single list with a few variations and with only the most effective stuff. If you usually bring only 8-10 units including FW and LoWs while I alternate 20+ different choices I would not define my meta to be costipated and close minded, rather the opposite.
I think people need to often take a step back when considering their lists. For events like Nova and other tournaments, you have to approach it from a more WAAC viewpoint than normally, whereas, if you are playing at your local club for some fun, this is where you then tone it down (unless of course your opponent agrees and/or you are practising a list for a tournament). Understanding the balance is something some people struggle with.
What causes the problems are when people attempt to compare a highly competitive, event winning army, to their own or to the armies in their group. There is a very very high chance that these event armies will be way stronger than most of the clubs armies, but, it is a different arena and a different concept. The two shouldn't be compared, or attempted to be. Unfortunately, people see 1 thing being spammed, or another thing appearing in loads of different armies and they immediately think it is broken or OP, whether it is FW or GW, and then complain about it without first taking a look at everything. Elysian's is a very good example of this. LoW are sometimes also an example of this, BobbyG being an example. In my view, the only time LoWs become a problem, is if you aren't setup to deal with them. This happens more so in casual games, but in a tournament setup, you need to expect to come across some. Sure it can be dull to play against 3 knights and Magnus/RG but in an event, it shouldn't be the end of the world. If it's a casual game, then, by all means set some restrictions, however, i'd advise to first try some matchups against the things you want to restrict, rather than just restricting them. A lot of units can be very fun and offer different challenges and people would find that some things really aren't that "scary".
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gunzhard wrote: Great breakdown Kdash. It's been said (to death) here but the Elysians were the least offensive units in that IG list and are indeed interchangeable with other units from the GW Index.
As for both FW and GW needing further attention to game balance - we all agree - but it does appear that they are interested in doing so; and there's no denying the GW side is by far the worst offender currently.
They've both released FAQ right out of the gate... GW released several more but they still have so many glaring balance issues left unresolved (Conscript spam, assassin spam, etc etc etc) that could've been fixed in any of those updates. Hopefully the Chapter Approved does some work.
It is just sad to see that uninformed fear is causing folks to ban "FW" of all things, at certain events - worse at events in the Northeast that I might otherwise attend.
I I think, well, hope at least, that once Chapter Approved is released and every army has a codex things will settle down and those with the "auto ban FW" mindset will be able to re-assess their position. One thing Reece from FLG did say on the podcast about Chapter Approved, is that he fully expects their to be no requirement to have a power level cap on ITC events after it's release. To me, that is pretty big and implies that the units that need "adjustment" will be looked at. I think that the upcoming LVO will potentially be one of the turning points.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/09/09 16:02:17
15k+
Emperor's Spears 2500
Beastmen 10k
