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.

I have 2 issues with FW:

1. Availability, can I go to my local game store and have them order me a FW kit? Probably not I would either have to order it myself or get a group together and do it. I usually always support the local game store but I also call them out on BS practices but the fact is until FW is able to sell through distrubitors so that a local game store could put in a order, I don't want to support that. So I support the decision to keep FW out of competitive events for that reason but its not the only reason.

2. It is clearly a huge benefit to Imperial/chaos players than any other faction in the game, Tau and CWE are close but nowhere near the size of the Imperium list. I play DE and I have 3 options from FW, only 3 with no hints at future models, I get that Imperial players are the most numerous and so they have to cater but come on throw us xenos players a bone. I could take the tantalous and its a great vehicle mind you, I love the model but I know if I allow that then I have to allow whatever BS imperial FW option that completely invalidates it while costing less.

On a side note I don't think Superheavies or primarch level LOWs should be allowed in competitive events either, they should have stayed in apocalypse where they belong.

Luthon1234 wrote:
I have 2 issues with FW:

1. Availability, can I go to my local game store and have them order me a FW kit? Probably not I would either have to order it myself or get a group together and do it. I usually always support the local game store but I also call them out on BS practices but the fact is until FW is able to sell through distrubitors so that a local game store could put in a order, I don't want to support that. So I support the decision to keep FW out of competitive events for that reason but its not the only reason.

2. It is clearly a huge benefit to Imperial/chaos players than any other faction in the game, Tau and CWE are close but nowhere near the size of the Imperium list. I play DE and I have 3 options from FW, only 3 with no hints at future models, I get that Imperial players are the most numerous and so they have to cater but come on throw us xenos players a bone. I could take the tantalous and its a great vehicle mind you, I love the model but I know if I allow that then I have to allow whatever BS imperial FW option that completely invalidates it while costing less.

On a side note I don't think Superheavies or primarch level LOWs should be allowed in competitive events either, they should have stayed in apocalypse where they belong.

As to your point 1 - I still don't get how that translates to keeping FW out of competitive events? ...and why it should matter at all? You're saying you choose not to buy FW for your own reasons, so nobody else can use it either. I refuse to buy Primarus marines for my own reasons - don't think they should be banned though.

As to your point 2 - well... the same attention to Imperial/Chaos can be said of GW, on a much bigger scale - so your argument is totally bogus.

Luthon1234 wrote:
I have 2 issues with FW:

1. Availability, can I go to my local game store and have them order me a FW kit? Probably not I would either have to order it myself or get a group together and do it. I usually always support the local game store but I also call them out on BS practices but the fact is until FW is able to sell through distrubitors so that a local game store could put in a order, I don't want to support that. So I support the decision to keep FW out of competitive events for that reason but its not the only reason.

2. It is clearly a huge benefit to Imperial/chaos players than any other faction in the game, Tau and CWE are close but nowhere near the size of the Imperium list. I play DE and I have 3 options from FW, only 3 with no hints at future models, I get that Imperial players are the most numerous and so they have to cater but come on throw us xenos players a bone. I could take the tantalous and its a great vehicle mind you, I love the model but I know if I allow that then I have to allow whatever BS imperial FW option that completely invalidates it while costing less.

On a side note I don't think Superheavies or primarch level LOWs should be allowed in competitive events either, they should have stayed in apocalypse where they belong.

I can't walk into a GW store and grab certain kits because they might not be available. In fact, anytime I've been in their store I've never seen a Sternguard kit. Should Sternguard be banned?
OR I can stop whining and order online.

Second point is bad because lots of races still get benefit. Necrons currently NEED those units available to them as they're one of the weakest armies currently just as an example. Eldar get Spectres which are a pretty competitive choice.

You never will have every area stop "auto banned fw" b.c of bias, with a game this large, we will always shave sometype of bias.

 Gunzhard wrote:

On a side note I don't think Superheavies or primarch level LOWs should be allowed in competitive events either, they should have stayed in apocalypse where they belong.

As to your point 1 - I still don't get how that translates to keeping FW out of competitive events? ...and why it should matter at all? You're saying you choose not to buy FW for your own reasons, so nobody else can use it either. I refuse to buy Primarus marines for my own reasons - don't think they should be banned though.

As to your point 2 - well... the same attention to Imperial/Chaos can be said of GW, on a much bigger scale - so your argument is totally bogus.

Uhh What? ...how does Primarus being in codex invalidate my point? ...answer - it doesn't.

The FW index are currently cheap, and can you buy online versions. If you choose to buy 'local only' that's cool - but that doesn't mean everyone should have to follow your code.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

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.

My point is that I consider that these units belong to apocalypse or any possible large scale matches. I couldn't care less about the OPness of the units, I prefer fighting against 300 conscripts than facing an imperial knight. Not because the big guy is broken, the conscripts are way more difficult (if not impossible sometimes) to deal with, but because IMHO it shouldn' belong to casual games with mid sized points formats.

I'm not interested in being competitive at any cost, I play all kind of games, super competitive, super fluffy and something in between, it doesn't matter. Of course it's a matter of personal tastes, I don't want FW or LoW to be banned out of principle, but I'm reluctant to play against those stuff because I don't like them in 2000 points (or lower format) games. In my group there's no reat FW or LoW ban, we just prefer playing with other options. I'm just saying that I understand why people hate FW or other huge models.

Again, competitive 40k is not the only way to play 40k. It's a game and people have fun playing it for different reasons and in different ways.

 Blackie wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Again, competitive 40k is not the only way to play 40k. It's a game and people have fun playing it for different reasons and in different ways.

Yeah, sure, but in this thread we're talking about tournament play specifically.

And further FW certainly does not equal - competitive advantage.

I get you might not want titans in your regular game, but there's way more to FW than titans.

Luthon1234 wrote:

 Gunzhard wrote:

On a side note I don't think Superheavies or primarch level LOWs should be allowed in competitive events either, they should have stayed in apocalypse where they belong.

As to your point 1 - I still don't get how that translates to keeping FW out of competitive events? ...and why it should matter at all? You're saying you choose not to buy FW for your own reasons, so nobody else can use it either. I refuse to buy Primarus marines for my own reasons - don't think they should be banned though.

As to your point 2 - well... the same attention to Imperial/Chaos can be said of GW, on a much bigger scale - so your argument is totally bogus.

Primarus are in the index and codexes that GW has made so that invalidates your argument there. Let say that GW made all the rules and indexes for FW, and lets keep it that FW is still in the situation they are in now. I would be totally fine with it as 1. there is a single group making rules for the game whether for better or worse and 2. GW is known to be bad to local game stores anyways so whats new?

2nd point: I guess? It would be nice if they would break the habit and support the other lines. Though I totally blame them for the resurgence of primarchs.

 Blackie wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

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.

My point is that I consider that these units belong to apocalypse or any possible large scale matches. I couldn't care less about the OPness of the units, I prefer fighting against 300 conscripts than facing an imperial knight. Not because the big guy is broken, the conscripts are way more difficult (if not impossible sometimes) to deal with, but because IMHO it shouldn' belong to casual games with mid sized points formats.

I'm not interested in being competitive at any cost, I play all kind of games, super competitive, super fluffy and something in between, it doesn't matter. Of course it's a matter of personal tastes, I don't want FW or LoW to be banned out of principle, but I'm reluctant to play against those stuff because I don't like them in 2000 points (or lower format) games. In my group there's no reat FW or LoW ban, we just prefer playing with other options. I'm just saying that I understand why people hate FW or other huge models.

Again, competitive 40k is not the only way to play 40k. It's a game and people have fun playing it for different reasons and in different ways.

So let me get this straight.

You admit that the Imperial Knight really isn't an issue to handle. Conscripts are an issue to handle. Yet you prefer facing the 300 or so Conscripts because, and I quote, "it shouldn't belong to casual games", when Conscripts are less a casual unit than the Imperial Knight, simply because it's in a LoW slot and you just believe, out of a principle, it doesn't belong. Even though 100+ conscripts, which takes up MUCH more table space and is only 300 points points compared to the Imperial Knight, which is 400+. Which is odd if you want a skirmish game isn't it?

What principle is this, really? People shouldn't be allowed to run models they want when they aren't broken in any way, shape, or form? What you exhibit is a refusal to accept any change in the game, and what is clearly a change for the better. That we've had a few broken choices in that slot (SO you have Wraithknights last edition and to a MUCH lesser extent Stormsurges, though one could argue for just buying more Riptides, and then this edition you have Roboute) ain't a good argument because you aren't looking at how many broken choices we've had in different slots over the years.

In the end, you have the ability to decide who to play and who not to play. Just remember that your reasons, to be honest, pretty dumb. I'd rather play against someone that's WAAC and a poor sportsman than someone just believes certain units don't belong in THEIR game. Because, ya know, it's everyone's game.

 Gunzhard wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:
We didn't ban GW units from tournaments when knights were destroying the game. We didn't ban GW units from tournaments when summoning was destroying the game, when re-rollable 2+ invulns were destroying the game, when allies we're destroying the game, when Riptides were destroying the game, when formations were destroying the game, when flyers were destroying the game, when invisibility was destroying the game. Guilliman, conscripts and certain flyers are destroying the game RIGHT NOW and still no one is suggesting banning Games Workshop units from tournaments.

The only people who advocate for banning FW wholesale are grognard fools who got into the game back when FW wasn't allowed in 90% of games and tounys, and want to "go back to the good old days".

Nailed it.

Exactly. The post above where it was said that FW is defining the 8th edition meta made me laugh out loud. Well, there's also folks who think the earth is flat.

Regarding pay to win: 40K is pay to win both with and without FW. There is no non-subjective way to place the bar on where "pay to win" begins. Ergo, anyone saying FW is pay to win is just declaring it based on nothing but subjective scale. A game either is pay-to-win or it isn't, saying a game becomes pay-to-win at a certain amount of euros/dollars/you name it is ridiculous, subjective, and dumb.

Someone with not that much income might consider the Triumvirate of the Imperium pay-to-win (since you need Guilliman from there). To someone else with bigger income it might be the Tau'nar, which costs way more. No one is more right or wrong in the matter, and the manufacturer is irrelevant. The only undisputable fact is that WH40K is pay-to-win to beginwith; you pay money to better your chances at victory (if you want to win that is, for after a certain point strategy alone won't cut it anymore when you're trying to beat the AM FOTM list with your Blood Angels Tactical Squads riding in Rhinos).

Well then... out of principle i'm not talking to the Anti-FW guy anymore.

 Runic wrote:

 Gunzhard wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:
We didn't ban GW units from tournaments when knights were destroying the game. We didn't ban GW units from tournaments when summoning was destroying the game, when re-rollable 2+ invulns were destroying the game, when allies we're destroying the game, when Riptides were destroying the game, when formations were destroying the game, when flyers were destroying the game, when invisibility was destroying the game. Guilliman, conscripts and certain flyers are destroying the game RIGHT NOW and still no one is suggesting banning Games Workshop units from tournaments.

The only people who advocate for banning FW wholesale are grognard fools who got into the game back when FW wasn't allowed in 90% of games and tounys, and want to "go back to the good old days".

Nailed it.

Exactly. The post above where it was said that FW is defining the 8th edition meta made me laugh out loud. Well, there's also folks who think the earth is flat.

Regarding pay to win: 40K is pay to win both with and without FW. There is no non-subjective way to place the bar on where "pay to win" begins. Ergo, anyone saying FW is pay to win is just declaring it based on nothing but subjective scale. A game either is pay-to-win or it isn't, saying a game becomes pay-to-win at a certain amount of euros/dollars/you name it is ridiculous, subjective, and dumb.

Someone with not that much income might consider the Triumvirate of the Imperium pay-to-win (since you need Guilliman from there). To someone else with bigger income it might be the Tau'nar, which costs way more. No one is more right or wrong in the matter, and the manufacturer is irrelevant. The only undisputable fact is that WH40K is pay-to-win to beginwith; you pay money to better your chances at victory (if you want to win that is, for after a certain point strategy alone won't cut it anymore when you're trying to beat the AM FOTM list with your Blood Angels Tactical Squads riding in Rhinos).

Well, put it this way.

100 conscripts will cost £180 for 300 points.
1 Leviathan dreadnought with 2 grav flux will cost £72 for 309 points.

Now, it will take the Leviathan 4 or 5 turns to clear the conscripts on his own, but, the conscripts have no chance of killing the Leviathan. (400 shots in the first turn will only do 4.3 wounds - then after the Leviathan shooting, that number will drop to around 272 shots, for another 2.9 wounds, then 145 shots etc etc (not including the heavy flamers))

An Elysian command squad and Commander will cost £44, but, to get a 4 plas Scion team you'd need to spend £84. (only has 1 plasma gun in each £21 box.........)

Guilliman essentially costs £55 (gotta by the full Triumvirate box). Magnus costs £80, Mortarian costs £85. A stormraven costs £50.

And there are plenty more examples. The Renegade HQs cost £16 for 2 moedls on FW for the models that could be used for the Malefic lords or rogue psykers. Sure, the artillery carriages cost a lot (as they are a huge block of resin), but, as everyone wants to play the battery version instead, they either proxy or spend £31 on a normal basilisk and basically remove the chimera part due to the model being OOP.

So, when you actually look at breaking things down a lot of the units being used from FW generally cost WAY less than a standard unit of 50 conscripts. Lets face it, you can buy TWO Imperial Knights for LESS than 100 conscripts. (I used the leviathan as the initial example, as it is not only a good counter to hordes, but worked out nicely with the points value when compared to conscripts)

Kdash wrote:

Well, put it this way.

100 conscripts will cost £180 for 300 points.
1 Leviathan dreadnought with 2 grav flux will cost £72 for 309 points.

Now, it will take the Leviathan 4 or 5 turns to clear the conscripts on his own, but, the conscripts have no chance of killing the Leviathan. (400 shots in the first turn will only do 4.3 wounds - then after the Leviathan shooting, that number will drop to around 272 shots, for another 2.9 wounds, then 145 shots etc etc (not including the heavy flamers))

Yeah but the POINT of the Conscripts is to keep the rest of your army alive and sit objectives....... Not everything in Warhammer needs to make their points back. Lets say a unit of yours that cost 300pts but only kills 10pts of models, now lets say that unit got 4 VP's making you win the game. Did that unit get its points back? No, but it doesnt matter b.c you won the game.

 Amishprn86 wrote:

Kdash wrote:

Well, put it this way.

100 conscripts will cost £180 for 300 points.
1 Leviathan dreadnought with 2 grav flux will cost £72 for 309 points.

Now, it will take the Leviathan 4 or 5 turns to clear the conscripts on his own, but, the conscripts have no chance of killing the Leviathan. (400 shots in the first turn will only do 4.3 wounds - then after the Leviathan shooting, that number will drop to around 272 shots, for another 2.9 wounds, then 145 shots etc etc (not including the heavy flamers))

Yeah but the POINT of the Conscripts is to keep the rest of your army alive and sit objectives....... Not everything in Warhammer needs to make their points back. Lets say a unit of yours that cost 300pts but only kills 10pts of models, now lets say that unit got 4 VP's making you win the game. Did that unit get its points back? No, but it doesnt matter b.c you won the game.

I think you mis-understood my point and comparison. People are saying the price and rules etc makes FW pay-2-win, especially in the current meta, due to it "not being accessible" for a lot of players. I chose conscripts cos there are thousands of them around right now, and the Leviathan, cos it is also considered a beast of a model and can somewhat counter hordes. Both happened to be the same in game points value.

The point i was making, is that the most common, over powered unit in the game right now, is literally twice as expensive to buy (therefore, in theory making it twice as in-accessible) as a lot of other big units in the game. That unit happens to be GW's not FW's. My 2k space marine army (which includes 2 FW models) will cost me £374 if i went out and brought everything now (oh god why did i do that? D: ) So, for roughly the price of 4 50 man conscript squads i can get, what i feel, is a very competitive all comers list.

So, what seems more pay to win? An army containing FW, or conscript spam?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:


I'd rather play against someone that's WAAC and a poor sportsman than someone just believes certain units don't belong in THEIR game. Because, ya know, it's everyone's game.

Fair enough. I just want a fair game which is based on infantries and transports. it's ok to bring LoW and huge models, but I won't play against lists that are basically built around them and at the same I won't bring (and even buy) those units. It's everyone's game of course but if I don't like some kind of games, which means armies with only a few immortal huge dudes, I'm free to decline playing against those armies. The purpose of playing 40k is to have fun, nothing more and nothing less, if I don't have fun playing against certain lists why should I face them just the same? The list with 3 knighs and magnus was too boring to play against, I won against that guy but who cares? With only 4 dudes every game against that list is going to be the same. No thanks.

Hundreds of conscripts are more casual than a knight because AM is supposed to be lots of cheap bodies, artillery and tanks, no matter of the scale of the battle. Now they may be OP but AM was designed to field a huge number of soldiers, you may play it with a different style but that's their fluff, I'd hate if AM gets new rules that actually make infantries disappear. I can't stand huge models, not because some of them are broken, I couldn't care less about that, but because 1500-2000 points formats are not apocalypse games. And when people abuse them, let me hate those kinds of lists

I'm not saying that everyone should do that but I'm offering an explanation about the hate that some people have toward LoWs or gigantic stuff, usually coming from FW, but not only.

This is completely out of topic though, I'm not even interested in arguing about this matter.

 Blackie wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:


I'd rather play against someone that's WAAC and a poor sportsman than someone just believes certain units don't belong in THEIR game. Because, ya know, it's everyone's game.

Fair enough. I just want a fair game which is based on infantries and transports. it's ok to bring LoW and huge models, but I won't play against lists that are basically built around them and at the same I won't bring (and even buy) those units. It's everyone's game of course but if I don't like some kind of games, which means armies with only a few immortal huge dudes, I'm free to decline playing against those armies. The purpose of playing 40k is to have fun, nothing more and nothing less, if I don't have fun playing against certain lists why should I face them just the same? The list with 3 knighs and magnus was too boring to play against, I won against that guy but who cares? With only 4 dudes every game against that list is going to be the same. No thanks.

Hundreds of conscripts are more casual than a knight because AM is supposed to be lots of cheap bodies, artillery and tanks, no matter of the scale of the battle. Now they may be OP but AM was designed to field a huge number of soldiers, you may play it with a different style but that's their fluff, I'd hate if AM gets new rules that actually make infantries disappear. I can't stand huge models, not because some of them are broken, I couldn't care less about that, but because 1500-2000 points formats are not apocalypse games. And when people abuse them, let me hate those kinds of lists

I'm not saying that everyone should do that but I'm offering an explanation about the hate that some people have toward LoWs or gigantic stuff, usually coming from FW, but not only.

This is completely out of topic though, I'm not even interested in arguing about this matter.

Not to keep hammering this but all of the units you listed are standard GW... Knights, Magnus, 'tanks', ...add Guilliman, now Mortarion etc... there were not many "gigantic stuff" from FW in top performing armies and there is typically very little anyway.

You seem to associate Forgeworld with WAAC or 'not fun' and that's just not right. Building pretty much any full Forgeworld army is a labor of love, it's generally WAY more narrative based as well. Yeah some WAACer might cherry-pick a unit or two to flush out the rest of his entirely broken (standard GW) list, but don't lump FW into that pile indiscriminately.

I don't have a dog in the fight. I just know its the LGS's here that run the tournies and they ban FW 90% or more of the time. Having owned an LGS before, I'm guessing because they can't order and sell the product (Just like GW stores not allowing non-GW models as conversions).

As for the LoW choices, I don't mind facing one big baddie. When the bulk of the army is that stuff, it just isn't any fun to play against. Playing against a knight list is extremely tedious. There are other legally allowed lists I dislike for similar reasons. 120 Conscripts aren't fun because it's just seeing who rolls the dice better with little other thought involved.

There is bad and good in everything though and in the end, it's a game, not a job.

GhostRecon wrote:
Orks had a list that finished 9th; otherwise the top 10 is littered with Imperial/Chaos Soup armies largely favoring Elysians, Conscripts, Cultists, and aura-Special Character spam.

Are you really surprised? Of course the top ten's gonna be all the Humies.
Good thing the Boiz made it Orky.

I really don't understand the concept of FW things being "too expensive" for people to buy.

I own a LOT of FW now (Mainly for my heresy World Eater force). Recently ordered the Kytan Rampager, it was £90. Compared to Magnus, which is £80.

The price is hugely relative and in fact Magnus is MUCH more of a offender then the Kytan ever will be in regards to power level / points efficiency. They're both similliar scale and in fact Magnus is cheaper, and much better then then my Kytan. So with regards to the fact "FW make OP units/it's too expensive" it just doesn't hold up. The main offenders right now (Imperium soup, CSM soup, Tau commanders) are infact 90% GW. What, Malefic lords and Elysians are FW problem right now?

The people saying "I can't go into a store and buy it" that arguments blows my fething mind. Should we ban all GW mail order only? Have you only ever purchased things from a store and NEVER ordered online?

I don't really play in 40k events and when I do they are small, local things. Nothing like the LVO qualifiers etc, but the arguments coming from people to ban FW is pure madness.

Yeah this is all super bonkers.

Especially the anti-LOW stuff.

"IG is hordes of bodies, tanks and artillery."

...

Yes. Among other things.

Including entire companies of super heavy tanks.

My anti-LOW feeling mostly come from the fact that most games against multiple super heavies results in a game I don't find enjoyable (win or lose), and that I don't feel that most feel well balanced in a standard size game. In casual games I don't care too much because you can plan around playing them to make an enjoyable game. That said they are considerably more tolerable this edition than they were in the past.

Breng77 wrote:
My anti-LOW feeling mostly come from the fact that most games against multiple super heavies results in a game I don't find enjoyable (win or lose), and that I don't feel that most feel well balanced in a standard size game. In casual games I don't care too much because you can plan around playing them to make an enjoyable game. That said they are considerably more tolerable this edition than they were in the past.

See, I love superheavies. I find the game unenjoyable without them (they are the reason I play 40k rather than a 'better game'). I went 4-4 at Nova and I think each of my opponents enjoyed their games; I bought them each a drink (bar one or two who had other commitments) afterwards and chatted about it, and they were usually pretty enthusiastic about the army, the fluff, the rules around superheavies, how I make them work with support units (Trojans, Salamanders, Psykers) the unique tactical challenges I face since they operate so differently than a regular army, etc.

Even my most recent opponent this weekend sat outside and had a cigar with me after our game and we chatted about it and it was fun & awesome. I've only run into a couple people who say "I don't like playing your army" and that's usually a pre-existing 'anti-superheavy' issue that shows up before the game, endures through it, and keeps right on steaming after the game, even if they won.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Breng77 wrote:
My anti-LOW feeling mostly come from the fact that most games against multiple super heavies results in a game I don't find enjoyable (win or lose), and that I don't feel that most feel well balanced in a standard size game. In casual games I don't care too much because you can plan around playing them to make an enjoyable game. That said they are considerably more tolerable this edition than they were in the past.

See, I love superheavies. I find the game unenjoyable without them (they are the reason I play 40k rather than a 'better game'). I went 4-4 at Nova and I think each of my opponents enjoyed their games; I bought them each a drink (bar one or two who had other commitments) afterwards and chatted about it, and they were usually pretty enthusiastic about the army, the fluff, the rules around superheavies, how I make them work with support units (Trojans, Salamanders, Psykers) the unique tactical challenges I face since they operate so differently than a regular army, etc.

Even my most recent opponent this weekend sat outside and had a cigar with me after our game and we chatted about it and it was fun & awesome. I've only run into a couple people who say "I don't like playing your army" and that's usually a pre-existing 'anti-superheavy' issue that shows up before the game, endures through it, and keeps right on steaming after the game, even if they won.

It depends on the armies. Most games I have played against superheavies (at least mass superheavies) seem to be as follows.

1.) I bring enough anti-armor weapons, and destroy them quickly leaving very little left early in the game.
2.) I don't and have no answer at all. For instance Knights were basically a hard counter to my late 6th ed Nurgle Daemon army, because I had very little that could hurt AV 13, and D-weapons + stomp basically eliminated tarpitting as an answer.

More recently their inclusion seems to me to be a reason not to take any "big" fun things in my army, as many delete larger standard vehicles in a turn, but are relatively useless against hordes. But as I said in 8th it isn't as bad because everything at least can potentially be killed.

I would be interested in know how many of your games at NOVA were close, I've seen you post that you got tabled by turn 3(I think) in several games. To me this isn't a fun game. A cool opponent makes things better of course, but games that are non-competitive don't tend to be super enjoyable.

Breng77 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Breng77 wrote:
My anti-LOW feeling mostly come from the fact that most games against multiple super heavies results in a game I don't find enjoyable (win or lose), and that I don't feel that most feel well balanced in a standard size game. In casual games I don't care too much because you can plan around playing them to make an enjoyable game. That said they are considerably more tolerable this edition than they were in the past.

See, I love superheavies. I find the game unenjoyable without them (they are the reason I play 40k rather than a 'better game'). I went 4-4 at Nova and I think each of my opponents enjoyed their games; I bought them each a drink (bar one or two who had other commitments) afterwards and chatted about it, and they were usually pretty enthusiastic about the army, the fluff, the rules around superheavies, how I make them work with support units (Trojans, Salamanders, Psykers) the unique tactical challenges I face since they operate so differently than a regular army, etc.

Even my most recent opponent this weekend sat outside and had a cigar with me after our game and we chatted about it and it was fun & awesome. I've only run into a couple people who say "I don't like playing your army" and that's usually a pre-existing 'anti-superheavy' issue that shows up before the game, endures through it, and keeps right on steaming after the game, even if they won.

It depends on the armies. Most games I have played against superheavies (at least mass superheavies) seem to be as follows.

1.) I bring enough anti-armor weapons, and destroy them quickly leaving very little left early in the game.
2.) I don't and have no answer at all. For instance Knights were basically a hard counter to my late 6th ed Nurgle Daemon army, because I had very little that could hurt AV 13, and D-weapons + stomp basically eliminated tarpitting as an answer.

More recently their inclusion seems to me to be a reason not to take any "big" fun things in my army, as many delete larger standard vehicles in a turn, but are relatively useless against hordes. But as I said in 8th it isn't as bad because everything at least can potentially be killed.

I would be interested in know how many of your games at NOVA were close, I've seen you post that you got tabled by turn 3(I think) in several games. To me this isn't a fun game. A cool opponent makes things better of course, but games that are non-competitive don't tend to be super enjoyable.

I had 2 close games out of eight, I think. Other notables: I tabled my opponent in Game 4 but lost.

To be fair, in 8th I think it's hard to have close games without superheavies.

Also, fair enough to you. To me, seeing awesome fluffy armies on the table is fun, regardless of the result/competitiveness.

I've had mostly close games in 8th, with 3 exceptions

1.) A game involving a Helforged Cerberus and Magnus (2 Lords of war)
2.) A game using a competitive DA list against a Deathwatch player with a suboptimal list.
3.) A game using Malestrom of War which due to random objectives swung wildly in my favor. Though this game was still close from a killing standpoint, just not VP.

Every other game I've played has been back and forth.