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.

Gotta love most of the people still bothering to post in these threads are in full denial of all the issues FW glorious way of writing rules has caused over the years.

If FW hadn't broken the game as often and as hard as they did, no one would even consider to decline a game because of a Leviathan Dread.

 Jidmah wrote:
Gotta love most of the people still bothering to post in these threads are in full denial of all the issues FW glorious way of writing rules has caused over the years.

If FW hadn't broken the game as often and as hard as they did, no one would even consider to decline a game because of a Leviathan Dread.

I started in 7th, so my history with Forgeworld is that it's similar to the main studio. Yes, there are some OP things (Tau'Nar) but plenty of it is just fine. Same with GW.

And you know what? I can understand that, if in the past, FW was bonkers-nutso OP and GW was not, people might have bad history with it. I would politely ask that they, however, look at the CURRENT state, and understand that FW is, at the most, no more OP than GW, and probably quite a bit less, since Chapter Approved.

 Jidmah wrote:
Gotta love most of the people still bothering to post in these threads are in full denial of all the issues FW glorious way of writing rules has caused over the years.

If FW hadn't broken the game as often and as hard as they did, no one would even consider to decline a game because of a Leviathan Dread.

Oh look, another troll!

Alright, I'll play for the sake of the uninformed who may mistakenly take your hyperbole as useful commentary.

No one has at any point stated (as well you know), that there has never been any issue with any FW rule. I will state, categorically, that FW have cause less rules issues than the main studio ever have... so, presumably, we shouldn't allow/use citadel miniatures in a game either on that basis?

Are we not of the level of intelligence where we can recognise a problematic unit, is problematic regardless of which division of a company cast the model? I'm pretty sure I can do that. Are you having issues with the same? Is that why you simply issue the blanket statement 'Hurr durr, Forge World bad'?

C'mon. Have a little self respect.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:
Gotta love most of the people still bothering to post in these threads are in full denial of all the issues FW glorious way of writing rules has caused over the years.

If FW hadn't broken the game as often and as hard as they did, no one would even consider to decline a game because of a Leviathan Dread.

I started in 7th, so my history with Forgeworld is that it's similar to the main studio. Yes, there are some OP things (Tau'Nar) but plenty of it is just fine. Same with GW.

And you know what? I can understand that, if in the past, FW was bonkers-nutso OP and GW was not, people might have bad history with it. I would politely ask that they, however, look at the CURRENT state, and understand that FW is, at the most, no more OP than GW, and probably quite a bit less, since Chapter Approved.

Thing is, chapter approved isn't ancient history, it's barely six months old. They fudged up in 8th just as hard as they always have. They only difference to the last decade is that at least GW cleans up after them.

 Jidmah wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:
Gotta love most of the people still bothering to post in these threads are in full denial of all the issues FW glorious way of writing rules has caused over the years.

If FW hadn't broken the game as often and as hard as they did, no one would even consider to decline a game because of a Leviathan Dread.

I started in 7th, so my history with Forgeworld is that it's similar to the main studio. Yes, there are some OP things (Tau'Nar) but plenty of it is just fine. Same with GW.

And you know what? I can understand that, if in the past, FW was bonkers-nutso OP and GW was not, people might have bad history with it. I would politely ask that they, however, look at the CURRENT state, and understand that FW is, at the most, no more OP than GW, and probably quite a bit less, since Chapter Approved.

Thing is, chapter approved isn't ancient history, it's barely six months old. They fudged up in 8th just as hard as they always have. They only difference to the last decade is that at least GW cleans up after them.

And GW itself didn't feth up majorly? No one is saying FW is perfect, but a lot of us ARE saying the GW is just as bad, if not worse.

So if you accept GW balance, why not accept GW balance with a FW label?

StrayIight wrote:
Oh look, another troll!

See, you're wrong and the only reason 99% of the forgeworld data slates find their way into armies because their are vastly more powerful than their codex equivalent.

 Jidmah wrote:

StrayIight wrote:
Oh look, another troll!

See, you're wrong and the only reason 99% of the forgeworld data slates find their way into armies because their are vastly more powerful than their codex equivalent.

In a tournament? Yes.

In your FLGS? No. They're there because they're a little bit better, or look super cool, or provide an option you wouldn't otherwise have. Yes, there are some WAAC jerk-holes who will use only the most powerful and mock you should you not play them, and some powergamers who are more competitive than you would like but are otherwise upstanding people, but there are also PLENTY of people who just think "Holy crap, that Land Raider variant looks BALLER! Let me get that!"

Edit: Also, do me a favor-point out which FW models are vastly superior than their Codex equivalents.

Bonus points: They have to actually be OP, not just better than a crap option.

 JNAProductions wrote:
And GW itself didn't feth up majorly? No one is saying FW is perfect, but a lot of us ARE saying the GW is just as bad, if not worse.

So if you accept GW balance, why not accept GW balance with a FW label?

I made literally no statement about my acceptance of FW.

I just made fun of the fact that there is another 14 pages on this forum of the same 10 people praising FW to be perfectly fine since chapter approved 6 month ago while completely ignoring the fact that FW had multiple massive feth-ups which has ruined their reputation up to a point that people walk away from perfectly harmless FW models like the OP's dread.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

StrayIight wrote:
Oh look, another troll!

See, you're wrong and the only reason 99% of the forgeworld data slates find their way into armies because their are vastly more powerful than their codex equivalent.

In a tournament? Yes.

In your FLGS? No. They're there because they're a little bit better, or look super cool, or provide an option you wouldn't otherwise have. Yes, there are some WAAC jerk-holes who will use only the most powerful and mock you should you not play them, and some powergamers who are more competitive than you would like but are otherwise upstanding people, but there are also PLENTY of people who just think "Holy crap, that Land Raider variant looks BALLER! Let me get that!"

Edit: Also, do me a favor-point out which FW models are vastly superior than their Codex equivalents.

Bonus points: They have to actually be OP, not just better than a crap option.

Sorry, I just was trolling you in response to you calling me a troll. Thanks for biting.

Are the people who lost to a Space Marine player still crying?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jidmah wrote:
Gotta love most of the people still bothering to post in these threads are in full denial of all the issues FW glorious way of writing rules has caused over the years.

If FW hadn't broken the game as often and as hard as they did, no one would even consider to decline a game because of a Leviathan Dread.

Show me the broken Forge World models. Please.

 Jidmah wrote:




I made literally no statement about my acceptance of FW.

I just made fun of the fact that there is another 14 pages on this forum of the same 10 people praising FW to be perfectly fine since chapter approved 6 month ago while completely ignoring the fact that FW had multiple massive feth-ups which has ruined their reputation up to a point that people walk away from perfectly harmless FW models like the OP's dread.

This guy gets it.

Too bad the FW Brigade will only accept being the Putin to our Trump.

 Jidmah wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
And GW itself didn't feth up majorly? No one is saying FW is perfect, but a lot of us ARE saying the GW is just as bad, if not worse.

So if you accept GW balance, why not accept GW balance with a FW label?

I made literally no statement about my acceptance of FW.

I just made fun of the fact that there is another 14 pages on this forum of the same 10 people praising FW to be perfectly fine since chapter approved 6 month ago while completely ignoring the fact that FW had multiple massive feth-ups which has ruined their reputation up to a point that people walk away from perfectly harmless FW models like the OP's dread.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

StrayIight wrote:
Oh look, another troll!

See, you're wrong and the only reason 99% of the forgeworld data slates find their way into armies because their are vastly more powerful than their codex equivalent.

In a tournament? Yes.

In your FLGS? No. They're there because they're a little bit better, or look super cool, or provide an option you wouldn't otherwise have. Yes, there are some WAAC jerk-holes who will use only the most powerful and mock you should you not play them, and some powergamers who are more competitive than you would like but are otherwise upstanding people, but there are also PLENTY of people who just think "Holy crap, that Land Raider variant looks BALLER! Let me get that!"

Edit: Also, do me a favor-point out which FW models are vastly superior than their Codex equivalents.

Bonus points: They have to actually be OP, not just better than a crap option.

Sorry, I just was trolling you in response to you calling me a troll. Thanks for biting.

What are the massive feth ups?

I am aware of 3 maybe 4 units in ALL of forge worlds history that were mega OP, I can think of a lot more (nearly the entire eldar codex in 7th) GW units that were OP, so please list the broken FW units that gave it a bad reputation.


Here is the truth of it, at some point in the past a few people didnt like FW for whatever reason and expressed that opinion online, now we have people who have no clue whatsoever aping the same opinion having NEVER encountered any of the actual issues they profess to ban FW for, I put the vast majority of anti FW into that bracket, big caveat though, im talking specifically about the people I have met and talked to on the subject.

Don't feed them. Either of them.

They'll keep replying with idiocy as long as you keep responding to their 'points'. It's obvious, it's artless, but they're having a great time watching everyone else taking them seriously.

Ignore both of them and let them play with each other. Anything else just muddies the water of what anyone with an ounce of common sense knows is a pretty black and white discussion anyway.

StrayIight wrote:
Don't feed them. Either of them.

They'll keep replying with idiocy as long as you keep responding to their 'points'. It's obvious, it's artless, but they're having a great time watching everyone else taking them seriously.

Ignore both of them and let them play with each other. Anything else just muddies the water of what anyone with an ounce of common sense knows is a pretty black and white discussion anyway.

Right, except you're the one trying to force your views on everyone else.

Literally the arguments against you are: People have had their experiences with forgeworld that have led them to avoid it. At least for the last few pages.

Aside from a short side trip where apparently the FWB doesn't understand what a subsidiary is, or a rules expansion.

 Mmmpi wrote:

StrayIight wrote:
Don't feed them. Either of them.

They'll keep replying with idiocy as long as you keep responding to their 'points'. It's obvious, it's artless, but they're having a great time watching everyone else taking them seriously.

Ignore both of them and let them play with each other. Anything else just muddies the water of what anyone with an ounce of common sense knows is a pretty black and white discussion anyway.

Right, except you're the one trying to force your views on everyone else.

Literally the arguments against you are: People have had their experiences with forgeworld that have led them to avoid it. At least for the last few pages.

Aside from a short side trip where apparently the FWB doesn't understand what a subsidiary is, or a rules expansion.

Uh huh. Don't you have a bridge you need to be sitting under?

I can't. Your brigade is there.

Seriously projecting.

 Mmmpi wrote:
I can't. Your brigade is there.

Seriously projecting.

Oh I'm sorry, how rude of me. Allow me:

"Common sense, 40K Designers, Self respect, Intelligent debate - could you all move away from the bridge so the Trolls can sit down? Thanks."

Common sense: people have bad experiences with FW, which validates their banning it. Check

40K designers: we're talking about FW designers, or more accurately, people's perception of them.

Self-Respect: why don't you respect yourself?

Intelligent debate =/= summoning 1d4+2 of your brigade to try and drown out anyone who disagrees with you.

And you trolls are already trying to burn the seats.

Yeah, this thread is riddled with trolls. Already reported some of the more egregious breaches of common etiquette to the mods.

Opinions are one thing, but pretending blatant lies, hyperbole and baiting are facts is another entirely different beast.

LEGALLY, as per the game, Forge World is as valid as any Codex unit. If you wish to deny your opponent the use of said unit, you have every right to do so, just as you'd have the same right to ban any and all Codex units produced by GW too.

In both situations, regardless if you're banning FW or GW based units, your opponent holds every right to admonish you if your reasons for vetoing those units is based on blatant ignorance, wilful malice, or pure childishness.

In both situations, regardless if you're banning FW or GW based units, your opponent holds every right to admonish you if your reasons for vetoing those units is based on blatant ignorance, wilful malice, or pure childishness.

This is the part I'm arguing against. You seem to think that you're entitled to push your intolerant views onto other players for the sake of an optional expansion.

 Mmmpi wrote:
Common sense: people have bad experiences with FW, which validates their banning it. Check

40K designers: we're talking about FW designers, or more accurately, people's perception of them.

Self-Respect: why don't you respect yourself?

Intelligent debate =/= summoning 1d4+2 of your brigade to try and drown out anyone who disagrees with you.

And you trolls are already trying to burn the seats.

Sigh. Alright. Fine.

Lets have some intelligent debate. First, realise that no-one has stated - at all - that there has never been an issue with any rule FW has put out. Of course there has. Second, no-one has said, at all, that people can't possibly have had bad experiences with FW in games, or that they can't refuse to play against them.

Are we understanding so far, or are we just going to ignore all the above because it doesn't fit our argument or world view?

What is being said:

FW doesn't equate 'OP' models or rules. That you could find one? Yes. You probably could. But you will almost certainly find more to complain about from the rules put out under the non-forge world banner.

You've been asked - more than once, to provide reasonable examples as to why a FW model should be seen as more of an issue than a Citadel one. As yet, you've not even attempted to address this issue, let alone provide examples or data for people to look at and discuss. Why? I think because you've no interest in doing so - rather, you'd prefer to provoke a reaction that isn't helpful or constructive to anyone. But here is your chance to prove me wrong, or instead to make hyperbolic statements and prove you're just here to troll.

My argument has been, and is, this:
They're all legal models. They are all part of 40K. Fact. That is the reality everyone must live with, because it is reality. Like it or not.
Now, WHY, not just be grown up, and complain about a problem unit or rule, rather than attempt to completely nullify or bad mouth an entire miniature production division - whether it is FW, OR Citadel. Is not dealing with issues on a case by case basis the far more sensible thing to do? Or are we ignoring sense because it's not as comfortable as holding on to an ancient and worthless belief that something is 'problematic'?

 Mmmpi wrote:

In both situations, regardless if you're banning FW or GW based units, your opponent holds every right to admonish you if your reasons for vetoing those units is based on blatant ignorance, wilful malice, or pure childishness.

This is the part I'm arguing against. You seem to think that you're entitled to push your intolerant views onto other players for the sake of an optional expansion.

It's no more of an optional expansion than any of the Codexes.

If anything, the Codexes are "expansions" of the Indexes. They're just as "optional" as the FW stuff.

Also, intolerant? Sorry what? Please, highlight where I'm being intolerant.
Yeah, I'm entitled to push my views on people. Same as you're entitled to decline a game if there's something about it you don't like.

That's called Freedom of Speech. You can speak out against, veto or deny whatever you want. I'm allowed to criticise you for doing that as much as I want in return.
If you can't handle that, perhaps you shouldn't criticise people using Forge World, regardless if you don't recognise it's validity.

StrayIight wrote:

Sigh. Alright. Fine.

Lets have some intelligent debate. First, realise that no-one has stated - at all - that there has never been an issue with any rule FW has put out. Of course there has. Second, no-one has said, at all, that people can't possibly have had bad experiences with FW in games, or that they can't refuse to play against them.

Check

Are we understanding so far, or are we just going to ignore all the above because it doesn't fit our argument or world view?

insulting, and putting words in my mouth.

What is being said:

FW doesn't equate 'OP' models or rules. That you could find one? Yes. You probably could. But you will almost certainly find more to complain about from the rules put out under the non-forge world banner.

You've been asked - more than once, to provide reasonable examples as to why a FW model should be seen as more of an issue than a Citadel one. As yet, you've not even attempted to address this issue, let alone provide examples or data for people to look at and discuss. Why? I think because you've no interest in doing so - rather, you'd prefer to provoke a reaction that isn't helpful or constructive to anyone. But here is your chance to prove me wrong, or instead to make hyperbolic statements and prove you're just here to troll.

I've never actually said that they were broken or overpowered. I said that there was a perception of it, due to a number of factors including: past broken or incorrectly priced stuff, players taking advantage of that, and groups realizing that if they ban FW, it stops both of those problems. Is it fair for the FW players who don't use the stuff that was broken, or incorrectly priced, no. But in my experience, most (not all) "no forgeworld" places will say sure after they realize you're not going to be a jerk. I'm saying this as one of the few people who got my group to start accepting FW.

My argument has been, and is, this:
They're all legal models. They are all part of 40K. Fact. That is the reality everyone must live with, because it is reality. Like it or not.
Now, WHY, not just be grown up, and complain about a problem unit or rule, rather than attempt to completely nullify or bad mouth an entire miniature production division - whether it is FW, OR Citadel. Is not dealing with issues on a case by case basis the far more sensible thing to do? Or are we ignoring sense because it's not as comfortable as holding on to an ancient and worthless belief that something is 'problematic'?

My argument is that while they're legal, they're part of an expansion. Says so right in the front of three of my indexes that they expand the rules. Which my six codexi don't say.
2 insulting the people who feel they have a valid reason for telling you to GTFO for bringing FW is counter productive...for you. They're just going to see another jerk trying to break the game with broken FW stuff, and what will you have accomplished? Nothing. You'll just reinforce their belief that they're 100% right. No minds will be changed, and you won't get a game in.

You say they're not being grown up, well, I say they had a problem, and found a working solution. Is there a better one? Sure, but they're not going to listen to you if you, again, insult them. What you see as non-sense, or ignoring sense is a very valid reaction to a perceived problem.

But I guess me pointing that out makes me a troll.

So you're ignoring the fact that most FW stuff is actually fine and not OP, but you willingly perpetuate and encourage people to have their prejudices instead of showing them the truth?

I didn't think it was possible to worse than a troll, but here we are.

And again, still factually incorrect about FW stuff being optional. It's no more optional than any of GW's stuff. It's an expansion in that it adds units, like how GW codexes add/expand units over the Indexes, but in neither case is that an OPTIONAL expansion.

 Mmmpi wrote:

StrayIight wrote:

Sigh. Alright. Fine.

Lets have some intelligent debate. First, realise that no-one has stated - at all - that there has never been an issue with any rule FW has put out. Of course there has. Second, no-one has said, at all, that people can't possibly have had bad experiences with FW in games, or that they can't refuse to play against them.

Check

Are we understanding so far, or are we just going to ignore all the above because it doesn't fit our argument or world view?

insulting, and putting words in my mouth.

What is being said:

FW doesn't equate 'OP' models or rules. That you could find one? Yes. You probably could. But you will almost certainly find more to complain about from the rules put out under the non-forge world banner.

You've been asked - more than once, to provide reasonable examples as to why a FW model should be seen as more of an issue than a Citadel one. As yet, you've not even attempted to address this issue, let alone provide examples or data for people to look at and discuss. Why? I think because you've no interest in doing so - rather, you'd prefer to provoke a reaction that isn't helpful or constructive to anyone. But here is your chance to prove me wrong, or instead to make hyperbolic statements and prove you're just here to troll.

I've never actually said that they were broken or overpowered. I said that there was a perception of it, due to a number of factors including: past broken or incorrectly priced stuff, players taking advantage of that, and groups realizing that if they ban FW, it stops both of those problems. Is it fair for the FW players who don't use the stuff that was broken, or incorrectly priced, no. But in my experience, most (not all) "no forgeworld" places will say sure after they realize you're not going to be a jerk. I'm saying this as one of the few people who got my group to start accepting FW.

My argument has been, and is, this:
They're all legal models. They are all part of 40K. Fact. That is the reality everyone must live with, because it is reality. Like it or not.
Now, WHY, not just be grown up, and complain about a problem unit or rule, rather than attempt to completely nullify or bad mouth an entire miniature production division - whether it is FW, OR Citadel. Is not dealing with issues on a case by case basis the far more sensible thing to do? Or are we ignoring sense because it's not as comfortable as holding on to an ancient and worthless belief that something is 'problematic'?

My argument is that while they're legal, they're part of an expansion. Says so right in the front of three of my indexes that they expand the rules. Which my six codexi don't say.
2 insulting the people who feel they have a valid reason for telling you to GTFO for bringing FW is counter productive...for you. They're just going to see another jerk trying to break the game with broken FW stuff, and what will you have accomplished? Nothing. You'll just reinforce their belief that they're 100% right. No minds will be changed, and you won't get a game in.

You say they're not being grown up, well, I say they had a problem, and found a working solution. Is there a better one? Sure, but they're not going to listen to you if you, again, insult them. What you see as non-sense, or ignoring sense is a very valid reaction to a perceived problem.

But I guess me pointing that out makes me a troll.

Solving one problem by creating several more is NOT a solution, as I said before the anti FW crowd tends to consist of people who have NEVER actually encountered any real issues with FW and have just read about it on the interwebs.

Also making 1 reasonable post in several clearly unreasonable ones does not preclude the fact that you looked like you were trolling.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:


If anything, the Codexes are "expansions" of the Indexes. They're just as "optional" as the FW stuff.

Indexes say expanded rules. Codexi don't.

Also, intolerant? Sorry what? Please, highlight where I'm being intolerant.

I've counted at least 6 instances of people being called silly or childish, and a few insinuations that they were mentally unbalanced for not bliindly accepting your arguments for FW. If you didn't say it personally, I apologize for including you in with the rest who did. I'm not going to search 14 pages tonight for quotes.

Yeah, I'm entitled to push my views on people. Same as you're entitled to decline a game if there's something about it you don't like.

That's called Freedom of Speech. You can speak out against, veto or deny whatever you want. I'm allowed to criticise you for doing that as much as I want in return.
If you can't handle that, perhaps you shouldn't criticise people using Forge World, regardless if you don't recognise it's validity.

You do NOT have the right to push your views on others. You have the right to say what you want, but nothing says they have to accept it, listen to it, or give you the time of day. Most stores I've played in would ban players for pushing views on other customers.

You obviously haven't actually read a word I've been saying. I've literately never said there was anything wrong with FW itself, only that people's reactions to it is based on valid experiences, and that insulting them isn't the way to get what you want.

Oh wait, there I go...trolling again.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Formosa wrote:



Solving one problem by creating several more is NOT a solution, as I said before the anti FW crowd tends to consist of people who have NEVER actually encountered any real issues with FW and have just read about it on the interwebs.

Also making 1 reasonable post in several clearly unreasonable ones does not preclude the fact that you looked like you were trolling.

You think they have no experience with it. How do you know?

as for your 2nd point: I disagree. But I've had 1d4+2 of you raging at me for everything but spelling now for what? 5 pages? So it's to be expected that this would come up again.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
Are the people who lost to a Space Marine player still crying?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jidmah wrote:
Gotta love most of the people still bothering to post in these threads are in full denial of all the issues FW glorious way of writing rules has caused over the years.

If FW hadn't broken the game as often and as hard as they did, no one would even consider to decline a game because of a Leviathan Dread.

Show me the broken Forge World models. Please.

Mekboss Buzzgobs' Stompa in 6th. You're welcome.

 Mmmpi wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:


If anything, the Codexes are "expansions" of the Indexes. They're just as "optional" as the FW stuff.

Indexes say expanded rules. Codexi don't.

No, they do not.

They say (and note that they were written by a different writer, using different vocabulary) that these 'expand (become or make larger or more extensive) upon the datasheets...'

Any. Written. Rulebook. after the index, will EXPAND upon the Index datasheets.

Tell me. Does a Codex not then expand a range of datasheets? Of COURSE they do! I'm so sorry, but you are not understanding the term expands. You are literally only interested in it being defined as a contraction of 'Expansion' (the action of becoming larger or more extensive), here by your definition meaning an optional add on to 'x'. That is not how the term is being used by the rules writer! They merely mean 'adds to'.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jidmah wrote:

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
Are the people who lost to a Space Marine player still crying?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jidmah wrote:
Gotta love most of the people still bothering to post in these threads are in full denial of all the issues FW glorious way of writing rules has caused over the years.

If FW hadn't broken the game as often and as hard as they did, no one would even consider to decline a game because of a Leviathan Dread.

Show me the broken Forge World models. Please.

Mekboss Buzzgobs' Stompa in 6th. You're welcome.

Thanks. Now check out Stompa's in 8th - especially given 6th isn't relevant and hasn't been for around half a decade - and get back to us with why they're OP...

No, sorry. You already have made clear that you do not want to understand my argument.
I have no interest in discussing an entirely different thing with you.

StrayIight wrote:

 Mmmpi wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:


If anything, the Codexes are "expansions" of the Indexes. They're just as "optional" as the FW stuff.

Indexes say expanded rules. Codexi don't.

No, they do not.

They say (and note that they were written by a different writer, using different vocabulary) that these 'expand (become or make larger or more extensive) upon the datasheets...'

Any. Written. Rulebook. after the index, will EXPAND upon the Index datasheets.

Tell me. Does a Codex not then expand a range of datasheets? Of COURSE they do! I'm so sorry, but you are not understanding the term expands. You are literally only interested in it being defined as a contraction of 'Expansion' (the action of becoming larger or more extensive), here by your definition meaning an optional add on to 'x'. That is not how the term is being used by the rules writer! They merely mean 'adds to'.

Wow, it's almost like an expansion adds to the game. Whoo'da thunk! And no, the codexi aren't an expansion. They're a redo of the data-sheets in your oh so important indexes, they hold the base rules for each army.

But I guess that's a complicated thought for THE BRIGADE!!!

Mmmpi wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:


If anything, the Codexes are "expansions" of the Indexes. They're just as "optional" as the FW stuff.

Indexes say expanded rules. Codexi don't.

Codexes add units. By English definition, that's expansion.

Codexes = expansion confirmed.

The FW indexes are not labelled as "Expansions" (proper noun) like Planetstrike, Apocalypse and Cities of Death are. They add additional units, expanding (verb) the combat roster, but they're not Expansions (Proper Noun) any more than the Codexes are.

Prove me wrong.

Also, intolerant? Sorry what? Please, highlight where I'm being intolerant.

I've counted at least 6 instances of people being called silly or childish, and a few insinuations that they were mentally unbalanced for not bliindly accepting your arguments for FW. If you didn't say it personally, I apologize for including you in with the rest who did. I'm not going to search 14 pages tonight for quotes.

I'm after quotes of ME here - not other people. I want these "6 instances" of me being intolerant, or frankly, your opinion remains just that - an opinion.

Yeah, I'm entitled to push my views on people. Same as you're entitled to decline a game if there's something about it you don't like.

That's called Freedom of Speech. You can speak out against, veto or deny whatever you want. I'm allowed to criticise you for doing that as much as I want in return.
If you can't handle that, perhaps you shouldn't criticise people using Forge World, regardless if you don't recognise it's validity.

You do NOT have the right to push your views on others. You have the right to say what you want, but nothing says they have to accept it, listen to it, or give you the time of day. Most stores I've played in would ban players for pushing views on other customers.

So what's the difference between Person A saying "I don't like playing against Forge World so don't do it" and Person B saying "I don't like the fact you won't let me play Forge World."

Surely by your own admission they must BOTH be violating Free Speech? Which means it's a violation of Free Speech to deny Forge World units!

I mean, to quote you "You do NOT have the right to push your views on others". Therefore, no-one has the right to push their Anti-FW views on me, so I can always play with my FW units.

You are very wrong on your definitions. Free Speech is the ability to voice your opinions free from censorship (exactly what these stores you're describing are doing), but it doesn't render you immune from critique. You can tell me to stop using my units (GW or FW), and as part of the contract of the game, I can't force you into playing it when you don't want to. However, I reserve every right to call you out on being intolerant, ignorant, or malicious if I believe that is why you've done so.

That, friend, is Freedom of Speech.

You obviously haven't actually read a word I've been saying. I've literately never said there was anything wrong with FW itself, only that people's reactions to it is based on valid experiences, and that insulting them isn't the way to get what you want.

And your solution is to let people have their (incorrect and unsupported) views despite them being supported by nothing (and these valid experiences you claim are since outdated - they're no more valid than me denying Riptides in 8th because what they were like in 6th/7th), and you expect them to accept Forge World... when? If you let them fester in their ignorance, then they will keep refusing to play against Forge World because you're not challenging their viewpoints.

If, as you claim, they will accept Forge World if they play against it and then notice it's okay, that's useless because without challenging them on it, they won't let you play Forge World against them to trial it in the first place!

Or, as I demonstrate in a chart form:
A = Non-Forge World player
B = Play against Forge World
X = Realising that Forge World isn't OP

A will only B if X occurs
X can only occur if A does B.
But A will only do B if X occurs.
X can only occur if A does B.

And so on, so forth.
This is the solution you propose - and it's doomed to failure.

Oh wait, there I go...trolling again.

Thank you for admitting it.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jidmah wrote:

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
Are the people who lost to a Space Marine player still crying?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jidmah wrote:
Gotta love most of the people still bothering to post in these threads are in full denial of all the issues FW glorious way of writing rules has caused over the years.

If FW hadn't broken the game as often and as hard as they did, no one would even consider to decline a game because of a Leviathan Dread.

Show me the broken Forge World models. Please.

Mekboss Buzzgobs' Stompa in 6th. You're welcome.

Riptides in 6th and 7th.
Eldar Scatter Laser Jetbikes in 7th
Pre-CA Guilliman
Pre-CA Conscripts
3rd Ed Iron Warriors (or was it 4th?)

"GW IS BROKEN NO GW ALLOWED GUYS"
You're welcome.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mmmpi wrote:
Wow, it's almost like an expansion adds to the game. Whoo'da thunk! And no, the codexi aren't an expansion. They're a redo of the data-sheets in your oh so important indexes, they hold the base rules for each army.

But I guess that's a complicated thought for THE BRIGADE!!!

Reivers aren't in the Imperium 1 Index. Nor are Lieutenants, Aggressors, or Primaris Librarians.

But don't let me stop your "trolling".*





*I'm quoting you by the way, just so you don't accuse me of calling you that. I'm just using the term you gave yourself.