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.

1.The codexi don't add rules to the game, they form the base rules of each army.

Also, the FW Indexes say the expand the rules.

2. I don't care, I already apologized for if I lumped you in with the rest of your brigade.

3. You just rewrote what I said. But made it insulting. Good job.

4. A player saying their won't play against forgeworld stuff is someone acting on their own agency. They're saying what 'they' won't do. That doesn't infringe anything on your part, but is them limiting themselves. But hey, Free speech, amiright?

edit:

5. Apparently ironically using an insult against me is now accepting it. But I guess that's just another troll projecting.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:
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.

You might want to do some research on what you quoted there. No single one of the things you named even comes close.
The only reason it never made a big splash is because not a single TO ever allowed it to be fielded.
If you really do want to know what was wrong with Buzzgob's Stompa, PM me, I'll tell you the whole story.

I'm not saying that they're OP, but I do recall a large number of people complaining about Fire Raptors.

 Mmmpi wrote:
1.The codexi don't add rules to the game, they form the base rules of each army.

The Forge World book form the base rules of each army too. Who says it can't come from two sources?
And the Codexes EXPAND on the rules of the Indexes, thereby making them "Expansions" by your definition.

Also, the FW Indexes say the expand the rules.

As a verb, yes - like how the Codexes "expand" on the Indexes. Neither one is a proper noun "Expansion" like Planetstrike.

Simple English language, folks.

2. I don't care, I already apologized for if I lumped you in with the rest of your brigade.

Referring to the people who disagree with you as some kind of unified "Brigade" is frankly poor etiquette.

I'm not part of some organised disagreement squad. I just disagree with your views personally.

3. You just rewrote what I said. But made it insulting. Good job.

If that's what you said, it's what you said.
Doesn't change that fact that's what you said.

4. A player saying their won't play against forgeworld stuff is someone acting on their own agency. They're saying what 'they' won't do. That doesn't infringe anything on your part, but is them limiting themselves. But hey, Free speech, amiright?

Except by "acting on their own agency", they're actively denying and infringing on what the other person can take to the game.

If your player had said "I won't field any Forge World stuff", then that would be correct - they are acting on their own agency, and this doesn't affect anyone else's agency. But saying "I won't play against Forge World", especially after the other person has put down their list, is definitely affecting other people - because the FW person must either acquiesce, and remove the FW in their list, or leave the game - both outcomes done against their own agency.

5. Apparently ironically using an insult against me is now accepting it. But I guess that's just another troll projecting.

You said it, not me.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jidmah wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:
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.

You might want to do some research on what you quoted there. No single one of the things you named even comes close.
The only reason it never made a big splash is because not a single TO ever allowed it to be fielded.
If you really do want to know what was wrong with Buzzgob's Stompa, PM me, I'll tell you the whole story.

I knew Buzzgob's Stompa, I've played against it. And I can tell you, and others will support me, that one unit didn't come anywhere near to the game-breaking mess that Riptides, TauDar, Scatterbikes, Battle Companies, 3rd Ed Iron Warriors, and even Guilliman/Conscripts on 8th have done.

But hey, they're just my opinions. Like your opinion on that Stompa is yours.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mmmpi wrote:
I'm not saying that they're OP, but I do recall a large number of people complaining about Fire Raptors.

They were powerful, this is true. Less so now, considering GW nerfed the hell out of them.

You know what got more people complaining (and some people still are)?
Conscripts
Commissars
Guilliman
Magnus
Mortarion
Most of the Astra Militarum army

All GW units.

 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.

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.

How do I know, quite simple really, when asked they just spout the false information that is perpetuated on the internet, almost verbatim at times, then when challenged they come up blank, no actual information to back up thier claims (kinda like what some on here are doing), so it really is quite easy to tell if people are just being anti FW without any real experience on the matter.

The biggest signifier of course is when you play them with a FW unit and they go “oh, is that it” or similar.

Of course there is also a tiny minority of anti FW who dislike it through simple jealousy and the perception of “pay to win” in spite of evidence showing that is not the case, it’s a “i can’t have it so neither can you” attitude, thankfully that is rather rare.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

 Mmmpi wrote:
1.The codexi don't add rules to the game, they form the base rules of each army.

The Forge World book form the base rules of each army too. Who says it can't come from two sources?
And the Codexes EXPAND on the rules of the Indexes, thereby making them "Expansions" by your definition.

Oh FW are base rules. For DKoK, or R&H, and such. Everything else is just an add on. Codexi however, are again, the basic rules for each army. Not that complicated.

Also, the FW Indexes say the expand the rules.

As a verb, yes - like how the Codexes "expand" on the Indexes. Neither one is a proper noun "Expansion" like Planetstrike.

Simple English language, folks.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
I knew Buzzgob's Stompa, I've played against it. And I can tell you, and others will support me, that one unit didn't come anywhere near to the game-breaking mess that Riptides, TauDar, Scatterbikes, Battle Companies, 3rd Ed Iron Warriors, and even Guilliman/Conscripts on 8th have done.

So, what was the issue with that stompa?

Since you know, you can surely elaborate.

 Mmmpi wrote:


Which is why I apologized. You said you understood simple English. The same 6ish people ram the same copypasta through every thread that has a whiff of not liking FW, and out the Brigade comes. So much for etiquette.

Have you stopped to consider, that this 'Brigade' that you're getting all torn up over, might actually be less of a brigade, and more, I don't know, every player who knows that FW are a completely valid, legal, intended and fully supported part of the default 40K experience, or, as we might also refer to them - the vast majority of the 40K community?

We. Don't. Have. An. Issue. With you - or anyone - having the right to turn down a game. Of course you have that right. We have the right to find it pathetic if the objection is objectively pathetic - which is exactly what occurred in the OP's scenario.

I personally also take issue at anyone who can't be humble enough to admit they're wrong, and who is still arguing about a provably incorrect point of language - despite having multiple native English speakers point out their mistake. And especially when that part of your argument is beside the point anyway.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jidmah wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
I knew Buzzgob's Stompa, I've played against it. And I can tell you, and others will support me, that one unit didn't come anywhere near to the game-breaking mess that Riptides, TauDar, Scatterbikes, Battle Companies, 3rd Ed Iron Warriors, and even Guilliman/Conscripts on 8th have done.

So, what was the issue with that stompa?

Since you know, you can surely elaborate.

Who cares? It certainly isn't an issue now.

I love archaeology as much as the next guy, but how is digging up a point from 6th edition strengthening your case against FW in 8th?

StrayIight wrote:
Who cares? It certainly isn't an issue now.

I love archaeology as much as the next guy, but how is digging up a point from 6th edition strengthening your case against FW in 8th?

You can find that answer by reading my previous posts

Seriously, if you don't even care to understand my argument, why bother to respond to my posts?

 Jidmah wrote:

StrayIight wrote:
Who cares? It certainly isn't an issue now.

I love archaeology as much as the next guy, but how is digging up a point from 6th edition strengthening your case against FW in 8th?

You can find that answer by reading my previous posts

And you can find that argument utterly torn apart, by the multiple posts that have illustrated that though problem units have existed, they're far more likely to come from the main studio, and simply do not continue to be a problem in this edition.

If you have a hang up regarding FW because of something that happened several editions ago, you're ignorant of the way things stand to date. That being the case - the issue is you. Not anyone who is using a FW model.

StrayIight wrote:

 Mmmpi wrote:


Which is why I apologized. You said you understood simple English. The same 6ish people ram the same copypasta through every thread that has a whiff of not liking FW, and out the Brigade comes. So much for etiquette.

Have you stopped to consider, that this 'Brigade' that you're getting all torn up over, might actually be less of a brigade, and more, I don't know, every player who knows that FW are a completely valid, legal, intended and fully supported part of the default 40K experience, or, as we might also refer to them - the vast majority of the 40K community?

We. Don't. Have. An. Issue. With you - or anyone - having the right to turn down a game. Of course you have that right. We have the right to find it pathetic if the objection is objectively pathetic - which is exactly what occurred in the OP's scenario.

I personally also take issue at anyone who can't be humble enough to admit they're wrong, and who is still arguing about a provably incorrect point of language - despite having multiple native English speakers point out their mistake. And especially when that part of your argument is beside the point anyway.

You have an issue, since your response to people saying no forgeworld is to insult them. That's what's really pathetic. If you were the bigger man you'd leave it at that. Like PL vs Points. But I guess that's a hard concept. And if the number of people who agree with you is The Brigade, I'm guessing that the six of you are trying really hard. Also, not that torn up. It's just easier to type 'the brigade' then it is anything longer. It's also rather apt as there's a few familiar faces from other threads like this.

I guess you take issue with most people you meet. So far I haven't been proven incorrect, especially on the language use. By the way, I am a native English speaker. It's not beside the point. Just like as much as I've never said that FW was currently OP, or illegal in games, doesn't stop any of you from trying to get me to admit that it isn't.

 Mmmpi wrote:


Yes, now start using the moderately, it's starting to maybe be the slightest bit not 5th grader English and actually see my point.

 Mmmpi wrote:



By the way, I am a native English speaker.

Uh huh.

Yup

 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.

Normally one would consider the ammount of pages that were changed the ammount of problems that were solved, therefore the more pages found unter the GW category the more Gw fethed up, the more FW the more FW fethed up.
Now call me dense but i see 4 pages for GW and 3* for FW.
*(There is also the fact that both sides massively changed their AM branches (DK Elysians and R&H in FW) General AM in the main line of GW. Now excuse me but since FW publishes more specific AM /Am- related lists, those all did change in equal ammounts to the AM general line now?
so basically what we are left is around 4 pages GW and 2 pages FW aswell as one page FW (related changes to bring them in line with the AM of GW) .

Quite frankly we have to consider in that case that GW did more of the fething up.

@Mmmpi, so you advocate, because people met WAAC players, that anyway will pick only the most broken stuff regardless of the source, people should be allowed to ban at an arbitary line?
That is basically the same as "Sippenhaft", or the underlying legal agrumentation, which was a medieaval law, that saw the family punished for the crimes of a person, because they are supposedly now also criminal anyways. (It was also formally introduced by the Nazis, but frankly they were anyways very backwards).
I know it is a drastic argumentation, but just judging via perception of yourself/ one person, is quite frankly not a very convincing standpoint.

Mmmpi wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

 Mmmpi wrote:
1.The codexi don't add rules to the game, they form the base rules of each army.

The Forge World book form the base rules of each army too. Who says it can't come from two sources?
And the Codexes EXPAND on the rules of the Indexes, thereby making them "Expansions" by your definition.

Oh FW are base rules. For DKoK, or R&H, and such. Everything else is just an add on. Codexi however, are again, the basic rules for each army. Not that complicated.

So, by your admission, can I tale R&H and DKoK to a game, and not be attacked by the anti-FW people? Because they're not expansions, and therefore aren't "optional" somehow?

Add-ons aren't optional. Nothing says that. Just because something be an add-on does not mean it's any less a part of that army. It just wasn't in the Codex, which itself is an add-on and update combined over the Index (see Lieutenant, Reivers, and Agressors).

Also, the FW Indexes say the expand the rules.

As a verb, yes - like how the Codexes "expand" on the Indexes. Neither one is a proper noun "Expansion" like Planetstrike.

Simple English language, folks.

Yes, now start using the moderately, it's starting to maybe be the slightest bit not 5th grader English and actually see my point.

You're the one putting in additional connotations that do not exist.
You seem to think that something being an add-on is optional. Show me where this is the case in something that is not given the proper noun "Expansion".

You're the one who can't pull evidence in here, not me.
If you want me to see your point, prove it with evidence.

2. I don't care, I already apologized for if I lumped you in with the rest of your brigade.

You haven't apologised whatsoever.
Referring to the people who disagree with you as some kind of unified "Brigade" is frankly poor etiquette.

I'm not part of some organised disagreement squad. I just disagree with your views personally.

Which is why I apologized. You said you understood simple English. The same 6ish people ram the same copypasta through every thread that has a whiff of not liking FW, and out the Brigade comes. So much for etiquette.

Address that to them, not me.

And maybe that copypasta is being copypasted because it's more correct that the notion you're providing here.

3. You just rewrote what I said. But made it insulting. Good job.

If that's what you said, it's what you said.
Doesn't change that fact that's what you said.

Nope, you just had to make it insulting. Again, so much for etiquette.

I notice that you're not actually addressing the point that denying Forge World use is a violation of Freedom of Speech.

Again, highlight where I'm being offensive.

4. A player saying their won't play against forgeworld stuff is someone acting on their own agency. They're saying what 'they' won't do. That doesn't infringe anything on your part, but is them limiting themselves. But hey, Free speech, amiright?

Except by "acting on their own agency", they're actively denying and infringing on what the other person can take to the game.

If your player had said "I won't field any Forge World stuff", then that would be correct - they are acting on their own agency, and this doesn't affect anyone else's agency. But saying "I won't play against Forge World", especially after the other person has put down their list, is definitely affecting other people - because the FW person must either acquiesce, and remove the FW in their list, or leave the game - both outcomes done against their own agency.

It is incorrect. It's not the FW player leaving the game, it's the other player.

Yes, but their action of leaving the game (provided that they don't force the FW player to change their list) is still having an effect on the FW player, regardless of their agency.

The FW player won't get a game if the other person leaves, and is therefore losing their agency because they won't be getting a game (which needs two people to play).
What about this don't you understand?

5. Apparently ironically using an insult against me is now accepting it. But I guess that's just another troll projecting.

You said it, not me.

Sure dude. This really don't give you much credibility.

And by much, I mean none. Who was it that had etiquette again?

Me. I'm not the one lumping everyone I disagree with into a "Brigade".
You lost credibility the moment you pretended that everyone was out to get you.

Jidmah wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
I knew Buzzgob's Stompa, I've played against it. And I can tell you, and others will support me, that one unit didn't come anywhere near to the game-breaking mess that Riptides, TauDar, Scatterbikes, Battle Companies, 3rd Ed Iron Warriors, and even Guilliman/Conscripts on 8th have done.

So, what was the issue with that stompa?

Since you know, you can surely elaborate.

The issue with the stompa was that it could be customised to essentially have no downfalls, and the lack of points scaling that came with that.

However, since that all happened in 6th, it holds just about as much validity here as all the terrible GW stuff from that time too.

So, let's ignore what happened in previous editions, because it has no bearing on the current one, yeah?

Mmmpi wrote:You have an issue, since your response to people saying no forgeworld is to insult them. That's what's really pathetic. If you were the bigger man you'd leave it at that. Like PL vs Points. But I guess that's a hard concept.

And how about the inverse - all those people who play FW and the people who deny them insulting them? I mean, after all "that's what's really pathetic. If they were the bigger men, they'd leave it at that", sucking it up and playing against units that aren't even as bad as GW ones. But apparently it's too much for them to handle, and they can't stand the filthy FW units.

I mean, is the inverse wrong?
Not really.

And if the number of people who agree with you is The Brigade, I'm guessing that the six of you are trying really hard. Also, not that torn up. It's just easier to type 'the brigade' then it is anything longer. It's also rather apt as there's a few familiar faces from other threads like this.

Perhaps you could stop using that. It's clearly a mocking gesture at best, and an insult at worst. I'm going to ask you to stop using it, if it isn't too hard to have a civil discussion without it.

I guess you take issue with most people you meet. So far I haven't been proven incorrect, especially on the language use. By the way, I am a native English speaker. It's not beside the point. Just like as much as I've never said that FW was currently OP, or illegal in games, doesn't stop any of you from trying to get me to admit that it isn't.

You have been proven incorrect on language. You seem to think that the verb "expand" is the same as the proper noun "Expansion", that something merely being an add-on is by default optional, and the definition of free speech (you're allowed to disagree with free speech, but not censor it - you're not exempt from people criticising you).

Again, the problem with your approach is that you KNOW FW isn't OP and illegal, but you still promote the abhorrent division between players. That's why I have an issue with your method. It flat out doesn't work, and you haven't addressed my comment about it.

FW units will never be accepted in your approach because you allow ignorance to breed. If you let people continue to believe their misconceptions about FW, without challenging those beliefs, then FW will never be accepted because those unfounded beliefs will not be swayed.

So, I'll just retackle these beliefs, and then the truth about them:
"FW units are overpowered" - Some are, but that's the same with GW units. The majority of FW units are not OP.
"FW units are optional additions" - They're additions, but no more optional than any unit in a GW codex.
"FW are not the same company as GW" - Incorrect completely
"FW is pay to win" - No more than GW - again, most of their units are not OP.
"FW is only Titans and Apocalypse units" - Incorrect, and GW does lots of "Apocalypse" units now anyway.
"FW rules are hard to find" - No more so than any GW rules. If your opponent doesn't have those rules on hand, that's not the fault of FW.

Without reinforcing these challenges on the anti-FW beliefs, FW will never be fully accepted.

@Mmmpi, so you advocate, because people met WAAC players, that anyway will pick only the most broken stuff regardless of the source, people should be allowed to ban at an arbitary line?
That is basically the same as "Sippenhaft", or the underlying legal agrumentation, which was a medieaval law, that saw the family punished for the crimes of a person, because they are supposedly now also criminal anyways. (It was also formally introduced by the Nazis, but frankly they were anyways very backwards).
I know it is a drastic argumentation, but just judging via perception of yourself/ one person, is quite frankly not a very convincing standpoint.

No, but at the same time, for these people, it's not arbitrary. It just seems like it to us, because you're coming in as an outsider to their group, or experiencing the what via Dakka, rather than being in place to know why they did it.

clarification: the "us" above refers to a nebulous outsider, not the automatically the people in this thread.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

And if the number of people who agree with you is The Brigade, I'm guessing that the six of you are trying really hard. Also, not that torn up. It's just easier to type 'the brigade' then it is anything longer. It's also rather apt as there's a few familiar faces from other threads like this.

Perhaps you could stop using that. It's clearly a mocking gesture at best, and an insult at worst. I'm going to ask you to stop using it, if it isn't too hard to have a civil discussion without it.

I'll agree to stop with it, as long as both sides keep it civil.

I'm going to bed, but I'll respond to the rest later.

 Mmmpi wrote:

And if the number of people who agree with you is The Brigade, I'm guessing that the six of you are trying really hard. Also, not that torn up. It's just easier to type 'the brigade' then it is anything longer. It's also rather apt as there's a few familiar faces from other threads like this.

Perhaps you could stop using that. It's clearly a mocking gesture at best, and an insult at worst. I'm going to ask you to stop using it, if it isn't too hard to have a civil discussion without it.

I'll agree to stop with it, as long as both sides keep it civil.

I'm going to bed, but I'll respond to the rest later.

Thank you.

 Mmmpi wrote:

@Mmmpi, so you advocate, because people met WAAC players, that anyway will pick only the most broken stuff regardless of the source, people should be allowed to ban at an arbitary line?
That is basically the same as "Sippenhaft", or the underlying legal agrumentation, which was a medieaval law, that saw the family punished for the crimes of a person, because they are supposedly now also criminal anyways. (It was also formally introduced by the Nazis, but frankly they were anyways very backwards).
I know it is a drastic argumentation, but just judging via perception of yourself/ one person, is quite frankly not a very convincing standpoint.

No, but at the same time, for these people, it's not arbitrary. It just seems like it to us, because you're coming in as an outsider to their group, or experiencing the what via Dakka, rather than being in place to know why they did it.

clarification: the "us" above refers to a nebulous outsider, not the automatically the people in this thread.

However it is regardless an arbitrary line, when percived from the outside aswell as from the inside and stems from:
A: Willfull ignorance, something one can not particulary blame an indiviual on if said individual has had bad memories of such an event
B: They are willfully ignorant anyways because somebody told them. (In Switzerland we have a saying for that: "Vom ghöre säge, lehrt mer Lüge". which translates to: From the hearing of said things, one learns to lie.)

And no it does not just seem like one, because it is one. It stems from bad selfreflection and aswell the simple fact that people tend to stay actievly uninformed.
Another exemple: Because the Japanese did extremely bad things during WW2, should we now judge every Japanese? Should we also judge every Japanese that lives today?
No, because it is morally wrong to do so. In one of my first posts in this thread i have explained it, it is because of perception and the hearing of people that had bad incidents.
That however does not allow me to be willingly ignorant and judge now, dosen't it, because as an individual i have to do some homework aswell alone.

I don't judge them, i judge however those, that insists this line of thinking is valid or ok, because it isn't.
It speaks literally against everything that is principle in a state that abides the law, and aswell as a person that has some baseline knowledge of selfreflection and morals.

No one is forced to play against someone.

If someone doesn't want to play with you, that is their decision.

If the reason is FW, you can talk to them, not play them, or drop the unit.

blaktoof wrote:
If the reason is FW, you can talk to them, not play them, or drop the unit.

Correct. However, we are under no obligation to pretend that the refusal is anything other than irrational TFG behavior.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mmmpi wrote:
Codexi however, are again, the basic rules for each army. Not that complicated.

No, the index is the basic rules for each army. The index is also the first-published rules for each army. The codex expands on the index rules. Therefore only the index should be assumed by default, and you should have to ask for special permission to use the optional codex expansion.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jidmah wrote:
If you really do want to know what was wrong with Buzzgob's Stompa, PM me, I'll tell you the whole story.

Here's the whole story: FW made a typo in an update pdf, missing the fact that the names of the units referenced in the rules had been swapped. This allowed you to take a Stompa for some ridiculously low point cost. It was, however, obviously a typo and nobody ever played it that way or believed that it was reasonable to do so. It's a "problem" on the level of the old RAW nonsense that models with helmets can not shoot because LOS is drawn from "eyes".

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Jidmah wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
I knew Buzzgob's Stompa, I've played against it. And I can tell you, and others will support me, that one unit didn't come anywhere near to the game-breaking mess that Riptides, TauDar, Scatterbikes, Battle Companies, 3rd Ed Iron Warriors, and even Guilliman/Conscripts on 8th have done.

So, what was the issue with that stompa?

Since you know, you can surely elaborate.

The issue with the stompa was that it could be customised to essentially have no downfalls, and the lack of points scaling that came with that.

However, since that all happened in 6th, it holds just about as much validity here as all the terrible GW stuff from that time too.

Nope, that is wrong. You are thinking of the big mek stompa in escalation which indeed was child's play compared to the things on your list. I wouldn't even call it OP at all.

No, Mekboss Buzzgob had a special rule that allowed him to ride into battle in his personal stompa for 300 points, which was using the kustom stompa rules. This meant that you could bring a stompa to any game - remember that in 6th, stompas were not allowed in regular games because super-heavy could not be used outside of apocalypse or escalation. It could have apocalypse-only weapons like the lifta-droppa that tossed vehicles around or the krusha ball that could remove terrain from the table. And the best part, depending on load-out, you got a 500-1000 point discount on the stompa. The most useful loadout for this stompa was 1265 and could, with a bit of luck, kill an entire 2000 point army in a single round of shooting(I had such a stompa kill 4000 points of blood angels in an apoc game). You didn't need to though, whatever was left after turn 1 wouldn't be able to take down a stompa with repair crew, KFF and void shield anyways.
Even if you could handle being matched against a unit that was out of your league and a 1000 point handicap, if you actually manged to destroy the stompa it would then die in an apocalyptic explosion, most likely taking half of your army down with it.

Thing is, this wasn't even an issue of FW failing to balance, it was simply their shoddy rules that allowed things like this to happen. Luckily, any TO worth two cents simply didn't allow this, but I know there were battle reports here on dakka of people pulling exactly this stunt.

So, let's ignore what happened in previous editions, because it has no bearing on the current one, yeah?

Well, that's exactly my point. People are not declining games against FW units because FW is in a bad state now.
FW has a decade long history of stuff just like the Buzzgob rule happening, and people have been on the receiving end of these rules being exploited. Some guy would walk up to you and ask if FW was ok to you (FW books back then explicitly told you to ask for permission) and if you said yes you could either have someone with a bunch of cool models as your opponent or be facing a fugly buzzgob conversion and friggin 1200 point super-heavy in a 750 point game.
People have been on the receiving end of these things, and others have read or heard about them. The FW studio has rightfully earned this reputation of creating terrible and unfair rules and people are unwilling to be confronted with such rules. And they are also unwilling to regularly check every FW publication if there are any issues - the next major feth-up might just be a release away. The dude that declined OP's game probably doesn't even know the rules for a Leviathan dread.
In time, this reputation will go away and bringing FW models will become less of an issue. Six months are definitely not enough time for that though.

Remember the times where people would simply refuse to play and pack up if the opponent brought any Grey Knights? That also went away.

So this entire thread (just like all before them) and all the arguments are completely missing the point. There is no rational reason for the guy to decline the game against the leviathan dread if he had all the information you guys have. He simply doesn't know what to expect from any given FW model, but from their reputation he knows it has a decent chance that it will make his game terrible.

For the record: I am happy to play against an FW data slate there is right now and I don't think there is a rational reason to decline a game against a FW model. So to all that attacked me for that specific reason: You should improve your reading comprehension instead of blindly raging into your keyboard.

Also lol @ the battalion thing. If you create multiple threads on any topic, you will usually find the same users there. Create any thread with "ork" in it's title and you can bet your hat that half the regular posters of the ork tactic thread will be there.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:

Here's the whole story: FW made a typo in an update pdf, missing the fact that the names of the units referenced in the rules had been swapped. This allowed you to take a Stompa for some ridiculously low point cost. It was, however, obviously a typo and nobody ever played it that way or believed that it was reasonable to do so. It's a "problem" on the level of the old RAW nonsense that models with helmets can not shoot because LOS is drawn from "eyes".

Oh, since you claim it was a "typo" what exactly to you think was mistyped?

For a thread asking if any other people see this kind of behaviour, it seems as if this has gotten into was way too overthetop argument about justification.
Stop there? I think you've exhausted the point now.

Jidmah wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Jidmah wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
I knew Buzzgob's Stompa, I've played against it. And I can tell you, and others will support me, that one unit didn't come anywhere near to the game-breaking mess that Riptides, TauDar, Scatterbikes, Battle Companies, 3rd Ed Iron Warriors, and even Guilliman/Conscripts on 8th have done.

So, what was the issue with that stompa?

Since you know, you can surely elaborate.

The issue with the stompa was that it could be customised to essentially have no downfalls, and the lack of points scaling that came with that.

However, since that all happened in 6th, it holds just about as much validity here as all the terrible GW stuff from that time too.

Nope, that is wrong. You are thinking of the big mek stompa in escalation which indeed was child's play compared to the things on your list. I wouldn't even call it OP at all.

No, Mekboss Buzzgob had a special rule that allowed him to ride into battle in his personal stompa for 300 points, which was using the kustom stompa rules. This meant that you could bring a stompa to any game - remember that in 6th, stompas were not allowed in regular games because super-heavy could not be used outside of apocalypse or escalation. It could have apocalypse-only weapons like the lifta-droppa that tossed vehicles around or the krusha ball that could remove terrain from the table. And the best part, depending on load-out, you got a 500-1000 point discount on the stompa. The most useful loadout for this stompa was 1265 and could, with a bit of luck, kill an entire 2000 point army in a single round of shooting(I had such a stompa kill 4000 points of blood angels in an apoc game). You didn't need to though, whatever was left after turn 1 wouldn't be able to take down a stompa with repair crew, KFF and void shield anyways.
Even if you could handle being matched against a unit that was out of your league and a 1000 point handicap, if you actually manged to destroy the stompa it would then die in an apocalyptic explosion, most likely taking half of your army down with it.

Thing is, this wasn't even an issue of FW failing to balance, it was simply their shoddy rules that allowed things like this to happen. Luckily, any TO worth two cents simply didn't allow this, but I know there were battle reports here on dakka of people pulling exactly this stunt.

So the issue was PRIMARILY with the kustom stompa itself then - which is as I said.

And yeah, you could take a stompa to any game. But really, this is 6th ed we're talking about. Ie, the edition that all the big stuff was becoming near commonplace on the tabletop. Riptides, Wraithknights, I believe, Grav Centurions, and you could still take a Stompa or Baneblade anyway. And as we all saw, and as I can personally attest to, the basic Stompa wasn't even that powerful back then.

So yeah, the issue was with the custom stompa, and the fact that it was pointed incorrectly in regards to it's upgrades. Not because it was suddenly available and anyone could use it. That alone wouldn't have been an issue - it was the poor costing.

So, let's ignore what happened in previous editions, because it has no bearing on the current one, yeah?

Well, that's exactly my point. People are not declining games against FW units because FW is in a bad state now.

Guilliman, Conscripts, most of the AM line, Eldar Dark Reapers, Mortarion and Eldar unhittable units have been worse blights on this edition than anything FW have done.

If you're going to ban FW for OP units, ban GW ones first.

FW has a decade long history of stuff just like the Buzzgob rule happening, and people have been on the receiving end of these rules being exploited. Some guy would walk up to you and ask if FW was ok to you (FW books back then explicitly told you to ask for permission) and if you said yes you could either have someone with a bunch of cool models as your opponent or be facing a fugly buzzgob conversion and friggin 1200 point super-heavy in a 750 point game.
People have been on the receiving end of these things, and others have read or heard about them. The FW studio has rightfully earned this reputation of creating terrible and unfair rules and people are unwilling to be confronted with such rules. And they are also unwilling to regularly check every FW publication if there are any issues - the next major feth-up might just be a release away. The dude that declined OP's game probably doesn't even know the rules for a Leviathan dread.
In time, this reputation will go away and bringing FW models will become less of an issue. Six months are definitely not enough time for that though.

By that logic, why haven't people been boycotting GW units because of things like Knights in 7th, Riptides in 6th/7th, Eldar for 6th/7th/8th, Guilliman/Conscript spam in 8th, and the various Decurions and suchlike? Or why aren't people mass-refusing games against Astra Militarum for being arguably OP?

GW have fethed up more than FW have. Why the double standard?

GW's publications are just as prone to fethups. And it's hardly like the Forge World ones are a struggle to find. You (general you) have no excuse not to know the rules for FW units any more so than GW ones.

How will that reputation go away if no-one's playing against FW units? It's exactly the problem I outlined earlier.
In order for A to do B, X must happen. However, X can only happen if A does B, and so the cycle continues.

So this entire thread (just like all before them) and all the arguments are completely missing the point. There is no rational reason for the guy to decline the game against the leviathan dread if he had all the information you guys have. He simply doesn't know what to expect from any given FW model, but from their reputation he knows it has a decent chance that it will make his game terrible.

But it's up to the FW crowd in these threads, on Dakka, in those situations to outline that those views are outdated, based on nothing, and if people actually treated FW stuff like it was GW's own (which it effectively is), then there would be no problem at all.

You're complaining that people are trying to educate people, so that they HAVE no rational reason not to accept the game. That should be EXACTLY what you want.

Also lol @ the battalion thing. If you create multiple threads on any topic, you will usually find the same users there. Create any thread with "ork" in it's title and you can bet your hat that half the regular posters of the ork tactic thread will be there.

I've not been vocal on pro-FW threads. I do not want to be lumped in with some kind of derogatory petty name. I'm sure that's not much to ask.

I'm still seeing weak arguments with no substance.

"But it used to be..."

"But it's..."

You know, I didn't really want to leap to it- but now I'm almost convinced the anti-FW crowd is just a bunch of folks that are buttmad over someone having a shinier and more expensive toy on the tabletop- and very little experience with them.

 Jidmah wrote:
Mekboss Buzzgobs' Stompa in 6th. You're welcome.

Warhammer 40k is currently in 8th edition. You have some catching up to do.

And you're welcome.

 Jidmah wrote:
No, sorry. You already have made clear that you do not want to understand my argument.

It's an easy argument to understand.

Something upset you a decade ago, and it has no relevance in the current edition in 2018. I'd normally say you don't have an argument, but you do- it's just not relevant to the game as it is now.

 Mmmpi wrote:
4. A player saying their won't play against forgeworld stuff is someone acting on their own agency. They're saying what 'they' won't do. That doesn't infringe anything on your part, but is them limiting themselves. But hey, Free speech, amiright?

Someone please let me know when freedom to do anything at all means you're automatically immune to your actions being questioned, challenged, ridiculed, or judged for doing it. I'd like to know this the next time some shrieking loser asks me about my rifles.

 Peregrine wrote:
Correct. However, we are under no obligation to pretend that the refusal is anything other than irrational TFG behavior.

That awkward and beautiful moment when someone I disagree with on nearly everything else is making the absolute most valid points.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
So the issue was PRIMARILY with the kustom stompa itself then - which is as I said.

Actually, the model with the rule in question was Mekboss Buzzgob. It gave you a stompa for 300 points no matter what the stompa itself would cost.
So it's not as you said and it was just an example out of many.

So, let's ignore what happened in previous editions, because it has no bearing on the current one, yeah?

Well, that's exactly my point. People are not declining games against FW units because FW is in a bad state now.

Guilliman, Conscripts, most of the AM line, Eldar Dark Reapers, Mortarion and Eldar unhittable units have been worse blights on this edition than anything FW have done.

 Jidmah wrote:
FW has been a blight on 5 editions. Guess which one people remember more, three months of dark reapers or ten years of terrible rules.

Lolwut. FW has been a blight? Have you forgotten about all the codex units that have been a blight on the game over that time period? Riptides, scatter laser jetbikes, GK razorback parking lots, etc. TBH most of the time when there has been a problem list it's been something from a codex being exploited. FW balance issues, while obviously present, haven't been the game-breaking thing nearly as often.

FW has always been famous for just slapping together rules that sound cool and feel right and then put some point costs on whatever they created. That's exactly how malefic lords came to be and I'm not convinced things like that will happen again unless they stay clear of such mistakes for a year or two.

You do realize that you're describing the entire GW design process, right? That they have publicly admitted to throwing together rules that seem cool based on what the sculptor (and/or marketing department) thought was a cool model? Why are you holding FW rules to a much higher standard than other rules GW publishes?

 Jidmah wrote:

Sorry, but you didn't understand anything at all. Especially not the part about reading comprehension.

Even more important, that I wasn't talking about myself at all. I know it's hard to understand, even if it's spelled out in the post itself.
But good job at just throwing insults my way. Makes your point seem very valid.

You're literally the one sitting here crying about how models were 10 years ago or more.

It's 2018.

If someone is too stupid, lazy, or just outright childish to understand that the game evolves- they can sit in the corner with their models and stink and not get a game. I'm sure there's plenty of room for the forgotten neckbeards of 'dead 40k' mentality.

To be fair that stompa wasn't the only OP thing FW ever produced. Remember the renegades and heretics list from 7th edition, which could easily compete with GWs OP Necrons, Tau, Space marines and Eldar.

In 8th edition I'd say the only FW outlier was Aetaos'rau'keres but that has been fixed.

Oh, and malefic lords.
But they are very similar to brimstones, conscripts and razorwing flocks and have been solved just as fast.

Sgt. Cortez wrote:
To be fair that stompa wasn't the only OP thing FW ever produced. Remember the renegades and heretics list from 7th edition, which could easily compete with GWs OP Necrons, Tau, Space marines and Eldar.

In 8th edition I'd say the only FW outlier was Aetaos'rau'keres but that has been fixed.

Oh, and malefic lords.
But they are very similar to brimstones, conscripts and razorwing flocks and have been solved just as fast.

Which one? There were 2 really broken ones, one was "the purge" formation with an artillery tyrant (which btw is not R&H as a whole but Siege of Vraks Renegades) and the other was the "Master of the Horde" + Infernal Relic Baneblade + unending Host which also were siege of Vraks renegades. However Vraks was also accompanied by DK and those guys technically could also pull similar stuff in the twilight days of 7th.

(one list spammed dangerous terrain with artillery because of gas shells and used huge ammounts of plague Zombies to tie you, whilest the other had 3+ cover for everything hidden behind any unit of Vraks renegades even the baneblade could get the save from lowely inf grunts, whilest also allowing those inf units to re- enter on 2 or 3 + roll. Meanwhile the Baneblade produced a bubble which made all Vraks militas surrounding it in 12" i belive fearless)
However those lists are really like the Eldar list someone used to complain about the OP sicarian, basically the same dickish move.....

Also both lists had easily abusable flaws, and the core piece for the later list was a Baneblade (which is a GW unit) , whilest the other one was also mainly broken because the whole formations which GW introduced were, put mildly, broken.
I mean when a SM player could get additional 400-500 pts in transports whithout paying which wasn't even the worst possible move to pull if i remember correctly then we have a problem in the main gamemode. There was also the problem with summoning Daemons via the GW rules and that everyone and their mother would use that to summon greater Daemons, had the funny side effect that the Tzeentch daemons always were sold out.....

Quite frankly neither modern day GW nor FW come close to old GW, or do i need to point to the infamous "fish of fury" tactic the Tau pulled early?
We should be happy that now atleast they do try to balance faster and on a much more complete and general scale, even if i disagree with the fact that i had to buy CA.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Sgt. Cortez wrote:
To be fair that stompa wasn't the only OP thing FW ever produced. Remember the renegades and heretics list from 7th edition, which could easily compete with GWs OP Necrons, Tau, Space marines and Eldar.

In 8th edition I'd say the only FW outlier was Aetaos'rau'keres but that has been fixed.

Oh, and malefic lords.
But they are very similar to brimstones, conscripts and razorwing flocks and have been solved just as fast.

Also isn't the Stompa a GW unit? Or was that a speccific Stompa that was this broken?

 Mmmpi wrote:

 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.

Turn that around.

Here is some hyperbole. If rules for the forgeworld models are brought to the game in written form then the only excuses one has to decline a game is if you are afraid to lose and seek to "control" what you play against so you have less chances of a loss OR are to lazy to learn how to formulate new strats on the fly or are incapable of doing so.