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.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
It doesn't help that Knights also have the single greatest amount of Warlord Traits AND Relics to use too.

Imperial Knights that is, not the Renegade Red-Headed Stepchildren.

Which COULD be fixed if they added a single page that listed out how to switch out certain keywords to run them as Chaos Knights.

That would be too hard though.

Dont be ridiculous it makes much more sense to....give everyone the rules for free but call them chaos knights...that's...we'll make more...money? that way?

stratigo wrote:

 SHUPPET wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
The main problem isn't that loyal 32+knights+Custards/Dakkabots is competitive, it's that it squashes out literally any other type of list. The game devolves into "Does your list contain two knights? If not, you autolose." because there is simply no way to bring anti-knight to the table when they can throw down 3++ saves and you need to burn half of your CP pool to have even a snowballs chance of hurting them.

So much wrong with this post that I'm not sure it deserves an honest attempt at reply. This is an incredibly low level mentality which displays an understanding of game knowledge that leaves a lot to be desired.

He was over stating his point, but there is no question that guard with knights plus a specialized usually character heavy detachment is the strongest list in the game. It isn’t unbeatable. Indeed it isn’t uncounterable. But it is the best list in the game and that is reflected by tournament results

'No doubt strongest list" no. Do not agree.
Its in the top 3 100%, top 2 yeah. But Eldar soup can most certainly match it.

Audustum wrote:

 Bosskelot wrote:
Isn't it always funny how the "fluffy" and "casual" players spit the most vitriol and get incredibly angry over how people choose to enjoy their hobby.

It seems mostly to be a dakkadakka thing. There is a large swathe of this forum that is, what I would call, 'militantly casual' as opposed to just actually casual.

And the less forgiving would refer to them as part of the Casual Gaming Mafia.

 Ordana wrote:

stratigo wrote:

 SHUPPET wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
The main problem isn't that loyal 32+knights+Custards/Dakkabots is competitive, it's that it squashes out literally any other type of list. The game devolves into "Does your list contain two knights? If not, you autolose." because there is simply no way to bring anti-knight to the table when they can throw down 3++ saves and you need to burn half of your CP pool to have even a snowballs chance of hurting them.

So much wrong with this post that I'm not sure it deserves an honest attempt at reply. This is an incredibly low level mentality which displays an understanding of game knowledge that leaves a lot to be desired.

He was over stating his point, but there is no question that guard with knights plus a specialized usually character heavy detachment is the strongest list in the game. It isn’t unbeatable. Indeed it isn’t uncounterable. But it is the best list in the game and that is reflected by tournament results

'No doubt strongest list" no. Do not agree.
Its in the top 3 100%, top 2 yeah. But Eldar soup can most certainly match it.

Again, I don’t think the record bears that out

 liam0404 wrote:
Hi Everyone,

Just to chime in here, I'm the Aeldari half of this battle report. I can confirm that we were asked by the studio to write lists which were as competitive as possible. I actually arrived home from holiday the day before I needed to travel to Warhammer World, so I was fully reliant on borrowing models from the studio (although I was able to get almost all of what I wanted, if not the specific factions).

I can see why some folks may have an issue with the fluff of the imperium list, but let me defend this by saying that we were asked to build our lists purely from a competitive standpoint. Even then there was some borrowing of models which meant we couldn't get quite to 100% of what we wanted, but it was close.

We had an absolute blast at HQ, happy to answer any questions that I can on this if folks are curious.

Thaks very much for popping and just finsihed reading the report in White Dwarf - most enjoyable.

I am not a competative gamer but its really interesting to see what you guys do and why

This inspired me to make a list of my own to show how balanced 40k is https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/769243.page

That list loses almost instantly to many secondaries in ITC. I'd be happy to see it across the table from me.

 Cephalobeard wrote:
That list loses almost instantly to many secondaries in ITC. I'd be happy to see it across the table from me.

You mean if you house rule 40k to no longer resemble 40k, some lists become less good?

I think you really overvalue how much ITC changes about the game.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Cephalobeard wrote:
That list loses almost instantly to many secondaries in ITC. I'd be happy to see it across the table from me.

You mean if you house rule 40k to no longer resemble 40k, some lists become less good?

My baneblade army would crush that list. Fairly trivially, actually.

A baneblade can deal with a 3++ Knight walking up and punching them? Also "You need LOW to counter LOW" just proves my point.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
A baneblade can deal with a 3++ Knight walking up and punching them? Also "You need LOW to counter LOW" just proves my point.

I've wrecked that kind of list, and ones much worse than it, with pure Craftworld Eldar without using Spears or Reapers.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
A baneblade can deal with a 3++ Knight walking up and punching them? Also "You need LOW to counter LOW" just proves my point.

No, but it can deal with the 5+ knight standing in the back while waves of fairly hapless guardsmen prevent the Knight from reaching ≤1" to the Baneblade. Once they've one-rounded the 5++ knight, they have 4 turns to scatter in 3 directions and chip down the 3++ knight, all the while essentially ignoring the rest of your list.

I've routinely faced Knights in my local meta, and am well versed in destroying them. Depriving yourself of the 3++ castellan just means I'm going to throw Guardsmen under your Titanic Feet until I feel safe enough to disengage and blast you to bits... as has happened every time I face a 3++ melee knight.

Also, how does that prove your point? 3 Baneblades is not a tournament winning list; it's certainly a gatekeeper, like Knights, but it's not like it's the "tip of the spear" of unbalanced 40k. You could use the same tactics with Leman Russ tanks, lol.

 Bosskelot wrote:
Isn't it always funny how the "fluffy" and "casual" players spit the most vitriol and get incredibly angry over how people choose to enjoy their hobby.

Um, no. I'm by no means a CAAC player (though I'm sure you'll accuse me of being, go on. I'm a big boy. I can take it ) but these kinds of lists are warping 40k into some kind of rubbish that it was never intended to be. You just know the types of players playing these lists are those miserable witches trying to squeeze every ounce of efficiency out of a game for no reason other than to show how good they are at toy soldiers. There's no sport in it, what enjoyment can someone possibly get from blowing someone off the board on turn 2?

I make lists like those and maximize efficiency.

I can absolutely guarantee each and every one of my opponents has a great time, because I am as much their opponent as my list is.

I was one of the top Daemon players in the entire ITC last year. Doubt I'd classify myself as a "miserable witch".

What a poor attitude you present, and I'm sorry you don't agree with how other people choose to have fun. I promise myself and those I know could not care at all about any of your lists or games. Glad you're playing.

Edit:

Quotes post calling out people for being toxic and spewing angry vitriol. Proceeds to call people names. Irony, thy name is Dakka.

Ruin wrote:

 Bosskelot wrote:
Isn't it always funny how the "fluffy" and "casual" players spit the most vitriol and get incredibly angry over how people choose to enjoy their hobby.

Um, no. I'm by no means a CAAC player (though I'm sure you'll accuse me of being, go on. I'm a big boy. I can take it ) but these kinds of lists are warping 40k into some kind of rubbish that it was never intended to be. You just know the types of players playing these lists are those miserable witches trying to squeeze every ounce of efficiency out of a game for no reason other than to show how good they are at toy soldiers. There's no sport in it, what enjoyment can someone possibly get from blowing someone off the board on turn 2?

It's GW's for allowing so many broken units to be created, not the player.

A player could coincidentally come into the same combos after all. They don't have to be competitive to do it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

the_scotsman wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
It doesn't help that Knights also have the single greatest amount of Warlord Traits AND Relics to use too.

Imperial Knights that is, not the Renegade Red-Headed Stepchildren.

Which COULD be fixed if they added a single page that listed out how to switch out certain keywords to run them as Chaos Knights.

That would be too hard though.

Dont be ridiculous it makes much more sense to....give everyone the rules for free but call them chaos knights...that's...we'll make more...money? that way?

They could've just printed money from the Chaos players that would've picked up the codex. It's only one page to create, really. I simply don't understand.

 Cephalobeard wrote:
I make lists like those and maximize efficiency.

I can absolutely guarantee each and every one of my opponents has a great time, because I am as much their opponent as my list is.

I was one of the top Daemon players in the entire ITC last year. Doubt I'd classify myself as a "miserable witch".

What a poor attitude you present, and I'm sorry you don't agree with how other people choose to have fun. I promise myself and those I know could not care at all about any of your lists or games. Glad you're playing.

Nope. IME every player I've played like that is a chore to play. Or are my experiences from 2 decades in this hobby invalid?

Take your terrible, awful warped lists and go elsewhere. Plonking 32 IG, some memetastic "smash captains" and other such bric-a-brac on the field is not a coherent, good looking list and gaks all over everything that is good about 40k. 40k is all about the visuals. It is not by any means a good game, at the very least I can say putting that stuff down is a warning sign from afar I'm not going to have a good game so I know in advance when to go get my ice cream.

Ruin wrote:

 Bosskelot wrote:
Isn't it always funny how the "fluffy" and "casual" players spit the most vitriol and get incredibly angry over how people choose to enjoy their hobby.

Um, no. I'm by no means a CAAC player (though I'm sure you'll accuse me of being, go on. I'm a big boy. I can take it ) but these kinds of lists are warping 40k into some kind of rubbish that it was never intended to be. You just know the types of players playing these lists are those miserable witches trying to squeeze every ounce of efficiency out of a game for no reason other than to show how good they are at toy soldiers. There's no sport in it, what enjoyment can someone possibly get from blowing someone off the board on turn 2?

Witches aren't bad people, please don't use my beliefs as a placeholder for bad people.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
They could've just printed money from the Chaos players that would've picked up the codex. It's only one page to create, really. I simply don't understand.

Yes, it's quite confusing. I mean, they just printed a 40k preview for the year that basically stated: "Dear Chaos player, through the various publications we will release this year, it is possible you may be inspired to purchase a single model, maybe. Otherwise, please feel free to take the year off."

 Blndmage wrote:

Ruin wrote:

 Bosskelot wrote:
Isn't it always funny how the "fluffy" and "casual" players spit the most vitriol and get incredibly angry over how people choose to enjoy their hobby.

Um, no. I'm by no means a CAAC player (though I'm sure you'll accuse me of being, go on. I'm a big boy. I can take it ) but these kinds of lists are warping 40k into some kind of rubbish that it was never intended to be. You just know the types of players playing these lists are those miserable witches trying to squeeze every ounce of efficiency out of a game for no reason other than to show how good they are at toy soldiers. There's no sport in it, what enjoyment can someone possibly get from blowing someone off the board on turn 2?

Witches aren't bad people, please don't use my beliefs as a placeholder for bad people.

Don't blame me, blame Dakka's filter.

Ruin wrote:

 Cephalobeard wrote:
I make lists like those and maximize efficiency.

I can absolutely guarantee each and every one of my opponents has a great time, because I am as much their opponent as my list is.

I was one of the top Daemon players in the entire ITC last year. Doubt I'd classify myself as a "miserable witch".

What a poor attitude you present, and I'm sorry you don't agree with how other people choose to have fun. I promise myself and those I know could not care at all about any of your lists or games. Glad you're playing.

Nope. IME every player I've played like that is a chore to play. Or are my experiences from 2 decades in this hobby invalid?

Take your terrible, awful warped lists and go elsewhere. Plonking 32 IG, some memetastic "smash captains" and other such bric-a-brac on the field is not a coherent, good looking list and gaks all over everything that is good about 40k. 40k is all about the visuals. It is not by any means a good game, at the very least I can say putting that stuff down is a warning sign from afar I'm not going to have a good game so I know in advance when to go get my ice cream.

Yikes

Ruin wrote:

 Blndmage wrote:

Ruin wrote:

 Bosskelot wrote:
Isn't it always funny how the "fluffy" and "casual" players spit the most vitriol and get incredibly angry over how people choose to enjoy their hobby.

Um, no. I'm by no means a CAAC player (though I'm sure you'll accuse me of being, go on. I'm a big boy. I can take it ) but these kinds of lists are warping 40k into some kind of rubbish that it was never intended to be. You just know the types of players playing these lists are those miserable witches trying to squeeze every ounce of efficiency out of a game for no reason other than to show how good they are at toy soldiers. There's no sport in it, what enjoyment can someone possibly get from blowing someone off the board on turn 2?

Witches aren't bad people, please don't use my beliefs as a placeholder for bad people.

Don't blame me, blame Dakka's filter.

So looking at your quote, the filter replaced you using demeaning language to women in reference to your opponent. Are you saying only women play this way?

I think we might be getting time for a closing!

He's definitely insinuating you're only allowed to have fun his way, play his way, and lacks the self awareness to recognize that his attitude is worse than what were attempting to vilify here, in a very real adult version of a child taking their ball and going home type of tantrum.

 Blndmage wrote:

Ruin wrote:

 Blndmage wrote:

Ruin wrote:

 Bosskelot wrote:
Isn't it always funny how the "fluffy" and "casual" players spit the most vitriol and get incredibly angry over how people choose to enjoy their hobby.

Um, no. I'm by no means a CAAC player (though I'm sure you'll accuse me of being, go on. I'm a big boy. I can take it ) but these kinds of lists are warping 40k into some kind of rubbish that it was never intended to be. You just know the types of players playing these lists are those miserable witches trying to squeeze every ounce of efficiency out of a game for no reason other than to show how good they are at toy soldiers. There's no sport in it, what enjoyment can someone possibly get from blowing someone off the board on turn 2?

Witches aren't bad people, please don't use my beliefs as a placeholder for bad people.

Don't blame me, blame Dakka's filter.

So looking at your quote, the filter replaced you using demeaning language to women in reference to your opponent. Are you saying only women play this way?

What on earth are you smoking? Calling someone a Cambridge university netball team is not an insult to women. I don't even know where to begin with that one...

Heaven forbid you go to Australia or the North of the UK.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Cephalobeard wrote:
He's definitely insinuating you're only allowed to have fun his way, play his way, and lacks the self awareness to recognize that his attitude is worse than what were attempting to vilify here, in a very real adult version of a child taking their ball and going home type of tantrum.

Nice to put words in my mouth there.

You can go play your warped terrible version of 40k and I'll play the proper one and our paths will never cross in twain. Okay?

Ruin wrote:

 Bosskelot wrote:
Isn't it always funny how the "fluffy" and "casual" players spit the most vitriol and get incredibly angry over how people choose to enjoy their hobby.

Um, no. I'm by no means a CAAC player (though I'm sure you'll accuse me of being, go on. I'm a big boy. I can take it ) but these kinds of lists are warping 40k into some kind of rubbish that it was never intended to be. You just know the types of players playing these lists are those miserable witches trying to squeeze every ounce of efficiency out of a game for no reason other than to show how good they are at toy soldiers. There's no sport in it, what enjoyment can someone possibly get from blowing someone off the board on turn 2?

And these types of people you describe have always existed. Back in 3rd they would have played some ridiculous CSM list that was actually statistically impossible to beat unless you also brought something from the 3.5 codex to deal with it. Or they'd have done some kind of 5 riptides shooting twice list in 7th. Because that's really fun. Wasn't it mathematically impossible for Guard and Tyranids to beat Tau and Eldar in 7th too? Fun times.

I've played vs many lists like the one from this WD and actually had great fun and I've won most of them too. Rather than blaming the list, maybe when organizing games you should make sure with your prospective opponent what sort of game you want to play. If I organize a game at my local club and my opponent tells me beforehand they want something friendly and casual I'm not about to bust out the 3 Hemlocks and 3 Fire Prisms. It's the same with many of the more competitive minded players; they'll either play and practice amongst themselves or if they do play a game vs a more casual opponent they will not bring a top tier filthy list.

So yeah, you're still spitting vitriol and getting angry at how certain people choose to enjoy a certain way to experience their hobby. Great job buddy, I'm sure you're great fun to play a game of 40k with!

Ruin wrote:

 Blndmage wrote:

Ruin wrote:

 Blndmage wrote:

Ruin wrote:

 Bosskelot wrote:
Isn't it always funny how the "fluffy" and "casual" players spit the most vitriol and get incredibly angry over how people choose to enjoy their hobby.

Um, no. I'm by no means a CAAC player (though I'm sure you'll accuse me of being, go on. I'm a big boy. I can take it ) but these kinds of lists are warping 40k into some kind of rubbish that it was never intended to be. You just know the types of players playing these lists are those miserable witches trying to squeeze every ounce of efficiency out of a game for no reason other than to show how good they are at toy soldiers. There's no sport in it, what enjoyment can someone possibly get from blowing someone off the board on turn 2?

Witches aren't bad people, please don't use my beliefs as a placeholder for bad people.

Don't blame me, blame Dakka's filter.

So looking at your quote, the filter replaced you using demeaning language to women in reference to your opponent. Are you saying only women play this way?

What on earth are you smoking? Calling someone a Cambridge university netball team is not an insult to women. I don't even know where to begin with that one...

Heaven forbid you go to Australia or the North of the UK.

Are you a woman?
If not, you have Zero right to say what's offensive to women, or what insults us.
That term is consistently used in offensive contexts.
Why else is it filtered?

Ruin wrote:

 Blndmage wrote:

Ruin wrote:

 Blndmage wrote:

Ruin wrote:

 Bosskelot wrote:
Isn't it always funny how the "fluffy" and "casual" players spit the most vitriol and get incredibly angry over how people choose to enjoy their hobby.

Um, no. I'm by no means a CAAC player (though I'm sure you'll accuse me of being, go on. I'm a big boy. I can take it ) but these kinds of lists are warping 40k into some kind of rubbish that it was never intended to be. You just know the types of players playing these lists are those miserable witches trying to squeeze every ounce of efficiency out of a game for no reason other than to show how good they are at toy soldiers. There's no sport in it, what enjoyment can someone possibly get from blowing someone off the board on turn 2?

Witches aren't bad people, please don't use my beliefs as a placeholder for bad people.

Don't blame me, blame Dakka's filter.

So looking at your quote, the filter replaced you using demeaning language to women in reference to your opponent. Are you saying only women play this way?

What on earth are you smoking? Calling someone a Cambridge university netball team is not an insult to women. I don't even know where to begin with that one...

Heaven forbid you go to Australia or the North of the UK.

What are you talking about North UK.

It's called scotland you insensitive I am highly offended by your lack of acceptance of my country also by your lack of acceptance that someone can play toy soldiers differently than you.

Ah yes, the WAAC brigade still being in denial that it correlates with the local TFG pretty much all the time.

Yet, I'M the bad guy. Mmmkayyy?

 BaconCatBug wrote:
This inspired me to make a list of my own to show how balanced 40k is https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/769243.page

My favourite part about this list is that it throws being competitive out the window in order to gather as much CP as possible without enough good strats to actually spend it on. That's a bold move, Cotton. Let's see how it plays out.

(I am aware you will never play this list)