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.
2019/03/29 20:27:11
Subject: "Warhammer 40,000 is in a pretty good place" - GW
My view on this is that anything that requires people to activly not do something they can easily do is a very wonky base for interaction. It more or less requires a perfect form of interaction between two or more people everytime. Not impossible, but hard to pull off.
If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain.
2019/03/29 20:40:07
Subject: "Warhammer 40,000 is in a pretty good place" - GW
Ah, so you meant a more general "kids these days" argument. That might have been true between you and your small circle of friends, a very tiny sample. But it was not true overall. Almost from the start there were people who viewed themselves as superior due to their skill or dedication to gaming offline, as well-- as I knew from my experience playing with a broader community at arcades.
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
2019/03/29 21:21:02
Subject: "Warhammer 40,000 is in a pretty good place" - GW
Karol wrote: My view on this is that anything that requires people to activly not do something they can easily do is a very wonky base for interaction. It more or less requires a perfect form of interaction between two or more people everytime. Not impossible, but hard to pull off.
If you can't manage this, then dating is going to be very difficult for you.
2019/03/29 21:36:36
Subject: "Warhammer 40,000 is in a pretty good place" - GW
Karol wrote: My view on this is that anything that requires people to activly not do something they can easily do is a very wonky base for interaction. It more or less requires a perfect form of interaction between two or more people everytime. Not impossible, but hard to pull off.
If you can't manage this, then dating is going to be very difficult for you.
This isn't dating. It's a hobby.
Granted some people consider dating a hobby in of itself, but that's the game of love for ya.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
2019/03/29 21:52:06
Subject: "Warhammer 40,000 is in a pretty good place" - GW
I think one thing needs to happen, Relics, Warlord Traits and Psychic powers should have points costs. They aren't even remotely well balanced enough between each other to justify them being the same effective cost.
The power I can grant to my genestealer cult army with one CP spent to give me three warlord traits? The fact that I can spend a total of five CP to grant myself five command traits is rather absurd.
Once you can adjust the costs of these things independent of the unit involved a lot of power combos could easily be dealt with more effectively.
2019/03/29 21:53:15
Subject: "Warhammer 40,000 is in a pretty good place" - GW
Karol wrote: My view on this is that anything that requires people to activly not do something they can easily do is a very wonky base for interaction. It more or less requires a perfect form of interaction between two or more people everytime. Not impossible, but hard to pull off.
If you can't manage this, then dating is going to be very difficult for you.
This isn't dating. It's a hobby.
Granted some people consider dating a hobby in of itself, but that's the game of love for ya.
It's a SOCIAL hobby, which requires SOCIAL skills. If you want to play a game that doesn't require interaction, try Solitaire. Or Dawn of War Skirmish.
Death Guard - "The Rotmongers"
Chaos Space Marines - "The Sin-Eaters"
Dark Angels - "Nemeses Errant"
Deathwatch
2019/03/29 22:12:06
Subject: "Warhammer 40,000 is in a pretty good place" - GW
Karol wrote: My view on this is that anything that requires people to activly not do something they can easily do is a very wonky base for interaction. It more or less requires a perfect form of interaction between two or more people everytime. Not impossible, but hard to pull off.
I mean, if you're playing for the fun of playing you may not take the most optimal list you can rattle off. Just go forth, throw something that seems interesting together and see how it performs. Mathhammer and net lists are not the end all of the game. You could always run the army you actually came up with and take some pride in that rather than cribbing someone's notes on what works best in a tournament.
You don't have to try not to win, you just need to not be a try hard about winning.
Or at the very least, don't tell people they're playing the game wrong because they didn't take a certain option. I've had a great deal of fun these last few weeks playing 40k, I no longer relate the stories here on dakka because I'm tired of being told things didn't happen because clearly no one uses unit X, or unit Y can't do that(when it's just rather unlikely). Don't be that guy at the club, because it actively discourages the community you play in.
2019/03/29 22:40:02
Subject: "Warhammer 40,000 is in a pretty good place" - GW
Karol wrote: My view on this is that anything that requires people to activly not do something they can easily do is a very wonky base for interaction. It more or less requires a perfect form of interaction between two or more people everytime. Not impossible, but hard to pull off.
If you can't manage this, then dating is going to be very difficult for you.
This isn't dating. It's a hobby.
Granted some people consider dating a hobby in of itself, but that's the game of love for ya.
It's a SOCIAL hobby, which requires SOCIAL skills. If you want to play a game that doesn't require interaction, try Solitaire. Or Dawn of War Skirmish.
It's only as social as you make it to be. For example, when I'm playing Black Jack, I don't have to interact with anyone but the dealer, or I can talk to the whole table.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
2019/03/30 01:04:50
Subject: "Warhammer 40,000 is in a pretty good place" - GW
YeOldSaltPotato wrote: Or at the very least, don't tell people they're playing the game wrong because they didn't take a certain option. I've had a great deal of fun these last few weeks playing 40k, I no longer relate the stories here on dakka because I'm tired of being told things didn't happen because clearly no one uses unit X, or unit Y can't do that(when it's just rather unlikely). Don't be that guy at the club, because it actively discourages the community you play in.
See also: "No one uses terminators, they suck."
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
2019/03/30 06:45:41
Subject: "Warhammer 40,000 is in a pretty good place" - GW
Octopoid wrote: It's a SOCIAL hobby, which requires SOCIAL skills. If you want to play a game that doesn't require interaction, try Solitaire. Or Dawn of War Skirmish.
I don't consider myself a particularly anti-social person, merely introverted... but...
If I could play WH40k alone I would. I don't play WH40k to meet people, or to socialize, or to bond with anyone. If any of that happens it is a nice bonus, but I primarily play WH40k because I enjoy playing the game itself.
40k should be designed in a way that the rules are clear enough that it can be played without the two opponents ever speaking to each other apart from things like "your turn" or "make three armor saves". It is the mark of a well designed game.
Just my 2 cents.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2019/03/30 06:48:49
2019/03/30 07:04:17
Subject: "Warhammer 40,000 is in a pretty good place" - GW
Octopoid wrote: It's a SOCIAL hobby, which requires SOCIAL skills. If you want to play a game that doesn't require interaction, try Solitaire. Or Dawn of War Skirmish.
I don't consider myself a particularly anti-social person, merely introverted... but...
If I could play WH40k alone I would. I don't play WH40k to meet people, or to socialize, or to bond with anyone. If any of that happens it is a nice bonus, but I primarily play WH40k because I enjoy playing the game itself.
40k should be designed in a way that the rules are clear enough that it can be played without the two opponents ever speaking to each other apart from things like "your turn" or "make three armor saves". It is the mark of a well designed game.
Just my 2 cents.
Heh, the funny thing is that even that form, 40K could still be in a good place for GW.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For GW to consider 40K to be in a good place, sales happen sufficiently to make the owners happy about the profit margins. 40K IS selling well, so that is still a good place for GW. One just needs to remember that one simple thing, GW's prime business intent is not to sell games, but to sell models. Game sales are used to drive the model sales.
Is that good enough for you? If you are buying their stuff, it is on one level or another. One can still be satisfied with the universe in general and the models, but be unsatisfied with the game. Your purchases then would follow more to the books on the lore and the models themselves then the lore. However, your model purchases may not be to a consistent level of a competitive player, unless you are planning on reselling to said competitive player.
One thing I liked about 40K is that the models were (largely) easy to put together and paint. This is especially noteworthy as I had all my infantry of a demi-company of marines painted at one point (with a single jump chaplain exception), and the only infantry I've painted in WMH is one 6 man unit, a Warcaster, 4 Warjacks, and 2 Warbeasts, and I've had them for much longer. I mainly dropped 40K from my collection because I was tired of the arguments of the poor rules and even poorer FAQs of those poor rules.
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Megavolt wrote:They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.
2019/03/30 07:59:14
Subject: "Warhammer 40,000 is in a pretty good place" - GW
Xenomancers wrote: Castellans dominated LVO and dominate all tournaments. There are no clever meta busters. Just the same old crap AKA - Ynnari spears/doom - Eldar flyers - blocking moving paths - Orks abusing SAG relic and ofc...shooting twice because nothing is competitive without shooting twice . Dont mistake a little bit of diversity for the same old thang. OP = playable. Not OP? Dumpster.
GW Grand Tournament would like to question your assumption that the Castellan dominates all tournaments.
All ITC events? As a statement, that'd be fair enough - but maybe a key factor there is those three little letters...
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/03/30 07:59:26
Gamgee on Tau Players wrote:we all kill cats and sell our own families to the devil and eat live puppies.
Kanluwen wrote: This is, emphatically, why I will continue suggesting nuking Guard and starting over again. It's a legacy army that needs to be rebooted with a new focal point.
Confirmation of why no-one should listen to Kanluwen when it comes to the IG - he doesn't want the IG, he want's Kan's New Model Army...
tneva82 wrote: You aren't even trying ty pretend for honest arqument. Open bad faith trolling.
- No reason to keep this here, unless people want to use it for something...
2019/03/30 08:22:20
Subject: "Warhammer 40,000 is in a pretty good place" - GW
It's a SOCIAL hobby, which requires SOCIAL skills. If you want to play a game that doesn't require interaction, try Solitaire. Or Dawn of War Skirmish.
That very much sucks for people that are very bad at all social stuff.
All ITC events? As a statement, that'd be fair enough - but maybe a key factor there is those three little letters...
Well in europe that doesn't play with ITC rule they also win a lot. So maybe it is not the 3 letters , but the two that does that?
If I could play WH40k alone I would. I don't play WH40k to meet people, or to socialize, or to bond with anyone. If any of that happens it is a nice bonus, but I primarily play WH40k because I enjoy playing the game itself.
This. I would love to enjoy playing the game.
If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain.
2019/03/30 09:01:38
Subject: Re:"Warhammer 40,000 is in a pretty good place" - GW
Castellans dominated LVO and dominate all tournaments. There are no clever meta busters. Just the same old crap AKA - Ynnari spears/doom - Eldar flyers - blocking moving paths - Orks abusing SAG relic and ofc...shooting twice because nothing is competitive without shooting twice . Dont mistake a little bit of diversity for the same old thang. OP = playable. Not OP? Dumpster.
I am sorry, but this mentality I see more and more in people who are just basing their opinion from Dakkadakka echo chamber. I also recommend watching Adepticon results to see how things aren't as cut and dry as LVO.
1. Jim Vesal - Chaos Daemon Mix
2. Stephen Fore - Genestealer Cults
3 Bilbo Baggins - Orks
4. Chris Blackham - Drukhari + Craftworlds
5. Sean Nayden - Ynnari
6. Braden Kohl - Militarum Tempestus(Had IK but no Castellan)
7. Thomas Byrd - Ultramarines
8. Bryan Hancock - Orks
9. Elliot Levy - Orks
10. Nick Nanavati - Orks
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/03/30 09:03:45
2019/03/30 12:05:19
Subject: Re:"Warhammer 40,000 is in a pretty good place" - GW
Castellans dominated LVO and dominate all tournaments. There are no clever meta busters. Just the same old crap AKA - Ynnari spears/doom - Eldar flyers - blocking moving paths - Orks abusing SAG relic and ofc...shooting twice because nothing is competitive without shooting twice . Dont mistake a little bit of diversity for the same old thang. OP = playable. Not OP? Dumpster.
I am sorry, but this mentality I see more and more in people who are just basing their opinion from Dakkadakka echo chamber. I also recommend watching Adepticon results to see how things aren't as cut and dry as LVO.
1. Jim Vesal - Chaos Daemon Mix 2. Stephen Fore - Genestealer Cults 3 Bilbo Baggins - Orks 4. Chris Blackham - Drukhari + Craftworlds 5. Sean Nayden - Ynnari 6. Braden Kohl - Militarum Tempestus(Had IK but no Castellan) 7. Thomas Byrd - Ultramarines 8. Bryan Hancock - Orks 9. Elliot Levy - Orks 10. Nick Nanavati - Orks
Okay, and what missions did Adepticon use? What was their scoring? I'm pretty sure Adepticon uses something different to ITC Champions missions like LVO.
That is a big factor to consider before you try to push this "See Castellans are fine one tournament didn't have them!" horsegak.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/03/30 12:06:04
- Wayne
Formerly WayneTheGame
2019/03/30 13:17:55
Subject: "Warhammer 40,000 is in a pretty good place" - GW
Karol wrote: My view on this is that anything that requires people to activly not do something they can easily do is a very wonky base for interaction. It more or less requires a perfect form of interaction between two or more people everytime. Not impossible, but hard to pull off.
If you can't manage this, then dating is going to be very difficult for you.
This isn't dating. It's a hobby.
Granted some people consider dating a hobby in of itself, but that's the game of love for ya.
It's a SOCIAL hobby, which requires SOCIAL skills. If you want to play a game that doesn't require interaction, try Solitaire. Or Dawn of War Skirmish.
This is basically the prevailing message some people don't seem to be getting.
"I'm having a bad time playing Warhammer because my opponents and I don't talk to each other, they model for advantage to try and get around the rules, they only bring the most cutthroat competitive armies and don't care about anything other than winning, and none of us care about the game or the story. GW can you change the rules so I can win more? That will finally make me happy,"
When you're at that point you just need to get some perspective on why you're playing a game (repeat: game) in the first place. It's literally designed to be a fun social activity.
Castellans dominated LVO and dominate all tournaments. There are no clever meta busters. Just the same old crap AKA - Ynnari spears/doom - Eldar flyers - blocking moving paths - Orks abusing SAG relic and ofc...shooting twice because nothing is competitive without shooting twice . Dont mistake a little bit of diversity for the same old thang. OP = playable. Not OP? Dumpster.
I am sorry, but this mentality I see more and more in people who are just basing their opinion from Dakkadakka echo chamber. I also recommend watching Adepticon results to see how things aren't as cut and dry as LVO.
1. Jim Vesal - Chaos Daemon Mix
2. Stephen Fore - Genestealer Cults
3 Bilbo Baggins - Orks
4. Chris Blackham - Drukhari + Craftworlds
5. Sean Nayden - Ynnari
6. Braden Kohl - Militarum Tempestus(Had IK but no Castellan)
7. Thomas Byrd - Ultramarines
8. Bryan Hancock - Orks
9. Elliot Levy - Orks
10. Nick Nanavati - Orks
Okay, and what missions did Adepticon use? What was their scoring? I'm pretty sure Adepticon uses something different to ITC Champions missions like LVO.
That is a big factor to consider before you try to push this "See Castellans are fine one tournament didn't have them!" horsegak.
? But ITC missions aren't even created by GW? But you're complaining that GW isn't balancing around a set of missions they didn't even create and sanction because those are the "one true" missions?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/03/30 13:20:23
2019/03/30 13:43:38
Subject: "Warhammer 40,000 is in a pretty good place" - GW
No, I'm saying people are saying the Catellan is broken because it's dominating tournaments. This usually means ITC Tournaments that use ITC missions. The person I replied to said basically but they didn't dominate at Adepticon so the Castellan is fine. So my counter was if Adepticon isn't using ITC missions, it doesn't mean gak if the Castellan wasn't there. And in fact, it means the Castellan is dominating ITC missions, not the game itself, and its most of the ITC TOs that are playtesting and providing feedback for GW's balancing.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/03/30 13:44:16
- Wayne
Formerly WayneTheGame
2019/03/30 14:11:56
Subject: "Warhammer 40,000 is in a pretty good place" - GW
Wayniac wrote: No, I'm saying people are saying the Catellan is broken because it's dominating tournaments. This usually means ITC Tournaments that use ITC missions. The person I replied to said basically but they didn't dominate at Adepticon so the Castellan is fine. So my counter was if Adepticon isn't using ITC missions, it doesn't mean gak if the Castellan wasn't there. And in fact, it means the Castellan is dominating ITC missions, not the game itself, and its most of the ITC TOs that are playtesting and providing feedback for GW's balancing.
The person you replied to didn't "basically" or literally say that at all, they responded to you saying (literally) this:
"Castellans dominated LVO and dominate all tournaments. There are no clever meta busters. Just the same old crap AKA - Ynnari spears/doom - Eldar flyers - blocking moving paths - Orks abusing SAG relic and ofc...shooting twice because nothing is competitive without shooting twice . Dont mistake a little bit of diversity for the same old thang. OP = playable. Not OP? Dumpster."
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/03/30 14:12:17
2019/03/30 14:43:17
Subject: Re:"Warhammer 40,000 is in a pretty good place" - GW
The issue with determination of the power of lists and the units within such lists is that with so little commonality in the way events and games are played around the game, in terms of missions, terrain, house rules.
For balancing 40k to realistically be achievable before GW decided that for some reason or another that they need a new rule system, you would have to significantly reduce the number of undefined variables that effect the way units interact.
Some people claim that using cities of death fixes 40k's terrain issues and others say it's borderline unplayable against - to hit armies.
It's the same with the super factions some people are convinced that playing mono codec is dumb and super factions are balanced, others still see 1 codex as how an army should play and view the super faction lists as unbalanced mess.
Untill everyone is playing atleast vaguely the same game the units could be perfectly balanced even down to mathematical probability modeling in GW vision of the game yet one of these house rules, mission packs etc would tilt it to 1 list always having and advantage.
2019/03/30 15:23:52
Subject: Re:"Warhammer 40,000 is in a pretty good place" - GW
Has anyone considered that GW isn't talking about playing the game, but instead the 40K line of products? No one army is driving sales like in the past. Instead, people are buying units from across the entire 40K product range, albeit the best units... every time an army gets updated or a new codex, they get new models and sales go up. And for the first time in 40K, we're seeing new stuff being added to armies already released. In the past, it was codex, then new models trickled out. Sometimes, no models for certain units were made at all! Then we moved into this era of codex and only the models in that codex. This lead to a large amount of new models available at the time of a new codex release (Primaris). Now, we are seeing "campaign books" with new models being released outside of a codex! That's awesome! New models with no codex entry at all, but rules for play!
Then there is the FAQ and errata schedule. An actual schedule we can plan around! The Community Survey! It looks like GW is listening to the players again!
Outstanding hobby and painting guides! How many of you have watched Duncan on Youtube say "Two thin coats"? Swag! More swag then ever! No bearing at all on game play, but it's kinda nice to have a Space Wolves luggage tag for my army bag. They have a very good and nicely laid out website and webstore! You want fluff? Have you seen the amount of Black Library books there are for 40K?!?!
Let's consider the current competition for 40K. Oh, that's right. There isn't any. Privateer Press is doing it's best to self destruct, Kingdoms of War has a following, Star Wars Legion? Hah! DOA. Maybe X-Wing? But that game... after the new edition came out, it's just not the same. What else is there to compare to 40K? Oh yeah, Age of Sigmar and Underworlds. Both GW products. Maybe Killteam? Again, GW product. Point being that no other table top games are even close to the popularity or player base of 40K.
I would postulate that everything about 40K except the actual game itself is in a pretty good place. With things going so well, I'm sure GW is taking a "If it ain't broke, don't fix it approach". As long as the game is selling and making profits, GW ain't gonna break the game with a new edition or change it significantly. That's what I think they mean when they say "40K is in a pretty good place right now."
Kara Sloan shoots through Time and Design Space for a Negative Play Experience
2019/03/30 15:30:16
Subject: "Warhammer 40,000 is in a pretty good place" - GW
Wayniac wrote: I think this is actually correct. But it does fracture the game. I mean, GW may be trying to balance things but they seem to be doing a poor job overall. So maybe it's time for ITC to step up again and balance the stuff GW won't, since they already have market share over competitive 40k so their word is essentially law when it comes to that. As much as I dislike ITC skewing the game, I think if they actually go whole hog like they had to in 7th and have their own houserules and such to fix competitive 40k, it at least does what GW won't: Divide Matched Play into matched play (as in points) and competitive play (with extra restrictions to help further balance the game). Things like reigning in soup, or limiting you to one battalion, or whatever the hell, you get the idea - just go full on split rather than this weird half split.
I once used a metaphor for this:
Basically, imagine an online RTS game. Ideally, all factions that you could use in this video game would be balanced against one another and do well if used correctly within their strengths and weaknesses. The real determining factor would be a player's skill and knowledge of his opponents' faction.
However, if GW ran this online RTS- two or three of the playable factions would have some 'Super Special Units' that could be purchased through online micro-transactions- and these units that you buy could be the definition of 'pay to win'- the other factions would have no real, practical way of countering these units without completely laser-focusing on it and even then, it's a huge gamble.
Sure, those 'Super Special Units' may cost $150.00 in the micro-transaction store, and you'd think that'd keep a lot of people from using them while still 'helping to fund the game'... but come on, we all know gamers. They'll pay for it if they hate losing to it enough, and want to win bad enough. They can whine on forums all they want but at the end of the day the profits will determine whether or not they are really that unhappy with the state of the game.
On top of that, why would they bother to balance the other factions to counter those $150.00 pay-to-win units? If people want to win, they'll switch factions and pay for them and GW wins without having to do more work. Everyone else is just whining and as long as they buy the game, GW still wins.
As long as people keep throwing money at the game, without so much as a hiccup- things will not change. And people keep buying it, all day long.
Some of the same people that have told me they hate cheesy soup lists and units... are usually one financial transaction away from funding the very thing they're whining about, whether they buy the units they 'hate' or spend just as much getting units to counter that... they play right into the trap.
We've all read the stories and seen it with our own eyes where guys will live on Ramen for a month, overdraft their bank account, cancel anniversary dates with their wife, skip out on their grandmother's funeral, take their childrens' Christmas presents back to the store, pawn family heirloom jewelry, and outright steal or swindle just to get a new toy that helps them win the game. Don't sit here and act like you don't know or know of at least ONE gamer whose 'addiction' would have have heroin and meth junkies saying, "Dude, I'm taking you to rehab, you've got a problem".
Why the hell would GW change that? Just like people screaming about how much they hated a movie- well, they still bought a ticket to go watch it so we can probably expect a sequel with the same formula- see the Austin Powers trilogy
.
Change that from RTS to a sports game and that sounds an awful lot like FIFA 19.
2019/03/30 15:35:18
Subject: "Warhammer 40,000 is in a pretty good place" - GW
Castellans dominated LVO and dominate all tournaments. There are no clever meta busters. Just the same old crap AKA - Ynnari spears/doom - Eldar flyers - blocking moving paths - Orks abusing SAG relic and ofc...shooting twice because nothing is competitive without shooting twice . Dont mistake a little bit of diversity for the same old thang. OP = playable. Not OP? Dumpster.
That is demonstrably not true. They did not dominate the GWGT finals, they did not dominate Adepticon. I think at this point anyone claiming that they dominate all tournaments has some very serious tournament blinkers on.
As for the OP/dumpster divide that is in the heads of certain players not in the reality of how things play out on the table - T'au Piranhas were supposed to be dumpster grade until someone took out a big tournament with a list that had 8 of them. Nothing changed in their rules, its just that the internet-driven group-think was wrong, just plain wrong. Your list of OP things managed to include precisely nothing in the Adepticon or GWGT winning lists - so how exactly are those things able to "dominate all tournaments" when plainly they do not even win all tournaments.
2019/03/30 15:49:06
Subject: "Warhammer 40,000 is in a pretty good place" - GW
Wayniac wrote: No, I'm saying people are saying the Catellan is broken because it's dominating tournaments. This usually means ITC Tournaments that use ITC missions. The person I replied to said basically but they didn't dominate at Adepticon so the Castellan is fine. So my counter was if Adepticon isn't using ITC missions, it doesn't mean gak if the Castellan wasn't there. And in fact, it means the Castellan is dominating ITC missions, not the game itself, and its most of the ITC TOs that are playtesting and providing feedback for GW's balancing.
"Castellans dominated LVO and dominate all tournaments." (direct quote from you)
"But they didn't dominate this major tournament."
"That doesn't count because....uh....."
"The 75mm gun is firing. The 37mm gun is firing, but is traversed round the wrong way. The Browning is jammed. I am saying "Driver, advance." and the driver, who can't hear me, is reversing. And as I look over the top of the turret and see twelve enemy tanks fifty yards away, someone hands me a cheese sandwich."
2019/03/30 15:57:48
Subject: "Warhammer 40,000 is in a pretty good place" - GW
Wayniac wrote: No, I'm saying people are saying the Catellan is broken because it's dominating tournaments. This usually means ITC Tournaments that use ITC missions. The person I replied to said basically but they didn't dominate at Adepticon so the Castellan is fine. So my counter was if Adepticon isn't using ITC missions, it doesn't mean gak if the Castellan wasn't there. And in fact, it means the Castellan is dominating ITC missions, not the game itself, and its most of the ITC TOs that are playtesting and providing feedback for GW's balancing.
"Castellans dominated LVO and dominate all tournaments." (direct quote from you)
"But they didn't dominate this major tournament."
"That doesn't count because....uh....."
Remember the time in 6th edition where the one Rubric Marines w/ Ahriman list got 8th or something like that, and everyone said Rubric Marines were fine because of it?
Yeah me neither.
So you're using ONE tournament as your argument to say Castellans are fair. Does that seem to really make sense when the other parties are using multiple tournaments to prove their point?
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
2019/03/30 16:00:24
Subject: Re:"Warhammer 40,000 is in a pretty good place" - GW
AlmightyWalrus wrote: It's perfectly fair when someone makes an absolute statement like that. You only need one datapoint to disprove the assertion.
While Xenomancers can make...grand statements, we all know what the point was, and it was that Castellans dominate. I haven't a clue what the goal is here with the "Gotcha!" outside some longwinded way to say Castellans are somehow okay?
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
2019/03/30 16:07:15
Subject: Re:"Warhammer 40,000 is in a pretty good place" - GW
AlmightyWalrus wrote: It's perfectly fair when someone makes an absolute statement like that. You only need one datapoint to disprove the assertion.
While Xenomancers can make...grand statements, we all know what the point was, and it was that Castellans dominate. I haven't a clue what the goal is here with the "Gotcha!" outside some longwinded way to say Castellans are somehow okay?
It’s to call out ridiculous negative hyperbole that adds nothing positive to a discussion.
2019/03/30 16:33:55
Subject: Re:"Warhammer 40,000 is in a pretty good place" - GW
Castellans dominated LVO and dominate all tournaments. There are no clever meta busters. Just the same old crap AKA - Ynnari spears/doom - Eldar flyers - blocking moving paths - Orks abusing SAG relic and ofc...shooting twice because nothing is competitive without shooting twice . Dont mistake a little bit of diversity for the same old thang. OP = playable. Not OP? Dumpster.
I am sorry, but this mentality I see more and more in people who are just basing their opinion from Dakkadakka echo chamber. I also recommend watching Adepticon results to see how things aren't as cut and dry as LVO.
1. Jim Vesal - Chaos Daemon Mix
2. Stephen Fore - Genestealer Cults
3 Bilbo Baggins - Orks
4. Chris Blackham - Drukhari + Craftworlds
5. Sean Nayden - Ynnari
6. Braden Kohl - Militarum Tempestus(Had IK but no Castellan)
7. Thomas Byrd - Ultramarines
8. Bryan Hancock - Orks
9. Elliot Levy - Orks
10. Nick Nanavati - Orks
Okay, and what missions did Adepticon use? What was their scoring? I'm pretty sure Adepticon uses something different to ITC Champions missions like LVO.
That is a big factor to consider before you try to push this "See Castellans are fine one tournament didn't have them!" horsegak.
So your saying the problem isn't Castellans but the ITC mission format.
Thanks for realising something people outside of the US have been telling you for years.
2019/03/30 16:36:27
Subject: Re:"Warhammer 40,000 is in a pretty good place" - GW
Castellans dominated LVO and dominate all tournaments. There are no clever meta busters. Just the same old crap AKA - Ynnari spears/doom - Eldar flyers - blocking moving paths - Orks abusing SAG relic and ofc...shooting twice because nothing is competitive without shooting twice . Dont mistake a little bit of diversity for the same old thang. OP = playable. Not OP? Dumpster.
I am sorry, but this mentality I see more and more in people who are just basing their opinion from Dakkadakka echo chamber. I also recommend watching Adepticon results to see how things aren't as cut and dry as LVO.
1. Jim Vesal - Chaos Daemon Mix
2. Stephen Fore - Genestealer Cults
3 Bilbo Baggins - Orks
4. Chris Blackham - Drukhari + Craftworlds
5. Sean Nayden - Ynnari
6. Braden Kohl - Militarum Tempestus(Had IK but no Castellan)
7. Thomas Byrd - Ultramarines
8. Bryan Hancock - Orks
9. Elliot Levy - Orks
10. Nick Nanavati - Orks
Okay, and what missions did Adepticon use? What was their scoring? I'm pretty sure Adepticon uses something different to ITC Champions missions like LVO.
That is a big factor to consider before you try to push this "See Castellans are fine one tournament didn't have them!" horsegak.
So your saying the problem isn't Castellans but the ITC mission format.
Thanks for realising something people outside of the US have been telling you for years.
GT was also won by Tau wasn't it?
"For the dark gods!" - A traitor guardsmen, probably before being killed.
