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.
bullyboy wrote: It's funny that people basically lose their gak when a FW ban is suggested (triggered anyone?). I get it, you spent a lot of money on your new models and want to play them. The thing is, you can still play them anywhere else, but having a tournament just suggest no FW (therefore narrowing the number of datasheets present) is not a terrible suggestion. It's easier for a TO to referee an event if the number of datasheets are limited. The suggestion of banning new marines or sisters is very childish as these are base armies, not expansions on to existing armies. Exactly how does removing FW hurt anyone's list options?...you have a codex with a plethora of other options to choose from. If you want to expand to allow newer players to enjoy the experience of the tournament scene, maybe not exposing them to a new set of rules and overly expensive models (above and beyond GW) would also be prudent. Sure, the top tournaments may want to keep things more open and I don't think I ran into anything FW at this year's LVO.
TOs can go a step further and modify existing rules (and some do), it is absolutely their prerogative. Don't like it? Don't go. Super simple.
The problem is, I don't think just banning the Levi is going to be enough to balance the IH, but I'm willing to see a lot more games played before that conclusion is reached.
You know what else TOs should ban? Genestealer Cult and AdMech when they were first released because that's more datasheets to memorize!
Again, another dumb response. You have a great record. Those are base armies, not expansions to armies. I wouldn't also be bothered if Vigilus or PA books were banned for an event, less book keeping. have you ever TO'd a decent sized event?
So should we just ban any new unit that pops up?
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.
bullyboy wrote: It's funny that people basically lose their gak when a FW ban is suggested (triggered anyone?). I get it, you spent a lot of money on your new models and want to play them. The thing is, you can still play them anywhere else, but having a tournament just suggest no FW (therefore narrowing the number of datasheets present) is not a terrible suggestion. It's easier for a TO to referee an event if the number of datasheets are limited. The suggestion of banning new marines or sisters is very childish as these are base armies, not expansions on to existing armies. Exactly how does removing FW hurt anyone's list options?...you have a codex with a plethora of other options to choose from. If you want to expand to allow newer players to enjoy the experience of the tournament scene, maybe not exposing them to a new set of rules and overly expensive models (above and beyond GW) would also be prudent. Sure, the top tournaments may want to keep things more open and I don't think I ran into anything FW at this year's LVO.
TOs can go a step further and modify existing rules (and some do), it is absolutely their prerogative. Don't like it? Don't go. Super simple.
The problem is, I don't think just banning the Levi is going to be enough to balance the IH, but I'm willing to see a lot more games played before that conclusion is reached.
You know what else TOs should ban? Genestealer Cult and AdMech when they were first released because that's more datasheets to memorize!
Again, another dumb response. You have a great record. Those are base armies, not expansions to armies. I wouldn't also be bothered if Vigilus or PA books were banned for an event, less book keeping. have you ever TO'd a decent sized event?
Sorry but you seem to be saying - People should only use the things "I" buy - if you buy other stuff I don;t - then no that should not be used. Just admit your self interest.
How is it harder to keep an eye on a coupel fo Index books rather than all the various Marine splatbooks, campaign books etc,
I AM A MARINE PLAYER
"Unimaginably ancient xenos artefact somewhere on the planet, hive fleet poised above our heads, hidden 'stealer broods making an early start....and now a bloody Chaos cult crawling out of the woodwork just in case we were bored. Welcome to my world, Ciaphas."
Inquisitor Amberley Vail, Ordo Xenos
"I will admit that some Primachs like Russ or Horus could have a chance against an unarmed 12 year old novice but, a full Battle Sister??!! One to one? In close combat? Perhaps three Primarchs fighting together... but just one Primarch?" da001
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Except you forget all the Codex Dreads suck as basically anyone, even as Iron Hands. Only the Gun Platform Ven Dreads are even worth anything.
Maybe before the codex was released, but they've got a new lease on life now.
Also maybe when so much is invested in one model, surprise surprise, it is hard to kill. Everything you talk about is an investment of both CP and points.
Its not really a huge investment in one model though? Everything that you would take with the levi dread, are good units in their own right.
And even then, even if you consider every single point spent supporting the Levi as not existing without the Levi... its still harder to kill than equal points of nearly any other unit in the game.
Selfcontrol wrote: Redemptor Dreads, Repulsors, Executioners and "Classic Dreads" benefit massively from Feirros and the Ironstone relic
So why not ban Feirros until they give him proper price and the relic?
I don't think that Feirros is an issue.
It's a 5++. I don't remember Demon Engines being broken. If you raise its cost is because he is a bit too good in melee for the cost.
Daemon engines aren't broken because
a) even at full HP their damage output is pretty terrible
b) their 5++ is already factored in to their cost.
This is kind of an issue with ALL aura abilities in the game and how intentional synergy can rapidly devolve in to OP cheese.
If Feirros sits next to a 300pt vehicle that was correctly costed without an invulnerable save, and improves its survivability by lets say 20% on average, then if he does literally nothing else all game he's still covered 3/4 of his points cost.
If he sits next to 2 vehicles, he's covered is points and then some.
Oh, but he ALSO has hit rerolls. and bonuses to hit. and healing. Not to mention his own respectable combat abilities...
LOL no they do not have any new lease on life. They're all still terrible for the price outside being Ven and being a gunboat. FW is the only source for a good variety of both good range OR melee dreads.
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.
bullyboy wrote: It's funny that people basically lose their gak when a FW ban is suggested (triggered anyone?). I get it, you spent a lot of money on your new models and want to play them. The thing is, you can still play them anywhere else, but having a tournament just suggest no FW (therefore narrowing the number of datasheets present) is not a terrible suggestion. It's easier for a TO to referee an event if the number of datasheets are limited. The suggestion of banning new marines or sisters is very childish as these are base armies, not expansions on to existing armies. Exactly how does removing FW hurt anyone's list options?...you have a codex with a plethora of other options to choose from. If you want to expand to allow newer players to enjoy the experience of the tournament scene, maybe not exposing them to a new set of rules and overly expensive models (above and beyond GW) would also be prudent. Sure, the top tournaments may want to keep things more open and I don't think I ran into anything FW at this year's LVO.
TOs can go a step further and modify existing rules (and some do), it is absolutely their prerogative. Don't like it? Don't go. Super simple.
The problem is, I don't think just banning the Levi is going to be enough to balance the IH, but I'm willing to see a lot more games played before that conclusion is reached.
You know what else TOs should ban? Genestealer Cult and AdMech when they were first released because that's more datasheets to memorize!
Again, another dumb response. You have a great record. Those are base armies, not expansions to armies. I wouldn't also be bothered if Vigilus or PA books were banned for an event, less book keeping. have you ever TO'd a decent sized event?
What would happen if a tournament decided to ban Stratagems? They're not part of the base army, they're an appendix tacked onto the end.
bullyboy wrote: It's funny that people basically lose their gak when a FW ban is suggested (triggered anyone?). I get it, you spent a lot of money on your new models and want to play them. The thing is, you can still play them anywhere else, but having a tournament just suggest no FW (therefore narrowing the number of datasheets present) is not a terrible suggestion. It's easier for a TO to referee an event if the number of datasheets are limited. The suggestion of banning new marines or sisters is very childish as these are base armies, not expansions on to existing armies. Exactly how does removing FW hurt anyone's list options?...you have a codex with a plethora of other options to choose from. If you want to expand to allow newer players to enjoy the experience of the tournament scene, maybe not exposing them to a new set of rules and overly expensive models (above and beyond GW) would also be prudent. Sure, the top tournaments may want to keep things more open and I don't think I ran into anything FW at this year's LVO.
TOs can go a step further and modify existing rules (and some do), it is absolutely their prerogative. Don't like it? Don't go. Super simple.
The problem is, I don't think just banning the Levi is going to be enough to balance the IH, but I'm willing to see a lot more games played before that conclusion is reached.
You know what else TOs should ban? Genestealer Cult and AdMech when they were first released because that's more datasheets to memorize!
Again, another dumb response. You have a great record. Those are base armies, not expansions to armies. I wouldn't also be bothered if Vigilus or PA books were banned for an event, less book keeping. have you ever TO'd a decent sized event?
What would happen if a tournament decided to ban Stratagems? They're not part of the base army, they're an appendix tacked onto the end.
It would change the game so much...Like...A lot.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/10/01 16:31:35
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
If we ban FW it just makes the game better. Or at least the marine half of the FW line. If something is broken xeno or chaos wise, I mean they deserve it because look at the state they are in. Imperium? They get so many things that most players don’t really care if that player base has nice things or not
Pain4Pleasure wrote: If we ban FW it just makes the game better. Or at least the marine half of the FW line. If something is broken xeno or chaos wise, I mean they deserve it because look at the state they are in. Imperium? They get so many things that most players don’t really care if that player base has nice things or not
What units do you actually want to ban?
The Malcador? Custodes Venatari? The Lynx? The Warp Hunter? What units are actually a problem? Or is this just the same kind of blanket "let's try and make the broadest one-sentence fix we can, to the Warp with whatever else we break along the way" that produces most of GW's rules and the Proposed Rules forum?
Pain4Pleasure wrote: If we ban FW it just makes the game better. Or at least the marine half of the FW line. If something is broken xeno or chaos wise, I mean they deserve it because look at the state they are in. Imperium? They get so many things that most players don’t really care if that player base has nice things or not
What units do you actually want to ban?
The Malcador? Custodes Venatari? The Lynx? The Warp Hunter? What units are actually a problem? Or is this just the same kind of blanket "let's try and make the broadest one-sentence fix we can, to the Warp with whatever else we break along the way" that produces most of GW's rules and the Proposed Rules forum?
Pretty much this. Honestly, good for you for buying a FW model. I have a few as well. But honesty as a TO idc if your army isn’t viable without FW, should of thought of that before purchasing an army that could at any point in time fall off the map by never getting updated. Not my problem friend
bullyboy wrote: It's funny that people basically lose their gak when a FW ban is suggested (triggered anyone?). I get it, you spent a lot of money on your new models and want to play them. The thing is, you can still play them anywhere else, but having a tournament just suggest no FW (therefore narrowing the number of datasheets present) is not a terrible suggestion. It's easier for a TO to referee an event if the number of datasheets are limited. The suggestion of banning new marines or sisters is very childish as these are base armies, not expansions on to existing armies. Exactly how does removing FW hurt anyone's list options?...you have a codex with a plethora of other options to choose from. If you want to expand to allow newer players to enjoy the experience of the tournament scene, maybe not exposing them to a new set of rules and overly expensive models (above and beyond GW) would also be prudent. Sure, the top tournaments may want to keep things more open and I don't think I ran into anything FW at this year's LVO.
TOs can go a step further and modify existing rules (and some do), it is absolutely their prerogative. Don't like it? Don't go. Super simple.
The problem is, I don't think just banning the Levi is going to be enough to balance the IH, but I'm willing to see a lot more games played before that conclusion is reached.
You know what else TOs should ban? Genestealer Cult and AdMech when they were first released because that's more datasheets to memorize!
Again, another dumb response. You have a great record. Those are base armies, not expansions to armies. I wouldn't also be bothered if Vigilus or PA books were banned for an event, less book keeping. have you ever TO'd a decent sized event?
What if I play Renegades and Heretics? What if I play a faction reliant on FW units to have any hope of competing on the same level as Eldar, new Marines, Guard, etc? What if I simply dont have enough non FW units for an army to make a coherent list otherwise (been there myself).
The distinctions you are drawing (e.g. "base army") exist nowhere in the rules, it is one you are projecting onto the game, differentiation by sales channel at best.
I've TO'd events myself. FW was never a problem from that perspective, and should be less so today than at any other point in the past with Battlescribe and digital downloads and FW books that don't cost $90.
So you chose to play a FW army.....so? You don't play in that particular event, sorry. Your choice.
I've TO'd many FOW events, and I hear the same excuses. Why can't my Soviets play in a Normandy themed event? Really?
It's not all events, just some. let's look at the books..
Codex Space Marines, Codex (insert specific marine supplement), Vigilus book, Space Marines FW book, FAQs, etc, etc. pretty extensive. Are you going to be annoyed if your opponent keeps asking you to show him the datasheet or strategem for a specific model from all of those sources? It's purely a book keeping issue. Each player has a single codex (and now I guess the marines have a supplement) to draw their army from. If tehy soup, the list gets even more extensive.
And sorry, but what faction depends on FW to make them competitive?
If anyone had that many rules and insisted on using them, every single turn on THEIR clock I’d ask as many questions as I’d want, look at data sheets, ask about specific weapons, interactions, movements, special rules, etc. who cares if their clock goes down.
That's kind of a gak attitude to have, cuz honestly, if people don't buy an army it's guaranteed to stop getting updates. Guess, to be safe, everyone should only buy and play Ultramarines.
bullyboy wrote: ...And sorry, but what faction depends on FW to make them competitive?
This is honestly the thing that has me kind of baffled about the whole "Ban FW!" thing that pops up every now and again. GW writes way more broken rules than FW ever has. The only case where FW models are actually integral to my army are my Custodes because GW couldn't be bothered to write a functional and complete army with them. I use FW models because I like them, not because they make me auto-win games by being broken, and then GW comes along and breaks the Iron Hands beyond all hope of repair, and people start shouting "FW broken, ban FW!" Nobody says "Ban GW rules!" when the Knights show up and every single list has a Castellan in it.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Can we all agree that the Levi by itself is slightly OP, but the IH crap with a Levi is broken as all hell?
Because the IH here is the problem. While the Levi is bad, it's not the problem. The godmode cheat code you get with IH is the problem.
The IH codex proves that GW has no clue what they are doing with rules. Who wrote the rules? Someone who had NEVER heard of FW before?
Well apparently they've never heard of repulsor executioners, venerable dreadnoughts, contemptor mortis, or space marine flyers. And I'm sure there's more we've not noticed yet. This codex makes units that are good in other armies horrific in their's. And if you think fw dreadnoughts are bad wait till you see what an ihfw super heavy looks like.
Ehhh - those are all pretty overpriced. Relic fellblade and falchion are in the 1000 points range. The Astraeus is like 750 but doesn't hit all that hard at all. Knights are significantly better than all these options. Yes - the ironhands abilitiy to give any vehicle POTMS for the whole game for the cost of 0 is flat out busted but lets just tac on reroll 1's for SNG's too.
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
People think the sky is going to fall if FW are banned from a tournament....that's pretty hilarious really. It's just one source of material. Same could be said of the Vigilus books...not in this event? OK, no problem. Or the upcoming Psychic Awakening. Not every list, datasheet, modification, etc needs to be available all the time. Bloat for the bloat God and all that.
It's like people who just play ITC all the time, nothing else. The game can be soooo much better. You're practically playing the same mission Every.Single.Game.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/10/01 17:04:56
bullyboy wrote: ...And sorry, but what faction depends on FW to make them competitive?
This is honestly the thing that has me kind of baffled about the whole "Ban FW!" thing that pops up every now and again. GW writes way more broken rules than FW ever has. The only case where FW models are actually integral to my army are my Custodes because GW couldn't be bothered to write a functional and complete army with them. I use FW models because I like them, not because they make me auto-win games by being broken, and then GW comes along and breaks the Iron Hands beyond all hope of repair, and people start shouting "FW broken, ban FW!" Nobody says "Ban GW rules!" when the Knights show up and every single list has a Castellan in it.
FW makes obscure units that do particular things really well...it is a balancing nightmare...Like...just look at a sicarian punisher. It's also extremely busted as iron hands and with doctrines. While it is true that GW also makes really busted rules...they are almost always exploited better by a FW unit.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
bullyboy wrote: People think the sky is going to fall if FW are banned from a tournament....that's pretty hilarious really. It's just one source of material. Same could be said of the Vigilus books...not in this event? OK, no problem. Or the upcoming Psychic Awakening. Not every list, datasheet, modification, etc needs to be available all the time. Bloat for the bloat God and all that.
It's like people who just play ITC all the time, nothing else. The game can be soooo much better. You're practically playing the same mission Every.Single.Game.
Can't blame them - they should be able to use their favorite models.
The solution is simple...GW/FW need to stop sucking at rules writing.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/10/01 17:05:58
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
bullyboy wrote: People think the sky is going to fall if FW are banned from a tournament....that's pretty hilarious really. It's just one source of material. Same could be said of the Vigilus books...not in this event? OK, no problem. Or the upcoming Psychic Awakening. Not every list, datasheet, modification, etc needs to be available all the time. Bloat for the bloat God and all that.
It's like people who just play ITC all the time, nothing else. The game can be soooo much better. You're practically playing the same mission Every.Single.Game.
Playing different missions =/= straight up banning units and armies line you want
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.
bullyboy wrote: People think the sky is going to fall if FW are banned from a tournament....that's pretty hilarious really. It's just one source of material. Same could be said of the Vigilus books...not in this event? OK, no problem. Or the upcoming Psychic Awakening. Not every list, datasheet, modification, etc needs to be available all the time. Bloat for the bloat God and all that.
It's like people who just play ITC all the time, nothing else. The game can be soooo much better. You're practically playing the same mission every.single.game.
You don't understand why people might take it personally when you say "Oh, (person), you can't use your stuff 'cause it'd make the game better"? ...If I restated it as "Oh, (person), the game would be better without you" does it make more sense?
So, honest reflection, we are all decrying the unbalanced nature of FW, but if there was zero FW, GW products would still be inherently broken. The IH silliness extends to GW models as well. I for one don't want to see unkillable Contemptors coming at me, or unkillable Executioners.
GW is not as widely unbalanced as GW is, but the GW unbalance is extreme in certain instances.
FW makes their units unbalanced. It's their thing. GW unbalances their units through sheer idiocy. Sloppy writing and not being aware what else is in their universe, leads to overpoweredness.
Xenomancers wrote: ...FW makes obscure units that do particular things really well...it is a balancing nightmare...Like...just look at a sicarian punisher. It's also extremely busted as iron hands and with doctrines. While it is true that GW also makes really busted rules...they are almost always exploited better by a FW unit...
Maybe if they stopped writing all their rules in a little vacuum-sealed bubble without acknowledging the existence of anything else outside of that book?
I don't get why people are so hung up on banning stuff just because they don't bother keeping current on things they don't own. It's not like they're some sort of 3rd party company with fanmade rules for 40k.
I don't know anything about Dark Eldar, you don't see me trying to get them banned. Yes they are official an GW army, but then so is everything FW makes.
Orodhen wrote: Citadel miniatures. Made by GW, rules by GW.
Forgeworld miniatures. Made by GW, rules by GW.
I don't get why people are so hung up on banning stuff just because they don't bother keeping current on things they don't own. It's not like they're some sort of 3rd party company with fanmade rules for 40k.
I don't know anything about Dark Eldar, you don't see me trying to get them banned. Yes they are official an GW army, but then so is everything FW makes.
Not my problem to know your rules. Your problem to explain them to me during the tournament match. As many times as I ask.
Xenomancers wrote: ...FW makes obscure units that do particular things really well...it is a balancing nightmare...Like...just look at a sicarian punisher. It's also extremely busted as iron hands and with doctrines. While it is true that GW also makes really busted rules...they are almost always exploited better by a FW unit...
Maybe if they stopped writing all their rules in a little vacuum-sealed bubble without acknowledging the existence of anything else outside of that book?
considering the rules teams have been folded together one would expect better results right?
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
Xenomancers wrote: ...FW makes obscure units that do particular things really well...it is a balancing nightmare...Like...just look at a sicarian punisher. It's also extremely busted as iron hands and with doctrines. While it is true that GW also makes really busted rules...they are almost always exploited better by a FW unit...
Maybe if they stopped writing all their rules in a little vacuum-sealed bubble without acknowledging the existence of anything else outside of that book?
I think it is fair to assume that when GW makes rules they do not consider forge world units when they write them. Then they just give the rules away in an FAQ.
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
A lot of the ban FW cries come from a fear of the unknown, it's often units people don't see often and dont understand so they become the boogeymen.
Often people get a whooping from unit because they weren't sure how it behaves and didn't plan for it, so when they see it's not in a codex it becomes easy to point at it and blame it.
Agreed the weirdest combos are usually FW units because codex writers seem to forget they exist for some reason.
Xenomancers wrote: ...FW makes obscure units that do particular things really well...it is a balancing nightmare...Like...just look at a sicarian punisher. It's also extremely busted as iron hands and with doctrines. While it is true that GW also makes really busted rules...they are almost always exploited better by a FW unit...
Maybe if they stopped writing all their rules in a little vacuum-sealed bubble without acknowledging the existence of anything else outside of that book?
I think it is fair to assume that when GW makes rules they do not consider forge world units when they write them. Then they just give the rules away in an FAQ.
After the death of the FW subdivision leader and the initial wave of releases GW rules team has fully taken over.
THEY SHOULD KNOW WHAT EXISTS BEYOND THE CODEX POND.
They just lack the willingness to propperly adress the issues, and or admit they fethed up on some of the supplements.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
Xenomancers wrote: ...FW makes obscure units that do particular things really well...it is a balancing nightmare...Like...just look at a sicarian punisher. It's also extremely busted as iron hands and with doctrines. While it is true that GW also makes really busted rules...they are almost always exploited better by a FW unit...
Maybe if they stopped writing all their rules in a little vacuum-sealed bubble without acknowledging the existence of anything else outside of that book?
considering the rules teams have been folded together one would expect better results right?
Ehh - I find that really hard to believe. If I was writting a space marine codex and making changes to units within it why wouldn't I simultaneously modify the FW army entries? They benefit from the codex just as much as any unit inside the codex. They don't even consider them.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dudeface wrote: A lot of the ban FW cries come from a fear of the unknown, it's often units people don't see often and dont understand so they become the boogeymen.
Often people get a whooping from unit because they weren't sure how it behaves and didn't plan for it, so when they see it's not in a codex it becomes easy to point at it and blame it.
Agreed the weirdest combos are usually FW units because codex writers seem to forget they exist for some reason.
I own a levi dread. The people Ive used it against when were are playing just semi competitive games would really rather not face it. Because it results in them just picking up units every time it shoots. This was before the new marine codex made it even better...It is a clear OP unit and overall best unit marines have access to. It's not a boogeyman - it's been out in front all edition and everyone knows its OP. The only reason space marines wern't able to win with it is because they rest of their army was fething atrociously bad.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/10/01 17:26:36
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
Please, stop with the "GW writes FW rules" nonsense. It's clear to even casual observers that's not true.
- They often conflict
- They often invalidate previous units entirely, thus hurting sales
- They were an ENTIRELY SEPARATE company until recently
- GW only codifies the FW rules, they don't actively create them
- GW events have banned FW lists or models entirely at times. What business sense does this make to make a high cost model illegal?
- GW routinely makes rules regarding new units without seeming consideration of non-GW units. See IH fiasco.
- GW balance is based around non-FW units being in play. See what happens when you drop a Titan into a casual or even competitive game. You get beat up.
- The GW/FW business is not listed on either of their sites, meaning they are direct competitors for sales.
- GW rules cost money, whereas FW gives their's away basically for free. Downloaded PDFs. GW gives nothing away for free.
Xenomancers wrote: ...FW makes obscure units that do particular things really well...it is a balancing nightmare...Like...just look at a sicarian punisher. It's also extremely busted as iron hands and with doctrines. While it is true that GW also makes really busted rules...they are almost always exploited better by a FW unit...
Maybe if they stopped writing all their rules in a little vacuum-sealed bubble without acknowledging the existence of anything else outside of that book?
considering the rules teams have been folded together one would expect better results right?
Ehh - I find that really hard to believe. If I was writting a space marine codex and making changes to units within it why wouldn't I simultaneously modify the FW army entries? They benefit from the codex just as much as any unit inside the codex. They don't even consider them.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dudeface wrote: A lot of the ban FW cries come from a fear of the unknown, it's often units people don't see often and dont understand so they become the boogeymen.
Often people get a whooping from unit because they weren't sure how it behaves and didn't plan for it, so when they see it's not in a codex it becomes easy to point at it and blame it.
Agreed the weirdest combos are usually FW units because codex writers seem to forget they exist for some reason.
I own a levi dread. The people Ive used it against when were are playing just semi competitive games would really rather not face it. Because it results in them just picking up units every time it shoots. This was before the new marine codex made it even better...It is a clear OP unit and overall best unit marines have access to. It's not a boogeyman - it's been out in front all edition and everyone knows its OP. The only reason space marines wern't able to win with it is because they rest of their army was fething atrociously bad.
I agree on the leviathan, I more meant why people knee jerk to the ban all fw card.
bullyboy wrote: People think the sky is going to fall if FW are banned from a tournament....that's pretty hilarious really. It's just one source of material. Same could be said of the Vigilus books...not in this event? OK, no problem. Or the upcoming Psychic Awakening. Not every list, datasheet, modification, etc needs to be available all the time. Bloat for the bloat God and all that.
It's like people who just play ITC all the time, nothing else. The game can be soooo much better. You're practically playing the same mission every.single.game.
You don't understand why people might take it personally when you say "Oh, (person), you can't use your stuff 'cause it'd make the game better"? ...If I restated it as "Oh, (person), the game would be better without you" does it make more sense?
yeah, because there are many people that if were banned, would increase enjoyment for many others. That's a poor comparison
FW is an expansion, period. Not all expansions should have to be included all the time, especially if GW have a hard time balancing their existing content.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Please, stop with the "GW writes FW rules" nonsense. It's clear to even casual observers that's not true.
- They often conflict
So do mainline GW rules, or are we forgetting the exception to the exception rules?
- They often invalidate previous units entirely, thus hurting sales
LOL
- They were an ENTIRELY SEPARATE company until recently
FW is not a other Company, infact it's not even a subsidary. IT'S completely inhouse. but here Let me enlighten you:
Spoiler:
You'll occasionally find arguments online or perhaps within local gaming groups about the validity or "official-ness" of Forge World products. This has become less prevalent in recent years as the general perception of Forge World has become more mainstream, though every now and then the prejudice rears its ugly head, usually when your opponent won't let you play the FW model you forked out a small fortune for.
Lets make one thing perfectly clear: Forge World (and Black Library) is Games Workshop. They share the same trading address and legal identity. It is not a subsidiary company (which would be a separate legal entity, but owned by the parent) nor is it a licensee (which is a third party permitted to use the IP).
By comparison, Citadel Miniatures was founded as a subsidiary company and had its own separate projects outside of Warhammer/Warhammer 40,000 (so your opponent can Rage when you tell him your Forge World model has more direct legal provenance than his old metal models). GW also acquired Sabertooth games, which operated as an independent subsidiary, but both were eventually absorbed back into Games Workshop.
So, back to the issue with Forge World. Many people had an innate dislike for the fact that Forge World models and rules were not actually declared by Forge World *or* Games Workshop to be "officially" part of the game; they would refuse to allow them on the tabletop, since they did not come from a Games Workshop primary rules source (such as a Codex, or the Big Rule Book). Forge World eventually started printing prefaces in their books explaining that their rules were official; but some still claim that since "Games Workshop" itself hasn't come out and said it, that they remain unofficial. However, since the spines of FW's books have always had the Games Workshop logos on them and the inside front cover have the legal copyright and property notices from GW, this argument seems specious at best; rather, much like how the Big Rule Book has no actual explicit declaration that rules from White Dwarf are "official", the Imperial Armour books themselves should be considered as canonical (what ever that means in 40k) as GW sources.
However, as with White Dwarf, GW hates you far too much as a gamer and customer to label any of their rulebooks/codices with edition numbers, much less ensure that their FW rules are always kept up to date with the current edition, and unlike Codices where you can typically determine the edition at a glance, a lot of Forgeworld books superficially "look" similar and may even have exactly the same name (to date there have been FOUR books with the title "Imperial Armour Apocalypse" but only two of them have sub-titles). This can be a major reason the rules are banned at tournaments, and an opponent might object for the same reason they might object to fighting a Squats army under the current rules - however "obvious" the rules translation might be, some people are uncomfortable playing games across too wide an edition gap, as rules interactions may make no sense at all and/or have utterly pathological balance ramifications. Update this has become pretty much irrelevant with the release of 8th edition where forgeworld have released complete indexes for pretty much their entire line.
We all know how litigious GW can get with regards to "unofficial" products using their copyright, so you can bet if it wasn't official/legal Forge World would have had their asses handed to them, but it would seem absolutely stupid to sue the guys in the next office over in the same building as you.
So next time you get to the table and your opponent starts whining about your Forge World models not being legal, just batter him over the head with your Imperial Armour book, which will be an order of magnitude heavier than his little codex and claim your victory by default.
As an additional side note - this has nothing to do with the perception of FW rules being either powerfully unbalanced or too focused on the narrative, but on reflection, that's no different from the skub surrounding codex creep and painful nerfing already rampant within "core" GW material. So what's new?
If a Tournament Organiser decides that they don't want to include Forgeworld rules then that is entirely their prerogative as they will want the tournament to be as balanced or as hassle free as is reasonable, especially since FW have a tendency to publish their rules with minor variances across multiple "in-date" books, which can be a nightmare to manage, especially where some books have "current" rules alongside other rules which have been superseded elsewhere. Though with the advent of 8th edition, and all factions receiving simultaneous rule updates via indexes (Imperial, Xenos and Chaos Imperial Armour indexes), these rules are much easier to keep track of than ever before.
But these organisers (if they are smart) will also likely restrict "core" army selections too, so no Unbound lists or may exclude certain FOCs, because in the end which is more unbalanced and cheesy? The guy who takes a contemptor dreadnought in his Combined Arms detachment or the guy who take an unbound army of Heldrakes? (Ha Held Rakes sound scary). If the tournament organizer is using the ITC standard for 40k, Forge World units themselves are in fact quite legal.
- GW only codifies the FW rules, they don't actively create them
CA begs to differ.
- GW routinely makes rules regarding new units without seeming consideration of non-GW units. See IH fiasco.
You are talking about GW. A company that has no fething clue half the time about the game and it's units.
- GW routinely makes rules regarding new units without seeming consideration of non-GW units. See IH fiasco.
GW allready knew what rules are there, they just want to push sales for leviathans.
- GW balance is based around non-FW units being in play. See what happens when you drop a Titan into a casual or even competitive game. You get beat up.
Depends, some people can't deal with one, albeit that is nowadays less an issue due to knight prevalence, other times they start crying becausew "FW BOOGEYMAN TOUCHED ME"
- The GW/FW business is not listed on either of their sites, meaning they are direct competitors for sales.
GW/FW are the same fething legal entity, LOOK IT UP, instead of spewing BS.
Are you now trying to be an elitist, or are you just misinformed uninformed or willfully ignorant, i honestly can't tell anymore.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/10/01 17:49:49
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
| 
| 
Krieg | 
| 
| Blackshields 
