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.
yeah, for a few months I actually believed that. But after the reaction to IH codex, I now know that the all those casual players in other countries care for the rules just as much as people here do. So I think your wrong or moraly grand standing here.
even in this thread people playing eldar say that they are going to use the new rules for their flyers.
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.
AlmightyWalrus wrote: What's the aggressively costed, hot new Ork model? Grey Knights? What was the new, aggressively costed model when the first Marine Codex was released at the start of 8th?
We know that GW does fudge points in order to sell models from the interivew with that one designer who said that was why Wraithknighs were stupid in 7th edition. We don't have any way of distinguishing between such corruption and old-fashioned incompetence on GWs part though. This is more of the "this could be the case, so it has to be true!" stuff that I've been arguing against all along.
I'd wager than certain factions are exempt from the preferential rule hotness for various reasons.
Why? Why would GW intentionally make less money? The far easier explanation is that they're just incompetent.
Who said anything about making less money? I literally explained your query in the rest of my post, that you purposefully removed from your quotation.
If having preferential rules increases the sales for Space Marines, would not having preferential rules likewise mean more sales of Orks? Assuming this is the case, by not having preferential treatment for Orks, GW would intentionally be reducing sales of their product. That doesn't make sense.
Your explanation didn't explain why GW would purposely be skipping giving certain factions more powerful rules as a policy, it provided a plausible explanation for why they didn't give the Ork Buggies preferential treatment (which, by the way, disproves the notion that there's always a new hot undercosted model). Still not an explanation for the bunch of other cases where there wasn't any new hotness (SM 1.0, GK, AdMech, CSM and so on).
It`s quite simple. GW have limited production, so they can optimize it with selling one kit more times, than to produce multiple kits.
Also reworking models is not so profitable, since most old players have the old models.
SM 1.0 is probably considered fail by GW standards, so with SM 2 they ignored testing and created rules that will sell their pile in models.
There is a reason Falcon was putted in the box and every new box have vyper in it.
Karol wrote: some options aren't options, if an option makes something strictly better in every aspect, then other options or not having the options then it stops being a question of wanting it or not.
Its like diet and supplements in sport. stronger engine for a car etc
you mean utterly irrelevant for the casual hobbist and only important at the highest levels of compeition?
Casual hobbyist will not go and buy 18 centurions. Casuals maybe get 1-2 box for 2-3 mounts, because they spend their time to paint the minis to their best standards.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/11/10 11:50:21
Karol wrote: some options aren't options, if an option makes something strictly better in every aspect, then other options or not having the options then it stops being a question of wanting it or not.
Its like diet and supplements in sport. stronger engine for a car etc
Well, I've got 6000+ points of painted craftworlds and not a single flyer, so I'd maintain that it's all optional.
I likewise own 6,000 points of Eldar and not a single flyer. In fact someone bought me one for a Christmas gift and I sold it to fund more terrain.
It's akin to playing Tau but not running two Riptides and 40 shield drones. You'll still take all the flak for running Tau in certain metas, even if your army is sub-par and nothing special.
Eldar are a decidedly okay book, but if you remove a handful of mega-units, they're nothing special. Fully 60-70% of the codex units are "sub par" when it comes to game strength or efficiency. I'd say casual Eldar lists can be really horrendous if you're not paying attention or building for flavor over strength.
Eldar are a decidedly okay book, but if you remove a handful of mega-units, they're nothing special. Fully 60-70% of the codex units are "sub par" when it comes to game strength or efficiency. I'd say casual Eldar lists can be really horrendous if you're not paying attention or building for flavor over strength.
I don't think you can know what sub par is, when you always have the option to run the good units. I play weekly against eldar players, who don't go to tournaments and have non optimised lists. They are all far from being sub par, both in rules, unit costs.
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.
Daedalus81 wrote: Why did it take over two years?
What were Ynnari and Castellans doing at top tables? Are they favorites, too? And the soup that powered them? I seem to recall IS were 'incredibly strong' being 4 points.
My statement had nothing to do with timeframes, but I'm also not terribly surprised to see you jump in with a completely unrelated defense. Crusade on Daed, GW will reward your loyalty someday, I'm sure.
"In relating the circumstances which have led to my confinement in this refuge for the demented, I am aware that my present position will create a natural doubt of the authenticity of my narrative."
It just isn't powerful, and is way behind the SM curve, that's all...
However, I have to say I've had 100% wins with my pure CWE since I switched to custome traits, MSU Spears, and MSU spam in general. And boy they are more fun to play.
Case in point: 8-man storm guardian squad with two fusions, with expert crafters, are a fearsome threat now, for 76pts. They are awesome against primaris, and just delete 2 marines every round they fire. A lot of my lists start with 3 squads, 2 in WSs, one in the web.
I've had a lot of success running 3x3 spears, hiding them backfield, and taking it in tursn to slingshot them one squad at a time to go interfere with quicken, to hunt and shut down my opponent's key units.
I've even had some success with weird units like BL Vypers, due to rerollling that BL's hit and wound. Wraithseers with wraithcannons. Single warwalkers. Vibro cannon spam. hornets. That kinda thing. Previously playing Alaitoc I felt constricted in my listbuilding and movement, now I can threat saturate, never say die due to every unit in my list having some AT punch, and a jump in survivability with CHEs, Wave Serpents, Vypers, Wraithseers and Hornets all carrying a 2+ save most of the game.
Finally, Banshees got piercing strike, for killing aggressors and the like (only viable with crafters), Avengers got bladestorm that made them very accurate, CHEs got a huge buff when crossed with Crafters, And boy do MSU Spears love a 3++ 3w exarch.
I'm happy with the book, when my first reaction was sniffy. I don't think it brings CWE back into the top tier, but it does give them tools to play in a whole new and very enjoyable way, which is great news imo. But so much of that is how expert crafters syncs with the previously reroll-starved CWE roster...
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2019/11/10 21:10:07
Daedalus81 wrote: Why did it take over two years?
What were Ynnari and Castellans doing at top tables? Are they favorites, too? And the soup that powered them? I seem to recall IS were 'incredibly strong' being 4 points.
My statement had nothing to do with timeframes, but I'm also not terribly surprised to see you jump in with a completely unrelated defense. Crusade on Daed, GW will reward your loyalty someday, I'm sure.
Yea, check is in the mail.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/11/10 22:49:50
Karol wrote: some options aren't options, if an option makes something strictly better in every aspect, then other options or not having the options then it stops being a question of wanting it or not.
Its like diet and supplements in sport. stronger engine for a car etc
you mean utterly irrelevant for the casual hobbist and only important at the highest levels of compeition?
Casual hobbyist will not go and buy 18 centurions. Casuals maybe get 1-2 box for 2-3 mounts, because they spend their time to paint the minis to their best standards.
what the feth does that have to do with anything? or are you just so focused on screaming about Marines you're unable to understand what was being said.
Someone noted that Pheonix Rising was an option not, strictly speaking, nesscary. Karol tried to argue with that by making a comparison to sports supplements etc. I noted that sports supplements etc are only used by those engaging in high levels of compeitiveness and generally aren't used by Ricky Junior at the 8 year old hockey rink.
Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two
Hey, Brian. Just a mention that, if a book makes your army strictly better, then it's not really much of an option anymore. Even casual hobbyists (most of whom are 50/50 between games with friends and blind matches) are aware of this much.
Eldar are a decidedly okay book, but if you remove a handful of mega-units, they're nothing special. Fully 60-70% of the codex units are "sub par" when it comes to game strength or efficiency. I'd say casual Eldar lists can be really horrendous if you're not paying attention or building for flavor over strength.
I don't think you can know what sub par is, when you always have the option to run the good units. I play weekly against eldar players, who don't go to tournaments and have non optimised lists. They are all far from being sub par, both in rules, unit costs.
What kind of asinine logic is that? Someone is suddenly incapable of judging the value of a unit because they have access to another good unit? Explain yourself.
Darsath wrote: Hey, Brian. Just a mention that, if a book makes your army strictly better, then it's not really much of an option anymore. Even casual hobbyists (most of whom are 50/50 between games with friends and blind matches) are aware of this much.
maybe but if I was just starting out in 40k, I don't NEED supplement X and campaign book Y. nice to have? absolutely, something I should pick up when I wanna be serious? totally. "nesscary" no
Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two
Darsath wrote: Hey, Brian. Just a mention that, if a book makes your army strictly better, then it's not really much of an option anymore. Even casual hobbyists (most of whom are 50/50 between games with friends and blind matches) are aware of this much.
maybe but if I was just starting out in 40k, I don't NEED supplement X and campaign book Y. nice to have? absolutely, something I should pick up when I wanna be serious? totally. "nesscary" no
Campaign books are not needed. Supplements, or books that make the base codex strictly better are necessary, yes. You'll be fighting an uphill battle vs not buying it.
Darsath wrote: Hey, Brian. Just a mention that, if a book makes your army strictly better, then it's not really much of an option anymore. Even casual hobbyists (most of whom are 50/50 between games with friends and blind matches) are aware of this much.
maybe but if I was just starting out in 40k, I don't NEED supplement X and campaign book Y. nice to have? absolutely, something I should pick up when I wanna be serious? totally. "nesscary" no
You mean until you loose your first game, and people ask you why you didn't use the new doctrines, strats & traits & relics ? And you realise how much stronger your army is for free? You wont even need the book. people will just tell you the traits/doctrines. You think a new player wont be adding those on even if they don't have the book ? LOL...
AngryAngel80 wrote: I don't know, when I see awesome rules, I'm like " Baby, your rules looking so fine. Maybe I gotta add you to my first strike battalion eh ? "
What kind of asinine logic is that? Someone is suddenly incapable of judging the value of a unit because they have access to another good unit? Explain yourself.
Why would you care about the worse units. The norm is the good units, not the bad ones. Heck even on this very forum, when I try to compare stuff to the stuff my army gets, am being told I shouldn't do that.
as for the eldar specific stuff, I find the idea of an eldar player saying his codex or units in it being sub par laughable. you can take 5-6 flyers and the worse unit in the eldar book, and you still are going to have an army working better then what the best version of an army out of my codex can do.
So yeah after all editions of being at least good and almost always OP at some time of an edition, eldar players would not be able to judge what good or bad means. It is only proven by months of eldar player mounting defence of how Inari were not OP, and at the same their rather hypocrite reaction to when IH got a better book.
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.
Eldar are a decidedly okay book, but if you remove a handful of mega-units, they're nothing special. Fully 60-70% of the codex units are "sub par" when it comes to game strength or efficiency. I'd say casual Eldar lists can be really horrendous if you're not paying attention or building for flavor over strength.
I don't think you can know what sub par is, when you always have the option to run the good units. I play weekly against eldar players, who don't go to tournaments and have non optimised lists. They are all far from being sub par, both in rules, unit costs.
What exactly are they running in their lists? Are all the lists more or less the same ? Then they are not using sub par units. If you think GK is the only army with sub par units and CWE is somehow all top tier units I have to tell you are severely mistaken. Take the CHE/WS away and the faction really has little else... As you said "just take 6 fliers" does not show there is a problem? Because you have to take those fliers? Yeh they are very good and much better than everything else we have. Nobody is arguing they are not.
As grouchoben said; I was also very disappointed with PR ( I even Bought it believe it or not). But Actually I think it really allows CWE to play in a whole new way and really opens up for experimentation. The combination of faction traits opens up different builds. Is it OP broken ? No, and that's a very good point? Is CHE an auto take? yes - But it has been all codex so...
Its a shame they didn't bother doing warlord traits and relics that irks me.
Again I'm also in the no CHE club. I think its a crutch the limping codex has been forced to rely on due to a systemic roll out of nerfs, points increases due to ynnari... I like to use stuff people don't see on the table very often because I think it makes more interesting games. People looked at me like I was crazy when I fielded my DA, vibro cannons, Wraith lords and warp spiders. Only one serpent? No CHE? Why you even play ?
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/11/10 23:50:41
AngryAngel80 wrote: I don't know, when I see awesome rules, I'm like " Baby, your rules looking so fine. Maybe I gotta add you to my first strike battalion eh ? "
It is funny how this book is now seen as "strictly not optional due to power increase" given the first post of this thread and thread title.
I have the feeling you guys don't understand Brian or don't want to. Yes, if you play the army of a supplement and it makes that army stronger you will pick it up eventually.
No, there is no rules police who will prevent you from playing your faction without the latest PA rules. Aeldari are still at 95% of their power if they don't use these rules.
Designer's Note: Hardened Veterans can be represented by any Imperial Guard models, but we've really included them to allow players to practise their skills at making a really unique and individual unit. Because of this we won't be making models to represent many of the options allowed to a Veteran squad - it's up to you to convert the models. (Imperial Guard, 3rd Edition)
a_typical_hero wrote: It is funny how this book is now seen as "strictly not optional due to power increase" given the first post of this thread and thread title.
I have the feeling you guys don't understand Brian or don't want to. Yes, if you play the army of a supplement and it makes that army stronger you will pick it up eventually.
No, there is no rules police who will prevent you from playing your faction without the latest PA rules. Aeldari are still at 95% of their power if they don't use these rules.
We are saying PR rules is optional because its a sideways upgrade. Arguably its a downgrade as alitoic overall is still probably better. Exarch powers again pick one and you will only ever use that one and exarchs already have an innate power anyway so its not like the rules were not there and now they are... By not using PR your army is not going to be underperforming, for the most part.
SM supplements just are vastly superior and make your army better in all phases of the game and give better options... Its like a fact. By not using them for your chapter you are essentialy crippling yourself.. Its kind of obvious, no? Im not saying players need to run out and buy the book, but I'm saying they would be playing with the rules if that is their chapters.
Ya'll saying: "Of course you will use it eventualy" = translates; You need it... Obviously a s anew player you don't need gak. You can play with bottle caps, beer cans and cheetah packets.... and some gray plastic. And if we really want to get in the dirty... You "technicaly" only need the core rules pamthlet to play and don't need FAQ's & erratas. So where do we draw this line eh?
I guess what I'm trying to say is I wouldn't expect someone new to own the supplement, but id certainly let them use the doctrines because those are kind of the rules now, and would feel like he's doing himself a disservice... I don't need a win handed to me. I want fair competition.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2019/11/11 00:13:17
AngryAngel80 wrote: I don't know, when I see awesome rules, I'm like " Baby, your rules looking so fine. Maybe I gotta add you to my first strike battalion eh ? "
For me, the book is a complete upgrade. iyanden trait really did nothing for me, the only benefit was the psytronome, which is extremely situational. Custom doctrines, however, have been a breath of fresh air for my wraiths. reroll wounds of 1 is great for my hemlocks, wraithlords, wraithblades. Still playing with my second choice.
What kind of asinine logic is that? Someone is suddenly incapable of judging the value of a unit because they have access to another good unit? Explain yourself.
Why would you care about the worse units. The norm is the good units, not the bad ones. Heck even on this very forum, when I try to compare stuff to the stuff my army gets, am being told I shouldn't do that.
as for the eldar specific stuff, I find the idea of an eldar player saying his codex or units in it being sub par laughable. you can take 5-6 flyers and the worse unit in the eldar book, and you still are going to have an army working better then what the best version of an army out of my codex can do.
So yeah after all editions of being at least good and almost always OP at some time of an edition, eldar players would not be able to judge what good or bad means. It is only proven by months of eldar player mounting defence of how Inari were not OP, and at the same their rather hypocrite reaction to when IH got a better book.
Removed - Rule #1 please.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/11/11 07:15:42
I know that this is going to throw a mess in here, but reading text dramas is the only purpose of this forum, so i will do it anyway.
In the last games of Heat4 yesterday, even with 9 IF 6 IH and 6 UM partecipating, the top table was drukhary vs drukhary + harleys.
Rememember that GW heats are the most competitive tournaments around using the standard ruleset (CA18 at 1750), so they are the most important indicators on the state of the game balance wise.
After seeing that game, i'm not that angry that SM got a huge buff and aeldari a quite mild one...
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/11/11 06:22:58
What kind of asinine logic is that? Someone is suddenly incapable of judging the value of a unit because they have access to another good unit? Explain yourself.
Why would you care about the worse units. The norm is the good units, not the bad ones. Heck even on this very forum, when I try to compare stuff to the stuff my army gets, am being told I shouldn't do that.
as for the eldar specific stuff, I find the idea of an eldar player saying his codex or units in it being sub par laughable. you can take 5-6 flyers and the worse unit in the eldar book, and you still are going to have an army working better then what the best version of an army out of my codex can do.
So yeah after all editions of being at least good and almost always OP at some time of an edition, eldar players would not be able to judge what good or bad means. It is only proven by months of eldar player mounting defence of how Inari were not OP, and at the same their rather hypocrite reaction to when IH got a better book.
Removed - Rule #1 please.
First, rule 1.
Secondly he has a point, as much as you hate to admit it.
Not saying the whole Mounting defense /hypocrite is the right assumption but there are dexes out there that can't even perform against obsolete codex units.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/11/11 07:16:29
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.
Spoletta wrote: I know that this is going to throw a mess in here, but reading text dramas is the only purpose of this forum, so i will do it anyway.
In the last games of Heat4 yesterday, even with 9 IF 6 IH and 6 UM partecipating, the top table was drukhary vs drukhary + harleys.
Rememember that GW heats are the most competitive tournaments around using the standard ruleset (CA18 at 1750), so they are the most important indicators on the state of the game balance wise.
After seeing that game, i'm not that angry that SM got a huge buff and aeldari a quite mild one...
Marines definitely needed a boost, we'll just have to see if he overcorrected in the months to come.
What kind of asinine logic is that? Someone is suddenly incapable of judging the value of a unit because they have access to another good unit? Explain yourself.
Why would you care about the worse units. The norm is the good units, not the bad ones. Heck even on this very forum, when I try to compare stuff to the stuff my army gets, am being told I shouldn't do that.
as for the eldar specific stuff, I find the idea of an eldar player saying his codex or units in it being sub par laughable. you can take 5-6 flyers and the worse unit in the eldar book, and you still are going to have an army working better then what the best version of an army out of my codex can do.
So yeah after all editions of being at least good and almost always OP at some time of an edition, eldar players would not be able to judge what good or bad means. It is only proven by months of eldar player mounting defence of how Inari were not OP, and at the same their rather hypocrite reaction to when IH got a better book.
Removed - Rule #1 please.
First, rule 1.
Secondly he has a point, as much as you hate to admit it.
Not saying the whole Mounting defense /hypocrite is the right assumption but there are dexes out there that can't even perform against obsolete codex units.
Nope. He doesn't have a point. In fact he responded to a point I didn't make and then decided to put words into the mouth of every Eldar player. This is one of the most common bs fallacies on DakkaDakka. If you "can" make a good list from your codex, your codex is amazing and thus you're seemingly not allowed to actually critique anything else in the book? That's a gak stupid argument.
Why respond to my post if he's responding to something I didn't say? Oh wait, that's right...Eldar have been good before so I'm not allowed to critique anything in the book. Fair point.
What kind of asinine logic is that? Someone is suddenly incapable of judging the value of a unit because they have access to another good unit? Explain yourself.
Why would you care about the worse units. The norm is the good units, not the bad ones. Heck even on this very forum, when I try to compare stuff to the stuff my army gets, am being told I shouldn't do that.
as for the eldar specific stuff, I find the idea of an eldar player saying his codex or units in it being sub par laughable. you can take 5-6 flyers and the worse unit in the eldar book, and you still are going to have an army working better then what the best version of an army out of my codex can do.
So yeah after all editions of being at least good and almost always OP at some time of an edition, eldar players would not be able to judge what good or bad means. It is only proven by months of eldar player mounting defence of how Inari were not OP, and at the same their rather hypocrite reaction to when IH got a better book.
Removed - Rule #1 please.
First, rule 1.
Secondly he has a point, as much as you hate to admit it.
Not saying the whole Mounting defense /hypocrite is the right assumption but there are dexes out there that can't even perform against obsolete codex units.
Nope. He doesn't have a point. In fact he responded to a point I didn't make and then decided to put words into the mouth of every Eldar player. This is one of the most common bs fallacies on DakkaDakka. If you "can" make a good list from your codex, your codex is amazing and thus you're seemingly not allowed to actually critique anything else in the book? That's a gak stupid argument.
Why respond to my post if he's responding to something I didn't say? Oh wait, that's right...Eldar have been good before so I'm not allowed to critique anything in the book. Fair point.
I agree, why is "the best unit the norm"? Some players play units they like lookwise, or lorewise or simply because they own them.
Empty your mind, be formless, shapeless — like soup. Now you put soup in a cup, it becomes the cup; You put soup into a bottle it becomes the bottle; You put it in a teapot it becomes the teapot. Now soup can flow or it can crash. Be soup, my friend.
Karol wrote: some options aren't options, if an option makes something strictly better in every aspect, then other options or not having the options then it stops being a question of wanting it or not.
Its like diet and supplements in sport. stronger engine for a car etc
you mean utterly irrelevant for the casual hobbist and only important at the highest levels of compeition?
Casual hobbyist will not go and buy 18 centurions. Casuals maybe get 1-2 box for 2-3 mounts, because they spend their time to paint the minis to their best standards.
what the feth does that have to do with anything? or are you just so focused on screaming about Marines you're unable to understand what was being said.
Someone noted that Pheonix Rising was an option not, strictly speaking, nesscary. Karol tried to argue with that by making a comparison to sports supplements etc. I noted that sports supplements etc are only used by those engaging in high levels of compeitiveness and generally aren't used by Ricky Junior at the 8 year old hockey rink.
Simple, hobbyist don`t update or play their army often, they don`t know most of the rules, so every book for them is optional.
Most players who play at least 1-2 game per mount will know about the rules and will get the book(or use illegal copy).
If you use that logic FAQs and errata are also optional, because most of the casuals don`t read or care about them.
Point increase and decrease is CA, also optional, because most people wont spend 40 euros for book.
If we did not have battlescribe most of the games will be with illegal lists.
Also since WD and PA is not mandatory, you wont like if someone bring index Ynnari.
Karol wrote: some options aren't options, if an option makes something strictly better in every aspect, then other options or not having the options then it stops being a question of wanting it or not.
Its like diet and supplements in sport. stronger engine for a car etc
you mean utterly irrelevant for the casual hobbist and only important at the highest levels of compeition?
Casual hobbyist will not go and buy 18 centurions. Casuals maybe get 1-2 box for 2-3 mounts, because they spend their time to paint the minis to their best standards.
what the feth does that have to do with anything? or are you just so focused on screaming about Marines you're unable to understand what was being said.
Someone noted that Pheonix Rising was an option not, strictly speaking, nesscary. Karol tried to argue with that by making a comparison to sports supplements etc. I noted that sports supplements etc are only used by those engaging in high levels of compeitiveness and generally aren't used by Ricky Junior at the 8 year old hockey rink.
Simple, hobbyist don`t update or play their army often, they don`t know most of the rules, so every book for them is optional.
Most players who play at least 1-2 game per mount will know about the rules and will get the book(or use illegal copy).
If you use that logic FAQs and errata are also optional, because most of the casuals don`t read or care about them.
Point increase and decrease is CA, also optional, because most people wont spend 40 euros for book.
If we did not have battlescribe most of the games will be with illegal lists.
Also since WD and PA is not mandatory, you wont like if someone bring index Ynnari.
I think you are missing the point. Karol said that some options aren't really options because you'll always use the strongest one anyways. That you'll "self-optimise" like a professional athlete. And to a certain degree, he is right, but most/many/some players are not "professional" players so they don't need to self optimize in the same way that a casual athlete does not need to.
For some part of the playerbase it is an option so you wouldn't NEED the book. If I don't use the option, I don't need the book.
As FAQs and Errate affect almost all units in my book, I still need them, so they behave differently to supplements like PA
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/11/11 08:09:17
Empty your mind, be formless, shapeless — like soup. Now you put soup in a cup, it becomes the cup; You put soup into a bottle it becomes the bottle; You put it in a teapot it becomes the teapot. Now soup can flow or it can crash. Be soup, my friend.
Spoletta wrote: I know that this is going to throw a mess in here, but reading text dramas is the only purpose of this forum, so i will do it anyway.
In the last games of Heat4 yesterday, even with 9 IF 6 IH and 6 UM partecipating, the top table was drukhary vs drukhary + harleys.
Rememember that GW heats are the most competitive tournaments around using the standard ruleset (CA18 at 1750), so they are the most important indicators on the state of the game balance wise.
After seeing that game, i'm not that angry that SM got a huge buff and aeldari a quite mild one...
Heat tournaments are not well documented(atlest i could not find anything).
So it` impossible to make conclusions, since you don`t have the results list and the format is out of the ordinary.
What look like sure thing is that people bringing so many SM list, shows that the army is strong.
Karol wrote: some options aren't options, if an option makes something strictly better in every aspect, then other options or not having the options then it stops being a question of wanting it or not.
Its like diet and supplements in sport. stronger engine for a car etc
you mean utterly irrelevant for the casual hobbist and only important at the highest levels of compeition?
Casual hobbyist will not go and buy 18 centurions. Casuals maybe get 1-2 box for 2-3 mounts, because they spend their time to paint the minis to their best standards.
what the feth does that have to do with anything? or are you just so focused on screaming about Marines you're unable to understand what was being said.
Someone noted that Pheonix Rising was an option not, strictly speaking, nesscary. Karol tried to argue with that by making a comparison to sports supplements etc. I noted that sports supplements etc are only used by those engaging in high levels of compeitiveness and generally aren't used by Ricky Junior at the 8 year old hockey rink.
Simple, hobbyist don`t update or play their army often, they don`t know most of the rules, so every book for them is optional.
Most players who play at least 1-2 game per mount will know about the rules and will get the book(or use illegal copy).
If you use that logic FAQs and errata are also optional, because most of the casuals don`t read or care about them.
Point increase and decrease is CA, also optional, because most people wont spend 40 euros for book.
If we did not have battlescribe most of the games will be with illegal lists.
Also since WD and PA is not mandatory, you wont like if someone bring index Ynnari.
I think you are missing the point. Karol said that some options aren't really options because you'll always use the strongest one anyways. That you'll "self-optimise" like a professional athlete. And to a certain degree, he is right, but most/many/some players are not "professional" players so they don't need to self optimize the same way that a casual athlete does.
For some part of the playerbase it is an option so you wouldn't NEED the book. If I don't use the option, I don't need the book.
As FAQs and Errate affect almost all units in my book, I still need them, so they behave differently to supplements like PA
I`m not missing anything, even the most casual athlete will try to have better chance. Even casual soccer players will get the best shoes and gear he can afford.
Have friend who got tired of losing with his AM, so he got 3 tanks and baneblade, because he thought that will increase his chance of winning. He is using Vigilus also, al through he did not got the book.
No one like to lose and most players will go and check forums for advice, so they learn about this stuff sooner or latter.
The only people that don`t need such book are the collectors, that simple don`t have the game or do it couple of times per year.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/11/11 08:11:59