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.

 Skinnereal wrote:

Gadzilla666 wrote:
Or conversely people who insist on everything always being wysiwyg have lots of both money and free time and can't understand how anyone else doesn't.

I SAVE money by forcing myself to use WYSIWYG.
A pack of magnets might cost £2, and save me from buying another £20 box of models just to get the extra weapons.
The time, yes. It takes more time to magnetise. But, while filing down the lumps of sprue and mold lines, it is a bit more to drill and glue in a magnet. Again, it is a lot less time spent than doing another box of models.

I don't insist my opponent does, but I insist I do.

Depending on the model you might even save time in the painting stage if you use magnets. Makes it so much easier and quicker painting some models when you dont have to work around annoying arms and weapons.

And it isnt only money you save by using magnets you also only have to paint some extra spare weapons instead of complete models if you want to change the load out. Huge time saver over all. You dont have to use magnets on every model but only on those you are quite sure you will want to use different load outs and its a hassle to buy and paint a second version of. Like sponsons on predators, weapons on elite units, characters and squad leaders. Can save a ton of time too. Not only on the tabletop when playing but also when building ypur army.

As a BA player I use magnets on most backpacks/jumppacks to make it easier to paint and if the rules changes I can just remove the JP, put on a normal backpack and put my unit in a transport. Im also a bit lazy so have only 15 or so jumppacks painted that I share between characters, Vanguard vets or death company depending on what list I run instead of painting 30 of them. Gonna paint the rest some day.

WYSIWYG is a good thing for 40K imho.

In friendly games I don't care much, it's all about throwing some dice and have fun.
In a tournament that asks for WYSIWYG (either complete or partial) I'm definitely more strict. Having to remember what's what in a single friendly game is manageable, doing it in a 3-4-5 games tournament while also having to remember tons of rules is a different thing.

I always play with WYSIWYG (thanks to magnets) and possibly fully painted models whenever I can. It adds a lot to the immersion and makes the game more fun and less confusing.

 Skinnereal wrote:

Gadzilla666 wrote:
Or conversely people who insist on everything always being wysiwyg have lots of both money and free time and can't understand how anyone else doesn't.

I SAVE money by forcing myself to use WYSIWYG.
A pack of magnets might cost £2, and save me from buying another £20 box of models just to get the extra weapons.
The time, yes. It takes more time to magnetise. But, while filing down the lumps of sprue and mold lines, it is a bit more to drill and glue in a magnet. Again, it is a lot less time spent than doing another box of models.

I don't insist my opponent does, but I insist I do.

That is my view as well. I keep my army wysiwyg but understand that sometimes my opponents don't have the models or modeling skills to keep their army 100% wysiwyg.

Of course I don't play tournaments. I can definitely understand why a tournament army should be wysiwyg.

ccs wrote:

 Castozor wrote:
I personally don't adhere to strict WYSIWYG but I only play garage hammer and it's not my fault GW deems it unnecessary to include all options in a kit. Having said that I do keep my proxies/stand ins simple so as to not burden my opponent, eg. all my Killa Kans have rokkits despite what they are modeled as. If I were to use a second unit of them I'd gave all of them rokkits too just so it would always be clear what they have. Because I do agree mix and matching between identical looking squads is just asking for errors later in the game and/or cheating.

So you're just lazy. I mean, there's enough rockets out there (Gw or from anything else) that you could easily arm your Kans.
You want cheap rockets? Take a stroll through a toy aisle in your local WalMart. Or take 5 minutes & scratch build yourself some.

Yes you got me sir, pure laziness. Nothing to do with the fact newer players like me don´t have 10 bitz boxes laying around or don´t want to spend more money on a hobby that´s already expensive just because GW can´t be arsed to put all the proper equipment in a kit. Not too mention that the Killa Kan models actually look great and me trying to tinker with them would just leave them ugly. But go ahead and not play me, I´m sure your toxic attitude carries over in the actual game too so it´s a win for both of us.

 Castozor wrote:

Yes you got me sir, pure laziness. Nothing to do with the fact newer players like me don´t have 10 bitz boxes laying around or don´t want to spend more money on a hobby that´s already expensive just because GW can´t be arsed to put all the proper equipment in a kit. Not too mention that the Killa Kan models actually look great and me trying to tinker with them would just leave them ugly. But go ahead and not play me, I´m sure your toxic attitude carries over in the actual game too so it´s a win for both of us.

I don't have 10 bitz boxes lying around right now, either. There's no way I can with the new CSM kits. It's something developed over time.

But you know what...I'm patient. I'm not going to suddenly lose all my games, because I don't have that extra plasma gun. Maybe next year i'll get another box, or source bits on ebay, or buy something else. The idea that we should have it all with no consequence is a bit disturbing - I'll take the new kits with fewer options over the old kits with gormy chainswords that STILL didn't have everything to equip them as I wished.

 Castozor wrote:

ccs wrote:

 Castozor wrote:
I personally don't adhere to strict WYSIWYG but I only play garage hammer and it's not my fault GW deems it unnecessary to include all options in a kit. Having said that I do keep my proxies/stand ins simple so as to not burden my opponent, eg. all my Killa Kans have rokkits despite what they are modeled as. If I were to use a second unit of them I'd gave all of them rokkits too just so it would always be clear what they have. Because I do agree mix and matching between identical looking squads is just asking for errors later in the game and/or cheating.

So you're just lazy. I mean, there's enough rockets out there (Gw or from anything else) that you could easily arm your Kans.
You want cheap rockets? Take a stroll through a toy aisle in your local WalMart. Or take 5 minutes & scratch build yourself some.

Yes you got me sir, pure laziness. Nothing to do with the fact newer players like me don´t have 10 bitz boxes laying around or don´t want to spend more money on a hobby that´s already expensive just because GW can´t be arsed to put all the proper equipment in a kit. Not too mention that the Killa Kan models actually look great and me trying to tinker with them would just leave them ugly. But go ahead and not play me, I´m sure your toxic attitude carries over in the actual game too so it´s a win for both of us.

Wait you're getting defensive about not being able to do WYSIWYG on Orks? The 40k army who steals and cobbles together everything not nailed down and removes everything actually nailed down? You can make rokkit launchers out of plastic tubing, they're called bazookas. Orks are the flat out easiest army in miniature wargaming to make WYSIWYG and their models have nothing but straight perpendicular sides to glue cheap magnet to.

While I don't know your situation in life I'm almost positive you can get bits from almost every player in your gaming group if you're nice, when I started Orks I'd get spare guns, ammo boxes, unused armor panels, flags, helmets, etc from other players so I could kitbash my boyz into bigger, badder models for them to shoot. The more junky, cobbled together, and ramshackle your Orks are the better they look! There's all kinds of pieces on random toys or hardware stores that would make appropriate Ork weapons, not just GW bits. If that's what holding you back you back then, no offense, you need to get more creative and get lootin'!!

Edit: A rather famous case in point:

It is about visual immersion. If in a film Arnold Schwarzenegger is holding what clearly looks like a grenade launcher and then it suddenly starts to spew fire like it was a flame thrower then that is immersion-breaking. It's the same thing. This is also why conversions and proxies that look different than the official weapon but still look like they could function similarly are more acceptable.

Also, you don't always need to field the most optimal thing. If a plasma plasma gun is better than a greanade launcher but you only have a greanade launchers then just field the greanade launcher! It's not a big deal.

 Crimson wrote:
It is about visual immersion. If in a film Arnold Schwarzenegger is holding what clearly looks like a grenade launcher and then it suddenly starts to spew fire like it was a flame thrower then that is immersion-breaking. It's the same thing. This is also why conversions and proxies that look different than the official weapon but still look like they could function similarly are more acceptable.

Also, you don't always need to field the most optimal thing. If a plasma plasma gun is better than a greanade launcher but you only have a greanade launchers then just field the greanade launcher! It's not a big deal.

Okay but even then you cut the circular edges off the grenade launcher's magazine, paint a blue or green glow like the rest of your plasma guns, and you've got a MK324 "Crimson pattern" plasmagun by making it yours. You know the flying Primaris guys in the previous box set? They come with the bolters but the plasmas are clearly superior so I cut off the shields, trimmed the magazines down, and painted glowing coils in there so they very clearly look like plasmas across the table. It's a 6 minute conversion that makes it clear to my opponent that these bolters are actually plasmas.

I didn't have enough heavy bolters and missiles for my 13th Company Long Fangs so I used plastic tubing to make very obvious bazookas and cut down vehicle heavy bolters to be hand held. I'd never field a Devastator box as-is and just tell my opponent what they're all supposed to be while making them remember who has meltas or lascannons when they start deepstriking near me.

Out of curiosity for the non WYSIWYG crowd: if an opponent is deep striking near one of your squads with proxied weapons that will cause serious harm do you remind them, "Hey just remember this command squad you're landing near has 4 plasma guns in it, they're all grenade launcher models but I told you two hours ago they're plasmas and just wanted to make sure you remember before you park your Terminators right next to them."

Are some people seriously telling me that they can tell apart tiny model guns from accross the table but color coded lips are too much? How is this even possible since lips have massively bigger surface area? Also I would ask ccs to be less impertient.

About immersion, there is nothing stopping someone from fluffing their grenade launcher to fire plasma grenades, and voila you have an immersive plasma gun proxy. You can do that to other weapon types too if you're creative.

No one is saying that conversion are a problem.

Even if said conversion isn't completely wysiwyg, eg. the model has an autocannon instead of a phosphor blaster? While that standard is nice it feels wholly arbitrary.

I think many people have already said it, but for the sake of beating a dead horse, it needs to be said again.

The "Don't be a jerk" social contract is the simplest and easiest way to avoid problems, and that includes WYSIWYG.

Don't bring an entirely similar looking, but vastly different, tailor list, and try to cheap out an advantage in a friendly game, by making 17 varying changes to your proxies. General rule is anything more than 3 broad changes (All blue SMs are not Black Templars), and/or no more than 1 specific change (Despite how I modeled this character, here is is actual loadout).

Also, Friendly games are just that, and I will gladly take lumps trying to help a new player out, by proxying or playing open, just to help them get the experience. That being said, if you are a 15 year vet and you are trying to play 12 proxies and this is that, and that is this, then I will kindly refrain from playing with you.

If you prefer a previous codex (like the changes from 5th-> 6/7th) do you say “I’m not using the new codex because that’s just GW wanting more money from me,” and continue to use the old list? Is using old force orgs a problem?

I ask this specifically because somewhere along the line my 3000pts of Deathwing were taken out of the DA codex as troops. I have Cyclones mounted on top of TH/SS models that can’t be taken like that anymore. I have a Belial conversion with lightning claws that can’t be taken anymore. I built two venerable dreads and actually bought two Aegis Defense Lines just for their dual autocannons to put on them and that can’t be taken anymore. With on new codex an entire army I paid hundreds of dollars for at my local GW then assembled and painted entirely WYSIWYG now sits in a box because it’s just a vanguard formation.

If I want a Venerable Dreadnought with a missile launcher, I need to buy an additional Dread box. FETH YOU GW.

 _SeeD_ wrote:
If I want a Venerable Dreadnought with a missile launcher, I need to buy an additional Dread box. FETH YOU GW.

Or you glue some extra bling on your regular dread and say it is venerable.

 Crimson wrote:

 _SeeD_ wrote:
If I want a Venerable Dreadnought with a missile launcher, I need to buy an additional Dread box. FETH YOU GW.

Or you glue some extra bling on your regular dread and say it is venerable.

It’s kind of what I did for my chaplain venerable dread, it’s one of the old pewter dreads, like look at this guy he’s so venerable he doesn’t even have a modern model.

 Crimson wrote:

 _SeeD_ wrote:
If I want a Venerable Dreadnought with a missile launcher, I need to buy an additional Dread box. FETH YOU GW.

Or you glue some extra bling on your regular dread and say it is venerable.

Seriously. If someone were to tell me their Dread was venerable because it had a spot of gold paint on it's hull, I'd be like, yeah that's right. There is no major difference between a venerable and non that I can see, other than a little bling. But even this is entirely optional. Just like the Landraider. A Venerable landraider has gold paint. Done.

Ppl are funny. All for proxy and counts as but still hate Power level games.

That was the whole point! You can just pick whatever unit options you want!

 _SeeD_ wrote:
If I want a Venerable Dreadnought with a missile launcher, I need to buy an additional Dread box. FETH YOU GW.

You buy the regular dreadnought with a missile launcher and call it venerable, the actual game effect of the venerable rule doesn't really have to be modeled in the spirit of the game. The game effect of different guns is far more important to be modeled. You can buy a Landraider and buy the Crusader weapon sprue separately but you can't buy a Crusader and get the lascannon turrets separately. This was kinda dumb on their part - if GW wanted to make more money they could just charge us more for a LR with both sets of sprues in the box.

I ran into this with Adeptus Titanicus - at release the weapon options for the titans weren't even available for purchase. Forget WYSIWYG - you couldn't even go WYS GW's lack of model support for AT wasn't them using WYSIWYG to get us to buy more models, it actually incentivized 3d printing which is exactly what I did. I began 3d printing my own laser blasters, quake cannons, megabolters, etc.

Seriously though, which codex army entries out there can't be modeled by what's in the box anymore? WYSIWYG as a business model is probably going more towards WYGIWYS (the same idea in reverse) as the box contents dictate the army list entries is it not?

 Nightlord1987 wrote:
Ppl are funny. All for proxy and counts as but still hate Power level games.

That was the whole point! You can just pick whatever unit options you want!

PL was a neat idea but since they don’t update that when they do points PL games can be super unbalanced and unfun. I tried some games with PL, the problem we ran into is that we sometimes were basically playing with a 300 to 400 point difference so one side had a massive advantage.

On the one hand, it would be perfectly fine (mechanically) to be playing this game using colored blocks of wood or plastic with words or pictures on them to indicate what's what. Go out, buy a bucket of your favorite plastic blocks, and everyone's happy.

On the other hand, if you've gotten as far as choosing pieces of plastic or metal that are supposed to look like the unit you're using today, being inconsistent about it defeats the whole purpose. If you're going to say 'I know I assembled these models using missile launchers, but this missile launcher is a las cannon; that missile launcher is a flame thrower', it would have been less confusing to just leave the missile launcher off the model and put a sign there.

Disclaimer: What we're doing is generally considered a game, not some elaborate ritual involving dice to determine the course of a poorly animated stop motion film. I mean, most people don't even have all of the pose variants for their hero figures.

 Fajita Fan wrote:
If you prefer a previous codex (like the changes from 5th-& i; 6/7th) do you say “I’m not using the new codex because that’s just GW wanting more money from me,” and continue to use the old list? Is using old force orgs a problem?

I ask this specifically because somewhere along the line my 3000pts of Deathwing were taken out of the DA codex as troops. I have Cyclones mounted on top of TH/SS models that can’t be taken like that anymore. I have a Belial conversion with lightning claws that can’t be taken anymore. I built two venerable dreads and actually bought two Aegis Defense Lines just for their dual autocannons to put on them and that can’t be taken anymore. With on new codex an entire army I paid hundreds of dollars for at my local GW then assembled and painted entirely WYSIWYG now sits in a box because it’s just a vanguard formation.

Pretty sure this is just another social contract thing. If your opponent is fine with you using an old formation, then… it's fine. Whatever the most recent rules document GW put out is NOT the final arbiter of the "rules" of the game. You and your friends are.

Rules are fake! Topple the man! Smash the state! Do crimes!

 Crimson wrote:
It is about visual immersion. If in a film Arnold Schwarzenegger is holding what clearly looks like a grenade launcher and then it suddenly starts to spew fire like it was a flame thrower then that is immersion-breaking. It's the same thing. This is also why conversions and proxies that look different than the official weapon but still look like they could function similarly are more acceptable.

Also, you don't always need to field the most optimal thing. If a plasma plasma gun is better than a greanade launcher but you only have a greanade launchers then just field the greanade launcher! It's not a big deal.

Yes it IS a big deal because Grenade Launchers are super bad and you pay for them. It isn't a free upgrade. So basically you give the pass to GW for the inability to balance anything and say to your opponent "tough luck your squads aren't good but muh immersion", even though any immersion is gone the moment you actually play the game because IGOUGO is more unrealistic than a Plasma Gun looking like a Grenade Launcher.

That's dumb, sorry.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Castozor wrote:

Yes you got me sir, pure laziness. Nothing to do with the fact newer players like me don´t have 10 bitz boxes laying around or don´t want to spend more money on a hobby that´s already expensive just because GW can´t be arsed to put all the proper equipment in a kit. Not too mention that the Killa Kan models actually look great and me trying to tinker with them would just leave them ugly. But go ahead and not play me, I´m sure your toxic attitude carries over in the actual game too so it´s a win for both of us.

I don't have 10 bitz boxes lying around right now, either. There's no way I can with the new CSM kits. It's something developed over time.

But you know what...I'm patient. I'm not going to suddenly lose all my games, because I don't have that extra plasma gun. Maybe next year i'll get another box, or source bits on ebay, or buy something else. The idea that we should have it all with no consequence is a bit disturbing - I'll take the new kits with fewer options over the old kits with gormy chainswords that STILL didn't have everything to equip them as I wished.

And your attitude is why the Chaos Terminator box is the way it is.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

And your attitude is why the Chaos Terminator box is the way it is.

I'm pretty sure the engineering practicalities of how much you can fit on a sprue and the market conditions of how much the box can be expected to sell for are why the terminator box is the way it is, but hey…

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Yes it IS a big deal because Grenade Launchers are super bad and you pay for them. It isn't a free upgrade. So basically you give the pass to GW for the inability to balance anything and say to your opponent "tough luck your squads aren't good but muh immersion", even though any immersion is gone the moment you actually play the game because IGOUGO is more unrealistic than a Plasma Gun looking like a Grenade Launcher.

That's dumb, sorry.

Sorry, taking such a WAAC tryhard attitude in an unbalanced beer and pretzels game is dumb.

Would it be nice if grenade launchers were not crap? Sure. But I really don't have a pressing need to optimise every unit, so I take some anyway as I like the variety and how they look. And if this causes me to lose some games (unlikely but theoretically possible) it is not a big deal as my self worth is not tied to winning a game of toy soldiers.

Slayer keeps finding new ways to make every thread about IGOUGO. That is one mighty obsession.

TheAvengingKnee wrote:

 Nightlord1987 wrote:
Ppl are funny. All for proxy and counts as but still hate Power level games.

That was the whole point! You can just pick whatever unit options you want!

PL was a neat idea but since they don’t update that when they do points PL games can be super unbalanced and unfun. I tried some games with PL, the problem we ran into is that we sometimes were basically playing with a 300 to 400 point difference so one side had a massive advantage.

Be fair; as bad as GW is at balancing units sometimes you need a 300-400 point handicap to avoid one side having a massive advantage.

The Newman wrote:

TheAvengingKnee wrote:

 Nightlord1987 wrote:
Ppl are funny. All for proxy and counts as but still hate Power level games.

That was the whole point! You can just pick whatever unit options you want!

PL was a neat idea but since they don’t update that when they do points PL games can be super unbalanced and unfun. I tried some games with PL, the problem we ran into is that we sometimes were basically playing with a 300 to 400 point difference so one side had a massive advantage.

Be fair; as bad as GW is at balancing units sometimes you need a 300-400 point handicap to avoid one side having a massive advantage.

But in this case I would rather just run my guys wysiwyg and with points and give a point bonus to one side on purpose than leave it up to PL hopefully giving a point advantage in the correct way.

Like the castalan when it got its points bump went up 100 points, but it PL stayed the same,so what would have been the equivalent to a 2k v 2k match was now 2k vs 2.1k in the castalan’s favor.

 Daedalus81 wrote:


I don't have 10 bitz boxes lying around right now, either. There's no way I can with the new CSM kits. It's something developed over time.

But you know what...I'm patient. I'm not going to suddenly lose all my games, because I don't have that extra plasma gun. Maybe next year i'll get another box, or source bits on ebay, or buy something else. The idea that we should have it all with no consequence is a bit disturbing - I'll take the new kits with fewer options over the old kits with gormy chainswords that STILL didn't have everything to equip them as I wished.

Why should I not have it all? The rules say I can give them all rokkits, I buy an expensive box but hey, there's only one rokkit sprue. I'm not good at kitbashing and I personally prefer the immersion of having good looking models over scrapbuilt junk just to make them WYSIWYG. In this case I prefer to proxy especially since "all kans have rokkits" is not hard to remember for anyone. Now people saying "this flamer is a melta, and the flamer from this squad is a plasma" yes I can see how people would not want to play against that because it is needlessly confusing and probably leads to cheating.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

And your attitude is why the Chaos Terminator box is the way it is.

Is it?

Or is the community making a post-hoc rationalization, because they have now decided they like super cheap terminators better than previous versions?

GW designs the models before the rules. We all know this. No one sat down at GW and said, "hey chain axes are going to 1 point and it should be the 'default loadout' -- let's go change the sprue entirely".

Let's take a stroll down memory lane from the last CT box and see that this one actually has more in it :

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/325031.page