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.

Personal Opinion Rant Warning:

I've never really understood players who worry overmuch about balance or realism in a game like 40k. It's a silly, over-the-top, maximalist, tongue-in-cheek, what-if-the-future-was-like-Iron-Maiden-album-covers, ultra violence game where even the generic newbie-friendly faction is comprised of 8-foot tall genetically engineered fascist theocrat supersoldiers in power armour who's side arms fire armour-piercing, exploding rounds.

It's the same as the endless arguments and tier lists in the Fighting Game community… it's impossible to maintain both balance and variety in a game. So long as there's differences between characters, weapons, units, playstyles, factions, etc, there will be some that are "better" than others- and definitely some that are situationally better.. If you want a truly balanced game, everyone would have to have the exact same list to draw on. It would have to be Horus Heresy for all eternity, but with no non-cosmetic differences between legions, no Primarchs or unique characters, no Solar Auxilia, no Mechanicum, no Custodes, no Sisters of Silence.

To me, 40k is inherently a friendly, more casual sort of game, with at least a little bit of narrative thinking woven into games. That's what it's best at being, what the whole mentality of it is "optimized" for, so to speak. As a game that's all about getting to choose from a wide variety of colourful, cool-looking models, in a somewhat silly and unrealistic and over-the-top setting with an "anything-goes" anachronistic quality to it, that has a ton of chance built into the rules, and that's rules are inherently structured around "telling a story" of a battle. It's when one tries to treat it as a precise, technical game of strategy that problems like stuff with WYSIWYG (both of people feeling they need a plasma gun instead of the grenade launcher their model is built with, and of people being extremely uptight about relatively minor things like saying a Canoness has an inferno pistol but it's just holstered in her boot or whatever), and problems with worrying about a mythical "balance" that has never been achieved in the entire history of the game and never will be.

Like, at that point, why aren't you just playing chess? Or diceless boardgames? Or CCGs? Or at least something like Adeptus Titanicus, where everyone has the same options?

Not that I'm saying that points values should be thrown out the window like the original Age of Sigmar rules or whatever, but just… that one should have a sense of perspective on it. That it's nice to have a benchmark by which you can say your armies are fairly COMPARABLE in terms of their strength, but… actually being evenly matched is just plain never gonna happen.

 Castozor wrote:

 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.

If you were playing Eldar with lots of curves and needed green stuff to make wraithbone for conversions I’d kinda sympathize. But if you’re telling me that you can’t be bothered to cut some 5mm tubing - or at the very least cut apart a plastic mechanical pencil - to make bazooka tubes because you’re afraid of ruining the beautiful aesthetics of Ork Killa I’m going to giggle. Should they come with enough rokkits? Sure. But if you can handle cutting GW models off a sprue and assembling them with plastic glue I’m going to assure you that scratchbuilding your own launchers isn’t beyond your hobby skills. I chose to build an Ork army precisely because I got scratchbuild ramshackle pieces. Now I kinda miss my Ork army...

 Crimson wrote:
WYSIWYG enhances the visually immersive gaming experience. If you don't care about that, you can play with bottlecaps and coke cans instead of models.

Yep, it's this.

You may as well argue that "models exist to force people to buy models", but it would be equally daft as nobody's actually forcing anyone to do anything at all.

nataliereed1984 wrote:
Personal Opinion Rant Warning:

I've never really understood players who worry overmuch about balance or realism in a game like 40k. It's a silly, over-the-top, maximalist, tongue-in-cheek, what-if-the-future-was-like-Iron-Maiden-album-covers, ultra violence game where even the generic newbie-friendly faction is comprised of 8-foot tall genetically engineered fascist theocrat supersoldiers in power armour who's side arms fire armour-piercing, exploding rounds.

It's the same as the endless arguments and tier lists in the Fighting Game community… it's impossible to maintain both balance and variety in a game. So long as there's differences between characters, weapons, units, playstyles, factions, etc, there will be some that are "better" than others- and definitely some that are situationally better.. If you want a truly balanced game, everyone would have to have the exact same list to draw on. It would have to be Horus Heresy for all eternity, but with no non-cosmetic differences between legions, no Primarchs or unique characters, no Solar Auxilia, no Mechanicum, no Custodes, no Sisters of Silence.

To me, 40k is inherently a friendly, more casual sort of game, with at least a little bit of narrative thinking woven into games. That's what it's best at being, what the whole mentality of it is "optimized" for, so to speak. As a game that's all about getting to choose from a wide variety of colourful, cool-looking models, in a somewhat silly and unrealistic and over-the-top setting with an "anything-goes" anachronistic quality to it, that has a ton of chance built into the rules, and that's rules are inherently structured around "telling a story" of a battle. It's when one tries to treat it as a precise, technical game of strategy that problems like stuff with WYSIWYG (both of people feeling they need a plasma gun instead of the grenade launcher their model is built with, and of people being extremely uptight about relatively minor things like saying a Canoness has an inferno pistol but it's just holstered in her boot or whatever), and problems with worrying about a mythical "balance" that has never been achieved in the entire history of the game and never will be.

Like, at that point, why aren't you just playing chess? Or diceless boardgames? Or CCGs? Or at least something like Adeptus Titanicus, where everyone has the same options?

Not that I'm saying that points values should be thrown out the window like the original Age of Sigmar rules or whatever, but just… that one should have a sense of perspective on it. That it's nice to have a benchmark by which you can say your armies are fairly COMPARABLE in terms of their strength, but… actually being evenly matched is just plain never gonna happen.

You must really not enjoy playing 40k, because the majority of people play that way. WYSIWYG isn't "you can't have fun", it's please don't make the game harder for me than it already has to be. I have to memorize all of my units capabilities, stats, etc, and have a healthy understanding of yours as well, if I want to have a good time and not get crushed. I can't make split second decisions and come up with a coherent strategy for my side, if your side is a mashup of rules and "personal flair" that I can't make heads or tails of. Those Ultramarines with Bolters are Salamanders with Meltas because you say so. Those Rhinos are Executioners, and that Furby is Gullyman. STAAHP. It's already difficult to not waste time, now every turn I have to second guess myself because I can't remember what your stupid homebrewed force of misfit bits is this week.

It already takes about 2-3 hours to play a full 4-6 turn game with someone who has no clue how to play. Now factor that up to 11 because this week you have a different set of rules to play with from last week.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Nazrak wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
WYSIWYG enhances the visually immersive gaming experience. If you don't care about that, you can play with bottlecaps and coke cans instead of models.

Yep, it's this.

You may as well argue that "models exist to force people to buy models", but it would be equally daft as nobody's actually forcing anyone to do anything at all.

THANK YOU. Seriously. People act all entitled because they spent money. Well I spent money as well, and I spent way more in time making my models the best I could, and by the rules. I expect reasonably the same from any experienced opponent.

If GW included four of each gun in a box of Devastators so that all four models in the squad could be equipped the same way then the cost of the box would go up. They’d probably love that, I’m still stunned they haven’t made one Landraider box to gouge every LR sold. Not all of their modeling decisions are designed around maximizing sales (just about, say, 94% of them ) but WYSIWYG is about improving the gameplay experience for everyone involved.

You guys can save an awful lot of money by buying Guardsmen and using them to count as Marines. Technically speaking their power armor is base equipment so you could say all of your Marines are out of their armor but they count as having it.

I can totally understand someone not being able to convert or scratchbuild an Eldar bright lance but not being able to convert missile launcher tubes for beautiful Killa Kan models (either through not being able to afford it or having the requisite hobby skills) reeks of being actively UNWILLING to follow WYSIWYG conventions, not being unable to. There’s a difference between being unable to get a spare, heavily detailed, one-off gun model and being unwilling to glue a tube to an intentionally crappy-looking robot so it’s clear they have rokkits.

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:

nataliereed1984 wrote:
Personal Opinion Rant Warning:

I've never really understood players who worry overmuch about balance or realism in a game like 40k. It's a silly, over-the-top, maximalist, tongue-in-cheek, what-if-the-future-was-like-Iron-Maiden-album-covers, ultra violence game where even the generic newbie-friendly faction is comprised of 8-foot tall genetically engineered fascist theocrat supersoldiers in power armour who's side arms fire armour-piercing, exploding rounds.

It's the same as the endless arguments and tier lists in the Fighting Game community… it's impossible to maintain both balance and variety in a game. So long as there's differences between characters, weapons, units, playstyles, factions, etc, there will be some that are "better" than others- and definitely some that are situationally better.. If you want a truly balanced game, everyone would have to have the exact same list to draw on. It would have to be Horus Heresy for all eternity, but with no non-cosmetic differences between legions, no Primarchs or unique characters, no Solar Auxilia, no Mechanicum, no Custodes, no Sisters of Silence.

To me, 40k is inherently a friendly, more casual sort of game, with at least a little bit of narrative thinking woven into games. That's what it's best at being, what the whole mentality of it is "optimized" for, so to speak. As a game that's all about getting to choose from a wide variety of colourful, cool-looking models, in a somewhat silly and unrealistic and over-the-top setting with an "anything-goes" anachronistic quality to it, that has a ton of chance built into the rules, and that's rules are inherently structured around "telling a story" of a battle. It's when one tries to treat it as a precise, technical game of strategy that problems like stuff with WYSIWYG (both of people feeling they need a plasma gun instead of the grenade launcher their model is built with, and of people being extremely uptight about relatively minor things like saying a Canoness has an inferno pistol but it's just holstered in her boot or whatever), and problems with worrying about a mythical "balance" that has never been achieved in the entire history of the game and never will be.

Like, at that point, why aren't you just playing chess? Or diceless boardgames? Or CCGs? Or at least something like Adeptus Titanicus, where everyone has the same options?

Not that I'm saying that points values should be thrown out the window like the original Age of Sigmar rules or whatever, but just… that one should have a sense of perspective on it. That it's nice to have a benchmark by which you can say your armies are fairly COMPARABLE in terms of their strength, but… actually being evenly matched is just plain never gonna happen.

You must really not enjoy playing 40k, because the majority of people play that way. WYSIWYG isn't "you can't have fun", it's please don't make the game harder for me than it already has to be. I have to memorize all of my units capabilities, stats, etc, and have a healthy understanding of yours as well, if I want to have a good time and not get crushed. I can't make split second decisions and come up with a coherent strategy for my side, if your side is a mashup of rules and "personal flair" that I can't make heads or tails of. Those Ultramarines with Bolters are Salamanders with Meltas because you say so. Those Rhinos are Executioners, and that Furby is Gullyman. STAAHP. It's already difficult to not waste time, now every turn I have to second guess myself because I can't remember what your stupid homebrewed force of misfit bits is this week.

It already takes about 2-3 hours to play a full 4-6 turn game with someone who has no clue how to play. Now factor that up to 11 because this week you have a different set of rules to play with from last week.

I wasn't making an anti-WYSISWYG or pro-proxy / anything-goes argument? I even explicitly said that people thinking they "need" the weapon they haven't modelled is itself a byproduct of overly competitive mentalities? I was just responding to the side-discussion about balance and expressing my confusion at people who spend excessive energy worrying about that.

I'm fully WYSIWYG on both my armies but sometimes play people who aren't. I've never experienced an opponent with so many proxies I can't remember what's what, but it's certainly nicer to play WYSIWYG so when you look at the models on the table what you see matches the rules your playing.

 Fajita Fan wrote:

 Castozor wrote:

 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.

If you were playing Eldar with lots of curves and needed green stuff to make wraithbone for conversions I’d kinda sympathize. But if you’re telling me that you can’t be bothered to cut some 5mm tubing - or at the very least cut apart a plastic mechanical pencil - to make bazooka tubes because you’re afraid of ruining the beautiful aesthetics of Ork Killa I’m going to giggle. Should they come with enough rokkits? Sure. But if you can handle cutting GW models off a sprue and assembling them with plastic glue I’m going to assure you that scratchbuilding your own launchers isn’t beyond your hobby skills. I chose to build an Ork army precisely because I got scratchbuild ramshackle pieces. Now I kinda miss my Ork army...

"Blue Stuff" can be a little tricky, but I've resorted to it in the past for casting bits.

I can understand not wanting to kitbash with random junk. When I put together the 3 5-man TAC squads for my battalion detachment I wanted them WYSIWYG with loadouts that you couldn't build even with 2 complete TAC squad boxes. The solution I came up with was to buy some individual weapons from ebay and then sell the other half of the 2nd TAC squad box that I didn't use. So in the end, I got the 15 marines with the loadouts I wanted without kitbashing and without breaking the bank.

 Nazrak wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
WYSIWYG enhances the visually immersive gaming experience. If you don't care about that, you can play with bottlecaps and coke cans instead of models.

Yep, it's this.

You may as well argue that "models exist to force people to buy models", but it would be equally daft as nobody's actually forcing anyone to do anything at all.

I was going to respond that generally...40K exists to make you buy extra models. Everything GW does has an aim of pushing more plastic. It's a luxury hobby based on enticing consumers to part with substantial amounts of money.

Unpopular opinion: WYSIWYG is a tool for elitists to look down on people with less money, less time, less painting talent, less resources in general. It forces adherence to an arbitrary, unnecessary standard, so privileged individuals can whinge about immersion and realism. Play with bottle caps and sticks for all I care, as long as it's fun.

 Octopoid wrote:
Unpopular opinion: WYSIWYG is a tool for elitists to look down on people with less money, less time, less painting talent, less resources in general. It forces adherence to an arbitrary, unnecessary standard, so privileged individuals can whinge about immersion and realism. Play with bottle caps and sticks for all I care, as long as it's fun.

I am indeed a horrible elitist who insists to play the game with models instead of bottlecaps and thus supports GW's nefarious secret agenda to make money by selling models to people.

 Crimson wrote:

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.

Now we have the CAAC attitude creeping in. "Sorry GW made it so you built your models wrong so they can't do anything, but you shouldn't care because toy soldiers".

Do you honesty hear yourself? This is the kind of crap people defend when all of this bad balancing happens. We're fething paying for rules, almost as much as we are for the damn models. If you want suggestions on how to do stuff, there's plenty of PDFs you can find online ready to rock. You're defending what is, for all intents and purposes, non-professionalism for game design. Because toy soldiers.


Removed - BrookM

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Now we have the CAAC attitude creeping in. "Sorry GW made it so you built your models wrong so they can't do anything, but you shouldn't care because toy soldiers".

This is very simple. If you want plasmaguns, buy plasmaguns. Or spend effort to convert them. If you want to have them, that's your choice, no one is forcing you to take plasmaguns. And this has nothing to do with the quality of the rules.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

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

Said box was also made at a time when all Power Axes, Swords, Mauls, and Spears acted exactly the same: generic power weapons.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Crimson wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Now we have the CAAC attitude creeping in. "Sorry GW made it so you built your models wrong so they can't do anything, but you shouldn't care because toy soldiers".

This is very simple. If you want plasmaguns, buy plasmaguns. Or spend effort to convert them. If you want to have them, that's your choice, no one is forcing you to take plasmaguns. And this has nothing to do with the quality of the rules.

It does become related to rules quality though. Scions carrying Melta Guns are literally the best example of this. From 6-7, Melta Guns made sense, and the options weren't exactly clearly superior over another (outside Grenade Launchers being bad of course). In 8th, it is one of the single worst weapons you can buy for a Scion. It simply doesn't mesh with base deployment and becomes too expensive to make work for the job they used to do, which other weapons are doing instead. Essentially GW is saying "too bad buy more models" and you buy right into it like a good Loyal customer they LOVED to talk about under Kirby.

 Fajita Fan wrote:
If GW included four of each gun in a box of Devastators so that all four models in the squad could be equipped the same way then the cost of the box would go up. They’d probably love that, I’m still stunned they haven’t made one Landraider box to gouge every LR sold. Not all of their modeling decisions are designed around maximizing sales (just about, say, 94% of them ) but WYSIWYG is about improving the gameplay experience for everyone involved.

You guys can save an awful lot of money by buying Guardsmen and using them to count as Marines. Technically speaking their power armor is base equipment so you could say all of your Marines are out of their armor but they count as having it.

I can totally understand someone not being able to convert or scratchbuild an Eldar bright lance but not being able to convert missile launcher tubes for beautiful Killa Kan models (either through not being able to afford it or having the requisite hobby skills) reeks of being actively UNWILLING to follow WYSIWYG conventions, not being unable to. There’s a difference between being unable to get a spare, heavily detailed, one-off gun model and being unwilling to glue a tube to an intentionally crappy-looking robot so it’s clear they have rokkits.

Yes man I'll just mutilate my models because people like you think it fits the aesthetic hue hue hue. If remembering "all kans have rokkits" is too hard for you maybe you should play a different game. Your point about guardsman is a huge strawman since they have neither the correct size nor bases compared to marines. I do not expect people to accept proxies that are nowhere close to the original model. But accepting all models of X are equipped with Y is not hard. But yes blame laziness on my part and not the mega-million corporation to inept to include all the relevant options in the box.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

It does become related to rules quality though. Scions carrying Melta Guns are literally the best example of this. From 6-7, Melta Guns made sense, and the options weren't exactly clearly superior over another (outside Grenade Launchers being bad of course). In 8th, it is one of the single worst weapons you can buy for a Scion. It simply doesn't mesh with base deployment and becomes too expensive to make work for the job they used to do, which other weapons are doing instead. Essentially GW is saying "too bad buy more models" and you buy right into it like a good Loyal customer they LOVED to talk about under Kirby.

Balanced rules would be nice. But that's not gonna happen. Stop chasing the meta and do not build all your squads identically to conform what happens to be the currently accidentally OP option at the moment. Build squads with varied equipment, and as rules fluctuate sometimes some of them will be better and sometimes others. And all of them will be perfectly usable.

 Crimson wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

It does become related to rules quality though. Scions carrying Melta Guns are literally the best example of this. From 6-7, Melta Guns made sense, and the options weren't exactly clearly superior over another (outside Grenade Launchers being bad of course). In 8th, it is one of the single worst weapons you can buy for a Scion. It simply doesn't mesh with base deployment and becomes too expensive to make work for the job they used to do, which other weapons are doing instead. Essentially GW is saying "too bad buy more models" and you buy right into it like a good Loyal customer they LOVED to talk about under Kirby.

Balanced rules would be nice. But that's not gonna happen. Stop chasing the meta and do not build all your squads identically to conform what happens to be the currently accidentally OP option at the moment. Build squads with varied equipment, and as rules fluctuate sometimes some of them will be better and sometimes others. And all of them will be perfectly usable.

If somebody only ever purchased Scions for their Guard to deliver Melta because that was their job, then too bad?

No that's not how it works. You don't get to say that's okay because it really isn't. Balanced rules won't happen so who cares? I'm betting you haven't sent GW an email ONCE about certain rules being non functional and maybe even believe GW actually listens to playtesters LOL

If you are playing outside of a GW environment, ala a store, most places will let you use any 3rd party bits. I can go online right now and buy 20 plasma rifle bits that look great on my guardsmen. For under 20$.

The only excuse for the argument that WYSIWYG is elitest, is that the person saying that is over-entitled and likely shouldn't be in the hobby.

I make less than 30k a year, and I still have enough after bills and a kid, to buy a box of models a month. After 4 years, I have about 3 armies. It's not hard if you don't suck with money.

Over entitled for expecting GW to just ship boxes with all the proper parts? You white knights are amusing, this hobby is expensive enough as it is. Expecting me to buy extra 3rd party bits on top of that is ridiculous.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

If somebody only ever purchased Scions for their Guard to deliver Melta because that was their job, then too bad?

They can still do that, there just might be more optimal choices. If being optimal is what you care about the most, then you need to buy more stuff. It is always so with the meta-chasing. It is not limited to gear choices, it affects whole units. And my choce is to not do that. I buy models which I want to build and paint, and then sometimes they get bad rules and sometimes they get better rules. It would be nice if all units and options were always balanced, but I've played this game for a long time, it has never happened, and it will never happen. Like it or not, it is simply a fact.

No that's not how it works. You don't get to say that's okay because it really isn't. Balanced rules won't happen so who cares?

What's the point of raging about it? Does it make you happy? Do you think it changes anything?

I'm betting you haven't sent GW an email ONCE about certain rules being non functional and maybe even believe GW actually listens to playtesters LOL

I have send them emails numerous times, and whilst effectiveness of that is questionable, it is indubitably much better method to affect the quality of the rules than annoying your opponents by proxying meltaguns as plasmaguns would be. As for playtesters, it would probably improve things if half of the playtesters were not heouseruling the game beyond recognition instead of playing using the rules they were supposed to be testing.

I really am under no illusions that the game is perfect, far from it. I just do not have such expectations for it like you seem to have. It is not a finely balanced competitive game, never has and never will be. It is what it is, take it or leave it.

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
It's not hard if you don't suck with money.

Typical elitist lack of respect for those of us who suck with money.

 Castozor wrote:
Over entitled for expecting GW to just ship boxes with all the proper parts?

It would be nice. If you think this not being the case is a big enough of a problem, then don't buy the kit.

Expecting me to buy extra 3rd party bits on top of that is ridiculous.

Then don't. And then you don't have plasmaguns. That's fine. Most of my Guard units don't have them*, they're doing OK.

(*Not because I don't have the bits. I have plenty, but plasma gun is supposed to be a rare weapon in the fluff, so I don't want to have a lot of them in my Guard force.)

Alkaline_Hound wrote:
While I could focus on all the bad things that wysiwyg creates I will instead talk about how pointless it is.

A game where your opponent's units' armament has a distinctive impact on how I play may own- and this is "pointless". Oh, boy- we're in for a real treat.

Alkaline_Hound wrote:
It really isn't hard to remember what each unit is armed with even if the model isn't completely accurate

Found the guy that never played Deathwatch.

Alkaline_Hound wrote:
as most people don't model every single piece of weargear on their model, like grenades and sometimes even swords are often left behind

If all of them have a sword or grenade by default, then that's not really anything to worry about.

Alkaline_Hound wrote:
and relics and such are usually not modelled

Why would you model a relic?

Alkaline_Hound wrote:
and even if you forget you can just ask your opponent.

Oppenent forgot. Opponent is a WAAC player. What now?

Alkaline_Hound wrote:
So really the only question remaining is that why do so many people defend this rule? Certainly from GW's perspective selling people extra models so that their armies comply with this rule makes sense, but why do so many non GW affiliated people defend this rule?

Because I play an army with more than one weapon option, and every single guy in a squad can have a completely different weapon loadout (Deathwatch).

 Octopoid wrote:
Unpopular opinion: WYSIWYG is a tool for elitists to look down on people with less money, less time, less painting talent, less resources in general. It forces adherence to an arbitrary, unnecessary standard, so privileged individuals can whinge about immersion and realism. Play with bottle caps and sticks for all I care, as long as it's fun.

A page back or so there were like 3 different guys were piling on someone who just plays garage hammer and uses proxies.

It's obvious this has always been about snobbery rather than any good sportsmanship or cultivation of the hobby.

 Octopoid wrote:
Unpopular opinion: WYSIWYG is a tool for elitists to look down on people with less money, less time, less painting talent, less resources in general. It forces adherence to an arbitrary, unnecessary standard, so privileged individuals can whinge about immersion and realism. Play with bottle caps and sticks for all I care, as long as it's fun.

Even more unpopular opinion: Anyone who uses the word 'privileged' as a default explanation for someone who owns more Warhammer Toys, should never be invited to a table with employed adults.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dumb Smart Guy wrote:
It's obvious this has always been about snobbery rather than any good sportsmanship or cultivation of the hobby.

Sorry, I worked hard to get my army to accurately reflect their (main) weapons. I did that for my own enjoyment, and so my opponent could see what I am using. I have an army that can, quite literally, arm every member of the squad with a completely different weapon.

This cost me quite a bit of time and money, but I enjoyed collecting and building them- so it wasn't a burden. However, I do expect someone to at least mostly have WYSIWYG at the table so that I can play the game. I shouldn't have to make a note on every single squad. One or two proxies is fine, but at the point where your army appears to be "I just put whatever together but I get to decide what it is on the table", then you're not respecting your opponent.

Call it snobbery if you like, but I have every right to refuse a game with someone like that. I'm not asking too much, I don't ask it out of brand new players, but recognizing my opponent's weapons system (and not having to ask every turn, and hoping he's honest) shouldn't be a thing.

I'm pro WYSIWYG. At some point, playing with counts as or "they're almost what the models show" is saying that you don't care enough about the game to model your army properly. That's fine, man, you do you. It's your hobby. But I feel okay feeling elitist about it, you know?

 Castozor wrote:

 Fajita Fan wrote:

Yes man I'll just mutilate my models because people like you think it fits the aesthetic hue hue hue. If remembering "all kans have rokkits" is too hard for you maybe you should play a different game. Your point about guardsman is a huge strawman since they have neither the correct size nor bases compared to marines. I do not expect people to accept proxies that are nowhere close to the original model. But accepting all models of X are equipped with Y is not hard. But yes blame laziness on my part and not the mega-million corporation to inept to include all the relevant options in the box.

LOL @ “mutilate”
Now I’m really curious if we can get a pic of these Killa Kans? Those models were designed before GW shifted to not allowing war gear not included in the box. There’s an assumption and tradition that Ork players convert quite a bit of stuff. The original looted wagon rules said to just go buy another army’s tank.

The WYSIWYG standard has been around for a long time, even when conversions for models to be used in stores or events only had to be 50% GW bits. Calling converting missile launchers “mutilating” just means you don’t want your models to be represented accurately and that’s certainly an option for you.

 Polonius wrote:
I'm pro WYSIWYG. At some point, playing with counts as or "they're almost what the models show" is saying that you don't care enough about the game to model your army properly. That's fine, man, you do you. It's your hobby. But I feel okay feeling elitist about it, you know?

I don't think this is a problem at all. You invested a certain amount into your army and the game. And you expect something similar to that when you play. You are 100% free to play or not play against someone for any reason you like, and that's your own prerogative. I never could fathom why people see this as a major issue.

No one is entitled to play against anyone else, just because they bought some models.

Somebody start a non-WYSIWYG, full-on proxies allowed, etc.. tournament.

If it catches on, you'll be proven right.