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.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
GW have said almost exactly the opposite, that “everyone will be playing Heresy” rather than it dying.

Apparently you didn't read what I said: At no point did I say Horus Heresy was dying, I said nothing of the sort-. I said that my friend's words were that it was going to be rebooted and retooled, or something to that effect, and coming around for a second pass with more stuff. So... really, stop being reactionary. We get it, the game is super popular in your area, no one plays anything else, it's super booming, yada yada yada.

GW makes a lot of bold statements. Most people have enough sense to take these bold statements with a fistfull of salt and an amused chuckle, but GW says "We have plans for Horus Heresy" and people think this is some ironclad prophesy of Horus Heresy entering a new era of prosperity where all other GW games are cast aside and burned atop the corpses of 8th Edition players.

Unless they plan on selling everything for the Horus Heresy the same as they sell 40k or AoS- no, it won't happen. Horus Heresy's lack of popularity as a game across the US is entirely GW's fault, and they've had years to get "everyone" to start playing. Instead, they sat around with their thumbs up their asses until 8th edition rolled around and most players scoffed at the idea of "slightly better 7th edition". So, unless GW's plan for Horus Heresy is "more plastic, you can buy it in your FLGS"- don't expect that 30k 'community' to grow beyond three guys playing on an old door laid across the kitchen table.

MiguelFelstone wrote:

 Galas wrote:
TBH I would be okay with a ban for FW with the exception of custodes and other 100% forgeworld armies.

I honestly can't understand the FW hysteria, did you guys watch the LVO? Why aren't people advocating banning IH/RG, i think Siegler made it pretty clear FW isn't the problem.

how do you figure that? Did he take ven Dreads, or did he take a Levi and Chaplain dreads? Without the FW dreads, do you really think it's the same? GW can barely balance their codexes, adding FW units just increases the chances for ganky outliers. By all means have them in your home games, but competitive play should ban them alongside Legends, unless GW can balance units more effectively.

Also, as a RG player, I'd be fine with seeing centurions become "monsters" instead of Infantry (or whatever it takes to stop them infiltrating), and I attended LVO with zero Cents in my RG army.

So because GW won't balance correctly just ban units? Great logic there.

 bullyboy wrote:

MiguelFelstone wrote:

 Galas wrote:
TBH I would be okay with a ban for FW with the exception of custodes and other 100% forgeworld armies.

I honestly can't understand the FW hysteria, did you guys watch the LVO? Why aren't people advocating banning IH/RG, i think Siegler made it pretty clear FW isn't the problem.

how do you figure that? Did he take ven Dreads, or did he take a Levi and Chaplain dreads? Without the FW dreads, do you really think it's the same? GW can barely balance their codexes, adding FW units just increases the chances for ganky outliers. By all means have them in your home games, but competitive play should ban them alongside Legends, unless GW can balance units more effectively.

Also, as a RG player, I'd be fine with seeing centurions become "monsters" instead of Infantry (or whatever it takes to stop them infiltrating), and I attended LVO with zero Cents in my RG army.

If it wasn't a leviathan it would have been executioners. Or flyers. Or any of the myriad of units that become op when played with the broken ih supplement. It has nothing to do with fw. Nothing else is balanced when it's used in ih why is fw only a problem?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Galas wrote:
TBH I would be okay with a ban for FW with the exception of custodes and other 100% forgeworld armies.

For most armies, Forgeworld adds a couple of redundant stuff that in most cases is just some GW model but +++ (Like leviathans, deredeos, etc...) . In the case of Krieg and others, they are a full FW army so they are needed.

And in the case of adeptus custodes , banning forgeworld is literally killing the faction. They can't work without Forgeworld, not on a power level but on a tactical level. They are an incomplete army.

Like the Hellforged Superheavies-just like regular tanks, only many times more expensive for minimal gain!

Considering hellforged can't even be repaired raw ...

Preach brothers!

"I have no problem with a Forge World ban"- guy that doesn't own anything from Forge World

 Galas wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Galas wrote:
TBH I would be okay with a ban for FW with the exception of custodes and other 100% forgeworld armies.

I don't understand why anyone would want to ban FW.

I mean. I'm opposed to banning FW but you need to understand my context. Spain is nearly a full anti-FW country. Things are opening up in recent years, but all of this leviathan Iron Hand stuff is really butchering all the good will gained.


In my store for example, after asking for nearly a year, they allowed FW to be used. I was extasic to use my Achillus Dreadnought and my Saggitarum guard. Three tournaments after that, they banned FW again after 3-4 new space marine players came out of the wild (They never played or approached the store before) with their Leviathans dread and Firerraptors and Chaplain Dreadnoughts.

And I know FW has a TON of crappy stuff, and GW has a ton of OP stuff. But theres a very big stigma with FW and as much as on internet we insist it doesn't exist, it really does!

So I'm really hoping GW gives legitimacy to FW rules with those new indexes, improves balance, and puts to rest for one and for all this stupid debate.

I just want to use my Achillus Dreadnought, I literally started custodes as an army for that model.

So a few WAAC gakholes ruined a couple tournaments at your local flgs. So maybe instead of banning fw your flgs should have banned those WAAC gakholes.

And of course they were playing sm. Ever think that might be the problem and not fw?

And it's nice that you want to play your Achillus. I want to play my fellblade. A lot of people have fw units they want to play. So how do you defend banning our stuff but not your Custodes fw units?

Yes there's a stigma against fw. But it's stupid and unfounded. As most stigmas are.

No FW Tyranid unit is breaking anything and it's the only way Nids have access to any super heavies.

The same goes for Necrons. When has Kutlahk the World Killer turned the tide in a game of 40k?

 bullyboy wrote:

MiguelFelstone wrote:

 Galas wrote:
TBH I would be okay with a ban for FW with the exception of custodes and other 100% forgeworld armies.

I honestly can't understand the FW hysteria, did you guys watch the LVO? Why aren't people advocating banning IH/RG, i think Siegler made it pretty clear FW isn't the problem.

how do you figure that? Did he take ven Dreads, or did he take a Levi and Chaplain dreads? Without the FW dreads, do you really think it's the same? GW can barely balance their codexes, adding FW units just increases the chances for ganky outliers. By all means have them in your home games, but competitive play should ban them alongside Legends, unless GW can balance units more effectively.

Also, as a RG player, I'd be fine with seeing centurions become "monsters" instead of Infantry (or whatever it takes to stop them infiltrating), and I attended LVO with zero Cents in my RG army.

You are missing my point completely.

It's not Forge Worlds problem that Games Workshop broke their units with X_LATEST_GW_RELEASE

It's not the Forge World units, it's the Games Workshop rules.

He brought Leviathan and Chaplain Dreadnoughts because GAMES WORKSHOP broke those Forge World units with their Iron Hands codex.

But TBH FW rules are in general pretty bad and broken. And I don't mean by being OP, or being OP in interaction with GW rules.


But how many pure FW units are that you find "balanced"? A couple were broken and nerfed into oblivion (Like malefic lords, the ultra-chicken, etc...) but most of then just suck ass.

Some of the best rules for FW units in the sense that they are usefull and mostly balanced are the FW Custodes units. And their rules were written by GW. So thats why I hope with this nex FW indexs by GW (Advertised as being written by GW) settle the debate about banning FW or non once and for all.

 Galas wrote:
But TBH FW rules are in general pretty bad and broken. And I don't mean by being OP, or being OP in interaction with GW rules.


But how many pure FW units are that you find "balanced"? A couple were broken and nerfed into oblivion (Like malefic lords, the ultra-chicken, etc...) but most of then just suck ass.

Some of the best rules for FW units in the sense that they are usefull and mostly balanced are the FW Custodes units. And their rules were written by GW. So thats why I hope with this nex FW indexs by GW (Advertised as being written by GW) settle the debate about banning FW or non once and for all.

WRONG:

The malefic lord has a present incarnation in the Am book, that is virtually the same but better unit for the old price, you don't even see that model, do you know why? because allies were a fething mess at the start of 8th. Fun fact the malefic lord costs nearly as much as the vastly superior Sorcerer of CSM / MoP which recently got a price drop.

Same with IH leviatahs, nobody used them competitively until gw decided, "He let's slap rules upon rules on top off stuff for reasons, and sell them seperately because we made a gakload of money with booksales !"

Furher, the whole of 8th after the initial wave of frankly LACKLUSTER FW indexes due to GW again gakking the bed by not propperly communicating within the bloody company (FW isn't even a subsidiary, imagine that...) has been done by GW all aliong and i remember a time were the custodes FW stuff, was not looked kindly upon due to it beeing borderline op, it will change nothing regardless if GW writes it officially or not, on the perception Galas.

I think you missunderstand me. I have 0 problems with FW or FW rules. But their rules for 8th are just pretty bad. Many units are just non functional and others have desing philosophies that aren't of this edition (like weapons doing extra hits of X Strenght, when that has just dissapeared from 8th).

And about the custodes rules, the Grav Tank and the Telemon where too strong in the BETA rules and they where nerfed in the final rules in less than a couple of months (And many other rules that were too weak were buffed and changed, and things like making Custodian Guards with Pyryphite spears troops instead of elites, etc... all good changes) . I believe the rules for FW Custodes models are one of the best cases of GW actually using the beta-phase of rules for what it is done: Testing stuff and then changing what is needed.

MiguelFelstone wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:

MiguelFelstone wrote:

 Galas wrote:
TBH I would be okay with a ban for FW with the exception of custodes and other 100% forgeworld armies.

I honestly can't understand the FW hysteria, did you guys watch the LVO? Why aren't people advocating banning IH/RG, i think Siegler made it pretty clear FW isn't the problem.

how do you figure that? Did he take ven Dreads, or did he take a Levi and Chaplain dreads? Without the FW dreads, do you really think it's the same? GW can barely balance their codexes, adding FW units just increases the chances for ganky outliers. By all means have them in your home games, but competitive play should ban them alongside Legends, unless GW can balance units more effectively.

Also, as a RG player, I'd be fine with seeing centurions become "monsters" instead of Infantry (or whatever it takes to stop them infiltrating), and I attended LVO with zero Cents in my RG army.

You are missing my point completely.

It's not Forge Worlds problem that Games Workshop broke their units with X_LATEST_GW_RELEASE

It's not the Forge World units, it's the Games Workshop rules.

He brought Leviathan and Chaplain Dreadnoughts because GAMES WORKSHOP broke those Forge World units with their Iron Hands codex.

This is correct, but it still means FW is broken with GW rules, regardless of fault. It adds a crap ton of units to balance, in a system that already has so many units to begin with. I'm not saying it's a perfect scenario, but if GW don't care to balance FW models, they shouldn't be included in a tournament that features GW ruleset.

I understand all the crying from people about how much they paid for their FW models, but hey, local games are still a thing. I just don't think FW is balanced enough to be taken into a competitive environment and not expect poor outcomes.

 bullyboy wrote:

MiguelFelstone wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:

MiguelFelstone wrote:

 Galas wrote:
TBH I would be okay with a ban for FW with the exception of custodes and other 100% forgeworld armies.

I honestly can't understand the FW hysteria, did you guys watch the LVO? Why aren't people advocating banning IH/RG, i think Siegler made it pretty clear FW isn't the problem.

how do you figure that? Did he take ven Dreads, or did he take a Levi and Chaplain dreads? Without the FW dreads, do you really think it's the same? GW can barely balance their codexes, adding FW units just increases the chances for ganky outliers. By all means have them in your home games, but competitive play should ban them alongside Legends, unless GW can balance units more effectively.

Also, as a RG player, I'd be fine with seeing centurions become "monsters" instead of Infantry (or whatever it takes to stop them infiltrating), and I attended LVO with zero Cents in my RG army.

You are missing my point completely.

It's not Forge Worlds problem that Games Workshop broke their units with X_LATEST_GW_RELEASE

It's not the Forge World units, it's the Games Workshop rules.

He brought Leviathan and Chaplain Dreadnoughts because GAMES WORKSHOP broke those Forge World units with their Iron Hands codex.

This is correct, but it still means FW is broken with GW rules, regardless of fault. It adds a crap ton of units to balance, in a system that already has so many units to begin with. I'm not saying it's a perfect scenario, but if GW don't care to balance FW models, they shouldn't be included in a tournament that features GW ruleset.

I understand all the crying from people about how much they paid for their FW models, but hey, local games are still a thing. I just don't think FW is balanced enough to be taken into a competitive environment and not expect poor outcomes.

This implies that the game is in an appreciably better state of balance without FW, which I don't think anyone can make a reasonable case for. If FW disappears tomorrow, does the metagame meaningfully change beyond filling those points with the next best equivalents? Not really. There's no FW unique singular capabilities or meta defining units. If you ban the FW dreads, do Iron Hands tumble from their top spot to be definitively dethrone by something radically different? Not really.

 bullyboy wrote:

MiguelFelstone wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:

MiguelFelstone wrote:

 Galas wrote:
TBH I would be okay with a ban for FW with the exception of custodes and other 100% forgeworld armies.

I honestly can't understand the FW hysteria, did you guys watch the LVO? Why aren't people advocating banning IH/RG, i think Siegler made it pretty clear FW isn't the problem.

how do you figure that? Did he take ven Dreads, or did he take a Levi and Chaplain dreads? Without the FW dreads, do you really think it's the same? GW can barely balance their codexes, adding FW units just increases the chances for ganky outliers. By all means have them in your home games, but competitive play should ban them alongside Legends, unless GW can balance units more effectively.

Also, as a RG player, I'd be fine with seeing centurions become "monsters" instead of Infantry (or whatever it takes to stop them infiltrating), and I attended LVO with zero Cents in my RG army.

You are missing my point completely.

It's not Forge Worlds problem that Games Workshop broke their units with X_LATEST_GW_RELEASE

It's not the Forge World units, it's the Games Workshop rules.

He brought Leviathan and Chaplain Dreadnoughts because GAMES WORKSHOP broke those Forge World units with their Iron Hands codex.

This is correct, but it still means FW is broken with GW rules, regardless of fault. It adds a crap ton of units to balance, in a system that already has so many units to begin with. I'm not saying it's a perfect scenario, but if GW don't care to balance FW models, they shouldn't be included in a tournament that features GW ruleset.

I understand all the crying from people about how much they paid for their FW models, but hey, local games are still a thing. I just don't think FW is balanced enough to be taken into a competitive environment and not expect poor outcomes.

"Fw is broken with gw rules ". So obviously the problem is the gw rules that make previously unbroken units broken (read: ih) and not the units in question. Take away fw and ih are still broken, albeit with different units that also previously were unbroken.

The problem isn't fw its ih. Banning fw won't fix the problem while penalizing many players who aren't using the broken rules.

Not Online!!! wrote:
Fun fact the malefic lord costs nearly as much as the vastly superior Sorcerer of CSM / MoP which recently got a price drop.

Huh? They're all 80 points currently.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Fun fact the malefic lord costs nearly as much as the vastly superior Sorcerer of CSM / MoP which recently got a price drop.

Huh? They're all 80 points currently.

Base yes but sorcerers and mop both pay for compulsory wargear which brings them to 88 points. Malefic lords do not.

 Vaktathi wrote:
This implies that the game is in an appreciably better state of balance without FW.

Asking to ban FW units because GW keeps everything up is like asking to amputate a limb rather than change your diet. There are armies that can't compete without FW, it's an integral part of the game.
GW is taking the right step bringing everything under one roof, but i have my doubts.

Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Fun fact the malefic lord costs nearly as much as the vastly superior Sorcerer of CSM / MoP which recently got a price drop.

Huh? They're all 80 points currently.

Base yes but sorcerers and mop both pay for compulsory wargear which brings them to 88 points. Malefic lords do not.

Oh, weird, my brain read his post as "nearly twice as much". WTF brain.

MiguelFelstone wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
This implies that the game is in an appreciably better state of balance without FW.

Asking to ban FW units because GW keeps everything up is like asking to amputate a limb rather than change your diet. There are armies that can't compete without FW, it's an integral part of the game.
GW is taking the right step bringing everything under one roof, but i have my doubts.

This is all dependent upon GW addressing the rules. IH are no way near as broken if you remove the offending FW units. Yes, they are good, too good for sure, but the better list were choosing FW units to take it to next level.

You're asking GW to do a lot just balancing the rules they have now and reigning in marines, without throwing FW into the mix. For a tournament, there is no harm with removing FW at all. You at least gain a modicum of control over the sheer crazy combos that pop up.

Now if GW step up and do a stellar job with the new FW books, great, but if not, they should be looked at with the same eye as Legends. Can't believe that tournies are banning Legends while in the same breath, allowing FW? Sorry my Ravenwing Chaplain is such a threat to the meta.

And I completely disagree with FW being an integral part of the game....it's not, it's a side show bonus, nothing more.

 bullyboy wrote:
For a tournament, there is no harm with removing FW at all.

Maybe not for you personally, but as someone who fell in love with Custodies in 8th this would kill any chance of fielding a competitive force in an ITC. Our TROOPS are Forge World units.

Banning Forge World is not the solution, fixing the mess you created is (looking at you GW). No one was talking about banning Chaplain Dreadnoughts until GW flipped the table on the meta.

 bullyboy wrote:
...For a tournament, there is no harm with removing FW...

More harm than in removing Iron Hands. You'd affect fewer players that way.

It seems to me that whenever there's a hyper points efficient unit 9 times out of 10 it's from FW. I guess GW want to shift some of that expensive resin, huh. FW units also contain some of the most sloppy rules writing I've ever seen that is, frankly, embarrassing.

I don't really see why there should be a separate FW rule book for units. They should be included in codexes for clarity and balance. Although, that said, they're not even consistent with this - my Warboss on Warbike is a codex entry despite existing only as a FW miniature, as are my Nobs on Bikes.

FW has always been the place to find janky rules in the hope of stumbling across some OP combo - I really hope GW kill this dead.

This is a cash grab more than anything. Imperial armouir books were ridiculously expensive. I'm sure they will do this again. I never understood it because the books were not made of resin!

I am one of the honest few. Lots of folk buy FW for the awesome models and the fluff. I bought my triple deredeo and a leviathan and now a contemptor to run with my Deathguard purely for the rules to give my force a strength bump. There are loads of people like me they just can't admit it.

 bullyboy wrote:
Forgeworld should be Legends only.

Sorry, but with GW's shoddy rules writing, they can barely balance what is in the main codexes by themselves, let alone adding all the FW units. Yes, they are cool, but there is always that one unit that slips through the cracks and outperforms anything in the codex to a ridiculous degree.

The Levi dread is the best example recently. Yeah, it's a good dread, but when coupled with the IH stats, it becomes insane. You can argue that it is an Iron Hands problem, but is it really? Would people really lose their crap if the same rules were applied to an 8 wound venerable Dreadnought from the codex? I doubt it. GW balance within the codex, they don't consider FW. Competitive events should take this into consideration and remove FW to prevent these crazy outliers. Iron Hands would still have been good, no question, but not having Levi Dreads to use the crazy strats or Chaplain Dreads, the lists would have been more manageable.

FW should have been in the main codexes. I still don't see the value in separating them. Some armies are just super expensive to build like Tomb Blade spam is way more expensive than silver tide for example and Custodes are just going to be cheaper than most assuming they don't use FW.

Also, GW does not balance within the codex, they don't even try to pair the max flamer hits stratagem with the mortal wounds from flamers strat in a new supplement. There are no good excuses as to not include FW in their balance considerations, but when you tell people to just throw some models on the table and battle it out then you won't get any worthwhile info from playtesting. A scheme with all the units and delegation of testing roles for each new release could make 40k amazingly balanced in 34 months.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
It seems to me that whenever there's a hyper points efficient unit 9 times out of 10 it's from FW. I guess GW want to shift some of that expensive resin, huh. FW units also contain some of the most sloppy rules writing I've ever seen that is, frankly, embarrassing.

I don't really see why there should be a separate FW rule book for units. They should be included in codexes for clarity and balance. Although, that said, they're not even consistent with this - my Warboss on Warbike is a codex entry despite existing only as a FW miniature, as are my Nobs on Bikes.

FW has always been the place to find janky rules in the hope of stumbling across some OP combo - I really hope GW kill this dead.

Lol, go get the statistics in this one, because your assumption is utter nonsense.

Obliterators, plasma termites,letters, Alpha legion, plagueburst crawler plaguebearers,etc are all from gw as are -4 to hit Lord discordants and other BS of that calibre. And that is just chaos.

Further the whole of 8th nobody cared about fw dreads , IH show up and Look what happened.

And looking at the IG models from FW... I don't see anything broken. I think (!) the Macharius Vulcan is nearly a competetive choice but for everything else there are GW units that do it better for cheaper. So a total FW ban because units in some armies interact funny with their rules would be quite unfair in my opinion

I don't care if they ban them or not, honestly. Lots of people have made lots of good arguments on both sides of the fence, and honestly, maybe pruning the catalog is a good idea at this point. There are a LOT of things to balance in this game, maybe having a few less would be good.

Don't get me wrong, I love using my deredeo and my leviathan dreadnoughts, but if I couldn't use them tomorrow in a tournament I wouldn't be heartbroken about it.

Also: I understand everyone here really hates GW, but I have to say, this is the first time I have seen where they are legitimately trying to balance their game for more than a VERY casual setting. I think it's worth mentioning that things will go wrong. Yes, IH is way too good, yes they missed the max hit and mortal wound combo of strats, but every game has missed interactions, it happens.

Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Fun fact the malefic lord costs nearly as much as the vastly superior Sorcerer of CSM / MoP which recently got a price drop.

Huh? They're all 80 points currently.

Base yes but sorcerers and mop both pay for compulsory wargear which brings them to 88 points. Malefic lords do not.

Correction , malefic lords pay 0pts for "bare hands" , yes that is not a joke, yes they also have no armor sv.
what you thought there was a point in them beeing 80 pts?

Heck his possession rules only happen if he survives the possession...



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Seabass wrote:
I don't care if they ban them or not, honestly. Lots of people have made lots of good arguments on both sides of the fence, and honestly, maybe pruning the catalog is a good idea at this point. There are a LOT of things to balance in this game, maybe having a few less would be good.

Don't get me wrong, I love using my deredeo and my leviathan dreadnoughts, but if I couldn't use them tomorrow in a tournament I wouldn't be heartbroken about it.

Also: I understand everyone here really hates GW, but I have to say, this is the first time I have seen where they are legitimately trying to balance their game for more than a VERY casual setting. I think it's worth mentioning that things will go wrong. Yes, IH is way too good, yes they missed the max hit and mortal wound combo of strats, but every game has missed interactions, it happens.

(SO are RG and IF aswell.) no, GW has not ATTEMPTED even to do balance all over 8th, considering they literally ignored a 3rd of the bloody catalogue in pts balance in CA, which mind you , is nothing more than a paywalled balance patch...

Seabass wrote:
I don't care if they ban them or not, honestly. Lots of people have made lots of good arguments on both sides of the fence, and honestly, maybe pruning the catalog is a good idea at this point. There are a LOT of things to balance in this game, maybe having a few less would be good.

Don't get me wrong, I love using my deredeo and my leviathan dreadnoughts, but if I couldn't use them tomorrow in a tournament I wouldn't be heartbroken about it.

Also: I understand everyone here really hates GW, but I have to say, this is the first time I have seen where they are legitimately trying to balance their game for more than a VERY casual setting. I think it's worth mentioning that things will go wrong. Yes, IH is way too good, yes they missed the max hit and mortal wound combo of strats, but every game has missed interactions, it happens.

Pah, the game isn't even balanced casually. For the effort you have to do to balance it yourself, why even bother with dice? Just make pewpew noises.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Just make pewpew noises.

It would not surprise me in the least to hear this was official Games Workshop policy