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.
Also you have 3rd party sources so your mantra "but muh models" is a poor excuse to use.
The only answer to marines is to not play against them. Xenos and chaos players should just say no to marine matchups and let them play with other marines.
In the grim darkness of far away forums, there is only SM and Eldar players whinging over who is more entitled, while Chaos players say they've not had anything good since 3.5, and other Xenos factions may as well not exist.
Really think a major issue with 40k is that its hard to measure skill. Which leads to this false idea that there isn't any. In the final rounds of a tournament you can probably start assuming player skill is roughly equal, and list imbalances (or just luck) may start being the main determinant of winning. For ye average group of people playing garage hammer though, this usually isn't the case. The guy who wins all the time is probably just much more interested in the hobby.
Before I say anything about 40k (which I largely agree with you on), I feel the need to point out some issues on your comparison to MTG and LoL. False equivalency is a sticking point with me, and I see these points pop up in a LOT of 40k conversations.
Some points of similarity and difference. If you're playing control in MtG or LoL you're having fun by going out of your way to make absolutely sure your opponent can't play the game at all. Anti-fun as said above (and a good bit of why I quit MtG). That style isn't just that the mana cost is one too low (though such a thing can enable or disable the style in a given set) it's that you're denying agency to your opponent. Similarly with LoL, some of the characters you mention have hard CC or insta-kill move sets if given a tiny bit of help/slack from ally/opponent team. They don't outplay the opponent face to face, they just kill you dead without interaction.
Spoiler:
Interesting take, I have played both games and I can't help but wonder why you came to these conclusions.
So you have an understanding of my experience and know I'm not talking out of my ass... Full disclosure:
I started playing MTG in the original release, Beta printing in 1993(?) when I bought some card packs from my local movie rental/geekshop/video game rental store, and ended when they introduced planeswalkers. I felt the game was getting too.... muddied for my more classical tastes. I have a fair bit of tournament play under my belt at the local FLGS and regionally but never went beyond that because it didn't interest me. I played a variety of decks, control, leech, sliver, myr, burn, destruction, DT etc.. I introduced my wife to MTG in 2017 and we play a fair bit amongst our small group of MTG players. She plays exclusively deathtouch (dont ask why, she hates spiders and snakes but loves them all of a sudden in magic). I'm not sure what the current meta is, and a quick google leaves me boggled on the casting costs of some of these cards... way undercosted for what they do. It seems like speed magic instead of strategy.
To address your point on magic:
In MTG control decks have usually been pretty strong. As have a half dozen other "OP" decks. With the exception of a VERY scant few decks that could reliably pull off T1 victories (looking at you artifact cheese) none of these are impossible to outplay. If you find yourself losing to the same deck construction over and over then the problem is you. Remember to old saying about the definition of insanity? Think that. Control decks are no different. They don't prevent you from playing the game at all, they prevent you from playing the way you intended when you constructed the deck. Its true for both casual and competitive. There are only so many legal cards in any given format, and of those cards there are only so many combinations, decks, and metas to prepare for. You're allowed a sideboard. There is literally no reason for you to be locked out of playing except for your own limited ability to prepare.
To address your point on LoL:
I play LoL and have been for years. I have played competitive but I don't enjoy the seasonal elo grind so I stopped. Again, for fun. I main support lockdown characters and tank cc gankers like Blitzcrank, Nautilus, and Lux. In all of my years of playing, on a level playing field there has never been characters that "kill you dead without interaction". Ever. Ever. You're either dying to your poor placement, your team's poor inability to counter, or a really good gank. Unassisted in some way (either with a gold advantage or number of players in the engagement), there are NO characters that can one shot you. There are no characters that can 1v1 CC and kill you before the CC wears off. If either of these things are true, the opponent is overfed, stacking either their items, ability buffs, or character buffs. It just doesn't happen. The game is literally designed to prevent just that.
This has been my experience in both of these games. If I'm wrong, please enlighten me. Your opinion matters to me, even in this toxic wasteland hobby we share.
That said, onto the 40k stuff!
Anti-fun in 40K is usually giving your opponent a lack of options (like having countering strats), giving a no-good-odds scenario (like having an obviously undercosted list), or a gimmick that just isn't interactive (shooting more than a quarter of a list off the board in top of T1). Sure, you can get an easy consistent win by playing the best list against unprepared opponents. There's a phrase for that. Idk why it seems like I'm in the minority for enjoying surmountable challenges.
In 40K there doesn't need to be that level of imbalance to make some armies/units just hopeless against others and thus unfun. That's on GW. A list with poor synergy, lack of win condition, exposed weaknesses are all on the player. Poor placement, risks taken, strats overlooked is all on player.
Spoiler:
Largely agree. In a VAST majority of cases, the people at the table are local flgs players. They aren't tourney titans. Anti-fun is going to be playing a casual friendly list against a tryhard list. It's frustrating. You don't always (especially now) get to play who you want, you play who shows up. If that isnt the case for you, I'm happy for and jealous of you. Playing against an undercosted FOTM list as a friendly player kill off the drive to play again. I chose necrons and thousand sons before either of them got updates, and despite their weakness in all of 7th and most of 8th I still enjoyed playing them.
GW does a TERRIBLE job at game balance and always has. Period. This is not up for debate. It's not because the core rules are bad; they are gimmicky at best, poorly worded at worst, and easily modified for local friendly or tournament play, which is what the majority of 40k players participate in. GW doesn't sell a tabletop wargame. They sell models. The rules for said models are incidental. On a level playing field, the army with the latest codex and the latest models is always going to be better than the armies that haven't received those benefits. Which is a shame, the focus should be on the rules first to keep players engaged. The proof is in the pudding.
Simply look at the difference in the codex releases. Necrons and Space Marines. In a vacuum, the Necron codex is a work of art. Beautiful new models, cool, fluffy rules changes in some places, extremely questionable changes in others, but all in all fairly balanced against themselves. Then compare it to the Space Marines codex. Just the difference in the percentage of core units compared between books is glaring. Without touching on any of the other power grabs they got just this one difference tells you what you need to know. GW wants to sell Space Marines, they want you playing Space Marines so you are buying all the new Primaris models.
Now look at the next few sets of codices. Deathwatch (Space Marines), Blood Angels (Space Marines), Death Guard (Chaos Space Marines), Dark Eldar (who need it for sure, them getting slashed down from what they were to what they are is a damn shame. See you evil space cowboy), Dark Angels (Space Marines). Two out of SIX(!) codexes are codexes that needed new rules to bring them up to snuff and desperately need(ed) new models. The others are all Space Marines (which have been getting new models every few months for years) and Death Guard (which just had a rework last edition). Not Tau (which needs rules updates to bring them in line with 9th and are extremely disadvantaged in the 2w meta), Nids (Which are borderline unplayable in all but the most gimmicky lists), Chaos Space Marines any flavor but DG (DEAR GOD FIX EMPERORS CHILDREN ALREADY! LUCIOUS THE ETERNAL IS THE WORST CHARACTER IN THE GAME!) or Eldar (Which were a powerhouse for several editions but havent gotten the updating ruleswise they need to be competitivie, or models for a lot of their 20 year old lineup). There's more, but I think you see the point.
Furthermore, look at the price increases. In the worst global economic, financial, and health crisis in our lives GW raised prices across the board. They created the indomitus boxset and the new versions of the start collecting boxes and made it damn near not worth the savings (in the case of the battleboxes), and artificially created inflated rarity. That said, Indom was worth it, and they did screw over scalpers pretty hard; so... point for them. What was terrible was how they treated their customer base throughout that whole ordeal. Just... total neglect. No communication at all, just glad handing.
At the end of the day, GW doesn't care about the rules or the casual player. They care about creating hype for new models, turning that hype into sales, and turning those sales into tournament winning lists that cause casual players to want to own the lists that win. They are a business. Their business isn't wargaming, their business is sales. Remember the GW exec who said the best part of 40k was buying the models? New GeeDubs™ is no different.
Finally, I just want to say that if you're lucky enough to exist in a bubble where youre army is doing well in your local group, don't discount the struggles other players are having. Don't ignore their want for updated sculpts or rules to fill out the fantasy they have for their army. Just because you don't agree doesn't automatically mean they're wrong for wanting them. They aren't doing as well as you are for whatever reason, and a little compassion and understanding goes a long way for a frustrated player. Be excellent to each other.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/12/16 13:23:27
Eldar have ALWAYS been OP outside 5th, when they were overall just an upper mid tier army. Yes the players are entitled, and no I don't care if Marines have 7 Supplements that's literally part of the problem with bloat in the game.
Also you have 3rd party sources so your mantra "but muh models" is a poor excuse to use.
So because i dared to play a wraith host for the enterity of 8th edition, i should be lumped in with the Ynnari/Flyers abusers?
The codex has always had a competitive build but its always been a spammy, non fluffy list.
Most aspect warriors have been in the gutter ever since i started playing the game (reapers, spears and crimson hunter exarchs being the exception, and spammed).
The eldar codex hasnt had any internal balance since ive been playing the game, its always spam something specific to try and win (right now its starcannons). This is boring to play, i wish we had as much list diversity as Marines get so we could actually play fluffy lists instead of rely on being elvish salamanders.
The actual 40k complaints are more like "Oh, you have finished painting the contents of the indomitus box and fielded them as part of a black templars list and beat my incoherent eldar list to which I applied random limitations according to my head-canon? Total TFGWAAC netlist! You are ruining the great hobby GW has given us! GW has never meant 40k to be played that way! I shall look for a new group to play, burn all bridges with you and never engage with such a level of toxicity ever again! 40k is the best game in the world if you take an old edition and rewrite half of it and only play it against three other people who like the exact same things you do!"*
*Hyperbole
see, ive never actually seen that happen except from internet tough guys. The most i've seen IRL is something akin to : "your army is pretty strong, can you play it a bit nerfed/lower power please"
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/12/16 14:08:47
Sgt. Cortez wrote: With the argument "but there's 3rd Party minis for you" even Squat - players should be happy right now. Which shows how worthless it is.
Squats haven't even been in the fluff for YEARS, and literally nobody is going to care if someone brings a Counts As army using Squats. Nothing here proves any point.
Eldar have ALWAYS been OP outside 5th, when they were overall just an upper mid tier army. Yes the players are entitled, and no I don't care if Marines have 7 Supplements that's literally part of the problem with bloat in the game.
Also you have 3rd party sources so your mantra "but muh models" is a poor excuse to use.
So because i dared to play a wraith host for the enterity of 8th edition, i should be lumped in with the Ynnari/Flyers abusers?
The codex has always had a competitive build but its always been a spammy, non fluffy list.
Most aspect warriors have been in the gutter ever since i started playing the game (reapers, spears and crimson hunter exarchs being the exception, and spammed).
The eldar codex hasnt had any internal balance since ive been playing the game, its always spam something specific to try and win (right now its starcannons). This is boring to play, i wish we had as much list diversity as Marines get so we could actually play fluffy lists instead of rely on being elvish salamanders.
The actual 40k complaints are more like "Oh, you have finished painting the contents of the indomitus box and fielded them as part of a black templars list and beat my incoherent eldar list to which I applied random limitations according to my head-canon? Total TFGWAAC netlist! You are ruining the great hobby GW has given us! GW has never meant 40k to be played that way! I shall look for a new group to play, burn all bridges with you and never engage with such a level of toxicity ever again! 40k is the best game in the world if you take an old edition and rewrite half of it and only play it against three other people who like the exact same things you do!"*
*Hyperbole
see, ive never actually seen that happen except from internet tough guys. The most i've seen IRL is something akin to : "your army is pretty strong, can you play it a bit nerfed/lower power please"
Imagine not fixing your own army and telling the other player THEY need to adjust to YOUR needs.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/12/16 15:51:47
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
Imagine not fixing your own army and telling the other player THEY need to adjust to YOUR needs.
if fixing my army means running 6 planes, then yes, i'll tell my opponents that i'm looking for a more casual-level game.
Not everyone enjoys playing with/against top tier armies.
The good thing is that my friends have the same view of the game so i feel absolutely no shame to ask them that.
EDIT:
Its the same as telling your playgroup what type of game you're looking to have when setting up a DnD game : Combat oriented or Roleplay oriented
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/12/16 16:04:06
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Imagine not fixing your own army and telling the other player THEY need to adjust to YOUR needs.
Imagine having a game balanced enough where this isn't necessary...
and then forget what you just imagined and blame all the other players instead of GW.
Nearly there
I'd like to exalt more then once unit
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/12/16 16:22:48
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Imagine not fixing your own army and telling the other player THEY need to adjust to YOUR needs.
Imagine having a game balanced enough where this isn't necessary...
and then forget what you just imagined and blame all the other players instead of GW.
Right, if gw did their jobs right then you would never have to "have a conversation" before a game. But until they do, I'm fine with doing that. Curbstomping someone is no more enjoyable than being curbstomped.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Imagine not fixing your own army and telling the other player THEY need to adjust to YOUR needs.
Imagine having a game balanced enough where this isn't necessary...
and then forget what you just imagined and blame all the other players instead of GW.
Right, if gw did their jobs right then you would never have to "have a conversation" before a game. But until they do, I'm fine with doing that. Curbstomping someone is no more enjoyable than being curbstomped.
Which makes you part of the problem quite frankly. The only way GW will listen is via emails AND voting with your wallet, not one or the other. If you keep up making those purchases and still having the conversation, GW assumes no wrong doing.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/12/16 17:04:54
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
Not only does GW assume no wrong doing, they assume they're doing it right because players are constantly chasing the current meta units (or avoiding the meta units) and they're selling more.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Imagine not fixing your own army and telling the other player THEY need to adjust to YOUR needs.
Imagine having a game balanced enough where this isn't necessary...
and then forget what you just imagined and blame all the other players instead of GW.
Right, if gw did their jobs right then you would never have to "have a conversation" before a game. But until they do, I'm fine with doing that. Curbstomping someone is no more enjoyable than being curbstomped.
Which makes you part of the problem quite frankly. The only way GW will listen is via emails AND voting with your wallet, not one or the other. If you keep up making those purchases and still having the conversation, GW assumes no wrong doing.
I never said I was going to "BUY MOAR MODELS" in order to adjust my lists to be less effective. I've been playing for 20 years, I already have plenty of weaker units I can slot in. Adjusting your list so that you and your opponent have more fun doesn't help gw. The entire point of playing the game is having fun. If you're not doing that, there's no reason to play it, whether it helps gw or not.
Which makes you part of the problem quite frankly. The only way GW will listen is via emails AND voting with your wallet, not one or the other. If you keep up making those purchases and still having the conversation, GW assumes no wrong doing.
we can have that discussion while not supporting GW. I havnt bought anything from GW in months, yet i have a couple new armies.... There are alternative options than buying from GW.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Imagine not fixing your own army and telling the other player THEY need to adjust to YOUR needs.
Imagine having a game balanced enough where this isn't necessary...
That'd pretty much begin & end with Chess & Go.
Lolno. When I play Infinity I don't have to have a conversation with my opponent about what units they're allowed to bring or not; I'm confident that pretty much no matter what we bring, the game will be decided by who plays better. Once you start looking outside of the GW bubble you realize their balance is bad. Really really bad.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Imagine not fixing your own army and telling the other player THEY need to adjust to YOUR needs.
Imagine having a game balanced enough where this isn't necessary...
That'd pretty much begin & end with Chess & Go.
Lolno. When I play Infinity I don't have to have a conversation with my opponent about what units they're allowed to bring or not; I'm confident that pretty much no matter what we bring, the game will be decided by who plays better. Once you start looking outside of the GW bubble you realize their balance is bad. Really really bad.
with infinity as long as both players have the same skill level, the game isnt decided. The fact that CB has a mathematical approach to costing their units gives them a really good base framework for balance.
I've heard GW does use a mathematical system, although I also heard that they used the same spreadsheet for Bloodbowl as they did Necromunda.
So I hope it's not true, and if it is that probably explains the issue.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/12/16 19:25:52
Also you have 3rd party sources so your mantra "but muh models" is a poor excuse to use.
The only answer to marines is to not play against them. Xenos and chaos players should just say no to marine matchups and let them play with other marines.
That comes with two problems. First I don't think harli or demon players have problems with playing any marine army, including the tier 1 ones, and the second being the fact that unlike xeno codex, marines with their multiple subfactions actualy have different armies to play with. A marine vs marine games doesn't have to, and more often then not isn't a mirror. An ork vs ork game is a game of two clone armies.
I never said I was going to "BUY MOAR MODELS" in order to adjust my lists to be less effective. I've been playing for 20 years, I already have plenty of weaker units I can slot in. Adjusting your list so that you and your opponent have more fun doesn't help gw. The entire point of playing the game is having fun. If you're not doing that, there's no reason to play it, whether it helps gw or not.
As someone who lives shorter then you collect models, I would like to point out, that the idea of balance fun games being achived after you collected for 20 years, or even 10 years is a bit mind blowing. Specialy considering how long an avarge w40k player plays the game.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/12/16 19:49:15
If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain.
Also you have 3rd party sources so your mantra "but muh models" is a poor excuse to use.
The only answer to marines is to not play against them. Xenos and chaos players should just say no to marine matchups and let them play with other marines.
That comes with two problems. First I don't think harli or demon players have problems with playing any marine army, including the tier 1 ones, and the second being the fact that unlike xeno codex, marines with their multiple subfactions actualy have different armies to play with. A marine vs marine games doesn't have to, and more often then not isn't a mirror. An ork vs ork game is a game of two clone armies.
I never said I was going to "BUY MOAR MODELS" in order to adjust my lists to be less effective. I've been playing for 20 years, I already have plenty of weaker units I can slot in. Adjusting your list so that you and your opponent have more fun doesn't help gw. The entire point of playing the game is having fun. If you're not doing that, there's no reason to play it, whether it helps gw or not.
As someone who lives shorter then you collect models, I would like to point out, that the idea of balance fun games being achived after you collected for 20 years, or even 10 years is a bit mind blowing. Specialy considering how long an avarge w40k player plays the game.
Cool, so there's no problem then. Marine players should be overjoyed to be only playing against other marines - it's so varied and fun.
It is a little odd that you see so many marine players specifically requesting they play against non-marine opponents, but I am glad to hear the confirmation that it's unnecessary to bother indulging them and they love just playing each other.
Also, if you think you have to wait 20 years to end up with a collection of models that are now sub-optimal or terrible for the current meta, then...well I dunno, you must just not pay very much attention, because I KNOW you've noticed and get weird, fetishistic levels of glee over some particular factions' models that were once overpowered now being terrible.
It is extremely unusual for any model collection to stay competitively optimized for more than 6 months to 1 year in 40k. The only exceptions that I can recall would be if your collection was Mechanized Wave Serpent Eldar starting in sixth edition, or razorback-heavy space marines starting in like 4th or 5th.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/12/16 19:55:09
"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"
"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"
"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"
"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"
Well from the looks of it that is what is happening. People at different levels play different marine lists, with classic marines with just primaris. And those that have good xeno lists play their lists.
Maybe it is different in western countries where people are rich enough to buy "that' one salamander or white scar list and you get 20 people playing it in like a month or two after the edition comes out.
I guess it is a good side of me playing in a place, where all players are evil and care about their own fun. Somehow it ends with people playing different lists and really liking 9th ed. It is sad that those casual players in other countries, get punished for somehow falling in to the trap of being able to afford the best list and everything playing that one the best list. Although that does rise a question, why aren't they playing demons or harlis, they are much better armies, specialy vs mariens that I am told everyone seems to play at every level.
Also, if you think you have to wait 20 years to end up with a collection of models that are now sub-optimal or terrible for the current meta, then...well I dunno, you must just not pay very much attention, because I KNOW you've noticed and get weird, fetishistic levels of glee over some particular factions' models that were once overpowered now being terrible.
Oh I think the 2.0 sm books or rather the reaction to them from non marine players opened my eyes like few things in my life. Till that book came out, I really thought that I my enviroment was full of bad people, playing w40k the wrong way, and that people in other places were playing the game the right way, and that there the good and powerful stuff wasn't used. Then I saw eldar players lose their minds when IH had a 5% higher win rate then best eldar lists win rates in 8th ed, and I do have to agree it was and still is ton of fun to read about, how xeno armies are the neglected one. Or how marines were always OP, specialy when the top armies being non marine ones. As I said opened my eyes to some cultural differences, which easily went over my head for years. But as I said, I ain't a smart person. It took me 2 years to understand that when people say space mariens, they don't count GK. Then when PA came out they started to count GK in the marine camp too, but now they stoped counting them as sm again.
It is extremely unusual for any model collection to stay competitively optimized for more than 6 months to 1 year in 40k.
I am not really understanding this argument. From what I understand armies like eldar had an OP, as in better then most of the field build or even builds, every edition or almost every edition of the game. While other armies may never had one or had one for a few months at the end of an edition. Plus there is non optimised power problem. I never played vs a fully optimised tournament eldar army. Mostly because people couldn't afford it here. But I did play against regular eldar and Inari armies. And their "unoptimised" vs my GK unopitmised wasn't even something I would call a game. It is like a 15 year old having a bout with a 11 year old in wrestling.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/12/16 20:09:48
If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain.
Also you have 3rd party sources so your mantra "but muh models" is a poor excuse to use.
The only answer to marines is to not play against them. Xenos and chaos players should just say no to marine matchups and let them play with other marines.
That comes with two problems. First I don't think harli or demon players have problems with playing any marine army, including the tier 1 ones, and the second being the fact that unlike xeno codex, marines with their multiple subfactions actualy have different armies to play with. A marine vs marine games doesn't have to, and more often then not isn't a mirror. An ork vs ork game is a game of two clone armies.
I don't know where you get the idea that every ork army is the same, theyre one of the armies with the most list variety.
And obviously when people say "Xenos and Chaos are bad", they mean the ones that arent functional right now
I never said I was going to "BUY MOAR MODELS" in order to adjust my lists to be less effective. I've been playing for 20 years, I already have plenty of weaker units I can slot in. Adjusting your list so that you and your opponent have more fun doesn't help gw. The entire point of playing the game is having fun. If you're not doing that, there's no reason to play it, whether it helps gw or not.
As someone who lives shorter then you collect models, I would like to point out, that the idea of balance fun games being achived after you collected for 20 years, or even 10 years is a bit mind blowing. Specialy considering how long an avarge w40k player plays the game.
You don't even need to purchase new models, just run the ones you have as count-as. It can be as simple as saying "my combi-flamers are actually combi-meltas" or saying "My bladeguards are actually Terminators with XYZ".
I've been collecting my Blood Angels for almost a decade now, and I've had essentially the same models for the last 6 years.
I don't chase the meta, I buy what I enjoy.
Hence I don't have a massive collection to draw from depending on whether my opponents want to be playing beardy games or not.
It's an argument that doesn't work, and is tone-deaf at best and very self-centered at worst.
Karol wrote: Well from the looks of it that is what is happening. People at different levels play different marine lists, with classic marines with just primaris. And those that have good xeno lists play their lists.
Maybe it is different in western countries where people are rich enough to buy "that' one salamander or white scar list and you get 20 people playing it in like a month or two after the edition comes out.
I guess it is a good side of me playing in a place, where all players are evil and care about their own fun. Somehow it ends with people playing different lists and really liking 9th ed. It is sad that those casual players in other countries, get punished for somehow falling in to the trap of being able to afford the best list and everything playing that one the best list. Although that does rise a question, why aren't they playing demons or harlis, they are much better armies, specialy vs mariens that I am told everyone seems to play at every level.
They don't play Harlies or Demons because these aren't armies that interest them i'd guess. I don't chose my armies by their winrate in tournaments, i chose them because their fluff is cool and their models look nice.
And you don't need to be rich to say "this squad of terminators are actually Eradicators" and "these Marneus bodyguards are actually Bladeguard"
Automatically Appended Next Post:
kirotheavenger wrote: I've been collecting my Blood Angels for almost a decade now, and I've had essentially the same models for the last 6 years.
I don't chase the meta, I buy what I enjoy.
Hence I don't have a massive collection to draw from depending on whether my opponents want to be playing beardy games or not.
It's an argument that doesn't work, and is tone-deaf at best and very self-centered at worst.
To who are you responding?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/12/16 20:09:46
I don't know where you get the idea that every ork army is the same, theyre one of the armies with the most list variety.
And obviously when people say "Xenos and Chaos are bad", they mean the ones that arent functional right now
Because they are everyone is playing the same or almost the same goff builds. Same with harlis etc
Also wait a minute, why are marines being described as one faction in every argument telling that they are too OP. But eldar are suddenly somehow split.
If a DA or IF players has to accept the argument that his army requires nerfs, because white scars or ultramarines are really good. Then an craftworld eldar or Inari player has nothing to whine about, when harlis are the army with win % high up in the stratosphere untouched by nerfs or a possible soon codex change or CA release.
And you don't need to be rich to say "this squad of terminators are actually Eradicators" and "these Marneus bodyguards are actually Bladeguard"
Well good for you, if you play in a place where someone would let you do that.
You don't even need to purchase new models, just run the ones you have as count-as. It can be as simple as saying "my combi-flamers are actually combi-meltas" or saying "My bladeguards are actually Terminators with XYZ".
Good luck with people allowing you to count as powerful models. They maybe will let you count as scounts, because scouts suck now. Or maybe if you are friends with people. But if you are just a random player or someone like me who has to go to another town to play, the chance for me suddenly going guys let me count as my GK termintor army as heavy intercessors and eradictors is zero. Even more so if people just don't like you, for what ever reasons.
If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain.
I don't know where you get the idea that every ork army is the same, theyre one of the armies with the most list variety.
And obviously when people say "Xenos and Chaos are bad", they mean the ones that arent functional right now
Because they are everyone is playing the same or almost the same goff builds. Same with harlis etc
Goffs boys is one of many possible builds for orks, just because its the current top tier one doesnt mean its the only one.
Harlies basically don't have a choice in what they run since the codex has so little unit options.
Also wait a minute, why are marines being described as one faction in every argument telling that they are too OP. But eldar are suddenly somehow split.
If a DA or IF players has to accept the argument that his army requires nerfs, because white scars or ultramarines are really good. Then an craftworld eldar or Inari player has nothing to whine about, when harlis are the army with win % high up in the stratosphere untouched by nerfs or a possible soon codex change or CA release.
Because marines are part of Codex:Space marines and Eldar are part of Codex: Craftworld, Codex: Drukhari and Codex: Harlequins.
And you don't need to be rich to say "this squad of terminators are actually Eradicators" and "these Marneus bodyguards are actually Bladeguard"
Well good for you, if you play in a place where someone would let you do that.
You don't even need to purchase new models, just run the ones you have as count-as. It can be as simple as saying "my combi-flamers are actually combi-meltas" or saying "My bladeguards are actually Terminators with XYZ".
Good luck with people allowing you to count as powerful models. They maybe will let you count as scounts, because scouts suck now. Or maybe if you are friends with people. But if you are just a random player or someone like me who has to go to another town to play, the chance for me suddenly going guys let me count as my GK termintor army as heavy intercessors and eradictors is zero. Even more so if people just don't like you, for what ever reasons.
I've done it in the past many times when contemplating wether i want to buy certain models or not, and i've let many of my opponents do it. (I once played a half skitarii, half sister army because the guy was starting sisters and he didnt know what he wanted to play). Most people i know would 100% allow ANY count-as. Heck, we've even played with only bases some times or even paper cutouts of the models we were testing.
To be fair, we don't play with winning as the sole goal, 40k is a way to relax between friends and talk.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/12/16 20:22:51
Oh I think the 2.0 sm books or rather the reaction to them from non marine players opened my eyes like few things in my life. Till that book came out, I really thought that I my enviroment was full of bad people, playing w40k the wrong way, and that people in other places were playing the game the right way, and that there the good and powerful stuff wasn't used. Then I saw eldar players lose their minds when IH had a 5% higher win rate then best eldar lists win rates in 8th ed, and I do have to agree it was and still is ton of fun to read about, how xeno armies are the neglected one. Or how marines were always OP, specialy when the top armies being non marine ones. As I said opened my eyes to some cultural differences, which easily went over my head for years. But as I said, I ain't a smart person. It took me 2 years to understand that when people say space mariens, they don't count GK. Then when PA came out they started to count GK in the marine camp too, but now they stoped counting them as sm again.
Karol, *you* are the bad person. When your army is underpowered you don't criticize the rule writers, you criticize the people who beat you; this a bootlicker/slave mentality. You don't deserve wins just for existing.
I am not really understanding this argument. From what I understand armies like eldar had an OP, as in better then most of the field build or even builds, every edition or almost every edition of the game. While other armies may never had one or had one for a few months at the end of an edition. Plus there is non optimised power problem. I never played vs a fully optimised tournament eldar army. Mostly because people couldn't afford it here. But I did play against regular eldar and Inari armies. And their "unoptimised" vs my GK unopitmised wasn't even something I would call a game. It is like a 15 year old having a bout with a 11 year old in wrestling.
What you understand about Eldar is wrong. At times Eldar had very powerful builds. At times SW, or IG, or Tau, had very powerful lists.
Also, if your "unoptimized" GK list was losing against "unoptimized" Eldar lists, the fault is not the codices - the lack of optimization means that that difference is erased. This is different from the current Astartes builds, where unoptimized builds are still extremely powerful. Instead, if you were losing a lot when playing unoptimized lists vs. unoptimized lists, it means that *you were much worse at the game than your opponents*, and therefore it was right that you lost more often.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/12/16 20:34:49
Imagine blaming a Grey Knights player for losing instead of the garbage codex they were given compared to Eldar. That's fething hilarious. Here's your spoiler, tiger: certain non-optimized armies are still significantly better than other armies.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Imagine blaming a Grey Knights player for losing instead of the garbage codex they were given compared to Eldar. That's fething hilarious. Here's your spoiler, tiger: certain non-optimized armies are still significantly better than other armies.
Which is what he said when he said the space marine codex can field unoptimized lists and still overperform....
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Imagine blaming a Grey Knights player for losing instead of the garbage codex they were given compared to Eldar. That's fething hilarious. Here's your spoiler, tiger: certain non-optimized armies are still significantly better than other armies.
Which is what he said when he said the space marine codex can field unoptimized lists and still overperform....
You missed the point saying that the Grey Knights player, Karol, was to blame vs even unoptimized Eldar, which isn't even close to remotely true.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Imagine blaming a Grey Knights player for losing instead of the garbage codex they were given compared to Eldar. That's fething hilarious. Here's your spoiler, tiger: certain non-optimized armies are still significantly better than other armies.
Which is what he said when he said the space marine codex can field unoptimized lists and still overperform....
You missed the point saying that the Grey Knights player, Karol, was to blame vs even unoptimized Eldar, which isn't even close to remotely true.
it is somewhat true IMO. Player skill does have a big say in the outcome of a game and an unoptimized eldar list can be even more trash than GK at their lowest during 8th.
A biel-tan aspect warrior list would probably get wrecked by karol's terminator heavy GK list.
5000
10000+ 
