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.
Bosskelot wrote: Tournament attendees are overwhelmingly not hardcore competitive players. 80% of your average tourny players will be there to show up, roll some dice, meet new people and have some fun. They're not casual, but they aren't hyper-competitive either. In fact the majority of players I've played vs in tournaments have been people deliberately and knowingly running weak or sub-optimal lists because they just want to run the army they like and want to have a fun day/weekend playing 40k. And of that subset of people they overwhelmingly play Marines more than any other army; they were playing Marines in the middle of 8th when the Codex was considered ultra-weak and they'll keep on playing Marines now that the army is strong. During the middle of 8th I was coming across so many Marine armies still (although half of them had added a single knight to their lists)
This is an anecdote. A claim on this scale is going to require proof, so can you prove you assertions?
Bosskelot wrote: Tournament attendees are overwhelmingly not hardcore competitive players. 80% of your average tourny players will be there to show up, roll some dice, meet new people and have some fun. They're not casual, but they aren't hyper-competitive either. In fact the majority of players I've played vs in tournaments have been people deliberately and knowingly running weak or sub-optimal lists because they just want to run the army they like and want to have a fun day/weekend playing 40k. And of that subset of people they overwhelmingly play Marines more than any other army; they were playing Marines in the middle of 8th when the Codex was considered ultra-weak and they'll keep on playing Marines now that the army is strong. During the middle of 8th I was coming across so many Marine armies still (although half of them had added a single knight to their lists)
This is an anecdote. A claim on this scale is going to require proof, so can you prove you assertions?
And Xenos' claim wasn't anecdote?
Actually, no-Xenos' claim WASN'T anecdote. It was conjecture! So why aren't you asking Xeno for proof to back his claims up?
Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne!
At least in Spain after attending for consecutive years the literally biggest tournaments in the country (And some of the ones in Europe, talking about 200-400 person tournaments)... it is the truth.
I would not say the 80%, buf the people that goes with the intention of ending top10 are probably less than 20% of the players. And most of the rest, go with "harder" lists that the ones they usually play, but don't go with that "I'm here to end in the top 1/3 of the tournament!" mentality. And then you have a not insignificant subsection that play in the tournament like in a normal casual game just to have fun with their friends in a couple of days.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/02/04 21:57:54
Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.
ERJAK wrote: Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.
Bosskelot wrote: Tournament attendees are overwhelmingly not hardcore competitive players. 80% of your average tourny players will be there to show up, roll some dice, meet new people and have some fun. They're not casual, but they aren't hyper-competitive either. In fact the majority of players I've played vs in tournaments have been people deliberately and knowingly running weak or sub-optimal lists because they just want to run the army they like and want to have a fun day/weekend playing 40k. And of that subset of people they overwhelmingly play Marines more than any other army; they were playing Marines in the middle of 8th when the Codex was considered ultra-weak and they'll keep on playing Marines now that the army is strong. During the middle of 8th I was coming across so many Marine armies still (although half of them had added a single knight to their lists)
This is an anecdote. A claim on this scale is going to require proof, so can you prove you assertions?
I have been involved in competitive 40k for years now, have attended numerous tournaments and also am friends with plenty of competitive-minded players, not just in the UK but abroad too. This is all of our experiences.
Can I get data about the competitive mindset of tournament attendees? Not really because that isn't quantifiable unless you ask people to sign a form. And while the 80% was certainly hyperbolic, especially with regards to the US scene, all you have to do is go look at the bottom half of placings and see what kinds of lists people are running. Nobody who is a hardcore competitive player would be running these sorts of lists as they're far too unfocused or unoptimized, or they're just plainly going for a somewhat fluffy theme/build for fun or as a self-imposed challenge. Again, the amount of people running pure Primaris armies in the middle of 8th and placing low in tournaments was honestly huge.
EDIT: Galas has a much more accurate breakdown in his post. A small subset of highly competitive meta-chaser players trying to win everything, a slightly larger subset that are your average matched play gamer taking a harder list than usual and going there to see how well they can do, and then the biggest subset of people are there to show up, roll some dice and have fun with the army they want to have fun with.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/02/04 22:03:05
JNAProductions wrote: This is an anecdote. A claim on this scale is going to require proof, so can you prove you assertions?
And Xenos' claim wasn't anecdote?
Actually, no-Xenos' claim WASN'T anecdote. It was conjecture! So why aren't you asking Xeno for proof to back his claims up?
Xenos' claim can actually be backed by facts. Unless Marines are rapidly growing in popularity, which would need evidence beyond your local meta, their new player rate will be the same as their overall play rate. Thus if Marines are 30% of the player base you'd expect roughly 3-in-10 new players to start with Marines and some other percentage to start with Chaos Marines, and some other percentage to start with Orks. Then, given that there should be no special inclination among any new player for or against attending a tournament you'd also expect those numbers to hold in terms of percentages of new players at tournaments. There will be more new Marine players than new Ork players by the ratios among them should be the same.
If these numbers aren't the same you'll have to provide evidence showing that to be the case as such an occurrence would be unusual.
JNAProductions wrote: This is an anecdote. A claim on this scale is going to require proof, so can you prove you assertions?
And Xenos' claim wasn't anecdote?
Actually, no-Xenos' claim WASN'T anecdote. It was conjecture! So why aren't you asking Xeno for proof to back his claims up?
Xenos' claim can actually be backed by facts. Unless Marines are rapidly growing in popularity, which would need evidence beyond your local meta, their new player rate will be the same as their overall play rate. Thus if Marines are 30% of the player base you'd expect roughly 3-in-10 new players to start with Marines and some other percentage to start with Chaos Marines, and some other percentage to start with Orks. Then, given that there should be no special inclination among any new player for or against attending a tournament you'd also expect those numbers to hold in terms of percentages of new players at tournaments. There will be more new Marine players than new Ork players by the ratios among them should be the same.
If these numbers aren't the same you'll have to provide evidence showing that to be the case as such an occurrence would be unusual.
So I'm sure you have facts to back those numbers up, right? You're not just assuming that 30% of the playerbase is Marines, are you?
Edit: Spoilered because the quote tags are acting up.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/02/04 22:04:03
Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne!
Bosskelot wrote: Tournament attendees are overwhelmingly not hardcore competitive players. 80% of your average tourny players will be there to show up, roll some dice, meet new people and have some fun. They're not casual, but they aren't hyper-competitive either. In fact the majority of players I've played vs in tournaments have been people deliberately and knowingly running weak or sub-optimal lists because they just want to run the army they like and want to have a fun day/weekend playing 40k. And of that subset of people they overwhelmingly play Marines more than any other army; they were playing Marines in the middle of 8th when the Codex was considered ultra-weak and they'll keep on playing Marines now that the army is strong. During the middle of 8th I was coming across so many Marine armies still (although half of them had added a single knight to their lists)
This is an anecdote. A claim on this scale is going to require proof, so can you prove you assertions?
I have been involved in competitive 40k for years now, have attended numerous tournaments and also am friends with plenty of competitive-minded players, not just in the UK but abroad too. This is all of our experiences.
Can I get data about the competitive mindset of tournament attendees? Not really because that isn't quantifiable unless you ask people to sign a form. And while the 80% was certainly hyperbolic, especially with regards to the US scene, all you have to do is go look at the bottom half of placings and see what kinds of lists people are running. Nobody who is a hardcore competitive player would be running these sorts of lists as they're far too unfocused or unoptimized, or they're just plainly going for a somewhat fluffy theme/build for fun or as a self-imposed challenge. Again, the amount of people running pure Primaris armies in the middle of 8th and placing low in tournaments was honestly huge.
That wasn't the issue I had with your post.
"And of that subset of people they overwhelmingly play Marines more than any other army."
I'd expect to see roughly the same ratio of casual marine players in tournaments as there are for any other faction. This isn't data you can gather from just one tournament scene, you'd need to gather your data from the entire player base.
Your assertion that 80% of the tournament meta is casual and that the majority is made up of Marines is bunk.
JNAProductions wrote: So I'm sure you have facts to back those numbers up, right? You're not just assuming that 30% of the playerbase is Marines, are you?
The thing is I'm not making a claim based on my 30% number being correct. I only chose it because it sounds roughly right, but this is a nitpick and really doesn't factor into my argument at all.
My claim is that the new player rate will roughly match the general play rate for any given faction or else that faction will be experiencing either growth or decline. My assumption is the default for any system and thus requires no proof. So either prove that Marines are seeing surging play rates among the casual ranks of the tournament meta or feth off.
JNAProductions wrote: So, C5, show us the facts to the contrary. Don't just so "You're wrong," show us that you are right.
I'm not the one making a claim in the affirmative and thus I have no burden of proof upon me. Much like a defense lawyer I only need to show that your argument is flawed.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2021/02/04 22:12:31
Nearly everyone playing 40K has a SM army of some sort at some point. Never met someone that didn't have or never had one.
And I'm pretty fething sure most of the introductory items bought are the starting box, it's their only reason to exist as otherwise the price to entry is quite intimidating (particularly if you fancy orks ). GW doesn't do them to please veterans, they know all we need is a rulebook.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/02/04 22:15:30
JNAProductions wrote: So I'm sure you have facts to back those numbers up, right? You're not just assuming that 30% of the playerbase is Marines, are you?
The thing is I'm not making a claim based on my 30% number being correct. I only chose it because it sounds roughly right, but this is a nitpick and really doesn't factor into my argument at all.
My claim is that the new player rate will roughly match the general play rate for any given faction or else that faction will be experiencing either growth or decline. My assumption is the default for any system and thus requires no proof. So either prove that Marines are seeing surging play rates among the casual ranks of the tournament meta or feth off.
JNAProductions wrote: So, C5, show us the facts to the contrary. Don't just so "You're wrong," show us that you are right.
I'm not the one making a claim in the affirmative and thus I have no burden of proof upon me. Much like a defense lawyer I only need to show that your argument is flawed.
Which you have not done.
You've said that unless Loyalist Marines are getting a lot more new players, they can't make up the majority of players-completely ignoring that Marines have had much greater focus (such as being in every single starter kit dating back decades) for a long time, and therefore are already more likely to have lots of players.
So again-don't just be negative. Be positive.
Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne!
JNAProductions wrote: You've said that unless Loyalist Marines are getting a lot more new players, they can't make up the majority of players-completely ignoring that Marines have had much greater focus (such as being in every single starter kit dating back decades) for a long time, and therefore are already more likely to have lots of players.
So again-don't just be negative. Be positive.
If your claim is that Marines are overwhelming played as low-end casual tournament chaff, which is the claim used to discredit the win rate of Marines as a useful metric for judging them, then it is on those making this claim to prove it. Not with anecdotes about a tournament meta they participate in, but with numbers from a large set of tournaments from all regions of the world where 40k is played. I don't have to prove a damned thing to sit here and think your claims as non-sense and ask you to prove them.
Dysartes wrote: An Iron Worriers list with Greater Blight Drones? That's the FW one, right? Are they not DG? If not, that's a bit odd from the rules side of things.
"Greater Blight Drones" are CSM and "Deathguard Greater Blight Drones" are .. well you guessed it, DG. There is 2 entries in IA (and I assume it's the same model).
Ah, fair enough - haven't picked up Imperial Armour for 9th yet.
Gamgee on Tau Players wrote:we all kill cats and sell our own families to the devil and eat live puppies.
Kanluwen wrote: This is, emphatically, why I will continue suggesting nuking Guard and starting over again. It's a legacy army that needs to be rebooted with a new focal point.
Confirmation of why no-one should listen to Kanluwen when it comes to the IG - he doesn't want the IG, he want's Kan's New Model Army...
tneva82 wrote: You aren't even trying ty pretend for honest arqument. Open bad faith trolling.
- No reason to keep this here, unless people want to use it for something...
We don't know how many marine players are out there, but we know from official data that 30% of the games played are loyal marines.
Now, this isn't particularly shocking.
As of now the game has 31 factions (excluding FW ones and mini factions).
35% of those are loyal marines. And I'm considering CF and Black Templars as IF, or the share would be even higher.
Even if you somehow believe that UM=WS=IH=IF=Sally=RG, then you are still looking at 23% of the game factions being marines.
They have around the same share of players as the other factions. Sure, new players tend to buy into them, because they are cheaper and easier to paint, but the games we are talking about are from players who have assembled and painted 2000 points of army. There are no "noobs" in that figure.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/02/05 09:56:52
This is an anecdote. A claim on this scale is going to require proof, so can you prove you assertions?
I have to agree with that. In sports, specialy in athletics that often get dominated by one or two people, or people from two countries, there are still professional sports men that qualified and joined the events from other countries. Would be rather insulting to them not call them sports men, just because everyone knows who is going to take the top 3-4 spots, or that they are going to drop durning the event.
w40k is the same, just because there are people with more money, more skills and more time to train for an even then the majority of people, it doesn't mean that only the top 10% are the real tournament players. If it was true we may as well say that that the only tournament players are those who place in top 4 or 8 on a regular basis, in larger events.
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.
This is an anecdote. A claim on this scale is going to require proof, so can you prove you assertions?
I have to agree with that. In sports, specialy in athletics that often get dominated by one or two people, or people from two countries, there are still professional sports men that qualified and joined the events from other countries. Would be rather insulting to them not call them sports men, just because everyone knows who is going to take the top 3-4 spots, or that they are going to drop durning the event.
w40k is the same, just because there are people with more money, more skills and more time to train for an even then the majority of people, it doesn't mean that only the top 10% are the real tournament players. If it was true we may as well say that that the only tournament players are those who place in top 4 or 8 on a regular basis, in larger events.
Just adding to everyone else's comments further up the thread: you're wrong. 40k tournaments, like tournaments for every other wargame I've seen played competitively, are mostly made up of players who aren't hardcore tournament attendees, in my experience. This goes for 40k, for WHFB, for X-Wing, for WM/H, for MTG and I'd be willing to bet most other game systems. This idea that tournaments are cut-throat arenas where the best of the best face off in mortal combat is just not the case. Most players are turning up with terrible armies, either knowingly or unwittingly, and are probably less invested in the game than most people posting on Dakka.
That doesn't mean the winners are bad players, because at any tournament there will still be a subset of players who are actually capable of winning the event, but that subset is much smaller than most people seem to think.
Oddly enough, Karol, comparing 40k to pro or semi-pro sports does not always work because the two things are completely different activities.
This is an anecdote. A claim on this scale is going to require proof, so can you prove you assertions?
I have to agree with that. In sports, specialy in athletics that often get dominated by one or two people, or people from two countries, there are still professional sports men that qualified and joined the events from other countries. Would be rather insulting to them not call them sports men, just because everyone knows who is going to take the top 3-4 spots, or that they are going to drop durning the event.
w40k is the same, just because there are people with more money, more skills and more time to train for an even then the majority of people, it doesn't mean that only the top 10% are the real tournament players. If it was true we may as well say that that the only tournament players are those who place in top 4 or 8 on a regular basis, in larger events.
It's not the same, there are no leagues, no processus of qualifications or anything. You could buy your first army, paint it and dispute your first match in a tournament along side players that have been doing this for decades.
This doesn't happen in any kind of sport worth its salt outside of "sunday fun". Which 40K is.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/02/05 11:46:12
addnid wrote: This has gone off topic quite badly hasn't it ?
Its a reasonable evolution I think.
"DA are overpowered."
"No."
"Yes. Also Marines are mid tier at best, these are clearly overpowered."
"It's not clear its as good as that - and Marines are not mid-tier - see tournament results."
"Transhuman is toughness infinity! Also look at my other tournament where someone running Imperial Fists didn't do so well."
"....okay?"
Its basically the long running issue that the only measure we have for armies being OP tends to be tournament results - but each individual tournament is a bit meaningless, because the outcome is a function of who was there and who played who.
The great joy of Iron Hands was that they scored 1-4 spot placings in almost every tournament 2 weeks after the codex dropped. So the problem was obvious.
Given Covid however the tournament scene isn't the same, so any evidence is unclear.
Realistically, I think it will just be more of the same. DA will slot in reasonably well in "has a 9th Codex or is just crazy cheap" meta. They won't be overpowered, but can place if played well. They'll probably have a very high win rate against the rubbish factions. But those factions are unsurprisingly often not super popular at tournaments - except amongst people who are playing largely for fun.
Related to the tournament data, I think we need to wait and see what the army lists look like and what's actually possible to fit into an army all at once. The Inner Circle buff is certainly extremely powerful but one of the problems DA have often had is fitting all their specialist stuff in at the same time and ending up with a coherent, powerful army. I'm not saying DA won't turn out to be OP, but I'd like to see some more practical evidence first.
dhallnet 795779 11048788 wrote:
It's not the same, there are no leagues, no processus of qualifications or anything. You could buy your first army, paint it and dispute your first match in a tournament along side players that have been doing this for decades.
This doesn't happen in any kind of sport worth its salt outside of "sunday fun". Which 40K is.
I am not trying to offend anyone, but do you think that when Quatar buys the bulgarian second olympic team, renames them and files them as their own. There were some sort of qualification running in Quatar?
What kind of qualifications did the jamaican sled team have durning the winter olympics, or Jerry The Eagle?
And even in big, sport powerful countries, the qualifications are often made up too. You make fake events, so people you don't want injured get the points their need, while sports people which aren't fully state controled, rebelious or in the case of US without big sponsors, don't get to go to the olympics.
Not everyone is allowed to send their Serbian basketball team, made mostly out of NBA players, or an american team, made 100% out of NBA players.
There is ton of people who could be labeled amatures in sports, if the qualification was only if they were 100% training with full sponsorship and country support.
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.
dhallnet 795779 11048788 wrote:
It's not the same, there are no leagues, no processus of qualifications or anything. You could buy your first army, paint it and dispute your first match in a tournament along side players that have been doing this for decades.
This doesn't happen in any kind of sport worth its salt outside of "sunday fun". Which 40K is.
I am not trying to offend anyone, but do you think that when Quatar buys the bulgarian second olympic team, renames them and files them as their own. There were some sort of qualification running in Quatar?
What kind of qualifications did the jamaican sled team have durning the winter olympics, or Jerry The Eagle?
And even in big, sport powerful countries, the qualifications are often made up too. You make fake events, so people you don't want injured get the points their need, while sports people which aren't fully state controled, rebelious or in the case of US without big sponsors, don't get to go to the olympics.
Not everyone is allowed to send their Serbian basketball team, made mostly out of NBA players, or an american team, made 100% out of NBA players.
There is ton of people who could be labeled amatures in sports, if the qualification was only if they were 100% training with full sponsorship and country support.
OK...I guess? And what does this have to do with the average tournament attendee?
Related to the tournament data, I think we need to wait and see what the army lists look like and what's actually possible to fit into an army all at once. The Inner Circle buff is certainly extremely powerful but one of the problems DA have often had is fitting all their specialist stuff in at the same time and ending up with a coherent, powerful army. I'm not saying DA won't turn out to be OP, but I'd like to see some more practical evidence first.
This. So many people said DG was going to over-the-top OP as well. Then we actually got the book. They're certainly strong, but not oppressively so. If someone is mad about all the extra stuff they (DA) get, that's fair, but, it's a marine book in the "Marine Era" so ... not sure what to tell you?
I'm interested to see how this book does, and how the various "wings" end up landing in terms of power.
JNAProductions wrote:
So, C5, show us the facts to the contrary. Don't just so "You're wrong," show us that you are right.
Just leave it. He's made enough silly arguments and been called out enough times that now he doesn't even try to make actual arguments. Just points out where he thinks others are wrong so that he can more effectively hand-wave and move the goal posts when challenged. Doesn't seem like C5 is actually looking for discussion so much as "gotcha" moments ...
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2021/02/05 14:39:19
Edit: I just googled ablutions and apparently it does not including dropping a duece. I should have looked it up early sorry for any confusion. - Baldsmug
Psiensis on the "good old days":
"Kids these days...
... I invented the 6th Ed meta back in 3rd ed.
Wait, what were we talking about again? Did I ever tell you about the time I gave you five bees for a quarter? That's what you'd say in those days, "give me five bees for a quarter", is what you'd say in those days. And you'd go down to the D&D shop, with an onion in your belt, 'cause that was the style of the time. So there I was in the D&D shop..."
I wonder how crazy the UM are gonna be once there new supplement drops.... GW loves them some smurfs I wanna see the reaction to that!! This one is 12 pages so far and has gone off the rails in quite a few places! Taking all bets now!
I wonder how crazy the UM are gonna be once there new supplement drops.... GW loves them some smurfs I wanna see the reaction to that!! This one is 12 pages so far and has gone off the rails in quite a few places! Taking all bets now!
That will be interesting to see IMO. The previous UM supplement bounced up and down the power scale depending on FAQs. Their rules were fairly tame, but made aggressors (already one of 8th's best units) that much better, but a lot of their "schtick" revolved around Leadership. An almost meaningless stat this edition.
That will be an interesting book indeed.
Edit: I just googled ablutions and apparently it does not including dropping a duece. I should have looked it up early sorry for any confusion. - Baldsmug
Psiensis on the "good old days":
"Kids these days...
... I invented the 6th Ed meta back in 3rd ed.
Wait, what were we talking about again? Did I ever tell you about the time I gave you five bees for a quarter? That's what you'd say in those days, "give me five bees for a quarter", is what you'd say in those days. And you'd go down to the D&D shop, with an onion in your belt, 'cause that was the style of the time. So there I was in the D&D shop..."
dhallnet wrote: Nearly everyone playing 40K has a SM army of some sort at some point. Never met someone that didn't have or never had one.
And I'm pretty fething sure most of the introductory items bought are the starting box, it's their only reason to exist as otherwise the price to entry is quite intimidating (particularly if you fancy orks ). GW doesn't do them to please veterans, they know all we need is a rulebook.
Pretty sure every army has a start collecting box and you can buy rules separately from gigantic starter boxes. The majority of these starter boxes are bought by experienced players too because they are just discounted models. Me for example I bought 3 indomidus boxes and 3 dark imperium. What happened though? Dark imperium got me into choas and now I have a black legion army and indom got me into Necrons. In the past I've gone halfsies on these starter boxes with other players and I keep the marine portion. Lots of marine players do that. It's really marine players that keep the game going. They are the long-term players - the players that never leave. This is why lots of these army bundle boxes include marines. They know marine players will buy them for the savings and maybe trade the other models armies away and guess what - there is a potential new player getting a non marine army. Or The marine player will just start another army like I did. The marketing strategy is all about this.
Just look at the new killteam box. The most anticipated model this year is heavy intercessors...you are gonna have to buy a 150 dollar box to get them and you get some crons with it too...They might even get you involved in kill team. How many new players are gonna spend that kind of money to get 5 dudes?
Related to the tournament data, I think we need to wait and see what the army lists look like and what's actually possible to fit into an army all at once. The Inner Circle buff is certainly extremely powerful but one of the problems DA have often had is fitting all their specialist stuff in at the same time and ending up with a coherent, powerful army. I'm not saying DA won't turn out to be OP, but I'd like to see some more practical evidence first.
This. So many people said DG was going to over-the-top OP as well. Then we actually got the book. They're certainly strong, but not oppressively so. If someone is mad about all the extra stuff they (DA) get, that's fair, but, it's a marine book in the "Marine Era" so ... not sure what to tell you?
I'm interested to see how this book does, and how the various "wings" end up landing in terms of power.
JNAProductions wrote:
So, C5, show us the facts to the contrary. Don't just so "You're wrong," show us that you are right.
Just leave it. He's made enough silly arguments and been called out enough times that now he doesn't even try to make actual arguments. Just points out where he thinks others are wrong so that he can more effectively hand-wave and move the goal posts when challenged. Doesn't seem like C5 is actually looking for discussion so much as "gotcha" moments ...
It's effect will be felt almost immediately. flat 2 weapons are going to disappear from armies. More or less it is a requirement for competitive play. This will not be great for DG. It's a stealth buff to primaris.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/02/05 14:58:49
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
They might even get you involved in kill team. How many new players are gonna spend that kind of money to get 5 dudes?
Don't exaggerate Xeno. It's 6. They're spending that much money to get SIX models ... the Heavy Bolt Rifle Captain is in there too ...
Seriously though, that is a puzzling set. I'm guessing the rules for that map are supposed to even out the somewhat lopsided nature of the armies. IDK. I just know that I'm getting ready to get my marines off the shelf and just need some Heavy Intercessors. In the past I probably would have bought this set for them, but not anymore.
No money until they come out as proper units.
Edit: I just googled ablutions and apparently it does not including dropping a duece. I should have looked it up early sorry for any confusion. - Baldsmug
Psiensis on the "good old days":
"Kids these days...
... I invented the 6th Ed meta back in 3rd ed.
Wait, what were we talking about again? Did I ever tell you about the time I gave you five bees for a quarter? That's what you'd say in those days, "give me five bees for a quarter", is what you'd say in those days. And you'd go down to the D&D shop, with an onion in your belt, 'cause that was the style of the time. So there I was in the D&D shop..."
). 
He's made enough silly arguments and been called out enough times that now he doesn't even try to make actual arguments. Just points out where he thinks others are wrong so that he can more effectively hand-wave and move the goal posts when challenged. Doesn't seem like C5 is actually looking for discussion so much as "gotcha" moments ... 
