Wargaming Forum and Wargamer Forums - Reply to Topic
General 40k This is the place to talk about everything related to Warhammer 40k.

Thread: Does 40k need new rules for Tournaments? Reply to Thread
Title:
Message:
Trackback:
Send Trackbacks to (Separate multiple URLs with spaces) :
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:
 

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Wargaming Forum and Wargamer Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










  Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

  Topic Review (Newest First)
12-17-13 10:13 AM
Sethis We-ell you can play it as AV13 wall, which still works, kinda. Min sized Las/Plas Rback squads for scoring, 6 Preds (I prefer Auto/Las and Dakka Baals) and a Crusader with Hammernators. So the codex is "usable" if not actually good.
12-16-13 05:58 PM
JAMOB
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sethis View Post
And I would argue that restricting Riptides and Heldrakes does the exact opposite of "limits options and what lists will show up at any given tournament" because if you did so, suddenly two entire codices become viable as main armies again, namely Grey Knights and Space Wolves.
Don't forget BA jumper spam
12-15-13 04:24 PM
Sethis There may well be a gap between the choice available in each of the two systems, inevitable when you consider the completely different mediums of interaction (small cards vs large chunks of plastic and resin), markets (Primary vs Secondary) and game philosophy (minimalism vs expansionist). I'm simply pointing out that the comparison of "Thousands of cards" to "twenty or so units" has potential to be a false comparison since the statement ignores a lot of what the actual games offer.

And I would argue that restricting Riptides and Heldrakes does the exact opposite of "limits options and what lists will show up at any given tournament" because if you did so, suddenly two entire codices become viable as main armies again, namely Grey Knights and Space Wolves.
12-15-13 04:17 PM
Wusword77
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sethis View Post
Well given that the ally matrix allows everyone to ally with at least two other armies barring Tyranids, that might not be entirely correct. Consider:

In any given MTG tournament, you are restricted to a selection of cards from the many thousands available (let's assume you're playing Standard Constructed). Some of those may be banned. Most of them will not work in your deck archetype (almost all aggro cards are useless for a control deck, for example), and anywhere between half and two thirds will not fit in because of colour restrictions (with tri-colour being the most you can realistically build a tournament worthy deck from). Of those cards that match both colour and archetype that are currently in Standard, something in the region of 60% of those will be jank that have no place in a tournament deck.

Thus your pool of "potentially useful" cards that you can consider adding to your deck is often in the low tens, rather than hundreds range.
The same idea can be applied to 40K however. If you want to play a specific type of army (say bikes) you will be limiting your self to specific types of units, much like how you be limited by the deck type you wanna play in MTG. Allies function as colors, as you will be looking for the units in the allied books to complement your deck, and you are limited by the number of "good" units that will be used in a dex as some units are just bad. Of course you can still take whatever units you want in 40K, just like you can run 5 colors in MtG, but it would reduce the overall effectiveness of your list (at least depending on MtG block or rule set).

Your actual choices for your list are just a limited, if not more so, then in Magic.

Quote:
Obviously there is some overlap between codices (Tac squads are basically the same, no matter which book they come from) and there are also some terrible units in each codex, but we haven't even looked at Fortifications, Forgeworld or Apocalypse yet.

Therefore, even if some tournaments end up banning certain units (so far we've got a list of, what, 3-4 units and a wargear item?) there are *plenty* still left to choose from.
Many tournaments already ban Forgeworld/Apoc and have imposed restrictions on Fortifications. Imposing more restrictions on players just further limits options and what lists will show up at any given Tournament.
12-15-13 10:26 AM
Sethis
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wusword77 View Post
Restricting any unit for a game like 40K doesn't work because, unlike something like MTG, you have a very limited amount of resources to make an army out of. Restricting cards in MTG doesn't mean asmuch because there are thousands of cards you can still construct a deck from, in 40K and FB you a limited to the 20 or so units presented in the codex. Restricting that one unit could hurt your codex quite a bit.
Well given that the ally matrix allows everyone to ally with at least two other armies barring Tyranids, that might not be entirely correct. Consider:

In any given MTG tournament, you are restricted to a selection of cards from the many thousands available (let's assume you're playing Standard Constructed). Some of those may be banned. Most of them will not work in your deck archetype (almost all aggro cards are useless for a control deck, for example), and anywhere between half and two thirds will not fit in because of colour restrictions (with tri-colour being the most you can realistically build a tournament worthy deck from). Of those cards that match both colour and archetype that are currently in Standard, something in the region of 60% of those will be jank that have no place in a tournament deck.

Thus your pool of "potentially useful" cards that you can consider adding to your deck is often in the low tens, rather than hundreds range.

Compare that to the Space Marine codex, which has (at last count) 54 individual units in it, and suddenly the comparison doesn't look so wildly different, especially when you add in the fact that they are Battle Brothers with Blood Angels (41), Space Wolves (33), Dark Angels (34), Imperial Guard (45) and Tau (25) to give a grand total of 232 seperate units (not including upgrade characters like Telion) and that's not even considering Allies of Convenience/Desperation.

Obviously there is some overlap between codices (Tac squads are basically the same, no matter which book they come from) and there are also some terrible units in each codex, but we haven't even looked at Fortifications, Forgeworld or Apocalypse yet.

Therefore, even if some tournaments end up banning certain units (so far we've got a list of, what, 3-4 units and a wargear item?) there are *plenty* still left to choose from.
12-15-13 08:59 AM
Zion
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kecyre View Post
No, those are Apple servers hosting it. Even with a cut apple takes it's far more than it should be.
You're talking about iTunes, but GW also hosts them on the Black Library site with the .mobi and .epub versions. That's why they're only a little cheaper than the interactive ones from iTunes (which need a lot more work to setup and make sure it's all cross linked correctly and the like).
12-15-13 05:16 AM
Lord_Aaron Let's try to leave the price complaints for another thread please.
12-15-13 02:53 AM
Kecyre No, those are Apple servers hosting it. Even with a cut apple takes it's far more than it should be.
12-14-13 04:05 PM
Zion
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kecyre View Post
Someone said Microsoft and Apple don't have forums? They in fact do. You can get to Apple forums via support and Microsoft has always had Technet.

My only complaint is the prices of digital codex. They should have really passed off the money they save from printing.
Tech support forums are not the same as the kind of fan forums people want GW to have.

Also, the digital codexes include the cost of the continued support (IT for the server, cost of server upkeep, the free updates they do instead of charging you for a new one when something changes, ect).

It's all packaged into the costs and thus GW can afford to do it.
12-14-13 01:13 PM
Ryu_Niimura
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kecyre View Post
Someone said Microsoft and Apple don't have forums? They in fact do. You can get to Apple forums via support and Microsoft has always had Technet.

My only complaint is the prices of digital codex. They should have really passed off the money they save from printing.
Wow mate, what have you been smoking? I think you took a wrong turn somewhere along the way.

Also with the new FW release I don't think 3 Helldrakes are going to be a problem, or Screamer star for that matter
This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome