Warhammer 40k Forum and Wargaming Forums banner
21 - 40 of 71 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,007 Posts
And thus begins a new battle between the veteran forces of the Coalition of Competitive Gamers and the laid back forces of the United Casual Gamers. CCG vs UCG, who will win this deadly battle of words? Only time will tell...
 

·
Grand Lord Munchkin
Joined
·
7,046 Posts
Why not settle it with a game? We are all from western nation.... War is how we do these thing isn't it?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
63 Posts
And thus begins a new battle between the veteran forces of the Coalition of Competitive Gamers and the laid back forces of the United Casual Gamers. CCG vs UCG, who will win this deadly battle of words? Only time will tell...
The UCG is too laid back to really care.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,648 Posts
Well, with a single FAQ, GW have managed to destroy a Tyranid army I have been planning for over a year. I wanted an all Tyranid Warrior army in drop pods, but now all units that have them MUST use them, and you can't attach your HQ to the units! Definitely GW closing down options rather than opening them up.

I think GW must redo all codices at the same time, because the drip-drip method is really shit for the hobby. Maybe they have just over stretched themselves with too many different armies.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,007 Posts
Well, with a single FAQ, GW have managed to destroy a Tyranid army I have been planning for over a year. I wanted an all Tyranid Warrior army in drop pods, but now all units that have them MUST use them, and you can't attach your HQ to the units! Definitely GW closing down options rather than opening them up.

I think GW must redo all codices at the same time, because the drip-drip method is really shit for the hobby. Maybe they have just over stretched themselves with too many different armies.
As I've said a thousand times they should just release codices in the rulebook. So the 6th ed rulebook would contain all the rules to play the game, and all the 6th ed codicies. It would mean that the miniature range could be independent of codex release. It would also ensure that all the armies were 'up to date'.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
230 Posts
Well, with a single FAQ, GW have managed to destroy a Tyranid army I have been planning for over a year. I wanted an all Tyranid Warrior army in drop pods, but now all units that have them MUST use them, and you can't attach your HQ to the units! Definitely GW closing down options rather than opening them up.

I think GW must redo all codices at the same time, because the drip-drip method is really shit for the hobby. Maybe they have just over stretched themselves with too many different armies.
Do you have any idea how much effort that would take and how poor it would be on sales? Everyone complains about GW balance but the last 5 books have been very balanced between themselves and internally. THere are some "automatic" units and some "never" units but for the most part, they are damn good books. These take time to produce and if you did them all at once what would development staff do? Go straight into the next round of books and then everyone would complain about imbalances, etc. The 'drip-drip' method and FAQs (when they come out) allows them to address some imbalances, keeps their sales up with new lists injected into the game and doesn't create encourage stagnation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
446 Posts
I do dislike certain perspectives of "use this not that at any given time" perfect example are devastators. Sure, an annialator can gets its worth back in killing transports and tanks but it wont deal with packed nids as well as a plasma cannon squad since even if they miss (ie not blow up in my face) they've got a good chance at splattering some MC I wasn't aiming for and are generally more survivable than the Pred.

Never take Dark Angels scouts. How else do you expect to get a squad with 10 lascannons (see: sniper rifles) with rending against high toughness targets for another 50 pts?

I understand if its just kinda there unsupported, my main problem really, but when it fits into the list well it really shouldnt be suggested to be thrown out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
332 Posts
That's how I felt about the game since 3rd edition came out. 2nd edition really had alot of different things going on and then it was completly dumbed down. Even now the game is still a shadow of what it once was.
That's how I felt until 5th, which for me is a nice compromise and I'm really quite happy with this edition. However, if there was ever a 40k skirmish rule set released (think kill team but more indepth)- i'll be all over it in a shot! For now though, 40k and Necromunda keep me entertained.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,007 Posts
That's how I felt until 5th, which for me is a nice compromise and I'm really quite happy with this edition. However, if there was ever a 40k skirmish rule set released (think kill team but more indepth)- i'll be all over it in a shot! For now though, 40k and Necromunda keep me entertained.
Like Inquisitor? Or is that too in depth?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
332 Posts
Nah Inquisitor is great, but to really enjoy it you have to put in a fair bit of prior planning and preparation. I'm prepared to put some in but my time is at a premium at the moment so I can't really commit that much effort into a game :) For those who have yet to play it, if you can get a small group (ie, 2 players and a GM), I really recommend Inquisitor.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,311 Posts
Inquisitor is awesome - I also recommend Dark Heresy for anyone that likes inquisitor.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,252 Posts
It is mainly the fault of the forum that there are so many copy and paste lists out there nowadays. A few years back, before I ever joined this site all my gaming friends were on no forum and nearly every week there'd be a new list with all manner of options. A lot of them gave u pthe game but my newer group, mostly warseer members too, all carry lists that i've seen online countless times. One guy is bringing a list to a tournament he's never played with but is confident as the people he heard use it did well in tournaments.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
63 Posts
I would hate the idea of a rulebook comming out with all the codicies in it. Could you imagine how much that would cost? GW wouldn't take a finicial hit like that, so then we would have to pay for the rulebook and about 15 or so different codicies. Your talking about $200-$300.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
4,491 Posts
I would hate the idea of a rulebook comming out with all the codicies in it. Could you imagine how much that would cost? GW wouldn't take a finicial hit like that, so then we would have to pay for the rulebook and about 15 or so different codicies. Your talking about $200-$300.
Would just encourage people to download PDF's illegally.

People wont even buy the books at the price they are now, never mind if they triple it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,539 Posts
I would hate the idea of a rulebook comming out with all the codicies in it. Could you imagine how much that would cost? GW wouldn't take a finicial hit like that, so then we would have to pay for the rulebook and about 15 or so different codicies. Your talking about $200-$300.
They did it in 3rd edition and that rulebook was like... $50. Even with inflation, there's no chance in hell it'd cost $200-300. Look at the size of the 8th edition Fantasy rulebook. They're charging, what, $75 CAD for that?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
63 Posts
does the 8th edition have full codicies in it? And I do remeber the 3rd edition rule book, it sucked in ways rancid crap does when it's shoved up your nose.
 

·
Grand Lord Munchkin
Joined
·
7,046 Posts
Yeah..... they wouldn’t change 300. No one would be that stupid. Besides, with the proper marketing it could work. Think about it, most of their expenses are in printing so this would also cost much less.
 

·
Ask me about Pins
Joined
·
1,408 Posts
If I play against someone bringing a non-competitive list then there is a good chance that I will table them and neither one of us will have fun.

Problem I see with the internets crying about WAAC is that you seem to think the scenario above is fun for the competitive player. It's not.

Personally, I've thought about building a non-competitive list... but I keep stopping myself from doing so because I just don't know how bad to make it... How bad does my army have to suck until we are on level footing.... and strangely, the Non-Comp players in my area are starting to make lists that don't suck... I guess they must like the win/lose part of the game at least a little bit...

Kirby, I think you are dead on about the Codex situation... Older armies struggle, a newer codex gives more options...

Warlock, there are crappy choices you can make in your list selection. If the game were perhaps a little better, then you would have viable choices in every FoC that would let you take multiple builds at every points level. But that's not the case. So you'll end up with some very similar builds.

For the copy and paste lists... I would rather see less "take x to win" and more "here's what is needed to make a competitive list" - And I'd rather have a new guy coming to the table with a viable army list rather than a basket of crap choices (assuming he wants to play the game to win/lose... It's easier to win if you're new with good tools rather than bad ones...)

The real problem, as I see it, is that many are attempting to play a competitive strategy game in a non competitive manner. As long as we're in agreement... then all is cool... but if you're playing one way and I'm playing another that could lead to a no fun game on either side (I don't get my competitive fix and you may be losing out on the in-game narrative that you might enjoy)


Stella, you say "if someone posts a list these days all effort is made to make that list the same as everyone elses, and if you take choices YOU want, then your just treated like some moronic sub-human"
- If you ask me what do you think of a list, then I will give you my opinion based on it's ability to win games (assuming a competent player) -- If you were playing the models YOU want, then why post it on a forum asking for constructive advice..

However, people DO need to be more clear about what they want... If somebody say's, for example, I'm gonna field 3 whirlwinds 'cause they're just made out of win... Then they shouldn't get upset when it's pointed out to them that Whirlwinds suck... Now if that same person were to frame their statement in a different way then they'd probably get a different answer. As an example, Hey guys, I LOVE whirlwinds and I have three of them already... but I'd like my list to be somewhat competitive (though it's not my biggest concern) What else should I think about adding to make my list more better....

See the difference?
Whirlwinds=Win --> You don't get it
Love Whirlwinds and need help ---> Might think about Rifleman Dreads and Speeders to give some needed punch...

Also, I think using phrases like moronic sub-human is a little much...
 
21 - 40 of 71 Posts
Top