PDA

View Full Version : Fanboi-ism?



Archangel_Ruined
18-10-2008, 15:01
This isn't a rant, or an accusation aimed at any person in particular, I'm just interested in an aspect of the hobby. Where does fanboi-ism begin and end? I'm sure we all can think of times where players, often younger players at that, have insisted things just because they want their army to be the nuts, and often these opinions have no basis in the fluff or facts of rules (very seperate areas of judgement, obviously). But I hear people being accused of the same thing (and usually in a derisory manner) when they maintain that 100 marines could reduce the military might of a planet to nought with ease, or that a single aspect warrior could slaughter an entire IG regiment without a scratch. Now, rules wise these opinions are clearly wrong, but as far as the fluff is concerned then that is the point of marines or aspect warriors. Are these people being insulted because others don't agree with them, or is it that I don't see where the distinction is? If anybody has a clear cut definition of what they believe being a fanboi entails, or where to draw the line I'd be interested, because while beardism is fairly well established and understood I think that the label of fanboi is being used simply to try and insult and cheapen the opinions of many people.

AngryAngel
18-10-2008, 15:10
It is simply that, a label given out to try and belittle your fellow gamer. When really in anything, there will be fans to one side or another. To one faction or another. I'd rather deal with a million fanbois, then 1 loathsome front runner who gladly only supports the most powerfull or new army out at the time. ( I do know many of such people, unfortunately. )

ankara halla
18-10-2008, 15:24
I dunno, I've allways assosiated the term "fanboi" to a person who has his or her mind set about an issue (or in this instance, GW or aspect of) and is imprevious to logic arguments or evidence to the contrary to change it and will instead try to spin those arguments around as much as s/he possibly can. Or either simply ignores them.

It's a kind of a closemindedness if you will.

max the dog
18-10-2008, 15:29
Think of what the label fanboy means, an individual who is fully involved with an activity that they enjoy. That's much better than being an emo; someone who's into and enjoys nothing.
40K/gamer fanboys are no worse than other types of fanboys. IMHO sports fanboys are the absolute worst.

Bassik
18-10-2008, 15:35
fanboi=creationist mindset used in a hobby setting.
The horror...:cries:

leonmallett
18-10-2008, 15:42
I see it as a label that is generally used in a derisory manner - a generalisation and/or an insult basically. As a term it ultimately means little I feel, since everyone will have their own definition, and generalisations are rarely (wholly) accurate in my experience.

Vic
18-10-2008, 16:05
fanboi=closeminded darwinist mindset used in a hobby setting.
The shame...

AdeptusOverton
18-10-2008, 16:08
I never collect the "best" or the "newest" army and i have maintained that edict from the age of 14 when I started out in the hobby.

I was sat in work yesterday and a collegue was on about a pub near GW HQ in nottingham and how all the "Wargaming Nerds" get in there and immediatly all fingers pointed at me.

Suffice to say I laughed I never take insults about the hobby to heart I laugh it off if im a fanboy im a fanboy so what. :D

shakespear
18-10-2008, 16:13
They come in different types:

The fluff-nutter
He argues constantly about army comp. What you can and can take, they started the whole "3 wraithlord" argument in 3rd ed. "Fluff" is so convaluted in 40k anyway. It changes from rule ed. to rule ed. There is cannon fluff and non-cannon fluff, and trying for rule justifications based on 2 lines in the back of a book.

GW-can-do-no-wrong-guy
Resin is more expensive than gold, GW plastic is more expensive than other companies because its "special". If Jervis was caught eating babies they would be like "it helps his creativity"

Power Gamers
They have 1 rulebook for the entire shop and never open it. Spray painted armies run all over yours to the sounds of "thats how we play it here"

Internet tough guy
Because anonymity + audience = total *********
Whatever your problem is, its because you are whining and should "play a real army" Often mispells "whining", and would never talk like that in real life.

If I can think of more, I will post them later

Cartographer
18-10-2008, 16:51
fanboi=creationist mindset used in a hobby setting.
The horror...:cries:

fanboi=closeminded darwinist mindset used in a hobby setting.
The shame...

lol, now I read the first post and thought it was a commentary on the sad state of affairs whereby a person who goes that little bit extra for his/her hobby (literally, a person who 'creates' background/stories for their units etc) is made the subject of mockery for doing so by others in the same hobby.

You seem to have read it as a direct attack on your beliefs.

If true, what does that say about us?

(Incidentally, there's nothing closeminded about 'darwinism', the entire scientific community is ready and willing to accept any other theory so long as it is supported by 'evidence'. It's just that creationism, like all fallacies pedaled by extremist religious groups, has none.)

Kahadras
18-10-2008, 16:57
Basicaly 'Fanboi' is an arguement used when the person posting is defending something that is felt to go against the general opinion of the board and no one has a very good counter arguement to hand. Then people fall back on the old 'Fanboi' arguement. Like Space Marines? Well that makes you a Fanboy. Think GW are doing OK at the present moment? Fanboy.

Kahadras

Daredhnu
18-10-2008, 17:06
Basicaly 'Fanboi' is an arguement used when the person posting is defending something that is felt to go against the general opinion of the board and no one has a very good counter arguement to hand. Then people fall back on the old 'Fanboi' arguement. Like Space Marines? Well that makes you a Fanboy. Think GW are doing OK at the present moment? Fanboy.

Kahadras

what? you saying GW isn't doing okay? they can do no wrong!!!


lol, anyway in my mind a fanboy is someone who likes something just because it was made by a certain company or something like that without actually looking at the product.

junglesnake
18-10-2008, 17:13
Think of what the label fanboy means, an individual who is fully involved with an activity that they enjoy. That's much better than being an emo; someone who's into and enjoys nothing.
40K/gamer fanboys are no worse than other types of fanboys. IMHO sports fanboys are the absolute worst.

Wow - whats with the emo hate? Plenty of emo bands out there to prove that they are into something more than nothing even if it is just hatred of everything that isn't emo. Surely that would make them great Chaos players then . . . .

Sergeant Uriel Ventris
18-10-2008, 17:18
(Incidentally, there's nothing closeminded about 'darwinism', the entire scientific community is ready and willing to accept any other theory so long as it is supported by 'evidence'. It's just that creationism, like all fallacies pedaled by extremist religious groups, has none.)

Check out a book called Uncommon Dissent edited by William A. Dembski. Someone shouldn't have to have an alternative to a proposed theory to point out the holes/faults/problems with an existing one.

Anyway, to the point at hand.

I feel that people through the term fanboy/boi around to try to discredit other people's arguments without actually dealing with the points that they make. Example:

Dude 1: "The new Space Marine codex focuses too mcuh on Ultramarines."
Dude 2: "It seems that because the background states the majority of Chapters are codex Chapters, and the Ultramarines are the greatest example of a codex Chapter and are the primogenitures of many more Chapters, that it is fairly reasonable for them to focus on the Ultramarines. Plus, the other famous divergent Chapters have their own books, and some are getting new books."
Dude 1: "Wait, your name is Ventris! You must like Ultramarines! FANBOY!!"

Something like that. However, often times it can be genuinely applied to those who think their army is the "best" simply because that is the army they happen to be playing at the time. It is, as has been said, ignoring logic/truth/fact in favor of supporting your team/army/miniature company, no matter what.

The_Outsider
18-10-2008, 18:04
It starts with chaos and tau and ends with SM.

Archangel_Ruined
18-10-2008, 19:46
Let us not discuss religion, evidence of faith and facts are very different and I sincerely doubt either of you will be convinced to climb down from your positions. I've found a lot of bile vented towards space marines, and particularly the UM's. I don't get it myself, I've been playing since the end of RT and I love marines, they're a constant favourite of mine. Many of you seem to associate closed minded views with certain armies, I wonder why? Yes, many newer players play marines, but many players new and old play whichever army is newest, and the odds are high that one of the marine flavours will be in that month. I realise that armies tend to draw players of a certain mindset, but what is it that causes these supposed links?

Ravenheart
18-10-2008, 20:53
They come in different types:


You forgot the HaterZ, which in effect is an contra-fanboi. Endlessly ranting about something and even making stuff up to 'prove' his point.

No good people to associate with.

DarkMatter2
18-10-2008, 21:13
I really just see Fanboys as people who choose a faction in 40k (or in real life) and can't rest until that faction is seen as completely superior in every way to every other faction.

The Background board tends to be infested with Necron and Eldar fanboys.

Max Jet
18-10-2008, 22:09
GW-can-do-no-wrong-guy
Resin is more expensive than gold, GW plastic is more expensive than other companies because its "special". If Jervis was caught eating babies they would be like "it helps his creativity"

Can I sign that?
Especially the GW plastic part


Well o.k... Fanboys.....it's not really much of a problem, everyone can enjoy the hobby and if someone is saying that a space marine or any other soldier from his favorite army can take on an oponent (single handedly a whole death star or something) I would gladly start a nice and calm debate or just let it be. After all it is just fantasy there are no definite rules.
But I do share a weakness myself. As soon as someone wants to know everything better (especially things concerning history, technology, physics and militaristic) AND brings the "Because I DO know it better" argument with absolutely no proofs I get mad. I cannot help it....
Sadly this happens sometimes in typical Fanboy conversations. I mean identifying with the army is a little bit problematic in 40k, because most of the background doesn't teach you moral and benevolence.

arch_inquisitor
18-10-2008, 23:09
Yeah the religious debate has no place here take it elsewhere, like another forum altogether preferably.

But on the topic of fanbois its most common use is for discrediting one side of the argument or another on this forum. You will often see it pop up as threads become heated debates and always in a 'your opinion means nothing because your a fanboi' fashion. Ironically enough the ones calling fanboi are often fans themselves.

We are all fanbois to an extent, the only person I would call a non fanboi gamer would be the guy who only has one army, the min required books and dice and is not a member of an internet forum on the subject ( to them it is a fancy board game ). Once you take any further steps you are indeed a fanboi.

ankara halla
18-10-2008, 23:19
We are all fanbois to an extent, the only person I would call a non fanboi gamer would be the guy who only has one army, the min required books and dice and is not a member of an internet forum on the subject ( to them it is a fancy board game ). Once you take any further steps you are indeed a fanboi.

Apart from being a member of an internet forum dedicated to the subject (well, two really), I am very much that guy. So me, a fanboi? Yay!

cailus
19-10-2008, 01:23
They come in different types:

The fluff-nutter
He argues constantly about army comp. What you can and can take, they started the whole "3 wraithlord" argument in 3rd ed. "Fluff" is so convaluted in 40k anyway. It changes from rule ed. to rule ed. There is cannon fluff and non-cannon fluff, and trying for rule justifications based on 2 lines in the back of a book.

GW-can-do-no-wrong-guy
Resin is more expensive than gold, GW plastic is more expensive than other companies because its "special". If Jervis was caught eating babies they would be like "it helps his creativity"

Power Gamers
They have 1 rulebook for the entire shop and never open it. Spray painted armies run all over yours to the sounds of "thats how we play it here"

Internet tough guy
Because anonymity + audience = total *********
Whatever your problem is, its because you are whining and should "play a real army" Often mispells "whining", and would never talk like that in real life.

If I can think of more, I will post them later

Nice summary.

I define fanboi's as people who could be force fed human excrement by a company or band or whatever and who would then defend it. Fanboi's change their minds to coincide with company/band/whatever new direction.

Heavy Metal fans are a particularly good example of fanboi-ism.

For example, Metallica fans:

Metallica releases more commercial album.
Fanboi response: It's just the band developing and maturing artistically. An excellent album that expands the bands sound.

Metallica releases more underground album.
Fanboi response: It's good that they're doing this because their previous commercial album was rubbish. This is more metal. An excellent album that goes back to how things should be.

Now looking at Games Workshop fans, they're just the same. The company could sell them pounds of excrement with pretty ribbons around it and these people would find some way of justify-ing it. It's a good thing these people aren't politically motivated cause they would be excellent fodder for extremists!

Born Again
19-10-2008, 01:46
A fanboy is, to me, someone who goes against all logic and reason to defend something that is clearly wrong. 1000 marines taking a planet or one aspect warrior taking out a platoon doesn't really count as fanboy to me. While it may be unlikely or not possible in 'the real world' (and remember people, 40k isn't real! If you think it is, you may well be a fanboy, or just nuts!), there are instances of these things happening in the fluff, ergo, it is possible in 40k. However, "ZOMG!!1 mai space marine sergeant is so hard he buit a time mashine and went back and killed Horus, it wasn't really the emperor, and he stole his other lightning klaw that abadon dusnt have LOLZ!!1" counts as fanboy.

MrBigMr
19-10-2008, 01:49
To me a fanboy is one who listens to all that GW says like it was the word of a god. Those that deny you the use of 3rd party models or even 3rd party bits on your models because GW says it's not cool to do so. People who hate fanfic and fan made armies that break away from the norm and established fluff, all the while their own armies sporting Ultramarines with incorrectly painted helmets and unit markings.

I haven't met many such people, but they make me want to exocist them immediately with my fists.


fanboi=creationist mindset used in a hobby setting.
The horror...:cries:

fanboi=closeminded darwinist mindset used in a hobby setting.
The shame...
Tonight on Warseer, the debate on creationism vs. darwinism. Was the world of 40K created in 7 days by an omnipotent G(od)W or did it come what it is through years and years of evolution. In this thread we hope to answer that question. For the creationists we have Dr. Bassik and Professor Vic. Welcome, gentlemen.

arch_inquisitor
19-10-2008, 03:01
Tonight on Warseer, the debate on creationism vs. darwinism. Was the world of 40K created in 7 days by an omnipotent G(od)W or did it come what it is through years and years of evolution. In this thread we hope to answer that question. For the creationists we have Dr. Bassik and Professor Vic. Welcome, gentlemen.

Gonna sig this.

Corax
19-10-2008, 09:46
To my mind, a fanboi is someone who drank the GW 'Kool-Aid' and speaks only in uncritically glowing terms about everything that GW does, no matter how stupid or incomprehensible it may be.

Archangel_Ruined
19-10-2008, 11:36
Hmmm... I suppose I can see some themes emerging here. I would happily brand myself a fan and a geek (note: never engage me in conversation pertaining to engineering or science, I am a monumental bore due to my boundless enthusiasm on the aforementioned subjects combined with my complete inability to suffer fools gladly, a fool not being somebody less well informed, but unaware of this fact and convinced of the opposite). But I wouldn't consider me a 'fanboi' as even after more than a decade in the hobby and having to swallow more rules changes and army updates or even cuts than I care to remember I still don't view GW with anything more than vague affibility. I don't think they're out to destroy the hobby but I don't think they're infallable by a wide margin. Still, I enjoyed the time machine definition, I think we've all encountered players of that ilk over the years, it can be quite funny and many of us were guilty of the same to some extent in our early days.

Pundabaya
19-10-2008, 11:51
I think there are two sorts of fanbois in the hobby

1) Company fanbois, who defend their chosen companies with all their being, ignoring any flaws. (not just for GW, theres plenty for other companies. Privateer Press fanbois are even worse, because most of them are ex-GW-fanbois-turned-haterz) Pretty stupid, when you consider that their loyalty is to a company. An entity designed to remove the money from their wallets as fast as possible. That's what companies do.

2) Faction fanbois. These I find much more annoying. They are the ones who love Eldar/Necrons/Space Wolves/whatever so much that they believe that they literally can't do anything wrong, ignore any fluff that says bad things about their faction, and gets into arguments a lot in the games store.

A good example of the latter, is when Space Wolves players state that no Space Wolf has ever fallen to Chaos. This is ignoring fluff to the contrary, because 'Space Wolves are honourable and stuff, they wouldn't do that!'

Nero
19-10-2008, 12:00
But I hear people being accused of the same thing (and usually in a derisory manner) when they maintain that 100 marines could reduce the military might of a planet to nought with ease, or that a single aspect warrior could slaughter an entire IG regiment without a scratch.

Because 100 marines most definitely couldn't take down an entire planet's military, and a single aspect warrior certainly can't defeat an entire regiment.

A fanboi (within the context of what you're asking) would adamantly argue otherwise, quoting random BL warporn #427 in which the lone Space Marine protagonist kills a million bajillion Orks with a toothpick (despite Black Library themselves having said that ALL of their novels are biased in favor of the protagonists, and their novels should be viewed as Imperial propaganda), or would point toward the Movie Marines article as to what GW thinks a Space Marines 'real' stats should be (even though the Movie Marines stats are just that - what a Marine's stats would be if he were in a Hollywood movie, complete with rules like 'the script writers hate us' and 'stunt-doubles').

In short, a fanboi will argue that their army is actually an unstoppable, invincible force that the rules don't do justice to, and will insist that the rules for the TT, Inquisitor, and Dark Heresy are wrong, as are all of the Computer Games ever made about 40k. Those cheap BL pulp-fiction warporn books are the only true representation of how powerful Ultramarines really are!

If only because it shows them in the best possible light...

Archangel_Ruined
19-10-2008, 12:05
I think you'll find the fluff disagrees with you on the first point, the rules do not represent the background for reasons pertaining to game balance and playability. However, after a most shakey start to the post you recovered well, I can see some good points in there.

MrBigMr
19-10-2008, 12:20
(despite Black Library themselves having said that ALL of their novels are biased in favor of the protagonists, and their novels should be viewed as Imperial propaganda)
So that's why traitor Marines, even when the protagonist, get slaughtered by lasguns and mortars while loyalist Marines armour just get glancing hits from anything short of a tactical nuclear warheads. If the enemy gets off a lucky shot and the writer feels like this is a good point for one hero to go down.

If you ask me, a Marine is like a German Tiger tank. Big, strong, able to take out any tank it comes across. But while in Stalingrad the Germans had 80 of these kings of tanks, the Soviets had 600 T-34s that just rolled over the Tigers. Even the best of us will fall.

Coasty
19-10-2008, 12:23
To my mind, a fanboi is someone who drank the GW 'Kool-Aid' and speaks only in uncritically glowing terms about everything that GW does, no matter how stupid or incomprehensible it may be.

What is Kool-Aid, and what is the full extent of its mind-altering effects?

Archangel_Ruined
19-10-2008, 12:36
I think Kool-aid is an american beverage of sorts. It's most remarkable property appears to be that, pound for pound, it actually contains more sugar than pure sugar. Not sure how that works, but then again they managed to put a man on the moon with little more than slide rulers and nazi's so messing with fundamental principles of science shouldn't be too tricky for a soft drink manufacturer.

Coasty
19-10-2008, 12:38
Ah, so on the same list of cunningly disguised chemical warfare agents as things like 'Twinkies' and that multi-coloured (alleged) breakfast cereal they have?

cailus
19-10-2008, 12:43
What is Kool-Aid, and what is the full extent of its mind-altering effects?


Basically cult leader Jim Jones got his 900 odd followers to drink Kool Aide (an energy drink) that was laced with various poisons.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonestown

In essence it's a way of saying fanatic and zealot.

Rabid Bunny 666
19-10-2008, 12:59
One more for the 3 types listed by Pundabaya;

Counter fanboi; normally Eldar players, they'll argue against the background of armies, normally marines, about them being genetically engineered warriors and somehow translating this down to "tougher humans" Despite using the argument that anyone who opposes this view by calling them "fanbois" they'll fight to the point of stupid about thir given race.

Check 40k background, go on, you'll see them, they're everywhere :D

Nero
19-10-2008, 14:47
So that's why traitor Marines, even when the protagonist, get slaughtered by lasguns and mortars while loyalist Marines armour just get glancing hits from anything short of a tactical nuclear warheads. If the enemy gets off a lucky shot and the writer feels like this is a good point for one hero to go down.

Really? The only BL library book I've read where Chaos was the protagonists was Dark Apostle. They had the usual plot armor in that (with the exception of the dissenting Word Bearers working against the protagonists, who must've gotten their equipment from a different armory. An armory wherein the power armor was made of bits of string, wet cardboard, and spit).


I think you'll find the fluff disagrees with you on the first point, the rules do not represent the background for reasons pertaining to game balance and playability. However, after a most shakey start to the post you recovered well, I can see some good points in there.

The fluff is massively contradictive. For example, the Space Marine fluff portrays SM as invincible supermen capable of taking down entire Craftworlds with one hand tied behind their back, while the Eldar fluff portrays SM as hugely incompetent, skill-less and easily tricked.

That was my point. The fluff is biased. You can't say it 'disagrees' with me, because it was never 'true' in the first place. The rules for things like Inquisitor and Dark Heresy are as close to unbiased as we can get.

Oh and guess what, a Space Marine in Inquisitor is not a match for a thousand guardsmen. Not even close.

MrBigMr
19-10-2008, 14:57
Really? The only BL library book I've read where Chaos was the protagonists was Dark Apostle. They had the usual plot armor in that (with the exception of the dissenting Word Bearers working against the protagonists, who must've gotten their equipment from a different armory. An armory wherein the power armor was made of bits of string, wet cardboard, and spit).
In Storm of Iron only IW armour that actually worked was the terminator armour. Naturally when used with a helmet, as one of the captains found out when the Imperials decided to pour few metric tons of toxic ooze on him. Other than that, lasfire snapped holes and even pierced the IW power armour quite easily and one Marine was peppered by an air bursting mortar shell.


Oh, by the way, anyone remember the DoW intro? Slugga shots pierce the sergeant's armour, though it would seem most of them hit joints, etc. But still. Where is your 3+ save now, Mr. Marine?

Templar Ben
19-10-2008, 15:01
I think Kool-aid is an american beverage of sorts. It's most remarkable property appears to be that, pound for pound, it actually contains more sugar than pure sugar. Not sure how that works, but then again they managed to put a man on the moon with little more than slide rulers and nazi's so messing with fundamental principles of science shouldn't be too tricky for a soft drink manufacturer.

You should see how we can build zealots. See below.


Basically cult leader Jim Jones got his 900 odd followers to drink Kool Aide (an energy drink) that was laced with various poisons.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonestown

In essence it's a way of saying fanatic and zealot.


The only "Fanboi" players I have met in real life were company ones. I have met them for PP and GW although they clearly don't know the glory of old school BattleTech. :angel:

It is hard to imagine a Faction Fanboi (That is the spelling right?) since GW changes the background willy nilly.

keatsmeister
19-10-2008, 15:20
Check out a book called Uncommon Dissent edited by William A. Dembski. Someone shouldn't have to have an alternative to a proposed theory to point out the holes/faults/problems with an existing one.

Disagreeing with a theory is a theory in itself, it's the theory that things do NOT happen in a certain way :D It's a generically vague theory, but it's still a theory based around a firm belief that something cannot and will not happen.

As to the OP...

As far as I'm concerned, there are people who have coined the phrase meaning well, a friendly jibe. Then there are certain people on here who simply cannot resist turning a friendly jibe into an out and out insult and derogatory label.

I do try and keep my armies fluffy, and I do have a decent working knowledge of the fluff for most things.

Does that make me a fanboy? Honestly - Who gives a smeg?!?

This is a hobby, something people should enjoy, so be definition we are ALL fanboys to one extent or another (or fanpeople for the ladies amongst you...;)) so if people want to be demeaning about it, that's energy better spent being demeaning about things and people who really deserve it, looking at you Simon Cowell :evilgrin: [sharpens his stabby-knife]

shakespear
19-10-2008, 15:21
Basically cult leader Jim Jones got his 900 odd followers to drink Kool Aide (an energy drink) that was laced with various poisons.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonestown

In essence it's a way of saying fanatic and zealot.

Definatly not an energy drink.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kool_aid

Its just sugar and flavoring.

Tropical punch is the best!

sydbridges
19-10-2008, 15:35
Basically cult leader Jim Jones got his 900 odd followers to drink Kool Aide (an energy drink) that was laced with various poisons.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonestown

In essence it's a way of saying fanatic and zealot.

It wasn't actually Kool Aid, IIRC... and kool aid isn't so much an energy drink as it is a drink with a crapton of sugar marketed towards children. It's not so much a drink for energy as it is a drink for inducing diabetes.

On topic:

I usually think of fanbois as the ones who think their army is the absolute best and guaranteed to win any battle ever. The ones who go, "Well, of course a hundred marines could conquer an entire planet," or "Of course the orks will eventually conquer the galaxy, they like fighting too much to lose," or "of course the necrons will eventually wipe out all life in the galaxy," or "Of course chaos can corrupt everything and will eventually the immaterium will overrun and destroy the materium," or whatever.

This is a viewpoint which tends to be encouraged by the codices, whose fluff is there in part to inspire you to buy the codex and the army it describes to make GW money. So you find out 700 marines can wipe out an entire death star-planet of necrons, or that the Tau have won every campaign ever that they've been involved with, or that the Tyranids are an unstoppable wave of destruction, because if the codex was full of, "Well, the marines are pretty good, but they're nothing really special compared to everything else out there, and here's some stories about futile last stands that Marines have been involved with..." it wouldn't sell as much Marine stuff. Nor would a Tyranid codex full of fluff about how the Tyranids are being kept from wiping out the Imperium by a combination of clever tactics, burying them in guardsmen, and Space Marines, or an Ork codex that discusses primarily ill-chosen Waaaughs against the Tau who then soundly defeated them, or a Necron codex primarily about 700 space marines blowing up their death stars, or a Tau codex about attempts to expand that were met with brutal destruction at the hands of Chaos, etc etc etc.

The BL books also tend to favor the protagonists - this shouldn't be surprising or alarming. Certainly, a 'more realistic' Gaunt's Ghosts story where Gaunt and his Ghosts are gruesomely wiped out by the third book would make for an even more depressing read than the current books already are. The sort of 'pulp sci-fi/fantasy' genre that BL books are in tends to favor books with superhuman leads that accomplish all sorts of deeds that somewhere in the back of your head you know they'd probably fail at because no suit of armor is going to protect you against *that* many shots, especially if you don't wear some sort of head protection - sort of like one should be reasonably aware somewhere in their mind that no one would actually be able to survive "Escape from Castle Wolfenstein." A realistic version of the game where the protagonist gets shot once and then spends the last few minutes of his life gasping for air as he bleeds out from his liver would not be nearly as much fun.

Archangel_Ruined
19-10-2008, 18:26
I agree whole heartedly with the view that codeces are just plain propaganda for their respective armies, but I've always felt some of the fluff transcends this. Such as:

If a battle company of marines turns up to a planet that isn't especially expecting them and armed accordingly then that planet isn't going to have a military presence on it in a few days, be it a rogue imperial world, an ork world or a Tau settlement, and whether or not the marines are shiny or spikey. That's what marines are for, rapid blows across a planet, pin point strikes and the such, all in all so they never fight a pitched battle, just muller disorientated, disorganised pieces of larger formations.

Eldar Aspect warriors are hard as nails, simple as. Even Mr. Marine doesn't want to tangle with one without the bonus of a tank for armour and hand held missile launchers. A single Dire Avenger would be faster, stronger and incomparibly better than any guardsman, due simply to the fact they'd have spent hundreds of years perfecting their particular craft of death, and in a confined space everyone but the pointy eared types would be in for a bad day.

Nids aren't that hard, on the whole, but then they come in multiples of millions, whereas bullets tend not to.

The Imperial Guard very rarely lose a fight if they know it's coming and have prepared accordingly, because unlike bullets, lasgun shots do tend to come in multiples of millions where the guard are concerned.

These are just principles I've always felt made the 40k universe more interesting, and whilst some might disagree I'm sure many of you see some wisdom in there. I see that a 'fanboi' attitude might be akin to agreeing with all of this and then just saying that's all well and good but the Tau could beat them all because they've got cool suits. But, perhaps these are just my beliefs.

Nero
19-10-2008, 19:13
If a battle company of marines turns up to a planet that isn't especially expecting them and armed accordingly then that planet isn't going to have a military presence on it in a few days, be it a rogue imperial world, an ork world or a Tau settlement, and whether or not the marines are shiny or spikey. That's what marines are for, rapid blows across a planet, pin point strikes and the such, all in all so they never fight a pitched battle, just muller disorientated, disorganised pieces of larger formations.

Uh, so... 100 marines could defeat an entire planet's military, if the... military isn't present? Well, it's an interesting take on the term 'defeat'. :eyebrows:


Eldar Aspect warriors are hard as nails, simple as. Even Mr. Marine doesn't want to tangle with one without the bonus of a tank for armour and hand held missile launchers. A single Dire Avenger would be faster, stronger and incomparibly better than any guardsman, due simply to the fact they'd have spent hundreds of years perfecting their particular craft of death, and in a confined space everyone but the pointy eared types would be in for a bad day.

I never said an Aspect Warrior isn't a match for a guardsmen (or a Marine for that matter), what you said was an Aspect Warrior could defeat an entire Guard regiment. For reference's sake, the current IG codex shows half the 8th Cadian regiment on one page. It numbers 4000 men.

Half. Half the regiment.

It doesn't matter how confined the space is, when that space is filled with 8000 lasgun shots.

Iracundus
19-10-2008, 19:29
It is hard to imagine a Faction Fanboi (That is the spelling right?) since GW changes the background willy nilly.

I do hope you're kidding. They are everywhere, and are probably more common than company ones. You get some for every faction, as players empathize and end up being lobbyists for their particular faction. Taken to an extreme, it leads into the realm of being a fanboy.

SM ones that insist "Movie Marines" and the novels with Marines as protagonists are the only accurate depictions of Marines.

Eldar ones that espouse the Tolkien theme of elves being uber versions of humanity and better in every way...while being mournfully emo and tragic at the same time.

Tau ones that completely disregard any possibility or mention of darker motives, or brutality and cruelty in the Tau's version of manifest destiny.

Necron ones especially in the old days just after the Necron Codex, who insisted on asserting the supremacy of the C'tan over everything in 40K and how the Necrons would wipe the floor with everyone...if they tried...which they don't want to because they're still waking up.

Imperium ones that will toss and turn and grasp for any excuse as to why they lost the Eye of Terror campaign, or try and spin it as a "draw" or even worse an Imperial victory.


In general, I would define a fanboy as any person who looks only positively on either a faction (or company), dwelling on, exaggerating, or even making up the positive, while conversely minimizing, downplaying, spin doctoring or outright ignoring anything remotely negative. They have basically stopped looking at individual issues to then form a conclusion/opinion but have instead already have an opinion/conclusion they want to reinforce and go looking for only that which supports their pre-formed position.

Archangel_Ruined
19-10-2008, 19:40
I really don't want to start an arguement on the 100 marine business, I'll limit myself to pointing out that during the gulf war the Iraqi army went from being the 4th largest on earth to the 2nd largest in Iraq in little more than a week due to swift armour and aerial offensives they were unable to counter. The difference between the Iraqi and Allied warmachine pales into insignificance when considered next to the supposed difference between marines and pretty much everything else that hasn't specifically tooled itself up and dug itself in for a protracted fight. As for the aspect warrior I concede some hyperbole may have crept in, although 8000 shots in an enclosed space would be more of a liability to the guard than anyone else. I should have specified I meant enclosed as in indoors or the such, where sheer weight of numbers could not be brought directly to bear, but by no means diminishing the feat accomplished.

Templar Ben
19-10-2008, 19:46
I do hope you're kidding. They are everywhere, and are probably more common than company ones. You get some for every faction, as players empathize and end up being lobbyists for their particular faction. Taken to an extreme, it leads into the realm of being a fanboy.

SM ones that insist "Movie Marines" and the novels with Marines as protagonists are the only accurate depictions of Marines.

Eldar ones that espouse the Tolkien theme of elves being uber versions of humanity and better in every way...while being mournfully emo and tragic at the same time.

Tau ones that completely disregard any possibility or mention of darker motives, or brutality and cruelty in the Tau's version of manifest destiny.

Necron ones especially in the old days just after the Necron Codex, who insisted on asserting the supremacy of the C'tan over everything in 40K and how the Necrons would wipe the floor with everyone...if they tried...which they don't want to because they're still waking up.

Imperium ones that will toss and turn and grasp for any excuse as to why they lost the Eye of Terror campaign, or try and spin it as a "draw" or even worse an Imperial victory.


In general, I would define a fanboy as any person who looks only positively on either a faction (or company), dwelling on, exaggerating, or even making up the positive, while conversely minimizing, downplaying, spin doctoring or outright ignoring anything remotely negative. They have basically stopped looking at individual issues to then form a conclusion/opinion but have instead already have an opinion/conclusion they want to reinforce and go looking for only that which supports their pre-formed position.

Still haven't met one in real life and I don't know that I am around enough people that could be that way with a background as mutable as GWs. Sure other settings RetCon but rarely as counter intuitively and rarely as frequently.

Iracundus
19-10-2008, 19:56
There are certainly enough variants of fanboy on these forums. One only needs for example to look at some of the Eye of Terror campaign threads to see the Imperium ones show their colors, or some of the Tau threads where the issue of ethnic cleansing/concentration camps/labor camps is brought up.

As for real life, the ones I've directly encountered have been SM and Imperium ones. The SM ones usually the young newish players that buy into the hype about Space Marines being super and never losing. As for the Imperium ones, that was during the EoT campaign conclusion where some people showed this quite incredible mental block in being unable to think about any result other than an Imperial victory or at worst a draw. The idea that a non-Imperial side could win was greeted with either blank confusion, outright denial, or convoluted explanations of why the Imperials didn't "really" lose/conspiracy theories of how the loss was GW's way of saying it was a draw/accusations of cheating by the other side. It was actually quite a revealing or disturbing moment of players practicing Orwellian doublethink.

Archangel_Ruined
19-10-2008, 20:16
Yes, I remember that little debacle, and the amazing theories put forward to claim that it was really a draw and that Abbadon had accomplished nothing. Despite what the figures said. Quite odd as I considered it a campaign that would never have any real effect on the fluff of the future, it would be too difficult to explain away a total victory for either side so I imagined the games designers would just ignore it for the most part. As they have really. I think it was a bad idea from day one to claim that this campaign would have a massive effect on the game, it was too wide reaching in it's potential consequences unlike the previous Armageddeon event. When all was said and done that was just one hive world and it's loss or defence would just be another page in an army's background section, the Cadian Gate is far too integral to the very essence of 40k fluff to be thrown out for a large number of completely unbalanced public games to decide. But that's really a seperate issue.

Iracundus
19-10-2008, 20:25
I disagree on that point about it being impossible to have a decisive victory tolerated in the story. The results can simply set the atmosphere and the trend direction. One doesn't have to reach the destination of that trend at all.

For example, take a hypothetical decisive Chaos victory with Abaddon completely breaking out of the Eye en masse and rampaging around in the Imperium or making course for Terra. He never actually has to get there. His advance can be slowed to a crawl over real life years, while little tidbits can still show he is still going or causing damage. The Cadian Gate can be in ruins or still embattled by remnants of Imperial forces or Abaddon's rearguard left to pillage. Overall then the feel is still of an Imperium buckling and crumbling even faster with a vengeful Abaddon on the loose....and yet at the end the setting is still there slightly altered but without the status quo so irrevocably altered as to be unrecognizable. In other words it is possible to write campaign results or any event results such that la plus ca change, la plus c'est la meme (the more things change, the more things stay the same).



A: "So it's a Disorder victory"
B: "Yeah the Imperium wins"
A: "No it doesn't, the WD says it was a victory for Chaos"
B: "So they're saying it is a draw"
A: "No they didn't say it was a draw. It says right here in print that it is a victory for Chaos"
B: "I don't understand what point you are trying to make. When they wrote that what they really mean is that it's a draw. They just wanted to avoid writing the word draw to make it different from the Armageddon campaign."


To be on the original topic...the above is a rough paraphrase from a RL observed conversation of that time. It is an example of doublethink and fanboy mentality in general in how B shows both wilful stupidity or incomprehension in one sentence in order to deny or block a negative piece of information yet manages to come out with a speculative theory with strained "logic" in the next to justify or twist that negative into something more positive.

FashaTheDog
19-10-2008, 20:55
I would be called a fanboy in regards to sailing (currently in withdrawal for lack of a boat) and caving were those not already referred to as addictions. So we can call fanboyism for 40K something like that, only with less physical activity.

Archangel_Ruined
19-10-2008, 20:59
To continue on the tangent for a brief while longer, I just felt that a major chaos victory would have reduced the Cadian army to little more than a foot note in the next codex and a shattered remnant of its former power, crippled or destroyed several crucial and historic marine chapters, destroyed or crippled a vital naval fleet, wiped out at least one craftworld and left the Terran system at war. Conversely a major 'imperial' victory would have left much of the chaos threat eliminated for a great deal of time. I just can't see either of these outcomes being good for the fluff as they're too decisive either way, as the Imperium couldn't have withdrew to fight the chaos forces elsewhere due to the very nature of the cadian gate and the forces of chaos would have splintered into a bitter civil war in the face of defeat, with so much at stake I always felt that only a minor victory/defeat could ever be tolerated by the existing background as from the fluff perspective neither faction could afford to back down until totally crushed. That, and to a lesser extent, the whole idea of the involvement of every concievable faction couldn't really be justified in hardcore, rulebook worthy fluff. Right, a big mental effort to pop this back on to the original topic...

t-tauri
19-10-2008, 21:03
Any further off-topic posts regarding "Who won what, when?" will be removed.

Treadhead_1st
19-10-2008, 21:54
I'm a bit of a fanboy, I admit to it. I'm not "OMG that can't happin as my f0rce is teh bestust evar!", but I enjoy the hobby and get wound up when something gets changed, or when someone claims I'm wrong - I'll go out of the way to back my points up.

++EDIT++

Ninja'd by T-Tauri. Since it's bad for to post something after a mod says no, I'll revive an old thread (yeah, I had a fun Cadia theory from a friend - it were credible, if 'wrong' by the background of the time of the campaign)

++END++

Though I freely admit to being a Fanboy, I'm a snobby fanboy. A 'healthy' fanboy, but a snob. I like the game, and the background, and will probably buy every 40K videogame that comes out (I also like video games, expecially shooters and RTS, so at least it fits). But I don't have any Bulldog 40K jewellry, no 40K tatoos, no 40K bedspreads/mugs, no posters - not even a 40K backdrop to my computer. I just like the hobby as a hobby, and for the pulp-fiction Black Library books (Ghosts/Cain series fan here). And I would be insulted to be classed in the same group as "Fanbois" - the aforementioned 'when I grow up I want to be a Space Marine, right now I'm just a Commissar. Why the hell has your Cadian army got Catachan boots? ROLF NOOB READ THE BACKGROUND *insert flame here*' kind of fanboy.

keatsmeister
19-10-2008, 22:03
And I would be insulted to be classed in the same group as "Fanbois" - the aforementioned 'when I grow up I want to be a Space Marine, right now I'm just a Commissar. Why the hell has your Cadian army got Catachan boots? ROLF NOOB READ THE BACKGROUND *insert flame here*' kind of fanboy.

As a term, I think fanboy is pretty good, as long as those happy to bear it lay claim to it. As to the second kind of "fanboy" you mention, I'd be inclined to call them something else - aggressive obsessives, or Agobs.

Archangel_Ruined
19-10-2008, 22:11
I think everyone on here would have to admit to being a fan, by virtue of being here. Anyway, I'm sure being open to reasonable debate isn't a negative thing, and defending your opinions is never a bad idea, as long as you're open to changing those opinions in the light of new evidence. I think I might have just stumbled across the answer to my original question there, especially when considering some of the posts found on forums such as this one. I find it odd that the posters I'm thinking about are usually those accusing others of being 'fanbois' though, methinks the lady doth protest too much...

Alrighty then?
19-10-2008, 22:15
I am a fan but warhammer isn't really a big part of my life, kind of 5% of what i do and how much time its takes of my life.

Archangel_Ruined
19-10-2008, 22:32
I'm being pedantic, I know, but 5% of your life is actually a massive commitment when you think about it (over an hour a day, far more time than most people spend eating, reading, commuting or socialising out of work). But then, I admit, I am somewhat literal minded.

FashaTheDog
19-10-2008, 22:47
Yeah, one hour, fifteen minutes may not seem like a huge amount of time until you do it every single day and make up for the time before you started 40k.

Coasty
20-10-2008, 07:48
*Lots of stuff about fanbois that would take up loads of space*

I notice there was no mention of Ork 'fanbois' in your post. I feel discriminated against and wish this imbalance to corrected.

boogaloo
20-10-2008, 20:38
lol, now I read the first post and thought it was a commentary on the sad state of affairs whereby a person who goes that little bit extra for his/her hobby (literally, a person who 'creates' background/stories for their units etc) is made the subject of mockery for doing so by others in the same hobby.

You seem to have read it as a direct attack on your beliefs.

If true, what does that say about us?

(Incidentally, there's nothing closeminded about 'darwinism', the entire scientific community is ready and willing to accept any other theory so long as it is supported by 'evidence'. It's just that creationism, like all fallacies pedaled by extremist religious groups, has none.)


This is just a funny story about EXTREME creationism. Now my father is a prist so i'll let that talk about my religious views. In Canada there is a museum created by some nutter saying that god made the world and the Tyranosaurus (obviously a vegetarian :eyebrows: ) would hang out with adam and eve peacefuly in the garden of eden. Again not bashing peoples Religious views... But to say that th T-Rex didn't eat meat under any religion is a bit... well i said i wouldn't trash anybody's views right?

Adra
21-10-2008, 16:15
Fanboi is a bit of a derisive term but then we are all fanbois and fangurls to one extent or another as really its just some one who will fight the corner of a loved topic or subject and support it. Their arguments are often blind to logic, blinded by love.

What is more interesting for me is the anti-fanboi. Now hes an interesting fish. An individual who is derisive of anyone elses love for a topic of subject. There are true bad fanbois out there that ignore all and spew rubbish about something but not as many as all that are so extream. The anti-fanboi will attack all who show any kind of loyalty and love for a subject area (like an army) and declare them fanboi, as if liking something and belive a specific aspect of it is something to be ashamed of. Such individuals are interesting because they scorn others enthusiasm while being part of the overall fabric of the topic being loved. So a GW fan who hates on anyone who loves aspects of GW armys....and ultimatly fit into their own definition of fanboi in some way.

Wintermute
21-10-2008, 18:51
I've just deleted a substantial number of off-topic posts.

You were all very clearly warned by t-tauri that any further off-topic posts would be removed.

If there are any more off-topic posts, in addition to the post(s) being removed, I will also issue warnings to those who ignore my 'advice'.

Wintermute
The WarSeer Inquisition

EmperorEternalXIX
21-10-2008, 19:16
I get called a fanboy a lot, because I am a big GW supporter.

I only buy my products directly from a Games Workshop store or online. I do not care about reduced prices available through clubs.

I see a logic behind many of their decisions that other people very much dislike, and often come to their defense in arguments. A lot of this revolves around the codex releases, and has a lot to do with my background in print design and media. Knowing how much money they spend on a codex release when they could just as easily put a pdf of a statline online for nothing to sell a new model...it really puts things in perspective to me, that they care about the game and are doing things they don't necessarily need to in order to preserve it's integrity.

Personally I think Warhammer's system of play is brilliant -- and yes, I have played "those other games" with the "superior" systems. I still feel 40k's paints the best picture.

I find it amazing that anybody can debate the quality of GW's miniatures since the Dark Angels releases.

The new space marine dex has been met with a lot of hate but I keep trying to get people to see the big picture, that it is clearly a release meant to set a trend for the duration of 5th ed.

I feel that pretty much all of their decisions since 5th Ed are solid and have good reasoning. Sometimes I even worry that they will do what the blind masses cry out for, things like endless faqs to update books, etc. You should NEVER do that, as it means people are buying only part of the product. It is, from a few standpoints, much better to let wargear that does nothing in 5th ed remain as doing nothing without updates to add replacement rules -- it saves them a ton of work and it is mostly going towards updating those new codex releases anyhow.

I feel very strongly that 5th edition balanced out pretty much all the armies. I know this is not the popular opinion, but I still feel as such. If pressed I can rattle off several things for each race. Yeah there are a few kinks, but it doesn't surprise me, and all things considered they are very minor.

I think that GW is a good company. When the DA and Chaos dexes came out to cries of "bland" and "weak" they released daemons, orks, and the new SM dex with those very complaints in mind. I even, unlike most DA players, believe the options for DA-like stuff in the SM dex (like their Mortis Dread) is actually a sort of easter egg, rather than a cruel joke like many believe. I think they put such things in there (along with vanguard vets) so that people wouldn't have to continue to use the weaker DA book or BA dex (which is still damn strong, I think) if they did not so choose to. I viewed it as an almost apologetic inclusion, rather than a spiteful one.

Games Workshop is often villified on these boards for doing things designed to make money. I think people quickly neglect how easily they could do that to greater effect if they disincluded much of the work they do. Why publish books at all when they can do pdfs? Sure there is money to be made, but without a doubt, plenty to be lost, too. Printing a bound codex in full color costs exponentially more than the development of a mini sprue. When I worked in news, we did a newspaper at 150,000 copies, it was only 24 pages and was in full color but nowhere near the quality level of GW's printing or paper choices. This cost the company literally hundreds of thousands of dollars a day. Now, quintuple that and multiply it by every codex and rulebook you see floating around your local game area. Literally the only reason they do it, is so we have a nice book we can carry with us to games and use to make life easier, instead of some crappy printout which would have to have no pics and be black and white for purposes of printer-friendliness. It is done because it makes money AND makes the game work better, presentation- and functionality-wise.

I feel that they do a good job of compromising things to preserve the game's integrity as well as make money. For instance, the new drop pod kit. They are better, yes, but not game-breaking better. They could have just as easily made them 20 points, AV13, and have a demolisher cannon. But they didn't. It seems to me from a designer standpoint that they go to at least some lengths to be reasonable in the promotion of new items, while simultaneously giving us more toys to play with.

Am I a fanboy? I don't think so. I will listen to any argument to the contrary, but I will not be convinced. People often say that a fanboy is someone who can't be convinced...that's ignorant...if I have an opinion, no one is going to change it except my own experience. Think about it: When was the last time you changed your mind about something, simply because someone told you to?

I love the game, and I am pleased with the company. If I'm a fanboy, I'm fine with that. The game's survival is paramount to me, and I will give them every dollar I am willing to in order to keep 40k healthy and strong.

Worse than any fanboy are the people who are here with 3000+ posts who just say "GW sucks, 40k sucks, all the rules are broken,I don't even play it anymore haven't for years." I hate those guys more than anything. They have no basis in reality and contribute nothing to the situation around them.

God willing, but I'd rather be a fanboy than one of those, any day of the week.

keatsmeister
21-10-2008, 20:28
Worse than any fanboy are the people who are here with 3000+ posts who just say "GW sucks, 40k sucks, all the rules are broken,I don't even play it anymore haven't for years." I hate those guys more than anything. They have no basis in reality and contribute nothing to the situation around them.

God willing, but I'd rather be a fanboy than one of those, any day of the week.

Ditto. If "GW sucks, 40k sucks, all the rules are broken,I don't even play it anymore haven't for years.", the question has to be asked, any reason you're regularly reading and posting in a 40K forum? :eyebrows:

The Rogue Trader
22-10-2008, 11:04
In my eyes a Fanboi is somebody who will believe 2+2=5 or that Airstrip One has never been at war with Eastasia.

Usually having a blind viewpoint is the sign of Fanboism. I knew someone who insisted EVERYTHING that was newer was automaticaly better. When 2nd ed 40K turned into 3rd Ed it was a massive improvement, but then when 3rd shifted into 4th 3rd edition was awful and really abstract.

:wtf:

Osbad
22-10-2008, 12:28
Worse than any fanboy are the people who are here with 3000+ posts who just say "GW sucks, 40k sucks, all the rules are broken,I don't even play it anymore haven't for years." I hate those guys more than anything. They have no basis in reality and contribute nothing to the situation around them.

God willing, but I'd rather be a fanboy than one of those, any day of the week.

Fair comment. However I think from the above we can clearly see that a "a GW fanboi" is someone who cannot discern the difference between criticism of the company and criticism of its games.

For instance a "hater" says "I like the new plastic gaming boards, but I think $290 is somewhat steep, GW would do better to reduce the price back to $200 and then I might buy one". But instead of hearing that, the "fanboi" hears "GW are the devil incarnate and eat babies and you are all ****** for even liking their products."

The subtle difference between a fan and a fanboi is that the latter likes everything GW produce good or bad (or *says* they do) whereas the simple "fan" is a little more discerning and is not so invested in GW's reputation. They like something because it is good in their sight, not simply because GW made it.

Its a bit like football supporters. Some season ticket holders enjoy most matches, but miss some and aren't hesitant to shout "sack the board" if things go badly for their team. Others have tattoos of their team crest across their buttocks and gladly bend over and take one from behind if they thought it might held their team to win on Saturday...

Its all a question of relative rationality. The fan recognises the absurdity of his passion, the fanboi does not, and feels belittled if anyone dares to criticise one aspect of their focus.

Ooh... and of course, the shear nerd-rage that comes forth from a fanboi if they ever become disillusioned. Now that can be absolutely fascinating! :skull:

Ozorik
22-10-2008, 12:59
any reason you're regularly reading and posting in a 40K forum?

Perhaps because it isnt a 40k forum?

Ward.
22-10-2008, 13:39
I'm pretty sure I would be classified as a fanboy by many of the most intense GW haters, so I believe I have pretty good insight into what a fanboy is.

When you hear someone use the words fanboi on here it is usually used in this sentence
"but I'm sure the hoards of GW fanbois will be in here to tell me I'm wrong pretty soon". This will come after a particularly long post that contains:
-a little bit of fact.
-the original question broken down into points.
-anecdotal evidence (often exaggerated).
-snide shots at something/ someone.
-suggestions about how GW should do it's business that sound good until you give them some thought.

So with that in mind, a fanboi is simply anyone that points out the flaws in your argument or asks you to "prove it".

shakespear
22-10-2008, 14:35
I forgot one type of fanboy

Guy who lets his health go in favor of his hobby
Saddest guys in the shop were the ones in their late teens early twenties and going bald. At that age I would have sold everything i had to get rogain or whatever. They all say its too expensive.

Another guy pulled his own teeth with pliers because it would have cost $80 to get done at the dentist. "Do you know how many marines that would buy?"

Another guy came in and had one pupil dilated, could be a sign of a stroke, aneurysm, or something bad. Didnt go to the doctor because he was building a new army.

EmperorEternalXIX
22-10-2008, 21:20
I'm pretty sure I would be classified as a fanboy by many of the most intense GW haters, so I believe I have pretty good insight into what a fanboy is.

When you hear someone use the words fanboi on here it is usually used in this sentence
"but I'm sure the hoards of GW fanbois will be in here to tell me I'm wrong pretty soon". This will come after a particularly long post that contains:
-a little bit of fact.
-the original question broken down into points.
-anecdotal evidence (often exaggerated).
-snide shots at something/ someone.
-suggestions about how GW should do it's business that sound good until you give them some thought.

So with that in mind, a fanboi is simply anyone that points out the flaws in your argument or asks you to "prove it". Quoted for truth. Oftentimes people give me grief simply for defending or seeing a reason behind a GW decision at all. For instance people are upset about the new space marine codex falling apart in the back pages...but even with all my harping about the expenses of printing such a thing, people think it's just because GW sucks and are cheap. Same with the measuring tape...my friend opened his to 48", let it whip closed, and it got stuck, and all he could say was "Stupid games workshop junk." So I did the same thing to my tape and broke mine too, just to show him that, yeah dude, doing that can break nice tapes, too. Same dude folded his Tau codex in half and bitched when a page ripped from the binding.

To be honest I think there is a lot of reverse-fanboyism here on Warseer. It is the haters who I feel are very blind to reality and refuse to accept discussion. I will not name names, but reputedly, there are many here with 4-digit post counts who will simply answer many debates with cries of "meh the game is just broken" or other some such nonsense. Everyday hundreds of people play this game across the globe and we get to a complete resolution and manage to enjoy it just fine; clearly the game is not broken. Similarly, there are a lot of outcries of what the company SHOULD do for things, but there is often no consideration of facts that imply toward sound reasoning of their original course.

The recent Dark Angels/Space Marine codex discrepency complaints are a good example. On the one hand, Dark Angels players as a whole have been upset with many of their options, lacking their unique dreadnought, their bike or terminator armies being tougher to use, points costs being too high, etc. Out comes the Space Marine codex, directly addressing all of these issues, and they are hung up on the formality that they would require the new book to use its' toys. In all reality those congruencies for the DA players were probably placed there for their actual benefit -- a way for them to get what they wanted, if they were willing to sacrifice some army composition, by simply by putting their green marines on the table and saying "I'm using the SM codex." Instead Games Workshop has been villified, and even stranger, some people think this was done CONSCIOUSLY as a slight to customers using the DA dex.

@Ozorik: 15000+ threads in the 40k General Forum versus 7000+ in the Fantasy one. Sure looks like a 40k forum to me...

Templar Ben
22-10-2008, 22:07
Quoted for truth. Oftentimes people give me grief simply for defending or seeing a reason behind a GW decision at all. For instance people are upset about the new space marine codex falling apart in the back pages...but even with all my harping about the expenses of printing such a thing, people think it's just because GW sucks and are cheap. Same with the measuring tape...my friend opened his to 48", let it whip closed, and it got stuck, and all he could say was "Stupid games workshop junk." So I did the same thing to my tape and broke mine too, just to show him that, yeah dude, doing that can break nice tapes, too. Same dude folded his Tau codex in half and bitched when a page ripped from the binding.

Perhaps that is because there are other games companies that put out books that cost less, have full color throughout, and do not suffer that problem. There is a certain perception of quality that comes with premium pricing and people are often let down by the execution. For instance, I have a trade paperback from TSR published in 1995. It is 144 pages and retailed for $18 (just under $25 in current dollars). It is full color throughout and it has not suffered a single page loss. To say that I can expect to pay more (SM Codex is $30) for a lower quality product (SM Codex has 22 color pages compared to the entire book) with lower quality binding (SM Codex lost pages in a week compared to 13 years and going strong) doesn't make sense to me.

It isn't that I hate GW. I just don't understand how it is good value for the money when others are able to put out better products for less.


To be honest I think there is a lot of reverse-fanboyism here on Warseer. It is the haters who I feel are very blind to reality and refuse to accept discussion. I will not name names, but reputedly, there are many here with 4-digit post counts who will simply answer many debates with cries of "meh the game is just broken" or other some such nonsense. Everyday hundreds of people play this game across the globe and we get to a complete resolution and manage to enjoy it just fine; clearly the game is not broken. Similarly, there are a lot of outcries of what the company SHOULD do for things, but there is often no consideration of facts that imply toward sound reasoning of their original course.

I have not seen anyone just say "the game is just broken" but I don't spend too much time looking for such. I have seen people say "the game is counterintuitive" and then list ways that it is (LOS for targeting but ignored for model removal is a common example). I have seen people say "the game is using an obsolete engine" and then give examples of how play in Epic doesn't lock in UGOIGO.

As to a large number of people using a product means the product isn't broken...well I will not use a Microsoft analogy.

Also I don't know what you are trying to say with that last sentence. Sorry.


The recent Dark Angels/Space Marine codex discrepency complaints are a good example. On the one hand, Dark Angels players as a whole have been upset with many of their options, lacking their unique dreadnought, their bike or terminator armies being tougher to use, points costs being too high, etc. Out comes the Space Marine codex, directly addressing all of these issues, and they are hung up on the formality that they would require the new book to use its' toys. In all reality those congruencies for the DA players were probably placed there for their actual benefit -- a way for them to get what they wanted, if they were willing to sacrifice some army composition, by simply by putting their green marines on the table and saying "I'm using the SM codex." Instead Games Workshop has been villified, and even stranger, some people think this was done CONSCIOUSLY as a slight to customers using the DA dex.

The DA/SM issue is not one that affects me personally. To say that just because they messed up X and decided to use that negative feedback to make Y better the people that paid for X should be happy with the result, doesn't follow. We know GW isn't going to change it and I think it is sad that so many have a tournament mindset but they do. That is why people are not able to say that their DA are SM, many tournaments don't allow it. GW released a FAQ that didn't really address the bigger concern that people have. It isn't the Mortis so much as the concern that wargear is either far less expensive for the same equipment or is better for the same price.

I know that many DA players said that they were upset because they paid full price for what ended up being a Beta version that didn't get patched properly. Not sure if that would count as a hater but I suppose it depends on your definition.

Lexy
23-10-2008, 10:41
Fanboi to me is the blind following of everything GW ( in this example)
That's totally not me, I like to see the nuances of a subject, though I am on the positive side of it.

I've read that people thought that GW should give more things away, not thinking about the fact that GW is a company with share holders.

I've seen the posts too where everybody knows what GW should do, I highly doubt, that they went to the board and presented their well thought ideas.

I've seen alot of posts where the comments were indeed "The game sucks" or "I don't play this anymore" where there was no contribution to the topic at all.

On the other hand, I'm not fond of ALL things GW does, the ones that annoys me the most is the treatment by employees that don't know you and treat you like a total idiot and the people of full fanboism ('cause they are annoying too).