PDA

View Full Version : Would you allow?



WhiteKnight
29-01-2009, 04:52
Woudl you allow an IG player to use the 3rd ed. Catachan codex in a friendly game. No tourneys or campaigns, just for fun? I got 2 nos and 1 yes from my local gw but I want to see what warseer thinks.

Pink Horror
29-01-2009, 05:03
Are they overpowered (whatever that means)? Are they fun? Do you have the models? If the answers are No, Yes, and Yes, where is the problem?

I'd let you write up a codex for warmachine guys or fantasy skaven too, so I do not know if my opinion would count.

starlight
29-01-2009, 05:03
No question about it - Absolutely. :D


Not only would I allow it, I'd *encourage* it. :D


Best part is the Codex is free and readily available. :)


http://oz.games-workshop.com/games/40k/catachans/default.htm

vladsimpaler
29-01-2009, 05:32
I wouldn't mind at all. I'm also saying this because I play Lost and the Damned.:D

They're not really overpowered or anything, more likely underpowered. They're really cool though, so I would say go for it.

laudarkul
29-01-2009, 05:40
I would allow... It's about fun. And they have an interesting list with a lot of laugh potential;).

march10k
29-01-2009, 05:40
What a strange question....

Orkeosaurus
29-01-2009, 05:46
Outside of Jungle Fight they're rather underpowered.

No problem from me.

Laser guided fanatic
29-01-2009, 07:12
Since when was deathworlds illegal. I still have the codex and i was thinking of starting a deathworld vets army but if it's illegal i don't know...

Vaktathi
29-01-2009, 07:20
I would let them use it, I'd have no problems whatsoever with that, although I'm not sure why they'd want to use it, it's not a very good army book.

Alx_152
29-01-2009, 07:22
The codex is still valid. I think there is a version on the website which was updated for the latest edition. I could be wrong.

So no problems with that list

ehlijen
29-01-2009, 08:15
If I actually believe the player when he says 'for fun', not a problem. However, I would not automatically allow for the player to then dump a cart load of woods terrain onto the table without prior consultation and time to prepare an army in the spirit of fun for a dedicated jungle fight.

Some armies just can't handle a jungle ambush very well and while they might not loose, it might become a frustrating game and thus not be fun. Some catachan units just seem designed to frustrate (snipers! grrrr!). Might be realistic, but not fun as a game.

Reflex
29-01-2009, 09:21
what kind of fool would not want to play against an auto loose army :P

unless ya be playing in teh junglz

Eryx_UK
29-01-2009, 09:31
In a friendly game yes. I don't see a problem with that.

Lord Damocles
29-01-2009, 09:46
If an opponant was really masochistic enough to want to play Catachans on a non-jungle table, who am I to stop them getting slaughtered? :evilgrin:

Bloodknight
29-01-2009, 10:07
Well, it's been slightly reworked for 4th edition after the new IG codex, so technically, it is still legal.

That said, let him play not only out of the jungle, but meet for a jungle trip once in a while. I used to have a DWV army, and they were pretty frustrating out of the jungle for me, and if properly built pretty frustrating for the opponent - the only army that ever put up a real fight in their own environment was a Kroot merc force ;). Balance is the key.

RCgothic
29-01-2009, 10:13
An opponent of mine plays using an older chaos codex because the current one 'isn't powerful enough'. It's bloody annoying.

Triggerdog
29-01-2009, 10:16
I'd mind if someone was using an older version of something like Chaos or Eldar because lord knows they used to be about four types of broken a peice but Catachans is a different case. Catachans was an odd army that fought in an odd way. Their current state as a blurb in the IG codex is good but doesnt do them justice in my opinion. They're a very unique group, just as unique as the silly Cadians that everyone seems to adore. I would have no qualms about playing a full force of them, none at all.

boogle
29-01-2009, 10:22
An opponent of mine plays using an older chaos codex because the current one 'isn't powerful enough'. It's bloody annoying.

Don't play him then, as those books are OOP and therefore not intended to be used anymore, the current books supercede what he is using, and if his excuse is 'it isn't powerful enough' then alarm bells should be doubly ringing and the big robot next to you should be going 'DANGER WILL ROBINSON' He's a WAAC player.

Oh as as to the OP, most certainly i would allow it, but what i would do is have a partially open and partially wooded/jungle board with the right amout of objectives so you both get to play in both parts of the board

willydstyle
29-01-2009, 10:27
I voted no. I guess I'm not the only person to vote so, but maybe I'm the only one to admit it?

I played against the DWV list on a pretty well forested board, and I found the rules to be not balanced at all. The Ambush rules in particular, due to the way the rule is set up, essentially allow a unit with multiple powerful special weapons to be set up anywhere on the board at the beginning of any of the DWV player's turns with no reserve rolls and with no chance to scatter.

The player is supposed to use a "grid" to show where his ambushing squads are set up, but only 50% of the squad needs to set up within that grid area, so there are two particular spots on the grid that basically allow your unit to hit any area on the table.

That's basically why I don't like playing them. They have all the benefits of drop guard with none of the drawbacks, and can easily set up a turn where they gain such an overwhelming advantage that you can't really come back from it.

Bloodknight
29-01-2009, 10:28
Keep in mind that their power in jungle terrain should have dropped seriously with the 5th edition rules, though. Their special LOS rules don't do anything anymore, and their improved cover save doesn't either (they got a flat 4+ when other people only had a 5+ in woods, now everybody has that).



They have all the benefits of drop guard with none of the drawbacks,

Yes, that's a part of the things that make Catachans 50% more expensive than normal Guardsmen. The other balancing factor is that they don't carry serious heavy weapons, pay 2-3 times as much as most people for flamers and pay 40 points for a Mortar. 40...

willydstyle
29-01-2009, 10:31
I know that. It was the ambush rules that seemed very imbalanced. He also saw my land raider and then told me he had no anti-tank weapons... the outflanked a special weapons unit with 4 melta guns right next to it. He was playing an all-out-flanking-all-ambushing list.

Angelwing
29-01-2009, 14:07
Of course I'd play them. It's still compatible with the current edition. Bring on the trees!

starlight
29-01-2009, 14:49
I know that. It was the ambush rules that seemed very imbalanced. He also saw my land raider and then told me he had no anti-tank weapons... the outflanked a special weapons unit with 4 melta guns right next to it. He was playing an all-out-flanking-all-ambushing list.

So your issue was with a git, not the list. :p

perplexiti
29-01-2009, 16:18
I voted yes, it would be fun to play. Anyway the codex is still legal so theres no probs there.

Vaktathi
29-01-2009, 16:44
I know that. It was the ambush rules that seemed very imbalanced. He also saw my land raider and then told me he had no anti-tank weapons... the outflanked a special weapons unit with 4 melta guns right next to it. He was playing an all-out-flanking-all-ambushing list.

Someone lying to you about their list isn't reflective of the army however. That's not an issue with the army, it's an issue with the player.

can't_decide
29-01-2009, 16:53
If the codex is valid, there is no reason not to play. Yeah the jungle stuff would have to be worked out before hand, but it's a legal army. For everyone saying "only in a friendly game" what type of "non-friendly" games are you playing. I let my plastic guys do the hitting, not me.

Ianos
29-01-2009, 17:25
Is it valid? Yes it is, so why should anyone object, even in a tournament.

40kdhs
29-01-2009, 17:34
Why say NO when it feels so good to say YES to a RAMBO army? :D

Dogma
29-01-2009, 18:04
I would say yes as I believe that it is still a valid/legal codex anyway.

40kdhs
29-01-2009, 20:14
What do Catachans and Woodelves have 1 thing in common? They like trees.:D

O&G'sRule
29-01-2009, 21:41
I'm not really familiar with the codex, but if theres not massive discrepencies there should be no problem. I mean if a trooper is 2 points less than a guardsman now, then no you can't do that, or even a lascannon if that had a lower points cost that would be wrong too. If you're just using the catachan army structure but paying current points then that should be absolutely fine

Stormhammers
29-01-2009, 21:48
yes I would allow it, mainly because I still have a small catachan force. Back in 3rd ed, they were awesome, had so much fun using them, especially against orks. I could keep my hvy bolters 7" in the jungles and just mow down orks as they appear while remaining untouchable. Not too sure about their power in the current edition, but I would still love to use them once again.

marv335
29-01-2009, 21:50
the catachans are actually more expensive points wise, they pay more for everything, and the most heavily armoured thing is the army is a *******' sentinel!
Hardly overpowered.

Stormhammers
29-01-2009, 21:58
lol, so true. And the heaviest weapons they have are autocannons.

Hicks
29-01-2009, 21:59
I would be happy to play against them, but I'd like to be warned before hand. Just in case I was planing something that wouldn't be able to work on a jungle board. What's the point of playing on a cool forest board if you have a bike army that just won't do anything but run in circles. :p

silence
29-01-2009, 22:02
I'd have no problems, its a very characterful army with a very large number of drawbacks if played outside of a jungle.

However I'd also be happy to play on a jungle table sometimes, simply for the experiance :)

Stormhammers
29-01-2009, 22:31
hmm, kroot vs catachan would be an interesting fight

starlight
29-01-2009, 22:47
I'm not really familiar with the codex, but if theres not massive discrepencies there should be no problem. I mean if a trooper is 2 points less than a guardsman now, then no you can't do that, or even a lascannon if that had a lower points cost that would be wrong too. If you're just using the catachan army structure but paying current points then that should be absolutely fine

Nope, the regular Trooper is 50% more expensive and the heaviest weapon (save the one-use Demo Charges) is the Rocket Launcher, so no cheap Lascannons...no Lascannons at all... :(

:p

The Codex is available for free download as a PDF from the GWOZ site here:

http://oz.games-workshop.com/games/40k/catachans/default.htm

nightgant98c
01-02-2009, 20:55
I would have no trouble with that.

Goq Gar
01-02-2009, 20:57
119 yes, 9 no.

That's a pretty overwhelming YES.

Thud
01-02-2009, 21:02
I would, as Starlight, actively encourage it.

I've never played against a Deathworld Veteran army, so I'd love to try.

phoenixshroud
01-02-2009, 21:34
I am starting a Death World Veteran army at the moment purely because it is different and it looks fun to use. It will probably die horribly out of the jungle/woods but I like the fluffy infantry platoon organisation of squads being under strength due to operating alone for extended peiods of time.

weissengel86
01-02-2009, 22:39
I would only ever refuse to play against people with total fluff heresy. Besides that i dont care at all. They want apocalypse? Sure as long as i can too. Dark Angels and BT using updated wargear rules from new SM codex? Sure i just get my update too. Brand new fan made army? Sure as long as its not obviously out of control. Cheesy army? Sure i believe most cheese is just an excuse to justify losing (key word being most).

precinctomega
02-02-2009, 09:34
Hell, yes. The point of playing is to have fun, not to win. Would I play it every single week? No, because that would be boring and, ergo, not fun. But would I love to take it on once in a while even if I knew I would be royally annihilated? You bet.

R.

LokkoRex
02-02-2009, 10:01
yes, because it is one of the coolest armys in fluff and army list i now(the models on the other hand)

Grazzy
02-02-2009, 10:35
I like old codexes. I would never refuse unless the opponent was using craftworld eldar or something in order to make the most powefull possible list.

elf_hater_7
02-02-2009, 13:44
Woudl you allow an IG player to use the 3rd ed. Catachan codex in a friendly game.

3rd ed? its only about as old as the guard and the necron codex then (think those are both 3rd ed.....) and no-one has a problem with necrons....