PDA

View Full Version : A plea for a new Codex.



Mad Doc Grotsnik
02-05-2006, 22:09
Deeer Misert Games Desiner.

I are have problem with mi chseon amry. Erverywun seams to beet me.

I r beleev that mi Codex is week and neds to bee much much hrader. I r tihnk taht Rendign shood bee on all mi wipons, as wee are teh best with tech.

Yoors sinecrely,

A Gamer.

Take a look at the above. It's gibberish isn't it? Complete and utter rubbish. But to me, thats how a great many 'suggestion' threads and discussion threads on there forums read.

A single poster has a gripe with an issue, and wails and moans so loud, he convinces himself that he is the majority, and that all other opinions are utterly invalid.

And what do we do as a community? We go in, and we tear strips off each others posts. Personally, I always regard attacking someone grammar/spelling as the first signs of surrender. What we rarely do however, is rationally discuss the various methods we employ each unit in.

For example. I get on very well with Shining Spears, a much maligned unit. I have found them excellent against Light Vehicles, whose points often match, and even exceed, their own. Huzzah! Yet, when this is raised in a thread, it's often decried by the very person I'm trying to help. I daresay I've done a few times.

So lets all be a little friendlier, and use the Forum for what it's meant for. The free exchange of ideas for the betterment (does that word exist? Or am I being thick?) of our gaming. Just listen (well, read) what others have to say. Read it in a neutral inner voice, rather than trying to guess the emotional syntax, and you should get on better. If someone suggests something radical, why not try it before deciding whether it's good or not? Particularly with individual units!

Tom
02-05-2006, 22:18
^Everyone, remember that post. COmmit it to memory. Those words are law now.

russian
02-05-2006, 22:19
i agree, also alot of threads peoplecomplain about then ask for opinons or a view and then flatly refuse to listen(read) to it, and just say no, if you want an opionon be prepaird for radical ideas youve never thought of, and if you disagree say so and offer your two cents,but dont do the no thats utter b.s and carry on whining have an open mind

Messiah
02-05-2006, 22:23
The problem is when people just sum up all players of a given army by the words of one person.

Oh yeah, And I totally agree with Mad Doc.

Norminator
02-05-2006, 22:25
At least someone has had the balls to point this out... something that is becoming more and more prevelant, particularly recently. I think one of the problems is a certain negative mood - not 'golly, blah blah are good' but 'zeesh, blah blah is *****!' - whether it's new products, GW policies (ok, maybe they are *****) or new rules.

Tom
02-05-2006, 22:31
At least someone has had the balls to point this out... something that is becoming more and more prevelant, particularly recently. I think one of the problems is a certain negative mood - not 'golly, blah blah are good' but 'zeesh, blah blah is *****!' - whether it's new products, GW policies (ok, maybe they are *****) or new rules.


I've actually been doing it for years, and each and every time I get some slef-righteous git tell me it's their right to bitch about stuff.

Mad Doc Grotsnik
02-05-2006, 22:35
There is a balance to be struck though. It's all fine and well to ask them to consider your viewpoint, but you have to be willing to do the same.

I'm almost certainly guilty of being overzealous in that department. Not everyone has the experience I have, and the experience they have and I have is likely to be very different! A lot of the tactics and cunning tricks I know I have discovered purely by accident during a tense game. Particularly the Shining Spear example. That one came up when some Sentinels were poised to tapdance on my poor Banshees!

Grimtuff
02-05-2006, 22:36
I've actually been doing it for years, and each and every time I get some slef-righteous git tell me it's their right to bitch about stuff.

True to a certain extent, as there is flat out bitching and then there's constructive criticism.

If someone posts on a forum asking how to beat something, then reject people's reasonable ideas that they have obviously not tried or they're just braindead/don't play with any terrain/obnoxious to heed said adivce, then why post such a question in the first place?

This (http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=34313) thread is a prime example of the above kind of person.

Mojaco
02-05-2006, 22:41
but... I DO want rending on everything. Give me rending armour saves!

stjohn70
02-05-2006, 22:43
@Tom - It's my right to .... ahem ... nevermind

I think it was best described way back when in one of my college courses - something like, "Ethics are your personal code for when other people are around; Morals are your personal code when you're alone." ...or close to that anyhow.
Basically the Internet gives us all a level of anonymity, which is good. No one should know what I type unless I want them too - the whole privacy thing. But it also gives people license to act on their morals, rather than ethics.

Some people's morals enable them to be flaming gits. Some show the level of personal maturity they have. Personally, I waver somewhere in the middle - I try to be nice and generally think out most of my posts - but I can be baited and get passionate about my side.

Just remember - everyone always thinks that they're right.

Mad Doc Grotsnik
02-05-2006, 22:45
But as long as you go into a debate with that thought in mind, you ought to do well.

If someone has had a bad time with a certain unit, don't just gibber about your army to them. To do so is relatively pointless. I would rather ask for their complete list, and then see whether they are missing any tricks that you know.

Tom
02-05-2006, 22:46
but... I DO want rending on everything. Give me rending armour saves!

*gives Mojaco a pony*



Agreed, SJ70, we all have our trigger level, the point we can't rise above. Mine's when I get people who can't stand GW, can't stand the models, can't stand their army and can't stand any others complains about 40K when in all rights they should leave the hobby, for their own good. Like people who watch the same show every night despite loathing it.

starlight
02-05-2006, 22:51
^Everyone, remember that post. COmmit it to memory. Those words are law now.

Agreed. Someone please Codify and Sticky this.:D

Mad Doc Grotsnik
02-05-2006, 22:52
Or those ******* Do-Gooder who go to a Gig just to be offended and have something to write into the Daily Mail about. Trust me. It happens! I'll never forget Brady in the Rubber Lingerie with that sign. Stupid Vicar. Shouldn't have decried Purity of Decadence without understanding who and what they are!

Anyways. For those who do understand where I'm coming from, and try to do as I try to as well, please please resist the urge to Troll. I've done it. It's pointless. Even if your point is water tight and solid, it eventually sounds laboured and made up! The best thing to do is make your point, answer criticism, then simply walk away. Your point has been made and defended. Nothing more is required.

Similarly, if you feel your being particularly ignored, and that your attempts to be heard are being lost in a stampede of brainless bleating, why not start a new thread? Far better your ideas are listed in a fresh thread, than you get frustrated with others. Then, if they come into your thread, ignore them, or tackle them as you wish. Never ever sink to their level. I have done so before, and you just feel stupid!

stjohn70
02-05-2006, 23:03
Another great quote (not meaning to be offensive):

Arguing on the Internet is like competing in the Special Olympics: You may win, but you're still retarded.

Chem-Dog
03-05-2006, 00:46
Mad Doc Grotsnik, just so you can rest easy, Betterment IS a word :D

Lyinar
03-05-2006, 01:13
One thing I've noticed is that people don't seem to have a copy of the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy handy. On the official GW forums and on here, people don't heed the words on the cover in big friendly-looking yellow letters: Don't Panic.

I've been an active poster on the GW forums for a little over a year, so I've seen people absolutely panicking with what I call "z0MG! T3H SKY IS FALLING!!!!!1111oneoneone" posts. On the GW forums, they're usually about every new army before it even comes out based on completely unconfirmed rumours that "X army is getting an uber-unit!" or "X army is completely changing/removing a unit from its current list". By the Gods, I remember the outcry that gave us the the "z0MG!!!! 2+ Save 5W T7 Carnifexes!!!!!1 My IG flashlights can't kill it anymore and I have to actually use anti-tank weapons!!!!!111111" posts, and the equally panicky posts about the changes GW was making to the Wood Elf Dryads. Oddly enough, I don't recall any giant uproar about the new Dwarfs, though... Maybe that says something about the mental stability of Dwarf players...

I've also found that people still follow that same irrational impulse that leads to the "z0MG T3H SKY IS FALLING" posts when complaining about stuff they've faced. Some people are a lot better about it and actually seek answers, but for the most part, it just seems like people WANT to have something to panic about.

Zzarchov
03-05-2006, 01:47
I know perhaps this may seem out of place, but one of my favourite forums in terms of civility is the "Have your say" BBC news forums, even the unmoderated ones.

Rather than needing to flame a post you disagree with, or waste space saying "I agree" you can just "recommend" a post and it keeps a tally of how many people recommend it.

Kahadras
03-05-2006, 01:54
I r beleev that mi Codex is week and neds to bee much much hrader. I r tihnk taht Rendign shood bee on all mi wipons, as wee are teh best with tech.


Sounds like we are having a jab at Eldar players here. Still it's a good point to raise. People seem to constantly compare their armies to others (usualy Space marines) and find it wanting. I hate the idea of vannillafication that some players seem to advocate. I've noticed it creeping into Warhammer with some races gaining access to stuff that they didn't have before (Wood elves and Lizardmen getting good cavalry, Chaos getting an artillery piece etc).

Kahadras

Toppan
03-05-2006, 02:54
i think the best example of a good thread would be the "Who Loves Orks?"...no one arguing or anything...everyone getting a long, sharing ideas...perfect harmony
IN AN ORK THREAD NO LESS!?

Tom
03-05-2006, 02:55
Let's not mock the unfortunate few who are... ahem, retarded.

I'm (barely) mentally ill myself so it's a little insulting, but if someone was reading this post and, say, had mild cerebral palsy (the kind where you'd probably still be able to play and paint, just about, like the people in the Paralympics who do seem almost normal) or was an amputee, it'd be quite nasty.


Not to be anyone's 'angry mother' here, and I doubt anyone here would be able to get into the paralympics (If you can and have, cool) but still.

Let's mock the French instead now, shall we? ;)

Gavmo
03-05-2006, 02:58
Yeah. I agree. I think my post was in poor taste. I think i'll fix it up.

Damn you conscience!!!

EDIT: Conscience appeased.

And now, the French...

The Dude
03-05-2006, 05:23
Just listen (well, read) what others have to say. Read it in a neutral inner voice, rather than trying to guess the emotional syntax, and you should get on better.

This is the best piece of advice EVER!!!

No matter how many emoticons you use, some subtle nuances are completely unable to be conveyed via text. I would also ad RE-READ before you react. and then RE-READ again!!! Sometimes you can skip over stuff and read completely the wrong word. I've done it before, but I always try to re-read before I post.

C. Langana
03-05-2006, 08:22
Good thread. I just wish to add my support.

Vanger
03-05-2006, 08:46
The funny thing is that the name of this thread does not cry out, that "YOU SHOULD READ ME!". But it should. Hope lot of people will read it, and at least think about it.

Sorry for shouting.

Btw: Where can I find something on the origins of this L33thsp34k or :wtf: ? Altough I'm surfing on some english message boards I missed it until now (lucky me).

Adept
03-05-2006, 09:53
Bah! Humbug!

You can all get stuffed, I say, with your "respect other peoples opinions" and stuff.

:p

Although to be honest, I find myself able to get worked up about gaming and related issues because, by comparison, it is an important thing in my life. Most of my problems are terribly minor. I have steady work and a steady relationship, no significant debts, no ill friends or family members, no problems with my neighbours or workmates...

I literally have nothing else to worry about.

Christine
03-05-2006, 12:05
but... I DO want rending on everything. Give me rending armour saves!

That'd be all those spikey bits on the chaos armour then :P

Hear Hear though to what Mad Doc said though.

Mad Doc Grotsnik
04-05-2006, 22:55
Adept, your not the only one who gets inexplicably hot under the collar about silly metal men! I think it's obvious that I have a certain passion for them.

And it can be so irritating when others neatly side step (also known as ignore) what you have to say to avoid bursting their little bubble of idiocy.

Grimtuff
04-05-2006, 22:59
And it can be so irritating when others neatly side step (also known as ignore) what you have to say to avoid bursting their little bubble of idiocy.

You've been reading that FOTD thread again haven't you?

Twice I have said that Tiggy with FOTD is NOT doubled to 24". Do they listen? Nope. Cause "Tigur1s iz teh ubar wit FOD!!!111!!!!ONE!"

Pah! ;)

my_name_is_tudor
04-05-2006, 23:04
Why do 40k 'tactics' have to be forged round single units? And so called 'tricks'? Why is it that noone talks about the way armies work, instead of each individual unit in an army?

I've said it before and I'll say it again, 4th ed 40k is glorified Top Trumps. Until it gets some tactical depth to it, people are always going to whinge about unbalanced armies, and crappy units. Because unless they know a handful of tricks - some armies are 'unbalanced', and some units are 'crappy'.

The more and more this issue comes up the more I feel myself moving over to play Epic..

Anyway, as a rule I ignore threads about how rubbish units are, etc etc. In fact is honestly pure fluke I looked into this one. I just saw that Mad Doc had posted in it, and knowing that Mad Doc is one of the more lucid posters here, and generally has good things to say, I dropped in.

But yeah, I don't read/post in threads about units and so called 'tactics'. I don't 'powergame', or do tournements, I don't have enough gaming experience to talk from any authoritative standpoint, or give much in the way of useful advice. I want characterful armies rather than 'hard' ones, and I don't really mind whether I win or not.

If someone thinks shining spears, flayed ones, any units you care to mention, are crap, then they are missing the point. Shining spears are mint looking jetbikers with lances - lances man! Flayed ones wear the skin of their victims.. I mean come on, thats cool as all hell!

Grimtuff
04-05-2006, 23:10
So true, we had some guy droning on about this in the store a couple of weeks back, claiming "this is what all the tourney winners take". and that unit on its own is crap after watching my Tau beat the stuffing out of a SM army.

I told him Tau are a prime example of Army synergy where all the units must work together and no one unit will do a lot.

Then he said he would just overrun me with Assault Marines, as, and I quote "all Tau players stand still". I dont seem to recall any time when my units stood still during that game :rolleyes:

Note this guy plays IW. Nuff said.

Though I do carry this philosophy into all of my armies now, and my SW are doing better because of it. It does seem to be SM players that think 1 unit can decimate an army.

my_name_is_tudor
04-05-2006, 23:12
Yeah, Tau can in theory be cited as the exception. But I think even they have a lot of problems. In fact, in a way their interdependency is one of them. I want to be able to take (almost) any combination of units I want, and (providing I work my **** of tactically) have at least a little bit of a chance to come out on top.

Mad Doc Grotsnik
04-05-2006, 23:21
Some armies have options which, thanks to internet weirdos, are accepted as being the only way to win.

Other Armies (Necrons and Dark Eldar mainly!) really do only have a couple of really effective combos open to them.

On the bright side, we can but hope that the synergy engendered in the Tau codex is just the beginning of greater depth to 40k. And when you think about it, SM should actually be the single exception, as if tooled up, each squad is a small army in it's own right. Certainly, with the increased benefits for Synapse, and general good going over the Nid codex got, it too has a certain, if less pronounced, synergy within it.

Perhaps rather than focus on stuff we don't like, we could be pointing out the bits we do? Then the design team will get a better idea of what to keep on doing.

my_name_is_tudor
04-05-2006, 23:26
To be fair, it does seem that the new codexes are picking up a bit. But I think the rules are the issue...

I've never played with or against the new Tyranids army, but at first glances it seems that there is a huge range you can do with it and still retain the competitive edge. The Tau army is entirely different in that it requires a lot of synergy, but often from select proportions of units. I don't mind this though, its very fluffy, and makes for fun looking armies on the table.

You know what I think is an issue? The fact that 40k is no longer a skirmish game.

Lyinar
04-05-2006, 23:29
Necrons? A COUPLE of combos? GW could pretty much make an army box for any given points value, and it would be the exact army the vast majority of the Necron players used. Granted, one of the features of that long-dead race is that they don't exactly value variety, but one of the few choices they do have, Pariahs vs. Immortals, is made into a no-brainer due to the insanely high cost of the former and their lack of WBB and counting for phase-out, and only crazy people like me even consider taking them. The only other real choice they have is whether or not to take a C'Tan, and if yes, which one.

I'm a loyal follower of the Greater Good, and I honestly thought at the beginning of 4th Edition before they'd announced any Codices other than the Space Marines, that the Necrons would be getting a new Codex before my own... Then again, I also thought the Orks, Eldar, and Dark Eldar would, too...

Mad Doc Grotsnik
04-05-2006, 23:30
Well, that depends on the size of game your playing, and also whether your playing Missions. Hell, it even depends on what level (Alpha Gamma and Omega I think they are) your playing them at.

40k, certainly more than Warhammer, has in my opinion always required a narrative to get the most out of it. Take for example Imperial Armours 3 and 4 (Taros and Anphelion). Not only do they give you Missions to play, but the forces to use. This takes away the whole 'any tit could create an army' problem, and instead puts the onus on tactical guile. Fantasy though, with it's more sophisticated rules benefits less. At least, in my experience.

You know, I think I feel another Thread coming on about this very subject!

my_name_is_tudor
04-05-2006, 23:36
You know, I think I feel another Thread coming on about this very subject!

Do it Doc! Do it do it do it!

cailus
05-05-2006, 00:35
Deeer Misert Games Desiner.

I are have problem with mi chseon amry. Erverywun seams to beet me.

I r beleev that mi Codex is week and neds to bee much much hrader. I r tihnk taht Rendign shood bee on all mi wipons, as wee are teh best with tech.

Yoors sinecrely,

A Gamer.

Take a look at the above. It's gibberish isn't it? Complete and utter rubbish. But to me, thats how a great many 'suggestion' threads and discussion threads on there forums read.

A single poster has a gripe with an issue, and wails and moans so loud, he convinces himself that he is the majority, and that all other opinions are utterly invalid.

And what do we do as a community? We go in, and we tear strips off each others posts. Personally, I always regard attacking someone grammar/spelling as the first signs of surrender. What we rarely do however, is rationally discuss the various methods we employ each unit in.

For example. I get on very well with Shining Spears, a much maligned unit. I have found them excellent against Light Vehicles, whose points often match, and even exceed, their own. Huzzah! Yet, when this is raised in a thread, it's often decried by the very person I'm trying to help. I daresay I've done a few times.

So lets all be a little friendlier, and use the Forum for what it's meant for. The free exchange of ideas for the betterment (does that word exist? Or am I being thick?) of our gaming. Just listen (well, read) what others have to say. Read it in a neutral inner voice, rather than trying to guess the emotional syntax, and you should get on better. If someone suggests something radical, why not try it before deciding whether it's good or not? Particularly with individual units!


So I am being unfair and childish in getting peeved off with GW for ignoring Orks for so long?

So I am childish for saying that some Ork units truly are worthless (e.g. stikkbombas) because they do not offer anything for their points value that I couldn't get with a cheaper unit? Or units that have had their usefulness reduced by successive rules updates (the Kustom Force Field comes to mind)

And I am childish for getting peeved off at GW for not supporting this range and offering many rubbish looking models as well as models that need significant redesign (e.g. Killa Kans which GW happily refunded me the money for and admitted that the models actually require extensive sawing to be able to even fit)?

I agree that armies have to work as a whole. I also have used units that are apparently not-optimal but used them because I liked the look of them (e.g. Dread with lascannon, flamer combo).

But I do feel that the Orks need a new Codex. A couple of new Kommandos and a new Big Mek model simply don't cut it.

So am I being childish or am I simply being a disgruntled customer who wants decent support from the manufacturer?

Lyinar
05-05-2006, 00:41
Umm... Cailus, I do believe that you completely missed the point of the entire thread... The Dok was suggesting that people A: post rational arguments in response to such threads instead of attacking the poster, and B: for the people who post such threads to actually listen to said rational arguments.

The Dude
05-05-2006, 03:49
So I am childish for saying that some Ork units truly are worthless (e.g. stikkbombas) because they do not offer anything for their points value that I couldn't get with a cheaper unit? Or units that have had their usefulness reduced by successive rules updates (the Kustom Force Field comes to mind)

I would argue that Stikkbombaz are NOT useless. They are great at turfing out Dug in, low Armour Save armies like defending Guard or Eldar in particular (Yay! Simultaneous combat). Yes they don't have Choppaz, but with guard, you don't need 'em.

Anyway, I'm not going to allow myself to get drawn into another one of these and will just fall back to my position of do whatever works for you, but don't stick your fingers in your ears and scream, "This unit is CRAP!!!" when you should be asking everyone else you can find if they know how to get the best out of it.

The end! ;)

cailus
05-05-2006, 05:38
I would argue that Stikkbombaz are NOT useless. They are great at turfing out Dug in, low Armour Save armies like defending Guard or Eldar in particular (Yay! Simultaneous combat). Yes they don't have Choppaz, but with guard, you don't need 'em.

So you pay 1 extra point for a model that allows simultaneous combat against two rarer armies if certain conditions are met (i.e. Guard/Eldar unit behind cover).

And this is a unit that under most other conditions is not as effective as the cheaper slugga boy against the main army type, the Marine-equivalent.

This is what I mean by useless. These guys are more expensive yet are only applicable in certain specific situations.

The Dude
05-05-2006, 05:52
And you're basing your argument on another specific condition, i.e. that you're facing a Marine equivalent. Stikkbommaz have a tactical flexibility to be able to take out entrenched light infantry and light vehicles. I for one am glad to have the option there. I'll admit that they are probably overpriced, but a Slugga Boyz mob can't do much else other than throw themselves at the nearest enemy and hope to take them out. At least Stikkbommaz have a choice ;) .

Still, that's just my opinion. You don't like 'em, don't use 'em. Everyone's happy!!! :D

cailus
05-05-2006, 06:32
And you're basing your argument on another specific condition, i.e. that you're facing a Marine equivalent. Stikkbommaz have a tactical flexibility to be able to take out entrenched light infantry and light vehicles. I for one am glad to have the option there. I'll admit that they are probably overpriced, but a Slugga Boyz mob can't do much else other than throw themselves at the nearest enemy and hope to take them out. At least Stikkbommaz have a choice ;) .

Still, that's just my opinion. You don't like 'em, don't use 'em. Everyone's happy!!! :D

The thing is I like the models. I just would like the unit to make a bit more sense...

As for the Marine equivalent, I think you would find most people play against Marine Equivalents a lot more often than any other army.

The MEq is the basline trooper for 40K.

The Dude
05-05-2006, 06:55
As for the Marine equivalent, I think you would find most people play against Marine Equivalents a lot more often than any other army.

This saddens me... :( But I don't play often and never in Tournaments, so I have to go by what other people say about this.

Maybe if they were 9 pts without Krak Stikkbombz and you had an option to buy Krak if you wanted they'd be a little better.

Delicious Soy
05-05-2006, 06:58
I'll start by giving a Library of Congress full of word to the Mad Doc, as per usual putting forward a fairly entertaining and well thought out post. This is becoming more and more of a chronic problem on the boards. While we haven't descended into the barabrity of the GW forums, we are slipping. It seems to be that we all suffer fro a 'squeaky wheel gets the oil' syndrome; whoever makes the loudest, stupidest comment is instantly shut down, but when someone either posts a rational response or proposition they are often ignored. I'm probably just a guilty as everyone else (I try to be a voice of reason, even if I do play Eldar :p), it seems we are quickly descending into a forum where quick two line posts and replies are the norm, rather than explaining your position, presenting arguements and rebutting contrary arguements.....


Crap. I've quite obviously spent far too long at uni, I sound like a lecturer.:cries:

Sgt Biffo
05-05-2006, 07:54
So you pay 1 extra point for a model that allows simultaneous combat against two rarer armies if certain conditions are met (i.e. Guard/Eldar unit behind cover).

Just because the occasion is rare doesn't mean that the unit is useless.

I'll bet my left testicle that any Ork commander would take a unit or two of stikkbomba's when fighting a death world vetrans army!

cailus
06-05-2006, 08:09
Just because the occasion is rare doesn't mean that the unit is useless.

I'll bet my left testicle that any Ork commander would take a unit or two of stikkbomba's when fighting a death world vetrans army!


I probably would if I ever saw such an army. They're about as rare in my parts of the wood as squats (and I have never ever faced Eldar in nearly 10 years of 40K).

Rlyehable
06-05-2006, 11:12
I, for one (and this thread tells me that I am not alone), enjoy playing the game for the fun. If I get too worked up about winning, then I loose because I fail to have fun.

I enjoy most of the discussions on the board. However, some threads seem to fall into "I can do this" and "No I can't", or "This is junk!" and "No, its not!".

I admit that I can get defensive when I hear some say that my army is overpowered (not my specific list, just the chosen codex). And I can get passionate in my response.

One of the questions that almost never gets answered on this (or other) board(s) is "I have X, Y, Z units in my army and I have trouble with {insert codex} army (or xxxx type unit). What tactics can I use?" Almost always the initial post is ignored and it is suggested that other units be added or substituted. Almost never are tactics using the units listed provided. I guess that this is a pet peive. You may ignore this paragraph, if you so desire.

I, also, have my views on the strength and weakness of many units in 40K. And I realize that my experience shades these opionions. For instance I have never been able to use a Tau Ethereal effectivly. But, I have seen others do so. Is the Ethereal useless, no. Is it something that I will use, no.

I appreciate Mad Doc's starting this tread and his post. Thanks.


Back on the "this army is cheese/junk" topics. My local store ran a tournament (before I started in 40K) called the Worst Army Tournament. Everyone brought a 1500 point list designed to be the worst list they could make. Players swapped armies and played a game. If you won a game (your opponent playing your army list lost), then you advanced in the tournament. I would love to play in this type of torunament, as I think that the players would quickly see the strengths and weaknesses of each army they had to play.

BloodiedSword
06-05-2006, 11:46
I agree with Mad Doc completely.

The only thing I would add (which has been implicitly but not explicitly said) is that it's very easy to get bogged down in the "I'm right" mentality and defend a viewpoint you took at the start, possibly even when you no longer even agree with it yourself, just because someone else is criticising it. Care is needed here..

Damokles
06-05-2006, 12:23
I'm really enjoying this thread. It has been a rare occasion to read threads that actually discuss a problem rather than whining about stats, rules or usefulness of certain units. As many of you mentioned before, the game is about fun. Nobody is forcing you to buy/field units you feel have flaws. But if you seek advice, listen to the advice given (that was mainly Mad dok's point) rather than still complaining. If you, for example, like the models of the stikkbombaz, but you would prefer a cheaper unit rule wise, than you will have to decide for your own, if you a) field the unit you like because you like the models and don't care about spending 10-20 points on it in 1500pt game, or b) go with the unit, you think is more effective in your gaming group.

I have given up option b) for a long time, because I felt it took away the fun. I play mostly friendly games and I don't really care about winning or loosing, not that I wouldn't enjoy winning, but I rather take units I like and have fun because they give me a challenge

marv335
06-05-2006, 12:28
i would rather lose a game i enjoyed, than win a game i didn't.

Kahadras
06-05-2006, 12:43
i would rather lose a game i enjoyed, than win a game i didn't.

Agreed. Too many people nowadays seem to equate winning with having fun. If you don't win, you didn't have any fun. Some of the best games I have ever played in where ones where there was no winner. A closely fought draw is far more of a laugh than knowing who has won by turn two (or earlier).

Kahadras

marv335
06-05-2006, 12:53
i know. i played a game recently against a mate with my new dwarf army versus his skaven.
(i know it's wfb and this is a 40k board, but the moral is the same)
i was massacred in the end due to VPs but the game swung wildley either way for 3 turns with victory in doubt for either side.
we both had fun.
we shook hands.
we didn't complain about each others "beardy lists" to explain losses.

life is a journey. not a destination.

Grand Master Raziel
06-05-2006, 15:41
I've also found that people still follow that same irrational impulse that leads to the "z0MG T3H SKY IS FALLING" posts when complaining about stuff they've faced. Some people are a lot better about it and actually seek answers, but for the most part, it just seems like people WANT to have something to panic about.

I think about 99% of that is simply due to inexperience. New players are most likely to face MEQs...heck, why be coy about it: new players are most likely to be playing and playing against Space Marines. So, they know what to expect when they play against another SM player. Along comes some guy who plays a GASP! different army. The new SM player isn't accustomed to playing against that army. He's never read that codex, so he doesn't know what the units do, nor does he know how he should proceed to defeat that army. He plays against it the way he would against SMs. It doesn't work, and he gets defeated in detail. It takes a lot of emotional maturity to step back from that and say to yourself, "Okay, that was the first time I faced that army, chalk it up to experience." It's much more ego-salving to conclude that the other army is broken. Hell, I was playing for a year before I realized that different does not equal broken.

Damokles
06-05-2006, 16:20
I think about 99% of that is simply due to inexperience.

Although I think that your comment isn't basically wrong, I don't think that it is a thing that is mostly occurring with new inexperienced players. I would say they are very likely to react in a way you described, but I would also say that there are plenty of older, experienced players, who need to complain and panic about changes and/or rules and units that they think are threating their victory.

What I'm trying to say is basically, how long you are playing and how many battles against whatever other army you may have had, it is up to you to play fair, tolerate your opponents skills, and play a good and enjoyable game for both of you, wether you win or lose.

Out of the people of my gaming group, only the more experienced tend to be complaining, rules layering and whining, no matter if they win or lose. Well, all of that a little louder if they lose.

Sgt Biffo
07-05-2006, 15:09
I probably would if I ever saw such an army. They're about as rare in my parts of the wood as squats (and I have never ever faced Eldar in nearly 10 years of 40K).

Wow! (sits in stunned, incredulous silence)

MadJackMcJack
07-05-2006, 16:15
Maybe if they were 9 pts without Krak Stikkbombz and you had an option to buy Krak if you wanted they'd be a little better.

Personally, I'd rather they got rid of stikkbombaz altogether and simply made frag stikkz an upgrade choice for sluggaz (no krak though. that should be reserved for the elites).

The Dude
08-05-2006, 01:52
No. The idea of Orks clonking their opponents on the head with their grenades has always appealed to me :evilgrin: . The point (as I see it) of having Stikkbommaz separate is that they are DIFFERENT. yes, they don't get Choppaz, but that's the drawback that is supposed to balance out them having Krak grenades. This, however doesn't work, as they are more expensive. If they were cheaper or at least the same price as Slugga Boyz, then their usefulness would be a little clearer.

Okay, I'm done talking about that now ;) All in all, I'd have to agree with most of you guys and say there needs to be more discussion on how to effectively use a unit, rather than supposition on how rules changes would make it better. If GW kept doing this, the already present problem of Codex Creep would be so much worse ;) .

dOOHICKY
09-05-2006, 12:01
I think there has been a big change in the mindset of players over the years...
Things have got so much more competitive. If I lose I look at what I did wrong and my opponent did right (or lucky :P)
I don't automatically call them beardy!

When I played 2nd ed there were broken rules all over the place and beardiness was ripe all over the place.... yet no one complained then... we all took it as something to overcome. If someone had a beardy army... you made a beardy army to counter it and so the cycle went until a basic army to actually beat the big beardy army. That still works today.....

So why has so much fun been sucked out and competitivenss been put in??