|
Post by Illithid on Oct 4, 2012 1:50:26 GMT
so the ork lifta droppa doesn't have any special rules oly found in some IA book? how about the mortiis dreadnought? mieotic spores? wraithseer? c'mon, ofcourse there are going to be some units that has normal special rules but the ones people field doesn't always have that. Again, all printed on the page in the IA2 book, with very clear rules. The Mieotic Spore for example has "Detonation", a very simple and clear cut rule, printed in one book. If you are playing these units, it would be expected that you have the IA2 book there next to you. There is no flicking between books. the opponent would most likely be using one unit, how hard is that to reference to? I would question any rule in either codex or IA2 that I did not know. It makes no difference. It requires you looking at a page in a book, just the same as if you were playing GK Paladin Spam and reading it... is that not what we do in our hobby anyway???
|
|
|
Post by coredump on Oct 4, 2012 2:14:50 GMT
First, lets review the 'logic' that was used to justify using FW models/rules: Nowhere does it say in any W40k rulebook / codex that you can not use Forgeworld miniatures. I already quoted it once, so this should not be surprise. "It doesn't say I can't" is a profoundly weak argument. And *if* that is the argument you are making, than it does equally apply to Vampire Counts and GI Joe. The easy response is "No where does it say you *can* use them." In fact, the rules *specifically* state you can use *Citadel* models. The 40K rules also specifically talk about using models from your army codex. NO WHERE does it mention using FW models, nor FW rules. They just printed a 400+ page rulebook; yet someone did not manage to fit the one little sentence of "FW models are okay". But you want us to assume that is what they 'meant'. FW is a separate company/division; it has separate business model, separate responsibilities, etc. They are not the ones tasked with making the rules for the 40K game. They do make supplemental rules, some of which *FW* thinks are appropriate for 40K. But that does not make them part of 40K.
|
|
|
Post by Illithid on Oct 4, 2012 2:37:36 GMT
First, lets review the 'logic' that was used to justify using FW models/rules: Nowhere does it say in any W40k rulebook / codex that you can not use Forgeworld miniatures. I already quoted it once, so this should not be surprise. "It doesn't say I can't" is a profoundly weak argument. And *if* that is the argument you are making, than it does equally apply to Vampire Counts and GI Joe. Coredump, you can get hung up on one comment many pages back and use that one little gem to try to disregard the remainder of my posts if that is what you have to do to try to back up your claims. Or you could actually present some facts about how we can not use them. You can also make wild claims about using GI Joe / Vampire Count miniatures, I actually think it aids my argument and actually hinders yours, as you are making wildly exaggerated references. Watch out that the Hyperbole Police don't come to take you away, and lock you up in Exaggeration-traz. Continue to ignore the other facts presented. Go visit the official GW site, they have links to the Forgeworld site. Go visit the Forgeworld site, the same occurs. Forgeworld (who is owned by GW) has made a ruleset that follows and fits into Apocalypse. Actually, I will quote something from the main Forgeworld page: Contact us on 0115 9168177 from the UK, for more contact details click here Copyright © Games Workshop Limited 2000-2012. All Rights Reserved. Games Workshop, the Games Workshop logo, the Forge World, Warhammer and the Warhammer 40,000 device are either ®, TM and/or © Games Workshop Ltd 2000-2012, variably registered in the UK and other countries around the world. All Rights Reserved. Games Workshop Ltd, Willow Road, Lenton, Nottingham, NG7 2WS. Registered in England and Wales - Company No. 01467092. VAT No. GB 580853421 They are owned by GW, they make rules for Apocalypse and have W40k Approved models stamped in the book. If they are not Citadel Miniatures, what are they then?
|
|
|
Post by N.I.B. on Oct 4, 2012 8:51:30 GMT
Well tell that to my Hive fleet... I keep getting My butt kicked by SM (with either SW or GK allies). They deploy in one of the far corners behind an ADL or in ruins and just gun me down. They never move just shoot, shoot and shoot. Sounds like you should win 5/6 games then, controlling objectives. Gunlines are the trademark of mediocre players - force them to move, they get insecure and lose. Ymgarls like static gunlines, lots of targets. Also when placing terrain, put a nice LOS blocking piece fairly central and move up your Hive Guards behind it.
|
|
|
Post by halvar on Oct 4, 2012 10:21:40 GMT
It's nothing about formstubborness and quite frankly to keep telling someone he or she is "an idiot" for having a diferent view is just a suppression technique. Coredump is the one who actually gives proof that you need your opponents consent. Is it not informative to tell the people that want to use those expensive cool models that they might be going to tournaments that don't allow them? I have no idea who the OP is and so I don't know if he/she is mainly a gamer or modeller and will therefore assume he/she is 50/50 on the two. And fw moels are fw models while citadel is also a sub company and specifically mentioned in the rulebook to be allowed.
|
|
|
Post by cibissum on Oct 4, 2012 10:57:00 GMT
My stance on the 40K stamp in the Forgeworld books is that it is merely to denote what Forgeworld thinks that unit is designed for. While they do make big units designed for apocalypse style games, they probably decided that not everyone plays games big enough to warrant a titan or gargantuan creature. For the smaller games they introduce models with more modest rules and points for those occasions. Using the stamp lets you know which units are meant for those more modest games where super heavy tanks and titans duke it out.
While Games Workshop does own Forgeworld, they are still separate companies. Which is why the rule writers for GW don't make the rules for Forgeworld models and why Forgeworld models aren't sold in GW stores. They used to sell the models in the store, but because they are different companies it was found difficult to keep the level of service where Games Workshop wants it so it was nixed.
As for playing against Forgeworld itself, I don't really have any qualms assuming that my opponent brings the book. The store I play at is nice enough to let me look at a codex if I want to read up on a rule but it's not so easy to read up on a Forgeworld model. Do I assume that the other player is lying to me? Not intentionally, but I learn better through reading and I often find things get left out when someone just mentions what special rule a unit has.
|
|
|
Post by free on Oct 4, 2012 16:14:43 GMT
Well tell that to my Hive fleet... I keep getting My butt kicked by SM (with either SW or GK allies). They deploy in one of the far corners behind an ADL or in ruins and just gun me down. They never move just shoot, shoot and shoot. Sounds like you should win 5/6 games then, controlling objectives. Gunlines are the trademark of mediocre players - force them to move, they get insecure and lose. Ymgarls like static gunlines, lots of targets. Also when placing terrain, put a nice LOS blocking piece fairly central and move up your Hive Guards behind it. Thanks for the advice. Objectives have not played such a big role as I am being tabled. So far I have clearly lost the last two games in a row. They went first both times and managed to take out most of my army in just the first turns. They usually block area terrain so my Ymgarls have to deploy a bit further away to come in for sure. They are extremely "generous" when it comes to LOS and such (borderline ...). I will try hanging back a bit next time to try to force them to move out (instead of rushing them which is my usual approach) the problem is that so far they have always gotten To place two objectives and I one.
|
|
|
Post by t⊗theark on Oct 4, 2012 16:20:13 GMT
I use Imperial Armour units a lot. Heaps of people use Imperial armour units around here. But every time I'm versing somebody who doesn't have the 40K approved IA stuff, I get permission and so I should. What, because GW own forgeworld, everything forgeworld gives the okay is therefore okay for the 40K game? Of course not! The game has codecies, the rule book and the FAQs. The codecies are not written with the Forgeworld teams' experiments in mind and not everybody has access to imperial armour rules. Of course you should get permission to use extra-codex units.
|
|
|
Post by Davor on Oct 4, 2012 21:40:35 GMT
First, lets review the 'logic' that was used to justify using FW models/rules: I already quoted it once, so this should not be surprise. "It doesn't say I can't" is a profoundly weak argument. And *if* that is the argument you are making, than it does equally apply to Vampire Counts and GI Joe. Coredump, you can get hung up on one comment many pages back and use that one little gem to try to disregard the remainder of my posts if that is what you have to do to try to back up your claims. Or you could actually present some facts about how we can not use them. You can also make wild claims about using GI Joe / Vampire Count miniatures, I actually think it aids my argument and actually hinders yours, as you are making wildly exaggerated references. Watch out that the Hyperbole Police don't come to take you away, and lock you up in Exaggeration-traz. Continue to ignore the other facts presented. Go visit the official GW site, they have links to the Forgeworld site. Go visit the Forgeworld site, the same occurs. Forgeworld (who is owned by GW) has made a ruleset that follows and fits into Apocalypse. Actually, I will quote something from the main Forgeworld page: Contact us on 0115 9168177 from the UK, for more contact details click here Copyright © Games Workshop Limited 2000-2012. All Rights Reserved. Games Workshop, the Games Workshop logo, the Forge World, Warhammer and the Warhammer 40,000 device are either ®, TM and/or © Games Workshop Ltd 2000-2012, variably registered in the UK and other countries around the world. All Rights Reserved. Games Workshop Ltd, Willow Road, Lenton, Nottingham, NG7 2WS. Registered in England and Wales - Company No. 01467092. VAT No. GB 580853421 They are owned by GW, they make rules for Apocalypse and have W40k Approved models stamped in the book. If they are not Citadel Miniatures, what are they then? Well going by your statement, we should be able to put Corvette parts in a Chevett. They are both Vetts, but that wasn't the point. The point is, that they are both made by GM. Just because it's the same company doesn't mean the same parts can be put in the in a different car. Yes it can be done, but that doesn't mean that GM would approve it. I respect you very much. Right now we are going in circles. For one, I am sure Coredump is only playing the devils advocate here. 2nd he is correct in a sense. I haven't seen you yet counter Coredumps point. You keep referencing something else. I believe Coredump made a reply to one of your rebuttals, but you have yet to make a counter rebuttal to "just because it doesn't say". Coredump in other posts and here keeps reminding us, that 40K is a permissive game. You have to be told what you can do, not told what you can't do. So since it doesn't say Forge World is "legal" in a regular 40K game, it is not. If you want to go by that it's the same comapny in the same building, Coredump made a perfectly good counter argument that if that is the case, how come Vamprie Counts can't be used then? It's the same company, under the same building. Now all of a sudden you will not address this point made. When we debate, we should listen to what others have to say and counter what they say not go off onto something else with at least addressing what the other person said.
|
|
|
Post by Illithid on Oct 4, 2012 22:53:53 GMT
Well going by your statement, we should be able to put Corvette parts in a Chevett. They are both Vetts, but that wasn't the point. The point is, that they are both made by GM. Just because it's the same company doesn't mean the same parts can be put in the in a different car. Yes it can be done, but that doesn't mean that GM would approve it. I respect you very much. Right now we are going in circles. For one, I am sure Coredump is only playing the devils advocate here. 2nd he is correct in a sense. I haven't seen you yet counter Coredumps point. You keep referencing something else. I believe Coredump made a reply to one of your rebuttals, but you have yet to make a counter rebuttal to "just because it doesn't say". Coredump in other posts and here keeps reminding us, that 40K is a permissive game. You have to be told what you can do, not told what you can't do. So since it doesn't say Forge World is "legal" in a regular 40K game, it is not. If you want to go by that it's the same comapny in the same building, Coredump made a perfectly good counter argument that if that is the case, how come Vamprie Counts can't be used then? It's the same company, under the same building. Now all of a sudden you will not address this point made. When we debate, we should listen to what others have to say and counter what they say not go off onto something else with at least addressing what the other person said. I have responded to it Davor, in fact I told him he was exaggerating. I am also listening to him, but so far that is the only case he has put forth besides the "citadel miniature" one. We all know you can not use those figures in W40k (they are fantasy or not even GW owned, hel they are not even labeled with a Warhammer 40k badge). Where else has anyone countered the information I have present (and there is quite a bit of it). But here are some direct quotes from the GW site: www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?prodId=prod1170260Direct quote: This new hardback contains everything you`ll need to use your collection of Forge World models to fight apocalyptic battles in conjunction with Warhammer 40,000 Apocalypse. Imperial Armour Apocalypse can be also be used for Warhammer 40,000 and it replaces Imperial Armour Update 2006, plus it updates the Imperial Armour hardback books where necessary. I do not think I have to explain why we shouldn't be able to use those models. But by his argument, I could use my Vampire Counts as they are "Citadel Miniatures" also. But I know I can not and am not going to try to use that as a hypothetical argument to debunk his statement. The latest rulebook, in the 'Miniature Showcase' section even has Forgeworld Chaos Reavers and Chaos Warhounds on display and refer to Forge World Campaigns on Page 383 in the current Rulebook. All I am doing is presenting more information and debating. For some reason, when you mention Forge World, some people get all defensive (I do not know if they have had horrible experiences tabletop in the past, but there is a certain "angst"). To counter the other arguments like Halvar's (someone else came up with these, but they are valid points): -Recent unit updates, like the Ork Dakkajet or do not currently have their rules listed in their purchasable codecies. Same thing with the recent daemon updates, are they also invalid since many FLGS cannot currently obtain these items? What about the current rules for the Sisters of Battle? The rulebook nor codices state that a Stormtalon is a legal model, you have to do a bit of digging for that. - Every issue of White Dwarf, their in house publication, discusses Forge World at least in advertisment. US issue 389 p.82 for instance. - The newer forge world books, the aronoutica book specificly, state that you have to show your oponent the rule as its polite but that they are normal force organisation slots -GW is a fierce defender of their IP and possible infringement. They have under no circumstance asked for FW (an in house company) to remove the specific notice on accompanying products about their legality. 'Sneeze' metaphorically about various elements and you will receive communication from an attorney. - GW does not state which rules are legal, it is only assumed current army books are legal while outdated information is replaced. Every book before 6th edtion (read every codex) is currently out of date and GW makes no mention of what version of the rules to purchase in their rulebook. If you show up to a table with a kroot mercenary army from 3rd edtion with its intended rules they are legal. -FW is an in house element of GW and it is solely responsible for its content. This isn't Chapterhouse or some other hobby site making rules, this is the same company one and the same. I have contacted both Forgeworld and Games Workshop customer service and look forward to their reply. If I am wrong, I will of course state that, but nothing at the moment proves that. Still get your opponents consent Everything is opponent consent in the name of player enjoyment over specific rulings or disavowing. FW is 100% good to go anywhere unless explicitly stated by a tournament, which can also ban things like Allies and double force org chart. The community needs to take a deep breath, and adapt.
|
|
|
Post by greycladstranger on Oct 5, 2012 0:05:46 GMT
Wow, some really good pro/cons about Forge World products. Thankfully I've been blessed with a really great LGS and a pretty awesome gaming community that has spelled out some good ground rules for our local tournies. for example. and as far as FW goes our guidelines are as follows. I've already ordered the book with the rules in it and am pretty stoked. I was in the same boat as free with shooty armies and was looking for just the right thing to really throw my opponent off and I think this is it. Thanks for all the positive feedback! yo joe!!!!
|
|
|
Post by Davor on Oct 5, 2012 0:22:33 GMT
Well said Ithllid, I am liking this debate. For me, I am reluctent about FW is because what I herd from people and what I read on the interent. While I will give someone the benifit of the doubt, (I play for fun) but I have always seen people take advantage of being sneaky and using the best overpowered units just so they can win.
That is why, I say, use only what is in your codex. This way, if it's overpowered, at least it's in the codex and they are not going else where to get something better than what is in their book. Now with allies, this basically goes out the window, and I am sure we will all acept using stuff that is not in your book. It will just take time for us all to get use to it, just like how most of us are use to "FW is overpowered".
But as long an the person tells me ahead of time and I am not shocked or unprepared for it, I would play them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 5, 2012 0:24:21 GMT
Make sure to let us know how the Meiotic Spores work out. Bare minimum they are sure to be a diversion but I'd love to hear about some Cheese Marines getting melted by floating sacks
|
|
|
Post by innocent on Oct 5, 2012 3:26:59 GMT
Mieotic Spores don't look hugely broken to me, so I wouldn't see any reason for anyone to refuse to play you in a friendly game.
That said, it's always a good idea to tell someone in advance if you plan to use Forgeworld units, and tell them which ones. The 40k Approved stamp does not change the fact that some of the 40k Approved units are downright broken. If I'm going to play against a Caestus, I'd like to know in advance so that I can plan a counter and not get steamrolled...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 5, 2012 3:43:23 GMT
None of the 3 40k tyranid units are remotely overpowered. Again, guessing you haven't actually read the book. What's broken about the Apoc Tyranids?
|
|