Stop worrying about the meta and have some fun

[mattblowers]

I sometimes scratch my head when people cry and moan on the internet about nerfs/buffs to xyz unit. I always find these as opportunities to expand my collection or make a nice profit.

Let me explain. I'm first and foremost a collector. Between my son and I we have 140,000+ points of models we consider our playing armies and somewhere in the vicinity of 80,000+/- more in our greater collection. I'm constantly looking for bargains. I'm constantly looking to fill out my core playing armies whilst always using the rest of the collection as stock. Once a model goes into my playing army (either because I painted it, did conversion work on it, or consider it key to my complete army) it's mine for good. The rest of the models are in a constant state of flux. I sell to local players in my club, trade on internet sites, and sell on ebay. It's primarily how I fund the hobby. I buy things when they are out of popularity and sell/trade them when they are super popular. My rule of thumb is I never pay more than $1 per model (including shipping) for infantry models. For special characters $15 is the outside and then only if it's a really rare model, and $12 for all others. I don't pay more than $45 for any heavy model and typically buy for $23-35. Just this week I bought 50+ Eldar warriors for $33. About 40% were missing heads, but I have such huge bits boxes that I easily fixed that. I fix/finish building any models I aquire within a week of purchase, otherwise the pile of shame can really get out of hand. Things are always changing depending on the meta. Right now Eldar and Riptides are really cheap. At the end of 7th imperial guard was being given away for really low prices. Now a squad goes for $40+. Every upswing and downturn in the power level of an army is an opportunity for someone. It's a part of the hobby I really enjoy. My point is this: if we quit worrying so much about always having the top army at the moment it allows us to find other opportunities. Another bonus about always buying things that are unpopular is that it drives me to play less popular units. I'm known for bringing lists that have something in it that most consider subpar, it doesn't always work out, but it does often enough that it's worth the risk. You will be much more driven by the shiny new model than you will be a netlist if you just got a new unit in the mail and you realize how awesome they look. The only start collecting box I've purchased is the one for Dark Eldar and it was because I bought it when a local store was going out of bussniness and it was $35. That was for 3 jetbikes, 10 troops, an HQ, and a transport. It fell within all my guidelines and so was a great purchase. Then when a new model comes out that I really want (like when GSC launched) I dip into my trade stock and sell/trade off enough units that are currently popular to buy the new shiny.

TL/DR: Stop worrying about always getting the new thing that everyone tells you that you must have and buy what is affordable. Buy low and sell high and you can mostly fund your hobby addiction.

[keening]

I'm so similar! My own pile of shame is out of control though!

So far this edition bargains on Dimachaeron and Harridan. Looking for a good Eldar army still though...

[acehilator]

Concerning your collection, you realize that makes you an extreme outlier, and not the norm right? Both for the fact that you own that many models, and that you are interested in collecting that many armies.

[Overread]

Online debates for games tend to be conducted by a tiny margin of players. Honestly think of the biggest fansite and consider that of those actively talking you could easily fit them into one room. They represent a tiny, but often vocal part of the community. Furthermore they tend to be the more "serious" about many aspects - be that modelling, painting, gaming et c...

So as a result you often get more debate on the meta state of the game and of balance. It's not that any one person debating those points is incapable of a friendly game or is going to up and sell everything or the latest and greatest (honestly the number of people who do that is quite small in all truth). Most are simply passionate gamers who want a better game and debate the points of meta and balance in an attempt to share their views and gain new insights.

It's also their way to interact with the hobby community online; I wouldn't tell them to not talk about such matters. Instead I encourage them fully to do so. It generates discussion; keeps people around and when don in a polite fashion is part of the community. Same way I want painters to talk about paint and modellers to show off their new sculpts etc...

[able]

Yeah, after 10+ years you can probably expect that all your stuff will have been useful at some point, but not everybody has that history. You are always going to be able to field a decent army simply because the good stuff now has been weak in the past, so picking up cool models is not going to compromise how much fun you have in the game. Many of us are not in that position. The models we pick up now are the models we will be playing with, and while we are prepared to tolerate some compromise for the sake of cool models committing ourselves to ineffectiveness in every game is not fun. In 5 years the models might be effective, but most people would not stick at it for 5 years of bad games.

You are also neglecting storage costs. I'm guessing you have about a room of models. How much do you reckon it would cost to rent a room for the time it has been used? You are effectively warehousing cheaper models. It is a nice side earner if the space would otherwise be empty, and I'm guessing you enjoy it too, but not everybody has the space and the time for what you are suggesting. A model that is not fun to play is often filling a space that could be taken by a model that is both cool and plays well, so if space is limited it should be swapped out.

The strongest points in the meta will always be changing, and always building to the perceived strongest list is foolish. If the game were in a good place, it would be possible to play a sub strength list into an optimal one and win with better play. Every unit should have a place in a list that is able to beat almost any other list played decently but not fantastically*. It isn't there though.

As a hobby I spend money to have fun. Losing can be fun, and winning can lack fun. I tend to find that playing out scenarios with an obvious outcome is not. Weak units tend not to be fun, unless they have interesting rules. I find nothing more disheartening than looking back at a game I have played where I played my strengths into my opponent's weaknesses, and still lost with decent luck. I don't even play against 'serious' lists. I probably could spend less money, but the game side of things would be less enjoyable because of it, so it would not be a good trade.

[mattblowers]

Oct 13, 2017 14:42:11 GMT able said:

You are also neglecting storage costs. I'm guessing you have about a room of models. How much do you reckon it would cost to rent a room for the time it has been used? You are effectively warehousing cheaper models. It is a nice side earner if the space would otherwise be empty, and I'm guessing you enjoy it too, but not everybody has the space and the time for what you are suggesting. A model that is not fun to play is often filling a space that could be taken by a model that is both cool and plays well, so if space is limited it should be swapped out.

I get that, but then we are simply talking a matter of scale. You could just as easily pick only 2 armies and accomplish the same thing. As for space, it does require that, but, at least in the US, people also spend a ton of money (if you consider renting out a room) to just have a spare bedroom or formal room that seldom gets used. My stuff is spread out over several locations in my home, but you could easily have 2 armies in 5-10 banker boxes and do the same thing.

[killercroc]

I'll throw my virtual hat into this conversation cause I slightly agree and disagree with the idea.

As far as meta goes it's easily changed by the players so there isn't really one meta, for example if people play with a lot of tanks you're going to create a tank/anti-tank meta. If people play with a lot of infantry you're going to create a troop/anti-troop meta. Pretty simple as it's just the collective play style in an area so it changes. I guess you can say for example in my area there is a "min troops max elites" meta where most people take minimum troops to get the most elite and heavies as they can bring.

Now all said this isn't a bad thing but it makes the "just play for fun" part of the game too difficult to do. So many times I've just brought what I wanted to have in a list to play and it just gets rolled over by the person who optimized every part of their army. It could just be me but when I go to play for fun and get rolled by turn 2 because I didn't bring a serious list I end up not having fun. If I wanted to waste my time and feel like hitting my head with a hammer would have been more productive I'd go watch an Amy Schumer movie or comedy special. I'm all for just fun games and bringing the models you like and converted and painted, I do that myself even if they aren't very good but I still bring more powerful units cause losing a game before it starts is just a reason to not bother playing.

The only way to get people to "stop playing meta and just have fun" is if you can get everyone to do it, which just isn't possible. People want to win so much they'll break the game to do so, I don't care about winning so much I'll do that. Hell I like winning but if it's a good game and I can play with what I have that's awesome.

[biomassbob]

Oct 13, 2017 16:41:18 GMT killercroc said:

I'm all for just fun games and bringing the models you like and converted and painted, I do that myself even if they aren't very good but I still bring more powerful units cause losing a game before it starts is just a reason to not bother playing.

The only way to get people to "stop playing meta and just have fun" is if you can get everyone to do it, which just isn't possible. People want to win so much they'll break the game to do so, I don't care about winning so much I'll do that. Hell I like winning but if it's a good game and I can play with what I have that's awesome.

This ^

I feel the same way. I like winning as much as the next person but would much prefer a game that is enjoyable and both sides a relatively good chance to win (understanding 40k will never be balanced). And there are some people in my community that play that way at times and also many people that want to make strong winning lists. Each area has its own meta - we have local tournaments for the toughest lists and tournaments where it is stressed to only bring 'fun' lists and not that OP stuff. That at least allows for some variety.