|
Check the last several pages of Blood Angels discussion.
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 18:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 03:37 |
|
|
Yeah, the Deathstorm box is dope and pretty good value, I even bought it at 10% off Australian prices and am flipping the crap I don't want.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 18:19
|
|
|
Rapey Joe Stalin posted:That isn't the feeling a customer of a reputable business should be left with. Really my argument just boils down to this. ^ Many people who have given lots of money to games workshop feel like they have been taken for a ride, and that's indicative of a problem in their approach to business. You can argue that we just bought dumb models or that we shouldn't worry about being competitive, but I feel like you just got done telling us that this game is a luxury and that we don't NEED the models that we're buying. What about the guy who had an all-bike ork army, or a horde of BA assault marines? They literally can't use their armies anymore until they buy more troops, extra books, forge world characters or whatever else. They can't enjoy the things they already spent money and time on without spending more money and time. They weren't even very competitive armies, so the argument that it was part of a rebalancing effort doesn't hold much water. It's a refinancing effort. Boon your eldar are great and I love your aesthetic. You don't have any full army photos, do you? Ignite Memories fucked around with this message at 18:25 on Dec 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 18:20
|
|
|
Esser-Z posted:Check the last several pages of Blood Angels discussion. A new player is going to give approximately 0 fucks about all of that. Is the first day DLC content bullshit? Yeah, totally. That doesn't make Deathstorm a lemon starter set. e: Ignite Memories posted:Really my argument just boils down to this. Many people who have given lots of money to games workshop feel like they have been taken for a ride, and that's indicative of a problem in their approach to business. You can argue that we just bought dumb models or that we shouldn't worry about being competitive, but I feel like you just got done telling us that this game is a luxury and that we don't NEED the models that we're buying. What about the guy who had an all-bike ork army, or a horde of BA assault marines? They literally can't use their armies anymore until they buy more troops, extra books, forge world characters or whatever else. They can't enjoy the things they already spent money and time on without spending more money and time. They literally can use their armies still you idiot. Just because people put their fingers in their ears and go lalalalalalala when people bring up unbound doesn't mean it doesn't exist. And these weren't even particularly competitive or common lists. Big Willy Style fucked around with this message at 18:23 on Dec 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 18:21
|
|
|
MasterSlowPoke posted:I'm really interested in learning what the Flesh Tearers and Blood Angels 2nd company detachments are. The new stuff is nice, but the question was "What add-on supplement has actually meaningfully improved upon the base codex? " and before that new stuff I would argue that Tyranids were easily one of the worst, if not the worst, codexes in the game. Before Tyranid apology month those paid dataslates at least made them somewhat competitive. I would also often choose Crimson Slaughter over normal Chaos Space Marines as far as rules go with both however being superior to Black Legion. Well, if I still played and was not selling a massive Chaos Army in SAMart.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 18:22
|
|
|
It wasn't what I thought it was when I bought it. My reasoning when looking at the BA models was "wow okay, that's an HQ, two Troops and an Elite, I don't have any modern BA models but I do have unused assault squads... I can build something unlike my C:SM." Then the day the box arrived I found out that the two Troops choices in the box were moved to Elites, and so had assault squads. The army I wanted to build was now unavailable but here's some more tactical marines to buy. While I could use the Deathstorm dataslates the DC one costs a fortune for a five-man squad with a loadout I'd never choose, and the DC dread costs more points than the codex version. Oh and then two weeks after the box arrived another £40 book comes along that has a formation designed to capitalise on the now insane congestion (eleven units for Christ sake) in the Elites category. In large part it was my own fault for buying in just before a new codex came out, but at the same time I don't think anyone here could honestly say they expected GW would remove 60% of the Troops options from a codex, all of them signature units. In short I feel like this whole release was designed to force existing BA players to re-buy the compulsory elements of the armies, and to make any BA player wanting to utilise the BA specific units pay for multiple books. Lovely Joe Stalin fucked around with this message at 18:25 on Dec 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 18:23
|
|
|
Esser-Z posted:Check the last several pages of Blood Angels discussion. None of that really matters to a new player. They aren't stuck with an excess of elites and FA and no troops. A new player gets that box and has a pretty cool little HQ and elites section to build off with a clear next step: pick up two troops. Also, in regard to KFF chat, don't forget that the switch to an invuln is a huge buff that makes the KFF effective against all that ignores cover shooting in the game. And the nerf to its radius is part of a trend of "fixing" all those bubbles and clouds and force fields. E: that First Company data slate isn't designed to capitalize on your sudden gloat of elite veterans and terminators. It's designed to let you field the First Company. PeterWeller fucked around with this message at 18:30 on Dec 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 18:23
|
|
|
Big Willy Style posted:They literally can use their armies still you idiot. Just because people put their fingers in their ears and go lalalalalalala when people bring up unbound doesn't mean it doesn't exist. And these weren't even particularly competitive or common lists. The game is played with objectives. Unbound doesn't exist. What's he gonna do, loving table you with his 30 ork bikers? You said it yourself, it wasn't a competitive list. So why exactly should these armies suddenly become worse at scoring points? Ignite Memories fucked around with this message at 18:35 on Dec 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 18:27
|
|
|
PeterWeller posted:None of that really matters to a new player. They aren't stuck with an excess of elites and FA and no troops. A new player gets that box and has a pretty cool little HQ and elites section to build off with a clear next step: pick up two troops. It matters to a new player because the box says those units are troops and then you get the codex and it turns out it was lying to you.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 18:30
|
|
|
I'm building my stormtrooper army around the Ground Assault formation from the Militarum Tempestus codex, which has a bunch of special rules but not ObSec. I want to add a Knight and a Thunderbolt, and I'm just gonna go unbound so I can take that neato fighter plane without a platoon of Guardsmen to go with it. No, I don't plan to win a lot of games.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 18:30
|
|
|
Rulebook Heavily posted:It matters to a new player because the box says those units are troops and then you get the codex and it turns out it was lying to you. Those particular units can still be fielded as troops, though, so you haven't actually been lied to.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 18:31
|
|
|
Yeah, it's a specific formation of Troops, but they're still Troops.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 18:33
|
|
|
PeterWeller posted:Those particular units can still be fielded as troops, though, so you haven't actually been lied to. Right up until the player wants to actually use the codex and build different armies and try things out, yes. It's also needlessly confusing to have one supplement say one thing and the next say something different, especially to someone unfamiliar with how this all works.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 18:35
|
|
|
Ignite Memories posted:The game is played with objectives. Unbound doesn't exist. Unbound units are still scoring. SRM posted:Yeah, it's a specific formation of Troops, but they're still Troops. Well, they're not a formation, they're a dataslate, like every other unit in the Blood Angels codex. The nomenclature is taking some getting used to. Rulebook Heavily posted:Right up until the player wants to actually use the codex and build different armies and try things out, yes. Raphen's Death Company and Crassor the Damned ARE Troops when building your list, though. They're like special characters. I kinda expect an Errata on that, though I'm guessing it will never come. It should also be noted that Deathstorm was never a starter set. MasterSlowPoke fucked around with this message at 18:38 on Dec 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 18:36
|
|
|
Unbound units score table scraps like a loving dog
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 18:37
|
|
|
Also, I don't really have much sympathy for people who have gimmick armies that become useless or unusable. For them to become unusable GW now has to literally (literally in the literal sense not the American sense) remove it from the rules.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 18:38
|
|
|
Blood Angels with assault squads and DC as Troops was not a 'gimmick' army any more than C:SM with tacticals and scouts is. They were the basic defining Troops of the faction.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 18:41
|
|
|
Ignite Memories posted:The game is played with objectives. Unbound doesn't exist. What can I tell you then? You don't think a rule that exists doesn't exist so there is really not much point in having a discussion. GW fucks up, a lot, but you don't need to lie and ignore rules to demonstrate it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 18:44
|
|
|
Boon posted:Lots and lots of lame GW chat in here so here are some models because I finally got off my rear end and finished painting something. Your models look good and you should feel good.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 18:47
|
|
|
Ignite Memories posted:Boon your eldar are great and I love your aesthetic. You don't have any full army photos, do you? Thanks man, I appreciate it! I don't have any at the moment. I'm going to finish putting a board together and touching up some of my metal models (because someone sent them all flying) and then I'll grab some pics. Hopefully within a couple of months it'll be ready. In the meantime... I finished a couple of DE models as well (for deep-strike shenanigans).   
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 18:48
|
|
|
Big Willy Style posted:Also, I don't really have much sympathy for people who have gimmick armies that become useless or unusable. For them to become unusable GW now has to literally (literally in the literal sense not the American sense) remove it from the rules. So I guess you feel that because you disagree with the things that customers are upset about that these customers do not matter. Where else have I gotten this vibe... Ignite Memories fucked around with this message at 18:51 on Dec 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 18:48
|
|
|
MasterSlowPoke posted:Unbound units are still scoring. Blah blah yes they are troops if you take the special dataslate. I know. That's not the point and you know that too. As for it not being a starter set, there sure seem to be a whole lot of BA players new and old who are mining it as if it were one so the difference is clearly lost on the consumer regardless of whatever the company intended X or Y to be or not be. GW's intent is worth nothing because they are completely incapable of actually communicating it to their supposed customer base.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 18:50
|
|
|
If it comes with two factions, a campaign, and a complete set of the rules, it is a starter set. Of course it is.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 18:52
|
|
|
Rapey Joe Stalin posted:Blood Angels with assault squads and DC as Troops was not a 'gimmick' army any more than C:SM with tacticals and scouts is. They were the basic defining Troops of the faction. My Blood Angels had 55 assault marines, and I'd say it was a gimmick army.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 18:52
|
|
|
Ignite Memories posted:So I guess you feel that because you disagree with the things that customers are upset about that these customers do not matter. The customer in this case (you) is just straight out wrong or is telling fibs? You said you literally cannot take assault or bike armies. YOU loving CAN AND THEY CAN EVEN CAPTURE OBJECTIVES. If a unit exists you can run as many of the stupid thing in an army if you want. There are drawbacks for breaking the FoC chart but that has always been the case (paying a character tax usually)
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 18:57
|
|
|
That you chose to make it an assault gimmick is irrelevant. It also doesn't explain why DC were removed. I can make a gimmick list of 55 tactical marines, does that mean I shouldn't be at all bothered if the next vanilla codex moves tactical squads to Heavy Support and leaves me with the choice of 'Scouts in this new boxed set with extra skulls!' as my compulsory Troops? Lovely Joe Stalin fucked around with this message at 19:01 on Dec 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 18:58
|
|
|
Rapey Joe Stalin posted:That you chose to make it an assault gimmick is irrelevant. It also doesn't explain DC were removed. I don't know how 2nd ed worked but in third ed you rolled for each unit to see if a dude succumbed to the black rage. In 5th you could buy units as troops. In 7th you can only have them as elites (except that squad from deathstorm). The pendulum swings, and from a fluff perspective I would argue that it more thematic for them to be outside of the troops slot because it isn't like the have half a chapter of angry dudes to call on. The elites slot is too jammed full though, for sure.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 19:03
|
|
|
So how many people have to feel slighted before it's a trend? P.s, Don't forget to answer the question of why these armies had to become worse at scoring, if not to sell more troops models. It's the pendulum, right? Maybe the bikes were just too OP with the ability to wrestle control of an objective from an empty wave serpent. They do such rigorous balance testing, you see. Ignite Memories fucked around with this message at 19:09 on Dec 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 19:06
|
|
|
Big Willy Style posted:I don't know how 2nd ed worked but in third ed you rolled for each unit to see if a dude succumbed to the black rage. In 5th you could buy units as troops. In 7th you can only have them as elites (except that squad from deathstorm). The pendulum swings, and from a fluff perspective I would argue that it more thematic for them to be outside of the troops slot because it isn't like the have half a chapter of angry dudes to call on. The elites slot is too jammed full though, for sure. I should probably clarify, it's not the individual removal of either the DC, the DC dread or the assault squads that really bothers me. I can see individual reasoning, and there is a history of change with how the DC are handled. If it was one or even two units it would be a case of "sucks but whatever". As it has been with other books where a unit that could be made Troops no longer can. What upsets me is that it was all three of the distinctly Blood Angels Troops options that were moved at the same time, with no (at least for DC) obvious necessity, while a slew of new products came out to exploit that fundamental change. As someone just buying in to Blood Angels as a distinct faction from my vanilla marines it leaves a really bitter taste in my mouth. Lovely Joe Stalin fucked around with this message at 19:15 on Dec 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 19:11
|
|
|
Rulebook Heavily posted:Blah blah yes they are troops if you take the special dataslate. I know. That's not the point and you know that too. The point is the units the starter set says are troops are, in fact, troops, and GW isn't lying to anyone.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 19:13
|
|
|
Can't wait to see the kind of discussions that will pop up once Necrons get their update 
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 19:21
|
|
|
Ignite Memories posted:So how many people have to feel slighted before it's a trend? Why do you feel the need to lie about rules to make a point? You lie about about rules to set up a more favourable scenario for your argument. I haven't had to do that mate. The reasons you gave for being slighted are dumb. You said you literally cannot build an assault marine army or speed freak army and you simply can. Feel slighted about your army being nerfed, I couldn't care less. GW could have thought the extra special weapon in an assault squad was enough to justify the move to elites? I don't know their inner working and you don't either. It is essentially a cavalry unit but in space, and cavalry aren't as effective as holding holding objectives as infantry? As I said earlier, I think they haven't done the best job on this release.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 19:23
|
|
|
PeterWeller posted:The point is the units the starter set says are troops are, in fact, troops, and GW isn't lying to anyone. And if you want to take them in any other configuration than troops they suddenly cease to be troops. You might want to use them in other configurations because you bought the Codex after enjoying the set, and that is what a Codex is for. And now that we've established that new players DO buy starter sets, both new ones to the army and new ones to the game, and that the set that looks very much like their starter set is basically a starter set from a consumer standpoint, and that they might want to actually use a Codex like a Codex is used afterwards, we can totally agree that obviously there's no problem with anything and GWs decisions here are perfectly fine and not in any way confusing, misleading or otherwise not ideal for the customer. Rulebook Heavily fucked around with this message at 19:25 on Dec 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 19:23
|
|
|
Big Willy Style posted:YOU loving CAN AND THEY CAN EVEN CAPTURE OBJECTIVES. Up until a single tac marine with ObSec sits near the objective and scores it more than him because hey guess what, in a game about objectives an army with Objective Secure has a clear and present advantage over an army that does not. This is why a lot of the alternate FOC choices in army books are given a wary eye when they don't have ObSec because giving that up is a really tough choice, and in many instances there's not enough of a bonus to make up for that fact. Yes, Unbound is a choice you can take. No, no one loving uses it because it's balls. It's not even considered a choice among most warhamms, and there's not a single major tournament out there that currently allows it, and for a lot of people that IS a deciding factor. The current trend from GW is taking away FOC-altering choices like all-bike armies or all-assault marine armies and it's possing a lot of players off for a reason, "gimmicky" or not.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 19:24
|
|
|
I bought some oblits from eBay and got these dudes instead, anyone know what they are? (sorry for the lovely pic)
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 19:30
|
|
|
Slimnoid posted:Up until a single tac marine with ObSec sits near the objective and scores it more than him because hey guess what, in a game about objectives an army with Objective Secure has a clear and present advantage over an army that does not. This is why a lot of the alternate FOC choices in army books are given a wary eye when they don't have ObSec because giving that up is a really tough choice, and in many instances there's not enough of a bonus to make up for that fact. Cool, I understand this. You can still take assault marine and bike armies, not every game is a tournament. I'm not arguing that them moving units around is was a poor decision. I am arguing you can still take these armies and Ignite Memories says you can't. People definitely use unbound, I saw some dumb as gently caress army with knights and riptides and something else the other day at my local games store.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 19:32
|
|
|
Mango Polo posted:Can't wait to see the kind of discussions that will pop up once Necrons get their update We're not going to have to wait long, hopefully. If it actually drops before the new year I know where my extra cash is going. That baby didn't need juice anyway, lose some weight for the new year, baby.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 19:33
|
|
|
This is awesome! hahah
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 19:33
|
|
|
Big Willy Style posted:Why do you feel the need to lie about rules to make a point? You lie about about rules to set up a more favourable scenario for your argument. I haven't had to do that mate. You trot out unbound like it matters. I'm saying it really doesn't matter. It's just a bullshit cover-our-rear end rule so they can Technically not be utterly damning these armies to literal unusability. It still is a rules change that strongly incentivizes these players to buy more by trashing the usability of his current stuff, while simultaneously opening the door for the plastic crack addicts to buy Even More Thing™. Just because I used an american Literal doesn't mean my point doesn't stand, so why not address the meat of my argument instead of the grammar? You're giving me the catholic "don't question god" argument like there is some grand mystery to the motivations of games workshop. They're trying to sell more loving troops. It's not rocket science. Didn't the Brand New Troops Box tip you off? Big Willy Style posted:People definitely use unbound, I saw some dumb as gently caress army with knights and riptides and something else the other day at my local games store. Definitely the people I would like to be playing with. Ignite Memories fucked around with this message at 19:42 on Dec 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 19:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 03:37 |
|
|
Ultragonk posted:I bought some oblits from eBay and got these dudes instead, anyone know what they are? (sorry for the lovely pic) Those are possessed, I'm sorry for your misfortune.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 19:38
|
|
