Goatboy’s 40k Thoughts: Meta, SPAM & You

Goatboy here. Its been a crazy few weeks of a new edition. Should we embrace or avoid the SPAM?

The current meta that seems to be rolling out from the latest 8th events from overseas and in the states is full of one thing – spam, spam, and more spam.  Oh and some flyers mixed in too.  It seems to be the biggest thing I see in most lists.  It is all about finding the undercosted option that either kills a lot, gets boosted by auras the best, or really has the most wounds for its point limit.  I know I am one to “complain” about spam – but it really seems to be crazy with lots of lists looking kinda nutty.  So the question comes in – do we do anything about it?

SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM

I think a lot of the spam will start to move away as people get used to the edition and how to win games with updated missions.  A lot of the game will depend on having some movement tricks, damage tricks, and survivability.  This can come in from some vehicles, deep striking options, and answers to all sorts of “problems”.  Will the balanced list make it to the top out of all of this?  Who knows right now but it is something to hope for.  Still is there something else maybe GW can do or some events to do to make better “matched” play?  Is there too many options and with the unlimited “collections” groups have access to mean you will see armies that weren’t even thought about by playtesters/gw/etc?  I am pretty sure no one tested the Ravenflock spam army.

CAW CAW

 I think the real issue with that army is that its Aura power breaks the normal – only from “X” faction gets to use this aura.  The Ynarri faction gets to cherry pick from 3 different army lists, add a new keyword, and amp up the usage of their aura powers.  The Imperium has some of this too – but again it is limited to rerolls and less abuses with a lack of a cheap large wound option that is also fast.  Chaos has some of this but it isn’t nearly as problematic.  I again think it is due to the nature of intent play testing versus straight breaking the game play testing.  I also hear chatter that some things were left out of the play testers hands as well.

Lessons from MTG

Let’s look at the current standard for a competitive game right now with some random factor mixed in.  I know I have talked about Magic the Gathering but I think there is a lot we can take from it.  Whether we deal with a set of “seasons” with specific rules, tournaments with a different format, or a “balancing” of the army/deck.  I think the one thing we could for sure look at is limiting “Unit choices” in a way to match Magic.  If you don’t know about the game you can only have a max of 4 of a specific card unless it is a “Basic” land.  This limits the deck and keeps things from spamming out of control.  This is something we could bring into 40k by force only x amount of certain units in an army to try and curtail the copy and paste nonsense we see in any initial game.  Let’s say you can only have troops repeated more then 3 times in an army and while you could say copy an “amazing” troop choice over and over – it will probably limit some of the things we are currently seeing from the “best” armies.

I still like the idea of specific formats that seemed to get tested in the last edition of the game.  Old Skool 40k with only one army and no “allies” seemed to be a thing.  We had issues with some armies not being usable and others being a bit too good for their option.  I could see all factions must be the same type of army event.  This is easier to do now as everything is somewhat balanced at the beginning with a few stinkers.  Heck we could see some other types of formats pop up if enough people get excited.  I do suspect future releases will have things like – everything has to be from this faction to unlock the CP usage and extra rules.

RAW Rears Its Head

Of course all of this could be blown out of proportion because we haven’t had enough time to let the edition settle.  As is usual with any group of players – the competitive environment doesn’t look or consider intent in the rules.  They usually only look at RAW and how to get the most out of their choices.  I know I think this way a lot and have talked extensively that while it was great GW had play testers from the community they did miss out a bit by not giving enough “intent” in their codexes, commentary, and FAQ that we miss by not directly working with them.  Its the same thing that happens in Magic when certain things fall through the cracks due to play testers having the intent of the rules and not just dealing with the language of the rules themselves.

But I am still really enjoying the new edition of 40k right now.  A lot of it feels right with just a few rough options showing up.  I wish some of the FW stuff was tested a bit more – but I know it is hard to deal with some many things that have “different” rules.  I think will see a good deal of the “future” of the game when Space Marines and Deathguard come out later this month.  And of course seeing 8 more books after that means GW is serious about trying to complete the game with everyone hopefully having a chance with their models.

Facing the SPAM Without Fear

Right now I am getting ready for ATC which will be an event full of spam.  I think there will be a ton of Storm Ravens, Devastators, and Mr. Roboute himself in every team’s list.  The event is letting the drop first go first to stay and I see a lot of lists trying to use and abuse that.  I am sure there will be a lot of hordes too with some Birdies making it a pain to play on any table top.  There are some rough AM lists still – as while the FAQ took out the initial Scion builds there are still other ways to fit in way too much Plasma into an army.  I am not playing a Daemon/Chaos build but I do know of some that seem alright.  The FAQ change to Daemon Princes means a ton more hiding out in Brim blobs or other large footprint Chaos units.  There isn’t FW in this event so the one PoxWalker build I like isn’t allowed currently.  I won’t have time to get it done for BAO but it is something to think about with the upcoming Deathguard books coming out.

What armies are you seeing kicking butt locally?

Are you tired of seeing the spammed lists like 10+ Rifleman Dreads/Razorbacks, 4+ Storm Ravens, and other copied and pasted options that might cost too little?  Do we want limits to try and curtail this or figure out missions/terrain/etc set up to try and keep this terrible meat option out of our dinner?

~Does it make no sense for me to complain about this?  Do these shorts make me look fat?

  • Drpx

    If you don’t like spam why not just play a smaller game?

    • Munn

      Because tournament standard is 2k.

      • wibbling

        So? Stuff tournaments, play sensibly.

        • Lebowski1111111111

          you play how you want to play, he plays how he wants to play.

    • Karru

      Smaller games have their own downsides. For example, if I want to field any sort of vehicle, it will most likely mean that my army is now cut in 1/3 the size due to the pricing.

      I am amongst those that prefer larger games because it allows me to field a nice chunk of my models that I’ve spent months painting. If I spend that much time painting, I want to use them. Only way to properly do that unfortunately is to play larger games which leads to spam for certain players/armies.

    • Graham Bartram

      Or play against better friends.

      • memitchell

        Or, play more smaller games with a bunch of chunks of painted models, instead of a big chunk. Or, come up with a better excuse.

      • GreyPanthers

        I agree, sometimes it’s about WHO you play and not WHAT you play.

  • Nocturus

    Honestly I think the difficulty of how points work right now for matched play is also a factor. People don’t want to make each unit unique as it ups the chances of making a mistake in your list.

    • Michael Kapuscinski

      I think you are giving people too much credit. The tournament nerds don’t care about how hard the math is. They did harder math than that trying to figure out which units are going to have maximum impact for minimum cost.

      Don’t make excuses for them. They are making boring spammy lists because all they care about is the win. That is the only way they get fun out of the game.

  • Paul Mattingley

    Apparently 8 billion cans of spam have been sold since it came on the market. It feels like gamers must have bought the bulk of that sometimes.

  • benn grimm

    You know it already, which is why you wrote this, the only thing is, you are literally the worst offender on here, so stop being disingenuous and playing to the gallery like it’s something you just noticed. We get it, you play where spam is an important part of life, so get on and enjoy the salty goodness.

  • Aaditya Rangan

    I can imagine an “augmented” point system where the first instance of each unit costs the listed amount, the second costs 1.25x, the third 1.5x, etc. (with, perhaps, an exception made for basic troops)
    That way you *can* take duplicate units, but it’ll cost you.

    Is there an obvious flaw with using such an augmented point system for a tournament?

    • Heinz Fiction

      It’s kinda more punishing to smaller (Sub-)factions with less different units to choose from than to big factions with a lot viable options. But i think it’s a good concept in general. Even a 10% tax would be disencouraging anyone who wants to optimize his list.

      • Matt Halkos

        Then the multiplier would be on each individual unit. So ork boys would have a 1X multiplier so that they don’t get more expensive and the morkanaut could have the 1.25%. This way armies like harlequins who have less units don’t get more expensive.

    • ZeeLobby

      I mean they could return to a 0-2 system. But that of course would limit sales. Something the current GW would never ever ever do. Sadly when you remove all restrictions this is what you get.

    • Karru

      The first problem I find with that system is the damage it does to horde armies like Orks, Tyranids and Guard. Guard Tanks for example are amongst the worst in this edition, so you have to rely mostly on your Infantry to do the damage and objective grabbing. Orks need many of their specialist units in decent numbers to do damage to certain targets, Boys aren’t enough in some cases. Tyranids need a proper Synapse web to keep their army in order, which means lots and lots of Warriors and/or bigger bugs.

      There was a system I came across many years ago. It was for Warhammer Fantasy and the system was brilliant. Basically, the system was “living” and was changed depending on the meta changes. The idea was that certain unit combos costed two types of points. The regular points and “system points”. The system points were based on the effectiveness of the unit. A highly efficient super unit, for example the dreaded Flail Marauder Block while cheap in points was quite expensive System point-wise.

      You aimed for 100 System points, that was the “sweet spot”. To give an 40k example of an army, the Double Demi-company would have easily been 200 to 300 System points. I don’t remember exactly what the “benefits” were for having less System points, but I do remember them giving things like extra Tournament Points if you lost and tons of extra points if you won. I think there was also things like you get extra re-rolls and/or get to choose who goes first if you were the underdog by a lot.

      The system was brilliant because it was always changing. If a new extremely powerful combo/unit was discovered, for the next tournament, it would be “fixed” and had its cost set to appropriate level. It requires a lot of work from the TO, but I think it is worth it.

      • Frank Krifka

        Reminds me a lot of Swedish comp for WHFB, where units had points, but also comp points. Then you were usually paired with an opponent who has a similar comp score to yours.

        It was probably the most annoying exercise in math I’ve ever had to deal with.

        • Nameless

          There where also several Comp systems used that offered rather large advantages to the army the TO felt was ‘under powered’.

          There is always a lot of subjective balancing and restrictions aimed at curbing spam often hits the more moderate builds harder.

      • Brettila

        You keep saying this, but I haven’t seen Guard lose yet in 8th; and most of the army is vehicles.

        • Karru

          Have you seen a full Infantry Guard Army being played?

          Having played a game against a Guard army that utilised Vehicles more over Infantry, that game was a wash. By the end of the third turn, most of his vehicles were dead and my army had barely lost 1/3 of its models. The only ones that had survived were Artillery that didn’t need LoS to fire so they hid behind something the entire game. Their damage was so pitiful against my Infantry it was just sad. His Basilisks averaged 2-3 dead Models dead per volley. Meanwhile my Heavy Weapons were removing and crippling vehicles left and right while his Infantry was getting cut down by my volleys of Lasgun and Grenade Launcher fire.

          The main issue with Guard Tanks is the fact that their Infantry can just do anything the Tanks can do much better for a cheaper price. I just don’t see any use for Tanks in a Guard army. For the price of one Tank, I can usually fit 20-30 Infantry or 2-4 Heavy Weapons Squads.

          My average Infantry List contains 120 models in the Troop section, this is just the Infantry Squads and Conscripts. When an entire volley of fire from a Parking Lot can remove between 20-25 models per volley assuming they only fire at my Infantry, the following return fire will have the opponent realise just how powerful Infantry is. My Infantry Squads alone bring 8 Missile Launchers into the battlefield. My usual list also has 12 Lascannons hiding in the backfield. Best bit? These guys aren’t going to run away either. With Commissars spread across the entire line, my units need to be killed to the last man before they are removed from the table. This means that you will quickly find yourself spending those precious few shots your vehicles can dish out to kill a single guy holding an Objective that could decide the game.

          Guard Tanks are the worst this edition compared to everyone else. They are very expensive and bring very little to the table compared to other Vehicles. Predators have better damage output than Exterminators. The slight durability of the Russ isn’t enough to justify their price either. All it takes is 6 wounds and that Tank won’t be doing any damage as it can’t hit anything due to the 5+ BS.

          • Heinz Fiction

            After getting around in 8th a bit I have to say: guard tanks aren’T bad, at least most of them aren’t. Their infantry is just ridiculously good. I wouldn’t be suprised if we se a point increase on HWT and infantry squats in the future

          • Nick Parrett

            Suppposedly gm will be more likely to make changes to units now instead of waiting years for a new codex. I’m hopeful, I know it doesn’t mean they will actually fix things. I guess we just wait and see.

  • If tourneys want to curtail spam then it’s easy enough but I don’t really have an issue with those lists, they come and go while the meta shifts to deal with it, it usually balances out after a while, it all becomes Rock Paper Scissors after a while and pretty boring to play and play against.

    It would be nice if everyone took balanced lists then you could see who the really good generals are. I’ve played against some truly bad generals who win games simply because they took a netlist but never even bother to learn tactics I’ve even seen players concede turn 1 because they didn’t roll the powers they wanted so their single tactic wouldn’t “work”!!

    • Graham Bartram

      “it all becomes Rock Paper Scissors after a while and pretty boring to play and play against.”
      To me, avoiding this situation is a measuring stick for rules writing. :/

  • Gorsameth

    Spam will always exist.

    Something is always better, even in perfect statistical balance something is perceived better. And people will often pick what they believe is best. Add in redundancy because stuff dies in this game and voila you have spam.

    Your example of Magic also confuses me as a counter point to spam since competitive Magic decks consist of spamming the best card for a given task at the maximum allowed number (4 as you said). Look at a magic deck and you see nothing but spam.

    We also had the limit on maximum amount of a choice. It was called a Force Organisation Chart.
    Did people complain about spam during 5th edition? I seem to remember they did.

    You are not going to stop spam.

    • Odras

      This is exactly it. Spam works because if you have an army comprised entirely of X, and you are playing against an opponent with a mix of units a third of which can counter X while the other 2 thirds are to counter Y and Z. You will likely win as his counters to X are overwhelmed and his counters to Y and Z are not contribution much.

      While it is not quite this simple, given that you have to capture objectives to win the mission too it is a big reason why spam works. Most armies can counter 1 imperial knight or 1 flyer, some armies can even counter 2 or 3 but very few will have the tools to deal with 5. Same with infantry, most lists just don’t have the tools to be able to kill hundreds of conscripts.

  • AircoolUK

    Fortunately, such tedium is restricted to the ultra competitive world. Most people are looking at those Open War cards and thinking… that looks like fun.

    I prefer to spend time making my armies look great on the table (no quick paint jobs for my miniatures) and fielding great looking models, even if their stats aren’t the best. For example, most of my Tau units are in fact Fire Warriors with Carbines. They look like commando’s and I play them like commando’s.

    • KingAceNumber1

      Although I consider myself a competitive player and attend tournaments regularly, I have a separate army for narrative games that I explicitly build because I enjoy the look and playstyle of (right now, Ksons/Tzeentch Daemons) and don’t worry too much about how hyper-effective the rules are. I have a separate army that I build for effect, and that’s what I take to tournaments. You can definitely have both, I think people just get too wrapped up in being one or the other.

  • Karru

    In some cases, spam is the only option certain armies have. For example, my Guard Infantry army. GW has made it so that Guard players have to resort to spam or allies if they wish to take the Brigade Detachment, which Guard really should pretty much always take due to how they split the units.

    Brigade requires you to take 6 Troop choises. Guard has two options, Infantry Squads and Conscripts, that’s it. So right out of the gate, you are forced to take many of these units. Sure, you can take allies like Scions, but at that point you are not taking full Guard army. I know I am nitpicking here, but it is still somewhat valid comment for those, like me, who prefer to play pure armies.

    Then you face multitude of problems as a Guard player. Morale is a big issue as is the need for Orders to buff your otherwise mediocre at best Infantry. You get 2 Orders per Company Commander or 1 per Platoon. That means that in order to get 1 Order going for each of your Infantry Squads, you need a minimum of 3 Company Commanders or 2 Company Commanders and 2 Platoon Commanders. Now, if you take things like Heavy Weapons and such, you will quickly realise that you need even more Orders, which leads to the Guard player needing even more Commanders. Space Marines and Tau enjoy from bubble effects that help their Infantry. Guard can buff single units with their Commanders.

    Morale. With a 6″ bubble and a large area to cover you will quickly find yourself lacking in Morale boosts. Commissars are needed in abundance if you wish to keep your Infantry in line.

    The final thing is the price. Infantry is so cheap that in order to make up the points, you have to take hordes of them, again if you wish to keep with the Infantry Company theme.

    GW wanted this. They removed formations because they gave unfair advantages to certain armies, which led to people not using the less useful formations which meant less money for GW. They made these Detachments instead which give minor advantages and are available to everyone, but they made sure that the requirements are high enough so that people are forced to buy large amounts of models to run them.

    So overall spam, while annoying, is understandable in certain cases. If you have the option not to spam, you shouldn’t do it. If you have a good reason to spam, such as a theme, then it is okay to spam, but you should still try to avoid it wherever possible.

    • Nathaniel Wright

      Eh, I think there’s ‘spam’ like Green Tide and Blobguard that are sort of assumed as ‘normal’, and spam where it is MSU of super strong dudes (GravCent) that cause more eyebrows to be raised. I wouldn’t mind, for instance, spammed Tactical Marines. Hell, even Spammed Scouts make sense for certain chapters.

    • AircoolUK

      Plus, spam can actually be fun for some armies. I know that ‘fun’ can be a dirty word in a competitive environment, but I’ve always wondered how far you’d get just by spamming Necron Warriors.

      However, let us not forget that a lot of these internet blog things are focused on competitive, where every possible advantage is going to be taken. Spam is inevitable and you need to build an army that’s ready for anything… but usually just more spam.

      • Karru

        The Necron Phalanx army sounds very interesting concept that I’ve been drawing in the past. The Phantom Menace Droid style army with just rank upon rank of Warriors supported by Ghost Arks and Doomsday Arks with very little Elite units.

  • Nyyppä

    So, essentially just denying the option for other than the middle classic foc (the one with 2 HQ and 3 troops minimum) would solve most issues…..

    • KingAceNumber1

      I honestly just think tournaments should restrict it to one of each kind of detachment.

      • Nyyppä

        I don’t think that that would solve the problem.

  • highwind

    So, what did you expect with rules like “objective secured” gone and FOCs which allow you to take everything as often as you want without any tax?!

    The balance between the different factions may be better this edition but the balancing within a single faction is absolutely horrible with 8th edition thanks to the completely dumbed down rules

    • ZeeLobby

      Yeah. Was really hoping all that playtesting would have been focused on both external and internal, but that may have been asking too much.

      • Graham Bartram

        Playtesting? Nooo, no playtesting.
        Paytesting…. ah, yes, lot’s of that.

    • Shawn Pero

      You might be surprised at how important making lists that maximize command points can be. I take multiple battalions and can max out at 10, whereas someone spamming heavies or elites might top out at 4-5. I’m rerolling critical dice every phase of every turn and denying the opponent a lot of smaller victories over the course of the game. It adds up.

      • vlad78

        I can max out troops with twin linked assault canon razorbacks and have both the command points and crazy firepower.

      • Brettila

        Either you play huge point games or an army that can really go MSU. My Chaos boys can make a battalion at 2000. My units are not maxed out either. Yes, I could squeeze more if I play 5 man squads with no equipment or fhinos, but what’s the point then?

    • Gorsameth

      People spammed when we had FOC’s.
      People spammed when we had Objective Secured.

      Something is always best
      People will take multiple units of the best because you want redundancy.

      If people can bring 2 of the same unit they will do so because its optimal.
      The only way to stop spam is to force a 1 per unit limit.

  • ZeeLobby

    I mean first company terminator armies are spammy, fluffy and can be fun to play. I don’t think spam is necessarily a bad thing, even in a casual environment. It just should never be the obvious choice. To avoid that factions would need to have good internal balance, something that’s never existed in 40K.

  • Drew

    Well, there we go. Less than a month in and fresh, fun new 40k has devolved again into the tourney crowd trying to chase/crush the meta and find ways to use and abuse the system for MAXIMUM WIN.

    More power to them, I suppose- if that’s what makes you happy, who am I to stop you? Just don’t come around looking to play me. I’ll happily forfeit the game to you and go find someone more interested in having fun than winning. We’ll all be happier for it!

    • Crablezworth

      It’s not their fault that jervis and cruddace let the marketing team design the game.

    • Brettila

      I’ve often wondered if they do it for fun. At a certain point it starts to look like an attempt to stroke a tiny ego that needs to be puffed up by ‘crushing enemies’. Watching it never looks like either side is having fun. I’m with you, Drew. I don’t even play people in my casual group. It isn’t enough that they plau Tau, they play half+ Forge World. Or they play Tzweentch demons with 450 (exaggeration folks) models castin (not exaggeration) 21 smites a turn.

  • J Mad

    You know.. tournaments could just pay 1 Battalion and only -1 CP aug as the other 2 choices if spam is a HUGE problem (I mean like 20 of the same unit type of spam, like 200 swarms).

    • Karru

      And you just killed Guard armies and made Tyranids and Orks much, much worse. It isn’t that simple.

  • Defenestratus

    But wait! I thought 8th edition was supposed to fix *everything* that ailed 40k!!!!!!!!11111
    :rolleyes:

    • Crablezworth

      Yeah I’ve waiting for that narrative to run out of steam too.

  • Jose Delgado

    People cried about formations when were great and fun and now we have this umbalanced editiin based in only spaming the best unit.

    Good joke the extensive testing of gw

    • Brettila

      I’ve played every edition but 1st. Formations were the single worst thing ever in the game. The only thing to reduce how much I play (including fing chemo) or make me seriously consider stopping.

      • highwind

        So in 7th you prefered to play vs Space Marines with 2x 5 man Scout units and maxed out elite / heavy support cheese instead of a Formation like Gladius Strike Force which was fluffy AND viable?

  • Commissar Molotov

    I’m not seeing spam too much in casual play…so I figure I’ll just let the tournament set worry about it.

    • Defenestratus

      The problem is that this crap trickles down to the casual group. It’s like Chaos – it seems innocent and “something that other people have to worry about” but by the time you realize that your community has been corrupted, its too late to do anything about it.

      • CloakingDonkey

        Well… be happy I guess that you’re not playing Warmachine. Where tournament meta is the only acceptable meta 😛

  • OldHat

    “Are you tired of seeing the spammed lists like 10+ Rifleman Dreads/Razorbacks, 4+ Storm Ravens, and other copied and pasted options that might cost too little?”

    No, because the game hasn’t been out that long and my gaming group isn’t filled with Goatboys.

    • orionburn

      It’s like formations. Everybody hated formations…except for their own. It was all those other formations that were broken. It’s the same with spam. Your spam is too spammy but my spam is spamalicous!

      FFS we’re not even a month into 8th…

      • OldHat

        FFS we’re not even a month into 8th…

        THIS. THIS THIS THIS.

  • Horus84cmd

    Sadly, spam is prevalent in heck of a lot (if not all) of collectable strategy games; and, it fair to say that it is predominantly driven by the harcore, “win at all cost players”.

    Now, of course you can lay blame on the rules designers for creating a set of rules that allows for “spam” type behaviour; however, no matter the company, be that GW, MtG, PP, FFG, etc.., when it comes to it they want to sell product (and lots of it), so they aren’t going to go out of their way to layer restrictions on rule set that will potentially stifle sales – what company would?

    Ironically here GW, who regularly get the gip, that are possibly the most honest when it comes to the fact that they want to sell models first and focus on rules “balance” as second priority. Although, with 8th and AoS it would seem they are making a concerted efforts to produce a sets rules that are fun for casual play and better balanced for tournament play.

    So, it really comes down to the tournament hosts to set boundaries if they do not want see players turn up with spam lists – afterall it’s their tournament. Whilst other organisers may be happy not to and just let players play with in the rules as is. Alot of companies could more to put emphasis on players tweaking rules themselves if they don’t like something; again here, GW seems to be the most vocal about saying “feel free to changing rules you’re not happy or entirely satisfied about, within your gaming circles – as long as you’re having fun there no harm. But be prepare other circles may do things differently.”

  • RAKSHA

    Game workshop make spam possible..why not stick to old army composition rules why you can have just elites or fast atack armys this is mistake from them…I don’t mind old rules I like it because you have to think how to play..now you can have spam armies just because GW whant to sell more models…this is broken and will be..just wait for codexes spam will continue…money making machine..lol

  • Vachones

    Anytime a TO tries to limit options for list building they will get pushback from players, so its not as simple as TOs trying to “fix” things. Frankly, the community should be out of the business of “fixing” the game; I’m sure ITC would rather not have to deal with the howls of protest every time a change is implemented. GW has shown they are responsive and will FAQ things, let them be the ones to figure out how to fix it.

    What TOs can do is use better missions for their events. The Eternal War missions out of the book are part of the problem here. End of game scoring and the last deployment goes first favor certain list builds and boring static gun line play.

  • Shouldn’t the title be more like “Meta, spam and me”?

  • Primaten Fürst

    Where are those birds from?

    • Horus84cmd

      Dark Eldar range – used in beastmasters units.

      • Primaten Fürst

        Thanks a lot!

  • badmojo1966

    I played in a tournament where you were awarded the usual points for winning, painting quality and sportsmanship. The kicker was army theme. If you didn’t get enough positive army theme votes (I believe it was over 50%) you simply couldn’t win. So power gamers were left in the cold.

  • CloakingDonkey

    Honestly if some muppet wants to blow all his lunch money on bird bases that will be worthless as soon as GW releases their codex – have at it mate. Until the codex releases, I’ll just ask if anyone wants to play Bolt Action whenever you walk in 😛