40K: Reject the Meta and WIN

Black Blow Fly here to talk about the 40K’s meta and how NOT following it makes you a better player.

So 8th edition has been out for awhile now and we’ve seen some of the new codices with plenty more on the way. So far I’ve liked everything I’ve seen and I like how the new stratagems work bringing back some of the really good old flavor.

I want to discuss competitive play that’s in line with the spirit of the game and designing cool armies that follow their core background.

Part of the problem

First though I’d like to issue a simple disclaimer.

You can be a very competitive player without actually being good at the game… in fact I see it all the time. Thank the dark gods that Games Workshop has been so far been very proactive against these types of armies that normal gamers like you and I that have no desire to play against them given any serious alternative. Yes I’m talking about pathetic armies like Ravenspam. Any fool could at one time play Ravenspam and win a lot of games – you don’t have to be good at things like actual tactics when your forte is spam spam spam. Razorflockspam got the nerf bat to the face too… lovely ain’t it now ?!

Conscripts – also part of the problem.

I was at a local shop earlier this week to sign up for fall league play… was told Space Marines and elite armies in general aren’t competitive. Well well well… I don’t want to run conscripts or cultists bubble wrap with Forge World artillery – again the axiom you can be competitive but not good at any actual tactical brevity and I welcome the challenge. In regards to developing anti meta armies that’s what I do and I encourage others to do so as well. Spam is on its way out if you haven’t received the official memo yet. Dare to be great in the true sense.

Going back to what I said above Games Workshop so far has been on top of their game and that’s what happens when the parent company finally really cares about the game and their core base customers. All rules and changes to any existing rules should come straight from Games Workshop first. We don’t need a third party to dictate how games are played. It’s fine to design your missions and this is the proper way to introduce a twist.

So I’m not here today to tell how exactly how to design an army other than to go against the current competitive meta. It can be hard at first but if you stick with it you’ll eventually design the type of army that gets a lot of thumbs up and can win against any given counter army. My advice is don’t get discouraged… it takes some time and you’ll be glad you did.

Let’s make tactics good again.

~Tell us about how you plan to win by countering the meta.

  • dave long island

    Stop spamming the word ‘meta’. How about that?

    • how would that help?

    • how about you go jump in a deep end of the lake ?!

      • dave long island

        Wow, cool! I’ve accumulated a troll! How you been girl? And I see you upvoted your own post… lol… Kind of sad, really. Upvoting your own posts on a Friday night, LOL… 🙂

  • I fully agree. You can reject the meta and learn to win games, which if you are not using the most mathematically optimal spam list will make you a better place.

    And very few will actually do this because mathematically spamming the best things makes the game easy, which is what one is after if one is paying money to play in a big tournament with big prizes and your name in lights.

    • Jabberwokk

      First rule of Jungle warfare: Remove the Jungle.

      Yeah but what if you are a better player and you got a mathematically superior army. A great cook can make wonders with a random kitchen and mediocre ingredients. Now give him some professional grade tools and fresh ingredients and watch him create magic.

      • Its still playing the game on easy mode. I wish there was a ranking system like chess has, where you gain more ranking points for playing more difficult armies than you would playing easy mode armies.

        Being good at easy mode doesn’t necessarily make one a good player, nor is there any real tests unless everyone else is also playing on easy mode (which I suppose is what tournaments are).

        • ILikeToColourRed

          list building is part of the game

          • It is unfortunately for a lot of folks the most important part of the game.

          • ILikeToColourRed

            proper planning is an important part of of strategy

            you cant expect to win often by bringing a box of models with no thought as to how they work together

            the only question remaining is, is winning important to you?

          • Thats an extreme take on what I am saying.

            I, like most folks, play a number of different wargames. I have since the 1980s. Games Workshop games are the only ones that I have an issue with the disparity and how important list building is.

            Here you have a world where there are hundreds of models and damn near tens of thousands or more combinations you can see, but because of how they write their rules and balance their armies, you only see a tiny fraction of those.

            Listbuilding in 40k and AOS/WHFB is what is the most important part of being good at 40k and AOS/WHFB. One can only get excited so long in a game where you see the same things over and over again.

            Being good at listbuilding in general is not very difficult. Especially with the internet. I have a closet full of GT, RTT, and other GW related trophies from when I was a tournament player in the late 90s and early 00s from listbuilding. That didn’t make me a good player, however.

          • memitchell

            I don’t disagree, but it is the “hundreds of models and damn near tens of thousands or more combinations” that make the lists unbalanced. No amount of rules writing excellence could “fix” that. The opposite would be players using identical lists, which would be absolutely balanced. The imbalance is baked into the cake. The vast variety of models and rules makes the GW games unique, and also lead to an issue with the disparity and how important list building is.” Again, I get your point, but I think imbalance is a byproduct of what GW offers in the way of variety. If anything, they deserve credit (or blame) for trying to “balance” a game that features gretchin and Gargants and Ripper Swarms and Hierophants.

          • I think they can do better. I think they intentionally bake imbalances in to the degree that they do to drive sales. They also said as much after AOS was released at a hobby interview in the UK that when they design their armies that they purposely make some things easier to use than others because some people like that, just like they make some things harder to use than others because some people like that.

            Pretty much every wargame on the market has a ton of combinations you can use, but none have as bad a disparity in power within the factions as GW games do where listbuilding is as key of a facet … and I’d argue THE KEY to master to win games.

          • David

            If you don’t like list building don’t play a game based around list building

          • Or play in events that neuter list building and run events that also do the same.

          • Bigalmoney666

            List building =/= Stormraven spam

        • Jabberwokk

          eh. I mildly disagree.

          Part of developing a good strategy is recognizing and removing unnecessary risks and finding avenues of consistency. Whether that’s removing dice from a dice game or stacking multiple copies of a key strategic card in a deck it’s fairly time tested habits anyone should get into to be successful. So yeah you can say that’s easy mode but I say that’s just good sense. bringing order to chaos as it were.

          If you want to challenge yourself by giving yourself a handicap fine. I used to do that with my Brothers when playing street fighter. but that’s less about making it more challenging for me as it is increasing the chance of victory for them.

          • Really what I’d like is GW to balance their damn games and get rid of the wide gulf in power that the lists you always see have over the rest of the game.

            I’m not denying that its good sense if you’re aim is to win. It ruins the rest of the game though when so much of the game is relatively useless to take.

          • Jabberwokk

            And I very much agree with you here.

            alot.

    • ZeeLobby

      Or you could be a great player and use the best lists. I mean it’s cool if you want to handicap yourself, but most of these people piloting spam lists to victory are pretty frequent and skilled tournament players in their own right. Sure you can try to win with worst lists, and it might feel more rewarding, but it’s more like knowable handicapping yourself than anything else.

      • Thats the thing. We’ll never know if they are really good players, or if the lists are just what is responsible. When I was running netlists I won a ton of events and always at the last placed very high.

        I’m not a very good player though. When I stopped using my netlists I started losing as much as I was winning.

        • Jabberwokk

          This makes me think that perhaps you blending two different strengths. Look at SC2 players. Some of them have amazing micro skills other’s FAR better macro skills. they both play in high level tournaments. it may be you value the mirco more so than the macro. Someone had to crunch the numbers to make those net lists after all(an example of macro).

          EDIT: I wanted to add it’s an entirely understandable and respectable position for you to have though.

          • Having spent years as a chess player, I’d like the game to reflect table skill more than listbuilding skill, though you are correct in your assessment on micro vs macro.

          • David

            And I would prefer there to be more list building options. Given that half the table skill has been removed from 7th (directional shooting, cover, directional shooting)

        • ZeeLobby

          I dunno. At the events around me there are always the same people at the top, even when 20 other people take the power lists the top player take. Power lists only get you to a certain point.

          • Right. But again I was always in the top of every event I went to as well until I stopped taking power lists.

          • Charon

            That is beause it is still a game of numbers. No amount of “skill” will ever change that to a degree where you can just ignore the raw numbers. We can go back to the SC2 example here. If you army is way higher up in the ressources count you will most probably win the fight undless your opponent is so way above you that his mico alone makes his units worth a lot more.
            You can try to position to get your numbers higher and move around to make your units worth a bit more but at the end you will need these numbers to work with.

          • A small group doesnt really mean much tbh .

      • You obviously dont get it do you ?!

        • GnomesForge

          uh oh. Were gettin into exclamation mark territory.

    • BrianDavion

      I’d argue rejecting the meta is often best, people tend to plan around the meta, rejecting it and doing your own thing can give you odds of people being unable to deal with it.

  • BJ Mickle

    Not to rain on things, but conscripts do happen to be a traditional way to play Astra Militarum. Huge mobs of infantry is essentially one of the two things guard are known for. The other is those artillery/tanks you refer to them protecting.

    • ILikeToColourRed

      conscripts and artillery is essentially what my renegade army in 7th boiled down to, I never won with it but I enjoyed it

      • memitchell

        He’s referring to the tournament winning list written about last week (approximately):
        (Conscripts x 30 + Commisar) x 5 + (Earthshakers x5).

        It didn’t look like winning with that list required a tactical genius. It works because of spam, and tournament opponent’s own fixed list allowing no way to compensate. Plus, it exploits specific rules. I think it would be neat to see on the table. And, fun to play against, IF there are ways around the rules it exploits. If not, why bother?

        • Aaron_The_Ys

          Wait, did my Death Korps army just become a top tier list, and I don’t have to sacrifice my fluff integrity?

          • memitchell

            Wasn’t it already a top tier list? 😉

            It’s an interesting point, fluff. The Conscripts fit the fluff. They way they play does not.*

            Says the guy who painted up 30 Conscripts to protect his weapon teams in the AM detachment in his Genestealer Cult!

          • Aaron_The_Ys

            Actually having the newbies guard the artillery in the rear while the real guardsmen do the work sounds like a sound strategy to me and one that would be in line with IG tactics. Now as to it already being top tier, I don’t know, honestly I’ve been playing since third and believe me the Guard was not at the top back then. As it is now any victories I get with my guard are hard fought but maybe that goes more to our terrain set up. If you go up against a IG gun line with little to no LoS blocking terrain then I can see why it has become a top tier list. Maybe we shouldn’t be looking at lists so much as what terrain is being put on the table to challenge our top tier armies.

          • Of course any pathetic IG player will try to defend the list .

          • Thebob288

            Creating an article where you voice your opinion on what makes a good player and then taking cheap shots at people in the comments that disagree with your ideas is neither professional nor constructive. If you want your ideas taken seriously then act like an adult in the comments even if others don’t.

          • Aaron_The_Ys

            It’s what the IG do best, hold the line against all comers. Especially if the Commissar is looking. 😉

          • GnomesForge

            Blackfly is this your first article ever? Here’s a tip, its rare for the author to respond like a child to every single comment.

          • David

            The list won it does not need defending

          • It’s a garbage list that requires no tactics. It can’t be defended.

    • ZeeLobby

      Are conscripts regular guardsmen though? I mean I know they’re still fluffy, but I thought the main IG army consisted of units of IG?

      • memitchell

        No. regular guardsmen are trained soldiers. Often experienced. And, well equipped. Conscripts are pretty much men right off the street pressed, into service. They are cheap because they are unreliable, inept, undisciplined, under-equipped and untrained. But, in great numbers, and with a Commissar which grants them Space Marine like discipline, they become cheap, but highly effective bubble wrap.

        • ZeeLobby

          That’s pretty cool. So I mean conscript lists are definitely cool then, but if everyone is rocking them that’s not really fluff representative. I just hate when fluff is used to justify a possibly broken list, when clearly IG use a whole bunch of stuff.

          • memitchell

            They exploit an exception to the morale rule that is there to explicitly differentiate between cheap, horde troops, and elites. But, GW loves to make special rules that except or obviate core rules (Synapse, Commissar, etc.). The reason Conscripts are cheap is low morale problems. The Commissar turns that into no morale problems. So, they fight fearlessly to the last man. Just like NO untrained fighters ever would, ever. Coupled with the scale of the game that allows a unit with a large number of figs to flood a sizable piece of the battlefield, and thus screen of a corner of the table. And, the result is only fluffy in that Conscripts exists in the mythos. But, would perform nothing like they do on the table…

            “Whilst rallying Mankind’s greatest, but faltering warriors, the Primarus Chaplain looked on enviously as the absolute rabble of Conscripts stood their ground to a man against the ravenous Tyranid horde. Even the retreating Legio Custodes were amazed and ashamed by the Conscripts’ example. Legendary would be the Iron Will of ALL Conscripts EVERYWHERE. Spammed they would be. And, spammed again. And, again. Yet, no man would question their fluffyness.”

          • Red_Five_Standing_By

            Which why why Snipers are so important. Kill the Commissar, kill the horde.

          • Marco Marantz

            How many factions get dedicated snipers though…

          • David

            Am
            Admech
            Sm
            BA
            DA
            SW
            Assassins
            And that’s just the imperium

          • Marco Marantz

            Fail. They are all essentially the same faction and can ‘share’ the snipers available to them. Imperium, Aeldari and Tau are the only factions with sniper units, though im not even sure if Rangers even act like proper snipers. A lot of other factions have no option to even ally with snipers.

          • BJ Mickle

            Conscripts are 1 points cheaper than guardsman. For that, they get 1 less BS, WS, and like 4 less leadership. You can’t blob up guardsmen like you used to. As far as fluff, it was exactly what they did on Cadia. (The planet broke before the guard did)

            In all fairness, they will probably take away the benefit of a Commissar in the codex. But the standard guard aren’t that much more expensive.

          • Bootneck

            I don’t see any problem with the conscript list, if someone rocked up with that it wouldn’t bother me one bit.

            Who said using isn’t fluffy?

            That’s how Russia won the eastern front during WW2, massed conscript’s, artillery and cheap tanks.

          • Red_Five_Standing_By

            Blame GW. They removed normal Guardsmen blobs from the game.

          • ZeeLobby

            That’s sad. Didn’t know that.

    • Scrubs are non fielded in significant numbers.

  • Ian Chisholm

    My first foray in 8th was trying conscripts for the first time because I didn’t have to take a platoon to use them. After three games I recognized their power, but stopped because it was too many models to handle. Now it’s normal infantry all the time loaded with special weapons.

  • ZeeLobby

    Creating an army regardless of the meta sounds like a good way to lose a lot, lol.

    • Fergie0044

      Eh, to each there own. Me and my regular opponents collect what we like and play with what we collect. Sure the strength of my chaos guys wax and wane with the rules but I’m happy with all of them regardless.

      • ZeeLobby

        Oh. That’s perfectly fine. I was talking more to the point that if you or your group is worried about any “meta” you should probably play to beat it, meta shouldn’t matter, nor beating it, if your playing for fun.

        • Fergie0044

          Ah right – I misunderstood you there, soz. Even though I don’t play in it, following the meta online is fun in itself. Just so i can shake my head at the ‘g-man plus 24 assassins’ lists

  • YetAnotherFacelessMan

    Tournament meta doesn’t matter. Local meta matters. If you have a guy at the store who you play, and he’s running an army consisting of Bjorn leading an army of nothing but dreadnoughts, don’t come crying to me that you weren’t ready because you expected conscripts.

    “You can be a very good competitive player without being good at the game.” Yeah? It’s a dice game. If you never roll less than a 4, you’re amazing at this game. If you never roll less than a 4 and have the right tools for the job, you’re unstoppable. If I had a choice, though… I’d rather have the wrong units and be amazingly lucky.

    I guess what I’m saying is… I gained nothing from your article except that you wanted to complain while also establishing the stance that you’re more resolute and informed than a hypothetical audience. Did it feel good to write? I didn’t feel anything positive reading it.

    • Red_Five_Standing_By

      The meta at large influences local metas.

    • You obviously dont get it do you ?!

      • YetAnotherFacelessMan

        I really freaking don’t.

        If you’re at a tournament, you don’t know who you are going to play, but you know they intend to win because there is no other purpose to a tournament.

        If you are playing against your local opponents at a FLGS, GW store, or garage with 4×6 marked in tape on the floor, you’re playing for fun. You might play a person you don’t know, but after a certain point, you should really know your opponents by name.

        Chances are, unless they’re very wealthy men with a lot of free time, you’ll also see the same collection of miniatures. If your friend HAS 7 stormravens, then maybe they might bring 7 stormravens. If they’re bringing 7 stormravens and that bothers you, ask them to tell you when they’re bringing them so you can prepare enough anti-air… or ask them not to bring them.

        If they want to bring 7 stormravens no matter what and you can’t fight against that and they allow no concession in the form of mission or army composition… don’t play them. It’s that simple. It is a game. Don’t play it if it isn’t fun.

        I used to play Magic the Gathering with a group of friends. We had our regular decks that we’d play against eachother. Some of them had a hard counter, so when a player bust out his deck with the red sleeves, I’d say “oh, best not use this one, I won’t stand a chance.” That was fine. We each also had one or two old and powerful decks with rare and expensive cards that just weren’t fun to play against. The Stasis Deck. The Balance Deck. The Power 9 One-Turn Kill Deck. Occasionally, we’d blow the dust off of them and give them a shuffle, but everyone had more fun just playing regular old Magic.

        If you’re not having fun, don’t play. If you could have fun, if your opponent just didn’t bring X unit, talk to your opponent about that unit. Maybe phrase it in a way where your opponent gets to use something else he has already in his collection.

        Maybe your opponent is feeling the same. Maybe the only reason he’s bringing X unit is because you always bring Y unit and his Z unit will get crushed if he brings it. Maybe he really really wants to play Z, but he can’t because he’s afraid of you. Communication is important.

        But you know me… I don’t get it.

  • V0iddrgn

    How about rejecting the notion of it being a handicap when you take a “suboptimal” unit choice or two in your list? Taking more variety in your lists (AKA not spamming) could effectively disrupt the tournament scene because then it wouldn’t be obvious what you will be facing based on the current meta. Throw those wrench’s, people. 😀

    • Red_Five_Standing_By

      Doesn’t really work that well. You don’t have the weight of numbers to really excel in any one aspect of the game. 🙁

  • DoctorBored

    More often than not, I notice that the winners of tournaments and such tend to be quite intelligent. Engineering majors, math majors, and the like. They’re taught to see numbers and methods in different ways than us art or business majors. They make the lists that nobody else sees, and then when they win a tourney with them, everyone’s like ‘Oh, duh!’

    Do you have to spam to win? No. Do you have to know what you’re doing if you don’t spam? Yes. A mixed force is harder to manage since often times you’re relying on one or two units to do a certain job. If the enemy sees what those units are supposed to do and takes them out before they get a chance to do that thing, the rest of your army is hampered dramatically.

    Alternatively, you spam one unit so many times that it doesn’t matter if you lose one or two. The rest of the army will come in and take care of it. In this regard, spam is much easier to play.

    But, it’s all arguments that are reserved for these articles, since if you just have a mature conversation with your opponent about the kind of game you want to play, you’ll avoid spammy situations. If you go into a tournament, the solution isn’t going to be to complain about the opponent’s list, since GW won’t fix it for months and the tournament organizers aren’t going to do anything about it. You should have either prepared, or not gone to a hyper-competitive tournament filled with people who win by breaking the game.

  • Peter Almo

    This is a debate with no end. 40k isn’t chess, it never was and it never will be, yet there will always be players who play 40k all the while insisting it play like chess. “Ok both of us have one Captain, one librarian, one tactical squad, one assault squad, one devastator squad, and one vehicle, now let that best man win.” This is some sort of deranged fantasy. And 40k is hardly alone. Think about MtG, people don’t show up to tournaments with decks of random cards, when a set comes out they scour the details looking for the best cards and combinations, then show up to the tournaments with decks made up of those great cards and great combinations, 40k is the exact same thing. Take a slightly more abstract example, any random MMORPG, theirs always tons of skills you can use with tons of traits or talents to augment those skills, and tons of armor and weapons to bring those skills to bear, but people don’t equip random unrelated great pieces, or select randomized traits or talents, they carefully examine the game to identify the powerful choices and combinations, then choose those things. It’s all the same thing. It all boils down to people who place winning or succeeding first, then other things like lore, fluffiness or aesthetic second. The author of this article and the people complaining here are people who either consiously or sub consiously place something other than winning first, then complain that the game designers didn’t start the design from the ground up with that attitude. Like I said in the first sentence, it’s a problem without end.

    • TLDR

    • Marco Marantz

      You know you have options for each ‘slot’. You dont have to take an assault squad, you can take a flyer, whereas your opponent might opt for another fast option. Both players using the same organisation makes for a much fairer, fun and competitive game than the extreme of the other side where games can be determined immediately after players pull out their models and before one is even put on the table.

      • Peter Almo

        I hear what you’re saying, it doesn’t sound terrible, but it also doesn’t sound possible within the game design and game rules as they stand. Are you suggesting that for organized play everyone has to run a battalion detachment, or some approach like that?

        • Marco Marantz

          Essentially yes. In doing so this would hamper people from CP farming, which might be a good thing, as players would basically have the same number, unless they took more detachments but inevitably with less support options. Id be curious to know how it doesn’t work with the current game rules; there must be something i’m missing…

    • GnomesForge

      Ok here’s the difference. MtG cards are cheap and ready to use. You may not get the ones you want so choose to buy more, but buy in is low in time and money.

      A single painted squad may cost $100 and many hours just to use once. Stability is the war gamers friend.

      • Peter Almo

        Do you play MtG? My modern deck costs over 2 Grand, I can build most 2k point armies from the ground up for 500-600 bucks.

      • YetAnotherFacelessMan

        I agree with Peter in that Magic the Gathering is a very expensive game to play at a very high level. I’ve always appreciated that when I buy a model from GW, I know exactly what is in the box.

        That being said, I don’t think a unit in 40k is quite the same as a card in magic. First off, a single painted squad in 40k gets purchased, painted, and used hopefully based off of more than just its effect in the game. I think there are a lot of players that have unpainted grey plastic (or in some cases empty bases) because they don’t actually care about the model, they just want the effect in battle.

        On the other side of that, I can’t think of a truly useless unit in the game anymore. It used to be that if you’d purchased and assembled certain units, you were asking for disappointment. Maybe not every unit is equally applicable to the meta, but if you plan ahead when you’re building and painting your army, I don’t think you’ll have too many “wasted” miniatures. I’ve got several spare sergeants and special weapons guys, just in case I feel like running a different type of list. They see a lot of shelf-time and not a lot of table-time, but I don’t regret them.

        And they don’t cycle out when a new set comes in, no matter what people say about Primaris.

        I guess what I’m trying to say is that if you don’t have a lot of money to invest in magic, a starter deck is fine enough for friendly games. You can add on a rare or two traded or bartered from buddies… maybe run some proxies. As long as you play against friends and decent people, you’re fine; just avoid tournaments.

        The same thing applies to 40k. Start Collecting box. Add on some cool dudes. Don’t play against jerks or go to tournaments.

  • Heinz Fiction

    Well what does being “better” at 40k mean anyways? I’m playing this game for more than 20 years now and can’t think of a single instance when someone surprised me with clever tactics. Being good at this game usually means being aware of all the loopholes within the rules and having enough money to field all the broken stuff.

    • David

      Exactly let he with the biggest wallet win that’s the spirit PAY TO WIN! PAY TO WIN!

    • You obviously dont get it do you ?

  • Martin B

    Learn how your units work. once you’ve got that down you’ll be a force to be reckoned with. No matter who you play. Always be ready and willing (and capable of) throwing your opponent off balance and delivering a counter punch in whatever form it may need to take and you can’t go far wrong.

  • Bigalmoney666

    You can make an army list that exploits advantages of units and rules, that’s okay, but when you take it to the extreme of these cheese tournament lists, you’ve crossed a line.

    • 415Native

      yeah, and if you cross that line you should be shunned from friendly games.

      • memitchell

        I don’t know if you’ve been keeping up with current events, Pal. But, Warhammer in all its forms is already an expensive way to get shunned by girls, guys, and people of all races ,creeds, and color, etc. Shunning the already shunned is shunful.

        • 415Native

          Oh really, I thought Warhammer was what all the cool kids played? You mean I can’t impress women with my collection of tiny painted army men?? Cheesy powergamers should be mocked and shunned, why should anyone waste their time playing against 9 Stormravens or 100+ Conscripts? “Shunful” isn’t a word, Pal.

          • memitchell

            If you don’t recognize the first sentence in my previous post, you need to do some Geek homework, Pal. And, try to relax and let your Geek Flag fly. Oh, and you can’t impress women with ANYTHING that has the adjective “tiny.” Just say’n.

          • GnomesForge

            Its funny how this game that desperately relies on network utility and strangers coming together is constantly splitting into sub groups. By all means continue. Shun the power gamers, shun the fluffy. Shun people who make racist jokes in private, shun those terrible SJWs. Shun people who don’t paint, shun the people who bring proxies or recasts. Shun anyone who doesn’t agree with you. I mean eventually there wont be a cohesive player base to support necessary infrastructure like gaming stores, but don’t worry you’ll have shown them, or something.

          • 415Native

            Hey Gnome, if you want spend your valuable and limited free time playing against an essentially unbeatable list, be my guest. I don’t see how that “supports necessary infrastructure like gaming stores”. In my experience, power gamers are rarely contributing members of the local gaming scene, anyway. They just want to show up and get a win in, with the latest mega-list from the internet. Don’t worry your gnomish head about my support of “gaming infrastructure”, as I’ve shopped at the same LGS for 20+ years, played in multiple tourneys there, and host a bi-monthly 40K night at my home.

        • That was a waste of time to read Ill never get back.

          • memitchell

            No, you are better man for it. You may not see that now.

          • Lol !!!

          • 415Native

            Agreed. It was downright “shunful”

    • David

      Their is no line play what you want have fun if you lose think about why your army lost and build a better one dont tell others not to play there list because your too bad to beat a decent list

  • David

    can be hard at first but if you stick with it you’ll eventually design the type of army that gets a lot of thumbs up and can win against any given counter army

    What is the Author smoking

    If you come up with an army that can win against any given counter army everyone is going to moan about it and then GW will ban it.

  • Bootneck

    Just another pointless article.

    • Glad to know I wasted your time !

      • GnomesForge

        Sorry what? Below in the comments you COMPLAIN about having your time wasted by a reader.

  • Marco Marantz

    The problem still comes back to what you are permitted to do in the force orgs/detachments. I have a tourney coming up and adopting the mindset you seem to need at tourneys i have designed a tough 1500 point force putting out over 60 mortal wounds per turn. Will I run it? Probably not; it makes me feel dirty just conceiving it. I probably wont play in the tourney because of the state of the game; I had hoped with 8th ed we wouldnt even be able to spam….sadly we arent there yet. I contributed alot of ideas to 8th and many were picked up but sadly one that wasnt was a fixed org structure for competitive play: Minimum: HQ, 2x troops, then as you expand you can take 1 elite, 1 fast, 1 heavy (whatever order) before adding any further units. Further structure could be mandated. This should eliminate spam, while adding diversity (and flexibility), and force GW to make all options (at least under each category ie fast, elite, heavy) viable. It should also make painfully clear which units need further tweaking for balance across factions.

  • Rechnin

    I have a really great idea… and I know its controversial, but, just play the damn game? I play in a group where there is only one other real gamer in it, we play for the fun of it.

    • Every game except tournies are social contracts. I’ve always advocated playing with people that like the same things you do.

      • Rechnin

        Always a good thing

  • Rechnin

    I have a few Chaos factions, many of them which have been nerfed somewhat because I like to have the number of men in a squad equal to their (un)holy number. It seem thematically right. But, it cripples them for points and gameplay.

  • GnomesForge

    “Going back to what I said above Games Workshop so far has been on top of their game and that’s what happens when the parent company finally really cares about the game and their core base customers.”

    Don’t worry money, your moneys money is all that money.

    • So you don’t respect the change in attitude from GW ?