Warhammer 40k

[LORD IMPERATOR]

please, you really need to read up what demographics are what the overton window is, because while some stuff you say is valuable, this is below zoomer-tier.

Take a good long look at the people pushing this crap on us. They were the same people leading or funding the Left back in the 80s, 90s, and the early 2000s. Every time society gave them what they wanted, they pull out a new set of demands. The Millennials didn't pull SJW ideologies out of their asses; they were taught to become SJWs by boomer and Gen X leftists in college.

they'll still buy it because people are niggercattle. gw will always have buyers, just the number's gonna change.
the hobby aspect is kinda moot since you don't need your own printer, you can just give 20 bucks for a kilogram of plastic to someone in your circle or "friend of a friend".

That's mostly because custom 3D-printed minis have limited use. The most you'll get out of the actual tabletop hobby is playing in official tournaments. Custom games with friends rarely necessitate figurines since you can just make up rules on the fly. Unless you know a place that lets you play with custom minis, or you know some friends you can hit up to play with at the drop of a hat, your 3D printed mini will at most just sit there in your shelf.

like most things it's simply not an overnight process. there's no easier way to make a gw paypiggie seethe than showing him a great model gloating how you paid less than a dollar for it and happily keep playing on the next table. either he keeps buying gw plastic, or caves and starts buying from you (or your source), and then once he has his own mini for less than a buck, it suddenly becomes a lot more difficult to justify to himself giving (at least) ten times to a company which most likely pissed him off in some other issue before, if not their pricing alone.
otoh you'll always have the MUH ORIGINAL MUH LEGIT spergs, but those aren't really wargamers but warhammer-fags. matt ward could sodomize their girlfriend in front of them and kick their dog and and they'd still give GW money because MUH WARHAMMER!!11 (or whatever brand they latch onto).

That won't work. He can actually play those models at an official game. And that's probably all he cares about. It's either consumerism, or chasing the meta. Anyone else would prefer cheaper 3D-printed models.

 

[p1138]

Take a good long look at the people pushing this crap on us. They were the same people leading or funding the Left back in the 80s, 90s, and the early 2000s. Every time society gave them what they wanted, they pull out a new set of demands. The Millennials didn't pull SJW ideologies out of their asses; they were taught to become SJWs by boomer and Gen X leftists in college.

He's not wrong. Yes, the people writing this stuff in the 80s(D&D also) were liberals, that doesn't mean they were the name themselves "Moonblossom", constantly stink like patchouli, protest everything right of stalin, etc. liberals. And no one is saying you can't have or can't post your opinions but you've re-posted the same 2-3 things dozens of times in the past few weeks without any additional information, sources, etc. I'll even give you an example of one of those other things. The other day I responded to someone who asked about the price increases affecting people's buying habits for 40k, I included GW's own articles about it and prior to the obvious covid bump third party articles covering those price increases for a few years to make my point. The person I responded to could look up the stock price themselves, see the price increases that have occurred and been complained about, and can draw a conclusion based off of the presented information but... you still needed to bring up the femstodes thing, amazon deal, and youtube grifters when no one had really even mentioned them outside of my offhand comment regarding what GW has survived and maintained their margins.

Seriously, just pause for a moment and think about how many times you've brought this stuff up in just the past month, practically verbatim. No one is really even arguing against you or in massive disagreement either, you're kind of preaching to the choir. ZMOT isn't the only one to notice this and say something either. Other people have said similar in one way or another, it's kinda tiresome. At the end of the day, the femstodes shit is a bit over a month old now and there are other people who do seem to want to discuss their painting, kitbashing, 3d printing, even playing, without needing the same thing thrown in their face as often or moreso than the shitty youtube grifters do. Just calm down, most of us are on the same side in this thread.

 

[LORD IMPERATOR]

He's not wrong. Yes, the people writing this stuff in the 80s(D&D also) were liberals, that doesn't mean they were the name themselves "Moonblossom", constantly stink like patchouli, protest everything right of stalin, etc. liberals.

Oh boy, you should've met the people who preceded them. They're even crazier than the people we deal with now. If you think for a moment that today's leftists are the worst.......you don't know the truth about the Left. Especially who and what they were cheering on back in the 70s and 80s, when Warhammer was new.

Stalinists. Maoists. People who thought the genocidal Commies were the good guys. People who cheered them on as Soviet tanks rolled into Czechoslovakia and millions died in Red China. And yes, these fuckers taught the Millennials who became SJWs. So yes, their BS passed on to the next generation.

Seriously, just pause for a moment and think about how many times you've brought this stuff up in just the past month, practically verbatim. No one is really even arguing against you or in massive disagreement either, you're kind of preaching to the choir. ZMOT isn't the only one to notice this and say something either. Other people have said similar in one way or another, it's kinda tiresome. At the end of the day, the femstodes shit is a bit over a month old now and there are other people who do seem to want to discuss their painting, kitbashing, 3d printing, even playing, without needing the same thing thrown in their face as often or moreso than the shitty youtube grifters do. Just calm down, most of us are on the same side in this thread.

Fine then. If that's what you want.

Now that you've spoken about the minis and painting, here's my take. Like I said before, I was originally going to get a Custodes army before this update. I really loved the look, the lore behind them, and the fact that they're the hard-hitters. I thought I could probably paint them well. I was even thinking about making my own custom unit of them, like an elite group that I'd cook up or something that serves as a subdivision of the Custodes. Or maybe I'd paint them in rainbow colors as a joke faction. Then the new meta basically chopped off their balls. Ironic, I know, given the new lore changes, but that just killed any interest for me. Even if I choose another army, even one that has good meta, that meta can change and chop their balls off, making my hard-earned spending and hard work pointless.

 

[The tired cat]

Now that you've spoken about the minis and painting, here's my take. Like I said before, I was originally going to get a Custodes army before this update. I really loved the look, the lore behind them, and the fact that they're the hard-hitters. I thought I could probably paint them well. I was even thinking about making my own custom unit of them, like an elite group that I'd cook up or something that serves as a subdivision of the Custodes. Or maybe I'd paint them in rainbow colors as a joke faction. Then the new meta basically chopped off their balls. Ironic, I know, given the new lore changes, but that just killed any interest for me. Even if I choose another army, even one that has good meta, that meta can change and chop their balls off, making my hard-earned spending and hard work pointless.

Soooo....why chase the meta in the first place? Like, unless you're planning to dive deep into big tourneys, theres no real reason to chase the meta. Easier just to pick an army and build em how you wanna while picking a detachement you think will give you some buffs.

 

[LORD IMPERATOR]

Soooo....why chase the meta in the first place? Like, unless you're planning to dive deep into big tourneys, theres no real reason to chase the meta. Easier just to pick an army and build em how you wanna while picking a detachement you think will give you some buffs.

Playing the game with others is the main reason to get the minis in the first place. But if the rules change with the new edition, and the other players don't want to play the older editions with me, then I'm fucked. So if I say, get a Custodes army, and I wish to play using the rules of an older edition before the Ten Thousand got their balls chopped off, and the other person says no, I'm screwed, and I'm left with an army of paperweights.

 

[p1138]

Now that you've spoken about the minis and painting, here's my take. Like I said before, I was originally going to get a Custodes army before this update. I really loved the look, the lore behind them, and the fact that they're the hard-hitters. I thought I could probably paint them well. Then the new meta basically chopped off their balls. Ironic, I know, given the new lore changes, but that just killed any interest for me. Even if I choose another army, even one that has good meta, that meta can change and chop their balls off, making my hard-earned spending and hard work pointless.

Alright, cool, lets have a discussion about that.

40k, and most other wargames aren't the equivalent of chess(and even chess doesn't actually have a 50:50 win:loss ratio). And we also know that companies want to sell models. Fortunately, GW doesn't just assign batshit insane rules to whatever the latest and greatest model is usually. The new custodes shield captain? Shit. The new ork boss? Mediocre. The big draw for potential recent buyers who don't already have a 10k point army? 100+ ork boys, which are super easy to proxy. GW actually nerfed those stupid desolator nerf missile launcher marines pretty quick, they also nerfed the apothecary rezzing the stupid primaris mario kart pretty fast in 9th. With that said, they don't want a stagnant meta either. We're past the idea of games never getting a balance update or armies going an entire edition or more without a codex. Generally speaking for a large portion of 9th and eldar for the first 6 months of 10th(which they were actually trying to reign in) the W/L ratios for most armies have been between 40-60%, which is close to the ideal of 45-55. Why is this relevant? Because any game that isn't stagnant and actually gets updates, also has these issues and will have the same result. If you're buying a specific 2,000 point army(or equivalent for another system) the moment any kind of update happens... that army's usefulness will change one way or the other. If it becomes good, no one cares. If it becomes sub-optimal... where's the other units for that army you could have been working on while you were playing with your currently painted models? I'm not saying buy them from GW or some huge company either. Recasts, 3d prints, proxies, whatever. If you had a custodes jet bike army to play in 9th, could have been painting other units to be playing the first 9 months of 10th while they were still "good".

And that's not taking into account that GW has already previewed that battle line units will be important again with the annual mission pack update. Other than the first couple months of 10th with 10 man units of custodian guard, the meta has been wardens and caladius grav tanks mostly. Those aren't battleline, so in 2 months it's going to be back to needing custodian guard or running the sisters of silence detachment(fuck that... only 2 damn kits... expensive as hell trash) to get prosecutors as battleline to work with the new missions.

Play the game with your painted models in your army, continue printing/painting/whatever while you're playing with the current stuff and by the time things come around... a different set of units will be the meta. Another thing to keep in mind. If you aren't actually participating in the huge GTs at the big conventions, then it probably won't matter if you show up to your local 3 round RTT for a saturday, since not everyone there is going to have or be running the top meta lists. You're probably not one of the guys from the Art of War 40k podcast "pro"(can't believe I seriously need to say that, but there's indeed a few now) team where a 5% change in win rate worldwide is actually going to affect you at your local store regularly. Eventually once you've "caught up" then there's a good chance you might already have whatever the next meta is in 6-12 months ready to go.

I'll even give you an example of a totally stagnant meta fucking a company. Warmahordes mk3 and privateer press(this is one of many reasons they shit the bed, but it's a pretty big one). Halfway through mk3, the game was stagnant, there was eventually an update but the problem for the company was that damn near everyone still playing who was invested enough in the game to consider buying more had already basically bought max units counts of everything for their army at 50-75%(or more) off because they fucked their distributors and stores were racing to the bottom in terms of pricing to get rid of stock. I had managed to pick up the stuff I needed to complete mine at somewhere around $4-5 a box for some units, got a colossal for 75% off, it was absurd. This also meant that update basically provided zero income for the company. What did they do next? Mixed army detachments(they were called theme forces but provided bonuses like extra units for 0 cost and shit, which also meant if you weren't playing a theme force vs a theme force it was more like 75 points vs 125 points in 40k terms this would be like someone just getting an extra 1000 points of units for a 2k game because their detachment rule said so), that also happened to be the only thing even remotely viable on the table. If you played khador, now you need cygnar units. Convergence army? Now you had to buy a bunch of Cryx and Cygnar shit. This went over horribly as no one wanted to buy into another 1-3 armies worth of shit just to stand a chance at trying to keep playing the faction they liked and not get stomped. I don't recall this affecting the hordes side of the game very much outside of the troll faction because they got roped into buying a a couple of minions solos. As you might imagine, most players were not happy about this, especially since all of the new shit was only available via the PP web store anyway so even getting a small discount at the LGS wasn't going to happen since a lot of their distribution had already dropped the company to begin with(this is actually another reason why GW does their obnoxious MAP... Minimum Advertised Pricing shit in north america where they can get away with it, because they don't want retailers racing to the bottom in terms of pricing since it's easier for online retailers to usually maintain a lower margin and remain profitable vs brick and mortar stores people actually play at).

Playing the game with others is the main reason to get the minis in the first place. But if the rules change with the new edition, and the other players don't want to play the older editions with me, then I'm fucked. So if I say, get a Custodes army, and I wish to play using the rules of an older edition before the Ten Thousand got their balls chopped off, and the other person says no, I'm screwed, and I'm left with an army of paperweights.

Why would anyone want to play an older edition of the game with you(there are actually people who do this), simply because whatever version of a particular edition happened to have the best rules for your army? That would be like if I had a harlequin army and just wanted to play the Nachmund 1.1 version of 9th edition(where they had a 75% win rate due to dedicated transport fuckery, this is why 40k now requires dedicated transports to start with a unit on board) and expected to find an opponent who wasn't also just playing that and trying to curb stomp whatever random joe who wanted to play an old edition for whatever reason.

Hell, print yourself a 2nd faction that isn't custodes, play both and swap when one isn't optimal if that's what your concern is. Even though custodes are still at 42% btw with the talons detachment above 50% depending on if you're looking at metamonday or stat-check)

 

[LORD IMPERATOR]

Play the game with your painted models in your army, continue printing/painting/whatever while you're playing with the current stuff and by the time things come around... a different set of units will be the meta.

That's the thing. I have no way to predict how the meta will go, so I don't know which army to go after. I can get the army that's strong now, but they can get their balls chopped off later. Or I can get an army that's so-so now, hoping that a later change might make them stronger. Will my army of paperweights gain their former strength, or will some other army that I have yet to buy become stronger and sweep the competition?

GW probably goes for changing the meta in a way that will force players to buy multiple armies so they can sell more models to the same idiots. Which is profitable for them, but it gets exhausting as you keep building armies to keep up, especially when you play against others who might already have the army that the meta suddenly grants supremacy to. And again, if I wish to play using older rules that favor my army, that's up to the person I play with. If they say yes, then great, if not, then I'm left with an army of punching bags.

It just gets annoying, in a way that other games I've played before do not. I've played other card games before, I've played video games, obviously, and the changing meta in those games rarely bounce so erratically. And when they do, people complain. At most, the time I remember when people chased the meta in other games was with strategy games like Starcraft where the professional gaming scene only have to wait for the expansion packs, and given that the game is over, they don't need to care about that shit. Oh, and they also still play the older versions of the game like Brood War, so people who liked the meta back in 1998 can go back to that instead of playing the 2015 meta.

And there's the fact that yes, despite all I've said, I do care about the lore behind these armies. I probably care more about the lore than GW does. I don't want to just get some Ork or Tyranid army just to chase the meta; I specifically wanted groups like the Custodes because of the lore hype and the story around them. Not to mention aesthetics, which is supremely important in my eyes. But the slapdash way GW handles both the lore and the meta means I'm left with my head spinning, figuring out which army looks the best in my room while hoping they don't become a bunch of punching bags in the game. That's practically impossible. Especially since GW might take complaints from people who lose against the army I'm fielding, and nerf them.

Fuck it, I'll probably get some Grey Knights in the future if I can. I get the feeling that it'll be a while until GW fucks them up.

 

[p1138]

That's the thing. I have no way to predict how the meta will go, so I don't know which army to go after. I can get the army that's strong now, but they can get their balls chopped off later. Or I can get an army that's so-so now, hoping that a later change might make them stronger. Will my army of paperweights gain their former strength, or will some other army that I have yet to buy become stronger and sweep the competition?

It's not a MTG deck. Orks were strong with vehicles and shit in 9th, no one was going to predict an army of boyz would be good again once they got their codex in 10th. Even if you aren't playing orks, that is going to impact what you bring to the table at a tournament to deal with possible opponents. It doesn't mean you suddenly need to buy an ork army, it means you'll need to consider high a high volume of shooting or blast wepaons to deal with an ork horde army, or a high volume of lower strength melee attacks to clear chaff once engaged with them.

GW probably goes for changing the meta in a way that will force players to buy multiple armies so they can sell more models to the same idiots. Which is profitable for them, but it gets exhausting as you keep building armies to keep up, especially when you play against others who might already have the army that the meta suddenly grants supremacy to.

No, not really. Because 90% of the people at your local game store are not playing at the big US open invitation events and trying to count BCP points either.

And again, if I wish to play using older rules that favor my army, that's up to the person I play with. If they say yes, then great, if not, then I'm left with an army of punching bags.

Because it's not the current version?

Oh, and they also still play the older versions of the game like Brood War, so people who liked the meta back in 1998 can go back to that instead of playing the 2015 meta.

Actually, no. People who prefer playing as terrans do not just get to go back and play whichever version it was from 2000 where you could slide your command center right next to the mineral stacks so your SCVs didn't even have to move to harvest, which was a massive advantage for obvious reasons. Sure, if you happened to have that patch version for whatever reason you could setup a LAN game I guess against an opponent specifically to do that... but who the hell would be wanting to play against you in that version if not for doing that exact same thing?

Especially since GW might take complaints from people who lose against the army I'm fielding, and nerf them.

That's not how that's handled... at all. GW uses their own statistic gathering and doesn't cite sources or what qualifies to be counted for statistics, but https://40kmetamonday.wordpress.com/ and https://www.stat-check.com/the-meta do list their criteria and normally aren't too far off from the meta watch articles on warcom when GW is willing to post the win/loss ratios.

Fuck it, I'll probably get some Grey Knights in the future if I can. I get the feeling that it'll be a while until GW fucks them up.

Honestly? They're probably going to get nerfed in the next balance update in July since they're currently sitting above 55%. But this gets back to my point... why do you care so much? If GK get nerfed from 55% down to a 45% win rate, is that actually going to affect your games at the local store? Not really. And even if it did... when the meta switches(I can't remember wtf it is for GK at the moment) from dreadknights(baby carriers) back to infantry... then play the infantry you were painting while playing dreadknights or vice versa.

You make it sound like you expect the game to be stagnant, it's never going to be. Even without the balance updates, new releases will inevitably mix things up even if they aren't released with busted rules(they usually aren't). 40k has basically almost never, even back in 2nd-5th edition, been a "buy this list once and never need to change anything again" type of game. Most games that aren't a skirmish game with pre-set teams(killteam, malifaux, shit like that) aren't like that either, and with those games where the teams are fixed it's generally expected you have a couple to alternate with as things change.

You keep talking about buying an army, not already having an existing army. Keep talking about the meta, but don't have an understanding of it. Don't seem to be aware of BCP points or how the WTC/ITC scenes actually work(which btw, have their own balance changes independent of GW and you will need to play one or the other depending on your location if you're participating in a GT, and even most local RTTs still go with one or the other for various rulings, even if still using GW table layouts). It sounds like you're worrying about the meta as if you're a player in the top 1%, when you're still deciding on an army? That doesn't make any sense.

If you like the lore, then find out of any LGS in your area host crusade leagues, and play that. The competitive tournament win rates basically have no impact on how crusade games play out due to xp progression, and you're encouraged to actually make your own lore for your own dudes even if they're part of an existing faction/chapter/whatever. Honestly, this sounds more like what you'd actually be interested in, at least for the short term.

And yes, lots of people own multiple armies. Usually 2, some crazy people will have a half dozen with 10k points for each. No one is expecting anyone to be doing the latter. But... if you're really dead set on meta chasing in the tournament scene... do that with one army, and play narrative with the other.

 

[LORD IMPERATOR]

It's not a MTG deck. Orks were strong with vehicles and shit in 9th, no one was going to predict an army of boyz would be good again once they got their codex in 10th. Even if you aren't playing orks, that is going to impact what you bring to the table at a tournament to deal with possible opponents. It doesn't mean you suddenly need to buy an ork army, it means you'll need to consider high a high volume of shooting or blast wepaons to deal with an ork horde army, or a high volume of lower strength melee attacks to clear chaff once engaged with them.

That actually does sound like I should buy an Ork army. Even if they get shit rules now, they might get good rules later.

Because it's not the current version?

No. Although I have seen more than my share of people who want to play the older rules for 40K, citing them as better. Some of them even act like GW went down under and refuse to play new rules.

Actually, no. People who prefer playing as terrans do not just get to go back and play whichever version it was from 2000 where you could slide your command center right next to the mineral stacks so your SCVs didn't even have to move to harvest, which was a massive advantage for obvious reasons. Sure, if you happened to have that patch version for whatever reason you could setup a LAN game I guess against an opponent specifically to do that... but who the hell would be wanting to play against you in that version if not for doing that exact same thing?

Yes, I remember that. But those changes are rather tiny in comparison to the Custodes getting nerfed so hard they lose three-fourths of all their battles. At most, a tiny change here or there, Psionic Storm being a bit weaker was one such change, but I doubt they've changed anything recently since Blizzard got so focused on their newer games.......before they started having their own troubles.

Ah, there is a blessing when a company is beginning to go down under and the players have the certitude of a game that won't be changing anytime soon.

That's not how that's handled... at all. GW uses their own statistic gathering and doesn't cite sources or what qualifies to be counted for statistics, but https://40kmetamonday.wordpress.com/ and https://www.stat-check.com/the-meta do list their criteria and normally aren't too far off from the meta watch articles on warcom when GW is willing to post the win/loss ratios.

Which means that GW might try to change the meta for a faction that wins too much. I bet my ass they'll buff the Custodes in the next edition because of their terrible losses.

Honestly? They're probably going to get nerfed in the next balance update in July since they're currently sitting above 55%. But this gets back to my point... why do you care so much? If GK get nerfed from 55% down to a 45% win rate, is that actually going to affect your games at the local store? Not really. And even if it did... when the meta switches(I can't remember wtf it is for GK at the moment) from dreadknights(baby carriers) back to infantry... then play the infantry you were painting while playing dreadknights or vice versa.

Well.......shit. I kind of liked the look of their models, to be fair. But I suppose if they've won over half their battles, they might get more than a bit of a nerf. But it might not be guaranteed. I mean, it's not as dramatic as a 23 percent win rate. It's barely over half, so they might just ignore it or just do a smaller nerf come next edition. An ideal game would have most, if not all factions winning around 45-55 percent of their battles.

You make it sound like you expect the game to be stagnant, it's never going to be. Even without the balance updates, new releases will inevitably mix things up even if they aren't released with busted rules(they usually aren't). 40k has basically almost never, even back in 2nd-5th edition, been a "buy this list once and never need to change anything again" type of game. Most games that aren't a skirmish game with pre-set teams(killteam, malifaux, shit like that) aren't like that either, and with those games where the teams are fixed it's generally expected you have a couple to alternate with as things change.

No living game will forever be stagnant, but I expected the changes to be less dramatic. I don't mind a bit of a nerf; I dealt with that shit when I played online Starcraft back when SC2 was still releasing its three campaigns. A good game would update with rules that don't cause a massive win/loss ratio change; just enough to keep things balanced.

You keep talking about buying an army, not already having an existing army. Keep talking about the meta, but don't have an understanding of it. Don't seem to be aware of BCP points or how the WTC/ITC scenes actually work(which btw, have their own balance changes independent of GW and you will need to play one or the other depending on your location if you're participating in a GT, and even most local RTTs still go with one or the other for various rulings, even if still using GW table layouts). It sounds like you're worrying about the meta as if you're a player in the top 1%, when you're still deciding on an army? That doesn't make any sense.

I don't like to dip my toes into something that'll waste my time in the end. I've got several other games to play myself; tabletop is merely one option. Card games, video games, on top of things like work that's probably going to be more tiring as I'm probably going to have less free time by the end of this year, so yes. I am going to be picky as fuck.

And yes, lots of people own multiple armies. Usually 2, some crazy people will have a half dozen with 10k points for each. No one is expecting anyone to be doing the latter. But... if you're really dead set on meta chasing in the tournament scene... do that with one army, and play narrative with the other.

I'll probably stick with two armies. Hopefully they'll fix the Custodes in the next edition, but Grey Knights for now it'll be, unless the next edition chops their balls off too. But hopefully by then, they'll have fixed the banana-boys. That is, if I have time and money enough to afford them without handicapping my other pursuits.

 

[Swiss46]

Buying an army for meta relevance is a fools errand because It changes and always will. For example I picked blood angels up for 10th because I like Dante, and at the start of 10th they were absolutely trash, but I stuck with them and played/painted dudes because I like my space vampires with jetpacks and daddy issues. Now they're decent with Jump Intercessors.
Paint custodes and have fun with them and your friends, if you're really worried about rules play a couple of rounds on Tabletop Simulator with your friends to see if you like how the army plays.

 

[p1138]

That actually does sound like I should buy an Ork army. Even if they get shit rules now, they might get good rules later.

Practically all of the armies work like that at one point or another throughout every edition of 40k.

But those changes are rather tiny in comparison to the Custodes getting nerfed so hard they lose three-fourths of all their battles.

That isn't happening. They're currently sitting in the low 40s, not 25%, no faction is currently doing that poorly except deathwatch, which looks like it's getting rolled into a book with inquisitors anyway(which is a good thing for them because it means expansion of the army).

Well.......shit. I kind of liked the look of their models, to be fair. But I suppose if they've won over half their battles, they might get more than a bit of a nerf. But it might not be guaranteed. I mean, it's not as dramatic as a 23 percent win rate. It's barely over half, so they might just ignore it or just do a smaller nerf come next edition.

No one has a 23% win rate. I linked you the sites previously. Custodes are currently at 42% on stat-check, and a 45% weekend win rate from the holiday weekend on meta monday.

Which means that GW might try to change the meta for a faction that wins too much. I bet my ass they'll buff the Custodes in the next edition because of their terrible losses.

There's a balance update due in July, and as I said already we know the comp pack also coming in July will rely heavily on battleline units which have not been a staple of custodes armies for the past few months. Points updates are generally quarterly, balance updates(rules) are usually every 6 months, with the latest codex releases not seeing much unless they've had at least 3 months of play in the public.

but Grey Knights for now it'll be, unless the next edition chops their balls off too. But hopefully by then, they'll have fixed the banana-boys.

Again... that's not how this works. Custodes took a hit with their codex, GK don't have their codex or even a date for it on the roadmap(which to be fair isn't much of a roadmap since it only really ever shows a couple months out). In other words, GK still has a massive update due with their codex in this current edition, and custodes like I've said are going to be seeing a shift as the meta changes with the pariah nexus comp update.

And yes, like Swiss46 said, you can try this shit all on tabletop sim for free even. Don't have to even print a model to play 40k these days. Just because you like the lore of custodes or GK, doesn't necessarily mean you'll like the gameplay of what is basically a hyper-elite army, which can have drawbacks in terms of board presence and available actions for missions(remember, the winning does not just mean tabling your opponent, you can table them and still manage to lose if you're not PTFO).

 

[LORD IMPERATOR]

Paint custodes and have fun with them and your friends, if you're really worried about rules play a couple of rounds on Tabletop Simulator with your friends to see if you like how the army plays.

I'll probably go with the latter before the former.

That isn't happening. They're currently sitting in the low 40s, not 25%, no faction is currently doing that poorly except deathwatch, which looks like it's getting rolled into a book with inquisitors anyway(which is a good thing for them because it means expansion of the army).

No one has a 23% win rate. I linked you the sites previously. Custodes are currently at 42% on stat-check, and a 45% weekend win rate from the holiday weekend on meta monday.

So they bounced back. But they were at a 23 percent win rate when I linked that article.

Practically all of the armies work like that at one point or another throughout every edition of 40k.

Basically. But a good game wouldn't be going between shit rules and good rules. You'd just have a balanced ruleset that would keep victories and losses at a stable rate between all factions.

And yes, like Swiss46 said, you can try this shit all on tabletop sim for free even. Don't have to even print a model to play 40k these days. Just because you like the lore of custodes or GK, doesn't necessarily mean you'll like the gameplay of what is basically a hyper-elite army, which can have drawbacks in terms of board presence and available actions for missions(remember, the winning does not just mean tabling your opponent, you can table them and still manage to lose if you're not PTFO).

That's been my biggest thought bubble when it comes to 40K. The lore is meant to suck you into the tabletop game, yet it doesn't represent the armies accurately at all, and it's been that case for years. Basically, the lore is false advertising.

 

[p1138]

So they bounced back. But they were at a 23 percent win rate when I linked that article.

That was basically a "half weekend" where half the GTs/RTTs yet hadn't switched to the codex rules, and hardly anyone even knew the new rules yet. It's basically irrelevant. It's smoothed out to them being low to mid 40s, without any additional changes so far.

Basically. But a good game wouldn't be going between shit rules and good rules. You'd just have a balanced ruleset that would keep victories and losses at a stable rate between all factions.

First, no one considers 40k a good game. It's the game you'll actually be able to find a match up for at the local game store. It's the common denominator of a game and has been for ages. It's never been the best on the market, it's simply the biggest. And like I said, having a perfectly balanced set of rules, which is practically impossible(and again, even chess which has no rules updates is still not perfectly balanced) isn't healthy for a company like GW that produces minis. Even Warlord Games has to update rules for bolt action, and that game can literally just be played with green plastic army men if you want.

That's been my biggest thought bubble when it comes to 40K. The lore is meant to suck you into the tabletop game, yet it doesn't represent the armies accurately at all, and it's been that case for years. Basically, the lore is false advertising.

The tabletop has never matched the lore for 40k. Hell, the official models don't even match the damn scale for things like vehicles(and aircraft are way off). 10 firstborn marines aren't going to fit into a rhino unless to put them in a trash compactor first, the game is never going to properly represent a vortex missile. Hell, the lore doesn't even represent things properly(this is another reason why canon is a waste)as that's usually dependent on who is writing and who the protagonist of the book is.

I've got some examples for you. You seem to know a bit about custodes, they're powerful, can kick the shit out of regular space marines, etc. Ok, great so why are you interested in an army where an Iron Warrior legionnaire can just reach out of the hatch of a tank and crush the skull of a custodian with no issue? Or how about a Custodian getting killed by a couple word bearers and a half dozen cavemen with pointy sticks? Or even Grey Knights, who were so scared of chaos(hmm, whatever happened to "know no fear"?) at one point that they slaughtered a loyal sisters of battle army, just to bathe in their blood because they assumed for some fucking reason that coating their armor in the blood of a bunch of nuns would protect them from chaos? That's some Khorne shit. None of the dumb shit from the lore I just mentioned has anything to do with woke writers, it has everything to do with the lore being an inconsistent mess and expecting one custodian to just cut down a dozen space marines on the table like they can half the time, just isn't even reasonable going purely from a lore standpoint let alone needing to represent that in some fashion via gameplay that isn't just a mess.

And that's not even getting into previous editions that used armor facings for vehicles but some armies could get glancing shots off a tank and still blow it up type shit(I think it was necrons that had an issue doing that in 4th?).

It was never a good game, it's just been the most available one for decades. And the lore... is only "great" if you've got a favorite period, author, faction, etc. and literally ignore all of the other stupid shit written for decades.

 

[LORD IMPERATOR]

That was basically a "half weekend" where half the GTs/RTTs yet hadn't switched to the codex rules, and hardly anyone even knew the new rules yet. It's basically irrelevant. It's smoothed out to them being low to mid 40s, without any additional changes so far.

Low to mid 40s means it's not balanced. It should be high 40s to low 50s, at least. And for a faction like the Custodes to even have the latter is me being generous.

If it were me, I'd just have one ''Imperium'' faction where the common chump is the guardsmen, the elite forces are the Sororitas and the Space Marines, and the Custodes are the super-elites that you can only deploy one or two at a time, unless you're playing a custom game where the other side VASTLY outnumbers you. That would at least respect the lore while balancing out the game.

First, no one considers 40k a good game. It's the game you'll actually be able to find a match up for at the local game store. It's the common denominator of a game and has been for ages. It's never been the best on the market, it's simply the biggest.

And why is that? Mostly due to the appeal of the lore and the aesthetics of the Space Marines. And while the latter is as simple as ''what you see is what you get'', the former is what got a lot of people, myself included, to be interested in 40K to begin with. And as we've already gone over, the lore is false advertising, since it doesn't accurately represent what's on the table.

And like I said, having a perfectly balanced set of rules, which is practically impossible(and again, even chess which has no rules updates is still not perfectly balanced) isn't healthy for a company like GW that produces minis. Even Warlord Games has to update rules for bolt action, and that game can literally just be played with green plastic army men if you want.

Chess is pretty balanced; you have a static set of rules that you can work around, and each piece has its strengths and weaknesses. Pawns can't move much outside of forward, but there's eight of them. Bishops and rooks can move as many squares as possible so long as it's the directions they're allowed to. Knights can only move in an L-shape but they can jump over enemy pieces. The queen can move at any direction, no matter how many pieces, but you only get one unless you get a pawn over to the other side. And the king only moves one piece for each direction, but he's the most important piece in the game, since if you lose him, it's curtains.

The tabletop has never matched the lore for 40k. Hell, the official models don't even match the damn scale for things like vehicles(and aircraft are way off). 10 firstborn marines aren't going to fit into a rhino unless to put them in a trash compactor first, the game is never going to properly represent a vortex missile. Hell, the lore doesn't even represent things properly(this is another reason why canon is a waste)as that's usually dependent on who is writing and who the protagonist of the book is.

Again, I already made the comparison to Pokemon, where the TCG actually does make the more powerful Pokemon represented faithfully. 40K is not. Also, there is no 40K canon, GW have made that clear. So any protagonist for any book can go Super-Saiyan and defeat fucking Grey Knights and Custodes, or Tyranid Hive Tyrants and Ork Warbosses, just to show how cool they are.

I've got some examples for you. You seem to know a bit about custodes, they're powerful, can kick the shit out of regular space marines, etc. Ok, great so why are you interested in an army where an Iron Warrior legionnaire can just reach out of the hatch of a tank and crush the skull of a custodian with no issue? Or how about a Custodian getting killed by a couple word bearers and a half dozen cavemen with pointy sticks?

I suppose they just got unlucky. The authors writing those stories chose them to be the resident punching bags to prove how threatening someone else is. It's like how they made Super-Saiyans into weakling chumps during the Android Saga to sell how much of a threat Androids 17 and 18 were.

Or even Grey Knights, who were so scared of chaos(hmm, whatever happened to "know no fear"?) at one point that they slaughtered a loyal sisters of battle army, just to bathe in their blood because they assumed for some fucking reason that coating their armor in the blood of a bunch of nuns would protect them from chaos? That's some Khorne shit.

That actually does sound like Khorne shit, which makes sense, considering GW intended for the Imperium to be full of hypocrisy and bullshit. Also superstition, since knowing the BL authors, that probably won't protect them at all.

None of the dumb shit from the lore I just mentioned has anything to do with woke writers, it has everything to do with the lore being an inconsistent mess and expecting one custodian to just cut down a dozen space marines on the table like they can half the time, just isn't even reasonable going purely from a lore standpoint let alone needing to represent that in some fashion via gameplay that isn't just a mess.

I just assumed all the stupid shit fell under the pretense of ''nothing is canon''. But I suppose all that yammering about how great the GK and the Custodes in the lore is just propaganda. Or the lore that states they're far more powerful is just baloney, at least in the view of the authors whose work you cited.

I agree with you, the lore is a mess. But the general attitude from other lore books towards the GK and the Custodes was that they're supposed to be extremely powerful. So this is just another example of it being a mess; they can't decide between super-units or chumps. They might as well be at the same power level as Ork gretchens, as far as we're concerned. All that terminator armor and specially-crafted weapons might as well be replaced by kevlar suits and bo-staffs found in a junkyard, and you wouldn't notice the difference.

 

[Swiss46]

The game doesn't accurately replicate the lore purposely homie. If it did it would be shit like 30-50 guards men models being needed to kill a single Space Marine. The game is an abstraction of war in the 41st millennium and you just have to accept some weirdness like Tyranids not drowning the entire table literally or your super heavy super soldiers being shot to death by guardsmen.

 

[p1138]

Low to mid 40s means it's not balanced. It should be high 40s to low 50s, at least. And for a faction like the Custodes to even have the latter is me being generous.

"balanced" within reason would be 45-55. It's not far from that.

Chess is pretty balanced;

This is utterly incorrect. The reason why factions having a win rate of 45-55 is reasonable to shoot for, is because chess where the factions just mirror eachother still manages to have a 55% win rate in favote of white... which does not translate to a 45% rate for black, it's more like White, Draw, Black 40/35/25 or something along those lines? Yeah, it's really fucking weird, but no chess is not balanced in terms of sides being even. It's balanced by the volume of games played so people don't care.

I suppose they just got unlucky. The authors writing those stories chose them to be the resident punching bags to prove how threatening someone else is.

Nope. In the first one I mentioned, that was in a recent Dawn of Fire novel, where the custodes were the protagonists. The example with the word bearers(first heretic if I remember right?) was indeed a HH book with the word bearers kind of being the main protagonists even though it's really more specifically Argel Tal.

I just assumed all the stupid shit fell under the pretense of ''nothing is canon''. But I suppose all that yammering about how great the GK and the Custodes in the lore is just propaganda. Or the lore that states they're far more powerful is just baloney, at least in the view of the authors whose work you cited.

No, because all of the stupid shit would be canon as well except for some very specific things like draco and the half-elf ultramarines librarian(who is technically back as a full eldar but that's beside the point). Nothing is canon because GW doesn't give enough of a shit to have someone keep track of it or force their writers to read everything else. This is why "but that's from rogue trader" is a lame excuse fans use to wave away the massive lore changes between 1st and 2nd edition, because they weren't fans of it during rogue trader and thus didn't give a shit.

The game doesn't accurately replicate the lore purposely homie. If it did it would be shit like 30-50 guards men models being needed to kill a single Space Marine. The game is an abstraction of war in the 41st millennium and you just have to accept some weirdness like Tyranids not drowning the entire table literally or your super heavy super soldiers being shot to death by guardsmen.

Now that's some damned truth right there as well. If we want to try and use the majority of the lore, you're talking 50 guard to kill 1 space marine, and 20 space marines to kill 1 custodian. Trying to represent a full guard wtf would the word be... regiment I think? Like The valhallans from the Ciaphas Cain novels would be practically impossible on the table since in the books within a single combat action they've had 4-5 entire companies engaged at a single time. No one is going to want 500 guard minis on the table at a time. Hell, people tend to hate movement trays outside of rank and flank games as it is. But of course in that same game of imperial guard vs space marines... a couple units of catachan can take out a primarch which is something the custodes practice and fail at doing in their practice in current lore.

If you want to get really absurd, the necrons have the orrery which because lore reasons can just magically snuff out stars by popping them like bubble wrap on a holographic map. how the hell would you represent that on the table? Or even an imperial virus bomb and have it come out anything like the lore? They've tried to have eldar d-cannons lore accurate on the table in past editions, and that was a stupid mess. I mentioned a vortex missile previously, I believe that was a 10" pie plate template that just deleted anything under it on the table in apocalypse? That's not even a game at that point, that's just a matter of who goes first.

 

[LORD IMPERATOR]

"balanced" within reason would be 45-55. It's not far from that.

I suppose so.

This is utterly incorrect. The reason why factions having a win rate of 45-55 is reasonable to shoot for, is because chess where the factions just mirror eachother still manages to have a 55% win rate in favote of white... which does not translate to a 45% rate for black, it's more like White, Draw, Black 40/35/25 or something along those lines? Yeah, it's really fucking weird, but no chess is not balanced in terms of sides being even. It's balanced by the volume of games played so people don't care.

It's also far less luck-based, and even if you play Black, there are strategies you can employ to even things out.

Meanwhile, if your Space Marine terminator squad rolls the wrong number on an armor save, it doesn't matter who you're fighting, even if they're fucking guardsmen or cultists, you're going down. Those guardsmen/cultists become heroes to their side, and the other Space Marines run away like chickens just at the sight of them.

Nope. In the first one I mentioned, that was in a recent Dawn of Fire novel, where the custodes were the protagonists. The example with the word bearers(first heretic if I remember right?) was indeed a HH book with the word bearers kind of being the main protagonists even though it's really more specifically Argel Tal.

Like I said, with the first example they were done like that show how threatening someone is, which goes back to my Super Saiyan analogy. The Super Saiyans were the protagonists of the Android Saga, they were horribly crushed in battle just to show that the new Androids were far stronger. With the second example, the Word Bearers were the protagonists and the Custodes were in the way.

No, because all of the stupid shit would be canon as well except for some very specific things like draco and the half-elf ultramarines librarian(who is technically back as a full eldar but that's beside the point). Nothing is canon because GW doesn't give enough of a shit to have someone keep track of it or force their writers to read everything else. This is why "but that's from rogue trader" is a lame excuse fans use to wave away the massive lore changes between 1st and 2nd edition, because they weren't fans of it during rogue trader and thus didn't give a shit.

That actually reminds me of how Lucasfilm used to have a guy whose only job it was to keep track of the Star Wars canon and remind people whenever something is going off-canon. The man's name was Leland Chee, and he basically made sure to keep SW canon somewhat consistent, which worked well up until 2008 when the new TCW show started rolling over old Clone Wars canon. Then the Disney sale came, and SW canon has never been the same since, because Disney SW is an even bigger mess with Filoni openly contradicting previous works that were once canon in Disney SW.

But to the point, GW could've easily paid one of their Black Library employees to keep track of Warhammer 40K canon, and they chose not to. I suppose they're too busy counting coppers to share some of their profits with someone whose job it would've been just to keep the lore straight. Which baffles me; I know no end to the number of lorefans who would've happily taken up that gig even if it was minimum-wage. Hell, many of them would probably do it FOR FREE.

Now that's some damned truth right there as well. If we want to try and use the majority of the lore, you're talking 50 guard to kill 1 space marine, and 20 space marines to kill 1 custodian. Trying to represent a full guard wtf would the word be... regiment I think? Like The valhallans from the Ciaphas Cain novels would be practically impossible on the table since in the books within a single combat action they've had 4-5 entire companies engaged at a single time. No one is going to want 500 guard minis on the table at a time. Hell, people tend to hate movement trays outside of rank and flank games as it is.

I suppose so. But it'd make more sense if both sides had their elite units; so instead of 50 guardsmen, 3-5 Tempestus Scions with hotshot lasguns or plasma rifles will do for killing one marine. And the side with the 50 guardsmen would ideally have other elite units, be they Tempestus Scions, Sisters of Battle, or their own Space Marines, to even things out.

But of course in that same game of imperial guard vs space marines... a couple units of catachan can take out a primarch which is something the custodes practice and fail at doing in their practice in current lore.

LOL that'd be hilarious to see in lore. The banana-boys failing while some ripped mortals succeed.

If you want to get really absurd, the necrons have the orrery which because lore reasons can just magically snuff out stars by popping them like bubble wrap on a holographic map. how the hell would you represent that on the table? Or even an imperial virus bomb and have it come out anything like the lore? They've tried to have eldar d-cannons lore accurate on the table in past editions, and that was a stupid mess. I mentioned a vortex missile previously, I believe that was a 10" pie plate template that just deleted anything under it on the table in apocalypse? That's not even a game at that point, that's just a matter of who goes first.

I'm pretty sure the virus bomb or the orrery would just count as super-weapons and just not be on the tabletop outside of maybe some roleplaying scenario where you're trying to stop the Necrons or the Imperium from using them. Same with the vortex missile. Just have it be a roleplaying scenario thing and give the other side a time/turn limit to stop it from being used. Like say, your two sides are fighting on an Imperium vessel, one Ork, one Imperium, and the Imperium vessel is preparing to fire a virus bomb on the Ork-infested planet, and the Orks' job is to stop it from firing.

The game doesn't accurately replicate the lore purposely homie. If it did it would be shit like 30-50 guards men models being needed to kill a single Space Marine. The game is an abstraction of war in the 41st millennium and you just have to accept some weirdness like Tyranids not drowning the entire table literally or your super heavy super soldiers being shot to death by guardsmen.

Or, more likely, the lore is just bullshit or rumors as GW says they're not canon. It could be either way, really. Especially since GW feels free to trample all over lore as well, and they've made it clear that codexes and books are full of bullshit.

''Here's our standard line: Yes it's all official, but remember that we're reporting back from a time where stories aren't always true, or at least 100% accurate. If it has the 40K logo on it, it exists in the 40K universe. Or it was a legend that may well have happened. Or a rumour that may or may not have any truth behind it. Let's put it another way: anything with a 40K logo on it is as official as any Codex... and at least as crammed full of rumours, distorted legends and half-truths.

It's a decaying universe without GPS and galaxy-wide communication, where precious facts are clung to long after they have been changed out of all recognition. Read A Canticle for Liebowitz by Walter M Miller, about monks toiling to hold onto facts in the aftermath of a nuclear war; that nails it for me. Sorry, too much splurge here. Not meant to sound stroppy. To attempt answer the initial question: What is GW's definition of canon? Perhaps we don't have one. Sometimes and maybe. Or perhaps we do and I'm not telling you."

-Marc Gascoigne, chief editor, Black Library

 

[Just Some Other Guy]

Lore accurate table top gaming is dumb.

Buying meta armies for casual play is dumb.

 

[LORD IMPERATOR]

Lore accurate table top gaming is dumb.

Buying meta armies for casual play is dumb.

Yet they need not be, at least with the former. The latter, the game evolves and changes as it goes on, so the meta inevitably evolves. But the former, they could've toned down the lore to make it less overblown and have less of a power gap between the common soldier and the super-soldier to make it more accurate to the Tabletop, or they could've limited the number of super-soldiers one can use in any given game, if they're to remain ''super''.

 

[Just Some Other Guy]

I'll be honest. I do not care enough about the lore to worry about it.

Like seriously. Just play the game lol

Or a better one, idk.