WTF is it with people giving counts as crap to people? I swear - you would think with 3++ with a much more "competitive" minded nature people would just be like - play whatever you want. Well no matter what nice army. I think people can just suck it and I am sure they just have a half painted grey army :). It is crazy how people have gotten so - unimaginative about armies and how people play. Have fun. At least we support a store by making new armies :).
Keep up the good work.
Goatboy aka Thomas
Hey all, just a quick discussion point which was sparked by this email from Goatboy over on BOLS. Wtfudgemuffin Goatboy, you e-mailed Vince but not me :(? I mean my Marines are the same as yours, three chapters in one! Oh how I love you magnets... So, 'Counts as' armies... Love em, hate em?
The first guy who commented on my Night Lords piccies was a hater :( It seems there is a bit of a divide with counts as armies and what some people narrowly think is not fluffy, WAAC doucheness, etc. Well let me tell you haters, my Night Lords are very fluffy, as well as competitive. We here at 3++ strive for competitive, balanced lists and the idea that a DoA Blood Angels jumpers list doesn't represent a Night Lords raptor cult, well it's beyond stupid. I've included Honour Guard and VVets for the Chosen and the ASM are raptors. Seems fairly fluffy :P At least to a non-narrowly minded gamer.
The idea with 'counts as', at least to me, is to make a shitty/boring/less fluffy codex (such as CSM in this case) into another, more competitive but equally more fluffy and exciting list using an appropriate codex (BA jumpers in this case). Am I supposed to use the CSM dex to represent NLs, Alpha Legion and Word Bearers? I think there can be serious cases put forward to use the BA, SM and SW dexes respectively.
Appropriate is an important word here, it must be reasonable to assume that we can use the BA, SM or SW dex for some of the Chaos Legions (which aren't represented nearly well enough in the CSM dex), where it would be quite unreasonable to represent your Night Lords as Tyranids or IG. There is a common sense approach here which should be reasonably adhered to so as not to make unrepresentative armies, just because you want to use their dex. Even a pre heresy thousand sons army looks like it can be done very well with the next DH codex.
So this mini rant is getting a bit long for my tastes lol, but I will leave you to ponder and discuss what you guys think of 'counts as'... Haters gonna hate :(
Logging you in...
chumbalaya 79p · 734 weeks ago
Miniature Wargame Co · 734 weeks ago
As you put very well, its not like we are using the nid dex for our forces. We are simply going with the most fluffy option.
moug · 734 weeks ago
MVB · 734 weeks ago
I want to play post-heresy automaton thousand sons marines who are dust inside armor and have no bodies anymore and are mindless zombie marines. SO I'M GOING TO USE THEM AS SPACE WOLVES, BUT WITH THE POST-HERESY THOUSAND SONS MODELS AND CONVERSIONS!
Approach #2 -
I want to play pre-heresy Thousand Sons, and the codex that best suits them are the new Grey Knights, so I'm going to convert up pre-heresy armored and colored thousand sons and use the GK rules!
Approach 1 = gay
Approach 2 = not gay
Approach 1 = largely the same as going "MY TYRANID ARMY IS COUNTS-AS FOOT GUARD"
Approach 2 = sensible use for an army that does not have a representative codex
I don't generally like a bunch of Ultramarines with Ultramarines symbols painted as Ultramarines but counting as Space Wolves. Just my $.02 ... I'm not going to flip out at someone for running whatever as whatever, but if there's a codex that flawlessly represents your army, counting it as something else is rather crappy of you.
For me, what got me a little on the goatboy thing, and what I'm sure actually "upset" others (I didn't really care that much, Goatboy and I even gchatted about it), is that he was doing a post-heresy chaotic Word Bearers army, using unit types that were pretty much all in Codex: Chaos Space Marines. It would be one thing if he was doing World Eaters with a bunch of dudes on bloodcrushers ... need thunderwolves for that. People were upset b/c he was doing a Chaos Space Marines army with Chaos Space Marines units, but ... was using Space Wolves rules.
TheDuke07 · 734 weeks ago
wisdom like silence · 734 weeks ago
@SackOfOwls · 734 weeks ago
Night Lords with Red Thirst? So a Legion that is known to have recruited large amounts of murdering criminal psychotics can't be represented by Red Thirst?
Word Bearers, the Legion known for summoning daemons and enslaving them to their cause wouldn't be able to summon up some daemonic beasts to use in battle?
Bro_Lo 82p · 734 weeks ago
WARNING: SPOILER ALERT
This is a game of imagination. Space marines DO NOT exist. Red Thirst is just a rule that is built into the cost of a sub-set of models. It can represent ANYTHING that would make some guys a little crazy and not scared of anything. What... Chaos Marines won't have that?
Please... think before you type. Rules are rules. Models are models. Fluff is fluff. Let's not confuse the 3 please.
SneakyDan · 734 weeks ago
muggins12 45p · 734 weeks ago
@SackOfOwls · 734 weeks ago
-I want to play a new army that is really different to my Tau
-An all Jumpers army would be cool. It looks fun to play and would be easy to transport
-I don't like Blood Angels though. But I do really like the Night Lords
-I will paint these models to be Night Lords instead
Helpless William · 734 weeks ago
I started out about two years ago, playing chaos. It just so happened that my army's color scheme was dark grey, and I had planned to go with a Relictors theme. I liked the idea of a chapter using the enemy's weapons to fight more effectively. I liked the ruthlessness it implied, and I had been kit bashing loyalist and chaos bits, planning to use them as a codex chapter sometimes, a chaos renegade force other times.
My only regret was I couldn't field an all terminator force, and I liked terminators. So, enter the Space Wolves Codex and a all terminator LoganWing expansion to this generic dark grey army. Since then, it's evolved into about six thousand points of dark grey marine army. Sometimes they're chaos, though rarely, as I've added more and more loyalist gear, most of the time they're 13th company Space Wolves, and when I feel like it, codex., as you can't do an effective all biker army with anything else.
The fluff for the army is that they've been lost in the warp for thousands of years, accumulating odds and sods, replacing defunct equipment with whatever they can lay their hands on. What's left from the original force(s) that form the core of the force are survivors, united in brotherhood and the desire for continued survival. If you're sensing a theme,yes, very much a fan of Glen Cook's "Black Company "series.
Like Goatboy, I like the look of chaos bits, and see nothing wrong with adding a horned helmet or two to my Vikings in Space, or the space biker gang, or what have you. Around the store I play at, the worst I've ever heard gotten is some good natured teasing about my Space Wolves having found some oblits to hang out with, or someone nodding when I say "Space Wolves 13th Company" when they ask if I'm playing chaos and what I'm using my thunder lizards (Carnosaurs as Thunderwolves) to represent.
I've also gotten more than a few compliments on the army and the idea(s) behind it.
In the end, I think obviously, I can't begin to see where people would have issues with a completely wysiwyg force, fully painted, using an appropriate codex, particularly not in Goatboy's case. Sure, he could have painted them just like the GW studio army, and then we'd have another boring clone of what we can see by opening the pages of the codex, or going to GW's website. He's talented enough to do so, certainly. I'm glad he's chosen not to. These outlets for his creativity are fun to look at. I'd be lieing if I didn't admit to having drawn some inspiration here and there.
GW encourages us, in the back of every dex, to use our imaginations. They state specifically that the list of chapters using the dex,, is just a small selection, and that we should feel free to create our own, with our own color scheme, and that we should use the named characters to represent characters of our own creation. Goatboy, you, me, we all just take, arguably, it an extra step or two.
In my local environment,that sort of creativity is applauded. If I ever find myself in an environment where it's not, I'll look for somewhere else to play. Too much in life demands we adhere to arbitrary rules that may or may not make sense, and to me that's all these detractors of Goatboy's are doing. They are trying to impose their own, arbitrary guidelines, not GW's, their own. It smacks of wanting to make everyone over into their own ideal, and of their own lack of imagination. Isn't "the most important rule" applicable in their world?
Then again, that sort of thought process may be what attracted me to chaos in the first place.
xjoshybear 37p · 734 weeks ago
In the end, it basically comes down to people hating on Marines like they always have.
CptFornost 44p · 734 weeks ago
@SackOfOwls · 734 weeks ago
A Space Marine Model with a Bolter can be used as a perfectly WYSIWYG mini in six different armies right now. No conversion work needed.
Gx1080 · 734 weeks ago
artemi7 78p · 734 weeks ago
And I see little distinction between you using the BA dex as the basis for your Night Lords and you using the BA dex for a completely fictitious fan made jumper marine army called, say, the Lords of Darkness. The diffrence, of course, is that the first you get called cheating, and the second you are praised for your creativity. You wouldn't even have the change the paint scheme; just change what you call them, and people stop bitching.
Grimnar Angband · 734 weeks ago
MikeTau · 734 weeks ago
I can understand that you use a night lord theme for a C :S M army, but then you have to start up as SM (with chaos minis) and always count them as SM, as intended. Not changing them every day.
Another thing, 'Space marines-like armies' have always been the best alround armies for noobs and newbies. With the right tactic they will almost always win games. Considering this, do you power-armor lovers really need another excuse to field the best army. Smells like WAAC to me...
I'm concerned for I play 40k since the 90's and the recent years there has been a rise of count as armies... Very childish, same as fielding unpainted or proxy minis.
Sorry people I just hate count as armies, grey minis and spam lists... Shame that Goatboy starts to whine on this blog as well for he got flamed on the BOLS-comments.
wisdom like silence · 734 weeks ago
The only person being childish here is you.
Sepharine · 734 weeks ago
Thalenchar · 734 weeks ago
Second of all, wow, I couldn't disagree more. I do not get the problem with count as armies at all! Provided someone puts a little effort into making sure everything is WYSIWYG I'm all for it.
I think it is erm, not very nice to tell someone that they should buy a new army if they want to play another codex. Really, where does that idea even come from? :p It's a game! People can play it whichever way they want! That means your views are just as valid as other people's on how to play and how to use your armies.
I've been playing 40k since the 90s as well. I agree count as armies are more common, but I think it's great! It is most definitely not childish, nor is it the same as fielding unpainted or proxied minis. Childish in my opinion would be to hate on other players' armies and then go tell them how they play is wrong and that they should buy more stuff.
So, not saying that what you think is wrong. Just that I feel it is wrong! ;)
tzeentchling 76p · 734 weeks ago
Space Marine hateration. Yes, Space Marines are special, other armies aren't. This is the way of the GW world, and likely will not change. People want to play new rules, don't want to buy new minis. It's not hard.
Roland Durendal · 734 weeks ago
I think people need to relax and realize not everyone wants to use an "uber" 'dex and that people want to, you know, creatively express themselves sometimes.
sinsynn 106p · 734 weeks ago
It's called 'power gaming,' simply put.
Lame excuses are exactly that- lame.
Someone puts a Night Lords army down in front of me, they better be using the book the army is ACTUALLY LISTED IN.
Pull out the BA book, and your marines better be red or yellow with checks.
Otherwise I laugh at you, pack up my minis, and leave.
Arlok · 734 weeks ago
Plya wath you like/love and be clear to your opponent.
Waaagh! i'm and Ork · 734 weeks ago
tzeentchling 76p · 734 weeks ago
"Pull out the BA book, and your marines better be red or yellow with checks. "
LOL - "If your army isn't exactly what I think it should be, then imma go home." Great sportsmanship! So much for creativity.
Keith · 734 weeks ago
@SackOfOwls · 734 weeks ago
1inchwarriors 39p · 734 weeks ago
=.= · 734 weeks ago
McNs · 734 weeks ago
I've played since the 90s and fondly recall GW using a myriad of counts-as stuff (anyone remember the snake-people army in White Dwarf right around the time the 2nd Ed Chaos Dex was released?). Now, you'd think you were playing an army of Jar-Jar Binks Marines if you even meekly consider using, say the Space Wolves 'dex to represent Iron Warriors.
Frankly, if people want to roleplay the fluff - go play one of FFG's roleplaying games. If people want to 40K a certain way, that's cool too. Don't tell other people how to play the game, even if you don't like it. Pissing on someone's army, after they've spent time, money, and effort making it look pretty; because "Itz not fluffehs" is childish. Its WARhammer, not YOURhammer.
And for the record: the Grammarwolves are, in fact, teh lulz.
Zjoekov 74p · 734 weeks ago
abortedsoul · 734 weeks ago
1inchwarriors 39p · 734 weeks ago
Night Lords as BA is a cool and creative idea. Alpha Legion with SW rules - you can't tell me that the idea of AL Wolf Scouts is un-fluffy and wouldn't be a blast to model!
LolCommissar · 734 weeks ago
I just hope that I never play against some dude with the wrong coloured marines or I'll just have beat him over the head with his own codex and stamp on his models ARGGHH.
BOLS is just full of whiners and haters, makes me sad.
Gredus · 734 weeks ago
Now i'll be using them as Grey Knights.
They see me rollin
vbs · 734 weeks ago
Now, say I really like an aspect of fluff, a faction or race or army that isn't represented in a codex, since GW can only design new models so fast, and they streamline this process by only releasing armies every so often. They can't create models for every single faction in this galaxy of millions of planets and hundreds of sapient species. What am I to do? Should I use the codex of the faction that is most likely to ally with my faction? What codex would you recommend for the following:
Renegade humans/non-PA chaos worshippers
Chaos raptor cult
Genestealer cult with hybrids
Adeptus Arbites
Adeptus Custodes
Adeptus Mechanicus
Pre-heresy world eaters (or any pre-heresy chapter... i.e. pre-codex astartes)
Harlequins
DIY space marines whose parent chapter is black templars, whose chapter monastary is on a feudal world, whose elites ride horses and chariots into battle with power lances and troops form combat shield walls with pikes
Each of these are legitimate 40k factions who can probably be represented on the battlefield using an existing codex. However they cannot be represented in full by any codex. I can only take harlequins as elites. I can only take chaos raptors in FA. I can only take world eaters as khornate berserkers. The flavor and fluff is lost completely if I want to model and play an army entirely built of one of these awesome factions. So I have to counts-as.
Yes, there are some people who use counts-as simply to have an army that plays the way they want to play, or to exploit the marked imbalances between codices that fail to equally represent or cost identical units with identical battlefield roles. So what. That's a problem with the rules, not with the people playing by them. But seriously, if they go to all the trouble to model and paint things specifically to represent choices from another codex, why not applaud them for their effort and creativity? What's the difference between playing a counts-as army, and the actual army? The guy playing counts-as blood angels could have easily put a bunch of effort into painting and modelling blood angels, but he wants to paint and model something other than blood angels.
My point being... people shouldn't base their enjoyment of a game on a corporation's manufacturing and marketing decisions. It would be like refusing to play monopoly because someone wants to use a penny instead of having to be the wheelbarrow. Yet they do. And furthermore, they condemn others for not conforming to this mindset as cheaters and W.A.A.C. cheesers. IMO, though, If you use a codex, you can represent the models in that codex however you want. The codex is the ruleset, the models are gamepieces. As long as you are following the rules, the game pieces are arbitrary.
That said, I will reiterate the problem is with the imbalanced and inflexible codices and the increasing focus, both in the rules and community, on WH40k as a competitive rather than collaborative gaming endeavor.
Bro_Lo 82p · 734 weeks ago
I'M NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR YOU HAVING FUN! I'm happy to communicate correctly what 'type' of game I'd like, but ultimately, You need to make sure YOU have fun.
Count-as is sticking to the rules so STFU. If I want my Night Lords to be all Jump pack then what do you want me to do? Not play at all? Adapt my list to the boring codex that is C:CSM, which actually goes against the fluff of certain chapters? Or just play BA?
So you think I'm doing it just to win? And.... what's wrong with trying to win? Do people play football on a cold Sunday morning purely to do dumb shit? No. They go to compete. And whilst they do it, they have fun. You know... competing AND having fun.
If these dumb ass people - yes you're dumb - spent less time whining and more time understanding how to have fun then maybe you'd enjoy your hobby more. I'm happy to teach and do dumb stuff so people understand the rules. I have fun. I'm happy to run a shit list in a competitive play style, I have fun. I'm happy to do my best to make my strongest list (i.e. put fluff aside) to compete and I have fun. You notice the recurring theme. I have fun with 40k. The only thing I complain about in 40k is dumb people complaining. Please, drop the hobby if you don't have fun. Or maybe you just can't compete and this is why you're against everybody else trying to do so?
Sigh.
@oldgrue · 734 weeks ago
As you state: "I'm happy to communicate correctly what 'type' of game I'd like, but ultimately, You need to make sure YOU have fun. "
So it seems your needs get met on your terms.
Your example of football still assumes the social contract that all players are going with a willingness to negotiate - fouls, offsides, distance gained in each play etc. Even assuming this is a pickup game with strangers these things need to be negotiated. This isn't license to be a petulant child - we have enough of that in our daily lives - this is a game. By participating its assumed the goal is 'fun' for all sides.
Bro_Lo 82p · 734 weeks ago
"Hi, I need some practice with my 2k list for a tournament next week." Read: I'm here to play competitively and I will use all of my rules knowledge, codex knowledge and tactical accumen to win this game.
"Hi, fancy a 1500 point mess-about? I've always wanted to have a laugh with Legion of the Damned." Read: I'm here to have a piss about with a dumb unit that I understand to be terrible in competitive play and henceforth haven't had the opportunity to use them.]
If you agree... you make your own fun. If one of us cheats, that's a different case. That's not playing the game. Whoever does is a dick. It's nothing to do with a game taking part on my terms, it's a game on mutual, understood terms. If you don't want a competitive game, don't play me. If you don't and I have no other options, then I'll adapt my list and playstyle because I understand you don't want to play competitively and I don't find it fun hammering somebody into the ground.
You make your own fun if a game is played on mutually understood terms within the rules. I don't rely on you to make it fun for me. If you do, bonus. If you don't, I'll still have fun.
Kira · 734 weeks ago
Bro_Lo 82p · 734 weeks ago
@proximityNZ · 734 weeks ago
MikeTau · 734 weeks ago
Firstly I don´t dictate how people must play the game. It is just ashame when people use count as armies when not properly made (initially build and painted to fit one codex, whatever codex that may be) which is roughly 90% of these armies. Indeed it think that 90% of the people who use count as armies started with for example night lords and later used them as BA or SW. Call me childish, but i find that lame. Especcially when those people start using the new C:CSM when that codex get an update.
People, just accept: Warhammer is expensive and takes a lot of time and effort for one can field an army. Don't go the easy way and make an army that practically can be used like 10 different armies. Mark my words, we'll be seeing a lot of CSM count as Grey Knights... i mean, what the hell!
Marshal_Wilhelm 61p · 734 weeks ago
What if dudes are just doing it for the win?
If I spend $1K and start a BA army, you are okay if I beat you 10-1
yet if I use my Templars and C:BA, if I beat you 10-1 then I am just a jerk?
The Codex is legal. I have not cheated. Even Jervis, Lord of 'for fun' has grey Marines that he uses different Dexes for. He even had an article in WD on it.
If you are playing and don't do so for winning's sake, then how can winning be the issue?
If you play for the sake of winning, isn't my army just as legitimate as a Blood Red one?
I can't see how you can say 'It is acceptable for a Red army to beat me down, but a Black army is unacceptable!'
If it is about Marines, well Marines are GWs faves. Always have been and probably always will be.
There model range is bigger, even just looking at the Vanilla section.
Now, I don't play counts-as, but I do use Wolf, Blood, DA and Chaos Marine stuff in my modelling.
I also use Fantasy Empire, Bretonnian, Skaven, Elf and Chaos stuff too.
With my Tau, they don't get to kitbash anything, unless I make Guard, Eldar or Ork Fire warriors.
What do you think?
Keith · 734 weeks ago
You don't have the money to buy another copy of the same shit you already have? Well FUCK YOU, play an outdated codex for a few more years.
MikeTau · 734 weeks ago
By the way, does anyone has ever seen a SM count as CSM army. (Codex creep is say) I rest my case....
Sorry that i have stepped on your toes, but i like a nicely build and painted army, battlefield etc. Too bad most of the people here just want to play competitative (which was NEVER the intention of GW in the first place) with proxy-coffeecans and count as shit.
(Note: in Dawn of War game you can play various armies and you don't have to own them, isn't that great!!!)
Roland Durendal · 734 weeks ago
Some people do just swap one army for the next without changing color schemes or adding additional flare. But hey, how do YOU know they're not doing to get a feel for their army list and that they have EVERY INTENTION of re-painting/modeling/etc later on down the line? Is it not somewhat arrogant and conceited to tell another person how to have fun and that he MUST spend more money and time on another army WITHOUT even having an opportunity to playtest it? So I want to use my Space Wolves as Grey Knights when the new Codex comes out to try out some of the rules and see how my lists play before I invest time/money in building a GK force. Is that bad? And how? Again I must ask, since everyone who's boo-hooing "counts-as" has yet to answer these questions:
How is having a "counts-as" army negatively impacting the game or how is it a detriment to game play? If they are playing Proxy "counts-as" to test new codex rules/units/army lists, it SHOULDN'T be so long as they clearly demarcate what is what prior to the game. Moreover, if they do take the time to model/convert/paint an Army that fits their aesthetic wishes and fulfills their ideas and is in line with their creative leanings, even if doing so requires using a Codex not associated with the force in question (ex: the Night Lords) is their doing so in anyway immoral, illogical, unethical, or in direct violation of the rules clearly established by GW? No? Then shut the fuck up, man up, and play some Warhams.
Apologies for the RAGE, I just grow weary of people who whine and offer criticism without any support to their argument. You disagree with something? Ok cool, but why? What's the justification? People, put some thought and logic into your haterade, otherwise you just come across as a whiny, pretentious, warham snob.
End of Roland's Rant of RAGE
@oldgrue · 734 weeks ago
Often the 'counts as' does not however directly correlate to 'what you see is what you get'. Lets assume Player A has a WYSIWYG army, and player B is proxying for similar units. Equally importantly this doesn't necessarily relate across several codices. A Space Marine (C :S M) is not equipped the same as a Chaos Space Marine (C:CSM), or a Grey Hunter (C :S W) - using the same proxy model for each might be good for one player, yet leaves the onus of knowing what each unit has on the shoulders of player A. In addition proxied units may have the further trouble of incompatible wargear across two or more codices. This sets an opportunity for confusion - and our social contract in a game is to play both fairly, and have models clearly and consistently marked. The road cone in unit 1 should represent the same thing as the road cone in unit 2. As the 'counts as' gets more complex the opportunity for fair play erodes.
I think that's one of the main arguments however - when one set of game counters represents one clearly identified unit player A is going to assume its that unit. Player B should have the onus that if they've only got counters for one category of unit that player A understands and accepts that. Player B shouldn't for some reason be indignant that upon breaking out a meticulously crafted and marked Ultramarines force player A is taken aback that the assault marines are actually Chaos Raptors (or worse yet Swooping Hawks!).
Its not about "Its nice that A has the money to have # of armies..." rather that B needs to understand that playing army du Jour is understandably and reasonably going to create a cognitive dissonance in other people who haven't intimate knowledge of B's army (and how pre/post heresy it represents different codices, or that the rules for 'death company' more accurately reflect B's opinion of how Khorne berzerkers/whatever should be played).
Katie_Drake 49p · 734 weeks ago
Katie_Drake 49p · 734 weeks ago
ManusCelerDei 53p · 734 weeks ago
SneakyDan · 734 weeks ago
Why not use the CSM codex? Because when the Gav incident occured, they FUCKED IT RIGHT UP. I dumped my 4k worth of Iron Warriors on the spot, because unless you played a very specific way, (lash/oblits) they werent in the slightest bit effective.
So Grey Knight 1k sons is what ill be rolling. All on foot, all in PA, and you suck my left testicle if you dont like it. Its my fucking money, ill play them how I want. Dont like counts as? Dont leave your mum's basement, some of us have kids/houses and shit to pay for, and cant afford (or be bothered, for that matter) in making 5 different full PA armies.
(for the record, I also have 2 other PA armies. :D )
@oldgrue · 734 weeks ago
Somehow *I*, the non-'counts as' guy got painted as actively unpleasant because Sneaky doesn't like rules that don't reflect his point of view. Therefore I must be some horrible person stopping him from playing his way rather than being (I think reasonably) concerned that his game counters won't reflect the equipment options in the codex he chooses to use. Moreover his out of hand hostility to a differing opinion leaves no real room for sway beyond compliance to his worldview.
Keith · 734 weeks ago
Riiiiiiiiight, that's what you guys have been concerned about this whole time. Maybe you should kick people out of your camp who say things like "Pull out the BA book, and your marines better be red or yellow with checks.
Otherwise I laugh at you, pack up my minis, and leave", they're making you look like idiots.
WYSIWYG =/ = counts-as.
Have you actually looked at the Night Lords army that's been referred to throughout this post? Guys with meltaguns are holding meltaguns. Guys with a powerfist have a powerfist. Guys who are fancy veterans have fancy wings instead of jump packs. It really isn't difficult to tell what's what and they look awesome. http://kirbysblog-ic.blogspot.com/2011/02/we-have...
Roland Durendal · 734 weeks ago
And again, let's say he WAS using another army to "counts-as" something else (in Sneaky's case GK), so long as he articulated early on and what was what and continuously articulates that throughout the game, what's wrong with him doing that? How do you know he's not trying to playtest units / his army list before investing time and money in another army? My problem is many people who are anti-"counts-as" advocate this unrealistic expectation that everyone MUST go out and spend more money and time to create a second army. So what happens if someone does that and they realize some of the units they bought don't work in their list or just suck? Now they're stuck with a bunch of useless models and a hole in their pocket. To advocate such a course of action is, quite frankly, arrogant as it assumes everyone has some limitless supply of time and money to throw into the hobby.
People need to remember this is a hobby and that not everyone has the same level of money/time to dedicate to it and thus people sometimes have to make accommodations to allow themselves to get the most out of the hobby, i.e. counts-as.
Countasrules · 734 weeks ago
But get serious and just admit you play 4 winning.
MikeTau · 734 weeks ago
Bro_Lo 82p · 734 weeks ago
Seriously... can you not play to win AND have fun? Really? I feel so sorry for you man.
My work is incredibly competitive. It's fun.
Any sport I play is always competitive - from a headers and volleys in the park to actual competitive games. It's fun.
I play 40k competitively. It's fun.
You know what it's even bloody fluffy to at least TRY to win.
Seriously. Fun and Competitive are REALLY NOT mutually exclusive. Play around like a dick with plastic men all you want. But I really don't see the fun in it. I'm not 5 years old.
...oh... and before you say it, no, I'm not 'that' guy. I can assure you of it.
AnonymousE · 734 weeks ago
ManusCelerDei 53p · 734 weeks ago
Do you mean bullshit, you can cuss here in 3++. Nobody gives half a fuck if you say bullshit, call it like it is, fucker. The only people who say bullcrap are fucking 10 year olds.
Bro_Lo 82p · 734 weeks ago
abortedsoul · 734 weeks ago
xjoshybear 37p · 734 weeks ago
Kirby 118p · 734 weeks ago
Says something?
CarbonBased · 734 weeks ago