Wargamer Posted May 17, 2018 Author Share Posted May 17, 2018 Well that begs the question of whether customisation improves the game, and I suspect that the majority of people will say that it does. I think part of the initial backlash against Primaris was down to a complete lack of any options whatsoever, suggesting that the people who want cookie-cutter units are a minority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ishagu Posted May 17, 2018 Share Posted May 17, 2018 I don't want any restrictions whatsoever. None are necessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claws and Effect Posted May 17, 2018 Share Posted May 17, 2018 Well that begs the question of whether customisation improves the game, and I suspect that the majority of people will say that it does. I think part of the initial backlash against Primaris was down to a complete lack of any options whatsoever, suggesting that the people who want cookie-cutter units are a minority. It does. But for every player that wants to customize everything there is another who likes to play as their favorite character from the lore. I enjoy both. Shrike is my favorite character in the 40k universe. I like the fact that I can make him my Warlord any time I feel like doing so, whether it benefits me or not. On the other side, I have decided that Shadow Captain Korvydae is my Watch Captain in my Deathwatch army. He doesn't have 8th edition rules but his model is cool, so I converted it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wargamer Posted May 17, 2018 Author Share Posted May 17, 2018 Well this is why I suggested a way back that special characters should become generic. Want to field Shrike? Have a Raven Guard Chapter Master unit entry in the Codex, and give them suitable wargear options, relics and Warlord Traits so you can field Shrike... Who is given in the Codex itself as a sample Chapter Master. The worst case scenario is still where the characters are needed to field the army in the first place. That should never be the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ishagu Posted May 17, 2018 Share Posted May 17, 2018 No. People want to use the characters from the lore and their favourite stories. If you want to self insert or invent your own glorious chapter master that's a personal choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzer Posted May 17, 2018 Share Posted May 17, 2018 Or, you know, we could just keep how it is and point them accordingly for the intended game size and if they're too strong for small point games we can still restrict them that way (instead of banning them completely). However I'd say a bunch of Leman Russ are just as devastating in small point games as a Mortarion or other special characters since nobody really expects to face multiple T8 models with that damage output in a 1k game normally. What, that's half the points of the army? Well good that the infantry costs almost nothing, eh? Small point games will always be unbalanced to some degree since the game isn't supposed to be played at such a level on a regular basis. Face it, special characters aren't stronger than generic units for similar points these days. It doesn't even need to be LoWs or Flyer. It's just that you recognize the special characters more often because they are special. Selective perception and stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ishagu Posted May 17, 2018 Share Posted May 17, 2018 How can anyone complain about Mortarion in a small game when I can take Shadowsword for less points anyways? lol I really think some inexperienced or casual players are making complaints about issues that aren't there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Blaire Posted May 17, 2018 Share Posted May 17, 2018 I'm surprised there hasn't been a call in this thread to ban Primaris, since they are new units too... Being absolutely realistic - this ban on Named Characters is not going to happen. GW is not going to put something like what is proposed into the game, they won't even put a points restriction in place. The discussion isn't worth continuing, because it's a worthless proposal with no merit (there's not even any data to back up things like "at low points, destroys balance"), and will not be acted upon, because it is an unreasonable concept couched in an old view of 40K and would mean less sales for GW - the exact opposite of their business model. My personal suggestion would be thus - if you don't agree with the OP, see your way out of the thread, you aren't going to convince him that his idea is unreasonable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzer Posted May 17, 2018 Share Posted May 17, 2018 I'm surprised there hasn't been a call in this thread to ban Primaris, since they are new units too... I'm actually surprised this thread is still open considering how the whole thing is just going "I think special characters are bad for the game." "How?" "Dunno, but they should go." :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Casman Posted May 17, 2018 Share Posted May 17, 2018 So, having kept an eye on the thread, I think I can provide a definitive answer to the question posed in the OP, based on the reactions of the Frater: No, special characters should not be banned from Matched Play. Since it seems that this discussion is revolving around the same points, and not providing constructive ways forward, I think it's time to lock this up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.