Is Forgeworld the new Meta?

[Vaktathi]

Its not a cut and dry thing but heres the run-down of advantages
1) you can take four in the elites spot, which for normal CAD is fairly awesome

That's only for DKoK Siege Regiments using the Siege of Vraks book for their army list (who also don't have access to the Wyvern, nor any psykers within the army list). Otherwise they're Heavy Support for normal IG armies and you can only take up to 3 per FoC slot.

2) a S7 model (and through artillery rules helping your sqaud too) you can put in cover, has a different kind of survivability than a vehicle with an av10 facing, which I take down in combat constantly.

If you get into combat with the guns, you're fighting WS3 S3 T3 I3 Ld7 5+sv guardsmen, certainly no harder to kill than the Wyverns. The guns (and their T7) are entirely ignored in CC. Wyverns can't be swept either.

3) Overwatch - Wyrvn = 0, Thudd gun = at least one crewmen per battery shooting, for another 56 points put some more crewman in there for a lot more...

Sure, you can get some S3 lasguns, but they're not going to scare much.

4) close combat, the ability to survive it due to the ability of crewman to fight around the models.

Again, WS3 S3 T3 I3 Ld7 5+sv guardsmen aren't usually going to survive anything that'll kill a tank unless you're talking about a single SM sergeant with a powerfist all by his lonesome or something.

only thing else is like the wyrvn and a psyker, keeping an IC around with stubborn/fearleass/zealot is where it gets to be a rule tough cookie.

With a Wyvern you don't need the psyker or IC and you can deploy them without having to worry about concentrating your units around the IC bubbles. The Wyvern gets to ignore cover and twin link all of its shots, and not worry about Ld, without any external support. Also, they can move if needs be.

[Anggul]

Sure, some Forgeworld stuff is superior to similar GW units. That isn't because FW is too good, that's because FW tend to look at the units GW stubbornly refuse to make good and decide they're going to cut the crap and make a good version. See: Predators to Sicarans, Vypers to Hornets. It's sad because Predators and Vypers are cool and should be good on their own merits, but it's GW, not much can be done about it.

GW write most of the rules that give people head-aches, not FW.

You could say some of the most commonly seen FW units are a bit like gimmicky linchpins, but that's what comes to having to firefight the 'main' GW's rules design team.

I can see it now: "Oh crap, they've gone and made Zoanthropes mostly dead weight with their new psychic phase but people are having to take them anyway because they need synapse, we'd better combine the synapse they provide with Venomthropes so they aren't having to throw a crazy chunk of points into the two separate rules, and we'll need to make it decently resilient so they don't lose both at once too easily." Thus, the new Malanthrope rules.

That's what it has always looked like anyway. I could be totally wrong, but FW seem much better at writing rules and it might just be a coincidence but they do tend to make units that play the same role as GW units but do it well.

[ShadowcatX]

While everything you list is good there isn't anything there that I would balk at playing against. I just don't think there is really anything you can weave into the meta from FW that is auto-include. The FW stuff complements certain builds nicely but most of it is situational just like the regular codex stuff. Is there anything that you would auto-include in every SM army if you were going to an event? Anything that gives a 'leg up' on someone handicapped with mainline models only? I haven't see anything that creates a build that is universally better than what you can do with GW proper models.

I can't speak to the space marine line, but point for point the hornet is good enough that an eldar player handicaps themselves if they don't take them and they are available.

[Vaktathi]

I can't speak to the space marine line, but point for point the hornet is good enough that an eldar player handicaps themselves if they don't take them and they are available.

It also doesn't help that there's not much to compete with in the FA slot, where most of the least impressive Eldar units reside.

It's also really one weapon option that's the issue. If Pulse Lasers were 15pts each instead of 5, they'd be much less popular.

[ShadowcatX]

It also doesn't help that there's not much to compete with in the FA slot, where most of the least impressive Eldar units reside.

It's also really one weapon option that's the issue. If Pulse Lasers were 15pts each instead of 5, they'd be much less popular.

You can fix anything by raising or lowering its cost, but that's not what this thread is about. They are an auto-include if they are available and not taking them is a handicap.

[DarkLink]

While everything you list is good there isn't anything there that I would balk at playing against. I just don't think there is really anything you can weave into the meta from FW that is auto-include. The FW stuff complements certain builds nicely but most of it is situational just like the regular codex stuff. Is there anything that you would auto-include in every SM army if you were going to an event? Anything that gives a 'leg up' on someone handicapped with mainline models only? I haven't see anything that creates a build that is universally better than what you can do with GW proper models.

I'm just saying that there's very good stuff that does change the meta. I also agree with you that none of it is so gamebreaking that regular 40k stuff can't deal with forgeworld, not by any means.

[40kGamer]

I'm just saying that there's very good stuff that does change the meta. I also agree with you that none of it is so gamebreaking that regular 40k stuff can't deal with forgeworld, not by any means.

Got it! I think we're actually saying the same thing but have slightly different definitions of game-meta changing / game breaking.

[DarkLink]

Yeah, it'd be one of those threads where both people are too proud to quit flaming each other because they thought they were disagreeing even though they weren't .

[Lurker]

You can fix anything by raising or lowering its cost, but that's not what this thread is about. They are an auto-include if they are available and not taking them is a handicap.

True and true. But as Vakthathi points out, it's the dearth of comparable choices in the FA slot (in this particular instance) that makes it true. I think that's why we see more and more FW over GW preference as players seek to replace "weaker" units with decent ones. I don't think it over balances the game either, anymore than can possibly be done by someone determined to do so anyhow.

[ShadowcatX]

True and true. But as Vakthathi points out, it's the dearth of comparable choices in the FA slot (in this particular instance) that makes it true. I think that's why we see more and more FW over GW preference as players seek to replace "weaker" units with decent ones. I don't think it over balances the game either, anymore than can possibly be done by someone determined to do so anyhow.

So don't you think replacing weaker units with stronger units is, by definition, changing the meta, and putting armies that have to use the weaker units (your words) puts non-forgeworld armies at a disadvantage?