|
Post by jpgreat1 on Feb 19, 2018 16:24:47 GMT
Sorry JP, that just doesn't hold. Not when I can use the same models interchangeably in systems, you really have to look at the value offering of the actual toys, and on those ground PP is ludicrously expensive by comparison. -und_ed Again using that video he talked about what additional he would add. He talked about cost effective adds versus straight up power pieces. You are looking at an additional 230 to 400 in additional prices. Even with my Cygnar army and I go use my most expensive list as my second list which is a stryker1 double lancers, stormwall, arlan, jr, squire, and charger is additional 340 bucks(I deducted pieces that crossed over) for trolls I would go beast army for my 2nd army which would be an additional 250 to 300. The total price total for that Ultra marine army can range from 670 dollars (going cost effective pieces) to 810 bucks for 1 army. With the cygnar armies I used (which were the 2 most expensive lists I had) you have 716 dollars and for trollbloods (a faction that is notorious for being expensive with little crossover) 717. So you are either saving 47 dollars to play an army that may not be the best at tournaments but enough to enter to an army that is almost 90 dollars more expensive that may provide you with better results due to them being power pieces. You want to talk about interchangeable pieces? Add in my old Haley2 double lancer build and its additional 40 bucks or maybe Jarl's heavy metal H2 build which would be an additional 50 bucks. I'm still not reaching 800 price tag and yet I got 4 list builds with cygnar. So yes, my point does hold water because I am able to construct multiple lists and still be at or under the price tag for 1 damn 40k power list. So your statement of "PP is ludicrously expensive by comparison" is a very silly statement of someone who believes the narrative versus what is actually true. Also keep in mind and Yes, I am basing this on the bloggers very rarely you continue to play the 1 list in 40k through tournament after tournament. Chances are you making a totally different list to play (whether you want to be competitive or just excited about making another list) so that means you are adding in another 700 dollar price tag.
|
|
|
Post by galrohir on Feb 19, 2018 16:26:13 GMT
So, if you are "playing with intent" against someone, and then you use the same "intent" against them that they have used the rest of the tournament, you are the evil rules lawyer, Galrohir? I thought that was the point of the thread, not what constitutes intent between GW and PP rules. I don't quite understand what you mean. AFAIK Alex didn't do anything unsportsmanlike before his game with Tony (or after, for that matter) that would make Tony act like he did out of spite. Or do you mean in the finals, when Tony was on the receiving end of his own tactic because of what he'd done to Alex? Because I've only really chastised Tony in this thread, so I'm confused.
|
|
|
Post by Charistoph on Feb 19, 2018 18:01:37 GMT
So, if you are "playing with intent" against someone, and then you use the same "intent" against them that they have used the rest of the tournament, you are the evil rules lawyer, Galrohir? I thought that was the point of the thread, not what constitutes intent between GW and PP rules. I don't quite understand what you mean. AFAIK Alex didn't do anything unsportsmanlike before his game with Tony (or after, for that matter) that would make Tony act like he did out of spite. Or do you mean in the finals, when Tony was on the receiving end of his own tactic because of what he'd done to Alex? Because I've only really chastised Tony in this thread, so I'm confused. It seemed like you were lambasting the final player who turned the tables on Tony (as well as Tony). The final two players agreed to "play with intent", correct? And both were "rules lawyering" the game with lousy sportsmanship at certain points of the tournament. If that was not your intent, I apologize for misreading it.
In regards to the cost discussion, PP models have always been more expensive per model. PP's saving grace has been that you have needed fewer models overall to play a game with. The problem with WarmaHordes is two-fold, to have a significant change in play to counter changes in the meta, it usually requires a significant alteration across the entire list. Essentially, the amount of "core army" models in a faction are rather low. Themes can remedy that a little bit, but only by staying within that Theme. 40K has relied on having specialized units supporting a generalist core. Once you have your generalist core (and a few HQs), you can effectively change your list with a couple boxes of Elite/Fast Attack/Heavy Support, each of which are cheaper, per model for the size, than PP's. The closest thing that Warmahordes has to a "core" is the Battlegroup, and that is an incredibly diverse selection right there.
|
|
|
Post by galrohir on Feb 19, 2018 20:06:03 GMT
I don't quite understand what you mean. AFAIK Alex didn't do anything unsportsmanlike before his game with Tony (or after, for that matter) that would make Tony act like he did out of spite. Or do you mean in the finals, when Tony was on the receiving end of his own tactic because of what he'd done to Alex? Because I've only really chastised Tony in this thread, so I'm confused. It seemed like you were lambasting the final player who turned the tables on Tony (as well as Tony). The final two players agreed to "play with intent", correct? And both were "rules lawyering" the game with lousy sportsmanship at certain points of the tournament. If that was not your intent, I apologize for misreading it. Oh, geez no. I'm sorry if I didn't express myself properly. I meant Alex and Tony had agreed to "play by intent", not Tony and his opponent in the finals. In fact, his opponent stated he only rules-lawyered Tony because he rules-lawyered Alex. Maybe I'm a bit hypocritical but I don't mind that. Tony reaped what he sowed. I don't really know much about the finals except for that tidbit. Except that the other guy won, of course.
|
|
|
Post by jpgreat1 on Feb 19, 2018 20:40:40 GMT
I mean again it sounds more narrative and not what actually goes on. In the first post, that youtuber talked about shift changes in the meta where folks had to start over on square 1 when building a list as well as Commander Gazma has several videos of 2000 points armies built and discussed small changes he would make. The problem is, each of these changes whether its what you discussed to full fledged army redesign is still a lot more expensive than a typical warmachine/horde change. For reference, my grissel list can swap to madrak1 list with 70 to 100 dollar change while some of the changes discussed in some of these videos is easily 200 to 300 dollar change.
|
|
unded
Junior Strategist
Posts: 760
|
Post by unded on Feb 19, 2018 21:04:08 GMT
I really have no idea what "narrative " you're talkig about, JP.
I'm talking about what it costs me to participate in a hobby and to expand my own collection(s).
If I want to add a unit of Bane Cav, it costs me $55. If I want to add a unit of chaos knights, it costs me $49 for twice the number of models.
If you're looking to buy a single list from scratch, you need to factor the 2-list system of PP into it, which with themes also means very little overlap.
-und_ed
|
|
|
Post by Charistoph on Feb 19, 2018 21:07:40 GMT
To be fair, a lot of that has changed in recent years with the changes to how Detachments work. Detachments today are far more open then they used to be.
But going from there, if you have 3 squads of Tactical Squads, those Tactical Squads will still be there no matter how you change your list. Certain other Roles will be kept the same, depending on how the meta changes. Even then, for the mass and size, GW trends to be cheaper than PP on a model per model basis. Of course, one doesn't have to get 3-4 boxes of Steelhead to make an effective unit like one does for Termagaunts or Ork Boyz, either.
Go to Warmachine, and many of the Warcasters only work well with certain 'Jacks, and it's even worse for Warlocks who not only have to pick from the stats of the models, but the animi they provide for the 'Lock. The army building process is just too vastly different, and the game is meant for a much larger scale in 40K, then in WarmaHordes.
|
|
|
Post by mcdermott on Feb 19, 2018 21:36:31 GMT
I mean, this sums up the GW perspective pretty well
|
|
|
Post by jpgreat1 on Feb 19, 2018 21:52:53 GMT
undedThe narrative that I am talking about is stating 40k and overall GW is cheaper than PP. The truth that its not. I just crunched the numbers for you it turns out PP was cheaper. In some cases by 15 to 100 if you just want to be tournament ready with minimal models possible versus lists I've personally built. If you truly want to expand your army in games like 40k you will spend near 1000s while PP you spend 100s. You talk about adding 1 unit or a model and say that is proof but I ask you to look at the big picture. Look at the entire army built. CharistophI'm going off of these youtubers and bloggers say not based on my own experience. Many videos showcase 100s of dollars worth of changes and while some have overlap still to add in a few key changes will cost a lot. Going off of Gamza's video to finish off that list he starting building he talked about adding Landraider, more tanks, dreadnaughts, and primaris marines. Thats a pretty penny. If I change my Grissel2 list to a madrak1 list thats money too but not as much as I would spend playing 40k. Once you gain a few key pieces in each army in warmachine you can easily change and expand spending less then you would overall for 40k.
|
|
unded
Junior Strategist
Posts: 760
|
Post by unded on Feb 19, 2018 22:20:25 GMT
I'd say you're not looking at the big picture. When you (or at least the people I know in tabletop gaming) collect an army / faction, you don't just buy one list. You collect a faction / race / army unit by unit, and so adding a playable unit to army becomes the relevant metric. Similarly, you are collecting toy soldiers, so again a reasonable metric is toy-by-toy. I crunched those numbers, but clearly they don't fit your narrative.
Even if you do live in a region where people only collect specific lists, in Warmachine that means collective a pairing, which still comes out more expensive.
-und_ed
|
|
|
Post by jpgreat1 on Feb 19, 2018 22:34:24 GMT
I'd say you're not looking at the big picture. When you (or at least the people I know in tabletop gaming) collect an army / faction, you don't just buy one list. You collect a faction / race / army unit by unit, and so adding a playable unit to army becomes the relevant metric. Similarly, you are collecting toy soldiers, so again a reasonable metric is toy-by-toy. I crunched those numbers, but clearly they don't fit your narrative. Even if you do live in a region where people only collect specific lists, in Warmachine that means collective a pairing, which still comes out more expensive. -und_ed unded I've shown you numbers based upon the websites directly themselves. You are talking anecdotally. If you want to go that route, the plasma list I wanted to build was 680 bucks and that was including discounts I would get from my local store. The 2nd list I was semi-interested in included Imperial knights, list was damn near 1000. My entire cygnar collection which I've been collecting on and off since mark 1 prime remix is 988 bucks. 2 lists in 40k is close to 2000 bucks versus an entire collection for warmachine plus merc options. Warmachine is still cheaper. I don't know how else to spell it out to you
|
|
|
Post by Charistoph on Feb 20, 2018 6:57:13 GMT
Charistoph I'm going off of these youtubers and bloggers say not based on my own experience. Many videos showcase 100s of dollars worth of changes and while some have overlap still to add in a few key changes will cost a lot. Going off of Gamza's video to finish off that list he starting building he talked about adding Landraider, more tanks, dreadnaughts, and primaris marines. Thats a pretty penny. If I change my Grissel2 list to a madrak1 list thats money too but not as much as I would spend playing 40k. Once you gain a few key pieces in each army in warmachine you can easily change and expand spending less then you would overall for 40k. I'm going based on my own experience. I've built up 4 different 40K armies, I have yet to properly complete 1 WarmaHordes army (partly because of building those 40K armies, and then losing my job which paid for those armies). Part of it is because the price for units in WarmaHordes is rather high, even when they didn't include the full unit and Attachments. The good news for collecting any of the original 8 (of either system), is that most units can only be fielded up to 3 times at most (and actually fielded in pairs at most), while 40K can field a unit up to 6 times, easily, in one single detachment (and the only real limit is points, not detachments). I've long said that WarmaHordes is more expensive per model, cheaper to get in to, but trends to be more expensive to the collector. 40K is more expensive to get in to, but once you have an army established, isn't as expensive to the collector. This is mostly due to the fact that the cost per model is usually higher with PP, then with GW. The other part of this is consider how many solos there are to the big 8, before Mercenaries/Minions (and Mercs/Minions have a LOT of solos), while how many HQs (the normal version of a "solo" in 40K) the average 40K army has.
|
|
|
Post by Swampmist on Feb 20, 2018 7:26:08 GMT
To be fair, the cost of 40k goes up massively when you start playing unit at larger than minimum size. When you buy 3 boxes of gaunts, or guard, or boyz to finish the unit in it's intended form, that price is higher than most units+ua from PP. An army like Space ,marines that can largely play a unit as-is from asingle box, plus some support characters, is going to be cheaper by comparison.
|
|
Cyel
Junior Strategist
Posts: 685
|
Post by Cyel on Feb 20, 2018 8:24:35 GMT
unded I've shown you numbers based upon the websites directly themselves. You are talking anecdotally. If you want to go that route, the plasma list I wanted to build was 680 bucks and that was including discounts I would get from my local store. The 2nd list I was semi-interested in included Imperial knights, list was damn near 1000. My entire cygnar collection which I've been collecting on and off since mark 1 prime remix is 988 bucks. 2 lists in 40k is close to 2000 bucks versus an entire collection for warmachine plus merc options. Warmachine is still cheaper. I don't know how else to spell it out to you So people playing Combat Patrol have it cheaper than people playing 10.000 Apocalypse games ? That's a surprise. At the end of the day a toy soldier dwarf is a dwarf is a dwarf. If someone buys twice as much product for less price and better quality than finding convoluted justification for your purchase doesn't change the fact that it's objectively much more expensive. It doesn't matter if my collection is big or small, when I wanted a unit of undead knights for my army I checked the market for black/dark/evil knight models and PP wasn't even trying to compete for my money with their prices and quality. The result is quite predictable : lormahordes.freeforums.net/thread/1801/bane-riders-less-half-priceThe thing is the % of the playable army is entirely subjective, and - shockingly! - points values are set by the same company that is trying to sell you models. A company easily can (and does!) abuse players who share your POV to set exorbitant prices for their models just because they constitute a certain amount of points they themselves made up! If we went by the flawed logic of the "playable army cost", PP could easily say that the average size of a tournament army is now 20% of the current one, raise the price of every model 5 times and still end up with reasonably priced toy soldiers in your eyes. It just doesn't work like that. If you bought several bags of chips for your party and they cost 5$/bag and some other person bought -similar or better in quality - chips that were 2$/bag you wouldn't say that your chips are cheaper just because the other guy wants to throw a much bigger party and therefore buys more bags. If you did you'd be just fooling yourself to justify the fact that you've just paid way too much for the damned chips...
|
|
|
Post by HereComesTomorrow on Feb 20, 2018 11:53:53 GMT
To be fair, the cost of 40k goes up massively when you start playing unit at larger than minimum size. When you buy 3 boxes of gaunts, or guard, or boyz to finish the unit in it's intended form, that price is higher than most units+ua from PP. An army like Space ,marines that can largely play a unit as-is from asingle box, plus some support characters, is going to be cheaper by comparison. It's actually about the same. In fact GW is still cheaper compared to the newer unit. For the sake of example a box if Iron Fang Pikemen is €58 (from a discount site) whereas 3 boxes of 10 termagants for a full unit of 30 is about €55 (from the same site). And let's remember that this is 30 models vs 10. 3 variations for loadouts (spikefists, fleshborers, devourers) vs 2 (vanilla and black dragon) and the termagants also have Rippers on the sprues I think so you actually get two units in one box. I might be wrong about that. Then you also get some minor decorative bits in the termagant kit like adrenal glands amd toxin sacs. Then there's the granularity of termagamt units. You can only run one unit of IFP out of the box whereas termagants can run 3 of 10, 2 of 15, 1 of 20 and 1 of 10 etc.
|
|