Jump to content

is there a TGA like forum for 40K?


GeneralZero

Recommended Posts

Yeah I think B&C is fun but to be completely honest with you there is no real 40k TGA equivelant. But to be honest I'd love it if TGA or Ben would consider opening themselves to a 40K forum gateway too. The only thing is that 40k used to be very different but Grand Allegiances more or less apply to 40K's Chaos and Imperium (Order equivelant) too. Then there is Xenos in 40k which is more or less Death and Destruction combined.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, generalchaos34 said:

Theres always DakkaDakka, which has lots of of 40k stuff, the only problem is the 40k online crowd in general tends to be super toxic (and this is coming from someone who plays AoS as a secondary game from 40k). TGA is magic because you guys' aren't a bunch of jerks. 

Sort of have to agree here what I like about this place is that normally when disagreements happen we can at least be somewhat civil about it. On other sites I wonder if certain people are grouchy about things all the time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, generalchaos34 said:

Theres always DakkaDakka, which has lots of of 40k stuff, the only problem is the 40k online crowd in general tends to be super toxic (and this is coming from someone who plays AoS as a secondary game from 40k). TGA is magic because you guys' aren't a bunch of jerks. 

Mmm... yeah, the disagreements in dakkadakka tend to be a bit more... stringent than ours (not that we are faultless!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, KillagoreFaceslasha said:

Mmm... yeah, the disagreements in dakkadakka tend to be a bit more... stringent than ours (not that we are faultless!)

Oh yeah I know but discussions here I find much more pleasant. Even if I disagree with something or someone. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, generalchaos34 said:

the only problem is the 40k online crowd in general tends to be super toxic

It's sad but true. Just got into the hobby last year and did a fair amount of research before choosing a game. I do prefer fantasy but that isn't the only reason I'm here. I was lucky enough to stumble upon this forum and 2+tough right off the bat and decided it was a community that I would like to be part of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find this difference between 40k and AOS players very interesting and somewhat puzzling. I don’t play 40k myself, but I cannot imagine of a convincing correlation between 40k and being a ******. I would expect both games to attract the same amount of rude, aggresive people. But then maybe AOS is still young and carrying a reputation of being a simplistic game not suitable for them greatest of generals.


Or it could simply be that the creators and moderators of TGA are doing a great job protecting us from our true self :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would avoid DakkaDakka.  I was there for a couple of years and it is a very toxic site, full to the brim with incredibly rude, unsavory and condescending people.  However, I would recommend 40k online.  It's a fairly small site with a different setup to TGA, and it has a slight leaning towards Eldar (if only because that's what all it's regulars play) but it's a very friendly and welcoming place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used to like librarium online that was a very pleasant site and also had lots of tourney and net list discussion but it was never very toxic.  Alot of the guys there moved onto to blogs like faeit and war of sigmar

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Planar said:

I find this difference between 40k and AOS players very interesting and somewhat puzzling. I don’t play 40k myself, but I cannot imagine of a convincing correlation between 40k and being a ******. I would expect both games to attract the same amount of rude, aggresive people. But then maybe AOS is still young and carrying a reputation of being a simplistic game not suitable for them greatest of generals.


Or it could simply be that the creators and moderators of TGA are doing a great job protecting us from our true self :)

To me it looks like a huge amount of the toxic fantasy players never moved to AoS. You will find tons of them online if you try to talk AoS in other places that are not pure AoS. AoS had a pretty hard start and a was helped by some really positive community leaders (like Ben with TGA). So we got a positive thing going and many new people line up with the established tone. I'm sure it will even out again over time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, generalchaos34 said:

Theres always DakkaDakka, which has lots of of 40k stuff, the only problem is the 40k online crowd in general tends to be super toxic (and this is coming from someone who plays AoS as a secondary game from 40k). TGA is magic because you guys' aren't a bunch of jerks. 

You don't know me! ;) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, N1SB said:

I also recommend Bolter & Chainsword.  Funnily enough, I'm here on TGA because I'm mostly a 40k fan seeking AoS info and found TGA most similar to B&C.

If I have to recommend a forum I would say that one. The community site looks well moderated and they have branched out to all races. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Killax said:

Yeah I think B&C is fun but to be completely honest with you there is no real 40k TGA equivelant. But to be honest I'd love it if TGA or Ben would consider opening themselves to a 40K forum gateway too. The only thing is that 40k used to be very different but Grand Allegiances more or less apply to 40K's Chaos and Imperium (Order equivelant) too. Then there is Xenos in 40k which is more or less Death and Destruction combined.

I personally would also love a 40k subforum :). Perhaps if more people request it they could add it?^^  I doubt it would become a huge community considering most of us are AOS players and there are bigger 40k forums out there, but it would be great if we could all share a bit of info concerning that game as well. Its all GW in the end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I do like it too.

The funny thing is even that 40k is pretty much in the same state as GH2016 was in terms of most armies being Grand Allegiances instead of the more GH2017 Allegiance focused armies we see now. 

While some dislike it or joke about 40k-soup I do think an AoS player with some AoS experience can accept this blend of armies much more. As quite a lot of Allegiances luckily are a blend of models also and with the Firestorm Battalions being the prime example it's not uncommon to see mixed armies in AoS do very well also.

Having said that, I also would understand why Ben or the others wouldn't be too hot on it. I'd generally say that 40k social communities have a whole different way of communicating. For example a lot of Bells of Lost Souls articles seem to want to cover how bad the state of 40k's mixes/soups are. That certain models shouldn't be able to do X or Y but completely don't cover why unit Z should be able to do it...

So with this in mind I'm actually generally more at ease amongst AoS players (on this forum) who are much more open to changes and ideas instead of completely disliking how GW has done X or Y. In that same vein if Nurgle summonning worked the same in 40k as a change to their Index approach I'm certain that many more people would complain about it as they do in AoS. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, eekamouse said:

I second (third? fourth?) the idea to have a TGA forum for 40k. I feel like naming it after a detachment could work. "The Brigade Detachment"? TBD?

Ooo! The Fortification Network!

I dunno. Count me in whatever it's called.

I think overal the main aim of this forum will probably remain to be AOS :), it would just be a subforum, so don't think it needs to be that specific personally^^

Yeah I do like it too.

The funny thing is even that 40k is pretty much in the same state as GH2016 was in terms of most armies being Grand Allegiances instead of the more GH2017 Allegiance focused armies we see now. 

While some dislike it or joke about 40k-soup I do think an AoS player with some AoS experience can accept this blend of armies much more. As quite a lot of Allegiances luckily are a blend of models also and with the Firestorm Battalions being the prime example it's not uncommon to see mixed armies in AoS do very well also.

Having said that, I also would understand why Ben or the others wouldn't be too hot on it. I'd generally say that 40k social communities have a whole different way of communicating. For example a lot of Bells of Lost Souls articles seem to want to cover how bad the state of 40k's mixes/soups are. That certain models shouldn't be able to do X or Y but completely don't cover why unit Z should be able to do it...

So with this in mind I'm actually generally more at ease amongst AoS players (on this forum) who are much more open to changes and ideas instead of completely disliking how GW has done X or Y. In that same vein if Nurgle summonning worked the same in 40k as a change to their Index approach I'm certain that many more people would complain about it as they do in AoS. 

Agreed. I actually quite enjoy the 'new' 40k. It is still a small step up from AOS in terms of difficulty though, but that's ok :). I think they are doing a great job catering to casual players nowadays. More and more people seem to join GW games now.

Either way, I would love to be able to discuss with people on this forum in regards to 40k, considering that most people here are quite friendly and helpful, unlike most other communities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Kugane said:

Agreed. I actually quite enjoy the 'new' 40k. It is still a small step up from AOS in terms of difficulty though, but that's ok :). I think they are doing a great job catering to casual players nowadays.

Interesting. I find AoS to be the more complex game - particularly as more developed factions get released. The missions are better designed, just the addition of a warscroll battallion can completely change the way an army list plays and tiny aspects of movement and deployment can have a huge impact on the game. OK the "rules" are simple but I think playing the game well takes a lot more thought than 40k. For me anyway. other peoples experiences may vary. 

40k seems a lot more dependent on how good your list is than how well you play it. 7th ed was just enacting a set of rules. a lot of players confuse "its complicated and hard to remember everything" with "you need to play really well to be good at this game"

:/ makes some tea and waits for the inquisitors to arrive...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...