The future of compendium warscrolls

[Sleboda]

1 hour ago, stuntymike said:

I'm 100% with Jamie on this one, I don't understand why restricting choice and variety can be seen as a good thing. Nor do I understand who benefits by preventing people from playing with their toys, which they've spent years lovingly assembling and painting. 

Sensible and inclusive comp is a much better path in my opinion. Of course as with any tournament the TOs of SCGT can rule as they see fit but it's the knock on effect of this ruling that troubles me. 

 

If this forum had a Superlike feature, Is use it here.  What's the actual harm in letting people use their beloved collections?

 

 And yeah, trendsetting is a real, real worry. For years people have wondered why I voice my opposition to comp.  This is why. What happens in popular competitive gaming influences my local opponents.  Right now, folks around here don't mind my TK. If this happens, they will.

A last concern I have is the negative impact on the goodwill the New Games Workshop has built up.   I'm on a phone right now.   I'll edit shortly from my PC...

[Bosmer Nightblade]

The compendium also contains the only Slaanesh daemons warscroll battalion so far. Without it then Slaanesh armies take a hit.

[yarrickson]

Without Compendium we lose:

Tomb Kings

Bretonnians

Most of the decent Dwarf stuff

The coherent aelf stuff

World that was special characters

Extra batallions

If you extend that definition to Forge World then we lose: 

Tamurkhans Horde (inc Sayl)

Legion of Azgorgh

Monstrous Arcanum

Depending on how its worded I should think things like silver tower and Spire of Dawn are on iffy ground too. Are they compendium? Add-ons? Errata? Or integrated matched play options?

That's a lot of armies and a lot of unused models. Some of which could have had money spent on them very recently. Anecdotal evidence, my mate Dave just spent quite a lot of money buying up GW ovals and rounds for his Tomb Kings, in the belief that compendium in matched play would be around for at least a while longer. Bit of a kick in the balls for him. 

[mmimzie]

I saw get rid of the compendium.

1. The biggest issue is simply anyone coming in new, who see one of these armies on the top and falls in love; is simoly just pess likely to continue with the hobby when they kind out what massice hills they have to climb to play. This makes it bad for bussiness as GW makes no cash off TK/Bret/Compendium stuff. Players already with these armies are also less likely to buy as it would be a 2nd or 3rd army

2. Balance and play wise: These war scrolls are going to fall behind, with out attention which take some amount of attention from everything else.

3. Lore doesnt support it. No new lore means im plqying a historical game, when my personal army lore is all based on new fluff.

I think the best idea is to cut the compedium and run. Its full of left over hero and stuff that dont exidt in the fluff and may not get balanced.  

I think an alternative solution would be to offer war scroll that could use some of these models as count as. 

@yarrickson your doing the slippery slope/strawman thing something hard. No one has made the silver tower arguement you just made up so you could beat it up for a free win. Thats quite silly. Also there is little arguement against the FW stuff as those models are actually being supported. Actual i think when i was reading this thread the FW arguements were also strawmem??? 

[Marc Wilson]

Errr.... this isn't new news is it? - legacy/compendium warscrolls were omitted from SCGT 2016, right? From memory Tomb Kings were an exception as some guys had booked travel etc.

It's obviously the correct choice - even though it's 100% the TOs choice - and they don't have to explain or justify anything, even though I expect they will anyway. I keep reading that Narrative play will suffer, but lets face it, narrative matched play normally only extends to about 10 key characters and units that stand out like a sore thumb. 

p.s. I expect compendium points to stay but more tournaments moving away from them. The sky isn't falling in this year though - the GW GT heats haven't banned them as far as I know.

 

[yarrickson]

12 minutes ago, mmimzie said:

I saw get rid of the compendium.

1. The biggest issue is simply anyone coming in new, who see one of these armies on the top and falls in love; is simoly just pess likely to continue with the hobby when they kind out what massice hills they have to climb to play. This makes it bad for bussiness as GW makes no cash off TK/Bret/Compendium stuff. Players already with these armies are also less likely to buy as it would be a 2nd or 3rd army

2. Balance and play wise: These war scrolls are going to fall behind, with out attention which take some amount of attention from everything else.

3. Lore doesnt support it. No new lore means im plqying a historical game, when my personal army lore is all based on new fluff.

I think the best idea is to cut the compedium and run. Its full of left over hero and stuff that dont exidt in the fluff and may not get balanced.  

I think an alternative solution would be to offer war scroll that could use some of these models as count as. 

@yarrickson your doing the slippery slope/strawman thing something hard. No one has made the silver tower arguement you just made up so you could beat it up for a free win. Thats quite silly. Also there is little arguement against the FW stuff as those models are actually being supported. Actual i think when i was reading this thread the FW arguements were also strawmem??? 

Two points in rebuttal. 

1.Forge world stuff clearly labelled as compendium. See attached pic (tweet from Thornshield to TO)

2. No one has made the silver tower argument. Which is why I have asked a question? and not made a definitive statement. 

Also. Its all a slippery slope. 

[Thomas Lyons]

22 minutes ago, mmimzie said:

I saw get rid of the compendium.

1. The biggest issue is simply anyone coming in new, who see one of these armies on the top and falls in love; is simoly just pess likely to continue with the hobby when they kind out what massice hills they have to climb to play. This makes it bad for bussiness as GW makes no cash off TK/Bret/Compendium stuff. Players already with these armies are also less likely to buy as it would be a 2nd or 3rd army

2. Balance and play wise: These war scrolls are going to fall behind, with out attention which take some amount of attention from everything else.

3. Lore doesnt support it. No new lore means im plqying a historical game, when my personal army lore is all based on new fluff.

I think the best idea is to cut the compedium and run. Its full of left over hero and stuff that dont exidt in the fluff and may not get balanced.  

I think an alternative solution would be to offer war scroll that could use some of these models as count as. 

@yarrickson your doing the slippery slope/strawman thing something hard. No one has made the silver tower arguement you just made up so you could beat it up for a free win. Thats quite silly. Also there is little arguement against the FW stuff as those models are actually being supported. Actual i think when i was reading this thread the FW arguements were also strawmem??? 

You clearly didn't read my prior post so I'll start again:

1) These models are still available on the secondary market.   There are a number of FW models that are likewise not currently available for purchase and yet they are still seemingly legal, unless you are making the case to ban all FW.  You can't walk into GW stores and buy FW (at least not in the U.S.; not sure about the U.K.).  

2) If they fall behind, let them fall behind.  But it should be the player's choice to play underpowered stuff.  

 

3) This is simply not true.  As noted previously, some armies are still very current in the world (SAME KEYWORDS!).  Free Peoples, Dispossessed and Wanderers are all current armies with current lore.  Some models were moved into compendium status because of discontinued production (most metals were discontinued).  Even the Tomb Kings show up IN THE LORE.  Observe: 

 

 

[Ollie Grimwood]

Well you're all going to save at least £42 on a SCGT ticket, spend it on some new miniatures you tight wads, it'll stop other stuff getting discontinued ?  

 

 

[Thomas Lyons]

19 minutes ago, Ollie Grimwood said:

Well you're all going to save at least £42 on a SCGT ticket, spend it on some new miniatures you tight wads, it'll stop other stuff getting discontinued ?  

So I take it you play either Stormcast, Stonehorn mixed list, Sylvaneth, FEC, or mixed Chaos list with Sayl?  Yes?

[Jamie Ferguson]

17 minutes ago, Ollie Grimwood said:

Well you're all going to save at least £42 on a SCGT ticket, spend it on some new miniatures you tight wads, it'll stop other stuff getting discontinued ?  

 

 

I have no idea who you are and I don't know what sort of humour you have. Despite the tone I'm going to choose to believe you're trying to be funny because of the emoji you've used at the end and I'll choose not to bite 

[Ollie Grimwood]

3 minutes ago, Thomas Lyons said:

So I take it you play either Stormcast, Stonehorn mixed list, Sylvaneth, FEC, or mixed Chaos list with Sayl?  Yes?

Oh yes and Stormfiends lots of Stormfiends I'm all about smashing face, it's why my one tournament outting has seen me placed at around number 500 in the rankings ?

[Thomas Lyons]

3 minutes ago, Ollie Grimwood said:

Oh yes and Stormfiends lots of Stormfiends I'm all about smashing face, it's why my one tournament outting has seen me placed at around number 500 in the rankings ?

It has nothing to do with where you rank but what you bring.  The issue is that there are a handful of competitive lists.  Cutting out compendium scrolls shrinks this list.  Blood and Glory had, what was it, 30+ people bringing Stonehorn lists?  If people want to comp for balance, lets start with the actual broken stuff people are bringing.

[Jamie Ferguson]

1 hour ago, mmimzie said:

I saw get rid of the compendium.

1. The biggest issue is simply anyone coming in new, who see one of these armies on the top and falls in love; is simoly just pess likely to continue with the hobby when they kind out what massice hills they have to climb to play. This makes it bad for bussiness as GW makes no cash off TK/Bret/Compendium stuff. Players already with these armies are also less likely to buy as it would be a 2nd or 3rd army

2. Balance and play wise: These war scrolls are going to fall behind, with out attention which take some amount of attention from everything else.

3. Lore doesnt support it. No new lore means im plqying a historical game, when my personal army lore is all based on new fluff.

I think the best idea is to cut the compedium and run. Its full of left over hero and stuff that dont exidt in the fluff and may not get balanced.  

I think an alternative solution would be to offer war scroll that could use some of these models as count as. 

@yarrickson your doing the slippery slope/strawman thing something hard. No one has made the silver tower arguement you just made up so you could beat it up for a free win. Thats quite silly. Also there is little arguement against the FW stuff as those models are actually being supported. Actual i think when i was reading this thread the FW arguements were also strawmem??? 

I didn't get from Yarricksons post that he was 'beating it up for a free win', ironically what you're doing is creating a straw man argument. 

I actually agree with your second point, these scrolls will fall behind. Let it happen and people with old collections can still use them but with the understanding that they'll be at a disadvantage. That's personal choice, I support that. 

As to your first point, unsupported is a tricky one, GW are currently bringing back 'made to order' models from the past that they previously said they'd not redo. Recently, the Balewind vortex model had rules but the model was not in production. And then it was. Who knows what the future holds, if we don't, why arbitrarily ban compendium? 

As someone earlier stated, it has the feel of, I like my models but you can't play with yours because I don't like them. That may well be a strawman too. 

[Ollie Grimwood]

16 minutes ago, Jamie Ferguson said:

I have no idea who you are and I don't know what sort of humour you have. Despite the tone I'm going to choose to believe you're trying to be funny because of the emoji you've used at the end and I'll choose not to bite 

Well spotted, but it does have a hint of truth. 

[Ollie Grimwood]

11 minutes ago, Thomas Lyons said:

It has nothing to do with where you rank but what you bring.  The issue is that there are a handful of competitive lists.  Cutting out compendium scrolls shrinks this list.  Blood and Glory had, what was it, 30+ people bringing Stonehorn lists?  If people want to comp for balance, lets start with the actual broken stuff people are bringing.

Oh I thought you were joining with the joke. I have actually posted the details of my army here on TGA, Bloodbound, lots of Bloodreavers a few Slaves to darkness units not particularly gamey, one Bloodsecrator. 

[Thomas Lyons]

1 minute ago, Ollie Grimwood said:

Oh I thought you were joining with the joke. I have actually posted the details of my army here on TGA, Bloodbound, lots of Bloodreavers a few Slaves to darkness units not particularly gamey, one Bloodsecrator. 

Sorry, my frustration level has clouded my sense of humor this morning :-/  

[Ollie Grimwood]

3 minutes ago, Thomas Lyons said:

Sorry, my frustration level has clouded my sense of humor this morning :-/  

Quite understandable, and for what it's worth I do agree that more variety is better.  

[yarrickson]

15 minutes ago, Ollie Grimwood said:

Quite understandable, and for what it's worth I do agree that more variety is better.  

Absolutely. Hopefully 2017 gives us Steamhead Duardin, some sort of Aelf release and something new for Death. Spice things up a bit.

[Marc Wilson]

This decision will be catastrophic for the EBay market in pro-painted Heinrich Kemmler models. It's an outrage!

[mmimzie]

44 minutes ago, Jamie Ferguson said:

I didn't get from Yarricksons post that he was 'beating it up for a free win', ironically what you're doing is creating a straw man argument. 

I actually agree with your second point, these scrolls will fall behind. Let it happen and people with old collections can still use them but with the understanding that they'll be at a disadvantage. That's personal choice, I support that. 

As to your first point, unsupported is a tricky one, GW are currently bringing back 'made to order' models from the past that they previously said they'd not redo. Recently, the Balewind vortex model had rules but the model was not in production. And then it was. Who knows what the future holds, if we don't, why arbitrarily ban compendium? 

As someone earlier stated, it has the feel of, I like my models but you can't play with yours because I don't like them. That may well be a strawman too. 

I have two focuses in my hobby play. First and foremost is to enjoy a competitive game and second would be inviting new people to play the hobby. Both of these give me a great deal of joy, but both of these are in my eyes hurt by compendium models.

 

While i can see how people who already have these models can enjoy the compendium as it lets them continue to enjoy thier models. 3,4 ,5 years from now how many dusty TK and Bret armys (should they not get an update) will we see???

From a competitive stand point these factions will either become more powerful if GW takes a down ward trend with war scroll alteration, or become too weak to be relevant if they make stronger and stronger units and allegiance bonuses stop them from competing. Time spent balancing of adjusting these units take from adjustment of armies that are continuing to be developed. So from this stand point keeping them around is silly if they wont be fully supported or have future potential updates.

From the new player aspect. i'd rather the TK/Bret options not be there. If some one is scrolling through my Warhammer app that i'm trying to show the game is torn between brets and stormcast, and goes with brets. Then i have to tell them "well you can hob on ebay and get your half painted half assembled army there at various prices, or kit bash it out my new hobbyist friend." It just seems to have these dubious route for people to go down. Something that is sort of a trap as  they may never see new models or updates to thier army and end up scorned.  

Which is why i like a "it's dead" approach. if folks want to still play with the models that'd be fine and cool. Makes them rare kind of like kesliv stuff was. It was a cool collectors type of army that some folks pulled out of thier wheel house on occasion. Or similar to magic where you have access to this old cards that you can still play with and a few special tournament formats where they exist, but this cards are all collectors side things that don't need further development. 

[Jamie Ferguson]

Totally hear what you're saying but I come to different conclusions.

From a competitive standpoint, competitive games are unlikely to be affected by hobby players bringing Brett's (an example) as they'll be at the bottom tables. That's their choice. Does it hurt anyone, I don't believe so, does it make them happy, probably. If they're not happy they can always pick up a new army. Again, their choice. 

For a new player who likes the Brett models, simply explaining the difficulty in collecting/modelling/playing them will enable them to make their own mind up. Again, their, informed, choice. Does it hurt anyone else if they fall in love with chivalrous knights? I don't think so. If you think being unsupported is an issue, tell them. They decide. 

Your 'it's dead' approach is just really telling everyone else to play your way and making decisions for them, or not allowing them to make decisions. 

If you introduce 20 new players to the game and they all lean towards Brett's (unlikely, they and all compendium forces hardly proliferate) then explaining the issues will probably just cause 19 of them to change their mind and choose stormcast. The 20th player? Probably just wants to push horsies across the table and, informed as they were about their chance of winning, just wants a cool game on the bottom tables with like minded people. 

Sure, dropping compendium makes things simpler for competitive gamers who are aware of the latest meta, but is that enough of a reason?

[Mengel Miniatures]

Don't worry guys. the Tomb Kings will live on regardless  http://theendlessdeserts.blogspot.com/

[daedalus81]

I'm not really sure why this is an issue.  Old armies aren't going to get new scrolls - we knew this.  They're going to fade out.  You can still use them in open/narrative play whenever you want.

Eventually you'll get a new army that fits some part of the aesthetic you enjoyed about the old one.  

Tomb Kings are in the fluff and have kits far too recent to toss out the window.  The problem is making them fit in.  Brets will need a total redo.  Forgeworld will eventually bring Chaos Dwarfs back into the fold - they just Shar'tor.  Duradin are coming and Aelves are not far behind and considering the re-release of Island of Blood under an AoS story they models don't seem to be making a radical shift.

 

[BaldoBeardo]

If no effort is going to be expended on keeping the compendium stuff up to date - and why would it if GW don't sell any of it - then the rules are going to slip away from the current version number.
Tournaments are a competitive environment.
[insert a sentence about rules of your choosing here that contains words like "balance", "fair", "over/underpowered" and "power creep".]
You can (and should) still play open / narrative with your stuff.
At some point, GW are going to bin the matched play additions for the compendium stuff.
Better people get used to that idea sooner rather than later.
That's not schadenfreude - imagine trawling eBay to put together an absolutely mint army for a tournament, only to discover two weeks beforehand that it's invalid due to the new GHB release.

Compendium armies have been on borrowed time since day one.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

[Jamie Ferguson]

48 minutes ago, daedalus81 said:

I'm not really sure why this is an issue.  Old armies aren't going to get new scrolls - we knew this.  They're going to fade out.  You can still use them in open/narrative play whenever you want.

Eventually you'll get a new army that fits some part of the aesthetic you enjoyed about the old one.  

Tomb Kings are in the fluff and have kits far too recent to toss out the window.  The problem is making them fit in.  Brets will need a total redo.  Forgeworld will eventually bring Chaos Dwarfs back into the fold - they just Shar'tor.  Duradin are coming and Aelves are not far behind and considering the re-release of Island of Blood under an AoS story they models don't seem to be making a radical shift.

 

Yes, you can use them in open/narrative play. The issue is that I personally know a number of players who enjoy the tournament scene who also happen to play compendium armies. What you're essentially saying is that you can't go to tournaments unless you have an up to date competitive army. 

Does your tournament experience depend on people with old armies not turning up? If not, then why should their experience depend on your arbitrary decision that their army is currently out of date when there are available points and rules for them. 

I like to play newer armies myself, I just don't see who is served by excluding older armies that are not going to be competing for podiums due to low power levels anyway. Isn't that just elitist or is there another reason to exclude these armies? As you say, they'll fade out eventually, hopefully to be replaced. Why push them out now and upset people when there's no real need?