Rant: The gayest thing ever!!111!

I want to get in a disclaimer that I have nothing against folk, I have three gay friends in life and that's not including myself ;) . Also the word gay in the UK doesn't mean gay as such, it's also classified as a light insult too, anyway...

I was giving some feedback on someone's list on Dakka Dakka and a user called Billinator mentioned this little system called S3 in Denmark:

You somehow just can't deny that statement!

- Our OT's here in Denmark allows 1,7k lists with an added system called S3. I'm uncertain of whether or not it's taken from elsewhere, or have been invented by these people themselves. But the intention is to take off a good deal of the top of the stronger lists.

Link: http://www.powerfist.dk/forum/index.php?topic=43696.0

- Basically, they've added something called a Strategem cost to the powerhouses of each army, and have it capped at 10 SP for 1,5k-1,7k games.

(Ie, a LR is 4 SP, 2nd Rhino is 2 SP etc.)

- Furthermore, it strongly discourages redundancies in any lists, as each duplicate entry is added a cost of +2 SP.

The system itself has some holes, all around, and with proper knowledge, you ARE able to break it. But if you can prevent from utilizing it's loop-holes, you're looking at a decent system that gives the army some hard-choices, overall.

Well, i just thought i'd mention it!

Now I don't now about you but that's the gayest and most annoying thing ever. Basically it's giving points to vehicles which means armies with plenty of armour i.e Razorback lists, mech Guard etc are all going to get screwed. Lets take for instance my Razorback Angel list with 8 Razorbacks and three Vindicators is probably about 22 points in that system. The system only allows 10 which means I cannot play my army, how annoying is that?

Also mech is king in 5th edition, it's the way things are yet this system isn't playing to the strengths of the rules and making everything 4th edition.

This is really bad because people who come up with good lists (whether copied or not) are penalised for using a good list. If someone has a good list and put effort into making it then why should they be shackled down? We all have the same codexes and people chose what they want to take so if someone takes a crappy list that system gives them more of a chance? Well, I'm gonna bitch and say that's not fair as they have ability to make a decent army list but chose not too.

Stupidiest system ever. I'm glad nothing like that is used where I play.


The GunGrave said...

All sounds a bit gash to me mate.

Jabbdo said...

So, basically it forces you to gimp your army =)

Based on a quick look through, the only things I see working are genestealer spam for nids or possibly letter spam for daemons (as no-one will have more than 5-6 vehicles anyway)

Old School Terminator said...

I personally hate this kind of thing. Adding a secondary system to the rules to restrict army lists is ridiculous and then implementing it so people have to play that way is pure BS.

Systems like this exist because people with models they bought in an older addition and lists they made then as well, want to play the game the same way and not buy models (at least that is one reason) OR it comes from the fact that people don't like getting beaten up or hate to see spammed units and they hide behind the "fluff" blanket or some other straw man as an excuse for creating a system like this, but the truth is that armies come to war in vehicles, often many of the same ones. If an army can bring one great unit or tank, then why wouldn't they try to bring more?

The 5th Edition Codices and rules, more than any before, were written with intention toward a balanced system of armies and USRs (any of the 5th Ed books can compete well with any other). Anything some hack does to gimp that (be it comp or SP penalties toward lists) takes away a part of the balance professional rules writters like Phil Kelly intended when they wrote the rules.

They think the system is broken, so they want to fix it, but their rules break the system and in turn, they will find less people will be willing to play their version of 40Gay. I for one would take my game back into the closet rather than play openly under a crap system, such as the one mentioned here.

Just my two cents, Mercer, sorry for the long rant!

Jabbdo said...

Playing shitty armies and defending them as "fluffy" is just pure bullshit, and trying to force other people to use your shitty "fluff" system is just stupid.

Where does it say in the fluff that marines all walk around on a battlefield? Nowhere. They have rhinos for transportasion. But wait, mech is too OP for us fluff bunnies! (read: shitty players). So rhinos must be unfluffy!

michael said...


vinsklortho said...

Think of it as a challenge. People started playing MSU mech armies to take advantage of the decreased costs, mobility, and increased survivability during 5th edition. Players with some reasonable amount of reasoning capability should be able to build devastating lists that take advantage of the metagame of that system. If anything I'd consider people who whine about that system almost as bad as people who whine about the current system. Use your superior gaming skills to build lists that dominate in that environment instead of waiting for a better player to give you a netlist to use.

Grovel said...

Contrary to popular e-pinion, not everybody likes WAAC. Some people just prefer balanced armies on both sides of the table as opposed to spamming the 'best' units.

Anonymous said...

so wouldn't tyranids have a huge advantage since they don't have any vehicles or do they charge more for monstrous creatures too

Jen said...

I hate that there are so many people (apparently) that have some weird quasi-moral objection to spam. Real life is all about spam. Spam spam and more spam. Read any book about WWII.

AbusePuppy said...

Comp is stupid.

Calling people "gay" as an epithet is stupid.

Please don't do either of them. The SP system is FULL of holes and I could wreck that shit the way like a frat house at a sorority party. There are plenty of 5E armies which are totally unaffected by it and most older codices are utterly crippled by it. Classic bad comp planning at work.

Also, I'm curious what they mean by "duplicate" squads; many Tyranid squads, for example, have few or no squad options. Is taking 10 Termagants twice a duplicate? That seems stupid. They don't want the faceless hordes of skittering monsters to be too similar to each other?

Mercer said...

vinsklortho - It's called moving with the times, why should new lists be gimped because people like old ones?

Grovel - WAAC is a false word and being used in false circumstances here. If you look at popular list builds you will actually find they are balanced.

Abusepuppy - I didn't actually call anyone gay if you read my post properly ;) plus if I want to call people gay I will do; you're not my Mommy ;)

I presume monstrous creatures would be point acosted too.

Anonymous said...

You are not the only ones who think this kind of thing is stupid. Most 40k gamers in Denmark find S3 insulting in many ways, but here's the kicker - The system is made for and used by a single group of people called "Emperors Pride". Its not something to be forced down anyones throat. The club consists of around 40-70 guys who just want something different than the usual "Log onto warseer and see what list helps me win" way. So if you think its stupid or just disagrees with their way of playing, do as I and DONT use the system! Its that simple.

TMiles001 said...

Plus since when is a Rhino a "powerhouse unit"? Useful? Yes. Powerhouse? No.

Post a Comment