K_DUB Posted August 3, 2016 Report Share Posted August 3, 2016 and his name is Matt Ward.... Welcome back destroyer of Worlds and Codex's 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Romans832 Posted August 4, 2016 Report Share Posted August 4, 2016 Bummer :( Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretre Posted August 4, 2016 Report Share Posted August 4, 2016 Meh the hate for Ward was always overblown. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prophecy Posted August 4, 2016 Report Share Posted August 4, 2016 You dont play fantasy man so you never felt the wrath of ward demons in both games. When you chalk up both games he deserves some smack talk. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AbusePuppy Posted August 4, 2016 Report Share Posted August 4, 2016 Just because he was bad at WFB doesn't mean he's bad at 40K. I'll take his version of Blood Angels and Grey Knights over their current incarnations any day. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prophecy Posted August 4, 2016 Report Share Posted August 4, 2016 I can admit he made those armies amazing to play but it also broke them. Greatest transition of daemon hunters to true grey knights. He also made assault squads troops which is a great idea. But my opponents struggled to compete and it ruined the game play overall. I would take a happy medium of current vs ward. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
galahad911 Posted August 4, 2016 Report Share Posted August 4, 2016 I can admit he made those armies amazing to play but it also broke them. Greatest transition of daemon hunters to true grey knights. He also made assault squads troops which is a great idea. But my opponents struggled to compete and it ruined the game play overall. I would take a happy medium of current vs ward. Assault squads as troops, or any other slot, are still assault squads which really aren't very good. That GK book was good at the time, but the the things that were making that book strong back then are really not strong now. 4 TL Str8 shots is just not impressive anymore. A mid point between what is good now and the things Ward wrote would put Ward on the weak end of the conversation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AbusePuppy Posted August 4, 2016 Report Share Posted August 4, 2016 I can admit he made those armies amazing to play but it also broke them. Greatest transition of daemon hunters to true grey knights. He also made assault squads troops which is a great idea. But my opponents struggled to compete and it ruined the game play overall. I would take a happy medium of current vs ward. Actually, Ward didn't make ASM troops- they had been for years prior to that with the 4E Blood Angels book (if it can be called that.) GK certainly had some problems in the meta of their time and created extremely problematic matchups for certain armies, most notably Tyranids (who they were better at killing than they were Daemons.) However, that's as much the fault of poor design on the part of the Tyranid book as anything wrong with the GK book. I don't think it was ever as powerful as people thought it was and its tournament win rate was never out of proportion with that of its overall numbers. I don't like the power creep that has worked its way into the game, but I would rather see powerful and interesting rules than weak and bland ones like the early-7E codices (BA, GK, SW, Orks, DE) or the early-4E ones. Players can voluntarily limit the strength of a list when playing with a powerful book, but they cannot (easily) invent new rules to make a boring book interesting. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.