How far does counts-as go, in your opinion?

[MARK0SIAN]

 

 

 

The other consideration with proxying is the transition between editions (and to a lesser extent rule changes within an edition).

 

It may be that someone built their army in 7th and equipped it in a way that was appropriate or fun for that edition, but those same units and weapons etc may have been radically altered in the way they work, their cost or their performance in the transition to 8th edition.

 

So the player who put a lot of effort and time into his army has now (through no fault of their own) got an army that may be equipped with utterly useless/overcosted special weapons, units that are a shadow of their former selves or perform radically differently than how they used to and now don’t match the players desired playstyle.

Right, Grav Guns on bikers comes to mind. I don't think a player who put the effort into modelling those in 7th Edition needs to be punished by not allowing them to proxy them as Plasma in 8th because GW pulled the rug from under them between editions.

I'm one of those players. And I never have or will use my Grav guns as Plasmas.

 

If I need to be running the absolute optimum units it means I'm in a tournament setting. In casual play a less than the best option is not a problem.

It seems a bit odd that you have different expectations of how optimum lists should be in a casual game (that it can be more relaxed and less cut throat) but by the same token you’re not willing to relax your wysiwyg requirements even slightly for a casual game.

 

If you’re fine with reducing your chance to win through less optimum lists why are you not fine with reducing your chance to win because the opponent is using counts as for certain weapons?

 

You say proxying allows people to field the most powerful stuff but if you’re not going all out to win your casual games (and you aren’t if you’re fine with less than optimised lists) then why does it matter if they have a further advantage over you for the sake of allowing someone to play a different special weapon than the one shown on the model?

[Ishagu]

Because I place a large importance on modelling and painting the armies. 40k is a visual game, as has been pointed out before.

 

I don't run units I've bought until they are fully assembled and painted, and equipped as I have stated. I expect my opponent to offer me the same courtesy. It makes the spectacle of the game much better for all involved.

 

There's little difference between a proxy of wargear or an entire similar looking model. If my request to have your army presented according to what it is sounds unreasonable, it's perfectly fine not to play me.

[Halandaar]

I'm one of those players. And I never have or will use my Grav guns as Plasmas.

 

Congrats?

 

I guess I just don't see the point of being so hard-headed about it, especially not in a "casual" setting where WYSIWYG isn't being enforced. The correct points have been payed, the rules are being followed and functionally you wouldn't notice any difference to your game if the models physically had Flamers or Meltas on them (or in your case, Grav/Plasma). At a glance in amongst a blob of other Guardsmen, you probably wouldn't even notice without leaning over to inspect them. 

 

Just feels like pedantry which is going to cost you games to me, but there you go.

[Oshikai]

I think it does really come down to what one values the most from his Game and to reach a consensus on this. 

 

I prefer count as being used  for narrative or aesthetic Reasons.

 

I find it perfectly fine when someone uses the rules for the Axe of Blind Fury to represent his Sowrd of wholesale Slaughter. We have one Player in our Store with a Beautiful Imperial Fist Army who uses Ultramarine Rules representing the specialisation of his Strike force and we really don`t mind, since we found it ridiculous to punish him for painting his Guys Yellow. Someone else is using Tigirius rules for the same Scriptor Modell he has been using for nearly 20 Years now and who is an absolute psychic Beast...and he hates the Tigirius Sculpt with a Passion.

As long as I can follow your Train of Thought while you explain your reasons for using Counts as I will be fine for the most Time.

 

I will not Play against a Styrofoam Sphere Tyranid Army or My little Pony Puppets (Years ago I saw someone using them for a Fantasy Tournament Army). 

 

When it comes to proxying weapons or testing new Minis/Armies I will be okay with it as well... for a while. 

 

Around here it will be expected that if you use your Flamers as Plasmas every single Game that you will start to actually build Plasmas. 

 

But then thats seldom a problem since Magnetizing is really common around here and Poeple are more than happy to provide Extra Bits or show newer Players how to Magnetize their Stuff. We have several WhatsApp Groups and Drop Box for ressources in that Regard which is really helpful ( I was blown aways when I found the Instructions for the Octablade in this forum and immediatedly shared it.)

 

All this is totally subjective and arbitrary of course, but I think it s a spectrum and everyone places differing degrees of Value on Hobby Aspects...which shouldn`t be a problem or include hard feelings.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

I totally agree with ishagu. The opponent wanted to proxy to tailor his list. That is poor sportsmanship period .

[ShibeKing]

I'm WYSYWIG to the bone. I would never use counts as. However, I wouldn't put these same restrictions on others. I just like holding myself to that rule.

 

The few people I play with are pretty big on WYSYWIG too so I never ran into this issue with Counts as...

 

I'd like to think I'd be pretty easy going, but some of the things I've read in the thread make me wonder.

[Bryan Blaire]

I totally agree with ishagu. The opponent wanted to proxy to tailor his list. That is poor sportsmanship period .

They didn't discuss list restrictions beforehand, clearly. Ishagu could have easily tailored his list as well.

 

List tailoring and proxying are not one in the same, and doing one doesn't make the other wrong, nor does using either make someone a bad sport.

 

If his opponent had rushed out to paint up five or six plasma/melta gun bearers wouldn't have been any different. Exact same result.

 

Give it a rest, Ishagu is an elitist WAAC player and needs and deserves no defending. His example is about the worst thing you could use to try and argue against someone being able to use Counts-As or proxying - it's ultimately rendered a non-issue by the pre-game discussion. It could have easily been headed off by a well placed “... and I don’t game against proxies.”

 

I'm WYSYWIG to the bone. I would never use counts as. However, I wouldn't put these same restrictions on others. I just like holding myself to that rule.

What about Counts-As means that things wouldn't be WYSIWYG? Yes, it may mean not using the official GW produced models, but they should ultimately be very, very closely representative of whatever the model is supposed to be, otherwise it isn't Counts-As.

 

If I put my correctly armed Scions on the table, and you notice that they are Van Saar gangers, do you believe those are not WYSIWYG?

 

I mean in a rare instance, maybe someone might represent a relic sword with an axe, or vice versa, but ultimately Counts-As is not about proxying, and a lot of the relics are generally not actually modeled different by most players, nor do they have official models.

[ShibeKing]

I'd see ridiculously well trained and disciplined gangsters.

 

I guess I mistook the two terms. Got caught up in thinking about Ishagu's rants about grav guns being used as plasma guns.

[Vykes]

Might be a liiiiiiiittle harsh there, Bryan Blaire, my dude.  I do agree with the notion, though. 

 

I mean, I don't own any grav, never have as it was always an OOP gun in my mind that displaced the already ridiculously dangerous plasma*; but someone coming into it that happens to like the concept of grav might just not like how they are currently portrayed conceptually.  

 

Still, it brings up a question: What about units that have neat concepts or fun stat blocks but people loath the aesthetics?  

 

From my own little counts-as toolbox: 

Breacher legionnaires as Plague marine? 

Reaver jump trooper as Raptors?

Destroyer Marked Volkite Caliver support team as Noise Marines?

Escher Gangers as cultists? 

Deimos pattern predators as standard predators rather than Relic/Hellforged versions? 

Combi-volkite as combi-plas?

 

But what about the Chaos sort that truly detest all the gribbly Daemon junk and use stuff like Castellax as Obliterators, or Dominar as Maulerfiends?  Are players expected to represent relics as distinctly different from their standard equivalency (IE, Angels Wing as something other than a Jump Pack, or Archangels Shard as something recognizably not a simple power sword?)

 

*But then again I've never played with an unpainted or half assembled model.  I've also never millimeter checked after a bump that might have decided if a charge passed or failed, etc.  But this isn't about me, none of it is.  My standards are my own, I can only apply them to me and select opponents that mesh well with my style of play.  I don't just go to local shops for throw downs with pick up games and run masher lists against teens. My ingrained style is that it's almost certainly going to be a set up game with some dudes that I know, that build armies for themes, or are part of the local 30K league who have their own external rules and restrictions.  I'm bound by those and adhere by those. 

[Bryan Blaire]

Might be a liiiiiiiittle harsh there, Bryan Blaire, my dude. I do agree with the notion, though.

Be that as it may, from what I’ve seen, games against him must stink - I’d expect calipers to be pulled out too to ensure there’s no “modeling for advantage” by various basing set ups (unless you both the official “hero basing” kits or whatever). It’s a pretty closed-minded attitude and I’ve seen too many posts by him where he tries to argue that he’s just being fair when it’s rather transparent that he just wants to win.

 

We’ve also had this argument several times on this board, and he always trots out the same sob story, or a minor variation of it - I’ve begun to think it’s the only game he ever actually encountered a proxy in, or it’s the only game he ever played. Either way, that the single occurrence marred him so badly doesn’t speak well of his attitude for gaming.

 

As I said, I’ve had some very good games (and clearly memorable ones, as i still remember the unit’s that were proxied for other things) against folks using proxies, and it’s a disservice to all hobbiests to try and label it as “only trying to WAAC.”

[Vykes]

Some people's posting style/online etiquette can be radically different than in-person personalities, so I try not to ascribe one to the other. But I know there's a few posters who get me to sneer a bit but in person I'm always willing to give people 2 games to figure out how they play and if I like it or not enough to put them on my gamer list for fun.  Just like I know a few delightful people who are great sorts that have no concept of what is a fun thematic game beyond, "Grind people into the dust and use greasy sleezeball tactics*."

 

Trust me mate, I'm definitely on side.  In a game of millimeters I'm still willing to give an inch if it looks cool and the opponent is fun.  I like the cinema of the game, proxy or well done counts-as often are more noteworthy and engaging than bog-standard kits, so I tend to remember them better and am pretty lenient on them as a result.  I can recall one of my friends using a few Kingdom Death slathering monsters as Slaneeshi Spawn before and I'm still totally good with that. 

 

*Tactics like the old WFB 'turn your unit at the start of the game to avoid facing the 'anything in line of sight' Indiana Jones Ark of the Covenant weapons, or turning a chariot/monster on its side to eek out an extra 1" of movement on Turn 1 sort of gamey garbage I hate so much. 

[Zephaniah Adriyen]

Some people's posting style/online etiquette can be radically different than in-person personalities, so I try not to ascribe one to the other. But I know there's a few posters who get me to sneer a bit but in person I'm always willing to give people 2 games to figure out how they play and if I like it or not enough to put them on my gamer list for fun.  Just like I know a few delightful people who are great sorts that have no concept of what is a fun thematic game beyond, "Grind people into the dust and use greasy sleezeball tactics*."

 

Trust me mate, I'm definitely on side.  In a game of millimeters I'm still willing to give an inch if it looks cool and the opponent is fun.  I like the cinema of the game, proxy or well done counts-as often are more noteworthy and engaging than bog-standard kits, so I tend to remember them better and am pretty lenient on them as a result.  I can recall one of my friends using a few Kingdom Death slathering monsters as Slaneeshi Spawn before and I'm still totally good with that. 

 

*Tactics like the old WFB 'turn your unit at the start of the game to avoid facing the 'anything in line of sight' Indiana Jones Ark of the Covenant weapons, or turning a chariot/monster on its side to eek out an extra 1" of movement on Turn 1 sort of gamey garbage I hate so much. 

This.

Does anyone else have inordinate amounts of fun when their (potentially game-winning) Knight explodes (thus ensuring defeat), takes out like 10 full units on both sides and then causes a nearby enemy vehicle to also explode and take some stuff out?

I loathe being ground into the dust without fun moments. I don't mind losing if it's fun and I get to do fun things like nuke enemy units in a single attack roll, make charges with an entire grouping of HQs and support all at once, and cause explosive chain reactions of cinematic glory.

[Bryan Blaire]

Truthfully, this is all GW's doing anyway - at one point there was simply the hobby, and it included wild things like deodorant tanks and customization through scratch-building or conversions, and it really didn't seem to matter as much what models' sizes and the like were while playing, or that you might only have the Marines from the starter box, so you didn't have any plasma or melts guns, but wanted to use them.

 

Then there was the period where enough official models were out that folks started to talk about "proxies" and your armies grew larger than three to four easily remembered squads and a few heroes, but conversions were still encouraged by GW and things weren't restricted to only GW stuff at the GW stores (and the guidance of GW stores didn't seem to be the official game play way for most people).

 

Then GW actually wrote the concept of "counts-as" into some of the Codexes - make your own character with name, doesn't have to be the official model, but needs to have the appropriately modeled (or very, very similar) wargear. Around this time, WYSIWYG also crept into the actual rules, codifying how things need to be represented. Somewhere along the way, the bits ordering service was discontinued and the kit-bashing of plastic kits became the norm.

 

Now everything has basically been dropped from the rules - the concept of proxies, counts-as, and WYSIWYG, and for the most part it seems like the direction has moved (by GW's own decisions, model production methods, and marketing) to only using the official representations via GW models and kit-bashing has been reduced to just making a few judicious additions to models to identify them as part of a certain sect within a model line.

 

Overall I blame GW for making the Hobby more closed-minded, even though the lore of the setting itself indicates that there would be way more identifiable differences among the factions than the model lines GW produces.

[Marshal Rohr]

They talk about that in the podcasts. Refusing to play a game against someone who converts a scratch built gunship to use as an arvus lighter because it’s a proxy is 100% not what they intended the game to be. Some players are just not worth playing against and people who refuse conversions and proxies are part of that group.

[MegaVolt87]

Just because someone is proxying within the same faction, does not mean 100% of the time they are WAAC. I put myself to WYSIWYG standards and I could most certainly WAAC list tailor, the only differences being I have the correct model, its painted and I can easily have multiple variants of the list to list tailor if I really want, I got the transport options to do it to take all the needed mini's. How is that any different to what a WAAC proxy player can/dose do? My point is, the bad seeds are in both halves of the apple. Its not fair to put all that at the proxy players feet. 

[Kinstryfe]

Vykes made some really good examples, and I think they can be used to illustrate the counts-as versus proxy argument. Purely in my opinion:

 

Breacher legionnaires as Plague marine? Counts-as, as long as there aren't shield toting Marines in the list as well.

 

Reaver jump trooper as Raptors? Counts-as if they're converted with jump packs, proxy if it's just the little grav chutes.

 

Destroyer Marked Volkite Caliver support team as Noise Marines? Counts-as, with the same caveats as for the plague marines above, though possibly a bit unimaginative as a conversion if there's no other ties to noise marines. It kind of spins off its own debate: how do you treat things that exist in the lore, but only in another game system? I'm not sure I have a definitive answer to that. On one hand I appreciate the creativity of making a Legion army into a 40k compatible list, but on the other I feel like there's a point where it stops being convenient for your opponent. Two units of breachers as plague marines, a destroyer squad as noise marines, volkite weaponry as plasma gunners, little battle robots as Rubric Marines. It seems like eventually it would get confusing, so I'm not really sure where "cool conversions" ends and "needs a list of pictures and descriptions" begins.

 

Escher Gangers as cultists? Not even a counts-as in my opinion. Humans with las/autoguns or pistols counting as humans with las/autoguns or pistols. I consider necro gangs, cultists, genestealer neophytes, Catachans, Cadians, and the like an example of the same basic unit until special weapons get involved. Same goes for something like using the Blood Angels Tactical Marines kit minus molded shoulders for some fancy Ultramarines with the proper paint scheme, a Venerable Dreadnaught model as a regular dread, Chaos Marines as Chosen, etc. Humans is humans, Marines is Marines, and so on, and they're only counts-as insofar as they're not officially the <named unit> kit.

 

Deimos pattern predators as standard predators rather than Relic/Hellforged versions? Don't consider it even counts-as largely because I have several old predator models (metal plastic hybrids). Does the old model need to be ran as a relic, or can it be what it said it was on the box? Is a new model designed to look like an old model necessarily a relic, or what the old model was?

 

Combi-volkite as combi-plas? Ostensibly both, but it brings up an interesting point. Is a volkite, something that exists in 40k but only extremely rarely, really any different than just kitbashing a cool looking sci-fi gun with a bolter component and calling it a combi-whatever? Personally, I don't think so, as you're not using Viable Option A as Viable Option B, but rather Cool Not40kgun A as Viable Option B. I suppose it goes back to whether all combi-volkite in the army are combi-plasma or not. If so, I'll say it's a counts-as (and a pretty cool one).

[MARK0SIAN]

Because I place a large importance on modelling and painting the armies. 40k is a visual game, as has been pointed out before.

 

I don't run units I've bought until they are fully assembled and painted, and equipped as I have stated. I expect my opponent to offer me the same courtesy. It makes the spectacle of the game much better for all involved.

 

There's little difference between a proxy of wargear or an entire similar looking model. If my request to have your army presented according to what it is sounds unreasonable, it's perfectly fine not to play me.

But no one is saying the army wouldn’t be fully painted and assembled, just that they want to say the grav gun or whatever is a plasma gun.

 

But, according to your standards, I could have a Golden Daemon winning army with the best modelling and painting skills in the world on display but if I wanted to say a flamer was acting as plasma gun then you’d refuse to play against it. That sounds more like you’re sacrificing a great spectacle on the table for that principle.

[Darnok]

This whole thing is a massive grey area, with no single "correct answer" ever. It always comes down to the two players in question - it only matters what those two are happy with.

 

I enjoy building and converting most of all, so I naturally are more on the relaxed side of things when it comes to proxy and counts-as discussions. As long as some effort was put into the build in question, and it is easy and clear for me to tell what I am dealing with: bring it on I say!

 

Another factor is availability of models, in the sense of how much choice a person has in his or her collection. It is easy to demand WYSIWYG for special weapons if you have 10000 points of models and can always bring what you want. A player with a smaller collection does not have that luxury. Again: I just expect clarity, so do not play one flamer as a melter and another flamer as a plasmagun. "All flamers are plasmaguns, no exceptions" though - why not?

 

 

P.S.: Somebody early on mentioned bases being an issue, citing Terminators on 25mm bases as "not okay". For a long time those were the ones the models were supplied with, and for models from that era (!) it hould not be a problem at all.

[D3L]

I totally agree with ishagu. The opponent wanted to proxy to tailor his list. That is poor sportsmanship period .

it's actually quite the opposite, as it would seem my self, and everyone else in this thread (excepting you and Ishagu, naturally)

 

seem to agree that it is sporting to allow proxies

[GreenScorpion]

@Everyone: please calm down a bit with the discussions towards A or B person in this thread.

Regardless of their opinions, keep in mind that in our free society everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

Just smile and relax

 

In what relates to the content of this thread:

- Proxys or count-as should be fine, if everything is clearly accepted from both sides and mostly, if everyone is able to follow up what is what.

- This is a game and games are supposed to be fun, so try not to overthink some things and just enjoy the hobby, even if your opponent doesn't have X or Y models or weapons on those models, it should still be possible to enjoy the match.

- No one is forced to play with someone they don't want and this has really nothing to do with the quality or aspect of the models on the table, always keep that in mind.

- Not everyone has the funds to buy every model (as has been stated already) and those that don't, should not have to be shamed because of that.

- There are good and bad people in every community, some will use X model because they like the looks, others might do it because it causes confusion.

- Who is good or bad always depends from the perspective, keep that in mind

[Cpt_Reaper]

We seem to be in agreeance that counts-as and proxying are two different things.

• Counts-As: This model uses the rules for X and has been modified as such (kitbash) or is a 3rd party model intended to be used as X (Victoria Miniatures Matilda tank being used as a Russ)
• Proxy: This model uses the rules for X but has not been modified or is a similar model. The running of said model is to test the waters before purchase or final gluing is made.

What is acceptable when the dice hit the table is seems to be up for debate. Do you expect your opponent to meet your standards or do you need to meet theirs?

 

Ask this question: Will I be at a significant disadvantage before the dice are ever rolled that will significantly impact my enjoyment?

If yes - a discussion is required with your opponent. The topic is for you to decide.

If no - roll initiative for deployment and mission

 

Personally if you paid the points it's in your army. If I get tabled in a turn or two I will ask questions. Other than that...go nuts.

[Volt]

WYSIWYG is an utterly moronic and restrictive concept to begin with. I don't give a damn what's on the table so long as it doesn't butcher lore or is the wrong size. Marines on elevated basis as Primaris or plasma guns counting as meltaguns? Who cares? So long as the opponent doesn't try to pull a fast one on you the modeled wargear is completely irrelevant so long as the player clearly and cleanly remembers what the wargear in their list is.

 

I have a particular issue wit counts as wargear and models. In almost every single case players are using counts as models for an advantage in the game, so it has a shade of WAAC attitude that I can't support.

Let me explain:

A while back I was running a vehicle heavy army and had a game arranged against a local player. We had loosely discussed our armies before the game. When I arrived for my game we laid out our armies, and at that point the other player advised me that the multitudes of flamers his models were armed with are actually all Meltas, and some of the other anti infantry weapons were Plasmas (He was running Veteran heavy Guard).
You see my problem with this? He isn't trying something out, he is merely proxying weapons in his army for something more effective against mine. Why should this behaviour be supported?

I have never come across a player, not once, who was running an effective model as a less effective model. I have also come across many players who advise me they are simply "testing units out before buying them" but they never go on to buy the units, and simply move on to running counts as of the next best thing that is released.

For these reasons I will never support anything beyond well done conversions that are a clear labour of hobby love.
My hobby enjoyment and immersion should not have to suffer to accommodate someone else who is either trying to make their army more effective at best, or doesn't respect the hobby at worst.

So what? You shouldn't be having "vague games" in the first place since the digital era. Both players should always demand to see the other's list at around the same time before confirming to a match. Not nebulously agreeing to something, and then one guy suddenly swapping points around to bring a :cussload of melta/plas where there wasn't.

[Panzer]

WYSIWYG is an utterly moronic and restrictive concept to begin with. I don't give a damn what's on the table so long as it doesn't butcher lore or is the wrong size. Marines on elevated basis as Primaris or plasma guns counting as meltaguns? Who cares? So long as the opponent doesn't try to pull a fast one on you the modeled wargear is completely irrelevant so long as the player clearly and cleanly remembers what the wargear in their list is.

 

Many care obviously, so dismissing it as "utterly moronic" is kinda rude and insulting to a large part of the community.

[Marshal Rohr]

 

WYSIWYG is an utterly moronic and restrictive concept to begin with. I don't give a damn what's on the table so long as it doesn't butcher lore or is the wrong size. Marines on elevated basis as Primaris or plasma guns counting as meltaguns? Who cares? So long as the opponent doesn't try to pull a fast one on you the modeled wargear is completely irrelevant so long as the player clearly and cleanly remembers what the wargear in their list is.

 

Many care obviously, so dismissing it as "utterly moronic" is kinda rude and insulting to a large part of the community.

 

 

People restrictive about counts-as are easily a small minority. If the people who literally make the game run counts as and proxies, and you say no in your games, we finally have an example of people 'playing the game wrong'.

[PeteySödes]

=][=   Clearly we're done here. Just a reminder we need respect that we all have opinions and not get personal. Be excellent to each other.   =][=