Subscribe Us

header ads

Presence of Faeit: Codex Supplements, Freedom of Speech, Armoured Company


Quite a busy week going on, and of course the site this coming week has a lot coming to it. So while I am wrapping up this week, it will be a busy week on the site.

Presence of Faeit is my weekly (unless I forget) editorial. Most of the time, I am reporting what other people are saying, and doing, and this is my chance to talk about what I am thinking or is going on here in my own little corner of the globe.


Freedom of Speech and the Comments Section
I want to quickly address a friend of mines suggestion that if I edit the comments I am censoring peoples right to free speech. this is the post from earlier if you missed it
http://natfka.blogspot.com/2013/10/the-comment-section-and-natfka-loses-it.html
Thank you for all the positive support I have heard since this post.

First of all, if you are in the United States (I can only speak of the US since I am from here), Free Speech as protected by the first Amendment of the Constitution of the United States does not give you the right to say anything you want the moment it comes to you.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

So no, by me moderating the comment section am I violating any Rights you believe you have. Even though I am moderating the comment section, if I delete your comment, I am sorry. You may of course exercise your rights by screaming anything you want at the monitor or screen you are looking at, and can say anything you want to it. I don't mind.

When it comes to moderation, I do want to hear peoples opinions. Keep it positive, do not insult other readers, authors, companies, etc. Just stay positive, if you don't like a product that is fine. Lets keep the dialogue going. 

I am also going to apologize before hand right now. Its quite possible that with moderation, that I remove comments that really did not need to be, most likely as a result of someone else s comment. I do not like comment casualties, but they sometimes occur, its not intentional.

Codex Supplements
For those of you that have not noticed, I am very excited about codex supplements. There is just an amazing amount of directions that Games Workshop can go with these. Individual Companies for instance are just an amazing idea and I feel will be a huge success. With this we are able to really get into the meat of the army's supplement, and the room for expansions and coming back to the Chapter in question with future releases is always open.

Here are some directions I have been thinking of.......
Combined Army Supplements- Following rumors of a Book of Tzeentch (CSM and Chaos Daemons), or a Genestealer Cult (Tyranids and IG), I think there are lots of opportunities here.

Warzone or Themed Supplements- These could easily be a supplement of that included the forces that were part of a Campaign, like the Macharius Campaign, which could easily hold rules for minor factions/chapters within several codices.

Since we are moving into Space Marine Chapter companies, there are two, yes two very vital companies that I would love to see expanded upon. Deathwing and Ravenwing. These are two of the most iconic companies in the game, and a supplement that deals with both or one for each would be amazing.

The Armoured Company
Yea, I know, armor in 6th edition sucks. Well, I love tanks and have a lot of them, and will end up with more very soon. I have been working on a 2500pt list that includes not just 12-15 tanks, but a whopping 24 or 25 depending on which of the final varients I am going to settle on. Yea, it may seem extreme, but I just love these kinds of lists.

So how am I doing it? 25 tanks in 2500pts seems a little bit ludicrous. Well, to start with the theme is an Inquisitorial force, which makes Grey Knights my primary. So yes, Coteaz is involved and there are lots of Razorbacks (I own up to 10), and of course feeding into that are platoons.

Here is the weakest armour portion of the two lists
9 Razorbacks with Psybolt Heavy Bolters
8 Chimeras as part of two platoons and company command
4 Armoured Sentinels
4 Hydra Flakk Tanks

Inside is a rediculas amount of plasma guns 27
rediculas amount of melta 16
a lot of Autocannons on Sentinels, Hydras, and Heavy wpns


Lots of fun, lots of shooting.

Post a Comment

43 Comments

  1. This is your site, if people fail to behave, youre in your right to delete the offensive comments.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I totally agree on you comment policy. People don't seem to understand that freedom of speech isn't equal to freedom of forcing your opinion unto others nor does it exclude you from the consequences and responsibility of the things you say.

    For the rest i am quite excited for the army supplements, really, the possibilities are endless!!! For me personally, this is the best move ever made by GW!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's not even right though, the First Ammendment is protection from the Government restricting speech. That's it. Private citizens/groups/whatever, like say some blog on the internet, are free to restrict things as much as they like. It'd be nice if more Americans actually understood how their rights work, or the government for that matter.

      Delete
    2. pboyle hit it. Natfka could, for example, arbitrarily decide that any comment with the word "rabbit" (for the sake of absurdity) was not permissible on his site, delete every comment with that word in it, ban every account that ever used that word, etc etc. There is absolutely nothing illegal about that. If a shop owner decided that he wished to ban anyone who ever displayed (X) opinion from his store, there is nothing illegal about that. The First Amendment in the constitution doesnt even apply to the state governments (that comes with a later one), though many state constitutions are very nearly copy+pasted versions of the federal one.

      Delete
  3. Hi !

    I had the same problem with commentaries a while back on my own french blog, and I totally understand you.

    There's a freedom of speech, right, but not a freedom of saying anything.
    And there's a universal right above that, the right to be respected. So if this last right is not obtained under the cover of freedom of speech, then this freedom shall be restricted !

    More : this site is not a forum or a public place built on everybody's opinion. It's YOUR blog, that YOU've created, and that YOU're updating.... You choose to allow peapole to comment, it's not the case everywhere and people are not screaming about it !
    You know what we say : Your Place, Your Rules ! And those who do not agree with that can fetch informations elsewhere !

    And thanks for all the day-by-day news !

    ReplyDelete
  4. Can't you change it so that only proper profiles can leave comments and if someone is offensive you can block them.

    Ill admit that sometimes I think of putting something on that might cause controversy, but usually I would do so in a jokey manner, however this being the internet jokes don't often come over we'll when written due to differing reasons,
    None native English speakers
    Lack of intelligence
    People being to sensitive

    I do agree that repeated attacks especially personal attacks must be stopped

    ReplyDelete
  5. Can't you change it so that only proper profiles can leave comments and if someone is offensive you can block them.

    Ill admit that sometimes I think of putting something on that might cause controversy, but usually I would do so in a jokey manner, however this being the internet jokes don't often come over we'll when written due to differing reasons,
    None native English speakers
    Lack of intelligence
    People being to sensitive

    I do agree that repeated attacks especially personal attacks must be stopped

    ReplyDelete
  6. I invite five people to my house. Four people are enjoying themselves and are making the evening fun. Yes they occasionally talk seriously, but it is good natured. One of the guests, however, is behaving angrily and is constantly berating the other four. He's spoiling the evening for others who just want to relax after a busy, and perhaps stressful, day.

    Am I not within my rights to throw him out? Would my four polite and respectful friends not applaud me for doing so?

    This is your house Natfka. Your house, your rules. Here you are the boss and you say what is acceptable and what is not. Frankly, none of us were invited here. We just walked in and made ourselves at home.

    What you're doing has both my respect and support.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well said! This is very much a simple case of behave or leave.

      Continue with the good work Natfka!

      Delete
    2. Agreed! Thanks again for letting us know the house rules in advanced too :)

      Delete
  7. Well in America we *DO* have the right to say whatever we want whenever we want... the difference of course is that our rights end where the next person's start. Meaning, on a privately owned webpage (like this one, go figure) you have every right (and even the responsibility) to moderate and censor whatever appears on the page.

    For people who have trouble connecting the dots, picture the whole thing as similar to posting a sign on your front lawn. You can write pretty much whatever you want on that sign, and there is little the Government can do about it. Your neighbors are allowed to dislike the sign. They area allowed post signs on their own yards, but they are NOT allowed to take down your sign, -OR- post their own signs on your lawn (unless you give permission) If you were to give them permission, how long those signs stay (or whether they stay at all) is completely up to the owner of the lawn. It doesn't become a free speech issue if the owner of the lawn looks out and decides to take down all the signs with racist speech, or all the signs supporting Eldar rights, or heck, all the signs written in blue ink.

    If anyone is upset about Natfka's moderation (you are certainly ALLOWED to be) then set up your own site, and you can post pretty much anything you want there. *THAT* my friends is what Free Speech means.

    ReplyDelete
  8. "congress shall make no law . . ." very clear, your not congress, so you can moderate all you want on YOUR site :-)

    ReplyDelete
  9. When earlier in the week I read:

    "Lets be honest here. There is no Corporate Greed, there is no I am out to ruin your hobby, and Games Workshop while they sometimes feel a little hard to interact with, are not here to destroy the hobby, nor are they doing that. If you believe that they are, and I mean truly believe that they are, I have no words to describe how little I feel about your slow decent and exit from this hobby."

    I just wanted to high five you into next week. I have found the most negative gamers in real life that I have met are generally on their way our anyway.

    The internet: it's a democracy of dictators. You have your choice of masters/moderators et al.

    ReplyDelete
  10. To be honest it's not their fault they don't know the limits of free speech, there is plenty of obfuscation of what an attack on free speech actually is floating about, mainly for fairly smelly political purposes such as promoting fascism, racism or homophobia without criticism.

    So thanks to the promoters of those, there's plenty of otherwise decent people who seem to think they're entitled to spew whatever nonsense they like wherever they like, while failing to take into account that while they are guaranteed free speech, what they are NOT guaranteed is a platform to broadcast their speech from, or an audience to listen to them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I hear you brother. Freedom of speech does not mean freedom of thought or freedom of responsibility.

      Delete
  11. NOT IN YOUR HOUSE!

    Like you said, you wouldn't let someone walk into your house and say something disrespectful. You'd kick them out. In the case of this sure, you delete their comment.

    People have the right to say what they want. But this is your blog. So you have the right to delete what you want.

    Can't wait for more CSM supplement news!

    ReplyDelete
  12. Or "Freedom of Screech" as Charlie Brooker once called it. Freedom of Speech, like so many other great and noble ideals, fails when it meets the rest of humanity. Unfortunately our species average IQ is barely in double figures....;).

    To be honest the entirety of the interweb could do with moderation. That way we can all live in harmony and peace...;)


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think the problem here is the nature of Internet itself. By reducing each of us to mere lines of text we forget that a real person with real thoughts is at the other end of our blathering. By stripping the humanity away, we set ourselves up to be vicious and cruel in ways that we would never accept in person, even with someone with whom we vehemently disagree.

      It's easy to hate on GW because our society has shifted in such a way that businesses and corporations are the big bad wolves who only want our money. And whether that's true or not, it is irrelevant. Corporations are made up of people, and those people like us want to get as much money for the things that they produce as they can. But they do not force us to buy anything, we choose to.

      My point is that there is no machine to rail against. Just people. And we all deserve respect.

      Thanks Natfka.

      Delete
    2. If I were religious I would say Amen to that. Here, here?

      Delete
  13. You can of course edit the you comment section as you see fit to maintain civil discourse. You are not the government and this is a for profit private enterprise so you do not have to worry about the first amendment.

    I believe that your note that this is no corporate greed is incorrect. All corporations are driven by greed but in GW case the issue is more their short term profit focus which many gamers who are heavily invested in GW games feel hurts the games long term. That heavy investment in both time and money yields strong feelings.

    Constantly harping on it does not good though. The only thing that will change GW course on this though is people not buying things so I would suggest the only comments allowed on this line be something like:

    "That is cool but I will not buy it personally since it is so expensive."

    Nice clean statement of personal opinion about how the cost is affecting your game buying decisions without ranting about corporate tyranny.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I am holding out a huge amount of hope for supplements. If sixth edition lasts a long time and more complex supplements (such as some chaos legions) come out late in the game and with model releases, it will be an amazing step forward for the hobby.
    I also really liked the idea of seeing a Ravenwing and Deathwing supplement, and at an outside chance, a Fallen Angel supplement. (Bring back cypher!)
    I am (like many CSM players) a little upset that space marines are getting all the love, but am also taking it to mean Chaos supplements will involve more changes and maybe some new units. Cult Terminators, Zerkers on Juggernaughts... So many possibilities.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Completely agree with your stance on unseemly or downright offensive behaviour, too many aggressive imbeciles feel they can hide behind what they consider to be their right to free speech on the internet without any form of repercussion.

    As far as I'm concerned free speech should never cover blatantly abusive, racist, homophobic and so on behaviour that is only damaging to society and has no upside but can be prevalent on various forums.
    Obviously those are more extreme cases and people misguidedly calling GW "evil" or foolishly stating that 'they're out to destroy war gaming' amongst other half baked ideas and conspiracy theories aren't as bad as that but it is nice to see somebody take a stance for positivity and intelligent discussion over what is essentially name calling and character assassination that can appear on various other comment sections.

    If someone feels that GW's prices are too much, they dislike a legal action undertaken by GW's legal department or they're not happy with a particular sculpt then do so without resorting to insults and stating opinions as facts. Do some research and have an open discussion about it instead, it's far more productive.

    Personally I have no time for GW bashers as whether you agree with everything they do or not and to be honest I can't think of a single company where I'd agree with everything they do, they produce some of the finest miniatures in the industry and have progressed and expanded the hobby far beyond anything any other company has achieved and deserve recognition for that amongst many other things.

    GW aren't perfect (who is?) but the tabletop gaming world would be a far, far poorer place without them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "As far as I'm concerned free speech should never cover blatantly abusive, racist, homophobic and so on behaviour that is only damaging to society and has no upside but can be prevalent on various forums."

      That's not freedom of speech though, that's speech with selective censorship. The thing about truly free speech is that you don't get to decide what is and isn't "free." Either everything is or it isn't free speech.

      That being said, free speech in and of itself is an illusion since every culture censors speech either by discouraging things to the point where they might as well be outlawed or by actually restricting them to a certain degree. Natfka, as the creator and moderator of this blog has every right to restrict what's said in his comment section. People who yell about "free speech" are people who just want to have the freedom to say whatever they feel like without consequences and like to use the term free speech as a cover.

      Delete
    2. Maybe I should have qualified it with the 'concept of free speech' should never 'be allowed to cover' etc....

      Racism, homophobia, sexism and so on can be very clear cut quite often in terms of an individual stating that 'everyone who looks like or has this point of view acts a certain way or should be treated this way' and no law or doctrine should condone that, are murder or rape for example act's that should be allowed just because not to allow it might inhibit someones freedoms.
      Racism etc can all be just as damaging to society and individuals as a whole and needs to be stamped out wherever possible, it's idiotic at best and downright dangerous at worst.

      I do think that America's idea of free speech can be very worrying at times when it allows clearly dangerous view's to be heard without sanction, I'm not talking about left/right political views (though groups like the tea party are obviously insane and not a little ignorant) or disagreeing with laws and government but views that can directly damage another human being and are based off complete fallacies such as all people of a certain race are a particular way.

      Basically you should have the freedom to put your views across unless those views are clearly racist, homophobic, sexist or otherwise seriously abusive just for the sake of it.
      How that's decided and dealt with is another matter of course and means you need to have a trust in whoevers making the decisions, whether that be Natfka for this blog or the government at a wider level.

      Delete
  16. People often make the mistake that freedom of speech includes a right to be heard. On a private website, nothing could be further from the truth. It is solely Natka's discretion as to what gets published here, either as a story or comment.

    If you can't deal with that, there is an unlimited amount of webspace out there for you to run your own blog, and state your opinions that GW is evil, overpriced, and driving you to play Warmachine or Malifaux, etc., etc., etc.

    I agree the Deathwing and Ravenwing could well be good subjects for a supplement. It has been hinted at least in the background, that both of these outfits are actually significantly larger than a standard company, though, to handle all of the detachments they do to other Dark Angel formations.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Moderation would be very welcome. I understand that people are unhappy about their aspect of the hobby but we don't need to know how bad their codex is on every post.

    Thanks for all the news and interesting posts.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Completely with you on the comments! Your house your rules! I didn't realise people used "freedom of speech" to say whatever they want. It's still illegal to be racist for example, so common sense says they're wrong about that! Anyway, keep up the good work on the site: it's the only hobby one I check daily!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's not illegal to be racist, not sure where you got that idea. Courts, and various laws, have established that it is illegal to use race to discriminate in hiring practices, housing, etc. However, an individual cannot be prosecuted simply because he espouses racist ideology not matter how abhorrent his views may be. Not that any of that matters in this context, I agree that Natfka's house is Natfka's house and he can moderate the forum any way he wishes.

      Delete
  19. I can only applaud moderation to maintain civil discourse. Abusive behavior only detracts from a fine blog for the community like this.

    However I do hope that moderation won't become censorship of critical comments. A positive mindset is one thing, undue praise for disappointing products is another.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Be careful, there, Antario. One person's "disappointing product" could easily be someone else's "must have unit" or "best codex I've ever seen".

      Let's keep things positive, and cut out the bashing, rude behavior, and repetitive bitching for the sake of bitching...

      :-D

      Delete
  20. Well I am curious as to what you would like to see in a ravenwing and deathwing supplements. I have a few ideas of what I would like to see but I would like to discuss with you and others what they would like to see or think should be included

    ReplyDelete
  21. I second the motion of 'Your Blog, Your Rules'. Moderation here has always seemed fair.

    I'm loving the thought of a Genestealer cult codex supplement (Been planning a Tyranid Killteam but lacking shooty-ness)

    I'm not convinced Death/Ravenwing need supplements though. They're both lethal enough as it is - my regular opponent spams them both and they're very tough to deal with. Bikers capturing flags thanks to Sammael, with Termies raining in behind your defensive lines - and all undercosted, points-wise. I may be biased though, as I detest spammy armies.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Deathwing - undercosted? It's the best joke I ever heard.

      Delete
    2. I agree on Ravenwing and maybe Ravenwing/Deathwing combinations, but I would love a Deathwing supplement that doesn't require a 200 points special character to take.

      In my experience, pure Deathwing has dissapeared from competitive tables as they just don't have the body numbers to capture objectives and withstand heavy rate of fire (which is now the normal). Getting rid of the 200 point character would allow a few more bodies to be squeezed in which is really necessary at the moment!

      On another topic, a Genestealer Cult supplement would be great if it mixed IG and Nids as I want to expand into a Nid army but at the moment am finishing off my guard.

      If there was a transition unit, such as hybrids or cultists then i would be 100% up for that!

      Delete
    3. Now now, let's not go spreading the very negativity that spurred Natfka to moderate the comments section. If you need to voice your opinions about the DA book, I'm sure Bolter and Chainsword has a plethora of posts on the subject.

      Anyway. Just a note about your comment on armor, Natfka: Armor has gotten more fragile in 6th, that I will grant you, but it's also been given an offensive buff. Through removing the glancing hits table and changing to solely losing a hull point, vehicles now suffer much less from stun-locking than in 5th. On top of that, if your transports have extra armor, your opponent has to roll a 5-6 with an ap3 or worse weapon to actually stop them from moving, which is pretty good if you ask me. And since auto-cannons are so prevalent this edition (AEQs?), that's a nice way of balancing the fact that vehicles can wear out now. Even then, people aren't taking as much anti-tank as they used to, so while your transports can break now, they at least don't have all the melta, ever, to worry about. (For laughs: http://cdn.meme.li/i/p2yup.jpg).

      Delete
    4. Personally I'd like to see a Dark Angel's supplement concentrate on a successor chapter, the lack of generic 'Supreme Grand Master' and 'Grand Master' unit profiles does limit your options there a bit.
      Well, unless you don't mind doing 'counts as special characters' anyway.

      Delete
  22. You are doing a great work here, man. As for the idiotic comments, i think they show how stupid their author is , and so should be avaliable to all to be read, as long as the author is not anonymous.
    Anyway, you make the ruels in your blog, off course!

    ReplyDelete
  23. Just thinking out loud but what about an aurora chapter supplement with loads of tanks for an army

    ReplyDelete
  24. Really? People were using the argument of "Freedom of Speech" as an excuse to trash talk on your site?

    These are the kind of people that do not understand how those freedoms actually work. Your freedoms do not override my freedoms.

    If someone walks on to MY property with a gun, and i tell them to leave it in their car, or to leave MY property, i am not violating their 2nd amendment right. Their rights DO NOT override my rights.

    It's the exact same thing on YOUR site. Their rights DO NOT override your rights.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Natfka, you almost had me. Putting "Armoured Company" in the title made me think for a moment that a similarly named IG Codex supplement would have finally been confirmed by the rumours, and "FW isn't official" could no longer stop me from making a list containing nothing but muh tonks. Alas, cruel world, this was not to be. Yet.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yea, sorry, Presence of Faeit articles are always my weekly editorials, not rumors.

      Delete
  26. Censorship is violating the intent of the founding fathers, period. They most certainly intended people to be able to say what they want, when they want, how they want, and where they want. The phrase isn't "limitation of speech." It is freedom of speech. If you don't like what someone says, don't read it. That is your right. There is never a right to forcibly silence someone. Ever.

    ReplyDelete