Tuesday, August 17, 2010

Counts as: Counts as annoying or counts as awesome!

I know that both OST and my self are currently working on a counts as army. I'm not sure if it is because of our recent dive into the world of counts as here as DFG making me more aware of it, but I've seen a few others cropping up. Is this because of hard economic times coupled with GW's price bump that we're making armies to use under multiple codex's? Is it because the hobby side is picking up? Is everyone just lining up their winter project? Over all I'm wondering, is the counts-as idea growing?

With that my follow up to the blog community is this: How do you feel about the counts as? Do you think it's awesome and great for the game? Or do you hate it when that crazy army shows up and you can't keep straight what unit is what because it's so obscure? Do you think it's just a dick way of saying 'proxy'? Tell OST and myself how you feel about our recent venture into the world of counts-as. I'm interested to get a gauge of how people will feel when my space marines on dinosaurs show up as space wolves or when OST's orks are rocking a 3+ save.


  1. As long as the models are roughly the same dimensions and you don't try any shannanigins with cover or line of sight because of the way its modeled then counts as is a nice way to mix it up a bit and do some very original modeling.

  2. 100% agree with SeerK.
    Playing a well painted standard army is cool. Playing something with 98% conversions and a different outlook on a theme is also cool, as long as general doucheyness is avoided by the player.

  3. I love counts-as, when it's (IMO) well done.

    I did an article a while back about WYSIWYG vs. counts as vs. proxies:


    also a number of other counts-as posts.

  4. I rely on counts-as in both WH40k and WHFB to field models and armies that GW has decided to phase out and do away with. Counts-as lets me run the models I have collected and painted, and not have to toss them all in the bin and start over completely.

    In other words, I'm a big fan, so long as its properly done with no intent for in-game benefits.

  5. If I didn't have the 'Counts-As' rule... I wouldn't have ANY legal army to play :P I model WAY too much. The biggest key for me is to always make sure that my opponent is clear and fine with what I'm using... I'm also a stickler for using GW and Scratch-built parts only... no mixing game systems!!!

  6. I love the idea of "counts as." It allows the hobbyist to do what he wants but doesnt constrict him financially. I play a counts as army. My chaos marines count as plague marines for tournaments and what I want when playing at the FLGS or club. Power armour is power armour! A carnifex head on a base is not a carnifex digging /burrowing out of the ground

  7. Counts as is generally fine so long as the units are clearly defined. I should be able to tell your "Tactical Marines" from your "Devastators," or your "Nobz" from your "Boyz," or whatever.

    Being roughly the same size is also good- generally speaking, the same base size is good enough. Height/profile changes aren't a big issue, since being taller or shorter has both advantages and disadvantages, so long as your aren't a melee-exclusive unit (Daemons, Genestealers, etc.) Even base size changes are fine so long as you're not taking particular advantage of it, like deploying that extra 1" out of transports or such.

  8. I think I fall into the same boat as most people. If it's obviously different, there shouldn't be too much problem. My Big Mek has a flamer, but nobody cares that I use it as a burna. My first Flash Gitz has a pair of shoota-pistol-thingies that count as Snazzguns. My usual group even lets me use a dozer blade with lots of spikes count as a deffrolla. They're very easy to spot, so everyone's chill with it.

  9. I'm all for the "Counts As" rule! Providing the model(s) in question are able to accurately represent what they are meant to be, then I don't see an issue with it at all. It enables the more imaginative/talented hobbyists out there to come out with some really cool, unconventional additions to their armies. Or in some cases some really unique looking armies.

    As far as I'm concerned, its only a problem when it's abused to enable things like a Coke can as a Carnifex...

  10. I'm glad to see the sampling of people are all for it. I love counts as when it comes to promoting the hobby side of the game. I'm all about it.

    I think the line between proxy and counts as wasn't clearly defined in my original post. What I ment by counts as is things like themed armies, like OST making the orks, counts-as, space wolves or over at FTW the looted guard list converted to be orky but still guard.

    Things like when someone is play testing a list, I'm all for proxies. 40k is expensive. If you think a unit is awesome on paper and want to try it out its crazy that you'll have to spend 40-100$ to get the models just to find out they don't fit your style.

    As far as tournament play though...I get a little elitist. It either better be what it is or at least be theme or look like you put a little work in it. To me 40k is a vanity. Its expensive in both time and money. Someone can spend 400+ dollars on an army. I like to see other people take pride in what they're doing and what they have. I think it pushes people to immerse themselves fully into the game side and the hobby side.

    Now, just to make it clear, I'm not saying I'd knock points off of someone's score for not having stunning models. I wouldn't refuse to play someone because of how their army looks. I'm only saying I like playing against armies people take pride in. If your 4 year old painted and converted your army with poster paint and playdough and YOU think its awesome, I think its awesome too.

  11. As long as I can tell whats what I don't mind, only if my opponent gains an advantage because I'm confused will cause me to get upset..

    Although I am playing a lion themed Space Wolf Army...so I'm not the most impartial of voters.

  12. I think "count as" is fine as long as scale is maintained, its done with intent and purpose, and is consistent across the army. If its standing in for something else, it needs to have similar size and proportions... calling a nurgling sized model a tyranid warrior would be unfair. The intent and purpose of "count as" should be something that contributes uniqueness to the hobby; using "count as" to play necrons as marines because you don't like the codex and you're too cheap and is mostly distracting, one game or a couple games and its a proxie, more games in the name of "count as" is just poor spirited to the hobby. Unique contributions come in the form of being the Adeptus Mechanicus army or being a unique Xenos army, or anything else that isn't supported. The final part, consistency, it is important that "count as" armies have the same degree of identity where weapons and armor can be identified by relative appearance even if not by immediate apparentness; it doesn't have to look like terminator, just the most heavily armored model; they don't have to look like plasma pistols, but all your model equipped with "plasma rayguns" should look like they have the same weapon.

    It all comes down to fairness and "doing no harm" by seeking advantage.

  13. I think as most others have posted here ... that as long as stuff is roughly equivalent in size and is WYSIWYG ... go for it! What I'm seeing lately that pisses me off and is just lame is ... "Oh my Black Templars "count as" blood angels ... or my Crimson Fists are blood angels" that is stupid and I wouldn't really want to play against someone doing that. Repaint your army if your to cheap to buy a new one ... or sell it on ebay and start over ... I have no sympathy for people who are such power gamers that they use codex standard marine armies that are undeniably Ultramarines, Crimson Fists, Imperial Fists, etc. as the flavor of the month new marine list. Its one thing if you have some successor chapter with its own paint scheme (always a benefit of running one of those eh!) ... but if your running Ultramarines as Blood Angels ... its just plain confusing and really is a disservice to the hobby. Just my pet peeve ... given that there are many people out there who could care less about the fluff anymore and who run unpainted stuff forever ... I'm sure may will disagree with me.