|
BlackIronHeart posted:If I had to choose, I'd put the narrative above winning but if I can have my cake and eat it too, I'd like to win with a 'narrative correct' army, if that makes sense. My Ork horde in this campaign is supposed to be very Goff heavy so I use big mobs of boyz and walkers with little in the way of other vehicles. That said, I do own quite a few Trukks, a handful of Battlewagons and flyers so I've begun slowly introducing them into the campaign as Eldar are hard to catch. My opponent likes to only use painted minis and that hampers his army selection some but most of our narrative comes from the locations we're fighting in, not our army lists. Yeah I have a similar attitude. I like to play and I like to win but to still use armies that use interesting and fluffy units. For example, If I play with my death guard I'll put the mark of Nurgle on anything that can have it and try and keep my unit sizes to factors of seven.
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 00:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 03:53 |
|
|
 easiest terminators I ever assembled
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 00:53
|
|
|
Putting together the Tyranids half of the Deathstorm boxset. Holy crap painting these is going to be so weird compared to space marines.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 00:56
|
|
|
Cataphract posted:Yeah I have a similar attitude. I like to play and I like to win but to still use armies that use interesting and fluffy units. For example, If I play with my death guard I'll put the mark of Nurgle on anything that can have it and try and keep my unit sizes to factors of seven. I like the cut of your jib. That's how I did my Nurgle.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 01:05
|
|
|
Wait didn't we havea 40k house rules thread, I seem to remember that existing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 01:10
|
|
|
no it was a thread full of nerds petulant about 7th edition convinced they could make a better game than GW and it unsurprisingly lost steam after like 3 weeks
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 01:19
|
|
|
nah there's still a group of dudes having fun making some house rules to improve 7th, they just don't use that thread for it anymoreREAL MUSCLE MILK posted:no it was a thread full of nerds petulant about 7th edition convinced they could make a better game than GW and it unsurprisingly lost steam after like 3 weeks also lol
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 01:27
|
|
|
I think most of us could make a better game than gw. Problem is that there's no point in making house rules if you ever play in public. No tournament will ever use them and nobody is going to want to do a pickup game at a FLGS with custom rules.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 01:39
|
|
|
Master Twig posted:I think most of us THINK WE could make a better game than gw. Fixed that for you. Most people don't realize how actually terribly difficult it is to make a game of this scale. I know I certainly couldn't, from the ground up, design a better game on my own that rivals 40k. REAL MUSCLE MILK posted:no it was a thread full of nerds petulant about 7th edition convinced they could make a better game than GW and it unsurprisingly lost steam after like 3 weeks As far as that thread goes with the people butt hurt over 7th edition and going to make a better version... Design by committee NEVER works well.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 01:43
|
|
|
I had a super fun game that included a walking tyrant with a venom cannon, hormagaunts, a sporecyst, and a unit of genestealers. I am the anti-gamer.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 01:44
|
|
|
Ghost Hand posted:Fixed that for you. I should rephrase. If given the resources of GW, I bet we could. You do need to have a committee to make it work, or else it becomes self serving (if I tried on my own, guaranteed I'd subconsciously make Tyranids overpowered.) To make a game of this scale work it takes a lot of playtesting and communication and player involvement. With all the resources GW has, there's no excuse for the game to be as unbalanced as it is and I honestly believe I could do better if in their position.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 01:54
|
|
|
Bolter Action would be cool and if you start with incremental changes from existing Bolt Action rules it would probably not be too hard for a single person or like a 2-man team to work on it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 01:56
|
|
|
Mange Mite posted:Bolter Action would be cool and if you start with incremental changes from existing Bolt Action rules it would probably not be too hard for a single person or like a 2-man team to work on it. I've already started work on it with a couple of nice people, alongside my entirely separate wholesale 40k rules project. It's like some kind of addiction.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 02:01
|
|
|
Master Twig posted:I should rephrase. If given the resources of GW, I bet we could. You do need to have a committee to make it work, or else it becomes self serving (if I tried on my own, guaranteed I'd subconsciously make Tyranids overpowered.) I think you would be better off with 2 to 3 designers rather than a committee. Every time I have seen someone try to organize something to make everyone happy - you end up flailing and failing, and wind up with no one happy. This is why you have positions such as "Lead Designer". People bring ideas forward and the lead designer has final say. I'm actually referring to the CORE rules as opposed to adding things like the various armies. I think each of those could be designed separately but with oversight. Again, from the lead designer... I agree GW, with their resources, SHOULD have a better and more balanced game. (Regardless of difficulty). However, I strongly believe that it is a LOT more difficult than most critics give it credit for. If it was that easy, every gamer who is a "wannabe" game designer would have an incredibly successful Kickstarter out there.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 02:04
|
|
|
Ghost Hand posted:I agree GW, with their resources, SHOULD have a better and more balanced game. (Regardless of difficulty). However, I strongly believe that it is a LOT more difficult than most critics give it credit for. If it was that easy, every gamer who is a "wannabe" game designer would have an incredibly successful Kickstarter out there. Yeah, very much agreed. It is actually REALLY hard to make a game interesting, balanced, and simple enough to be playable; anyone who's ever read through a fandex can probably attest to how awful most results end up being. That being said, however, GW does a pretty terrible job of it as well. Given that their designers have years- or decades- of experience with the system from an internal perspective, there's no excuse for the sort of rules they regularly crank out (e.g. Wave Serpents, Firebase Cadre, Transcendent C'tan, etc.) The fact that they seem to be actively opposed to getting any kind of input from a source outside their hand-picked playgroup of casual gamers certainly can't be helping things any at all.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 02:10
|
|
|
Master Twig posted:I should rephrase. If given the resources of GW, I bet we could. I'm not so sure. Many have tried, and I don't know of any who have succeeded. The Mantic games are solid, but too simplistic. WMH is good, but falls apart at larger scales. Spartan games are even more random. DSC is supposed to have some pretty big balance issues and a lot of trap units. Look over at the roleplaying side of the industry and none of the big companies do particularly good jobs. Look at the 5Es of D&D and SR for just the two most recent examples. Making a good game is hard. Board game companies have the most success, but board games are closed systems with a lot less variables, and you still end up with stuff like AH more often than not. MTG may be the one truly well made big name "trad" game, and it has a ton of resources behind it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 03:08
|
|
|
Ghost Hand posted:As far as that thread goes with the people butt hurt over 7th edition and going to make a better version... Design by committee NEVER works well. Agreed. That thread was a train wreck from the moment it started. Design by committee doesn't work, but you *do* need people to playtest what gets designed.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 03:14
|
|
|
Master Twig posted:I think most of us could make a better game than gw. Problem is that there's no point in making house rules if you ever play in public. No tournament will ever use them and nobody is going to want to do a pickup game at a FLGS with custom rules. As someone who designs and runs day long mega-games for 500+ people it's loving hard to have a rule set that is fair and balanced that simultaneously serves the spergs and their hypothetical scenario bullshit yet simple enough for newbies to understand and absorb. And at the end of the day there's always someone who thinks something is bullshit... This is the game by the way http://www.zedtown.com
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 03:40
|
|
|
Perhaps a better statement would be "given a look at the current state of 40K, most of us could probably iterate it into a better version much better, or at least more quickly, than GW." That's a much smaller task than coming up with an entirely new system ex nihilo, and more importantly it's all anybody sane is asking GW to do--nobody wants them to completely rebuild it as a d20 system using the Nethack character creation rules, or whatever else might serve as a strawman of unreasonableness.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 03:48
|
|
|
JerryLee posted:Perhaps a better statement would be "given a look at the current state of 40K, most of us could probably iterate it into a better version much better, or at least more quickly, than GW." This is a much better way of saying what I was going for. Yeah, I definitely couldn't write a better system from scratch, but there's things I know would improve the game if implemented.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 03:55
|
|
|
Cataphract posted:This is the game by the way Holy poo poo this is awesome 
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 03:58
|
|
|
Ghost Hand posted:Most people don't realize how actually terribly difficult it is to make a game of this scale. I know I certainly couldn't, from the ground up, design a better game on my own that rivals 40k. It really isn't. 90% is not reinventing the wheel. Move your mans: check. Roll dice to shoot: check. Games Workshop just farts out Codex books without playtesting them or taking even a passing moment to wonder how certain rules will interact badly. They did tighten up the rules considerably in 7th edition, though. I actually like how much hand holding they do in the core rules, reiterating the same concept several times and pointing out specific wrong examples. Helps keep the autists in check.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 04:04
|
|
|
JerryLee posted:Perhaps a better statement would be "given a look at the current state of 40K, most of us could probably iterate it into a better version much better, or at least more quickly, than GW." This is better, but I'm still not sure I agree. I'm not sure the problem is with the designers, but with their design process. They could probably improve a great deal by expanding their playtesting pool and hiring some mathematicians to check and tweak numbers. Post 9-11 User posted:It really isn't. 90% is not reinventing the wheel. Move your mans: check. Roll dice to shoot: check. How far do your mans move in one phase and how big is the table and how long do you want the two sides to maneuver beforep engaging and what about different types of mans and terrain? What dice do you roll and how many and what number do you need and when can your mans shoot and what happens to your mans when they're shot? And who goes first and do they move and shoot all their mans first or do the players switch off in some way? There's a reason 40K lumbers along with the same basic skeleton inherited from WHFB back in '86. Just coming up with decent resolution mechanics is a lot of work.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 04:20
|
|
|
Besides the normal GW fluff, is there any word/rumors if there will be new rules for these traits?
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 04:24
|
|
|
Got some more painting done this weekend, so posting the results, per ANAmal's request. This time it's more Thousands Sons. Almost done with the first squad, plus I finished the dreadnought and the first of the terminators. Mostly done in poor lighting with a lovely camera: Squad (8/9 done):     The Rhino:   The Dreadnought:   Terminator: 
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 04:53
|
|
|
REAL MUSCLE MILK posted:no it was a thread full of nerds petulant about 7th edition convinced they could make a better game than GW and it unsurprisingly lost steam after like 3 weeks Which is different from this thread because
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 04:58
|
|
|
TheChirurgeon posted:Got some more painting done this weekend, so posting the results, per ANAmal's request. This time it's more Thousands Sons. Almost done with the first squad, plus I finished the dreadnought and the first of the terminators. Mostly done in poor lighting with a lovely camera: yes
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 05:00
|
|
|
Ghost Hand posted:I agree GW, with their resources, SHOULD have a better and more balanced game. (Regardless of difficulty). However, I strongly believe that it is a LOT more difficult than most critics give it credit for. If it was that easy, every gamer who is a "wannabe" game designer would have an incredibly successful Kickstarter out there. PeterWeller posted:Making a good game is hard. This is all very true. I worked in games for 4 years before burning out and everybody thinks they can make games better than you. Half the time your audience doesn't even know what it wants and you spend valuable time guessing and or figuring it out. That said, there are industry practices GW could commit to doing in order to create better products. They don't.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 05:08
|
|
|
BULBASAUR posted:This is all very true. I worked in games for 4 years before burning out and everybody thinks they can make games better than you. Half the time your audience doesn't even know what it wants and you spend valuable time guessing and or figuring it out. There are also plenty of ways to clean up the game if your primary focus isn't moving product through rules. One of the big problems with the Space Marines as a faction is that they have too many units that do too many things, so you have lots of units that are basically obsolete because they do the same thing or serve the same role as another unit, with only small differences. Part of this is a result of releasing new units with every codex, so 20+ years later you're left with a mess where you have 15 units whose job it is to fight in close combat, some of which are just better, more expensive versions of each other. This is why the Tau and Necron codexes feel more coherent from a design standpoint than most--with clear strengths and weaknesses--simply because they are the newest factions.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 05:27
|
|
|
Bulbasaur and The Chirurgeon both make good points, but the latter wins because that hawk headed terminator totally loving owns. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 05:41
|
|
|
Yeah it seriously owns. If I was making a 'Merica themed army it's the only head I would use
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 05:54
|
|
|
CyberLord XP posted:Holy poo poo this is awesome here's guncam footage from a guy who played this year. http://youtu.be/3AuEm8ZRZZs
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 05:55
|
|
|
GW can do balance. Fantasy is in a decent place right now. It's not perfectly balanced, but most armies are very close together with only a few outliers. I don't know how they keep missing the target in 40k. And honestly, balance isn't the worst thing about GW rules. Ambiguity and bad wording and such is way too prevalent in current books, you'd think this was their first time writing rules. They should really look into hiring a specific person in charge of rules management, a la MTG.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 05:57
|
|
|
Slimnoid posted:Which is different from this thread because THIS thread didn't lose steam in 3 weeks. More of a slow burn.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 06:53
|
|
|
Ojetor posted:GW can do balance. Fantasy is in a decent place right now. It's not perfectly balanced, but most armies are very close together with only a few outliers. I don't know how they keep missing the target in 40k. Army by army balance isn't really the problem. "Most armies are very close together with only a few outliers" is something you can say about both games. The real problem is that whole types of units are weak, which is also something you can say about both games.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 07:18
|
|
|
Slimnoid posted:Which is different from this thread because this thread has people complaining about people being petulant too
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 07:22
|
|
|
Cataphract posted:As someone who designs and runs day long mega-games for 500+ people it's loving hard to have a rule set that is fair and balanced that simultaneously serves the spergs and their hypothetical scenario bullshit yet simple enough for newbies to understand and absorb. And at the end of the day there's always someone who thinks something is bullshit... This is so freakin badass. I wish I knew more about this when we met so we could discuss it at length.... TheChirurgeon posted:
This is awesome in a class all its own! Well done man.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 07:23
|
|
|
Well I done did it. I'm hopping on this 30k bandwagon. I ordered the the 2 mini rulebooks,the bundle deal that is a tac squad and rhino, and Lorgar. Now to wait till it all arrives and for my wallet to recover.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 07:53
|
|
|
The Sisko posted:Well I done did it. I'm hopping on this 30k bandwagon. I ordered the the 2 mini rulebooks,the bundle deal that is a tac squad and rhino, and Lorgar. Now to wait till it all arrives and for my wallet to recover. Welcome to the fold Word Brother!
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 08:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 03:53 |
|
|
One-of-us one-of-us
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 08:20
|
|