|
Saint Drogo posted:lol they don't respond to people who don't actually play the game going THIS IS GONNA BE lovely ARE YOU SCARED ARE YOU MAD YET BE MAD Critical thinking is nice, perhaps you should use some and not just mindlessly follow the whine-train on the internet. No, GWs rules aren't perfect, far from it (heck, just take a look at any rules-thread on any forum, can't find any praise of GW there). But to just whine for whining's sake is not very constructive and SA is for constructive discussions.
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 21:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 07:56 |
|
|
Safety Factor posted:SA is for constructive discussions. source your quotes
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 21:58
|
|
|
Safety Factor posted:Do you have more info than us? If that's the case please share, because so far I have seen just a mere handful of rule concepts from GW and most of those were in 40k 2nd edition long long before AoS was even thought of. 40k is a copy/paste of WHFB with a few extra rules added on (like vehicles, expanded melee and such) from the very start back in the day and has since evolved into what we have today. Through an ancient and secret technique known as PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE INFORMING FUTURE PREDICTIONS, I can reasonably expect it will be bad. Pretend I quoted the 40k posters who came into the WHFB thread during the Nigmocalypse to say our game that they didn't play getting turned into a steaming pile of poo poo was in fact a good thing, and furthermore,
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 22:00
|
|
|
 okay so 'don't respond' was a p high bar to set for tradgames spergs, you know what I mean.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 22:01
|
|
|
This week-end I put 400 euros' worth of Space Wolves models still on sprue on Ebay. I don't even know if I will ever paint the ones already assembled and primed or if I should discount them to get rid of them too. The idea of painting just one wolf pelt more fills me with existential dread. That was my story, awuuuuuu
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 22:03
|
|
|
You could use them in Infinity or the anticipated Scrappers game like I do. Of course, that's assuming that's your whole collection. Skirmish games don't really need many models, thankfully.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 22:03
|
|
|
hey guys whats going on in here
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 22:07
|
|
|
BULBASAUR posted:hey guys whats going on in here Hi, we're appreciating the wednesday frog https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3765732 and watching videos of cute opossums eating 'naners
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 22:08
|
|
|
love and friendship?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 22:08
|
|
|
So my 2 cents on the rumored changes. The movement values; I dig, ALOT. I think this gets rid of some of the rules bloat and really makes each unit more individual. The "rend" or "armor reduction" mechanic from 2nd and AOS; I also dig. It means 2+ / 1+ armor saves actually mean something, giving each gun that needs it a rend mechanic makes even the heavy bolter a valid and dangerous weapon on the table top again! It also means the 3+ save of a space marine will in fact be useful again (I think.) Charging going first? Nids and Orks shall reign once again! (good!) I am glad to see melee getting a much deserved buff, overwatchs make shooting strong and compensate for weak melee, where as the "charging goes first" means that you are forced into tactical decisions regarding your placement and options. The morale being battle shock......This is interesting, again I tend to like it, the Gw website said it very well "its not the "all or nothing system of now" or something akin to it. Imagine that this balances out "And they shall know no fear" honestly, maybe something like "units with this rule reduce battleshock loss by 1" and fearless will be "reduce by 2" or something like that. Overall....Good start, Cautiously optimistic.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 22:09
|
|
|
BULBASAUR posted:hey guys whats going on in here 
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 22:12
|
|
|
ATSKNF and the continued positive reinforcement that marines and players get is why morale won't ever be a useful mechanic in 40k game design.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 22:12
|
|
|
Safety Factor posted:So my 2 cents on the rumored changes. 'm tentatively excited by these changes. I've played variants of the rules they've mentioned in AoS and Emissary has given a fantastic break-down how it works. A key element is the sheer speed of the games compared to 40k, game turns are much faster. It sounds like people are concerned about the morale rules but what we have seen in AoS is a wide-range of ways to limit this effect. Command abilities from characters, unit size can increase leadership, certain banners in units. In 40k that could translate in a variety of ways: fearless could ignore battleshock; stubborn could count as half the models lost etc. Combat with chargers striking first is also a big deal. Assault units, despoilers and possibly even destroyers could see a huge advantage from this. Initiative would still be important from the second round, and you would be more likely to still be in a second round of combat due to the morale changes. However, that initial charge would seriously impact on the defenders chance to strike back - combat of Astrates versus Astartes would now be based on out-manoeuvring your opponent rather than luckier dice. Saving throw modifiers is a lot more interesting than AP. Now your armour is more graded rather than, it's working or blown through. As someone who has played since Rogue Trader, and lots of other systems that use a similar mechanism, it allows a finer differentiation of weapon. Bolters may be -1 but heavy bolters may be -2, lasguns might have no modifiers if they follow a similar system as before. Thicker armour like terminator plate may ignore modifiers of -1 or -2 and have a fixed minimum save - once again a system that has been tried, and works in AoS. I'm hoping cover is a modifier for 'to-hit' rolls as suddenly it becomes more tactical. Do you move your squad out into the open and hope their armour is good enough or do you lurk in cover and become harder to hit? I also found it funny that GW were talking about thematic armies that give bonuses - we already have that in 30k. They're called Rites of War and Legiones Astartes rules. My main hope is that these rules reward an infantry-based army that needs multiple tools (assault, tactical, defensive) in order to be successful. I think Shadow Wars: Armageddon will reveal a lot of the future development of 40k.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 22:21
|
|
|
From what they have mentioned so far, I think 8th will be something really neat. But then again, I really like Age of Sigmar.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 22:37
|
|
|
BULBASAUR posted:hey guys whats going on in here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lffg88WDRg
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 22:37
|
|
Lord_Hambrose posted:From what they have mentioned so far, I think 8th will be something really neat. But then again, I really like Age of Sigmar. I really don't care for the AOS rule set, but I will say I think it'll be significantly less jarring for 40K players to go from their rules to something closer to AOS than it was for Fantasy players.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 22:40
|
|
|
Imagine a new edition of 40k that is napoleonic rank and file battles. It would be just like the clone wars.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 22:42
|
|
|
And They Shall Know No Fear Of Getting Sigmar'd is a army wide rule for 40K hams
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 22:42
|
|
|
Turns out bad companies can change and do good things. If only the Death thread posters were so flexible. REEEEE GW WILL ALWAYS BE BAD REEEEEEE
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 22:44
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:Imagine a new edition of 40k that is napoleonic rank and file battles. It would be just like the clone wars. I am ready.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 22:46
|
|
|
Skinty McEdger posted:I really don't care for the AOS rule set, but I will say I think it'll be significantly less jarring for 40K players to go from their rules to something closer to AOS than it was for Fantasy players. May be a bit of a counter view, but I enjoy 40ks complexity over other systems. I agree that at entry level its good to have a simplified set of rules, but tbh thats achieved by simply limiting what the beginner learns with. The additional special rules, customisation, buffs/debuffs and situational things such as the cover system, nightfighting etc are all what separates it from other games. Yes there are always kinks and issues, but I do honestly love a decent level of complexity (although if we could centralise all the rules in one all available digital edition THAT'd be helpful!) I do understand this possibly isn't the majority vote though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 22:50
|
|
|
I just don't think at the end of the day fiddling with random poo poo in the core is going to save anything since the core 40k rules have been pretty serviceable if not clunky and poorly put together since 5th. The issue is in the vast amounts of extra rules and free poo poo granted to you by formations and erroneous non-codex rules. All these extra things are just going to bog the game down and make it even more of a slog unless they seriously look at cutting down the amount of figures on the table. Like, Bolt Action has a lot of these things, but it's also using about half the amount of figures and is a better written rule set with much quicker pace than 40k. It also doesn't help that the actual tactical choices in a game of 40k are extremely hampered by just how little space is left on a 6x4 table. The table size for the game was standardized in 2nd ed back when your average game was the size of the modern start collecting boxes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 22:52
|
|
|
TTerrible posted:Turns out bad companies can change and do good things. If only the Death thread posters were so flexible. *autistic hissing*
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 22:53
|
|
|
I'm personally looking forward to changes at GW that are going to make it a cool and good company superior to it's competition like: 1. Hmm. 2. Th- wait, no. 3. Give me a minute.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 22:54
|
|
|
spectralent posted:I'm personally looking forward to changes at GW that are going to make it a cool and good company superior to it's competition like: Friday Night Warhammer. Promo dice and exclusive foil unit cards
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 22:56
|
|
|
spectralent posted:I'm personally looking forward to changes at GW that are going to make it a cool and good company superior to it's competition like: GW sculpts are better on average than other wargames miniatures companies.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 22:55
|
|
|
nopantsjack posted:Also can we talk about what kinda sigmarification to expect from 8th? If you think AoS has too few choices to make in a turn, you are either a superior human being than the people you regularly play. Or more likely you haven't given it a proper go with the correct respect. AoS is mechanically a vastly superior game to 40k. If you enjoy tactical flexibility and decision making you should cheer for any rule ports from AoS. The movement phase alone makes 40k's movement phase look plain and binary. 40k has become too tied to the narrative of dice rolling, and lost its grasp on the reality. The dice are simply a tool of the mechanics and not the mechanicsics themselves. Rather than have to consult a dice roll chart to determine how effective a weapon is against a target. You build these effects into the system of unit interactions outside the domain of stat comparison. In AoS a sword is more effective agaisnt a orc than a stormcast because the orc has less armour and less wounds. These means mundane damage is a more heavy threat. Not because of a 1-10 scale system predicated on a d6. Don't be surprised to see AoS mechanics show up in other company's games over the next 3-5 years.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 22:57
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:Friday Night Warhammer. Promo dice and exclusive foil unit cards Oh yeah that organised play system they announced and are supporting! That'd be great. I guess they have a cosplay competition now which is kind of like supporting their products in stores? tallkidwithglasses posted:GW sculpts are better on average than other wargames miniatures companies. Really subjective. GW have released like maybe three models since sigmar that don't look like rear end, IMO. Unless you're including, like, absolutely every miniatures company including the guys who're casting dumpy potato men out of pure lead in 40 year old moulds in which case sure. GW are at least doing well in eliminating mould defects recently on models I've seen; they've generally been totally free of flash and mould lines. But the actual models they make... Yeah, not convinced.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 22:59
|
|
|
spectralent posted:Really subjective. GW have released like maybe three models since sigmar that don't look like rear end, IMO. Unless you're including, like, absolutely every miniatures company including the guys who're casting dumpy potato men out of pure lead in 40 year old moulds in which case sure. Enjoyment of things is subjective and it seems a little spergy to try to come up with some sort of KPI to analyze the objective best way to spend disposable income???
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 23:08
|
|
|
Maximise grog/hr at all times.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 23:10
|
|
|
Mango Polo posted:If you think AoS has too few choices to make in a turn, you are either a superior human being than the people you regularly play. Or more likely you haven't given it a proper go with the correct respect. There's a bunch of stuff you can decide in AoS, but the issue is it's way outweighed by random variation in a couple of big things and that some choices matter way more than others. Double-turns are game-ruiningly bad, and I've seen several armies where I'm just wondering why they're even played because people just straight walk over them. Artillery is particularly bad. The issues with GW's cargo cult design are, I feel, most emblematic with the removal of charts you mentioned. You put forward sound logic; it's true that you can build threat and vulnerability into the individual models, and that removing a chart speeds things up. But why keep hit and damage? You've got a single "threat" value, there, that's largely independent of everything else (there's some "reroll 1s to hit" type stuff, but that's not incompatible with a single dice roll for attack). All it does is prolong resolution and increase the randomness of a given number of attacks.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 23:10
|
|
|
tallkidwithglasses posted:Enjoyment of things is subjective and it seems a little spergy to try to come up with some sort of KPI to analyze the objective best way to spend disposable income??? I mean, if you want to phrase "spending money on good looking models instead of bad ones" that way, sure, but that just seems like common sense. TTerrible posted:Maximise grog/hr at all times. Also this but unironically.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 23:13
|
|
|
spectralent posted:I mean, if you want to phrase "spending money on good looking models instead of bad ones" that way, sure, but that just seems like common sense. It's why we buy Games Workshop.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 23:13
|
|
|
spectralent posted:There's a bunch of stuff you can decide in AoS, but the issue is it's way outweighed by random variation in a couple of big things and that some choices matter way more than others. Double-turns are game-ruiningly bad, and I've seen several armies where I'm just wondering why they're even played because people just straight walk over them. Artillery is particularly bad.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 23:16
|
|
|
Safety Factor posted:We will all see the finished rulebook sooner or later, and I can see no evidence yet that it will just be AoS ported over to 40k. Take a company like Blizzard, who constantly uses their experiences from their other franchises in their franchises (heck, WoW is getting more and more Diablo-esque every patch it seems). AoS has been an experience for GW, they have learned some things along the way and I would be more surprised if they didn't use their experiences from AoS in 40k. Does that mean they will just port it over as is? Not likely. Sure. I'm just not convinced given GW's track record they're really going to sit and do a lot of soul searching about what really needs to go in a ruleset and what's just sacred cows they won't kill and stuff that seems "fun". I mean, this is the company that made both LotR and Epic and did nothing with either of them. Who was responsible for LotR and Epic, anyway? I have a weird feeling they're not at GW anymore, either way, but I wouldn't be surprised if they were at mantic or something.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 23:21
|
|
|
Safety Factor posted:AoS has been an experience for GW, they have learned some things along the way and I would be more surprised if they didn't use their experiences from AoS in 40k. Does that mean they will just port it over as is? Not likely. Age of Sigmar (AoS). Free rules. Everyone rejoiced and there wasn't a word of descent on the matter whilst the flame-wars went on with other focus. This to me was actually a shame. Something no one suggested was an issue is actually one of the major problems with AoS. "The background is shallow" is the chorus we hear. The depth and soul of a gaming system is the cool background that makes the great miniatures we have painstakingly assembled and painted, come to life. How much cooler is it to have Magnus the Red leading a Warband against Space Wolves and settling old grudges, rather than generic big plastic monsters firing magic at generic armoured space knights? Well the crux of my post is thus; the free rules means players download the elements they need to play and have all the reading material they need. They don't buy background books they don't need. Given the choice between expensive books and new models and most folk go with the later. The proof is in the sales. If people don't have these books they won't be reading the amazing background material we all love. It'll be the unknown army of blue painted plastic vs red version. So I am of the opinion we need Codex books with rules and background to ensure the new players are as enamoured as ourselves. We don't want to be 5 years down the line and all the new players haven't a clue why Blood Angels have the Death Company, what their home planet is like or why the Dark Angels have Deathwing in different coloured armour.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 23:27
|
|
|
Doesn't look like they are moving away from core issues such as overpriced starting costs, rampant interfaction imbalances, and a ruleset that can't really pick whether it's skirmish or massive battles. And we are still in the dark regarding their proverbial love of loving rolling bucketloads for everything.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 23:31
|
|
|
Mango Polo posted:Age of Sigmar (AoS). Free rules. Everyone rejoiced and there wasn't a word of descent on the matter whilst the flame-wars went on with other focus. In the end, they have to keep various sorts of players/readers interested. On one side, they have people like me, adults approaching middle age who have been aware of the setting for decades and appreciate the subtlety, the darkness, the tragedy, the almost-midnight feel without being as deeply involved with the hobby at this stage in our lives. On another side, they have the youngest hobby adherents like my five year old, who is working on her very first Battle for Vedros Marines, and who needs to have a story that she can comprehend with the characters who can be seen as less morally ambiguous, and who can be categorized easily into good/evil categories. And then, you have everything and everyone in between, including people who want to emphasize the darkness and the (for the lack of better word) edginess of the setting, fans of the characters who want to see their favorite faction triumph, serious tournament gamers who are more concerned about how the meta plays out, and what not. The real challenge for GW is to do something that satisfies all, or at least most types of gamers, and that in itself is a Sisyphean task. I choose to see the campaign books and the codices as something between official histories taught in the Imperial schools and legends whispered in the shadow - primarily based on truth, but with a healthy amount of heroic embellishment to make the chosen factions look better, to make their defeated adversaries seem that much more terrible, or to create propaganda describing a fearsome enemy. I choose to see BL novels as being the "true" narrative of what had actually happened, as opposed to what made it into the official histories, or what became hearsay after being distorted by time and in retelling. Personally, I have been pretty happy with what they have been doing recently, but then, your mileage may vary, and there is nothing wrong with that. There is a part of me that does want to see the good guys (using the term very loosely) win, but I know that it would be the end of our favorite setting, so the best we can hope for is that they continue fighting, and that the midnight remains minutes, or seconds away in all perpetuity.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 23:35
|
|
|
E: ^ Subtility. Sure. Like uuuuuuh. Wait. The fascist parody that's now played dead straight? You even refered to litteral Space Nazi as the good guys. Think about that.Mango Polo posted:Age of Sigmar (AoS). Free rules. Everyone rejoiced and there wasn't a word of descent on the matter whilst the flame-wars went on with other focus. GW fluff is (now) trash, though. Murderfang, carrier of the Murderclaws, possessor of the Murderlust rule, from the planet Omnicide? Ferrus Manus from the Iron Hands? The Space Wolves in general? And beside, why do you give a poo poo whether or not the guy in front of you know the minute details of the army you are fielding, opposite to say, him being a good sport and good opponent? Iceclaw fucked around with this message at 23:40 on Mar 29, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 23:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 07:56 |
|
|
Iceclaw posted:And beside, why do you give a poo poo whether or not the guy in front of you know the minute details of the army you are fielding, opposite to say, him being a good sport and good opponent? Did you miss a most important part? Each faction has a binder/folder/something to keep RULES sheets in. These new books that I am proposing would have removable RULES that REPLACE/ADD/PDATE existing rules sheets. Leaving players free to take their rules around, and leave the fluff at home. Sure, restrict this method to codexes, so players see it more as an investment, and less as a chore to stay up to date. If we are going the "free rules" why not use White Dwarf, with removable pages to allow for codex updates instead? I'm not saying many many books to carry, but books that collect new releases in them, and provide pages for a living, GW supported codex. One that moves on EVERY edition change, and makes it easier and cheaper for both GW and players, thus leaving more money available for models/paints/etc.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2017 23:42
|
|