|
Moola posted:warmachine doesnt sound fun
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 21:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 22:55 |
|
|
Moola posted:warmachine doesnt sound fun I thought I saw you playing DOTA on steam before, but it's basically that in minis form.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 21:50
|
|
|
You should follow my motto: just say no-ta to DOTA.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 21:53
|
|
|
Yeah warmahordes isn't great. I play because some of my closest and oldest friends got into it but I wouldn't seek it out normally. The community is also disproportionately filled with rules lawyering rear end in a top hat types imo.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 21:59
|
|
|
anti_strunt posted:If I were to play with pirated rules using Chinese recasts painted with Vallejo, would I even be playing 40K...? Works for a huge number of us.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 22:05
|
|
|
Much of the time taken in a 40K game depends on a) the armies being played, and b) the people playing them. If Ham #1 plays Orks and Ham #2 plays IG, the rules mechanics pretty much ensure that Ham #1 will bring a gently caress-ton of Ork Boyz and Ham #2 will bring a gently caress-ton of template weapons. This will lead Ham #1 to be meticulous in how he spreads out his dudes during the Movement Phase which will in turn lead Ham #2 to be meticulous in how he places his templates in the Shooting Phase. Gods help them if either one is bringing gear that allows for re-rolls of any kind, because that poo poo's just going to get onerous. But hey, if you play a game of Grey Knights versus Imperial Knights and there's only a grand total of like 15 models on the board, yeah, it'll probably go quickly. 30K goes quickly because, hey, look at that, everyone's playing expensive Marine armies! There is definitely some truth to the idea of wanting to play with all of the tiny mans you have spent so much time/effort/money painting, and that's an inevitable aspect of the points-creep from which GW games have suffered over the years. I remember the heady days when tournaments were 1000 points. Then they were 1000 points with a 200-point sideboard. Then they were 1250 with a 250-point sideboard. Then they were just straight up 1500 points. Then at some point they jumped to 1850. And you could argue that part of the points creep is because things just cost more points in general, but a gump Guardsman with a lasgun has been like 6 points for as long as I can remember. Leman Russes have been ~150+weapon options going back to like 3rd Edition. Individual space marines have actually gotten cheaper over the last edition or two. But what has really changed over the years is the proliferation of mega-units, things like super-heavies and Lords of War. You can't bring your 800-point Lord of Skulls in a 1000-point game. But in an 1850-point game, you might just be able to make that work. GW wanted to sell more of their large, high-price-tag models, and encouraged the tournaments to accommodate it (back when they still supported tournaments). What's interesting is the counterpoint someone expressed with Infinity - I have never really even had the desire to play a massive, blow-out game of Infinity. It's just a different game, and I know how un-fun such a massive slug-fest would be. And while you still feel the draw of wanting to get your cool, new, painted minis on the table, you do that not by playing a bigger game, but by playing a different list. I think that's the thing that's different in Infinity - in 40K, your list is your list is your list, and once you've tuned your list, you don't deviate much. This is exacerbated by there being so many trap choices in 40K. In Infinity, there are very few trap choices (and more just less efficient or cost-effective individual profiles rather than just plain lovely units), and the sheer variety of combinations of opposing force and tournament mission type means it's easy to get "new toys" onto the board. This is actually one of the things I always thought GW missed the boat on in terms of peddling minis - army flexibility. Remember the 4th Edition IG Codex, the one with the Doctrines in it? I read that book and wanted to collect/paint/assemble/convert no fewer than three distinctly different IG forces (Tallarns, Elysians, and Savlar Chem-Dogs - the last of which would have doubled as Traitor Guard and therefore a gateway into the bottomless pit that is collecting Chaos). Fortunately for me, they changed editions shortly thereafter and the new Codex was way less interesting. I honestly think they'd sell more minis if they sold fewer books, so long as each book gave the players lots of cool customization options. And I don't think I'm alone in that feeling. Ilor fucked around with this message at 22:12 on Jun 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 22:07
|
|
|
https://i.imgur.com/f8eGwOV.gifv
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 22:19
|
|
|
Cute!
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 22:20
|
|
|
It's me. Carrying the death thread.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 22:30
|
|
|
im the white one clinging to ur face, making it all the more difficult
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 22:33
|
|
|
New troop transports are looking good.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 22:34
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:I thought I saw you playing DOTA on steam before, but it's basically that in minis form. Avenging Dentist posted:You should follow my motto: just say no-ta to DOTA.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 23:43
|
|
|
Avenging Dentist posted:You should follow my motto: just say no-ta to DOTA. Goons tried to warn me but my 1K rear end won't stop 
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 00:00
|
|
|
Ilor posted:What's interesting is the counterpoint someone expressed with Infinity - I have never really even had the desire to play a massive, blow-out game of Infinity. It's just a different game, and I know how un-fun such a massive slug-fest would be. And while you still feel the draw of wanting to get your cool, new, painted minis on the table, you do that not by playing a bigger game, but by playing a different list. I think that's the thing that's different in Infinity - in 40K, your list is your list is your list, and once you've tuned your list, you don't deviate much. This is exacerbated by there being so many trap choices in 40K. In Infinity, there are very few trap choices (and more just less efficient or cost-effective individual profiles rather than just plain lovely units), and the sheer variety of combinations of opposing force and tournament mission type means it's easy to get "new toys" onto the board. Hello. Again though, I think this ties in with the generally greater tactical depth to Infinity. The equipment given to a single guy will have a far bigger impact than the equivalent in 40K. Ilor posted:This is actually one of the things I always thought GW missed the boat on in terms of peddling minis - army flexibility. Remember the 4th Edition IG Codex, the one with the Doctrines in it? I read that book and wanted to collect/paint/assemble/convert no fewer than three distinctly different IG forces (Tallarns, Elysians, and Savlar Chem-Dogs - the last of which would have doubled as Traitor Guard and therefore a gateway into the bottomless pit that is collecting Chaos). Fortunately for me, they changed editions shortly thereafter and the new Codex was way less interesting. The best loving book they ever put out. Good God, if Anvil Industry's Regiment Builder had been around then I've would've spent so much drat money... PoontifexMacksimus fucked around with this message at 00:06 on Jun 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 00:04
|
|
|
Bad Moon posted:Goons tried to warn me but my 1K rear end won't stop Let me carry you to 4K.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 00:10
|
|
|
panascope posted:Let me carry you to 4K. Road to TI 17
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 00:16
|
|
|
As a mention of what this Infinity style ~depth~ entails, it ties in a lot with the skill ceiling: how far a more skilled player is able to leverage his skill. A comparison to video games: can a skilled fighting game player defeat a buttonmashing noob suffering only minimum damage? One way to describe it is the degree to which the system is putting a ceiling to what the players can do, thus acting as an equaliser, and to what degree the players are free to hang themselves with their freedom to act, and it is up to the players to limit the actions of each other. A good example of this is the "rambo" activations of Infinity. In 40K you know that every unit will just move a single time, shoot a single time. The system itself imposes a certain predictability by its procedural structure. In Infinity your opponent could spend all his actions on any one of his models. The system is not in any way stopping him from coming at you with his best unit - it's all up to you to figure out what its weaknesses are and how to stop it. However, it also offer flexibility: if you don't maintain proper defensive lines even a weak model could suddenly barge through an opening and tear up your backfield support. Allowing you to spend your activations freely gives the players enormous flexibility, but also places a huge onus on them as any weak links can be far, far more ruthlessly exploited than in the somnambulic 40K. Infinity is WW2 Blitzkrieg, 40K is WW1... (Edit: swingy randomness plays into this too, of course, but less than one might think as good players will always take risk mitigation into highest account.) PoontifexMacksimus fucked around with this message at 00:33 on Jun 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 00:26
|
|
|
anti_strunt posted:As a mention of what this Infinity style ~depth~ entails, it ties in a lot with the skill ceiling: how far a more skilled player is able to leverage his skill. A comparison to video games: can a skilled fighting game player defeat a buttonmashing noob suffering only minimum damage? One way to describe it is the degree to which the system is putting a ceiling to what the players can do, thus acting as an equaliser, and to what degree the players are free to hang themselves with their freedom to act, and it is up to the players to limit the actions of each other. A good example of this is the "rambo" activations of Infinity. In 40K you know that every unit will just move a single time, shoot a single time. The system itself imposes a certain predictability by its procedural structure. In Infinity your opponent could spend all his actions on any one of his models. The system is not in any way stopping him from coming at you with his best unit - it's all up to you to figure out what its weaknesses are and how to stop it. However, it also offer flexibility: if you don't maintain proper defensive lines even a weak model could suddenly barge through an opening and tear up your backfield support. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 00:29
|
|
|
To be fair, when they revamped that box, they made a dude get the kilt and sexy leg treatment 
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 00:30
|
|
|
Pyrolocutus posted:To be fair, when they revamped that box, they made a dude get the kilt and sexy leg treatment 
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 00:34
|
|
|
wehraboo weeraboo weeaboo  It was the historicals all along...
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 00:36
|
|
|
anti_strunt posted:wehraboo It's ok though, infinity has tactical depth
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 00:37
|
|
|
tallkidwithglasses posted:It's ok though, infinity has tactical depth wanna explore those depths
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 00:41
|
|
|
anti_strunt posted:wanna explore those depths  Extra View: Booty L2
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 00:49
|
|
|
https://store.corvusbelli.com/products/mission_packs/280002-0442-dire-foes-mission-pack-1-train-rescueand the alien has tits! posted:Angus did it again! Prisoner of the Yu Jing StateEmpire, two women will fight to rescue him, the Indigo Fusilier Bipandra spurred on by something more than loyalty, and the Treitak Anyat by the secrets Angus doesn’t know he carries in his Cube. Find out what the fate of poor Angus will be with the “Train Rescue” mission and play this new scenario with its true protagonists! wanna play out that scenario
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 00:51
|
|
|
The point is that when people talk about GW "missing out on the last decade of game design", the biggest thing is that today we known that the real core of game design is the action economy, not fiddling around in the barren design space of +/- gun stats.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 01:03
|
|
|
Mantic models aren't great, but when you have 200 of them on the table you don't really notice and that's the big draw. If I want to field a 2000 point army, I'm going to need an insane number of infantry and I don't care if each one is a finely crafted spectacle. It's too bad their centerpiece models are still mediocre, but since the game is model neutral I can pick the hero or regiment or monster I want from a huge variety of sources and I'll be willing to spend a bit extra on it since I saved money on my pile of generic infantry. Also, Mantic has tried really hard with its Warpath universe games to bake in different approaches to the same faction. Space dwarves can go with super elite infantry and high tech weapons or they can go with frenzied melee engineers who speed around on motorcycles and repurpose mining lasers. Space elves can go with fragile but special-rules-heavy infantry or energy bow wielding savages on space dinosaurs. Or you can mix and match within the faction.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 01:16
|
|
|
Moola posted:warmachine doesnt sound fun
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 01:16
|
|
|
If the miniatures are garbage, it's kind of a waste of your time (which is arguably more valuable than your money) to bother painting them at all, and if you find the gameplay more important than the spectacle why even bother with miniatures over, say, cardboard cut-out standees like these?
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 01:26
|
|
|
Infinity is a great system with cool miniatures, let down by also having gross cheesecake miniatures. They're getting better about it, but still.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 01:26
|
|
|
Gravitas Shortfall posted:Infinity is a great system with cool miniatures, let down by also having gross cheesecake miniatures. They're getting better about it, but still. It's also extremely over complicated
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 01:33
|
|
|
I'm getting the L2 booty bike. Texmo posted:If the miniatures are garbage, it's kind of a waste of your time (which is arguably more valuable than your money) to bother painting them at all, and if you find the gameplay more important than the spectacle why even bother with miniatures over, say, cardboard cut-out standees like these? Those own, but this is also why i prefer skirmish: I'd rather have 10-15 nicely painted minis you could display over 100 that look mediocre. Probably missing arms and heads too, if we're being honest.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 01:34
|
|
|
anti_strunt posted:The point is that when people talk about GW "missing out on the last decade of game design", the biggest thing is that today we known that the real core of game design is the action economy, not fiddling around in the barren design space of +/- gun stats. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 01:35
|
|
|
Texmo posted:If the miniatures are garbage, it's kind of a waste of your time (which is arguably more valuable than your money) to bother painting them at all, and if you find the gameplay more important than the spectacle why even bother with miniatures over, say, cardboard cut-out standees like these? The miniatures aren't garbage, they're just not jewel like objects of wonder that take 30 hours of work per mini to hit all the details to the level the money paid for them demands, in an army of 200 minis. Also I'd play against that papercraft army.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 01:37
|
|
|
Texmo posted:If the miniatures are garbage, it's kind of a waste of your time (which is arguably more valuable than your money) to bother painting them at all, and if you find the gameplay more important than the spectacle why even bother with miniatures over, say, cardboard cut-out standees like these? That army rules and I'd be happy to play against it and actually wish that was the standard in mass battle games and that fully painted miniatures was just something you could do if you had the time and inclination. But it's what NTRabbit said. Mantic's average models look fine painted when there are 20 or 40 of them all lined up in a unit. And they look even better when each unit is on a diorama base. I've never looked at my Mantic elf army, considered to be among the worst models they've done, when it was on the table and felt that it looked anything but great. Would I put them in a display case and show them off as just models? Probably not, but that's not their purpose.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 01:47
|
|
|
I personally want to play more of that Runebound mini game. The rules seem fairly tight and they are picking and choosing good stuff from a few other systems. Problem is, like most non-X wing FF games you can't find anyone else to play it. I kinda also like the way they handle the Eggplant Squire fucked around with this message at 01:54 on Jun 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 01:52
|
|
|
muggins posted:It's also extremely over complicated Yeah it could be streamlined a bit. But it's skirmish level so it's not that bad.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:09
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:18
|
|
|
NTRabbit posted:The miniatures aren't garbage, they're just not jewel like objects of wonder that take 30 hours of work per mini to hit all the details to the level the money paid for them demands, in an army of 200 minis. Honestly I'd be fine playing against that army too - it's just that, to me, Mantic models feel like you're paying money to receive a painting chore that will look ugly no matter what, so why spend your money on that instead of just papercrafting? Those space marines vs warpath comparisons might as well be comparing space marines to those cheap rear end russian miniatures as far as I'm concerned, like, you could buy $100 for a handful of good looking miniatures that are worth spending time painting because you can make them look nice (or at least serviceable with a base color and wash) but GW is actually a rip off because for $100 you could instead buy a ton of ugly garbage.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 22:55 |
|
|
Different strokes I guess. I think the hard plastic Warpath stuff is great.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2017 02:58
|
|