|
Hamshot posted:For the new dark imperium starter box the plague marines are super busy (or chaotic tbh if any faction of Kaos Marines should look like undifferentiated messy blobs its Nurgle. TheChirurgeon posted:Having played a few games, I think Command Points are by far the best addition to the new edition. 40k needed a manage-able resource so goddamn bad. Say what you will about Power levels (I think they're fine), but the Narrative Play missions are the most interesting part of the new rulebook's add-on rules. Narrative play has the most interesting (and asymmetrical) missions and adds interesting custom strategems for attackers/defenders. Does anything of that necessitate dispensing with points values?
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2017 00:52
|
|
) but their new flagship models, the Bigly Marines, are comparatively restrained. It's more likely down to design foibles than any tinfoil conspiracy. 
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 18:11 |
|
|
anti_strunt posted:tbh if any faction of Kaos Marines should look like undifferentiated messy blobs its Nurgle. Much like how you don't paint accurate camo on your minis (it makes them look like a featureless blob since that's the point of camo), you shouldn't sculpt your minis that way either.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2017 00:57
|
|
|
anti_strunt posted:Does anything of that necessitate dispensing with points values? They didn't do away with points values
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2017 01:03
|
|
|
Southern Heel posted:I'm having a game of L'Art De La Guerre today (which is the groggiest of grog historicals but hear me out), for the first time - and it's about as black-and-white as a comparison could be - every army has three commanders, each representing the vanguard and each wing. Each troop choice has a standard profile (imagine a universal special rule for all 'light skirmishers') with +1 or -1 modifiers depending on whether they're elite or mediocre. They have scissors-papers-stone relationships with each other: elephants destroy cavalry, but themselves are weak to skirmishers. Barbarians smash spearmen but have their impetus sapped by well trained heavy infantry without the need for seventeen different statistics and weapon profiles. If we're thinking of the same rules, I must admit I had a quick lol at the idea of a modernised DBx being the "groggiest of grog" http://www.madaxeman.com/L_Art_de_la_Guerre_page.php posted:The rules book itself is a hansome beast, with 240 pages including all of the lists for the ancient and medieval era. The lists appear to have been painstakingly researched, erm, I suspect, probably by reading 4 key "historical texts", but rather than organising them by "books 1-4" there are separate sections for different geographies and eras to allow more easy themed competitions. heh, Phil Barker Chill la Chill posted:Sounds amazing. I'm looking at the game now and it doesn't look all the groggy. . (I guess I define groggy as incredibly involved with dumb minutiae.... like 40K.) Could probably use my Brets and samurai and fight my friend's ogres and lizardmen with this stuff. Ever try good old De Bellis Antiquitatis, or its fantasy variant Hordes of the Things?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2017 01:03
|
|
|
TheChirurgeon posted:They didn't do away with points values TheChirurgeon posted:Having played a few games, I think Command Points are by far the best addition to the new edition. 40k needed a manage-able resource so goddamn bad. Say what you will about Power levels (I think they're fine), but the Narrative Play missions are the most interesting part of the new rulebook's add-on rules. Narrative play has the most interesting (and asymmetrical) missions and adds interesting custom strategems for attackers/defenders. Does using Power instead of Points work better specifically for Narrative play, or could those additional missions/stratagems be used with points as well?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2017 01:06
|
|
|
anti_strunt posted:Does using Power instead of Points work better specifically for Narrative play, or could those additional missions/stratagems be used with points as well? You can use either. That said, Power *are* points, they're just a different scoring system that's less granular (they are essentially calculated off the model's cost + 1/2 the possible upgrades, and it's something like 1 power ~ 20 points). You can use either Power or traditional points for the Narrative missions, but it's worth noting that the Narrative missions aren't designed to necessarily be balanced points-wise or symmetrical--some recommend that the attacker have higher power/more points than the defender, for example. I like power because it makes building an army take less than 5 minutes and I can make my decisions based off what the models I want to take are armed with. The biggest downside to power is that for some reason it caused GW to put out a terrible points layout for its new rulebooks.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2017 01:21
|
|
|
I like the idea of power levels, and I think honestly gw made real points so difficult so ppl would just use power levels. But there are weird things, like genestealers in gsc being 4 PL or 90 points and space ICP troupes 7 PL or 75 points
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2017 01:53
|
|
|
I feel like PL is admitting that they're bad at balance and maybe by having two sets of costs at least one will work.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2017 04:43
|
|
|
muggins posted:I like the idea of power levels, and I think honestly gw made real points so difficult so ppl would just use power levels. But there are weird things, like genestealers in gsc being 4 PL or 90 points and space ICP troupes 7 PL or 75 points Probably that you can tool up Harlequins a lot more than genestealers.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2017 09:59
|
|
|
Speleothing posted:I feel like PL is admitting that they're bad at balance and maybe by having two sets of costs at least one will work. Power Level is easy; just come up with a rough number, keep saying these are "rough but equal", and the GW supporters will parrot the rest. Granular points are hard, and usually are adjusted by looking at where the rubber meet the road. This is why PP/Mantic/Hawk are actually pretty balanced; they look at the results. So enter 8th edition. Power Level is right on the front of the datasheet! Easy, takes care of unit sizes and upgrades! Yay! Normal points are regulated to the back of the book and are painful to calculate. You usually have to flip back and forth to see the upgrades and basic weapons which may or may not cost additional points. This incentives people to say "gently caress it, lets do Power Level as they are rough but equal". This lets GW dump points easily in the future so they don't have to spend any time with actually balancing anything at a micro level. Yay! 
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2017 12:02
|
|
|
GW didn't have the forethought to not release books that would get completely invalidated by a new edition within the year. That kind of conspiracy is probably beyond them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2017 12:10
|
|
|
anti_strunt posted:If we're thinking of the same rules, I must admit I had a quick lol at the idea of a modernised DBx being the "groggiest of grog" So LADLAG is essentially big-battle DBA, more skirmish-shooting, and units don't immediately evaporate on a single bad dice roll. By Grog I guess I meant focusing more on historical accuracy/balance, and lacking 'personality'.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2017 13:09
|
|
|
Sometimes I wonder why minis games looking for a good start to a completely overhauled system don't just copy points and mechanics wholesale from some groggy wargame and go from there. I mean, those groggy games probably have reams of spreadsheets behind them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2017 14:25
|
|
|
Southern Heel posted:So LADLAG is essentially big-battle DBA, more skirmish-shooting, and units don't immediately evaporate on a single bad dice roll. Yeah, the exhaustion mechanic was what stood out to me. Our circle still has a bunch of old DBA armies from when ran some campaigns (really prefer DBA as a campaign system rather than a tournament system); will definitely check this game out and see if it scratches the 15mm itch. Thanks for making me aware of it! Chill la Chill posted:Sometimes I wonder why minis games looking for a good start to a completely overhauled system don't just copy points and mechanics wholesale from some groggy wargame and go from there. I mean, those groggy games probably have reams of spreadsheets behind them. Well, going by the very arch quote above L'Art De La Guerre appears to have based its army lists largely on DBM.  (There are certainly worse sources to start from.)
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2017 21:04
|
|
|
I will highlight for what it's worth that while I enjoyed playing both DBA and LADLAG either solo or with my usual frendly beer-and-chips opponent, I played it for the first time in a club on Friday and it was the most boring thing ever. I was literally loooking over at someone playing Rock Em' Sock Em' Robots with Space Marines on the table next door with envious eyes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2017 22:29
|
|
|
anti_strunt posted:Yeah, the exhaustion mechanic was what stood out to me. Our circle still has a bunch of old DBA armies from when ran some campaigns (really prefer DBA as a campaign system rather than a tournament system); will definitely check this game out and see if it scratches the 15mm itch. Thanks for making me aware of it! Just wondering why GW just didn't strap these rules into a warhammer or 40k ruleset and call it a day. Though I guess at some point they run out of different types of artillery and, as sci-fi games have this problem, they "need" dozens of types of weapons. As much as I like infinity,  that it has 5 types of airborne deployment.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2017 14:55
|
|
|
Serious post - is AoS Skirmish worth a shot for a Song-of-Blades-and-Heroes level gently caress-around (bear in mind I have no interest in AoS-full)Chill la Chill posted:As much as I like infinity, This is why I think (despite it being a slightly different level of game) Firefight totally scratches the itch of skirmish future-games. I found that Infinity had many special rules (each with unique mechanics) and there were multiple layers of counter, and anti-counter measures for each. It certainly does function if you're fluent with the ruleset and ALL of the idiosyncrasies, but IMO something like Kings of War or Firefight where there are very few unique mechanics and if there are, it modifies a roll up/down, provides some kind of reroll or precludes an action (or allows an action which would otherwise be precluded) is much, much cleaner.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2017 15:16
|
|
|
Southern Heel posted:Serious post - is AoS Skirmish worth a shot for a Song-of-Blades-and-Heroes level gently caress-around (bear in mind I have no interest in AoS-full) It's worth a punt. It's the only format I'd play AoS in.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2017 17:26
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:As much as I like infinity, 
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2017 19:02
|
|
|
ElNarez posted:GW didn't have the forethought to not release books that would get completely invalidated by a new edition within the year. That kind of conspiracy is probably beyond them. "GW wasn't smart enough to not bilk its customers for extra money" is not a strong argument. I agree they're not likely engaging in a conspiracy to undermine the use of points, though. They're just bad at making good rules.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2017 19:11
|
|
|
Ilor posted:To be fair, 40K has this too: Reserves, Outflanking Reserves, Deep Strike, and SpaceWolf Scout Outflanking Reserves. The only difference is that in Infinity, they're all in the same place in the rulebook. Right. I like infinity, like I said. I'm actually prepping the fat yuan yuan right now. It's still ridiculous that SF minis games all feel the need to have that much granularity. Did you ever have that one friend that insisted katanas were radically different from other bastard swords and that it was a travesty that D&D treated them the same?
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2017 19:38
|
|
|
Thundercloud posted:It's worth a punt. It's the only format I'd play AoS in. Hmmm.. so I watched an AoS Skirmish report and it looked dry as gently caress, so scratch that. I guess it's either Song of Blades and Heroes proper or something like Frostgrave, for my small-skirmish Fantasy...
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2017 20:58
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:Right. I like infinity, like I said. I'm actually prepping the fat yuan yuan right now. It's still ridiculous that SF minis games all feel the need to have that much granularity. Did you ever have that one friend that insisted katanas were radically different from other bastard swords and that it was a travesty that D&D treated them the same?
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2017 22:17
|
|
|
I used to have that one weeb friend that insisted a katana could cut clean through a lamppost
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2017 22:59
|
|
|
Sigh. *unsheathes blade*
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2017 23:14
|
|
|
Ilor posted:Katanas are different - they suck against heavy armor. But I'll bet that's not what your weeaboo friend had in mind, am I right? I am the weeaboo friend. But not about the swords bit. That was my other friend who loved talking about them as much as Gygax loved polearms.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 00:15
|
|
|
Moola posted:I used to have that one weeb friend that insisted a katana could cut clean through a lamppost They are powerful weapons.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 00:16
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:They are powerful weapons. they suck balls and were made of lovely steel
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 00:27
|
|
|
Katanas look cool and since it's the 21st century that's all that matters.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 00:33
|
|
|
Moola posted:they suck balls and were made of lovely steel mods?
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 00:34
|
|
|
Samurai? more like NAHmurai!
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 01:09
|
|
|
Moola is online bullying me on steam 😢
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 01:12
|
|
|
Mods?!
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 01:13
|
|
|
NTRabbit posted:Mods?!
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 01:14
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:They are powerful weapons. I'd sure hate to be hit with one, even in armor. A lamppost, that is.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 01:14
|
|
|
quote:That's it. I'm sick of all this "Masterwork Bastard Sword" bullshit that's going on in the Infinity system right now. Katanas deserve much better than that. Much, much better than that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 01:54
|
|
|
That's a fat yuan yuan
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 02:39
|
|
|
Speleothing posted:I'd sure hate to be hit with one, even in armor. Imagine if I had a real weapon!
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 03:11
|
|
|
Oh man. Those katanas are so sharp and efficient. You'd better accept lower wages and reduced benefits or those katanas will replace you. I swear to god any day now. I read a thing in the 80's and it's gonna happen.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 04:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 18:11 |
|
|
lol weebs
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 05:49
|
|