|
Pash posted:Isn't the whole swords verses armor thing dumb anyway? Its not like people were cutting through plate mail with bastard swords anyway...
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 21:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 00:16 |
|
|
tallkidwithglasses posted:40k, it's easy to find games. ftfy
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 22:02
|
|
|
anti_strunt posted:40K is not a very good system, but it is worth noting that it may not be as much a failure of mere design as a failure of a fundamentally impossible ambition. It's both. Because not only is the task very difficult or perhaps impossible, but the game has never been reasonably balanced, and the habit of tacking on new products with their own new rules designed to sell those products sabotages any chance it might have had. Throw in the over-reliance on randomness, fiddly true-line-of-sight, etc. etc. and you've got an overly ambitious game that is also badly made. 40k's a science fiction setting with magic that has gretchen fighting on the same battlefield as the living incarnations of gods. That's never going to work well, but if there is a company with the rules-writing chops to take on such a project, it isn't Games Workshop.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 22:59
|
|
|
TheChirurgeon posted:FLCL is the best anime but Gurren Lagann and Bebop are close I just watched Bokurano because I like depression.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 00:44
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:It's both. Because not only is the task very difficult or perhaps impossible, but the game has never been reasonably balanced, and the habit of tacking on new products with their own new rules designed to sell those products sabotages any chance it might have had. Throw in the over-reliance on randomness, fiddly true-line-of-sight, etc. etc. and you've got an overly ambitious game that is also badly made. Have you ever played a game of 40k?
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 00:49
|
|
|
Hixson posted:Have you ever played a game of 40k?
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 00:50
|
|
|
Describing true line of sight as "fiddly" always makes me laugh, because I remember the number of disagreements that were had over abstracted LoS that are now simply nonexistent when you can just resolve them using a laser pointer.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 00:52
|
|
|
tallkidwithglasses posted:40k is fun to play and it's easy to find games. This is the most important thing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 00:55
|
|
|
Texmo posted:Describing true line of sight as "fiddly" always makes me laugh, because I remember the number of disagreements that were had over abstracted LoS that are now simply nonexistent when you can just resolve them using a laser pointer. Laser pointers are great at determining what 25% of a carnifex looks like
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 01:27
|
|
|
muggins posted:Laser pointers are great at determining what 25% of a carnifex looks like They actually are, since you can point it at the physical model and indisputably say "these bits here can actually be seen" and then it's much rarer for there to be thats-definitely-a-quarter-no-i-dont-think-so, as opposed to haggling over if a quarter of an abstracted, intangible volume is obscured by several other intangible abstract volumes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 01:37
|
|
|
But the second set of scything talons are posed for dramatic effect, so they should be lower and not able to be seen. Much better than a definitive abstract volume that every unit of size X possess. Also the tables that 40K are played on do not provide adequate cover for the amount of models in the game. So you rely on area terrain. So you use true line of site to determine if a unit in an abstract volume can be shot. It's a dogs breakfast.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 01:47
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:It's both. Because not only is the task very difficult or perhaps impossible, but the game has never been reasonably balanced, and the habit of tacking on new products with their own new rules designed to sell those products sabotages any chance it might have had. Throw in the over-reliance on randomness, fiddly true-line-of-sight, etc. etc. and you've got an overly ambitious game that is also badly made. Couldn't you quote this verbatim, only changing out the setting specific nouns and the last sentence in a reference to Infinity as well?
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 02:08
|
|
|
gas
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 02:16
|
|
|
I'm so angry about the TLoS defense in this thread that I can't even really summon the focus to write a mulit-page leperfishesque attack on the concept and those who would defend it. So instead I say this: good day, sir
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 02:30
|
|
|
Remember when folks used to do poo poo like model their Wraithlords kneeling to abuse TLoS? Another thing KoW does right is that whether I use the man-sized Manticore from Dark World or the giganto GW version, it's always gonna be a height 4 model.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 02:36
|
|
|
fnordcircle posted:I'm so angry about the TLoS defense in this thread that I can't even really summon the focus to write a mulit-page leperfishesque attack on the concept and those who would defend it. The fact that modeling for advantage is a thing that exists is all that needs to be said imho
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 02:38
|
|
|
Texmo posted:They actually are, since you can point it at the physical model and indisputably say "these bits here can actually be seen" and then it's much rarer for there to be thats-definitely-a-quarter-no-i-dont-think-so, as opposed to haggling over if a quarter of an abstracted, intangible volume is obscured by several other intangible abstract volumes. Yeah but the point is you don't have to haggle over if anything is obscured if it's abstracted. That's a level two Hill, you have a level three model, you're 66% obscured. I don't understand how there would ever be a problem, and I've never ever seen one in wmh, unless you're trolling. Otoh, 25% problems came up at least two or three times a game in 40k. Always.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 02:38
|
|
|
spacegoat posted:Remember when folks used to do poo poo like model their Wraithlords kneeling to abuse TLoS? Another thing KoW does right is that whether I use the man-sized Manticore from Dark World or the giganto GW version, it's always gonna be a height 4 model. You have 2 options: Model height is defined by base size or model class (Warmahordes, KoW) Arguing over whether or not that small swirling bit of fabric visible above the fence constitutes enough LoS to shoot at someone. Whatever, I'm gonna go argue with theater people about Bette Midler.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 02:39
|
|
|
Having to perform invisible geometry calculations to determine Line of Sight and Cover really doesn't do any favors to the play speed of a game, and it's only sensible in skirmish games where you have around ten models per side where the extra detail doesn't bog the game down.spacegoat posted:Remember when folks used to do poo poo like model their Wraithlords kneeling to abuse TLoS? Another thing KoW does right is that whether I use the man-sized Manticore from Dark World or the giganto GW version, it's always gonna be a height 4 model. My favorite part of infinity's LoS rules is how, if a model climbs a ladder, its volume counts as sticking out from the ladder horizontally, like this: 
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 02:44
|
|
|
Too soon.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 02:46
|
|
|
Texmo posted:Having to perform invisible geometry calculations to determine Line of Sight and Cover really doesn't do any favors to the play speed of a game, and it's only sensible in skirmish games where you have around ten models per side where the extra detail doesn't bog the game down. I think you might be misunderstanding the abstraction process. A height 2 model can see over a height 1 model, and can see a height 4 model over the head of a height 3 model. Terrain occupies an area and has the same height characteristic, and maybe sensible keywords like obscuring or something. What you lose is the granularity that the corner of that bombed out building is missing so you SHOULD be able to see through it, but what you gain is being able to very very quickly determine the game state. Infinity of course blends the two, and definitely gets messy, but then Infinity kinda revels in its own mess (to its credit and also detriment). Texmo posted:Yeah this is poo poo, but honestly you're going to have a bad time playing against someone who does this sort of thing no matter what. The trouble with that is that different people will draw the line at different points. I really like the miniatures part of miniatures games, and modeling my little people is a big part of the appeal! I also like the games! I want those two to be correlated in fiction and theme, but explicitly NOT in mechanics - if the size and shape of a model is very much a relevant part of the way the game plays, then "what does my neat miniature look like" can also mean "am I being a jerk". Better to make the game clear and functional so that people never have to ask themselves if it's okay to try to win.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 03:25
|
|
|
Texmo posted:Having to perform invisible geometry calculations to determine Line of Sight and Cover really doesn't do any favors to the play speed of a game, and it's only sensible in skirmish games where you have around ten models per side where the extra detail doesn't bog the game down. Smoke grenades have infinite height, so if I shoot a smoke grenade at a wall can I get in infinite column of LoS blocking cutting across the table? Sadly I think the answer is no.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 03:45
|
|
|
Game is fun when played with people fun to hang out with. Food for thought.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 03:55
|
|
|
MCPeePants posted:I think you might be misunderstanding the abstraction process. A height 2 model can see over a height 1 model, and can see a height 4 model over the head of a height 3 model. Terrain occupies an area and has the same height characteristic, and maybe sensible keywords like obscuring or something. What you lose is the granularity that the corner of that bombed out building is missing so you SHOULD be able to see through it, but what you gain is being able to very very quickly determine the game state. I do understand how abstract volumes work, I play games (infinity, malifaux) that use them. I've found the exact opposite in games i've played though, having to measure around abstract volumes and then come to an agreement with my opponent has always been much slower for me than being able to eyeball something and solve any disputes with a laser. Like, you can get a very definite "Yes, this dude can see that dude, the laser is on him" which prevents any sort of argument about it whatsoever. MCPeePants posted:The trouble with that is that different people will draw the line at different points. I really like the miniatures part of miniatures games, and modeling my little people is a big part of the appeal! I also like the games! I want those two to be correlated in fiction and theme, but explicitly NOT in mechanics - if the size and shape of a model is very much a relevant part of the way the game plays, then "what does my neat miniature look like" can also mean "am I being a jerk". General rule of thumb here, I think, is if you're not doing it to try to gain some advantage, then you're not being a jerk.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 04:09
|
|
|
Texmo posted:I do understand how abstract volumes work, I play games (infinity, malifaux) that use them. I've found the exact opposite in games i've played though, having to measure around abstract volumes and then come to an agreement with my opponent has always been much slower for me than being able to eyeball something and solve any disputes with a laser. Like, you can get a very definite "Yes, this dude can see that dude, the laser is on him" which prevents any sort of argument about it whatsoever.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 05:33
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:It's both. Because not only is the task very difficult or perhaps impossible, but the game has never been reasonably balanced, and the habit of tacking on new products with their own new rules designed to sell those products sabotages any chance it might have had. Throw in the over-reliance on randomness, fiddly true-line-of-sight, etc. etc. and you've got an overly ambitious game that is also badly made. Well, this thread has been accused of being a haven of hyperbolic negativity, so I'm trying to ground my arguments and give the games some benefit of the doubt. There were some plaintive cries for substantiated discussion before, so I would really be interested to hear what a 40K fan finds specifically enjoyable about the game's mechanics - ignoring non-mechanical factors like popularity and familiarity.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 10:26
|
|
|
TLOS is an abomination before the Lord, but so is forbidding pre-measuring so it's not like Infinity comes out perfect either.Mugaaz posted:Couldn't you quote this verbatim, only changing out the setting specific nouns and the last sentence in a reference to Infinity as well? Not really, at all? Because Infinity is working from very different fundamentals and so has very different issues (and for the issues it suffers, has to my mind less of a discrepancy between its ambition and mechanics)? What both systems DO have in common, to their joint detriment, is that they evolved from RPG systems rather than being designed from the start as wargames, much like DnD was a wargame somewhat unhappily kludged into an RPG.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 11:06
|
|
|
LordAba posted:if I shoot a smoke grenade at a wall can I get in infinite column of LoS blocking cutting across the table 
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 11:24
|
|
|
I think infinity has a lot of problems but silhouettes aren't one of them. The amount of secrecy in the game, however, is, and it's to the point where squinting at people's tournament trays and keeping track of real lists vs courtesy lists, etc.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 11:26
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:The amount of secrecy in the game, however, is, and it's to the point where squinting at people's tournament trays and keeping track of real lists vs courtesy lists, etc. Yeah. Hidden board states is never easy to get right (calculable hidden information being an abomination etc.) and Infinity doesn't, really. Does 40K8 tell you to share your full army list?
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 12:32
|
|
|
anti_strunt posted:Yeah. Hidden board states is never easy to get right (calculable hidden information being an abomination etc.) and Infinity doesn't, really. 40k has never had secret army lists, though I don't recall the game ever explicitly telling you to show your list to your opponent. There's very little hidden information in 40k, outside of some missions/scenarios
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 13:07
|
|
|
Fantasy used to have hidden information like fanatics and stuff like that. That or the person that taught me being a dick when he had VHS on his wizards..
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 13:49
|
|
|
VHS being allowed on Warrior Priests was the stupidest loving thing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 14:04
|
|
|
Radish posted:VHS being allowed on Warrior Priests was the stupidest loving thing. What were they supposed to do, use betamax?
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 14:24
|
|
|
Don't be ridiculous. It was the 90s, so the clear choice was laserdisc.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 14:37
|
|
|
NTRabbit posted:What were they supposed to do, use betamax? This is good stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 14:46
|
|
|
anti_strunt posted:TLOS is an abomination before the Lord, but so is forbidding pre-measuring so it's not like Infinity comes out perfect either. Thankfully we now have gloomhaven for actually good and interesting D&D combat mechanics stilled mixed in with the RPG. It is the 4.5 of D&D, if only the designers went in that direction instead of the reactionary 5e.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 15:15
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:I think infinity has a lot of problems but silhouettes aren't one of them. One issue that I have is making sure people are accurately tracking their orders spent. I find that, especially when playing with newer people, they tend to forget what order they are on if there is a complex interaction. For example, you want to move your knights up the board and my Oniwaban appears out of hidden deployment and now tries to engage. What's your second move? No, it's not your ARO, this is your turn, your second action of the order. Okay cool, you're going to shoot at me. Did you spend another order to try and CC me, it's still your turn and activations cost orders. I figure people usually get an extra 2 to 3 orders out of me per game by teaching them the rules interactions, and them losing track of their orders. That's bound to happen when a game has so many moving parts though. Texmo posted:I do understand how abstract volumes work, I play games (infinity, malifaux) that use them. I've found the exact opposite in games i've played though, having to measure around abstract volumes and then come to an agreement with my opponent has always been much slower for me than being able to eyeball something and solve any disputes with a laser. Like, you can get a very definite "Yes, this dude can see that dude, the laser is on him" which prevents any sort of argument about it whatsoever. Silhouettes have never been a problem for us though; which is what I'm trying to wrap my brain around. You replace to models with silhouettes, you use a laser and you determine if they can see each other. No worrying about hats, guns, arms, pincers, wings, radio antennae, or any other part of a model that is designed to look neat. Same with cover; you're either touching the intervening cover and get a save mod, or you're not. Sure it's not "realistic", but it makes the game quick and everyone knows this going in to the game. Texmo posted:General rule of thumb here, I think, is if you're not doing it to try to gain some advantage, then you're not being a jerk. True that. I've never been more frustrated than by one rules lawyer, or should I say geometry lawyer, in Infinity. I just let him have it his way, beat him anyway, and haven't played him again. anti_strunt posted:TLOS is an abomination before the Lord, but so is forbidding pre-measuring so it's not like Infinity comes out perfect either. anti_strunt posted:Yeah. Hidden board states is never easy to get right (calculable hidden information being an abomination etc.) and Infinity doesn't, really. I think you have to assume that the lack of pre-measuring in Infinity is due to hidden information. Trying to engage out of Hidden Deployment, or walking into hacking range of a unit with holoecho for example, would give away the "surprise" of the hidden information. It's not like it's hard to eyeball eight inches, or any other common measurement in the game, after playing a few times. So they might as well allow for pre-measurement. But as you said, that's probably down to the RPG roots of the game. I happen to love how the game plays at the moment, so for me it's just part of the quirky charm.  People essentially play with pre-measurement when they play with intent anyway, and pretty much everyone is cool with that. "I want to slice the pie so that I can't be seen by that unit", is pre-measuring imo.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 15:47
|
|
|
Interesting... I guess it goes to show that different parts of a game can end up unexpectedly reinforcing each other. All the more reason to have a coherent design foundation. Anyway, if any ardent players of 40K want to share what they feel to be strong or enjoyable parts of the game's design I'd still be all ears. Not looking for gotchas, just curious. There must be some parts that recommend themselves well for what people are looking to get out of it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 18:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 00:16 |
|
|
Playing by intent in Infinity is even better than pre measuring imo. Way faster and less hassle.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2017 18:20
|
|