|
Stephenls posted:I mean, it's possible that it's going to be a lot of talk about novels, a new animation preview that's three-quarters made out of bits of animation we've seen in the previous animation previews, a more in-depth look at some of the contents of Pariah, and a five second teaser video for some sort of new big Necron mini that we all know is the Silent King but which GW will play coy about for the next three months. Possible, but not likely I think. You can easily spread that stuff out and I felt the last couple of online reviews felt a little light on 40K, they could have easily slipped some of it in then. If it's not 9th edition I reckon it's a return of a primarch. Maybe the Silent King and a Primarch return at the same time.
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 01:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 11:17 |
|
|
It's going to be disappointing, whatever it is
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 01:49
|
|
|
That goes without saying to be honest.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 01:55
|
|
|
A book of dogs of the 40th millennium. German Shepard Cadian, wearing doggles and posing in front of a Russ. Brave rotty facing down a tyranid. A corgi licking the fatal wound of a fallen ynarri, petting him moments before the void takes him, providing a final moment of comfort. They could give different general ideas to all these great artists and collaborate in secret. Big beautiful high effort paintings then release them in a big glossy book ONLY AVAILABLE AT NEW STORE OPENINGS HAHAH GOTCHA FUCKER
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 01:55
|
|
|
gently caress dogs. Gimme squads of those rad purple Eldar kitties
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 05:52
|
|
|
Booley posted:Turning this into a deck building game is terrible and kills options, no thanks. It just makes me sad that every faction has potentially dozens of stratagems, but only ever uses 1 or 2 spammed every turn. I'm not suggesting we go full Shadespire 
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 11:00
|
|
|
Harkano posted:It just makes me sad that every faction has potentially dozens of stratagems, but only ever uses 1 or 2 spammed every turn. I'm not suggesting we go full Shadespire this isn't true though you literally can't 'spam' stratagems
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 11:12
|
|
|
Corrode posted:this isn't true though you literally can't 'spam' stratagems Now it would be a big change if every in-game stratagem was one use per battle only. Would it be a good thing? Certainly a lot of armies rely currently on their best strats being employed every turn, so I imagine it would at least affect the current meta.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 11:59
|
|
|
I don't think poo poo like veterans of the long war should be once per battle, same for like wisdom of the ancients and similar. In fact I can't really think of a good reason to make anything once per battle.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 12:03
|
|
|
Harkano posted:It just makes me sad that every faction has potentially dozens of stratagems, but only ever uses 1 or 2 spammed every turn. I'm not suggesting we go full Shadespire I mean I agree most people use a handful of stratagems but the only one that's "spammed" is Tactical re-roll in the sense you could use it in every phase. In matched play you can only use a stratagem once per phase and there aren't many that you could realistically use in multiple phases in most turns. I think one of the interesting things about army building is that the stratagems reinforce the idea that you need to be building a list with a plan. You can't just whack all the best units in the codex into your army list, you need to know how they are going to be used and then you can figure out which stratagems are useful and which ones you're never going to use. Also some stratagems aren't designed to be used a lot, they are designed to be used in specific scenarios. The only element of "deck building" I like the idea of is the one they already implemented in CA19: building a deck of objectives. It makes sense that you should be able to filter out some but not all of your objectives depending on who you're playing against. ITC removes the random element entirely and allows you to just pick your objective, but I like the random element and management element of the deck. The major problem with the GW objectives is they clearly need a pass in terms of the army specific objectives.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 12:03
|
|
|
Yeah some people don't like it but I love the objective deck. Sometimes it screws you over but thats high command! They're idiots! Objective four, what the gently caress do you mean objective four!? We just left objective four!
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 12:07
|
|
|
Genghis Cohen posted:Now it would be a big change if every in-game stratagem was one use per battle only. Would it be a good thing? Certainly a lot of armies rely currently on their best strats being employed every turn, so I imagine it would at least affect the current meta. Not really, because GW have moved a lot of the faction and unit 'flavour' into stratagems now. It has been a tool to: a) encourage certain fluff-appropriate army builds, like DA bringing lots of plasma weapons b) rebalance units via expansions like PA, like the Haruspex getting a new strat to make it not utterly hopeless Restricting that just moves the meta back towards factions with the best armywide rules and largest selection of units *cough* marine codex *cough*. Imagine playing Harlequins or Custodes with their tiny selection of unit types, and being told your core units can only use their specific strats once.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 12:16
|
|
|
Genghis Cohen posted:Now it would be a big change if every in-game stratagem was one use per battle only. Would it be a good thing? Certainly a lot of armies rely currently on their best strats being employed every turn, so I imagine it would at least affect the current meta. Corrode posted:this isn't true though you literally can't 'spam' stratagems JBP posted:I don't think poo poo like veterans of the long war should be once per battle, same for like wisdom of the ancients and similar. In fact I can't really think of a good reason to make anything once per battle. I was thinking of lists built around just using a single/few Stratagems every round of the game until they burn all CP. Like old Rotate Ion Shields/Order of Companions Knights. Or Current Redoubtable Defence/Transhuman Physiology Grey Knights double Paladin. A lot of the 'double attack' stratagems on various SmashThings. I don't hold out hope though, as they've figured out the reason to get people to buy PA books is to include juicy new stratagems, WLTs, relics etc. It just makes me sad I have a codex with 14 stratagems in it, and I'll never use 11 of them. Playing Apoc and having Stratagem card equivalents of a lot of them I found a lot more fun. You got to use ones you'd never use, and you'd hold onto the good ones for when it really mattered, but you'd also eventually get them back once you went through the deck and reshuffled. I also like the tactical objectives deck, but I'm not a tournament play, so I can see why people don't like that.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 12:38
|
|
|
It is a shame that each army has pages of stratagems that will not get used. Intra edition rebalancing of stratagems might help.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 13:27
|
|
|
Harkano posted:I was thinking of lists built around just using a single/few Stratagems every round of the game until they burn all CP. Like old Rotate Ion Shields/Order of Companions Knights. Or Current Redoubtable Defence/Transhuman Physiology Grey Knights double Paladin. A lot of the 'double attack' stratagems on various SmashThings. Both allowing you to only use strats once and turning strats into a deck that you draw from (like apoc) do the same thing - remove your ability to rely on using them. Without strats you lose out on having different optional ways to run an army, and the game turns into purely whatever is mathematically the most effective at shooting. Schemes of war, the deck building tactical objectives format, is totally fine for non tournament play and most people I know who have used it like it a lot, I don't think anyone is concerned about it.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 13:48
|
|
|
Schemes is fine for tournaments too tbh, it eliminates most of what makes Maelstrom suck in a tournament setting
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 13:54
|
|
|
I mean double GK Paladin bomb isn't really built around transhuman. It's built around loads of stratagems, psychic powers, and rules:
In theory you could spam all this in one turn, but you start with like 13 CP and you'll be out of CP by like, turn 2 or 3. Sure you mostly only use like 4 or 5 stratagems out of all of them, but when you consider quite a lot of them are for units not in the list or stratagems that you'll rarely need (e.g. How often do you need to pay 1CP to manifest a second power?) it's actually not a singular as you're making out. Maybe there are lists which do just spam a singular stratagem every turn, but personally I'd say that's more an indication that the stratagem is too good. Like in the GKPB of all those stratagems I've listed you wouldn't use them all every turn, you need to think about it.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 13:57
|
|
|
Kitchner posted:
Only those are strats though right? I just like they way they did Apoc, and I hope they borrow some more modern design for 9th. Because I really don't want to end up with what Booley says here - Booley posted:Without strats you lose out on having different optional ways to run an army, and the game turns into purely whatever is mathematically the most effective at shooting. I'm brand new as of the start of 8th, so I don't have any experience of Pre-Stratagem 40k. I came from WMH where you have a stack of Focus/Fury to spend on spells each turn, and I feel like that's more interesting than "sorry you're playing an elite faction, enjoy getting 8CP to spend all game, and 95% of your strats are garbage, so you'd be better off spending them on rerolls". Something like the Sister miracle dice mechanic seems like a really cool way of making armies unique.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 14:56
|
|
|
I've played a few games with a friend where we didn't use the 3 generic rulebook strategems and TBH it makes the game a bit more interesting, you've got the accept the variance in dice rolls, morale actually matters and it avoids all the bad feeling weirdness the combat interrupt strategem causes. I've gotten more quarantine painting done, a pair of plagueburst crawlers:    And a pair of plague marine squads:     I went back to my old squads and redid the lenses to match the newer ones, and it's an excuse to post them too      I've got an army painted for the first time in years, if I can get through my 20 zombies (  ) they my other list is done too
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 15:23
|
|
|
Harkano posted:
This is exactly what would happen if you had strats as a deck building game. Without being reliably able to get your good strats, you'd build around not using them / using generics you always have access to or something. All marine armies would look pretty much the same, they'd all be whatever units you could best shoot things with. Right now, there are a bunch of different marine lists that are successful, because there are multiple different good strats you can build an effectivie army around.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 17:29
|
|
|
Introducing deck building elements in any capacity is bad for competitive play because without them you'll primarily lose due to your own lack or skill or the superior skill of your opponent, but the moment you throw decks in there you can play the game 100% perfectly and still lose because luck of the draw.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 17:46
|
|
|
ThoraxTheImpaler posted:Introducing dice in any capacity is bad for competitive play because without them you'll primarily lose due to your own lack of skill or the superior skill of your opponent, but the moment you throw dice in there you can play the game 100% perfectly and still lose because luck of the dice.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 17:49
|
|
|
I don’t know about that. Warhammer Underworlds is heavily built around the cards and seems to be pretty well regarded as a competitive game.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 17:49
|
|
|
The real threat of a deckbuilding aspect is that you need last year's New Store Opening strategem card if you want your Primaris Inflammaberators to be worth the points after their changes in Chapter Approved 2022 and the cheapest one on Ebay is $92USD.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 18:00
|
|
|
moths posted:The real threat of a deckbuilding aspect is that you need last year's New Store Opening strategem card if you want your Primaris Inflammaberators to be worth the points after their changes in Chapter Approved 2022 and the cheapest one on Ebay is $92USD. This is a great point. But to a lesser degree don't you theoretically need to have the latest PA book for your army if you want to use the *hot new strat* that makes your old lovely unit suddenly the new hotness? Based on the balance of the last few PA books they clearly haven't figured out the exact way of making *pay to win* productive. This is probably veering back into 'competitive gamers aren't as big of a deal as they think they are' but I wonder how sales figures are on book that makes army amazing (looking at you Ritual of the Damned!) compared to book with a whole lot of meh (phoenix Rising?) Booley posted:This is exactly what would happen if you had strats as a deck building game. Without being reliably able to get your good strats, you'd build around not using them / using generics you always have access to or something. All marine armies would look pretty much the same, they'd all be whatever units you could best shoot things with. Right now, there are a bunch of different marine lists that are successful, because there are multiple different good strats you can build an effectivie army around. I definitely have to defer to you guys on this as I haven't been exposed to old 40k. But bearing in mind the deck size in Apoc is pretty small would it really have been so terrible if Iron Hands at the height of their powers only got to use Duty Eternal or Cogitated Martyrdom every other turn? If in exchange every other stratagem they came up with actually gets used and makes things interesting. I'm actually in favour of more stratagems being used! Either like in Apoc where they have no cost, they just come out of your hand, or you get <number> of cards per phase, or a CP pool that regenerates each turn (maybe based on how many 'commanders' you have?). I also take the point that Rotate Shields Knights, and Iron Hands were both horribly overtuned on launch and that stratagems as a whole weren't the issue.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 18:15
|
|
|
Harkano posted:This is a great point. But to a lesser degree don't you theoretically need to have the latest PA book for your army if you want to use the *hot new strat* that makes your old lovely unit suddenly the new hotness? Effective strat use requires timing. Taking that away and making it random makes them ineffective.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 18:41
|
|
|
The dice can't lock your only victory points behind the castle your opponent built, and the dice can be mitigated. Drawing "Hold Objective 6" when there are three Riptides parked on top of it can't really be mitigated by smart play. You're just hosed.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 18:43
|
|
|
PA is definitely a step in that direction, but it's also available digitally and there are enough print copies that you'll never see a secondary market built up around it. Only rules are totally fine, but attaching deck-building opens up a lot of bad doors. That said, I might be OK with an annual stratagem deck that introduces new strategems, tunes the CP costs, and retires broken ones. But there's absolutely no way they'd be able to resist introducing exclusivity to push sales and then we're in X-Wing territory. They're definitely learning from the mistakes Privateer Press made, and I love the idea of an annual line refresh (Psychic Awakening) and rebalancing (Chapter Approved) but it's unsustainable entirely through expensive hardcover physical products. An app or online annual update would be great, or even a White Dwarf Double-sized Super-Special that includes the thirty actual pages of rules from all the Psychic Awakening books. Like I said earlier, gating rules behind a paywall only hinders model sales. I'm about to dump some Necrons I got through the years. I love the models, but I'm not going to buy $80 worth of rulebooks to use 750 points of them once in a blue moon. From the player's perspective, it's just not cost effective to keep up with more than one or two armies. moths fucked around with this message at 18:47 on May 20, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 18:43
|
|
|
Zuul the Cat posted:Bolt Action does the alternating activation system really well.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 18:45
|
|
|
moths posted:but it's unsustainable entirely through expensive hardcover physical products Why do you believe this? It has never been true for Games Workshop, and people into collecting and playing with luxury goods tend to be much less price adverse. I would personally love for them to go all digital, but I also only buy physical books for the two armies I play. I would just print off and elaminate the two pages of PA I need.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 20:05
|
|
|
All this talk of a new edition - does that mean I should hold off on buying the Dark Imperium set? I was planning to collect Death Guard (and hopefully trade away the marines)
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 20:08
|
|
|
peer posted:All this talk of a new edition - does that mean I should hold off on buying the Dark Imperium set? I was planning to collect Death Guard (and hopefully trade away the marines) No, its still one of the best ways to get started with Death Guard. All the characters in it are unique to the box, and it's the best way to get poxwalkers.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 20:12
|
|
|
It feels like I've uncovered a dirty 40k secret recently, and that is no one uses the Long-las from the Cadian Company Command Squad because the sculpt is awful. The moment you add a torsoit refuses to go together perfectly without gaps that would make a Shadowspear Eliminator blush and you gotta stuff a ton of greenstuff into to fix in turn.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 20:45
|
|
|
Lord_Hambrose posted:Why do you believe this? It's not a problem for most people, but it's a substantial barrier to anyone who wants to play casually, or especially with an army they don't "main." Dipping into a second or third faction means another $40 per army per codex and recurring $40 annually per [campaign] book which is a lot if you just want some guardsmen next to your marines or a knight alongside your custodes. Or for someone who might have a few boxes of Orks they'd like to bring out on a rainy day. As a luxury good, it makes sense to have an upfront investment - the first $40 codex gives you some personal stake in that army. And that might even be what they're going for with the current rules model. A die-hard Ork player is going to buy all the ork rulebooks. But I doubt it works backwards. Does forcing a casual ork player to buy all the books actually make him more committed? I'd think that's where you get people checking out, paying an annual $40 upkeep for every army they have would just tend to make them want fewer armies. I'm also in a dumb position where I have decades of collected figures from across 6 armies, which would cost $240 in codexes before I could use models I already paid for. I don't own $80 worth of orks, so it'd be dumb for me to buy their book and annual supplement. So I can either buy more orks, drop the ones I have, or go with the index. (The index is the best answer for me, but it's oop going forward.) It might also be a trap for flavor of the month whales who switch armies with the wind. It feels like a push to get players to identify with a faction as their army, and I don't know if that comes at the cost of pricing out those less-serious about an army. Splurging on a single knight is less appealing when there's an mandatory $80 codex and Engine War purchase. But if the associated rules were free / cheap, it would be easier to talk oneself into getting the plastic. I hope this makes sense, I'm probably over- thinking it because surface-level it looks like crying about prices, but it's more an observation of how they're shaping purchase habits.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 21:06
|
|
|
People who really care about that just pirate poo poo, nobody is actually being priced out
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 21:09
|
|
|
moths posted:Splurging on a single knight is less appealing when there's an mandatory $80 codex and Engine War purchase. But if the associated rules were free / cheap, it would be easier to talk oneself into getting the plastic. Lol no it isn't someone is going to buy a knight anyway cuz it's a cool fuckin' model and if the rules are free/cheap GW is out $80. It always feels like people saying the rules should be free/cheap are really saying "I don't want to pay for this" in which case goodbye, please make room for the next sucker who wants to build a Knight army. Strobe fucked around with this message at 21:23 on May 20, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 21:18
|
|
|
Corrode posted:People who really care about that just pirate poo poo, nobody is actually being priced out Exactly. So why not embrace this model?
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 21:19
|
|
|
Booley posted:No, its still one of the best ways to get started with Death Guard. All the characters in it are unique to the box, and it's the best way to get poxwalkers. cool, thanks. bloaty bois here i come
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 21:20
|
|
|
moths posted:Exactly. So why not embrace this model? Because you make a shitload more money saying "Books: $40" and ignoring when people just take one than you do saying "Books: Free".
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 21:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 11:17 |
|
|
moths posted:Exactly. So why not embrace this model? Print rules are both profitable and nicer to both read and reference than digital rules. Why get rid of it to appease some whiners when it's going to lose them more in book sales than it'll create in model sales?
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 21:25
|
|