|
Stephenls posted:If I had to guess? A Swarm detachment is about swarms of small bugs that respawn when their units are killed. A regen detachment is about tyranids stealing resurrection protocols instead, so you can have regenerating larger bugs. For regen I'm expecting something related to feeder-beasts like Haruspex, Mawlocs, and rippers eating enemy units to regain biomass. Hopefully they do more to distinguish it from the crusher detachment as another version of monster mash. Devorum posted:This just drives home, to me, how much the "one detachment until codex" system sucks. It's something I definitely prefer to how faction updates were managed in 8th/9th. The gap will be far less providing unit datasheets remain largely similar to the indexes. Most of the time new detachments will just open up new ways to use other units in your roster. For example my predominantly shooty Bad Moon ork collection tends to be wasted with the default melee-focused index rules, but would get new potential with better ranged weapon bonuses. That wouldn't make existing Ork lists any stronger, it just gives more choice.
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2023 10:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 19:38 |
|
|
Devorum posted:This just drives home, to me, how much the "one detachment until codex" system sucks. Hopefully the free sponsons and upgrades and weapons keep indexes viable into the codex era.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2023 11:28
|
|
|
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/08/28/smash-or-sneak-you-decide-in-a-first-look-at-new-detachments-from-codex-tyranids/ It's that time again, codex preview time! Sadly they only briefly talk about 2 out of the 5 different detachments.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2023 11:58
|
|
|
Currently my tyranid force is whats in the leviathan box plus a boarding patrol which includes six warriors, genestealers and a broodlord, what sort of detachment would that be i wonder...
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2023 12:38
|
|
|
Devorum posted:This just drives home, to me, how much the "one detachment until codex" system sucks.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2023 12:51
|
|
|
The hope is that they add extra detatchments and update index armies as the codexes roll out, so at leats there's some choice and index armies don't fall below parity. The expectation is lol, lmao
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2023 12:55
|
|
|
When you guys are saying "index armies" do you mean armies that don't have one of these codexes released yet? Which I presume is most currently since the new edition just came out? Or does that mean something else?
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2023 13:21
|
|
|
Weird Pumpkin posted:When you guys are saying "index armies" do you mean armies that don't have one of these codexes released yet? Which I presume is most currently since the new edition just came out? Yeah, everyone’s got an index right now with one detachment in it since this edition changed things enough the old codexes couldn’t apply. They’ll be replaced with codexes as those come out with more detachments and revised unit data sheets with tyranids being the first book out.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2023 13:24
|
|
|
from the codex previews it seems like if you're the sort of person who goes all in on a collecting a giant single-faction army they really give you alot of options to diversify what you can do with them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2023 13:26
|
|
|
Al-Saqr posted:from the codex previews it seems like if you're the sort of person who goes all in on a collecting a giant single-faction army they really give you alot of options to diversify what you can do with them. It's quite a neat system, I've only started playing again in the last year or so and back in 9th it let me try a different "army" almost every game (hive fleets for tyranids) without having to learn all new datacards etc. Of course I wasn't playing super seriously otherwise I would just have used leviathan, but it is good in theory.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2023 13:59
|
|
|
I think for me I dont plan on going for a single big army, since I'm essentially single-handedly starting my local scene once I'm done painting what I have in the long term I will buy combat patrols of different factions and work my way towards having 1000 points of different factions so me and the people I play with have variety.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2023 14:04
|
|
|
To go back to the earlier point I was making about "simplification" by removing stratagems and the idea that you can limit complexity by saying "OK have lots of strats but only bring 6 to the table". It's now confirmed that the Tyranid codex will have 6 detachments, each of which has 6 stratagems. If the bar for complexity was always "I feel the need to learn and recall every rule in both my and my opponents armies" it means you have to learn 36 stratagems to understand how a "Tyranid" opponent may play. Yeah sure you only need to recall 6 for that specific game, but if you can't recall them all then it's failed to meet that bar because your opponent can use any set of them. Unlike before where every single marine army had the same core set of strats that they used and was important (e.g. Transhuman) now the "key" strats to remember may be something like 2 per detachment. So the player playing the army only needs to remember 6, and REALLY remember 2, their opponent needs to remember 12. Honestly I'm sort of glad I've moved house as 10th has launched. The balance seems depressing and the state of the game as more codexes come out looks to be as frustrating as when Guard waited all of 9th to get a codex and then it was binned months later. On top of that, I don't really buy that the game feels more simplified, admittedly I've not actually played a game yet, but I've watched a fair few and nothing strikes me as simplified. On top of that the daft idea to basically turn points into power level throws up some weird quirks, and I'm not fully convinced they will stick with it and free Wargear for the entire of 10th. My suspicion is it will be like the start of 9th when they decided everything you bought with points needed to be in increments of 5 and then scrapped it half way through. That's my grumpy rant over. I suspect what I may do is play kill team in my own home with my friends as that seems to be working well until 10e has been fixed a bit.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2023 14:24
|
|
|
why would you need to memorize? your friend or whatever is gonna bring a specific detachment and all you need to do is know what is he going to field and play accordingly.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2023 14:36
|
|
|
I do agree with not being sold on the half-baked, quarter-assed implementation of "power level with bigger numbers" when it comes to wargear. Gonna be...interesting...to see how that works out over time. They need to pick a lane on that and re-work a bunch of infrastructural stuff around it one way or another for it to be a well integrated, sensical approach. My concern with that is that it will required bigger picture organization and design philosophy extending across the entire game. That level of planning and coordination is, let's say, new to GW's approach to things.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2023 14:36
|
|
|
https://bloodknife.com/improving-strategic-outcomes-for-the-black-crusade-xiv/ You find random 40k related articles in the weirdest places. This one made me chuckle at least a couple of times.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2023 14:41
|
|
|
I hope they double down on the no costs for wargear. I'm very happy with not having to loving nickle and dime 5 or 10 points on crisis suits over and over to try and hit the magic limit. +20 points for a shield drone get out of here
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2023 14:46
|
|
|
Kitchner posted:it means you have to learn 36 stratagems to understand how a "Tyranid" opponent may play. That's 100% not what that means, it means you're going to be asking your friend what strats he's got for two or three turns. It's also entirely possible there's four core army strategems and two detachment-specific add-ons.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2023 14:51
|
|
|
Cooked Auto posted:https://bloodknife.com/improving-strategic-outcomes-for-the-black-crusade-xiv/ Comparing McKinsey & co. to Abaddon isn't very fair to Abaddon
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2023 14:55
|
|
|
I'm of a mixed mind about it, the ease of list building is loving great but it's also rough when your list building leaves you with 20+ points that you just have to leave unspent. Some of that is just the state of being a Grey Knights player right now and having an incredibly limited bench but it still sucks.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2023 14:58
|
|
|
Abaddon, well known for fixing bread prices in the fourth quadrant and pushing Oxy all over terra.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2023 15:04
|
|
|
Devorum posted:This just drives home, to me, how much the "one detachment until codex" system sucks. Yeah, if you're new to 40k there's a good analogy in calling a codex a patch; just imagine you main an under powered hero in Overwatch or whatever and you're waiting season after season for the issue to be addressed. Except, you know, your hero cost several hundred dollars and months of hobby work.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2023 15:26
|
|
|
Al-Saqr posted:why would you need to memorize? your friend or whatever is gonna bring a specific detachment and all you need to do is know what is he going to field and play accordingly. I play in a league and tournaments, you don't know what your opponent is going to bring until you're matched, and even then you'll just know "Tyranids". The argument of playing with your mates is that there was only ever like 6 strats that were used frequently for each army anyway and if all you ever do is play with your mate you'll learn them in time anyway. The Deleter posted:I hope they double down on the no costs for wargear. I'm very happy with not having to loving nickle and dime 5 or 10 points on crisis suits over and over to try and hit the magic limit. +20 points for a shield drone get out of here Alternatively when your lost is 20 points short and there's literally nothing in your army that costs 20 points what do you do? From a Grey Knight perspective if I end up with a 2K list that is 50 points short, I either by an enhancement I don't need and won't even spend the full amount, or basically re-write the list. I find that way more frustrating than "Oh I'm X points under/over let's just throw in a random power weapon/trim some stuff off. moths posted:That's 100% not what that means, it means you're going to be asking your friend what strats he's got for two or three turns. Daft argument really, no offence. If you played against my Grey Knights or CSM with then 30+ stratagems in the book you'd have never really needed to learn more than about 8 maximum. Unless your friend completely wrote radically different lists each game in which case they can do the same now and you need to learn 36. On top of that if you're framing it in the context of playing against the same people and they are a friend a) they shouldn't sucker punch you with a strat and b) you wouldn't fall for it twice. I think the WarCom article said/implied 6 per detachment. It's possible there's core army ones and ones for detachments hut I doubt it. Mark my words, one of two things will happen: 1) turns out GW balance is still shite and even though each codex gets 6 detachments only 1 or 2 will ever be optimal and you only ever learn the 6/12 for those. It will feel simplified but the detachment system will be a total waste. 2) the detachments are relatively balanced and every single army has about 24 stratagems that will see play depending on the detachment and people who feel its "too complicated" now will say nothings changed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2023 15:35
|
|
|
The Deleter posted:I hope they double down on the no costs for wargear. I'm very happy with not having to loving nickle and dime 5 or 10 points on crisis suits over and over to try and hit the magic limit. +20 points for a shield drone get out of here I could actually get behind the approach of revamping wargear system entirely, if they incorporated that decision into the mechanics from the ground up. In the perfect world that exists in my head, remove wargear completely and every unit has two to three mutually exclusive choices of built-in bonuses of whatever works to achieve the goal of differentiating on the table performance. No fiddling with points and book keeping on each individual model, just mutually exclusive unit-level choices. Brief off the cuff example; for a squad of space marines the choice you make is "Choose one: Everyone gets frag grenades that do XYZ to make them charge resistant, or everyone gets punchier bolt gun ammo to make them a bigger shooting threat". Two different minor, supplementary bonuses to give them slightly different bonuses to different roles with no fiddly wargear points costs and tracking which model costs what and who needs to have which weapon modeled. I'd be OK with that approach to "wargear" under the currently implemented points mechanics. Right now we have vehicles getting every single extra sponson weapon for free, everybody whose not stupid taking adrenaline glands for free on every Tyranid model and so on because we're in a half-baked, not completely implemented middle ground and it's just dumb all around.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2023 15:53
|
|
|
Kitchner posted:I play in a league and tournaments, you don't know what your opponent is going to bring until you're matched, and even then you'll just know "Tyranids". (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2023 16:02
|
|
|
Yeah the book is out in a few weeks, we can panic about it then. I'd rather address important questions like; Is the Jakhal's Skullmasher named that because it's literally a sphere of skulls, or because it's used to mash skulls?
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2023 16:05
|
|
|
The Deleter posted:I didn't read any of this. Probably for the best, you wouldn't have had anything clever or interesting to say even if you had. Would have been a huge waste of your time! (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2023 16:09
|
|
|
Simple fix, have the data card pack come with 2 copies of each detachment/stratagem card. One for you, one for your opponent. Boom, problem solved.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2023 16:10
|
|
|
Douche Phoenix posted:Simple fix, have the data card pack come with 2 copies of each detachment/stratagem card. One for you, one for your opponent. In 9th i owned the deck of cards with all my strats on for every single army and I even sorted through them pre-game so it only consisted of the strats I could possibly use, and then I even arranged them so the top half (or 6 or whatever) was the most important ones that I'm most likely to use. I did all that for me, because I used them as a reference. I don't think a single opponent ever asked me to have a look at the cards or the strats in my codex. They did often ask to read them as I used them, that's sort of a different topic though. A few did ask about strats before the game (e.g. Can you advance and charge, do you have transhuman etc). By the half way point of 9th most had an idea of roughly the tricks I could pull with my armies, and it was mostly explaining the specifics (e.g. The teleport the GMDK happens after you target it and you can choose a new target, and it only happens once). I guess you could sell a pack of cards with the 36 strats duplicated (so 72 cards total) and give the 6 over to your opponent at the start of the game. Depends whether people feel they can read 6 strats for the first time and understand how they are used and how to play around then in the 10 minutes it takes you to say hello and get to deployment. Kitchner fucked around with this message at 16:18 on Aug 28, 2023 |
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2023 16:15
|
|
|
Kitchner posted:Probably for the best, you wouldn't have had anything clever or interesting to say even if you had. Would have been a huge waste of your time! I wouldn't count any of the tedious screeds you post as clever or interesting so don't start patting yourself on the back yet.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2023 16:21
|
|
|
Kitchner posted:Daft argument really, no offence. If you played against my Grey Knights or CSM with then 30+ stratagems in the book you'd have never really needed to learn more than about 8 maximum. Unless your friend completely wrote radically different lists each game in which case they can do the same now and you need to learn 36. You're essentially saying that you need to memorize like 2 million MtG cards because your opponent is using Red. The strategems aren't hidden. You can ask to see which six your opponent has before the game. You can look them up on third party sites and print a cheat sheet if you don't want to ask. It's still very better than it was.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2023 16:27
|
|
|
The Deleter posted:I wouldn't count any of the tedious screeds you post as clever or interesting so don't start patting yourself on the back yet. Sure, but then again you clearly find counting hard.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2023 16:28
|
|
|
Kitchner posted:On top of that, I don't really buy that the game feels more simplified, admittedly I've not actually played a game yet, but I've watched a fair few and nothing strikes me as simplified. On top of that the daft idea to basically turn points into power level throws up some weird quirks, and I'm not fully convinced they will stick with it and free Wargear for the entire of 10th. So how's that armchair looking for you? Like seriously, making a rantpost about design when you literally have not touched the game in any way is hilarious.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2023 16:33
|
|
|
I'm confused, what's the argument here? That it's too hard to be familiar enough with your opponents stratagems to properly anticipate and play against them?
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2023 16:34
|
|
|
moths posted:You're essentially saying that you need to memorize like 2 million MtG cards because your opponent is using Red. I mean the same argument does apply to my point though right? You don't have to remember every single red card in MTG standard because the reality is there's only a handful of one's you'll actually expect to see in a deck. The previous world was each codex had about 36 stratagems in it, but in reality you didn't need to learn them all to play your army or even play against someone else, because in truth only about ten had any use for a given army. I'm not saying the existing system is automatically worse, I'm saying its going to probably be the same (so the goal will have failed) , but has the potential to be worse if all the detachments genuinely see play. The stratagems weren't hidden in 9th and you could easily just read your opponent's codex/stratagem deck/third party sites etc. While most books had more than 6 subfactions, generally only two or three saw play at most. My guess is going to be that only one or two detachments will see serious play from each codex, but if they nail internal balance and all see play, it's a lot to remember.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2023 16:36
|
|
|
Even if tyranids have 6 detachments, everyone will hyper focus on the one agreed optimal one.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2023 16:38
|
|
|
The Deleter posted:I wouldn't count any of the tedious screeds you post as clever or interesting so don't start patting yourself on the back yet. Kitchner posted:Sure, but then again you clearly find counting hard. Abbadon looking through the window: "yes... hahaha... YESSS"
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2023 16:41
|
|
|
Jack B Nimble posted:Except, you know, your hero cost several hundred dollars and months of hobby work. Lol are we talking about videogames or warhammer?
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2023 16:43
|
|
|
Cyouni posted:So how's that armchair looking for you? I played in competitive leagues and tournaments all the way through 9th, I probably played more competitive warhammer than the majority of people who post in this thread. I've played warhammer 40K for about 15 years. I'm completely OK with the fact that maybe I'm totally wrong, and when I get around to played 10th I'm going to say "you know what, despite all my experience I was totally wrong and 10e balance is great and they really have simplified the game". Maybe that will happen, I'm big enough to be OK with the fact I may be wrong. All I'm saying is, giving my experience, the data coming out of tournaments, the discussion online and in person, and having read the rules and the announcements, I'm not really bothered by the fact I've missed this initial part of 10th. I don't think I would have enjoyed it, and I don't think I'm going to begin playing competitively regularly again until its shaken out. Jack B Nimble posted:I'm confused, what's the argument here? That it's too hard to be familiar enough with your opponents stratagems to properly anticipate and play against them? There is a prevailing online opinion that 9th edition was too complicated, because of all the subfactions and the stratagems. The argument was that opponents can pull tricks out of a bag you don't anticipate because there's so many. My view was even though there was a lot of strats, you don't actually need to remember loads because only a few are really regularly used and important. When it was announced each detachment would have "only" 6 strats to simplify things some people welcomed this as simplification, my argument is that if all 6 detachments see play then to anticipate anything a player can do, you also need to be able to anticipate any of the detachments they may play. In 9th there were more subfactions than 6 generally, but for now they seem like the detachments are more radically different. Kitchner fucked around with this message at 16:50 on Aug 28, 2023 |
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2023 16:48
|
|
|
It is exceedingly easy to wrap your head around an entire SIX stratagems before the game starts. I've played ~10 games of 10th edition against 7 different factions. Before every game I looked over the strats and went "hey do you mind just quickly explaining each of these to me and how you use them", and my opponent then spent about a minute doing so, and then I did the same for him. Even if my opponent had been some kind of rear end in a top hat who refused to explain the strats to me, I would have wrapped my head around them in two minutes. The second time I played each faction I didn't even need to ask. The fact that there might now be 36 Tyranid stratagems (or not, we don't really know) doesn't matter when your opponent is only using 6 of them in this particular game. Compare this to coming cold to a faction in 9th where you had dozens of stratagems and you couldn't know which ones were relevant without spending a long time reading each and absorbing them, and there is absolutely no comparison. 10th isn't perfect but this is one of the good changes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2023 16:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 19:38 |
|
|
When it was explained to me on Saturday, it sounded like the strategems/army trait stuff was sort of public knowledge in any given game, so I guess I assumed you could just ask your opponent what ones they're using before the deployment/game starts 
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2023 16:55
|
|