|
Hollismason posted:Should I make a Warhammmer Tactics and army lists for 40k Discussion thread? Honestly, either a 40k thread or just General Netlist Central would be fine. Not a bad plan either way.
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2014 02:41
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 13, 2024 21:15 |
|
|
Net lists can also mean lists that look skewed on paper and which negatively affect discussion of an army book without actually being a balanced review of said book. In theory.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2014 04:02
|
|
|
Does anyone know of a simple, cool, easily available conversion/alternative for Space Marine attack bikes? They're like the single model which has never been considered cool by anyone since the game's inception.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 4, 2014 22:37
|
|
|
I'm honestly surprised they never released dataslates for chapters like the Templars.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 17, 2014 20:47
|
|
|
Ignite Memories posted:No but literally, who even gets a 2++ anywhere? There's a few ways I know of. Dark Eldar with Eldar allies can get that 2++ to a rerollable state, and Eldar on their own can stack Shrouded and Stealth for an effective 2++ - I don't remember the specifics offhand. Demons can take heralds of Tzeentch, roll up Forewarning on the Divination table, cast it on a unit of Screamers and put the Fateweaver + Grimoire of True Names in there for a 2++ (reroll ones), which is a pretty common tournament deal. A lot of people focus more on Invisibility now, or stack it with the above if they really want to lose friends and win space barbies.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2014 15:55
|
|
|
raverrn posted:I think I'm in love with the new Grey Knights. Tell us more. Doing it in the form of a sonnet is optional.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2014 16:08
|
|
|
There's an entire section of the Grey Knights codex that feels like an apology for that blood tide crap, so that's decent? Shame about the half-hundred point plus paladins, though.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2014 18:55
|
|
|
Yeah, pretty much. SoBs still get to pull on their martyr imagery by sacrificing their lives in glorious battle to hold back the Chaos tides to give Draigo and his troops time and opportunity to end a demonic invasion, which fits much better than portrayed-as-Chaos-immune Grey Knights having to kill a bunch of battle ready chaos-immune warriors to make themselves resist Chaos better, let alone the worse aspects of that bit of fiction.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2014 19:13
|
|
|
Are there any good pterodactyl style models aside from Ripperdactyls out there that would work well with 40k? I want to try my hand at converting an Exodite force and doing levitating barges drawn by flying dinosaurs as a DE Raider conversion.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2014 21:34
|
|
|
The Dark Eldar codex gave Eldar players access to deep-striking open topped transports.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2014 22:45
|
|
|
Played Grey Knights for the first time, against Tau no less. Not super impressed with infantry performance but good lord is the Dreadknight way better than anything else on the table/in the codex, by far the superior choice in its slot and probably the best choice in the book for its price. Even when one doesn't arrive until turn 6. I mean, instakilling the enemy commander and most of his squad on arrival sort of makes up for that. GKs strike me as being almost or even more luck based than the buckets-o-dice Orks. At least Orks get buckets. Psilencers can instakill a multiwound infantry squad or an enemy monstrous creature, but it's a huge gamble. Even when you're not targeted by near ubiquitous AP2 weapons, you're still relying on luck to carry your terminator armor. I'm not sure I'm sold on that yet. 40k is turborandom, there's no need to compound the issue. I've seen people mention monobuilds, but are there any good posts and strategies floating around I could read? I've seen the gamut from "never take paladins/purifiers" to "you will always take paladins/purifiers".
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2014 15:34
|
|
|
That is a pretty interesting overview to me, even with the strict restrictions on them. Any reason for not going with two ranged weapons on the dreadknight aside from points?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2014 06:22
|
|
|
All my (both) experiences with knights have been fun so far, even when they don't do much - and at least they always seem to manage something. They're able to survive a lot of fire, can dish out a lot of punishment, don't suffer the Dreadnaught problem of being easy to tie down in combat for the entire game, but also are not invulnerable and present a pretty fair challenge. Their rules are a little clunky, but I'm pleasantly surprised and feel like they're a pretty decent addition to the game. Gonna convert me up a pair.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2014 18:06
|
|
|
JerryLee posted:Storyline-obsolete models isn't actually an issue insofar as they're already making minis for two different settings 10,000 years apart. Is anybody going to give someone poo poo for playing Konrad Curze in 30k-in-40k just because Curze is canonically dead? Or sperg out over the fact that your Calas Typhon isn't a plague-mutated horror yet? Watching two eldar players argue until red in the face over which one got to take Eldrad (because there's only one of him around, obviously) is a fond memory of mine.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2014 10:29
|
|
|
REAL MUSCLE MILK posted:That seems like you will not really be able to do a lot Warhammer-related with it. The scale is really off. Stick it on a flying base and play battlefleet gothic.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2014 17:27
|
|
|
I'm probably way late to the party on finding this, but apparently Horus Heresy has a super special Space Marine Katana in it that can cut tank barrels (Master-Crafted because of course it is, Rending) available to any HQ and one special dedicated katana-duellist unit for the Emperor's Children. I think Forge World understands this hobby.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2014 23:53
|
|
|
He's manipulating the "Select a Weapon" portion of the firing sequence. You have to resolve each weapon type on a model/in a unit one at a time, and there is no restriction on which weapon you fire with first. Ordnance has no special thing stating it has to be fired first or that it can't fire if you've fired other weapons, only that you can't fire other weapons at normal BS after firing an Ordnance one. The intent is pretty clearly that you fire Ordnance and that's it, but the rules do allow you to fire other things first and the interaction is weird. Depends on how much of an rear end in a top hat you want to be, basically.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2014 21:12
|
|
|
You know, I would have thought they'd make more limited edition miniatures to drive the collector's market. Not loving rulebooks.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2014 03:01
|
|
|
Personally I love that moment when people realize that the skimmer rule means Monoliths can jink.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2014 05:55
|
|
|
There's nothing inherent in a rules-balanced or tightly designed game that prevents, precludes or minimizes a narrative. Designing "for" a narrative should in no way mean worse rules balancing, and usually having a tighter ruleset creates more interesting situations as opposed to "and then the Tau shot everything to pieces and won the day yet again". It also means more units (and therefore $models$) being useful and seeing play and being more effective and fun instead of dividing armies into must-buys and leave-outs. And yes, some players will run them anyway and "forge the narrative". That's great for them. Let's make that exact thing easier to do for everyone else whose frustration tolerances aren't quite that high.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2014 18:29
|
|
|
Hey, we got Katanas a few books ago. 40k is just catching up.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2014 19:45
|
|
|
Not a viking posted:I'm selling my chaos space marines. listing removed/not available. I'm not even sure why I checked, guess I just have an ebay reflex for warhams now.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2014 23:59
|
|
|
I can see it being a deal if someone in the group buys a new unit and notices the new Marine bases lets more orks swarm into combat, or gets a single Assault Marine unit and whoops now all the other ones are uneven what gives, things like that. I mean, entirely aside from a tournament wanting standard and official, there's plenty of reasons why this will be annoying enough to some people that they'll want to deal with it.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2014 15:33
|
|
|
Wow, I did not expect BAs to keep their flame pistols. That's a nice little bonus.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2014 23:04
|
|
|
The Deepcut Studios mats tend to slide a bit but if you have any sort of underlay or grain on the table it's just fine. I like everything else about them so far, I got one for X-wing and one for generic games so far and might want others.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2014 23:46
|
|
|
BlackIronHeart posted:I guess I'm one of the outliers that doesn't want the timeline progressed but I do wish GW came up with solid campaign rules that would guide people through creating a campaign with multiple factions. Rules and guidelines for how to drive that campaign forward would be great. I'm lucky enough to have a friend who decided to take that on himself and we've been playing out a pretty awesome campaign that's utilized BFG, Kill Team and regular 40K games as Orks vs. Eldar on a Necron tomb world. It's been a lot of fun and I think more people would enjoy this sort of thing. The day GW both encourages you to use their product in a Forge Your Narrative way and also provides actual direct support for actually doing that will be a day to remember.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2014 01:09
|
|
|
An Angry Bug posted:Or at least create armies or units for more races. How about more than one type of Vespid, or a viable all-Watcher in the Dark army. Some stories about previous galaxies that got wiped out by the Tyranids, or campaigns from when the Eldar were still being killed off by Slaanesh. The RP series seems to get this sort of thing right, but I want to play with models, or there's not much point. Hell, actually support Kill Team. That's the sort of game style I'd absolutely adore. It just feels like there's so much unexplored or downright ignored in the setting. Exodites. I mean, who doesn't want an army of Eldar who conquer a space empire on foot through the webway, riding dinosaurs and rocking out with old school Wood Elf mohawks?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2014 01:15
|
|
|
Mod Bolt Action into Bolter Action, imo.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2014 01:40
|
|
|
40k hooks people by presenting these stories. It is not unreasonable to ask people hooked by them to ask for resolution, and the "it's a massive setting you can play anywhere!!!" thing doesn't address that.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2014 02:12
|
|
|
"I bet all of you who disagree with me are crybabies  " yeah, great post guyIt's basic storytelling. You build a situation, you bring it to a climax, and then you give it a resolution. GW wants to have its buildup and climax cake but doesn't want to ever resolve anything, which in basically all writing circles, books and resources you could ever find will tell you is a Bad Idea. And it doesn't even have to be resolution of major plot points; simple stuff like Sanctus Reach could have a definite end tomorrow if GW wanted it to and they could move on to another campaign. Multiple games which don't destroy factions or kill off characters at any point ever manage to do this. They even kind of did that with the first Armageddon war, but there they try to have and eat their cake again by just having it re-happen with very little modification. And the reason it's a bad idea to over-delay or even never have a resolution? Because it makes the reader frustrated or even feel cheated and grow tired of it all. Hey, that almost sounds familiar. I hope that helps you understand other people who play the same game that you do in ways that are not yours without the use of qq emotes.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2014 02:52
|
|
|
Rapey Joe Stalin posted:You are still confusing setting with story. What is the first armageddon war if not a story within a setting? What are any of 40k's various ongoing evolving-over-time setting bits if not a continuous line of storytelling? Not all of them are just additions to a setting. They're story hooks. You probably already know all that and understand it, but defending 40k's honor takes precedence apparently. PeterWeller posted:Climax is resolution. It is when the conflict is resolved. The point of 40K fiction is to give you a climax you can resolve on the table with your toys. Even very basic dramatic theory will tell you that climax isn't even second-to-last when it comes to resolving a story. The climax is just a turning point (or a battle) and the game has those. It then doesn't give a poo poo about falling action or resolution or give you ideas for how to approach those in an ongoing narrative or campaign, not even with the ongoing campaigns that are published on an official basis across multiple sets. "So just forge the narrative" only goes so far. Yes, you can put all the work in and make up your own thing and it will be drat satisfying. What the game is doing is not that, it doesn't give you the tools for it, and it deliberately hooks people with specific plot elements and important battles for specific armies that it then never goes anywhere with, and you don't really get to blame the customer for not making poo poo up hard enough to compensate for some other guy not doing the basic job of storytelling. e: and this bullshit about "it's always been just a setting" is bullshit. The Armageddon war had a beginning, a middle, and an end. Lots of things published by GW followed that structure for years and years. They just stopped doing it. Rulebook Heavily fucked around with this message at 03:29 on Dec 7, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2014 03:27
|
|
|
Hell, here's a radical concept: they can take the current "just add more detail to the setting" approach and set an entire conflict 3-400 years in the past. That's the case for Gaunt's Ghosts, a not unsuccessful series set in 40k of multiple novels which move forward while also having their own arcs and even multi-book arcs, now with models you can field on the table. You can tell an entire story, or set an entire campaign, in that kind of time with ease. The partner-company Forge World has done this successfully with much loved results in the Badab War and now with an entire game line. But the official stuff hamstrings itself by insisting on just adding more to 999.M41 all the time.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2014 03:36
|
|
|
The ideal here is something like the Land Raider Crusader. It was introduced with a specific faction of Space Marines, and then given a few hundreds of years of history which made the port to all the other Space Marines easier. I think the company just burned its fingers on the 13th Black Crusade and overreacted by never entering the kitchen again, that's my 40k story.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2014 03:58
|
|
|
e: and entirely aside from what is wrong with this, JerryLee is correct about why the "it's a sandbox" thing is a half-hearted excuse.PeterWeller posted:Nah man, that is basic dramatic theory. The climax is the resolution of the conflict. It is the peak of the narrative arc. Everything after is just stuff settling into place. One, no, you're getting some pretty important poo poo wrong in dramatic theory there just to argue a stupid point about 40k setting fiction (the climax is just a point of action after which there's an entire separate and even multiple stages of resolution), and two, the problem is that they're not only not doing it anymore, they're just adding more poo poo to the 999.m41 date as if they're going to one day resolve things but don't ever want to do it again. That they stopped resolving things, and stopped making things that they could realistically resolve, is the entire problem. They're in permanent lovely Anime filler material mode and people are defending this as good and just and the fault of the customer for not caring correctly. Rulebook Heavily fucked around with this message at 04:34 on Dec 7, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2014 04:32
|
|
|
Mange Mite posted:Bolter Action would be cool and if you start with incremental changes from existing Bolt Action rules it would probably not be too hard for a single person or like a 2-man team to work on it. I've already started work on it with a couple of nice people, alongside my entirely separate wholesale 40k rules project. It's like some kind of addiction.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2014 02:01
|
|
|
It's not like they won't release day one DLC that has alternate FOCs.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2014 00:30
|
|
|
Here's a rare instance of a codex that might be perfectly fine in every way and still piss its long-term established players off (that +1 strategic trait relic is gold if true). No wonder they're pushing a new BA-themed tac squad kit right around now, though. Sticking to the Crusader Squad for my troop choice assaults still, thanks.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2014 05:17
|
|
|
Keeping hand flamers and getting heavy flamers in tac squads is outright incredible. It's going to make Salamanders jealous. It's just a complete shift in the army's dynamic from what it's been for a long time, and with the "and here's our handy new Tac Squad kit!" timing it looks on the face of it like GW's regular bull. But like I said, there's no way the day one DLC won't do something for assault armies.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2014 05:31
|
|
|
TheChirurgeon posted:This is a really good idea. Something that should go in the rules/description for each vehicle with its entry in the relevant codex. That's almost as good of an idea as actually having the stats for weapons and rules a unit uses in a little graphic somewhere in the gigantic wasted space on their rules entry page.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2014 21:38
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 13, 2024 21:15 |
|
|
PeterWeller posted:None of that really matters to a new player. They aren't stuck with an excess of elites and FA and no troops. A new player gets that box and has a pretty cool little HQ and elites section to build off with a clear next step: pick up two troops. It matters to a new player because the box says those units are troops and then you get the codex and it turns out it was lying to you.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2014 18:30
|
|