|
ZeroCount posted:i would like to talk about star wars and/or anime Gundams are cool. They robit as gently caress. But not 00. More like Turn A. The right balance is somewhere between Wing and Iron Blood. Definitely not Victory. Let's not even bring up SEED.
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2016 17:13
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 14:59 |
|
|
Autism Sneaks posted:Corvus Belli's Infinity, home of cool Muslim Master Chiefs (though pictured dude is Yu Jing) and catgirl doctors And hyper-sexualized women.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 2, 2017 15:59
|
|
|
This is my infinity 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 3, 2017 19:27
|
|
|
Fess up, who made the loving scrunts wikia.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2017 00:10
|
|
|
BULBASAUR posted:Which makes no sense with such a massive IP. You don't just piss away years of brand recognition for no good reason. Nobody does this because it's bad and dumb. lol
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2017 22:54
|
|
|
That is just one step removed from Nigmo on the fake & dumb & Please Don't Do That scale.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2017 17:54
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:To make a better game? Hell yes. That's literally what happened with D&D4e and it was Do you actually own anything from GW?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2017 18:45
|
|
|
Atlas Hugged posted:Perhaps it is the dad thread? Good pick, considering that 30k is 100% about daddy issues.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2017 18:43
|
|
|
Drone posted:Anyone who has the sheer lack of self-awareness that is required to unironically utter the word "Bloodsecrator" really needs to be committed to an institution. 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2017 19:39
|
|
|
Thirsty Dog posted:I dunno man, furries usually are the worst part of any hobby 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2017 19:27
|
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:Is there anything more illustrative of the downfall of the Imperium than the difference between Heresy-era Space Wolves and 40k Space Wolves? Storm grey to baby blue is, indeed, shameful.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2017 19:33
|
|
|
The denial/closet love of GW in here is strong. You must all be Republicans.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2017 15:40
|
|
|
This thread is called the death thread because it's where brain cells go to die
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2017 17:26
|
|
|
Atlas Hugged posted:Everything about GW is still garbage. You guys have just mistaken "better than other garbage" for "not garbage" and I get why that's an easy mistake to make. I agree. Brothers, it is with deep regret that I've decided to withdraw my Great Company back to the Aett and submit to spiritual cleansing by the Wolf Priests after one too many losses. My stubborness in refusing allies, even ones which are approved by the Rout such as the Imperial Knights allied to Fenris, Imperial Guard regiments seeking glory alongside the Rout, even the beautiful and war worthy Celestine ..... .... sigh, sorry can't make a nice narrative out of this. Put it simply, I'm tired of 40K and my wolves and will retire from the scene until 8th edition. Since I started in 2014, I've only made use of Space Wolves, first the 6th Ed codex, then Champions of Fenris, then Curse of the Wulfen. I keep telling myself that I don't need to jump on the allied or multiple detachment to defeat Eldar, Tau, Necrons or even our supposedly subpar (at least until Traitors Legion supplement) enemies the Chaos Space Marines. Now though, it appears that no matter what I do, even if I am tactically sound which according to most of my opponents I am, I keep handing myself the smackdown by choosing to face SM/CSM with Imperial Knights allies, Ynnari, Cawl buffed Mechanicum, and heck, most recently, a simple formation of 4 daemon princes called Tetrachs. 4 Daemons (plus a small CAD of nurgle daemons). Smashed my entire force of 1500 wolves. Which had Wulfen, Iron Priest on wolf, even a Stormfang Gunship for anti-air which I was anticipating, though not 4 FMCs. And to round it off, a small Deathpack formation to be able to run and charge a TWC gang and a Thunderlord with shield an sword. rest of army was 3 Drop pods of MSU. If that isn't depressing, I don't know what is. I've been tabled before and was able to laugh like mad, even to Tau. This one along with many others just left a very sour taste in my mouth. They didn't just bring a gun to a knife fight. They brought automatic weapons, a tank, an F22 raptor and a nuke as well. Sorry mates, my wolf spirit has been quenched, along with my 40K spirit. That being said, I haven't written off the hobby entirely and have decided to focus on just assembly and painting at least for a few months before going back, hopefully just in time for 8th Edition. I still love the Vlka Fenryka. I have no intention of going vanilla or any other army. But it looks like I have to accept in my heart that for a long time now, the Wolves have not been able to stand up themselves, even after Curse of the Wulfen came out. A Blood Angel friend of mine has suggested 30K as an alternative, which I've accepted and therefore will be focusing on painting ALL my Burning of Prospero figures into the 6th Legion. Get me into the painting groove and at the same time, it's almost like making a fresh new army without giving up my first love of the Vlka Fenryka. Another alternative is to find a different FLGS for different meta. I just wish I could forget about competitiveness and just play with whatever the heck I want, even Swiftclaws and Skyclaws. Sadly if i do that, I'm handing a big "SMASH ME" sign to my whole meta. The kind of meta who will never play mutilators, non flying hive tyrant Tyrannid swarms or assault marines beyond skyhammer formation. Don't know why I'm posting this, I guess I'm hoping that what I feel is normal among some of you old timers especially between edition changes, or whether you guys have ever felt "tired" of your army before. Until the next winter.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2017 17:50
|
|
|
Safety Factor posted:Time will heal these wounds my friend. Wise counsel has been provided, take a break. Looking for a new group or even a like minded player within your existing group willing to 'dumb down' some games. I've had one guy that I've played with consistently for a few years now. He plays everything, I only play wolves but we're both relaxed, think that doing some 'dumb' stuff once in a while is OK and aren't really about power creep. The best part is that I can't tell you how many times other players have stopped at our table and asked the same question 'Are you guys over here LAUGHING?' because the idea of playing a game without the need to 'Crush your enemy, see him driven blah blah blah' is a foreign concept to many that play. TTerrible posted:I actually am in the same boat as you. I started my wolves almost 30 years ago in the early 1990's believe it or not. I have thousands of points of well painted models. However over the last year, I see GW going in a direction I don't want to go and honestly I don't think they are ever going back. Models will keep getting bigger and more powerful. I don't see 40k ever going back to a strick codex system, which is how I always played. I enjoyed 40k when each codex had strengths and weaknesses, now every codex has evolved to have access to all types of units and can overcome any sort of weakness with allies, formations etc. People talk of 8th edition streamlining- I don't see that happening as one of the biggest bloats is all the formations which we see in AOS. Who cares if they lop off a few rules but then continue to add formation after formation with free rules to where you never know what your opponents list can do. Some folks have blamed your experiences on the gamers, I don't believe that to be true, if that were the case GW's recent moves to this system would have failed- I imagine in a few years you'll see 40k gamers bringing armies with multiple primarchs, mixed in with warmachines etc and the majority of folks will love it. That just isn't for me and seemingly for you either. I want my gaming experience to be focused on the marine, the backbone of the legion, yet those days are long gone. When marine 2.0 is heralded in, I would suspect you will still have rules for marine 1.0 but in an effort to sell 2.0, those rules will be far superior to 1.0. Thank you, brothers. You kind words warm even this heart that the cold of Fenris had frozen. For now I will take a break and let my wolves rest a while. The pups definitely deserve it after all the beatings we've taken from our enemies. You know, I've always wanted to go on a spiritual pilgrimage and find my totem animal. Of course I already know it's a wolf, but I wonder what kind of wolf. So much of my time has been used on 40k that I could only entertain the idea... but now I think I can do it. I could find myself, my true vlka fenryka self. Again thank you brothers. I think I know what I must do now. May the Great Wolf watch over you all.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2017 18:10
|
|
|
Safety Factor posted:So my 2 cents on the rumored changes. 'm tentatively excited by these changes. I've played variants of the rules they've mentioned in AoS and Emissary has given a fantastic break-down how it works. A key element is the sheer speed of the games compared to 40k, game turns are much faster. It sounds like people are concerned about the morale rules but what we have seen in AoS is a wide-range of ways to limit this effect. Command abilities from characters, unit size can increase leadership, certain banners in units. In 40k that could translate in a variety of ways: fearless could ignore battleshock; stubborn could count as half the models lost etc. Combat with chargers striking first is also a big deal. Assault units, despoilers and possibly even destroyers could see a huge advantage from this. Initiative would still be important from the second round, and you would be more likely to still be in a second round of combat due to the morale changes. However, that initial charge would seriously impact on the defenders chance to strike back - combat of Astrates versus Astartes would now be based on out-manoeuvring your opponent rather than luckier dice. Saving throw modifiers is a lot more interesting than AP. Now your armour is more graded rather than, it's working or blown through. As someone who has played since Rogue Trader, and lots of other systems that use a similar mechanism, it allows a finer differentiation of weapon. Bolters may be -1 but heavy bolters may be -2, lasguns might have no modifiers if they follow a similar system as before. Thicker armour like terminator plate may ignore modifiers of -1 or -2 and have a fixed minimum save - once again a system that has been tried, and works in AoS. I'm hoping cover is a modifier for 'to-hit' rolls as suddenly it becomes more tactical. Do you move your squad out into the open and hope their armour is good enough or do you lurk in cover and become harder to hit? I also found it funny that GW were talking about thematic armies that give bonuses - we already have that in 30k. They're called Rites of War and Legiones Astartes rules. My main hope is that these rules reward an infantry-based army that needs multiple tools (assault, tactical, defensive) in order to be successful. I think Shadow Wars: Armageddon will reveal a lot of the future development of 40k.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2017 22:21
|
|
|
Skinty McEdger posted:I really don't care for the AOS rule set, but I will say I think it'll be significantly less jarring for 40K players to go from their rules to something closer to AOS than it was for Fantasy players. May be a bit of a counter view, but I enjoy 40ks complexity over other systems. I agree that at entry level its good to have a simplified set of rules, but tbh thats achieved by simply limiting what the beginner learns with. The additional special rules, customisation, buffs/debuffs and situational things such as the cover system, nightfighting etc are all what separates it from other games. Yes there are always kinks and issues, but I do honestly love a decent level of complexity (although if we could centralise all the rules in one all available digital edition THAT'd be helpful!) I do understand this possibly isn't the majority vote though.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2017 22:50
|
|
|
nopantsjack posted:Also can we talk about what kinda sigmarification to expect from 8th? If you think AoS has too few choices to make in a turn, you are either a superior human being than the people you regularly play. Or more likely you haven't given it a proper go with the correct respect. AoS is mechanically a vastly superior game to 40k. If you enjoy tactical flexibility and decision making you should cheer for any rule ports from AoS. The movement phase alone makes 40k's movement phase look plain and binary. 40k has become too tied to the narrative of dice rolling, and lost its grasp on the reality. The dice are simply a tool of the mechanics and not the mechanicsics themselves. Rather than have to consult a dice roll chart to determine how effective a weapon is against a target. You build these effects into the system of unit interactions outside the domain of stat comparison. In AoS a sword is more effective agaisnt a orc than a stormcast because the orc has less armour and less wounds. These means mundane damage is a more heavy threat. Not because of a 1-10 scale system predicated on a d6. Don't be surprised to see AoS mechanics show up in other company's games over the next 3-5 years.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2017 22:57
|
|
|
Safety Factor posted:AoS has been an experience for GW, they have learned some things along the way and I would be more surprised if they didn't use their experiences from AoS in 40k. Does that mean they will just port it over as is? Not likely. Age of Sigmar (AoS). Free rules. Everyone rejoiced and there wasn't a word of descent on the matter whilst the flame-wars went on with other focus. This to me was actually a shame. Something no one suggested was an issue is actually one of the major problems with AoS. "The background is shallow" is the chorus we hear. The depth and soul of a gaming system is the cool background that makes the great miniatures we have painstakingly assembled and painted, come to life. How much cooler is it to have Magnus the Red leading a Warband against Space Wolves and settling old grudges, rather than generic big plastic monsters firing magic at generic armoured space knights? Well the crux of my post is thus; the free rules means players download the elements they need to play and have all the reading material they need. They don't buy background books they don't need. Given the choice between expensive books and new models and most folk go with the later. The proof is in the sales. If people don't have these books they won't be reading the amazing background material we all love. It'll be the unknown army of blue painted plastic vs red version. So I am of the opinion we need Codex books with rules and background to ensure the new players are as enamoured as ourselves. We don't want to be 5 years down the line and all the new players haven't a clue why Blood Angels have the Death Company, what their home planet is like or why the Dark Angels have Deathwing in different coloured armour.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2017 23:27
|
|
|
Iceclaw posted:And beside, why do you give a poo poo whether or not the guy in front of you know the minute details of the army you are fielding, opposite to say, him being a good sport and good opponent? Did you miss a most important part? Each faction has a binder/folder/something to keep RULES sheets in. These new books that I am proposing would have removable RULES that REPLACE/ADD/PDATE existing rules sheets. Leaving players free to take their rules around, and leave the fluff at home. Sure, restrict this method to codexes, so players see it more as an investment, and less as a chore to stay up to date. If we are going the "free rules" why not use White Dwarf, with removable pages to allow for codex updates instead? I'm not saying many many books to carry, but books that collect new releases in them, and provide pages for a living, GW supported codex. One that moves on EVERY edition change, and makes it easier and cheaper for both GW and players, thus leaving more money available for models/paints/etc.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2017 23:42
|
|
|
Iceclaw posted:Sorry. I should have precised "minute fluff details". If players do not care about why your jump pack dudes are black instead of red, it's often because they either don't care about the fluff of the game versus playing it, or because they don't find it good. A very good point, for all their name, Games Workshop doesn't really consider themselves a game company, for whatever reason. Everything is for selling models, period. They, accurately, realized that people like having stories to go along with their models, so they have a game, fluff, and books to go along with them. To get the most out of it, they also sell them. If you can get money for the game and fluff, why not sell it? The problem with that is, a lot of up and comers in the industry are selling their models, but giving their rules away for little or nothing. Every dollar not spent on a book is spent on models. Corvus Belli still sells books for rules and fluff for Infinity, but they aren't required as they provide an army builder and all the rules by digital format. Spartan Games does similar for their older games (their newer Halo and Taskforce games are not yet available for download). Privateer Press has provided the rules for each model for free since the beginning, and for the last year you can get the general rules for download. Dream Pod 9 have free rules for their Heavy Gear series. Hawk Wargames and Catalyst Labs haven't done it for Dropzone/Fleet and Battletech yet, but they can be considered outliers at this point. AoS' base rules are already free. You pay for expanding the playstyle of the game if you want to get very formal, but that's it. And there is always the option to run the models with the free 9th Age or Kings of War rules. TL;DR: There is no point selling rulebooks if fewer and fewer people buy them in favor of using another game's ruleset.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2017 23:55
|
|
|
TKIY posted:Grimdark is going away. AoS moved to high fantasy and tossed it's grimdark element away when it lost the Empire and vampire counts etc. [Depth and breadth] The great appeal of 40k for me has been the richness, rather than depth, of the setting. That's not to denigrate the longer stories and fantastic novels that have sprung up, but the thing that really caught my eye back in the dying years of Rogue Trader and the early years of 2nd edition were the bits of colour text. Few were more than three or four paragraphs, and virtually none were connected. They covered everything from new scribes being told to rejoice, as their work would never be finished; tank crews chatting about an unfortunate crew whose heating broke down; hiveworlds that died in a single night to a rebellious population; and sorcerors storing their favourite memories in crystal so he wouldn't go mad (again). None of my favourites really involved 'Boy's Own' action stuff. Instead, each created a worm's eye view of the inhabitants of this horrible time period. In a few short sentences, the writers would conjure worlds and cultures and characters that really sparked my imagination. They helped to create a sense of the galaxy as a vast and mostly empty place, dotted about with jewel-like planets that were all unique, rich and individual. The background didn't go into them, and that left them open to make your own stories. These stories were tiny details in a vast and uncaring galaxy, and I loved that sense of scale and potential for creativity. The individuals didn't sound ground-down or miserable. They were doing things that were normal and everyday for them – and that lack of awareness about the pointlessness or fragility of their lives is what helped to create pathos. Importantly, it wasn't 'grimdark' as it has subsequently been caricatured. 40k's roots aren't nihilistic – while there has always been the sense of an oppressive Imperium – horrible, inadequate and doomed – that was very rooted in the real-world politics of the 80s. There was a similar tongue-in-cheek understanding that you weren't meant to root for the crumbling authoritarian Imperium or its spokespeople. Just like 2000AD's Judge Dredd, 40k was a darkly humorous mirror. The crux, then, was the shift from breadth – a broad canvas to create your own characters and stamp out your own campaigns and stories; to depth – looking into the details and losing that god's eye view of the galaxy. 40k moved from a personal viewpoint to the third-person archetype characters – savage Ghazgkhull, noble Dante and so forth – and in so doing, started down the line of giving people more and more detail. Colour schemes, awards, campaigns, histories – all very cool, and I certainly gobbled it up; but that brought with it a shift in tone. +++ I prefer the sense of 'unknown setting to explore and create' to the 'ongoing narrative' for two reasons. The first is that narratives need to have arcs and closure to remain compelling. However much you love a story, there is a natural length to it. We all know a book, a film or television series that went on too long. The second is that the sense of a crumbling empire appeals to the historian in me. Because early 40k was more concerned with setting a tone than with filling in the details, there was always a sense of something more to find out – archaeology as opposed to narrative. So, I'd reject the idea that there's a deliberate split between 'grimdark, nihilistic, mature' 40k of RT and 'energetic, comic-book superheroes' of the current era, because I think that's unfair. There were always hints of hope in 40k, it's always been gloriously over-the-top, and it's always revelled in being self-aware enough not to get too po-faced and earnest. Beyond hoping for a cleaner game in rules terms, I'll be blithely continuing with my own little corners of the galaxy. The background is collaborative. If you don't like the direction GW are taking it, drop down from the god's eye view and find your way into the underhive warrens and echoing halls of the everyday inhabitants. Whatever happens between the semi-mythical heroes and villains of the story, you'll never hear about it – except in half-truths, irrelevant legends and propaganda – and the only certainties are that there'll always be someone (probably a bit scabby) with a rusty shiv, ready to kill you for your shirt. Importantly, there will always remain an oppressive, doomed feeling to the galaxy – whoever 'wins' is going to find their victory turn to ashes; and the galaxy fall into war again. After all, the universe is a big place and, whatever happens, you will not be missed.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 00:16
|
|
|
ijyt posted:Exactly, things change for better or worse, and you cannot please everyone while chasing the next cash infusion. I suppose you may consider me one of those people who was resistant to the idea of the setting moving forward in terms of story. For a long time I have been committed to the idea that it is a setting and not a story, therefor not in need of advancement. It was two minutes to midnight for literally decades for a reason - the Imperium stood on the precipice of oblivion, a long road set in motion by the Horus Heresy. The setting itself, dystopian and grim, lent itself to countless stories, both hopeful and hopeless. The whole universe of 40k has revolved around the fortunes, fates and mishaps of the Imperium. For myself, the darkness was enticing. But here we have something that challenges this ingrained attitude. New content, new developments, new story. Of course, I only speak as someone who is invested in the Imperium's side of the setting. My interest in Chaos is not as strong, but it still represents a major part of how things are in 40k. I care what either side is up to because they are both each other's worst enemy. Their destinies are intertwined. The reawakening of Guilliman was a major and irrevocable change to the setting that was one of those things I, among others, felt apprehensive about (and had done, about the general concept of bringing back the loyalist primarchs, for years). Such a strong narrative shift will not only affect things within the game and the community, but would also set a precedent for the future. The way things were won't be how they are any more. I suppose it's an inevitability, really. Sooner or later, something had to change. Had to 'progress'. Not that I'm saying that I thought it was necessary, mark you. Except, you already know that by now. So. The setting has moved on, albeit treading over ground already trodden... and yet not. But we won't go into that. What exactly is the point to resisting at this juncture? Stubbornness? Maybe. But let's get to the point. I have next to no influence on the setting*. I don't have the ear of any of the development team. I have no real way to conform universal canon to how I like it (and I shouldn't, with the exception of my own scribblings and personal 'head-canon'). The setting will move on with or without me. I can be the rock, immovable and largely unchanging, or I can be the water. Adapt to what I like (or tolerate), jettison what I don't. So, Guilliman now walks again? Okay. Cadia is gone? That's a shame but... okay. Do I have to like all of the details? Not really - for instance, I ignore 90% of the Clan Raukaan supplement as canon (but there are still small parts that I can let lie). I can live with these changes decently enough. It's not easy to dig yourself out of an entrenched position but the quote I have kept in my signature for years seems quite relevant right now... TL;DR - The world will always move on. With you, or without you.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 00:19
|
|
|
Ashcans posted:The fact that GW resurrected the Necromunda rules apparently unaltered for their new game doesn't give me hope they'll learn anything from previous games. We have 30 years of development they could have applied. I think a generation gap is in play here as well. What is the average age of the people upset about the changes we've seen and are allegedly getting soon? 40-ish? Almost certainly over 30. I'm 47 myself. I consider Die Hard one of the best action movies ever made. It had a believable main character. He survived and killed the bad guys because he had training and experience, and he drat well took cover when he was being shot at. Compare that to the action movies being made in the last 10 years or so. The difference is stark. GW has noticed as well. They're moving from the grim darkness that appeals to the older players who grew up when Clint Eastwood was still a relevant action star to a more bombastic setting that appeals more to younger players that really enjoyed the Transformers movies. Younger players give you blank stares when you compare a game between 2 Guard armies to Hamburger Hill or Apocalypse Now. You MIGHT get some recognition if you mention Saving Private Ryan, but no guarantee. Simply put, what the new generation of players find entertaining is very different than what the older generation likes. GW is recognizing that, and shifting their flagship product to reflect what younger customers like in their entertainment.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 00:22
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:Well they certainly aren't doing it right when the Custodes aren't doing side-relaxed and front lat spread poses like Jojo characters. Here's what I think. I don't like when there is no advancement of the setting. Yes, I've heard the idea that 40k is not a story but instead a setting (that stories are told within). I don't disagree, but I'll also say that it's hard to get invested in any story if it doesn't have any impact on the setting (ie doesn't change anything beyond that system/planet). WWI and WWII radically changed the world we live in (our own setting), yet those are collection of real-life stories. Problem for 40k is that it can't get much more grimdark than it already was without everything falling apart. If the Imperium was to survive, it seems it really did need Guilliman to return and a small Eldar alliance. Otherwise, Abaddon would have taken Terra fairly easy this time around, Emps would have died, Chaos would have destroyed all order in the galaxy, and nothing strong enough would remain to stop the Tyranids/Orks/Necrons from mopping up whatever remains. So I am (for now) OK with how Gathering Storm has developed. Could it have been done better? Of course. The whole thing seemed like a huge sweep of developments for releases of just 9 models total (though they are nice models). But I do think that things had to get better before the Imperium... as long as they get worse. If the future is just Guilliman and his armies curbstomping all who stand before him, it's going to get boring real quick. But if every other faction gets some nice counterpunches in, this is an appropriate development. And the galaxy is still in way worse straits than in 30k. The Orks, Necrons, Tyranids, and Daemon Primarch led-Chaos are all on the prowl, and every one of these factions should have some time in the sun to beat some Imperial skulls. So to say the Grimdark is gone seems premature. The Imperium is no longer on a knife's edge, but at the same time there are WAY too many threats for anyone to argue Imperial victory is inevitable now.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 00:28
|
|
|
Avenging Dentist posted:While 40k requires a pretty substantial investment of time and money, if you're not getting much out of it anymore, you shouldn't feel bad for giving up on it and doing something that you enjoy more. As I was reading the thread discussing the hero-centric trend in recent story developments, and a shift towards more hopeful, less grimdark tone, something had occurred to me. While the tone of Guilliman's return suggests that the Imperium might finally get a fighting chance to prevail, or at least to push back the threats, at its core WH40K is a dark setting where hope it at a premium (and when it exists, it tends to feed Tzeentch). This created an apparent discrepancy between the hopeful tone of Gathering Storm III (the ending thereof), and what we know about the 30 years of accumulated lore and atmosphere. Then, it struck me. What if Guilliman's crusade-to-be is not a movement to save the Imperium, but a last-gasp effort that would see the remaining resources at Terra's command expended in a Quixotic quest to reconquer the galaxy, only to fall victim to overstretch, invasions, plagues, and what not? There was a real-world parallel to this in Western history - the attempted reconquest of Italy, North Africa, and Spain by Eastern Roman Emperor Justinian in VIth century. While successful for a time (and achieving a number of spectacular military victories), Justinian's conquests were already fraying within years of his death, and his territorial gains were completely reversed less than a century after his death, while leaving the Empire in dire financial straits, weakened militarily, and without a strong dynastic line of succession (given that Justinian's successors were considerably weaker, which led to a major crisis half a century later). Now, there was more to the historical precedent, including the early VIIth century Byzantine-Persian total war, the rise of the Arabs, and other factors, but for the purpose of this analysis, we can disregard them. We are, after all, discussing a fictional universe which is not by any means retelling real-world history. So, back to 40K. Guilliman restarts a Crusade, followed by everything the Imperium can muster, and maybe has some successes. The Crusade overextends its reach, or perhaps runs out of steam. The Imperium is back where it was before, and possibly even worse off, since it spent much of its precious reserves on attempting to push back the darkness. This seems very much in line with 40K ethos. Here is the kicker. GW fluff writers have been known to partake in historical, literary, and mythological inspirations, sometimes employing clever puns or in-jokes. I would not put it past GW to do something similar here - especially since there is an interesting connection. You see, Justinian was not a military commander during Byzantine reconquest of the West. Instead, this duty fell to one of the foremost generals of the time... an Eastern Roman named Belisarius. Belisarius... which is not at all dissimilar to the name of a prominent player in the Gathering Storm series - Belisarius Cawl, responsible for the resurrection of Guilliman and directly involved with the events of the Crusade. Now, it might be a coincidence, but I would not put it past GW to use the name as a subtle hint of what is to come, while keeping with the inherently tragic nature of the universe. This would be very... fitting for our beloved grimdark. So, what do you think? Does this hold water, or do you think it is most likely a coincidence?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 00:45
|
|
|
Safety Factor posted:The grim darkness of despair is a meme that misrepresents substancial peripheral bits of the setting. Logistically, it just couldn't be that bleak and have continued on for as long as it did. It had to be at least a semi-stable system. This time I'll build the case around Guard Logistics. Some kids I knew in high school were into the game. I can only recall that the one who lived around the corner from me had Eldar, though I can't even remember what colours his models were. I think someone else had Ultramarines or maybe Blood Angels. Anyway, Warhammer 40,000 didn't really interest me at that "golden age" of 12-14 in the early Nineties. Back then I had a Warhammer Fantasy Battle starter, the 4th Edition with the High Elves and Goblins, but never bought anything past that. To be honest, wargames never really interested me at all, probably because I'm not interested in competitive games. I was more interested in Dungeons & Dragons and other tabletop roleplaying games, though even Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay never made an impression on me at the time. Later on in high school I had a closer friend who also played 40K, and I learned more about it then, but I seem to recall he was also getting to that age of 16+ where he was still into it but faintly embarrassed by it, so not exactly trying to persuade his other friends to play it. Then he took up fencing and got really into that, so all of his spare time and money was invested in that (and he's been involved in fencing for 20 years, so it was probably the right call). I didn't really get into 40K until after I'd been out of university for some time and got married. At some point after 2008, I don't remember when or what prompted it, I must have decided I'd give it a go, because I bought a copy of the 5th Edition starter, Assault on Black Reach - but I discovered that same starter all but untouched in 2014, which is when I got into 40K in a serious way. What finally pushed me over the line was really the Horus Heresy novels. I had never really known that much about the 40K universe - I didn't even know the name Horus, really - but I did know the basic idea of the Chaos Space Marines and the Chaos Gods, and I'd always thought that the Thousand Sons had a cool Egyptian aesthetic. It didn't hurt that Tzeentch had seemed the most interesting of the Chaos Gods even back when I was briefly interested in Warhammer Fantasy Battle; I think there was something about that crescent moon-headed Sorcerer of Tzeentch that caught my eye. So then, in the context of the Horus Heresy series, I then became aware of the real backstory of the Thousand Sons, and decided I might as well read the novels in order. I read extremely quickly, so I figured it wouldn't take me long to get to the 12th book . . . but then I thought I should try out the audiobook for Horus Rising, since I had a long drive to work. I love the audiobooks, but I'm not always in the mood for them, so it's taken me about 3 years to make it to my current point of being about 2/3 of the way through Deliverance Lost. But in that time I've become really interested in 30K, at least in terms of collecting and painting models, and who knows what will happen once my wife and I manage to organise our move interstate in the next few months? Maybe I'll get into playing if we're close to a decent store or club down south.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 00:50
|
|
|
spectralent posted:Also the "It's a generational thing, protagonists can't be grounded now" thing is dumb. Fourteen year olds like invincible space marine heroes, did do and always will do. People in their 40s don't have a monopoly on liking characters with flaws. I have to admit I enjoy that the story is moving forward more significant now despite the cockups. I started with 40K in 1995 and since then literally nothing has really happenend in 40K, everything was on the brink of destruction, just 5 seconds to midnight, it just needs a small push and everythin will fail etc etc... No big campaign I participated in (2nd War for Armageddon and the 13th black crusade), despite GW said otherwise, had any impact on anything, it was the status quo ad infinitum, which got cockingly boring after such a long time in the hobby if you like stories and background material in your favorite universe. So GS is a nice change of pace and yes, after the first trilogy the universe looks a little bit less grimdark. But i can foresee some things, that might happen when the story progresses further: - The Emperor finally dieing, plunging the whole galaxy into darkness until he is reborn - The 13th black crusade wreaking havoc after that in one half the Imperium, maybe even destroy Terra in the process - the big waagh that was brewing wreaking the ofter part of the Imperium - Cypher reaching the rock, getting to Lion el'Johnson but it is revealed that the actual Dark Angels aren't so loyal and were just good at disguising their true allegiance to Chaos (yeah, it's a trope but the Fallen could be the last remnants of the loyal Dark Angels) - The Tau taking advantage of the situation in the Imperium and starting a new war for more worlds - The Tyranids finally arriving in full force to battle with everybody it's just.. there is so much potential for more War and grimdark and cocks at the Moment that the small "light at the end of the tunnel" now is just a mere candle getting snuffed out.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 01:08
|
|
|
ijyt posted:Ok lets lets get back on topic: I will make this clear, first and foremost, this is not a discussion of your thoughts and feelings on this Coming of the storm, hating the new fluff or any of that crap. I don't care for a great deal of this myself, but I have no interest in wasting my time lamenting over a Golden Age past or however we may perceive to be the present state of the 40k lore. You want to do that, go to one of the dozen other discussion and news threads. This is a hypothetical discussion of what may come to pass and what may we feel the repercussions will be for such actions. It is as much a discussion of the rammifications of transgressions and how we may feel things could turn in this regard. It can be viewed as potential canon or viewed as an alternating path like the many 'alternate heresy' scenes that a few people have played with. So let's discuss, what I like to call, the Secession of Orphans. First, let's talk about what we know. We know that Guilliman has returned, the Primarch who remade the Imperium after the Scouring into the system that has persisted for 10,000 years while corroding and degrading into the monstrous mortis-cult empire that we all know. We know that he will be officially recognized as the Lord Commander of the Imperium and is assuming some sort of role in or above the High Lords of Terra. We know that Guilliman was entombed in the stasis field before the Imperium turned to the worship of the Emperor of a God and thus, scorns the concepts of such faith. Next, let's discuss the hypothetical, discuss the things that I believe we have a good hunch of, though there is no absolute confirmation. We can assume that, as Lord Commander of the Imperium once more, he will likely command of the Imperium's military and, perhaps in turn attempt to assume claim authority over Space Marine chapters. Perhaps that won't be the case, but I find it unlikely that he won't. The second hypothetical is the potential coming of this new Legion or Space Marine 2.0 that may be coming with 8th Edition 40k. The third hypothetical could be the potential purging of Imperial Faith. I don't necessarily think this will happen, as I think Guilliman is smart enough to know that trying to get rid of this would have some major problem but it's not out of the realm of possibility. The Codex Astartes is a system of organization that most chapters follow to some form of concept. It is not only a guideline of military application but also a treatise identifying the autonomy of the Space Marine chapters that has been recognized for 10,000 years and has been engrained in their traditions and very identity as Adeptus Astartes. Now, the Secession of Orphans. Imagine this with me. Consider yourself a Chapter Master of the Space Marines who has held control over a sector distant from Terra and Ultramar. You are Lord Warden Osric Domalde, master to the Space Marine chapter, Knights of the Black Sun. You and your brothers have protected this distant part of the Halo region of the Imperium and the people who dwell in this sector since the 33rd Millenium. You are not sons of Guilliman, but you do not know your true origins. You follow the Codex Astartes and the traditions of your Chapter with staunch loyalty to your Chapter and the Emperor above all. More than anything, you value the power of your Chapter's autonomy, to protect and serve the Imperium as your Chapter sees fit and you continue this tradition of loyalty and freedom in equal measure since as long as your Chapter's libtrarium has transcribed... This is the way, I feel, that many Chapters will understand their nature. Quite a hefty number of Chapters have little to no understanding of their origins. They have no father or their father died long ago. You are an Orphan. Now imagine your surprise when you come to find, out of some sheer miracle, that the Lord Commander Guilliman has returned. And with it, he has demanded you bend the knee to him. Having assumed command of the Imperium's military he has thus called your chapter, as with every other chapter to answer his call and fight under his banner, to defend your land in his name and that of the Imperium. The man who had written the treaty of your autonomy, who fell in battle and immortalized and a saint of the Imperial Creed has suddenly returned and demanded you forgo all freedom and tradition to fight for him. What's more, there's rumor of this 'new Astartes' who fight for Lord Guilliman, some new construction of genetic manipulation from Mars, bastardizing the perfection of the process to create Adeptus Astartes that has been laid in stone since the authority of the Emperor himself. To not only demand you abandon your autonomy but also to shame the very name of the Adeptus Astartes and everything they stand for. To spit on the authority of the Emperor himself and his sacred decrees. What would you do? Secession? The Secession of Orphans is the concept of Guilliman assuming authority backfiring in his face, this coming age of 'progress and reason' utter anathema to everything the Imperium stands for and has known since the Horus Heresy. Space Marine chapters would break when their autonomy is called into question. Forge Worlds would excommunicate when the bawk in horror at the rampant and hedonistic butchery of the Machine God's most unquestioning commandments. Shrine Wolrds declaring the apostasy of this 'False Saint' who has dared to assume command in the Emperor's place and rebuke their faith. The Imperium remembers the horrors of the Age of Apostasy and the Mad Lord Vandire. I can't imagine any would see wish to see that again... And I can believe many would not be willing to take the risk.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 01:22
|
|
|
Broken Record Talk posted:Well, AoS is a new system starting a new mythos from scratch. People didn't let it grow, like everything it needs time to do so. Like with tacos hard and soft, the question becomes why not both? A case for free rules is that it allows kits to be released on a more varied schedule. Not having to tie a kit release to a campaign or a codex update would allow GW to release a kit when it's "finished" or to add support to a flagging product line with a shorter run up. Following that tack, it could allow for more kit bash units like the Razorback Rikarius, which would be a sort of soft update that might pull more sales as well for older kits. The secondary plus is assuming GW's ability to keep the rules updated, a seemingly fair amount of hobbyist clamor for balanced rules, and a set living rules would help that. There's also a tertiary bonus. When the rules first released for the Skyhammer Annihilation Force there was much grumbling about the pay-to-win nature of the bundle, the strength of the rules notwithstanding, it was frustrating to me personally because I had multiple of those kits already, which became a moot point days later because the rules did end up being released. Which brings me to why even with free rules, GW should still produce physical copies of stuff. Hard copies have the chance to be worthwhile pieces of the game worth owning on their own. Sure I've got digital codecies and rules books to use on my iPad, but I own physical copies too. I rather enjoy flipping through my 6th ed Rulebook and just reading random bits and pieces, the Crusade of Fire is helping me write out a campaign, and the Battle Missions book for scenarios (thank you again Gar!). One day I'll own the complete Horus Heresy, and hopefully updated Badab Books. So when Angels of Death released I went that day to my local GW and bought a copy. Was it for the rules? Partially. The reality is one day this game may not be played or supported anymore. The world changes, and things that seem like they'll always be around suddenly aren't. So I'm doing what I can to make sure my army can always be played. So that the history of that army can be read, and the art seen. One day my nephews will have kids, and who knows if GW will exist into those days, but with luck, my Grand Nephews will be able to play a game much like their Grunkle did by opening up one of his storage boxes and finding a massive stack of marines, a bunch of books, dice and play aids (though they'll have to hope their Graunty packed away her foul xenos, because I won't be). So if once a year GW released a codex style book of all the rules released and updated for that year with a bunch of fluff and art to support it, I'd buy it, every single year, for as many years as they made it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 18:29
|
|
|
nopantsjack posted:People who enjoyed having their old game thrown in the trash while GW allowed them to play the new bad game with their armies rules replaced by bad jokes are probably gonna love 8th to be fair. OK, I just watched a really good video essay, and it kind of inspired me to plant this here. Now, I’ll start off by saying I don’t nearly get ingrained into the Lore as much as some gamers. I don’t buy every book, and I read one every few months or so. But I do understand generally what is going on and what has happened, recognize key characters, and know the story-arcing themes of races. But lore does matter to me, and this is my opinion on how GW has made mistakes and can do better. PART 1: Comparisons with the Warhammer Old World - End Times - Age of Sigmar progression The End Times (and Age of Sigmar that came after) essentially invalidated all the general Lore for Warhammer Fantasy. The effect is the same as retconning WFB out of existence, as whatever happened in WFB had little effect on what happens in AoS. So, why would GW do this, when it is mostly poor storytelling? Well, their goal wasn’t really story driven at all, but instead driven by the need (or want) to create something entirely new and invalidate the old. The small references to WFB are mostly done to appease the customer base and maintain some justification for models. GW wanted to create better trademarks for IPs, and create new models that didn’t really fit WFB’s lore, while also changing gameplay entirely. In their eyes, these goals could not have been met without the End Times. Part 2: 40k and the Future Now we are seeing the progression of the storyline for Warhammer 40k. Thankfully, GW isn’t likely to AoS 40k, as 40k is the cash cow and doesn’t really need complete upheaval like WFB did. But GW obviously wants to sell more models and books, and story progression is the easiest way to do that. “Curse of the Wulfen,” “Wrath of Magnus,” and “Fall of Cadia” all meet GW’s goals of more books and more models, and don’t really change the dynamics of the galaxy to massive degrees. Yes, the Space Wolves took a beating, and Cadia is now gone. But these groundbreaking events need to happen for the story progression to feel important. Nonetheless, none of the factions is destroyed or culled, and it just flows into the next story arc. Old foes and allies have returned, new characters are brought to the fore, and the future is uncertain but in motion. Now I think that this is all promising. Obviously for anything to work there needs to be good writing, and it can be very hard to trust GW with progressing a storyline with their history in WFB. But at the end of the day, GW knows the best way to sell models and books is to accompany them with story progression. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing, as long as GW has learned lessons in their past mistakes and willing to improve. D&D 3.5 aside (which primarily survives due to a very odd quirk of copyright in the OGL), these games have wispy, zombie-like support at best. They live and breathe, but only barely, and they only really do so because they're fun systems. There's no useful example of a game background era that "sticks around," because there's nothing tangible to be had for it. It's fiction. It lives in our heads. Though, really, I don't think this is the reason people are displeased. The oft-repeated point of "but nothing's stopping you from ignoring it" is itself doing some pretty big ignoring of what people get and like out of a setting like 40K's. At the end of the day, it's a hobby that naturally requires external inspiration, and most of that comes from the people who make the hobby products. The spigot gets turned off, and there's nothing new to interact with. It's a game world, not a religion. Engagement isn't a monastic activity. People want to go where the product goes, but the product's going in a place a lot of people don't want it to. It may not be The End Times in the sense that 40K won't face the ignoble steamrollering that poor ol' WHFB got. The Emperor will still be on his Throne, kicking out the oldies for Navigators to jam to, and his Imperium will stand against the Gods of Chaos (well, minus one before too long, I'd wager), but all indications are that it's going to be a radically different place in terms of tone, focus and engagement than the setting that preceded it. Quite a few of us aren't pleased by that, and I don't think that's without cause. Whatever one wants to say about the merits of an advancing timeline, the fact is that the GW of today just doesn't cut it in terms of pure writing quality to execute on that advancement with anything like the competency it requires. Just look at these pages from the Fall of Cadia if you need an example. If you think that's the kind of material that should be used to birth the new era of 40K, well, I don't know what to tell you. You must not think much of 40K. I can't even bring myself to call that junk "cartoonish." Cartoons are, after all, are capable of subtlety, complexity and wit. With all that stacked up, it just doesn't seem worth it to try and carry forth the lonely banner of Oldhammer 40K. There's other games and setting with better background (and, God, do we even want to start up on the sadness and desolation of 40K's rules set right now?) that are actively being maintained at a satisfactory level of quality. Why settle for the garish parody that 40K is looking to become? Life's too short. Based on previous behaviour exhibited by Games Workshop, am I worried about the future of a games system I've been playing with for most of my life? YES. Based on a discussion I've had, the majority of people who want AoS style formatting and rules brought to the 40K setting are those who don't care about the lore, the setting, and have zero patience with actually creating something from their games. In my group, we have a saying "If the rules don't support a fluff event, we'll make arrangements." Want a Marine Librarian who is a master at summoning daemons to do his bidding? Sure! We use that one often when my Grey Knights come out, as my opponent likes a story as much as I do. Want a traitor guard company, but can't afford the Forgeworld book? Sure! Use the Astra Militarum codex, and deploy amongst your Chaos Marines! We have toyed with many ideas, some of which aren't board appropriate in nature, however if you are after a conversation about them, PM me for sure. However, there is ALWAYS a fluff based reason behind stretching or breaking things like the Allies Matrix. Nothing touches the core of the game. We are seeing story progression, new books and models, with rumours saying Loyal Primarchs might be returning (Which if in plastic would be cool), much the same way as End Times occured. Does 40K NEED anyting approaching an AoS style reboot? No. Not at all. Sure, some of the special rules need looking at, and how they interact with each other. However, that's the most it needs. The current edition has everything we could want to represent the stories we are telling on our tables. From a patrolling Imperial knight encountering allies and enemies, to a named character leading an assault on their opposing counterpart. I've had discussions and arguements with people who don't care about the lore, or tellign a story, they just want a game they can play once or twice, and move on. My suggestion to them has always been teh same. Want simple rules that are fast to play? Play Chess or Snakes and Ladders. 40K is an immersive hobby, very creative, and can be extremely cinematic. Forcing people who enjoy all aspects of teh hobby to put up with chess-simple rules, just because new gamers don't have the patience to learn about their hobby is wrong. For every new hobbyist with the attention span to learn, there are 3 or more impulse buyers who play with AoS style rules for a little while, then forget about it and move on to the next thing. It honestly feels like we are racing to the bottom here. What we might eventually end up with is Snakes and Ladders, with models we paint outselves. Is that what we really want? Main points in summary: 1) 40K is both the lore and the game. 2) Simple rules don't always work. 3) Want games you can "just play", play chess and snakes and ladders. 4) You get out what you put in.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 18:36
|
|
|
Bad Moon posted:Never forget except sigmar has what I love bitch 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 18:42
|
|
|
Avenging Dentist posted:i thought gw was good for a while but that was back when the only non-gw figures i had seen were the amateurish mush-faced sculpts from reaper and the like  - "A good model", Avenging Dentist
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 18:53
|
|
|
 -"This makes me hard", Avenging Dentist
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 18:58
|
|
|
Avenging Dentist posted:if you insist  - "GW should learn from Infinity", Avenging Dentist
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 19:02
|
|
|
Avenging Dentist posted:neither is the catgirl though  - "unf unf UNF", Avenging Dentist
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 19:05
|
|
|
Hustlin Floh posted:This thread not as much as Infinity ladies, if u get my drift 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 19:09
|
|
|
nopantsjack posted:Look at the poses though, the standing one is okay, the one on the left is slowly tripping over his own foot.  - "Yes this is how a soldier would pose, it is the epitome of good modelling and taste", Avenging Dentist
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 19:10
|
|
|
Lord_Hambrose posted:It is something modern 40k sculpts need. Maybe when they do new Xenos ??? all of the red butts are in 40k 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 19:36
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 14:59 |
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9TH9_s1pyE
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 19:41
|
|