Warhammer 40k Forum and Wargaming Forums banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
101 - 120 of 646 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
411 Posts
I like random running distances.
The mechanics work well depending on the army you play. 7th ed fantasy was too predictable, and shit.
My templars could run a bit and then run a bit more and then smash face.... or possibly fail completely and get shot up. It was a nice mechanic. What WAS lacking was some sort of mechanic to modify the result, such as D6+initiative or something.
 

·
Critique for da CriticGod
Joined
·
3,351 Posts
...I love the extra elements of randomization specifically because it destroys that kind of playing.
That's fascinating because I think we may intend similar things for very different reasons.

I'm not a power gamer. I never was. My army lists have always been designed as good faith all-comers lists. I despise the excessive randomness because I want to rely on my army to behave consistently. If it's not reasonably consistent, how can I expect to compete reasonably with my friends?

I very much agree with all of your descriptions of those fantasy games. I played fantasy from 4th through 6th or 7th ed, and while I enjoyed the setting the game was very broken. The problems you describe had a lot less to do with predictable movement and predictable magic powers and far more to do with poorly written rules and balance.

Let's be honest, it IS glorified chess. All table top battle games are to one degree or another. Reliability is what separates these from a game of chance. Obviously, there are many dice rolls and many chances for things to go awry, however managing that chance is what makes the game compelling. Too little chance and we are back at chess or a fait accompli, too much and there isn't enough control and reliability for my taste.

Circling back for a moment. Fantasy was so backwards because the close combat, the shooting, and the magic were too reliable and too powerful - not the movement. Armies were so stratified with the power of characters in combat (looking at you chaos lord), siege engines (looking at you high elf repeater bolt throwers and dwarf cannons), and wizards (looking at all of them?)

I actually prefer picking, or even better buying psychics/ spells because then they can be properly balanced. Having both players roll to select all too often can have one player shafted while their opponent gets a deal.

As a player who always attempted to bring scrupulously fair armies, the way I won was by savvy playing. A great deal of which came down to careful movement. I beat a number of armies designed to be rather lop sided or abusive by good generalship. A great example was a game against a good friend where we both brought warriors of chaos. I turned the game by judging my movement better. His army was built around a nigh unstoppable chaos knight charge. Which to his credit would likely have swept my main unit from the table. I maneuvered sand eyeballed the distance perfectly. He missed his charge by .75" and my ensuing counter charge shifted the game.

If we were rolling to randomize the distance, that kind of precision can't happen. On the other hand, in the midst of combat is exactly where the randomness fits. The swirl of melee or firing at a distant enemy, those shouldn't be absolutely certain. Conceptually, there are so many more variables in combat that having a partially randomized system for interactions makes sense. (Not based on D6s so much but that's a debate for another day.)

Anyway, I'll end with this thought. I totally agree that we don't want to cater to power gamers. There is legitimate list craft that happens though as we play and refine our armies without ending up back at Hero-Hammer. I would contend that some parts of the system should be entirely reliable and others should be more random.


Edit: re Dextus



I like random running distances.
The mechanics work well depending on the army you play. 7th ed fantasy was too predictable, and shit.
My templars could run a bit and then run a bit more and then smash face.... or possibly fail completely and get shot up. It was a nice mechanic. What WAS lacking was some sort of mechanic to modify the result, such as D6+initiative or something.
I'm curious what you found more successful about random movement compared to fixed moment? In your Templar example, it sounds like you're asking for a more consistent movement system because it was so unreliable.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,694 Posts
That's fascinating because I think we may intend similar things for very different reasons.

I'm not a power gamer. I never was. My army lists have always been designed as good faith all-comers lists. I despise the excessive randomness because I want to rely on my army to behave consistently. If it's not reasonably consistent, how can I expect to compete reasonably with my friends?

I very much agree with all of your descriptions of those fantasy games. I played fantasy from 4th through 6th or 7th ed, and while I enjoyed the setting the game was very broken. The problems you describe had a lot less to do with predictable movement and predictable magic powers and far more to do with poorly written rules and balance.

Let's be honest, it IS glorified chess. All table top battle games are to one degree or another. Reliability is what separates these from a game of chance. Obviously, there are many dice rolls and many chances for things to go awry, however managing that chance is what makes the game compelling. Too little chance and we are back at chess or a fait accompli, too much and there isn't enough control and reliability for my taste.

Circling back for a moment. Fantasy was so backwards because the close combat, the shooting, and the magic were too reliable and too powerful - not the movement. Armies were so stratified with the power of characters in combat (looking at you chaos lord), siege engines (looking at you high elf repeater bolt throwers and dwarf cannons), and wizards (looking at all of them?)

I actually prefer picking, or even better buying psychics/ spells because then they can be properly balanced. Having both players roll to select all too often can have one player shafted while their opponent gets a deal.

As a player who always attempted to bring scrupulously fair armies, the way I won was by savvy playing. A great deal of which came down to careful movement. I beat a number of armies designed to be rather lop sided or abusive by good generalship. A great example was a game against a good friend where we both brought warriors of chaos. I turned the game by judging my movement better. His army was built around a nigh unstoppable chaos knight charge. Which to his credit would likely have swept my main unit from the table. I maneuvered sand eyeballed the distance perfectly. He missed his charge by .75" and my ensuing counter charge shifted the game.

If we were rolling to randomize the distance, that kind of precision can't happen. On the other hand, in the midst of combat is exactly where the randomness fits. The swirl of melee or firing at a distant enemy, those shouldn't be absolutely certain. Conceptually, there are so many more variables in combat that having a partially randomized system for interactions makes sense. (Not based on D6s so much but that's a debate for another day.)

Anyway, I'll end with this thought. I totally agree that we don't want to cater to power gamers. There is legitimate list craft that happens though as we play and refine our armies without ending up back at Hero-Hammer. I would contend that some parts of the system should be entirely reliable and others should be more random.


Edit: re Dextus





I'm curious what you found more successful about random movement compared to fixed moment? In your Templar example, it sounds like you're asking for a more consistent movement system because it was so unreliable.

Man, i could not agree more. Movement and charges and double movement (run, march) SHOULD be fixed numbers, as movement should be the only part of the game we should be able to control (let me move my toy soldiers whit no problems, thank you. Also, movement is one of the last form of generalship this game has...). Let the dice roll when we are opposing something to something else (Str vs T, for instance). Also, i really loved, when charges and artillery attacks were made by declaring it BEFORE measuring. It was a cool skill to have and a cool mechanic that kept you awake all game! i fear that an extreme randomization of the game will just bring many problems, whitout fixing the powergamer / waac problems we have now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10 Posts
I beat a number of armies designed to be rather lop sided or abusive by good generalship. A great example was a game against a good friend where we both brought warriors of chaos. I turned the game by judging my movement better. His army was built around a nigh unstoppable chaos knight charge. Which to his credit would likely have swept my main unit from the table. I maneuvered sand eyeballed the distance perfectly. He missed his charge by .75" and my ensuing counter charge shifted the game.
Those were my chaos knights, so I can confirm Kreuger's war story, here.

That was an epic game, and it hinged entirely on that moment of solid generalship. Not everything should be random.

gg, friend.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
411 Posts
@Kreuger
No, the point is; sometimes you should get shot in the face and die like a bitch. Life sucks in the grimdark; even if you are a glorified church project with a sword.

EDIT:
I think that randomness is key to a lot of 40k. Yes, its a big chess game with fancy models, but I wouldnt have it any other way. Maybe its because I started in 3rd and quickly moved to necromunda because i was 15 and had no money. The combination of the skill of movement by my delaque guys popping off rounds only to die from falling off a ladder was irritating as hell.... but that's part of it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10 Posts
@Kreuger
No, the point is; sometimes you should get shot in the face and die like a bitch. Life sucks in the grimdark; even if you are a glorified church project with a sword.

EDIT:
I think that randomness is key to a lot of 40k. Yes, its a big chess game with fancy models, but I wouldnt have it any other way. Maybe its because I started in 3rd and quickly moved to necromunda because i was 15 and had no money. The combination of the skill of movement by my delaque guys popping off rounds only to die from falling off a ladder was irritating as hell.... but that's part of it.
Ahhh, but in Necromunda you move 4" and run or charge 8" and that is set in stone, no?

Sent from my SM-G860P using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,694 Posts
@Kreuger
No, the point is; sometimes you should get shot in the face and die like a bitch. Life sucks in the grimdark; even if you are a glorified church project with a sword.

EDIT:
I think that randomness is key to a lot of 40k. Yes, its a big chess game with fancy models, but I wouldnt have it any other way. Maybe its because I started in 3rd and quickly moved to necromunda because i was 15 and had no money. The combination of the skill of movement by my delaque guys popping off rounds only to die from falling off a ladder was irritating as hell.... but that's part of it.
Ah, the fun of faling from great heights...in mordheim i had a vampire fall from a tower...and die from it. Warband rout test failed, a won game turned into an inglorious retreat by a couple of 6's...what an EPIC moment!! :grin2:
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
10,976 Posts
I remember the tournaments for 40k back during 4th and 5th ed. Being able to pick and choose psychic powers and knowing exactly how far you could charge was an avenue for some armies just being unbeatable in the same way as Fantasy I described earlier. Taking away those two crucial elements of certainty levelled the playing field and made it easier for less powerful armies to have a chance.

I remember what Blood Angels were like during 5th. Librarians and Mephiston always being able to take Wings of Sanguinius and all but guarantee their force weapons struck exactly where the player wanted them to. As a tyranid player, I was basically deploying my Hive Tyrant already knowing exactly which of my opponent's models was going to kill it. Randomization of charging and psychic powers has stopped exactly this kind of thing and put these guys on closer to equal terms.

Besides, I have found that all it really did was cause people to shift away from psychic and combat reliant lists and focus more on ranged warfare. I've seen tyranid armies (including my own) go from being a prime close combat list into being a mobility and firepower based list with only a few combat beasts as support. People adapted to the changes last time, this time will be no different.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,689 Posts
I'm really REALLY happy with the preview of how they will handle the Psychic phase.

That single phase, almost single handedly (spelling?) removed wholesale the interest in 40k that my immediate group had.



In general I feel that the new rule set is going to get my group back into playing 40k. It at least has the greatest chance to do that.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,195 Posts
From the link: https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/04/30/new-40k-shooting-phase-apr30gw-homepage-post-4/


New Warhammer 40,000 – Shooting Phase



It’s a big one today folks, as we take a closer look at the Shooting phase.
This phase will be very familiar to anyone who plays today, but there have been a few tweaks and improvements to the rules.
We’ve already seen the profiles of our miniatures, so we know that we’ll be hitting on a fixed Ballistic Skill (a bit like you do now) and we’ve also seen a little about how weapons work – multiple damage from powerful weapons, and armour save modifiers, for example. Today, we look at some of the other rules of the phase.
When you select a unit to shoot, much like today, they can all fire their weapons at the enemy. You can’t shoot, however, if you Advanced this turn, or if you fell back from combat. (See our movement article for details on these.)

You also can’t shoot if there is an enemy with 1″ of you. The exception to this rule is pistols. Models with these hand-held firearms can shoot at the closest enemy target in the Shooting phase, even if they themselves are locked in combat! This is going to make characters with pistols <cough-Cypher-cough> incredibly deadly up-close.

When picking a target, you won’t be able to shoot enemies that are in combat with other units, much like the current edition. However, you can fall back from combat in your Movement phase, allowing other units to fire at your opponent at the expense of your own actions this turn. Expect to see cunning generals deploying their armies in waves to take full advantage of this.
Heavy weapons are worth talking about too. These no longer snap fire if you move, and instead they have a flat -1 to hit modifier for moving units. This applies to all models with heavy weapons, vehicles included. There are a few other factors that affect hit rolls too – smoke launchers on a vehicle, for example, have the same effect of -1 to hit.

The last big change we’re going over today is cover. Currently, cover saves give a blanket save to all units, and one that only comes into effect if the shot would otherwise ignore their armour. In the new Warhammer 40,000, cover is a bonus to your armour save. Critically, this ability often only applies to certain types of unit. For example, only Infantry gain the bonus of cover from a crater.
This interaction works quite nicely with the modifiers to armour saves of certain guns, and means that when someone is trying to hide behind a wall or barricade, if your weapon has a high enough armour penetration, you can shoot them through a wall!
There are also a few weapons that ignore this bonus cover to armour effect – such as those wielded by Chaos Noise Marines and a Leman Russ’ nova cannon.
There you have it – a few of the changes you can look forward to in the Shooting phase.
We’ll be back tomorrow with news on the Charge phase.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,520 Posts
Holy shit. Guess you still can't spell Seraphim without RAPE.

Also a giant boost for whoever else still carries a Bolt Pistol by default come the new Codex (can't be sure).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
455 Posts

Hmm...is he implying that there will be a new type of space marine? Super space marines? This would explain any potential 'true scale' models. You can explain the size difference with old marines by stating that they are the new super space marines.
 

·
Grand Lord Munchkin
Joined
·
7,044 Posts
Sounds very cool, though I think it might detract from the lore of previous marines. Regardless, if these are sort of super elites, I'm down for that.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,520 Posts
I'm just wishing they'd stop making the 40K release sound less like Age of Sigmar (now with free Stormcasts! err... supermarines!)

Love the voice actor for this though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: neferhet

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,003 Posts
Will be interesting to see what happens with these guys. What source material did Cawl make them from? Are they more resistant to chaos unlike your standard marines?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
321 Posts
Question is: Will they be available to every chapter fluff-wise or rather process creation? And why and how should I include them in my chapter and how will it change everything? I would really like to see some intriguing fluff behind them than bigger-better.

And they don't exactly look like primarch size/strength. So it is just about cloning ? To have endless amount of cloned marines instead of slow and risky recruitment process? W40k Clone Wars soon ?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
455 Posts
And they don't exactly look like primarch size/strength. So it is just about cloning ? To have endless amount of cloned marines instead of slow and risky recruitment process? W40k Clone Wars soon ?
But why do you assume it's cloning? We could simply be seeing the sarcophagi used to make normal marines.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
321 Posts
But why do you assume it's cloning? We could simply be seeing the sarcophagi used to make normal marines.
Maybe but scale here is obviously more huge ? Anyway, SM were the greatest defenders of humanity for over ten thousand years and now they are not enough? Will they still have any personality or will they be only war machines immune to any corruption as they should always be ? Are RG and Cawl trying to be better than Emperor ?

GW is obviously trying to do a fresh start here but I think they might destroy SM as we know them today. But it is still to early to judge. Maybe.
 
101 - 120 of 646 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top