New OOTS products from CafePress
New OOTS t-shirts, ornaments, mugs, bags, and more
Page 41 of 50 FirstFirst ... 163132333435363738394041424344454647484950 LastLast
Results 1,201 to 1,230 of 1476
  1. - Top - End - #1201
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Forum Explorer's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XL: Bloated Rules

    Quote Originally Posted by Squark View Post
    I think it more likely they meant that Reanimation protocols is an end of phase roll, or that we're moving back to the old Feel-no-pain in all but name rules.
    The way they said it, you get to roll for the entire unit after every attack, even if you took no damage. So I don't think we're going back to the old Feel no pain style.
    Spoiler: I'm a writer!
    Show
    Spoiler: Check out my fanfiction[URL="https://www.fanfiction.net/u/7493788/Forum-Explorer"
    Show
    here[/URL]
    ]Fate Stay Nano: Fate Stay Night x Magical Girl Lyrical Nanoha

    I Fell in Love with a Storm: MLP

    Procrastination: MLP



    Spoiler: Original Fiction
    Show
    The Lost Dragon: A story about a priest who finds a baby dragon in his church and decides to protect them.



  2. - Top - End - #1202
    Banned
     
    LansXero's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Lima, Peru
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XL: Bloated Rules

    Quote Originally Posted by Forum Explorer View Post
    I actually heard that Reanimation Protocols are getting reworked so they don't activate at the start of the turn anymore, but any time throughout it. The way the preview worded it, you can use Reanimation every single time a unit is attacked. If true, I presume that the Necron player will just have a certain number of Reanimations per turn, but that's an assumption. Going literally off what they said, every single time you attack a Necron unit they get to do a reanimation roll if you don't kill them all. And if that's true, I can see Necrons shooting up to be a top tier army.
    Remember when they hyped up the new uses of miracle dice and 'unrevealed, reworked acts of faith system because we listened' and it turned out that it was just the uses for dice?

    Remember when they talked about overwatch this, terrain +1, etc. then oh right its a strat

    Watch RPs be a strat for necrons, so you get 1 nigh-unkillable unit per turn so they shoot the rest of your army to pieces. I've got no proof, but no doubt either

  3. - Top - End - #1203
    Titan in the Playground
     
    LeSwordfish's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Oxford, UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XL: Bloated Rules

    Quote Originally Posted by LansXero View Post
    I've got no proof, but no doubt either
    the lansxero experience
    - Avatar by LCP -

  4. - Top - End - #1204
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Forum Explorer's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XL: Bloated Rules

    Quote Originally Posted by LansXero View Post
    Remember when they hyped up the new uses of miracle dice and 'unrevealed, reworked acts of faith system because we listened' and it turned out that it was just the uses for dice?

    Remember when they talked about overwatch this, terrain +1, etc. then oh right its a strat

    Watch RPs be a strat for necrons, so you get 1 nigh-unkillable unit per turn so they shoot the rest of your army to pieces. I've got no proof, but no doubt either
    Nah, Reanimation Protocols can be seen in the Data Sheets of some of the previewed units, so it isn't a strat.

    My money is on that you have a certain number of Reanimations per turn. Like you can reanimate 3 times every turn. But after that you don't get any.
    Spoiler: I'm a writer!
    Show
    Spoiler: Check out my fanfiction[URL="https://www.fanfiction.net/u/7493788/Forum-Explorer"
    Show
    here[/URL]
    ]Fate Stay Nano: Fate Stay Night x Magical Girl Lyrical Nanoha

    I Fell in Love with a Storm: MLP

    Procrastination: MLP



    Spoiler: Original Fiction
    Show
    The Lost Dragon: A story about a priest who finds a baby dragon in his church and decides to protect them.



  5. - Top - End - #1205
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Jan 2008

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XL: Bloated Rules

    Quote Originally Posted by Forum Explorer View Post
    History? Things getting worse in a codex doesn't often happen. It's possible yes, but this is Space Marines. All of the Space Marine releases since the 2.0 Codex have been aimed at being on the OP side of things.
    Something, something 3rd Ed.
    Something, something 4th Ed.
    Something, something 6th Ed.
    It's fun that people can only remember 5th and 7th Eds., and the second 8th Ed. Codex. It's real fun that 8th Ed. Marines will be remembered as overpowered, overhyped bulls*, when the Codex that made them broken was actually the second-last of the entire edition - between CA'17, all the way through to late 2019 (~2 years), Space Marines were not good.

    I wonder how fast hordes would play now. Particularly when you also can't really daisy chain any more.
    Slower?
    You now must move all your models. You can't let two-thirds stand still anymore?
    Hordes' problem is movement, and dice. The new coherency rules means that movement will take even longer. There is no change dice rolls.

    When 20 Cultists of Slaanesh, shoot twice...That's 80 shots. Pick up your dice please. Make sure to re-roll 1s.
    Remember that a proper Cultist army of Abaddon's had upwards of 100 Cultists.

    Quote Originally Posted by Forum Explorer View Post
    My money is on that you have a certain number of Reanimations per turn. Like you can reanimate 3 times every turn. But after that you don't get any.
    That's what I think, too.
    Last edited by Cheesegear; 2020-09-22 at 03:49 PM.
    Spoiler: My Mum Says I'm Cool
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Anuan View Post
    Cheesegear; Lovable Thesaurus ItP.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lycan 01 View Post
    Cheesegear, have I told you yet that you're awesome?
    Quote Originally Posted by MeatShield#236 View Post
    ALL HAIL LORD CHEESEGEAR! Cheese for the cheesegear!
    Quote Originally Posted by Shas'aia Toriia View Post
    Cheesegear is awesome

  6. - Top - End - #1206
    Banned
     
    LansXero's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Lima, Peru
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XL: Bloated Rules

    Quote Originally Posted by Forum Explorer View Post
    Nah, Reanimation Protocols can be seen in the Data Sheets of some of the previewed units, so it isn't a strat.

    My money is on that you have a certain number of Reanimations per turn. Like you can reanimate 3 times every turn. But after that you don't get any.
    All units can Overwatch. When do you overwatch then? when a rule or ability allows you to. What does the strat do? allows you to. Same with the UM one.

    Im sure it wont be a strat. Just saying that if they wanted it to, it could go "Reanimation protocols: When an special ability or rule lets you reanimate, you reanimate". Strat 1CP: Choose a unit. It reanimates until EoT.

  7. - Top - End - #1207
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Renegade Paladin's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Indiana
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XL: Bloated Rules

    Look, if the problem is that the missions disproportionately favor the player who goes first (I don't disagree that it is), then tournament data will bear that out in rapid fashion. Perhaps in Australia it already has; that being the case it should be trivial to compile and present that data. Once the European and North American circuits can fully open again, it will become blatantly obvious. Once that happens, one of two things will happen: Either the ITC or some other organization will write a mission pack that doesn't do that, or GW will take note and fix it in the next Chapter Approved mission pack. If the problem is the missions, that's great news, because the missions are by far the easiest thing to fix.
    Last edited by Renegade Paladin; 2020-09-22 at 07:50 PM.
    "Courage is the complement of fear. A fearless man cannot be courageous. He is also a fool." -- Robert Heinlein


  8. - Top - End - #1208
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Jan 2008

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XL: Bloated Rules

    Quote Originally Posted by Renegade Paladin View Post
    Look, if the problem is that the missions disproportionately favor the player who goes first (I don't disagree that it is), then tournament data will bear that out in rapid fashion.
    The problem is that because of reasons, tournaments aren't happening.

    Perhaps in Australia it already has; that being the case it should be trivial to compile and present that data...
    If our government was stupid, and allowed mass gatherings...Which it doesn't.

    We're allowed to go to peoples' houses. We're allowed to go to stores. We're barely allowed to play 40K, with public social restrictions. Private social restrictions, however, are basically non-existent. I can play 40K. I have been playing 40K this entire time at my opponents' houses, and my opponents have been playing at my house. What I haven't been doing, what I'm not allowed to do, is play in a tournament...Because tournaments don't exist at this time.

    I've heard of people who live out Woop Woop, using their private property to host 'tournaments' of no more than 10 players. Not that I've ever been to one.

    Once that happens, one of two things will happen [...] GW will take note and fix it in the next Chapter Approved mission pack.
    ...Doesn't a second Chapter Approved come out next week or soon?
    (GW's Missions are so bad, they've had to release two - two - separate Mission Packs so far.)
    Spoiler: My Mum Says I'm Cool
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Anuan View Post
    Cheesegear; Lovable Thesaurus ItP.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lycan 01 View Post
    Cheesegear, have I told you yet that you're awesome?
    Quote Originally Posted by MeatShield#236 View Post
    ALL HAIL LORD CHEESEGEAR! Cheese for the cheesegear!
    Quote Originally Posted by Shas'aia Toriia View Post
    Cheesegear is awesome

  9. - Top - End - #1209
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Durham, UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XL: Bloated Rules

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheesegear View Post

    ...Doesn't a second Chapter Approved come out next week or soon?
    (GW's Missions are so bad, they've had to release two - two - separate Mission Packs so far.)
    The problem is the new CA missions were written before 9th released, so are unlikely to address the structural problems caused by the timing of scoring, which as I understand it is the root cause. They might, but it would be accidental. That the current missions are bad is irrelevant to this release.
    Evil round every corner, careful not to step in any.

  10. - Top - End - #1210
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Jan 2008

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XL: Bloated Rules

    Quote Originally Posted by Avaris View Post
    The problem is the new CA missions were written before 9th released, so are unlikely to address the structural problems caused by the timing of scoring...
    You have to address that the core objective in the game, is removing your opponent's models, and GW keeps making models that are really good at removing your opponent's models...But also lumping those units into the same three or four Factions.

    1. You can't score Primary Objectives in the first Round. Just destroy your opponent's models since there's nothing else to do.
    2. The easiest and most rewarding Secondaries, involve destroying your opponent's models. Just destroy your opponent's models.
    3. Destroying your opponent's models, makes it harder for them not only to destroy your models, but also to achieve any other Objective, too.

    Just take units that destroy opposing models. Take units that can't be destroyed easily. ??? ...Profit.
    (Death Guard and Necrons are gonna be real strong for a while)

    ION;
    Does anyone do pre-washes on their models? ...Does it help?
    Last edited by Cheesegear; 2020-09-23 at 05:27 AM.
    Spoiler: My Mum Says I'm Cool
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Anuan View Post
    Cheesegear; Lovable Thesaurus ItP.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lycan 01 View Post
    Cheesegear, have I told you yet that you're awesome?
    Quote Originally Posted by MeatShield#236 View Post
    ALL HAIL LORD CHEESEGEAR! Cheese for the cheesegear!
    Quote Originally Posted by Shas'aia Toriia View Post
    Cheesegear is awesome

  11. - Top - End - #1211
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Killer Angel's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Lustria
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XL: Bloated Rules

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheesegear View Post
    1. You can't score Primary Objectives in the first Round. Just destroy your opponent's models since there's nothing else to do.
    2. The easiest and most rewarding Secondaries, involve destroying your opponent's models. Just destroy your opponent's models.
    3. Destroying your opponent's models, makes it harder for them not only to destroy your models, but also to achieve any other Objective, too.

    Just take units that destroy opposing models. Take units that can't be destroyed easily. ??? ...Profit.
    This is actually the very basic way how 9th must be played. ATM, at least.

    speaking of which...

    Quote Originally Posted by Fable Wright View Post
    2. Symmetrical, top-of-turn scoring means that First Move Advantage is nearly overwhelming in 9th edition.
    It is that true?
    Yeah, actually to have the first turn is amazing, mostly because, with a random roll, the set-up of the opponent won't be ideal.
    With the last iteration of the 8th (the one that goes first sets up everything, the second player sees and fields the units accordingly), the second player was in a better position, but with 9th the second one is just screwed.
    But it won't heavily reflect on the way you achieve the primary objectives… in the first round, you won't score primary oby, you must place your units to score them later… so the second player will act to remove those scoring units in his turn.
    Do I contradict myself?
    Very well then I contradict myself. I am large, I contain multitudes. (W.Whitman)


    Things that increase my self esteem:
    Spoiler
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Kaiyanwang View Post
    Great analysis KA. I second all things you said
    Quote Originally Posted by JoeYounger View Post
    Great analysis KA, I second everything you said here.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ryu_Bonkosi View Post
    If I have a player using Paladin in the future I will direct them to this. Good job.
    Quote Originally Posted by grimbold View Post
    THIS is proof that KA is amazing
    Quote Originally Posted by PairO'Dice Lost View Post
    Killer Angel, you have an excellent taste in books
    Quote Originally Posted by Eldan View Post
    Historical zombies is a fantastic idea.

  12. - Top - End - #1212
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Durham, UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XL: Bloated Rules

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheesegear View Post
    You have to address that the core objective in the game, is removing your opponent's models, and GW keeps making models that are really good at removing your opponent's models...But also lumping those units into the same three or four Factions.

    1. You can't score Primary Objectives in the first Round. Just destroy your opponent's models since there's nothing else to do.
    2. The easiest and most rewarding Secondaries, involve destroying your opponent's models. Just destroy your opponent's models.
    3. Destroying your opponent's models, makes it harder for them not only to destroy your models, but also to achieve any other Objective, too.

    Just take units that destroy opposing models. Take units that can't be destroyed easily. ??? ...Profit.
    (Death Guard and Necrons are gonna be real strong for a while)
    Given this is a war game, it’s very difficult to break that link to destroying models. What would you suggest? I suppose a first step would be to remove/weaken any objectives that involve killing stuff, as you’ll be doing that anyway, but what do you replace them with?

    Quote Originally Posted by Killer Angel View Post
    It is that true?
    Yeah, actually to have the first turn is amazing, mostly because, with a random roll, the set-up of the opponent won't be ideal.
    With the last iteration of the 8th (the one that goes first sets up everything, the second player sees and fields the units accordingly), the second player was in a better position, but with 9th the second one is just screwed.
    But it won't heavily reflect on the way you achieve the primary objectives… in the first round, you won't score primary oby, you must place your units to score them later… so the second player will act to remove those scoring units in his turn.
    I believe it is, and have seen analysis that supports it. With the primary objectives, the second player has the additional disadvantage that their final turn is meaningless, given scoring is top of turn. In the first players final turn they score, and then take actions to prevent the second player scoring. In the second player’s final turn they score, then have an entire turn that doesn’t affect the game.

    Ultimately, what the data suggests is that in the early rounds of a tournament first turn advantage can be nullified by player skill, but in later rounds, where players are more evenly matched skill wise, it can’t. This extends to casual players (like me) probably being unlikely to have a problem, as we don’t focus so heavily on the optimal play, whereas tournaments really suffer.
    Evil round every corner, careful not to step in any.

  13. - Top - End - #1213
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Jan 2008

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XL: Bloated Rules

    Quote Originally Posted by Avaris View Post
    Given this is a war game, itÂ’s very difficult to break that link to destroying models. What would you suggest? I suppose a first step would be to remove/weaken any objectives that involve killing stuff
    I mean, I'm sure if you looked around, the 8th Ed. Datacards are still around (especially 'cause they still have all the Stratagems). You'll find a Maelstrom deck easily enough:

    1. Objectives aren't optional (looking at you, CA'19),
    2. There are more Objective Points, than Kill Points, in the deck (looking at you, CA'19)
    3. The Objectives, are - usually - worth more than the Kill Points.

    Remember, the sole reason that Maelstrom dropped into the toilet, competitively, was because board control was no longer the way to win the game, because you could just remove all the board control Objectives in the deck, and cycle Kill Points hard like you're at the Tour de France. Competitively, Maelstrom turned into a numbers game, determined by army list creation, and who had the best numbers. Which it wasn't, previously.

    It's not even 'top of turn scoring' that's the problem. It's that the Objectives, themselves aren't weighted correctly.
    Destroying your opponent's models is weighted the same as - if not more than - any other Objective (Destroying your opponent's Warlord, on Turn 1, is worth 13 VPs, and 10 VPs on Turn 2! Roll hard, son!). And, as mentioned, destroying your opponent's models is what almost every rule is designed around, anyway (what, like you weren't planning on destroying your opponent's Warlord anyway!?).

    Just keep doing what you're doing anyway, and make sure you take units with good numbers.

    I recently spoke about 7th Ed. Which, at the time (before Gathering Storm, at least), I said was the best Ed. of the game I've ever played, and I still said that even in games when I didn't take a Gladius. Objective Secured was the best rule in the entire game, and Objective Secured, on its own, has no bearing at all on how hard a unit can kill, or be killed. ObSec was an esoteric rule that won games, without ever rolling a single dice for it. In 7th Ed., if your army didn't have Troops - and good Troops, at that (or a totally broken Formation) - you lost. Which had nothing to do with destroying your opponent's models.
    ...In hindsight, maybe that's why people don't like ObSec? Because it isn't a rule designed around destroying models.

    If you played in 5th Ed., you would know that Movement was the most important stat in the game. It was no good staying in your DZ for four turns, if, on the 5th Turn, you couldn't rocket out and grab all the Objectives on the board (hello Blood Angels Razorbacks...I've never forgotten you...Never...)...Oh wait, there's that word again. Objectives. 5th Ed. was about moving to Objectives. Yeah. You played Rocket Tag for four turns, but eventually, you had to move out of your DZ, and that's when the player going second was able to punish you for it, because the player going second, determined how the game ended, in a way that they can't, in 9e.
    Which is why Mech was King. Vehicles weren't exactly easy to destroy. So by the time Turn 5 rolled around, it was fairly unlikely that you wouldn't be able to compete in the final turn.

    6th Ed. was about Death Stars. We don't talk about 6th Ed.
    Last edited by Cheesegear; 2020-09-23 at 07:06 AM.
    Spoiler: My Mum Says I'm Cool
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Anuan View Post
    Cheesegear; Lovable Thesaurus ItP.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lycan 01 View Post
    Cheesegear, have I told you yet that you're awesome?
    Quote Originally Posted by MeatShield#236 View Post
    ALL HAIL LORD CHEESEGEAR! Cheese for the cheesegear!
    Quote Originally Posted by Shas'aia Toriia View Post
    Cheesegear is awesome

  14. - Top - End - #1214
    Banned
     
    LansXero's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Lima, Peru
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XL: Bloated Rules

    In other news, new supplement just released with rules for GW terrain, which is good to avoid the asinine 'agree with your opponent' bs, but... terrain set up guidelines are based around 'terrain points' instead of meaningful distribution so its almost nothing. Worse, its rules for each player to bring their own terrain and set their table side, which just throws balance to the crapper

  15. - Top - End - #1215
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Jan 2008

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XL: Bloated Rules

    Quote Originally Posted by LansXero View Post
    In other news, new supplement just released with rules for GW terrain
    [...] its rules for each player to bring their own terrain and set their table side...
    Okay; Player-placed Objectives have been removed from the game. But player-placed terrain is still in? That's terrible. I don't need to buy that.

    Now tell us about the second Mission packet.
    Last edited by Cheesegear; 2020-09-24 at 07:02 PM.
    Spoiler: My Mum Says I'm Cool
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Anuan View Post
    Cheesegear; Lovable Thesaurus ItP.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lycan 01 View Post
    Cheesegear, have I told you yet that you're awesome?
    Quote Originally Posted by MeatShield#236 View Post
    ALL HAIL LORD CHEESEGEAR! Cheese for the cheesegear!
    Quote Originally Posted by Shas'aia Toriia View Post
    Cheesegear is awesome

  16. - Top - End - #1216
    Banned
     
    LansXero's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Lima, Peru
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XL: Bloated Rules

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheesegear View Post
    Okay; Player-placed Objectives have been removed from the game. But player-placed terrain is still in? That's terrible. I don't need to buy that.

    Now tell us about the second Mission packet.
    That IS the second Mission packet.

    Quote Originally Posted by Games Workshop
    Chapter Approved: Tactical Deployment Mission Pack


    A brand-new 104 page Matched Play Mission Pack featuring an all new way to play Warhammer 40,000, where terrain is fielded as part of a player’s army
    Includes 18 brand new Matched Play missions specifically designed for use with Tactical Terrain, also includes a full set of basic Warhammer 40,000 rules

  17. - Top - End - #1217
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Jan 2008

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XL: Bloated Rules

    Quote Originally Posted by LansXero View Post
    That IS the second Mission packet.
    Oh.
    I just noticed that Beyond the Veil says 'Crusade' on the front.
    Oh.
    Maybe Crusade will make sense, now?
    We'll see.

    Posted from phone.
    Spoiler: My Mum Says I'm Cool
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Anuan View Post
    Cheesegear; Lovable Thesaurus ItP.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lycan 01 View Post
    Cheesegear, have I told you yet that you're awesome?
    Quote Originally Posted by MeatShield#236 View Post
    ALL HAIL LORD CHEESEGEAR! Cheese for the cheesegear!
    Quote Originally Posted by Shas'aia Toriia View Post
    Cheesegear is awesome

  18. - Top - End - #1218
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Durham, UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XL: Bloated Rules

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheesegear View Post
    Oh.
    I just noticed that Beyond the Veil says 'Crusade' on the front.
    Oh.
    Maybe Crusade will make sense, now?
    We'll see.

    Posted from phone.
    There are two products coming out: Beyond the Veil is Crusade focussed, but there’s also a tournament pack coming out, which is the terrain stuff.

    There is a lot of scepticism on the internet around the tactical terrain, most of which I think is unwarranted. Yes, it will have a distorting effect on games, but the same is true of any choice you get to make, and it’s not ‘anything goes’. Some bits of terrain will be better than others, and support certain playstyles, but that has always been true of every other aspect of the game. Tournament players are going to find the best option, that’s what they do.

    The criticism I think IS warranted is that this drastically limits tournament accessibility. Firstly, you have to be able to buy terrain: this is already an expensive hobby. So if a tournament uses this pack it potentially prices some players out. Secondly, you have to transport the terrain, which tends to be rather bulky. So large tournaments which attract people from across a wide area will struggle to make use of it. You can’t easily fly with terrain.

    So I expect that this will be primarily useful for local tournaments run out of FLGS on similar. I like the idea of there being different variations on tournaments and missions available: it’s a tool in the toolbox. Tactical terrain being in the core rules and in every mission would be a problem, but a mission pack seems a good place for it.
    Evil round every corner, careful not to step in any.

  19. - Top - End - #1219
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Renegade Paladin's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Indiana
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XL: Bloated Rules

    Speaking as an organizer of tournaments at an LGS, I will not use the Tactical Deployment terrain rules simply for reasons of time if nothing else. Redoing the tables each game will be time consuming. There's a reason tournaments set up terrain tables in advance and leave them all day.
    "Courage is the complement of fear. A fearless man cannot be courageous. He is also a fool." -- Robert Heinlein


  20. - Top - End - #1220
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Durham, UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XL: Bloated Rules

    Quote Originally Posted by Renegade Paladin View Post
    Speaking as an organizer of tournaments at an LGS, I will not use the Tactical Deployment terrain rules simply for reasons of time if nothing else. Redoing the tables each game will be time consuming. There's a reason tournaments set up terrain tables in advance and leave them all day.
    That’s also a fair criticism! Though surely it’s just an extra bit added on to deployment? You deploy your terrain, you deploy your army. I don’t think it will add all that much time? But I can see that it might make larger points games, which are already tight on time, difficult.
    Evil round every corner, careful not to step in any.

  21. - Top - End - #1221
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Jan 2008

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XL: Bloated Rules

    Quote Originally Posted by Avaris View Post
    There is a lot of scepticism on the internet around the tactical terrain, most of which I think is unwarranted. Yes, it will have a distorting effect on games
    My favourite part was when you contradicted yourself immediately.

    Some bits of terrain will be better than others, and support certain playstyles, but that has always been true of every other aspect of the game. Tournament players are going to find the best option, that’s what they do.
    This is a problem. You're saying that someone's terrain could, nay, should benefit their own army.
    There should be no such thing as standardised terrain, because, in actual fact, everyone should be making their own, to their own benefit.

    Now, there is some value in that.
    But it also says that your terrain that you bring with you, is equally as important as the rest of your entire army.
    That's a nightmare for transport.
    It's a nightmare for game balance...And that makes it unusable.

    The criticism I think IS warranted is that this drastically limits tournament accessibility.
    Stores should no longer have terrain at their tables.
    It is now on the players to bring their own terrain, since it's part of their army now.
    Using the store's terrain, potentially hamstrings the player, since they didn't get to choose it.

    LansXero said it first:
    If it's bad for tournament players, it's bad all the way down.

    That is; If it's not balanced, it's not balanced.

    So I expect that this will be primarily useful for local tournaments run out of FLGS on similar.
    I don't want to use my store's terrain.
    My store's terrain sucks and doesn't benefit me, and benefits my opponents.
    My store's tournament is broken. Do not play.

    It will be primarily useful for players who think 'modelling for advantage' isn't a thing.
    Last edited by Cheesegear; 2020-09-25 at 01:17 AM.
    Spoiler: My Mum Says I'm Cool
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Anuan View Post
    Cheesegear; Lovable Thesaurus ItP.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lycan 01 View Post
    Cheesegear, have I told you yet that you're awesome?
    Quote Originally Posted by MeatShield#236 View Post
    ALL HAIL LORD CHEESEGEAR! Cheese for the cheesegear!
    Quote Originally Posted by Shas'aia Toriia View Post
    Cheesegear is awesome

  22. - Top - End - #1222
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Durham, UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XL: Bloated Rules

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheesegear View Post
    This is a problem. You're saying that someone's terrain could, nay, should benefit their own army.
    There should be no such thing as standardised terrain, because, in actual fact, everyone should be making their own, to their own benefit.

    Now, there is some value in that.
    But it also says that your terrain that you bring with you, is equally as important as the rest of your entire army.
    That's a nightmare for transport.
    It's a nightmare for game balance...And that makes it unusable.
    Why is that any different to army and unit selection though? Why shouldn’t picking the correct terrain for your army be as much a part of building a force as picking the correct troops choice? The system has terrain points, and specified options, so why is it any different to selecting an army? It’s not. It’s another part of preparing a list.

    Transport IS a problem. This system shouldn’t be used for all tournaments. But every criticism from a game balance and usability perspective can equally be applied to options when building an army. Why is terrain any different?

    Edit to add: games should either be both players using these rules, or neither. So if one player has brought terrain, and the other hasn’t, they should both use store terrain, which is my understanding of the rules here. So ‘this store terrain benefits my opponent’ doesn’t apply any more than it previously did, as the specialised rules won’t come into play when using store terrain.
    Last edited by Avaris; 2020-09-25 at 01:30 AM.
    Evil round every corner, careful not to step in any.

  23. - Top - End - #1223
    Pixie in the Playground
     
    Daemon

    Join Date
    May 2020

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XL: Bloated Rules

    The big thing that I see these rules doing is encouraging people to have very very simple terrain in the modular fashions that are most advanteous, otherwise you model terrain for advantage when you make it for your army and that gets bad fast.

  24. - Top - End - #1224
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    ElfPirate

    Join Date
    Aug 2013

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XL: Bloated Rules

    Quote Originally Posted by Avaris View Post
    That’s also a fair criticism! Though surely it’s just an extra bit added on to deployment? You deploy your terrain, you deploy your army. I don’t think it will add all that much time? But I can see that it might make larger points games, which are already tight on time, difficult.
    Every little extra bit is loads of time unfortunately in a tournament. People spend inordiante amounts of time trying to figure out the optimal placement even when it makes almost no difference. I couldn't get people to deploy on time even with a hard limit on deployment time *and* standing behind then as the judge telling them they need to hurry up the first table already completed their game and I will dock both you slowpokes on scores if something doesn't happen *now*!

    Not everyone will, but there is a certain category of players who think they are better players than they are and are going through the motions they've seen better players do, effectively imitation without understanding. And it slows the game to a crawl. These players are quite common at tournaments too out to prove they are as good as that best player in their club is.

    It is bad enough I have to let people choose were to deploy their own troops, I'd never let them mess about with terrain too.



    Quote Originally Posted by Keraunograf View Post
    The big thing that I see these rules doing is encouraging people to have very very simple terrain in the modular fashions that are most advanteous, otherwise you model terrain for advantage when you make it for your army and that gets bad fast.
    Modelling terrain for advantage is exactly what is going to happen.
    Last edited by snowblizz; 2020-09-25 at 02:54 AM.

  25. - Top - End - #1225
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Jan 2008

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XL: Bloated Rules

    Quote Originally Posted by Avaris View Post
    Why is that any different to army and unit selection though?
    Because you're constantly stacking advantages that are taking place before the game starts.

    Why shouldn’t picking the correct terrain for your army be as much a part of building a force as picking the correct troops choice?
    Because you want less things taking place before the battle begins, not more.

    The system has terrain points, and specified options, so why is it any different to selecting an army? It’s not. It’s another part of preparing a list.
    Which is asinine.

    But every criticism from a game balance and usability perspective can equally be applied to options when building an army. Why is terrain any different?
    Because terrain is the one thing that doesn't need to change. What needs to change, it how units and Factions interact with the terrain (e.g; Maybe they don't just ignore it outright?). But that would require rewriting Codecies, and GW can't do that for two more years.
    This was said way back at the start. 8th Ed. terrain rules were mostly fine as is. 9th Ed. terrain rules are way worse and this is more turd, and even less polish.

    So if one player has brought terrain, and the other hasn’t, they should both use store terrain...
    In which case the book is a pointless product that shouldn't exist. Only silly people need buy it.
    We're agreed.

    Every game, I'm just going to tell my opponent 'No.' Then I'm going to set the terrain up in a roughly competitive fashion. That means I don't have to spend any money at all, and if they, did buy it, then they wasted their money.
    The people who don't want it, have no reason to buy it,
    and the people who do buy it, can't use it.
    Great product.
    Last edited by Cheesegear; 2020-09-25 at 03:36 AM.
    Spoiler: My Mum Says I'm Cool
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Anuan View Post
    Cheesegear; Lovable Thesaurus ItP.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lycan 01 View Post
    Cheesegear, have I told you yet that you're awesome?
    Quote Originally Posted by MeatShield#236 View Post
    ALL HAIL LORD CHEESEGEAR! Cheese for the cheesegear!
    Quote Originally Posted by Shas'aia Toriia View Post
    Cheesegear is awesome

  26. - Top - End - #1226
    Banned
     
    LansXero's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Lima, Peru
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XL: Bloated Rules

    Quote Originally Posted by Avaris View Post
    Why is that any different to army and unit selection though?
    Because it affects much more. Terrain placement affects deepstrike, strategic reserves, area control secondaries, line of sight, etc. Table design is already a cluster**** after the 'fun and interactive' balance pass of 9th, encouraging both players to clump together little bunkers on their sides to trade even less than before is more suck on top the already sucky pile of suck that is this edition. its not just modelling to an advantage, its also placement at an advantage with no concern to how enjoyable it might be to play for either the oponent or yourself.

    Why shouldn’t picking the correct terrain for your army be as much a part of building a force as picking the correct troops choice? The system has terrain points, and specified options, so why is it any different to selecting an army? It’s not. It’s another part of preparing a list.
    It totally is because I didnt choose 'zone mortalis' or 'battlefield manufactorum' or what have you as my faction. GW terrain is both expensive and sometimes out of print, but also its terribly internally balanced. You dont realize that when discussing an already borked game (more so come October) adding more imbalance skews things even worse

    Transport IS a problem. This system shouldn’t be used for all tournaments. But every criticism from a game balance and usability perspective can equally be applied to options when building an army. Why is terrain any different?
    Because you are adding points of failure with a different system on top of another system you never got to balance either. Because you impose those choices on your opponent as well as yourself.

    Anyways, from one of the largest FB groups for Competitive 40k

    {Scrubbed}

    the consensus is already out. So no real need to try and convince you of something the wider internet sees clearly.
    Last edited by jdizzlean; 2020-10-15 at 05:20 PM. Reason: clean up

  27. - Top - End - #1227
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Jan 2008

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XL: Bloated Rules

    Quote Originally Posted by LansXero View Post
    Because it affects much more. Terrain placement affects deepstrike, strategic reserves, area control secondaries, line of sight, etc...
    I was only thinking of LoS, and how it affects Factions that can see through walls, and the Factions that can't.
    But you are 100% right.

    encouraging both players to clump together little bunkers on their sides to trade even less than before is more suck on top the already sucky pile of suck that is this edition.
    This is an existing problem, with Fortifications. It's fortunate, that for the most part, most Fortifications aren't very good.
    However, there are notable exceptions - like Repulsors-on-a-Skyshield.

    But, I remember 7th Ed., when some Fortifications were really good. And yes. People absolutely did bring several Bastions and Bunkers, group them together, and lol.

    its also placement at an advantage with no concern to how enjoyable it might be to play for either the oponent or yourself.
    I am now having flashbacks to 7th Ed. and how awful Fortifications were, and why Fortification Networks were banned.
    But now, in 9th Ed., modelled-for-advantage terrain, is free.

    Anyways, from one of the largest FB groups for Competitive 40k
    I suggest maybe blacking/blurring out the word, and reposting the image?

    the consensus is already out.
    Pfft. Only 400 votes. Don't you know that's meaningless Lans? What would 400 people know? There are way more 40K players than that.
    We should just wait and see.
    Last edited by Cheesegear; 2020-09-25 at 04:10 AM.
    Spoiler: My Mum Says I'm Cool
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Anuan View Post
    Cheesegear; Lovable Thesaurus ItP.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lycan 01 View Post
    Cheesegear, have I told you yet that you're awesome?
    Quote Originally Posted by MeatShield#236 View Post
    ALL HAIL LORD CHEESEGEAR! Cheese for the cheesegear!
    Quote Originally Posted by Shas'aia Toriia View Post
    Cheesegear is awesome

  28. - Top - End - #1228
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Durham, UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XL: Bloated Rules

    The main thing I object to is how ready the community is to throw out any innovation in the game. The book isn’t even out yet. The vast majority of people saying ‘I won’t play with this’ haven’t read it, and haven’t even heard anything second hand from people who HAVE read it. If people play with it and find it sucks, great! That’s an opinion based on reality. But they’ve at least given it a go.

    There are definite reasons, as I’ve said, why this is absolutely not ideal for every game. These are the ones based on what is certain: terrain is bulky and expensive. Also the time issue raised up thread. But the gameplay isn’t fully known yet.

    It’s reasonable to be concerned about it: LansXero makes a very good point about it being another thing needing to be balanced. Adding too much to the game creates more points of failure. But throwing it out as terrible before it is even available is entirely unreasonable IMO.

    Then again, I should be used to the wider community being entirely unreasonable and throwing things out before they even get a chance to read it. It’s what they do every time.

    My view is that this is another option in the toolbox that is 40k. Some games will run with it, some won’t. Both will be different challenges for players, and add variety. It won’t work especially well for pick up games, but small local gaming groups could get a lot of use out of it. But how will people get the chance to see if it suits them if they are put off by the howling of people who whine about everything online?
    Evil round every corner, careful not to step in any.

  29. - Top - End - #1229
    Titan in the Playground
     
    LeSwordfish's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Oxford, UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XL: Bloated Rules

    We'll quit if this is implemented!
    Don't threaten me with a good time.
    - Avatar by LCP -

  30. - Top - End - #1230
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Forum Explorer's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XL: Bloated Rules

    Quote Originally Posted by Avaris View Post
    The main thing I object to is how ready the community is to throw out any innovation in the game. The book isn’t even out yet. The vast majority of people saying ‘I won’t play with this’ haven’t read it, and haven’t even heard anything second hand from people who HAVE read it. If people play with it and find it sucks, great! That’s an opinion based on reality. But they’ve at least given it a go.

    There are definite reasons, as I’ve said, why this is absolutely not ideal for every game. These are the ones based on what is certain: terrain is bulky and expensive. Also the time issue raised up thread. But the gameplay isn’t fully known yet.

    It’s reasonable to be concerned about it: LansXero makes a very good point about it being another thing needing to be balanced. Adding too much to the game creates more points of failure. But throwing it out as terrible before it is even available is entirely unreasonable IMO.

    Then again, I should be used to the wider community being entirely unreasonable and throwing things out before they even get a chance to read it. It’s what they do every time.

    My view is that this is another option in the toolbox that is 40k. Some games will run with it, some won’t. Both will be different challenges for players, and add variety. It won’t work especially well for pick up games, but small local gaming groups could get a lot of use out of it. But how will people get the chance to see if it suits them if they are put off by the howling of people who whine about everything online?
    It's pretty trash, just because player placed terrain is horrifically unbalanced. Gunlines are nigh unbeatable without sufficient LoS blocking terrain. Armies with units with good shooting that ignores LoS becomes insanely better. And that's before we get into whatever special abilities the terrain might have.

    And there is no reason to be optimistic about them balancing it well, because GW is horrible at balance.

    Though really, the big problem is player placed terrain. If it was simply spending points to upgrade terrain already on the field of battle, than I'd reserve judgement. But player placed terrain is just flat out a bad idea.
    Spoiler: I'm a writer!
    Show
    Spoiler: Check out my fanfiction[URL="https://www.fanfiction.net/u/7493788/Forum-Explorer"
    Show
    here[/URL]
    ]Fate Stay Nano: Fate Stay Night x Magical Girl Lyrical Nanoha

    I Fell in Love with a Storm: MLP

    Procrastination: MLP



    Spoiler: Original Fiction
    Show
    The Lost Dragon: A story about a priest who finds a baby dragon in his church and decides to protect them.



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •