Switch Theme:

Do you prefer "Eternal War" or "Maelström" missions ?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Poll
Which one do you prefer ?
Eternal
Maelström
Other (please, explain)

View results
Author Message
Advert


Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
  • No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
  • Times and dates in your local timezone.
  • Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
  • Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
  • Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.




Made in us
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar





Southern California, USA

Maelstrom missions are stupidly random. As others have said, the idea of shifting objectives is a great one but Maelstrom executes it poorly. And the way objectives are generated are just silly:

"Alright Major! Take your men and assault the south bunker! With it we can fortify our position against enemy counter attack!'

"Yes sir!"

"Major, orders just came down from Segmentum command. Enemy fliers have been spotted in your sector. We need you to take them down!"

"But sir, there are no enemy fliers within sight. And what about the south bunker?"

"Never mind that major, I have new orders from you. These come from the top. We need you to cut the teeth of those psykers we just assigned to your company. Order them to cast a few powers to see how they do".

"Sir, we don't have any pskers!"

"Not important major. We just got new orders. These are big, Major. We need your company to completely eradicate the enemy in close quarters assault. The brass thinks it would make for a good morale boost".

"WHAT ABOUT THE SOUTH BUNKER?!"

"Major! Our intell reports enemy Psykers in your area. We need them eliminated in the name of the Emperor! Do it, ASAP!"

"WE'RE FIGHTING TAU!".


Thought for the day: Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.
30k Ultramarines: 2000 pts
Bolt Action Germans: ~1200 pts
AOS Stormcast: Just starting.
The Empire : ~60-70 models.
1500 pts
: My Salamanders painting blog 16 Infantry and 2 Vehicles done so far!  
   
Made in gb
Fixture of Dakka




I think Custom sums it up nicely. Maelstrom is a good idea but it was done so very badly.

tremere47-fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate, leads to triple riptide spam  
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




Halandri

 Peregrine wrote:
nareik wrote:
Furthermore, gimmies also mean novice players get to feel they accomplished something in game, even if they play someone far out of their league.


Which is obviously the intent of maelstrom missions: make the game so random that a 10 year old with their first space marine starter set has a chance of winning against even the most experienced veteran, and continuing to buy more boxes of space marines because they're so excited about how they won. Most people grow up and move beyond kid-friendly games like this, it's just unfortunate that large parts of the 40k community haven't.
I don't think it is so much about a chance of winning, so much as a chance of putting something on the scoreboard. They are participation awards, not trophies.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/05/25 21:16:02


 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






SoCal, USA!

I am shocked that the majority prefer arbitrary and randomly-shifting objectives for randomness sake.

   
Made in us
Bonkers Buggy Driver with Rockets






 JohnHwangDD wrote:
I am shocked that the majority prefer arbitrary and randomly-shifting objectives for randomness sake.

I think your missing the point. The majority like maelstrom for the fact that they find it fun. If maelstrom wasn't fun then no one would want to play it....but more people find it more fun then eternal war. You look at that and think "they like it because they just want to be randum", while I look at it and think "they like it because they got tired of fighting against gunlines". Majority proves most of your "anti maelstrom " posts are just your opinion whIle most disagree with you

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/05/25 23:32:51


"dont put all yer boyz in one trukk" "umless its dredds, then take as much uf those as possible"

geargutz interpretation of the 'umies "eggs in one basket" 
   
Made in at
Stalwart Tribune





Austria

 TheCustomLime wrote:
Maelstrom missions are stupidly random. As others have said, the idea of shifting objectives is a great one but Maelstrom executes it poorly. And the way objectives are generated are just silly:

"Alright Major! Take your men and assault the south bunker! With it we can fortify our position against enemy counter attack!'

"Yes sir!"

"Major, orders just came down from Segmentum command. Enemy fliers have been spotted in your sector. We need you to take them down!"

"But sir, there are no enemy fliers within sight. And what about the south bunker?"

"Never mind that major, I have new orders from you. These come from the top. We need you to cut the teeth of those psykers we just assigned to your company. Order them to cast a few powers to see how they do".

"Sir, we don't have any pskers!"

"Not important major. We just got new orders. These are big, Major. We need your company to completely eradicate the enemy in close quarters assault. The brass thinks it would make for a good morale boost".

"WHAT ABOUT THE SOUTH BUNKER?!"

"Major! Our intell reports enemy Psykers in your area. We need them eliminated in the name of the Emperor! Do it, ASAP!"

"WE'RE FIGHTING TAU!".


Brilliant! Best explanation ever!

30k: Taghmata Omnissiah(5,5k)
Ordo Reductor(4,5k)
Legio Cybernetica(WIP)

40k(Inactive): Adeptus Mechanicus(2,5k)

WFB(Inactive): Nippon, Skaven

01001111 01110010 01100100 01101111 00100000 01010010 01100101 01100100 01110101 01100011 01110100 01101111 01110010 00100001  
   
Made in us
Bonkers Buggy Driver with Rockets






 Ankhalagon wrote:
 TheCustomLime wrote:
Maelstrom missions are stupidly random. As others have said, the idea of shifting objectives is a great one but Maelstrom executes it poorly. And the way objectives are generated are just silly:

"Alright Major! Take your men and assault the south bunker! With it we can fortify our position against enemy counter attack!'

"Yes sir!"

"Major, orders just came down from Segmentum command. Enemy fliers have been spotted in your sector. We need you to take them down!"

"But sir, there are no enemy fliers within sight. And what about the south bunker?"

"Never mind that major, I have new orders from you. These come from the top. We need you to cut the teeth of those psykers we just assigned to your company. Order them to cast a few powers to see how they do".

"Sir, we don't have any pskers!"

"Not important major. We just got new orders. These are big, Major. We need your company to completely eradicate the enemy in close quarters assault. The brass thinks it would make for a good morale boost".

"WHAT ABOUT THE SOUTH BUNKER?!"

"Major! Our intell reports enemy Psykers in your area. We need them eliminated in the name of the Emperor! Do it, ASAP!"

"WE'RE FIGHTING TAU!".


Brilliant! Best explanation ever!


While this does sound quite funny, most houserule that you discard cards that don't matter in a game...so in reality it never plays out like this.

"dont put all yer boyz in one trukk" "umless its dredds, then take as much uf those as possible"

geargutz interpretation of the 'umies "eggs in one basket" 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






SoCal, USA!

If one has to houserule the game to not play the game's actual victory conditions, then you're not playing the game...

   
Made in us
Bonkers Buggy Driver with Rockets






 JohnHwangDD wrote:
If one has to houserule the game to not play the game's actual victory conditions, then you're not playing the game...

So I guess you arent a fan of itc, the most common tournament houserule in the us.

"dont put all yer boyz in one trukk" "umless its dredds, then take as much uf those as possible"

geargutz interpretation of the 'umies "eggs in one basket" 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




The free points cards are there to promote list variety.

The fact that I choose to have flyers, characters, and psykers to make my opponent attempt those objectives while I focus on the ones based on board control has affected my list making since this addition dropped. Now, you can do the opposite obviously, but that is again a tactical decision that is added with the advent of these cards.

Yes, some armies don't have psykers. The objective to kill a psyker is then one where you are denying a point to the opponent as well.

   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






SoCal, USA!

No, I'm not a fan of ITC; I play among friends, so ITC is a solution to a problem that we don't have.

   
Made in us
Douglas Bader






Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote:
The free points cards are there to promote list variety.


Except they don't. If there's a "kill a flyer" objective you want to remove flyers from your list so that your opponent has a dead card every time they draw that objective. So instead of promoting diversity in unit choices you discourage people from taking anything that has a "kill this" objective attached.

And of course that's on top of the stupidity of taking units just in case they're relevant for an objective. Why should my Tau have to ally in a psyker that has no purpose in the army other than casting any random level 1 power if I happen to draw "cast a psychic power"? How is that producing interesting list diversity and strategic choices, rather than being a stupid gimmick?

There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. 
   
Made in us
Imperial Guard Landspeeder Pilot




On moon miranda.

Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote:
The free points cards are there to promote list variety.

The fact that I choose to have flyers, characters, and psykers to make my opponent attempt those objectives while I focus on the ones based on board control has affected my list making since this addition dropped.
Or rather, you've just given an opponent a greater array of methods to achieve victory with and any specialized assets they brought to deal with such are no longer dead weight and have targets while the rest of the army does what it was going to do anyway...all you are doing by reacting that way is opening up more points for an opponent to snag.

If you brought no flyer, well that Hunter tank your opponent deployed would have done largely nothing of value, but since you brought the flyer to try and stress their objective capabilities, you've just made it useful and now *you* have to devote resources to dealing with that threat, for no objective bonus, that otherwise you could have ignored. Alternatively, if they brought no specialized AA, you've given your opponent a fallback objective to try for if they cant reach their primary one, or given them the chance to score 2 objectives where otherwise they could only have scored one.

There's very little tactical merit to this sort of thing.

Yes, some armies don't have psykers. The objective to kill a psyker is then one where you are denying a point to the opponent as well.
which balances only over very many games, almost never just one, making the theoretical balance factor largely pointless.

IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.

New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights!
The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.  
   
Made in ca
Fixture of Dakka





Ottawa Ontario Canada

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
If one has to houserule the game to not play the game's actual victory conditions, then you're not playing the game...


Yes, thankyou!

That's the other problem, I have a gut feeling that a lot of the pro maelstrom side aren't actually playing maelstrom, they're playing modified maelstrom, but to admit that weakens their argument from the get go so that part gets omitted.


I'll be fair, I'll weaken the eternal war side, most of the eternal war missions suck too, but at least some are still primarily about final causality scoring as opposed to gotta catch'm all pokemon.

Do you play 30k? It'd be a lot cooler if you did.  
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




Ute nation

Maelstrom forces you to be reactive, and adapt to changing conditions on the battlefield. I appreciate that a lot more than the shin kicking contest that Eternal war missions tends to be. Lets face it this game isn't balanced at all, so anything dependent on kill points is horribly doomed to failure. At least weak armies can strive for victory in maelstrom (albeit with little chance of success) as opposed to getting their faces ground into the dirt like eternal war tends to do.

Constantly being negative doesn't make you seem erudite, it just makes you look like a curmudgeon.  
   
Made in us
Bonkers Buggy Driver with Rockets






 Crablezworth wrote:
 JohnHwangDD wrote:
If one has to houserule the game to not play the game's actual victory conditions, then you're not playing the game...


Yes, thankyou!

That's the other problem, I have a gut feeling that a lot of the pro maelstrom side aren't actually playing maelstrom, they're playing modified maelstrom, but to admit that weakens their argument from the get go so that part gets omitted.


I'll be fair, I'll weaken the eternal war side, most of the eternal war missions suck too, but at least some are still primarily about final causality scoring as opposed to gotta catch'm all pokemon.


So you mean to tell me that you guyz don't use any house rules at all? With the poor writing of gw there is almost no way to play the game without houserules....and also you are trying to give the concept of houserules a negative spin.
By your logic I am no longer playing a game of 40k if I'm making a simple houserule to either better the game or make it quicker....it's logic like this that makes people Snip. If you have to ask if something is considered an insult on Dakka, you should already know the answer. --Janthkin

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/05/26 05:14:42


"dont put all yer boyz in one trukk" "umless its dredds, then take as much uf those as possible"

geargutz interpretation of the 'umies "eggs in one basket" 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






SoCal, USA!

 Grimgold wrote:
Maelstrom forces you to be reactive, and adapt to changing conditions on the battlefield.


40k does that inherently, even in Eternal War missions. If you're playing some version of CTF or KOTH, for example, and your opponent makes a move, you generally have to find a way to counter it or you will lose.
____

@geargutz - if you're using "neckbeards" as an insult (and you are), then it's an insult. But far be it for me to judge...

Also, nice use of logical fallacy there. Maelstrom has a very specific set of rules, and the question is whether people are playing Maelstrom, Not whether they are playing a modified version of Maelstrom that ignores anything they deem to be "impossible" due to their (or their opponent's) failure to provide enabling units.

If one accomodates a player when their opponent doesn't have a Flyer, why not a similar accomodation when continuous Running by the nearest remaining unit(s) cannot reach an Objective? That's exactly the same.

   
Made in us
Imperial Guard Landspeeder Pilot




On moon miranda.

 Grimgold wrote:
Maelstrom forces you to be reactive, and adapt to changing conditions on the battlefield. I appreciate that a lot more than the shin kicking contest that Eternal war missions tends to be. Lets face it this game isn't balanced at all, so anything dependent on kill points is horribly doomed to failure. At least weak armies can strive for victory in maelstrom (albeit with little chance of success) as opposed to getting their faces ground into the dirt like eternal war tends to do.
I find that the armies that are considered "top tier" are generally also the best at Maelstrom missions too. Hard to find a unit better tailored to Maelstrom than Scatterbikes or Tomb Blades for example, super fast, can be played MSU or with large squads, and effective against a very wide array of targets with good weapons range to boot. Or things like TWC deathstars that can often achieve multiple Maelstrom objectives in a single turn (cast a power, kill something in CC, win a challenge, all while clearing the enemy off and claiming Objective X).

IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.

New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights!
The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.  
   
Made in us
Bonkers Buggy Driver with Rockets






 JohnHwangDD wrote:

Also, nice use of logical fallacy there. Maelstrom has a very specific set of rules, and the question is whether people are playing Maelstrom, Not whether they are playing a modified version of Maelstrom that ignores anything they deem to be "impossible" due to their (or their opponent's) failure to provide enabling units.
.

It might be logical falacy, but it's willfull misdirection to try to lead people to believe the houserulled version they've been playing isnt 40k....40K IS A TABLETOP GAME!!!!
The only game out there where you have to play it in its original form are video games, where you involvement is completely determined by the system...anything else that isn't a video game is pretty open to interpretation and doesn't automatically make it a completely different game when someone makes a change to a rule. Houserules are how we make a fun game better, easier, and an overall better experience. Even tournaments houserule.
So when I voted for maelstrom I was also including my houserule. Do you want me to retract my vote on this threads poll since I don't play the exact word for word version of Maelstrom missions?

"dont put all yer boyz in one trukk" "umless its dredds, then take as much uf those as possible"

geargutz interpretation of the 'umies "eggs in one basket" 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






SoCal, USA!

SMs in massed free Transports that all happen to be super-scoring aren't a bad choice, either...

   
Made in de
Contagious Dreadnought of Nurgle





Since playing the game the way you like including the use of houserules is literally stated as "the most important rule" in the rulebook, I see nothing wrong with that. We also play it with discarding impossible objectives right away.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






SoCal, USA!

Houseruled 40k is still 40k.

Houseruled Maelstrom is NOT Maelstrom.

Conflating the 2 is the mistake.

   
Made in us
Douglas Bader






Exactly. Talking about house-ruled maelstrom missions as justification for why maelstrom missions are good is essentially saying "maelstrom missions are great, once you change them to remove all of the bad things".

There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. 
   
Made in us
Terminator with Assault Cannon





 Peregrine wrote:
Exactly. Talking about house-ruled maelstrom missions as justification for why maelstrom missions are good is essentially saying "maelstrom missions are great, once you change them to remove all of the bad things".


Maelstrom is symptomatic of the utter cluster-feth that has resulted from: 1. power creep, 2. fliers and 3. superheavies being introduced into the regular 40k game.

Not all armies, even reasonably well constructed, have the same killing capacity. Thus, for "balance," you need some other mechanism.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




I modify maelstrom and eternal war. I am playing 40k either way. Exact same as when I play DND. Most armies anti flyer capabilities are based around also having flyers. If you decide to not take flyers, vehicles, monstrous creatures, and fortifications in order to keep your opponent from scoring a single POSSIBLE objective point you are going to lose. HARD.

So yes, they do promote list variety. You'll want fast units, durable units, assault units, shooty units, and psykers (maybe) in order to have the best possible odds of completing objectives. If you don't take those units (of which there is only one an army doesn't have access to which is psykers and that has the same odds of helping you as hindering you) you are putting yourself at a disadvantage.

With eternal war the only thing you need is ranged firepower and fast units in the very last round of the game. Because of the fact you won't NEED to close the distance between yourself and the enemy until the last couple turns.

Are you possibly going to run melee? Sure. Will it actually give you a serious advantage in the game? No. Because you had 4-5 turns to simply blow the enemy off of objectives. A melee unit probably isn't going to do much that late in the game. With maelstrom you may need that midfield objective NOW. A melee unit will get that for you faster than most ranged units will because they will be sitting on the objective when the target is dead. Shooty units are still where they started.

   
Made in us
Douglas Bader






Traditio wrote:
Maelstrom is symptomatic of the utter cluster-feth that has resulted from: 1. power creep, 2. fliers and 3. superheavies being introduced into the regular 40k game.

Not all armies, even reasonably well constructed, have the same killing capacity. Thus, for "balance," you need some other mechanism.


No, it's symptomatic of GW's desire to add more randomness to the game to allow 10 year olds to "win". If 40k is primarily won through player skill then GW's target audience is going to lose all of their games and stop buying boxes of space marines. If, instead, 40k has a major random element that overwhelms the importance of skill then GW's target audience is no longer at as much of a disadvantage, wins often enough to stay happy, and continues buying boxes of space marines. Maelstrom missions in 40k fill the same role as those silly "roll a die and move that many spaces" games you play with small children: they're both terrible as serious games, but small children aren't smart enough to know any better.

If anything maelstrom missions are more necessary in a balanced game, assuming you want to accomplish GW's goals. In a balanced game with no power creep issues player skill is decisive and you have to add a huge random element to let the small children win. In an unbalanced game like 40k player skill is less decisive. Even in the absence of a strong random factor to overwhelm player skill you can still tell the small child "BUY THIS AWESOME GIANT ROBOT AND WIN EVERY GAME" and collect another $500 next week when they come back to buy two more giant robots to win even more.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote:
So yes, they do promote list variety. You'll want fast units, durable units, assault units, shooty units, and psykers (maybe) in order to have the best possible odds of completing objectives. If you don't take those units (of which there is only one an army doesn't have access to which is psykers and that has the same odds of helping you as hindering you) you are putting yourself at a disadvantage.


The problem is that it promotes list diversity in a really stupid and awkward way. You aren't taking, say, assault units in a Tau army because they're part of a coherent strategy or because they match your fluff, you're taking them because there's an objective card that says "kill something with an assault unit". In the absence of that card you'd be perfectly happy to shoot stuff to death instead of charging. And it makes no sense at all that killing a unit with your guns is worth less as an objective than killing that same unit with swords, if you roll the wrong random objective. A dead unit is a dead unit, it shouldn't matter how you killed it.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/05/26 07:03:49


There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. 
   
Made in us
Bonkers Buggy Driver with Rockets






 Peregrine wrote:
Traditio wrote:
Maelstrom is symptomatic of the utter cluster-feth that has resulted from: 1. power creep, 2. fliers and 3. superheavies being introduced into the regular 40k game.

Not all armies, even reasonably well constructed, have the same killing capacity. Thus, for "balance," you need some other mechanism.


No, it's symptomatic of GW's desire to add more randomness to the game to allow 10 year olds to "win". If 40k is primarily won through player skill then GW's target audience is going to lose all of their games and stop buying boxes of space marines. If, instead, 40k has a major random element that overwhelms the importance of skill then GW's target audience is no longer at as much of a disadvantage, wins often enough to stay happy, and continues buying boxes of space marines. Maelstrom missions in 40k fill the same role as those silly "roll a die and move that many spaces" games you play with small children: they're both terrible as serious games, but small children aren't smart enough to know any better.

If anything maelstrom missions are more necessary in a balanced game, assuming you want to accomplish GW's goals. In a balanced game with no power creep issues player skill is decisive and you have to add a huge random element to let the small children win. In an unbalanced game like 40k player skill is less decisive. Even in the absence of a strong random factor to overwhelm player skill you can still tell the small child "BUY THIS AWESOME GIANT ROBOT AND WIN EVERY GAME" and collect another $500 next week when they come back to buy two more giant robots to win even more.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote:
So yes, they do promote list variety. You'll want fast units, durable units, assault units, shooty units, and psykers (maybe) in order to have the best possible odds of completing objectives. If you don't take those units (of which there is only one an army doesn't have access to which is psykers and that has the same odds of helping you as hindering you) you are putting yourself at a disadvantage.


The problem is that it promotes list diversity in a really stupid and awkward way. You aren't taking, say, assault units in a Tau army because they're part of a coherent strategy or because they match your fluff, you're taking them because there's an objective card that says "kill something with an assault unit". In the absence of that card you'd be perfectly happy to shoot stuff to death instead of charging. And it makes no sense at all that killing a unit with your guns is worth less as an objective than killing that same unit with swords, if you roll the wrong random objective. A dead unit is a dead unit, it shouldn't matter how you killed it.

This whole over exaggerated 10yr argument is reAly getting old....WE GET IT!!! You don't like gw business decisions, go ahead and fume while the rest of us play maelstrom and have a right and proppa fun time.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sgt. Cortez wrote:
Since playing the game the way you like including the use of houserules is literally stated as "the most important rule" in the rulebook, I see nothing wrong with that. We also play it with discarding impossible objectives right away.

Love this comment, in all seriousness this had made the most sense out a lot of recent comments. EXALTED

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/05/26 07:26:00


"dont put all yer boyz in one trukk" "umless its dredds, then take as much uf those as possible"

geargutz interpretation of the 'umies "eggs in one basket" 
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar





Southern California, USA

geargutz wrote:
 Peregrine wrote:
Traditio wrote:
Maelstrom is symptomatic of the utter cluster-feth that has resulted from: 1. power creep, 2. fliers and 3. superheavies being introduced into the regular 40k game.

Not all armies, even reasonably well constructed, have the same killing capacity. Thus, for "balance," you need some other mechanism.


No, it's symptomatic of GW's desire to add more randomness to the game to allow 10 year olds to "win". If 40k is primarily won through player skill then GW's target audience is going to lose all of their games and stop buying boxes of space marines. If, instead, 40k has a major random element that overwhelms the importance of skill then GW's target audience is no longer at as much of a disadvantage, wins often enough to stay happy, and continues buying boxes of space marines. Maelstrom missions in 40k fill the same role as those silly "roll a die and move that many spaces" games you play with small children: they're both terrible as serious games, but small children aren't smart enough to know any better.

If anything maelstrom missions are more necessary in a balanced game, assuming you want to accomplish GW's goals. In a balanced game with no power creep issues player skill is decisive and you have to add a huge random element to let the small children win. In an unbalanced game like 40k player skill is less decisive. Even in the absence of a strong random factor to overwhelm player skill you can still tell the small child "BUY THIS AWESOME GIANT ROBOT AND WIN EVERY GAME" and collect another $500 next week when they come back to buy two more giant robots to win even more.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote:
So yes, they do promote list variety. You'll want fast units, durable units, assault units, shooty units, and psykers (maybe) in order to have the best possible odds of completing objectives. If you don't take those units (of which there is only one an army doesn't have access to which is psykers and that has the same odds of helping you as hindering you) you are putting yourself at a disadvantage.


The problem is that it promotes list diversity in a really stupid and awkward way. You aren't taking, say, assault units in a Tau army because they're part of a coherent strategy or because they match your fluff, you're taking them because there's an objective card that says "kill something with an assault unit". In the absence of that card you'd be perfectly happy to shoot stuff to death instead of charging. And it makes no sense at all that killing a unit with your guns is worth less as an objective than killing that same unit with swords, if you roll the wrong random objective. A dead unit is a dead unit, it shouldn't matter how you killed it.

This whole over exaggerated 10yr argument is reAly getting old....WE GET IT!!! You don't like gw business decisions, go ahead and fume while the rest of us play maelstrom and have a right and proppa fun time.


What a great counter-argument. "Stop making that argument because I don't want to hear it!"

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/05/26 08:10:49


Thought for the day: Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.
30k Ultramarines: 2000 pts
Bolt Action Germans: ~1200 pts
AOS Stormcast: Just starting.
The Empire : ~60-70 models.
1500 pts
: My Salamanders painting blog 16 Infantry and 2 Vehicles done so far!  
   
Made in us
Bonkers Buggy Driver with Rockets






 TheCustomLime wrote:


What a great counter-argument. "Stop making that argument because I don't want to hear it!"


It was a statement, not an argument.
At this point I'm just gonna ignore anyone who compares honest to goodness players to 10yr olds because they like maelstrom. I have used terms like neckbeard, rules layer, and tfg, but I have never questioned the maturity of my fellow gamers (at least not in 40k )

"dont put all yer boyz in one trukk" "umless its dredds, then take as much uf those as possible"

geargutz interpretation of the 'umies "eggs in one basket" 
   
Made in us
Imperial Guard Landspeeder Pilot




On moon miranda.

So, it's ok to use derogatory language about people...but not to discuss rules within the context of what appears to be GW's increasingly targeted market demographic...

IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.

New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights!
The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.  
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: