So, today's WHC article announced terrain packs with datasheets. So far so not new. Then the article went ahead and said that people would bring their own terrain to matched play games in the future.
My first reaction was: they want to milk another line of models everyone has to bring and it's never going to stick with the community at large.
But is that right? Around here noone brings terrain, it's either the locations or the host. It's good tone to have a nice table set up when someone comes along to play. Is that different with folks the world over? Could you imagine bringing your own ruins and stuff, even to a tour ament? And what with generations of scratchbuilt terrain out there?
I'm a bit confused, can someone tell me it's alright and the sky isn't falling?
The problem there is that terrain tends to not be the easiest to transport. Especially different types of terrain.
If you would have a system where players would bring along their own terrain I fear that it will lead to a lot of arguments about them giving an advantage to some players. Of course, GW could have a few sanctioned kits that have to be built in specific ways (it is what they like), but I think that it could be very hard to completely ban scratchbuilt terrain. Especially because many players I know aren't the biggest fans of the GW stuff anyways.
They made a comment on the preview webcast along the lines of - "lots of clubs & tournaments struggle to have enough terrain", but that's not a problem I've ever come across.
I like the idea of theming terrain to your army (ruins with GSC graffiti or Ork barricades, for examples), but I'm not keen on bringing half a tables' worth of stuff with me.
Cpt. Icanus wrote: So, today's WHC article announced terrain packs with datasheets. So far so not new. Then the article went ahead and said that people would bring their own terrain to matched play games in the future.
My first reaction was: they want to milk another line of models everyone has to bring and it's never going to stick with the community at large.
But is that right? Around here noone brings terrain, it's either the locations or the host. It's good tone to have a nice table set up when someone comes along to play. Is that different with folks the world over? Could you imagine bringing your own ruins and stuff, even to a tour ament? And what with generations of scratchbuilt terrain out there?
I'm a bit confused, can someone tell me it's alright and the sky isn't falling?
They’re selling a Chapter Approved missions book revolving around both players contributing some terrain. It’s for those missions in that book only.
When I first read the OP comment and title, I had thought that it was just referring to the special 'terrain' such as the nurgle forest and the ork mekshop.
But standard terrain... generally that's down to the host to organise isn't it? Though a host with limited terrain, who asks people to bring some of their own to make the table better... I mean sure, that's normal too.
But having the -expectation- that people will automatically bring terrain to a game seems... odd.
Cpt. Icanus wrote: So, today's WHC article announced terrain packs with datasheets. So far so not new. Then the article went ahead and said that people would bring their own terrain to matched play games in the future.
Just the terrain they've paid points for, or the whole board?
Cpt. Icanus wrote: So, today's WHC article announced terrain packs with datasheets. So far so not new. Then the article went ahead and said that people would bring their own terrain to matched play games in the future.
Just the terrain they've paid points for, or the whole board?
Unclear at this point, but I'm guessing whole board:
WarCom wrote:If you’re hankering for extra matched play content, the new Chapter Approved Mission Pack opens up a world of new tactics for terrain.
Along with 18 brand-new missions for all sizes of game,* the Mission Pack includes extensive rules for playing Tactical Deployment games, focusing on Tactical Terrain. Now, you bring your own terrain to the battle and, depending on the type, it will have specific rules. Ardent matched play fans will have a blast coming up with new strategies to deal with this challenge!
Alongside Chapter Approved come the Battlezone: Manufactorum – Terrain Datasheet Cards, designed to be used with the Tactical Deployment Mission Pack. This set of cards includes narrative and matched play terrain rules for a range of Manufactorum pieces.
It also features rules for three different Battlezones. Whatever kind of player you are, you’ll want to grab these cards to take your terrain to the next level.
If I want to make sure that the table we are gonna play on has enuff terrain either:
(a) get to FLGS early to set up table with appropriate amount of terrain
(b) Bring a couple large pieces w some scatter from home to head off any discrepancies
(c) play at home where I have enuff terrain but not enuff space to play a game
I try to do (A) consistently with (B) if Im gonna be late. (C) just doesnt work without a ton of planning beforehand.
For how I play, would much rather not theme my terrain to my armies. Themed tables act as the 3rd adversary, which I love.
Sounds like a pretty transparent attempt to try to encourage people to buy GW's expensive terrain instead of making their own or relying on much cheaper third party suppliers.
It's also typical GW that they are trying to get people to pay separately not only for the terrain itself, and not only for the rules for said terrain...but even for the datasheets too. A triple charge.
If I had to guess I'd say this will end up being a huge bust, but I've been wrong before about how much people are willing to shove cash at literally anything GW pushes, so I guess we'll see.
I'm not a fan of the cash-grab approach, but as regards the wider point - ok, sure, right now it's kinda expected that terrain will be at the game's location, whether that's a club or someone else's house.
But... if you have the capability to bring some terrain with you... well, why not? It's easy enough to figure out a way to keep it fair, for instance players alternating placing a piece down, or agree beforehand to put the biggest piece smack-bang in the centre of the board.
For my part, I know that once lockdown ends I'll be looking at playing a couple of relative new starters that don't have a table worth of terrain going yet. So if I want to play them, I NEED to be providing the terrain. I suspect I'm not the only one that's ever been in that boat.
beast_gts wrote: They made a comment on the preview webcast along the lines of - "lots of clubs & tournaments struggle to have enough terrain", but that's not a problem I've ever come across.
I like the idea of theming terrain to your army (ruins with GSC graffiti or Ork barricades, for examples), but I'm not keen on bringing half a tables' worth of stuff with me.
Hmm. I usually have the opposite experience. The store or tournament not having enough terrain is normal.
But bringing having each player bring their own raises a lot of issues.
The signs are already there: there will be faction terrain in 9th edition, much like Age of Sigmar already has.
They currently have terrain available/incoming for:
Imperial Knights
Chaos Space Marines
Death Guard - incoming
Space Marines - incoming
Necrons - incoming
Craftworlds
Orks
Sisters of Battle
Genestealer Cults
The question is more "can they make the terrain so useful/viable that you will want to take it in the first place". That is solved in AoS by having the terrain essentially free.
This just sounds terrible, and totally unnecessary at this point of 9th. I certainly won't be buying or using this.
Likewise with the crusade pack. I think getting some codexes out first would be better than adding expansions already.
I think GW might not see the return they were expecting with this product.
Yeah I'm confused by this article. Are they advertising another chapter approved book or is this in the already existing chapter approved and they are just marketing it? Didin't bother with the CA this time around and seems I'd already need another one? Sounds a lot like cities of death thing..
I don't see me spending money on terrain rules where the core terrain rules are good enough personally. Or the crusade thing if I don't even have a codex.. This should be free content for those that have bought the CA book/BRBIMO.
Super Ready wrote: I'm not a fan of the cash-grab approach, but as regards the wider point - ok, sure, right now it's kinda expected that terrain will be at the game's location, whether that's a club or someone else's house.
But... if you have the capability to bring some terrain with you... well, why not? It's easy enough to figure out a way to keep it fair, for instance players alternating placing a piece down, or agree beforehand to put the biggest piece smack-bang in the centre of the board.
For my part, I know that once lockdown ends I'll be looking at playing a couple of relative new starters that don't have a table worth of terrain going yet. So if I want to play them, I NEED to be providing the terrain. I suspect I'm not the only one that's ever been in that boat.
You can always bring your own terrain to help out. This is GW trying to charge everybody 3x for their terrain by giving GW's own terrain special rules in return for three payments - one for the terrain itself, another for the book that lets you put rules onto the terrain you bring, and a third for the datasheets for said special terrain. With the promise that you'll want to do this because it gives you an advantage.
Luckily for now it seems to be restricted to this particular game type, not to matched play generally. It feels like they're testing the waters to see whether it's something they can push into the main game the same way it's pushed into AoS.
If that's the case... I can't wait to see it fall flat on its face, as everyone just continues to use relatively ordinary terrain rules.
The only way GW would have a shot at changing that is to make the terrain so powerful it's an auto-take... at which point, tourneys would have to consider banning/heavily restricting them for the sake of practicality in setting up their tables.
The sky's not falling yet, everyone. It's a separate mission pack and so the rules for bringing your own terrain will only matter if you use this mission pack. It's not like you'll be rocking up to your FLGS and your opponent will start flooding the field with obscuring ruins.
As for being a cash grab, we'll just have to wait and see.
yukishiro1 wrote: Sounds like a pretty transparent attempt to try to encourage people to buy GW's expensive terrain instead of making their own or relying on much cheaper third party suppliers.
As a massive proponent of GW's expensive terrain, I have to completely agree here.
They want every aspect of the 40k experience to be specifically tied to the products they sell, right down to terrain and the table surface itself, designing missions that require their specific terrain (this was the "company store" allusion I made in another thread that everyone except catbarf failed to understand). This might be the only expansion that tells you and your opponent to each bring generic terrain right now, but I can see that becoming the norm if it goes well. I fear this is them dipping their toes in the water.
yukishiro1 wrote: If I had to guess I'd say this will end up being a huge bust...
We can only hope. Last thing we need is "Bring your own Citadel™ Battle™ Terrain™" taking hold in the community like GW's standardminimum recommended board sizes.
yukishiro1 wrote: If I had to guess I'd say this will end up being a huge bust...
We can only hope. Last thing we need is "Bring your own Citadel™ Battle™ Terrain™" taking hold in the community like GW's standardminimum recommended board sizes.
Now if only there was a usable Warhammer 40k App™...
Switching to requiring citadel terrain in the middle of a pandemic and while a lot of people are frankly, disenfranchised with 40k is a bad play.
There was one guy locally who would bring his own terrain. He had a great collection of Ork themed terrain that went with his superbly painted army. He also had some more generic rocks-and-plants set, too. I think one reason he brought terrain is that he would often come a bit later to the FLGS, and it would guarantee that he could make an ideal table. Sometimes the off-the-shelf selection could be picked pretty dry by that point. Also, it made for fantastic looking tables. Magazine level polish, really.
yukishiro1 wrote: If I had to guess I'd say this will end up being a huge bust...
We can only hope. Last thing we need is "Bring your own Citadel™ Battle™ Terrain™" taking hold in the community like GW's standardminimum recommended board sizes.
Now if only there was a usable Warhammer 40k App™...
Switching to requiring citadel terrain in the middle of a pandemic and while a lot of people are frankly, disenfranchised with 40k is a bad play.
Just wait and see dude.
Coming Soon ™.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Insectum7 wrote: There was one guy locally who would bring his own terrain. He had a great collection of Ork themed terrain that went with his superbly painted army. He also had some more generic rocks-and-plants set, too. I think one reason he brought terrain is that he would often come a bit later to the FLGS, and it would guarantee that he could make an ideal table. Sometimes the off-the-shelf selection could be picked pretty dry by that point. Also, it made for fantastic looking tables. Magazine level polish, really.
Thats reasonable. Fair play. I hate being late and then having to use scraps all from different sets and still end up with a semi bowling ball lol.
Depending on how it shakes out in the end, I see potential for competitive minded games.
Let's say you could bring a list of terrain models with specific attributes (not costing any points) and set up your own deployment zone to your liking.
It would make comparing tournament results easier as it takes one unpredictable variable out of the equation.
Being a hobbyist who concentrates a LOT of energy on building terrain, I'd have to say if I'm going to make terrain transportable, it is a HUGE part of design consideration. It means smaller pieces, less flexibility, or a really big transport box. I don't think bringing my own terrain to any game is likely a thing that's going to stick, no matter what GW envisions about it.
My circle does this - depending upon where we're playing & if there's something specific desired (gets txt: "Hey, bring your trench system!")
Of course, if it's not faction specific AoS stuff, simply bringing it doesn't = you automatically getting it in your deployment zone. Whatever the game, we set the board first drawing from the terrain pool or building to a theme.
Then we determine the mission.
THEN sides & deployment zones.
Not counting AoS faction terrain, personally I have a pretty decent terrain inventory. But we rarely play at my place..... So virtually all of my stuff has been crafted with both storage & portability in mind.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: By having datacards defining the exact rules for specific terrain pieces, it’ll reduce, if not eliminate entirely, arguments about what’s what.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: By having datacards defining the exact rules for specific terrain pieces, it’ll reduce, if not eliminate entirely, arguments about what’s what.
I know at the clubs I've played at, terrain is never a problem. I'm not in London anymore, but sure as hell I'd struggle transporting half a table's worth of terrain on the tube after work during rush hour. I was already accidentally hitting people with my army case at the best of times.
As with their inclusion of terrain in the new starter set for 40k, it's a cash grab at the expense of actual models here, so I'll be passing on the ruleset coming out that requires you to bring terrain.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: By having datacards defining the exact rules for specific terrain pieces, it’ll reduce, if not eliminate entirely, arguments about what’s what.
But only when using Official™ Citadel™ Terrain™.
True, but at least it’s one way to prevent arguments, or someone bringing terrain entirely suited to their play style.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: By having datacards defining the exact rules for specific terrain pieces, it’ll reduce, if not eliminate entirely, arguments about what’s what.
But only when using Official™ Citadel™ Terrain™.
Not necessarily. It could also encourage a wider use of 'counts as' for terrain. If there are defined terrain 'pieces', rather than just keywords that you apply to terrain to define it, you could point at your own conglomeration of pipes and say "This counts as a haemotropic skullating pipulator" and both players would be able to see what rules that had.
I don't have any problem with terrain keywords, either, but people have been playing converted and kitbashed models for decades, despite official models having official rules, so converted and kitbashed terrain should be fine with official rules too, right?
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: By having datacards defining the exact rules for specific terrain pieces, it’ll reduce, if not eliminate entirely, arguments about what’s what.
But only when using Official™ Citadel™ Terrain™.
True, but at least it’s one way to prevent arguments, or someone bringing terrain entirely suited to their play style.
I dont know about that..
Whenever I finish setting up table I like to point at stuff and say "are you happy with this counting as ruins from here to here, this count as crater etc."
And if we forget to cover soemthing pre battle and it comes up we just roll for it it it becomes material or ask if we are playing this as cover before making movement decisions.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: By having datacards defining the exact rules for specific terrain pieces, it’ll reduce, if not eliminate entirely, arguments about what’s what.
But only when using Official™ Citadel™ Terrain™.
True, but at least it’s one way to prevent arguments, or someone bringing terrain entirely suited to their play style.
In my experience, the basic terrain rules already do a good job at that. We habe multiple boxes of self-build terrain and you can fit almost anything into the basic categories. We sometimes change a single keyword, for example the imperial statue rules when the piece in question is clearly chaos or ork (we have both in our collection), so we just change the keyword for the aura.
The only thing that I feel is not properly represented is trenches.
the new rules for terrain are much better for self made ones then the 8th ed ones. We had so many arguments ranging from if something was visible to a new player being informed by their tau opponent that the forests don't really do anything in w40k , we stoped using some terrain just to avoid problems. Now it is all nice and clear. We use bases for each type of terrain and it is the base and not the terrain out line that decides how wide a terrain is. the 5" rule for blocking LoS is very good too. No more models being sniped, because someone decided to give them a bigger base or GW made a model that is dynamic, instead of crawling on its belly.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: By having datacards defining the exact rules for specific terrain pieces, it’ll reduce, if not eliminate entirely, arguments about what’s what.
But only when using Official™ Citadel™ Terrain™.
True, but at least it’s one way to prevent arguments, or someone bringing terrain entirely suited to their play style.
Isn’t the whole point of this book to encourage bringing terrain that’ll benefit your army?
I mean, I know for sure it’s not a book our group will bother getting, but the WHC write up seems to suggest it’s encouraging you to add beneficia terrain to your army.
Jidmah wrote: Those would be either industrial structures or ruins. Most likely ruins.
Those look like the tower buildings for people with higher income. We have those in every larger city. I have one like 20m away from where I live. Funny enough when they build it the underground garage part was build on less stable and sandy ground, so over years the garage and the building are trying to split. Every summer they put new clamps to pull them closer and the garage has a small hill build to it side to stop it from going its own way.
Our FLGS has shelves of terrain some of it official GW some from other sources or custom made. since i love my tables to look good i have quite a bit of my own terrain for various games and scales. love me the fully painted ESLO terrain and a bunch of the smaller scale stuff 6-15mm from brigade models among others.
As always in the US at least, the acceptance will depend on if the major tournaments adopt the missions and rules or not. If they don't they will likely be completely ignored. If they do then you'll see widespread acceptance.
Personally I rarely if ever see anyone remember any special rules for terrain beyond the bare minimum. I saw the same thing in AOS where nobody remembered the mystic terrain rules so eventually they stopped using them because they were always ignored despite being an important addition.
'Brothers, now is the time to strike at the foul xenos! Forward and attack! Brother techmarine, if you could just dismantle that ruined engine shed and cart it around with us? Never know when it might come in handy, y'know. For the Emperor!'
Bringing your own terrain is standard practice for many historical games. It is an interesting and essential part of playing the game, and setting up the field is a whole mini-game with its own rules and strategy. However, this is best done with 15mm armies as the terrain is small enough to be easily transported. For 28mm it can be a real pain in the neck.
GW wrote:All of these new missions and terrain rules are brilliant for all games of Warhammer 40,000, but they really shine when it comes to competitive play. No longer will you be at the mercy of random terrain placement – you’ll now bring your own and have just what you need when you deploy your army. Choose the exact terrain you want to complement the units in your force and lead your army to tournament glory!
First they change the board size, and tournaments and mat makers jump on that bandwagon. Now they're trying to make the terrain their own.
When GW says jump, the answer needn't be "How high?".
Personally I don't think they will either, but that doesn't mean GW aren't trying to make this happen.
Table sizes, tournament terrain rules, changing core Blood Bowl mechanics, the fact that 9th is basically 'Tournament Edition' and launched with a whole tournament book.
They're trying real hard to take tournaments back from the organisers and make people dependent on them.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: By having datacards defining the exact rules for specific terrain pieces, it’ll reduce, if not eliminate entirely, arguments about what’s what.
But only when using Official™ Citadel™ Terrain™.
Oh noes. GW makes games to play with GW stuff.
If you can buy third party, I am sure you can make rules to use the third party stuff, no?
FFG doesn't make rules to use Wings of Glory planes in X-Wing either. If you wanna include that stuff, you gotta get creative yourself.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: By having datacards defining the exact rules for specific terrain pieces, it’ll reduce, if not eliminate entirely, arguments about what’s what.
But only when using Official™ Citadel™ Terrain™.
Oh noes. GW makes games to play with GW stuff.
If you can buy third party, I am sure you can make rules to use the third party stuff, no?
FFG doesn't make rules to use Wings of Glory planes in X-Wing either. If you wanna include that stuff, you gotta get creative yourself.
Did you miss his post further up (plus all the people mindlessly changing their board sizes too because daddy GW said so... )?
People will adhere to this because GW have told them to. They have fostered the perfect closed ecosystem that many companies would kill for and certain fans are lapping it up. GW can jog on if they think I'm bringing my terrain into town with me, nor am I buying their terrain. It is overpriced, locked to their aesthetic and scratchbashing terrain is far more fun.
You have to think there is some line past which the lemmings will not march. My money is on this being it. If nothing else, the sheer logistical nightmare of transporting your own terrain to a tournament should be enough to cause mass revolts if TOs actually try to force people to buy into this transparent cash grab.
Also, the previewed terrain is downright ridiculous. So much for taking rerolls out of the game - now you can get them just from being within your fancy overpriced GW terrain!
yukishiro1 wrote: You have to think there is some line past which the lemmings will not march. My money is on this being it. If nothing else, the sheer logistical nightmare of transporting your own terrain to a tournament should be enough to cause mass revolts if TOs actually try to force people to buy into this transparent cash grab.
I honestly don't know how they expect you to transport most of their bigger minis (especially when you don't drive), let alone terrain...
I always liked how 6th edition approached pregame battlefield creation.
You rolled a D3 for each 2'x2' section of the gameboard to see how many terrain pieces would be placed in that 2'x2' section. You and your opponent would then alternate placing one piece of terrain until all 2'x2' sections reached their max. amount of terrain pieces.
Battlefield creation was done before determining table sides and deployment zones as to encourage balanced placement.
This had always created the most interesting and enjoyable battlefields. For me, there's a lot of fun to be had in just the battlefield creation and this mechanic made it part of the game.
This definitely seems like a gimmick to sell their terrain kits, but I'll try to reserve judgement until we have a more complete picture.
I almost always bring my own terrain when gaming. As much as I like them, the FLGS can have some spotty looking terrain be it the last picked stuff, stuff that should have been retired or stuff the store hasn't had a chance to finish. However, I have a car and can generally park rather close to the store and take more robust terrain pieces. So this usually isn't much of an issue for me. Well worth the effort as I enjoying the spectacle of miniatures wargaming more than any other individual aspect of the hobby.
For the last two years, I was bringing at least enough terrain to setup two fairly dense Kill Team boards. If I thought/knew there was going to be more than 4 players I would bring 4 boards worth of terrain. See the spoiler below for some pictures of it.
Spoiler:
The store I currently play at, well when the pandemic eases up anyway, has some nice terrain especially for fantasy/Age of Sigmar. The store doesn't have enough quality terrain for every table and even less that works well with the 40k aesthetic save some actual 40k terrain generally just brushed. Which is fine, but since I have my own decently painting stuff I bring it in. It works much better for Kill Team than 40k as a good portion of it is scatter. But I like a good looking table so I usually set the boards/tables and try to balance appearance with playablity.
I have been doing this long before playing 40k. With the exception of Bolt Action which the store I went to have some outstanding pre-painted MDF stuff well suited for WWII Europe, I usually brought my own to supplement the store I was going to. When I played Dust Warfare/Battlefield (pics in spoiler below) I used mine as to allow far more urban games that the store's terrain would allow.
Spoiler:
At the same time, I don't think I like this idea of 40k having players bringing terrain for specific mechanical effects. If kinda feels like GW is trying again like they did in 7th. Just now they know they can't tie terrain to the points resource and expect players to make use of it (that was 7th right with all the terrain in the BRB?). I can't see it being anything more than a hassle. For me, it has a good chance of spoiling the table's theme. Well in theory anyways, terrain is so dominiated by IoM stuff that it makes the space marine line compare to everything else look modest. Then there is throwing yet another ball to be juggled balence-wise. I mean I have no issue generating special rules for terrain on a table, but I generally play with people that trust I am not doing those rules to gain an advantage but to make the game more interesting just like they are free to introduce all manner of crazy rules to spice things up. I just don't see the terrain rules GW working that great in a more PUG manner of gaming.
Jidmah wrote: I somehow doubt that tournaments will be adopting this.
Depends on the tournament.
I could absolutely see the bigger ones with Warhammer Community coverage and those up-and-comers who're desperate for attention from GW to recognise them. There's a difference between clearly optional rules like Cityfight/Cities of Death/Urban Conquest and GW putting out their own 'official' rulesets for tournaments, a scene that has been chomping at the bits for recognition since basically forever. ITC is one thing, but in recent times there's definitely been a shift to try and cling onto the word of the Party Line more than there was before. If the bigger tournaments do it, I think there'll be a lot more 'follow the leader' going on in smaller tournaments and LFGS' which will, overtime, eventually settle into normality.
The board size thing has already been mentioned a few times but I'll just echo it again. This might be a bit less 'unquestionable' since it comes in a supplement, but I'd not be shocked if by 10th these will be part of the core rules and thus unquestionable to most (especially those who already went out and bought GW(tm) official terrain).
I think another way this will be pitched by the GW Defence Force is that you're helping to take the financial strain off TOs by bringing your own terrain rather than expecting the tournament to 'cover it'.
H.B.M.C. wrote: They tested the waters by giving armies their own terrain piece and found that terrain sells more if the army can use it.
So now all terrain gets special rules beyond basic generic ones. How transparent.
I feel like AoS' terrain was successful because it costs literally 0 points and even if your army piece is a dud, there is literally no negative for bringing it anyway. Compare it to 40k where almost every bit of faction-terrain is a dud, although I'm sure upcoming Marine bunker will probably change that - but then, it does cost points, so who knows.
Arbitrator wrote: I think another way this will be pitched by the GW Defence Force is that you're helping to take the financial strain off TOs by bringing your own terrain rather than expecting the tournament to 'cover it'.
Cause it's not like there are tens of popular Youtube channels out there showing you how to make good-looking cheap terrain...
Oh wait, that's right. They want to play on the homogenized smaller, officially approved GW boards with officially approved expensive GW terrain kits. Can't be besmirching the appearance of the game with chipboard and recycled items. Gotta flash the cash to let everyone know you play at your elite pro level tourney that will totally be a for realsies esport one day! I will mum I'll show you, then you'll be sorry!
Oh there's a clear incentive for TOs to adopt, it lowers their costs substantially if they just wash their hands of terrain entirely and tell participants it's their own responsibility to bring their own terrain. That's presumably the hook that GW is using to try to leverage their way into getting TOs on board the terrain cash grab train.
You just have to hope the community finally shows some backbone here and says no to terrain just becoming another part of your army. The idea of "bringing your own terrain so you'll always know you have exactly the terrain you need!" is utterly contrary to the whole idea of terrain in the first place, and you have to hope that will wake people up a bit to what's going on here. I don't want my terrain giving me rerolls, and I have to hope that most of the community doesn't want that either.
You just have to hope the community finally shows some backbone here and says no to terrain just becoming another part of your army. The idea of "bringing your own terrain so you'll always know you have exactly the terrain you need!" is utterly contrary to the whole idea of terrain in the first place, and you have to hope that will wake people up a bit to what's going on here. I don't want my terrain giving me rerolls, and I have to hope that most of the community doesn't want that either.
But... but... muh 40k is sooper dooper tactical!
Bringing your own terrain removes all pretence of there being any tactics and strategy left in this game when you can just point and click after you've set up your battlefield before you even play a game. The whole point of terrain is it is random and a good general learns how to use it to his advantage on the fly.
Arbitrator wrote: I think another way this will be pitched by the GW Defence Force is that you're helping to take the financial strain off TOs by bringing your own terrain rather than expecting the tournament to 'cover it'.
Cause it's not like there are tens of popular Youtube channels out there showing you how to make good-looking cheap terrain...
Oh wait, that's right. They want to play on the homogenized smaller, officially approved GW boards with officially approved expensive GW terrain kits. Can't be besmirching the appearance of the game with chipboard and recycled items. Gotta flash the cash to let everyone know you play at your elite pro level tourney that will totally be a for realsies esport one day! I will mum I'll show you, then you'll be sorry!
It doesn't feel long ago I attended the opening for their Sheffield gaming centre and were showing you how to make craters out of those free AOL CDs in ASDA, some plaster and bitz. Granted, 'not so long ago' is probably about fourteen years or so at this point but...
One thing I always enjoyed about the different GW stores was seeing their unique table and terrain setups, whilst on the few occasions I've set foot in one in recent years it's always the same identical Sector Imperialis and... whatever AoS' official Citadel(tm) terrain sets are called.
It'll be interesting to see how Signals reacts to this, it should be a strong clue for how TOs are going to react generally.
I am holding out some hope that the reason this is in an "optional" pack and not part of the GT book is not only because GW wants to charge you more for it, but also because somebody somewhere (i.e. Reece or Brandt) put their foot down and said "you cannot put this in the core rules as a core part of the tournament experience or we will not sign on to using the GW mission pack."
Probably wishful thinking, but lest anyone accuse me of always being a pessimist...
Arbitrator wrote: I think another way this will be pitched by the GW Defence Force is that you're helping to take the financial strain off TOs by bringing your own terrain rather than expecting the tournament to 'cover it'.
Cause it's not like there are tens of popular Youtube channels out there showing you how to make good-looking cheap terrain...
Oh wait, that's right. They want to play on the homogenized smaller, officially approved GW boards with officially approved expensive GW terrain kits. Can't be besmirching the appearance of the game with chipboard and recycled items. Gotta flash the cash to let everyone know you play at your elite pro level tourney that will totally be a for realsies esport one day! I will mum I'll show you, then you'll be sorry!
It doesn't feel long ago I attended the opening for their Sheffield gaming centre and were showing you how to make craters out of those free AOL CDs in ASDA, some plaster and bitz. Granted, 'not so long ago' is probably about fourteen years or so at this point but...
One thing I always enjoyed about the different GW stores was seeing their unique table and terrain setups, whilst on the few occasions I've set foot in one in recent years it's always the same identical Sector Imperialis and... whatever AoS' official Citadel(tm) terrain sets are called.
Ha! Small world. Myself and a friend went to that too, not before getting lost though.
The loss of scratchbashed terrain in this hobby (well, what is immediately visible to a newer gamer) is one of the greatest losses out there. I don't want to play on the same board every time with same models over and over. Making your own terrain is dead easy and it can look great with minimal effort. I remember there being this amazing modular board at my local GW with ruins made from chipboard and some plastic computer parts, chemical tanks made from coffee tins etc. It was a city board that was built in such a way that the pieces could literally be slotted out for different ones.
My current local GW used to have loads and loads of different board setups, including the infamous Lizardmen temple board made from 50mm bases that made guess range weapons (and charges in WHFB) laser guided accurate.
Serious people, do you really think that tournaments are adapting the new table sizes because of blind loyalty to GW?
It's an all-upside change for anyone running a mid to large size event, because rent a smaller place and less tables for the same number of participants or get more paying participants into the same space as before.
GT organizers are still running a business, they are about as loyal to GW as GW is loyal to us.
Maybe I wasn't wrong to hold out hope. The reaction from Signals is super, super "meh." I think Reece even introduced the book as "the book you didn't know you needed or wanted," which is pretty savage for them.
Reece then made it super clear it will "never, ever, ever work at LVO." And then Freddie said "the tables will look like crap," which is obviously true.
The wrap-up was "it's an interesting idea, from talking to other TOs none of them seemed very interested."
If nothing else, it's clear GW hasn't stitched this one up with the TO community the way they did with the GT pack. So that's a massive relief.
I think there is some glaring issues they haven't really thought about..
- You going to paint the terrain instead of the 100+ purchased models backlog for your army/armies.. ??
- You have to transport the bloody things non top of your army, where some armies already need a small city bus worth of space...
- You gotta buy the book, and buy the exact terrain IF it will be usable at tourneys and IF people will want to use it localy. (I can tell you my group already said they are passing up on this)
- What do you do about people who don't have said terrain/ Don't want it If you are hosting a "competative" event. If half people wont bother with this/ think its unfair, so they will just loose/have no chance of winning the event? Good luck running future events..
Yeah... I think as a fluff bunny narrative piece it will work for some players but I guarantee you it wont catch on competitively. Player A might buy this, but as soon as player B wont player A will not be bale to use it or will need to find another player.. Its very silly. So I think the people who will buy this are people who already buy GW terrain coz its new terrain.. Seems like waste of time marketing it to average palyers imo.
This is a reaction to so-called 'events organizers' or storeowners at some indie shops here in the US whining that it's "too hard!" to have terrain on hand.
It's not. It's a matter of wanting to:
a) Invest a little bit of time and/or effort into setting up designated tables.
or
b) Actually getting one of your locals to do it for you and making their pay worthwhile.
With all that said, I see zero issues with this provided it's in the context of a Tactical Deployment game. Which is what this release is about.
And really, what is there to get upset about with stuff like this?
It shows you the scenery piece in question. It has all the details right there on the card. Getting upset about it just seems like you're wanting an excuse to be upset.
No, this is not a reaction to anything but GW thinking "you know what? let's see if we can get people to buy specialized terrain for every army they own, and then we can not only charge them for the terrain, we can also charge them for the book with the rule and the datasheets too!"
Any TO that didn't have enough terrain could just ask around and borrow some, it's not that hard. This is totally different; the whole objective is to get players buying and carrying around their own official GW terrain as part of their armies.
yukishiro1 wrote: Reece then made it super clear it will "never, ever, ever work at LVO." And then Freddie said "the tables will look like crap," which is obviously true.
The wrap-up was "it's an interesting idea, from talking to other TOs none of them seemed very interested."
ccs wrote: I just want to know what the pipeway access point does.
Ballpark guess is that it shows where pipelines can be linked to the outside of the scenery and where the pipes would have to go through within the actual scenery if you chose to run them through the scenery piece as well.
- You going to paint the terrain instead of the 100+ purchased models backlog for your army/armies.. ??
Yes?
I mean,terrain is part of my hobby/games. Some of it can be bought ready-to-play. But some times I need to invest time building & painting stuff. Wether that's GW's stuff, someone else's, or disparate bitz from the hardware store/Walmarts toy aisles/local craft store is irrelevant.
ccs wrote: Yes?
I mean,terrain is part of my hobby/games. Some of it can be bought ready-to-play. But some times I need to invest time building & painting stuff. Wether that's GW's stuff, someone else's, or disparate bitz from the hardware store/Walmarts toy aisles/local craft store is irrelevant.
It's generally not a first priority for people though. It is for me, but I'm weird, and not everyone thinks of terrain the way I do.
The loss of scratchbashed terrain in this hobby (well, what is immediately visible to a newer gamer) is one of the greatest losses out there. I don't want to play on the same board every time with same models over and over.
Eh... I've seen the downside to this too often. Terrain that's absolutely dreadful and its still the same boards with same terrain over and over.
Not saying this particular move is good, but 'scratchbashed' terrain has a real variety. And sadly, it tends to range between really poor (Chunk-cut Styrofoam vaguely daubed with a color to badly flocked blocks of wood with corners shaved off) and vaguely acceptable, but not much more.
- You going to paint the terrain instead of the 100+ purchased models backlog for your army/armies.. ??
Yes?
I mean,terrain is part of my hobby/games. Some of it can be bought ready-to-play. But some times I need to invest time building & painting stuff. Wether that's GW's stuff, someone else's, or disparate bitz from the hardware store/Walmarts toy aisles/local craft store is irrelevant.
I meant if you are actively in process of building and painting an army.. there's usually an actual unit that your army needs.. Could always do with one more XYZ etc..
They want you to buy and paint several hundred dollars worth of new GW terrain, not take your old stuff with you. Why do you think they have datasheets with precise dimensions?
The end-game here is GW hoping to be able to create a hobby where people feel the same need to buy GW branded terrain as they do to buy GW branded models.
The loss of scratchbashed terrain in this hobby (well, what is immediately visible to a newer gamer) is one of the greatest losses out there. I don't want to play on the same board every time with same models over and over.
Eh... I've seen the downside to this too often. Terrain that's absolutely dreadful and its still the same boards with same terrain over and over.
Not saying this particular move is good, but 'scratchbashed' terrain has a real variety. And sadly, it tends to range between really poor (Chunk-cut Styrofoam vaguely daubed with a color to badly flocked blocks of wood with corners shaved off) and vaguely acceptable, but not much more.
It certainly does get interesting when you go to a smaller tourney that requests you bring a few pieces of your own terrain just to flesh out their own collections. You end up with tables that have wildly differing quality of terrain. From stuff that looks great but is impractical to stuff that looks bad but is practical to stuff that's just, kinda bad allround.
- You going to paint the terrain instead of the 100+ purchased models backlog for your army/armies.. ??
Yes?
I mean,terrain is part of my hobby/games. Some of it can be bought ready-to-play. But some times I need to invest time building & painting stuff. Wether that's GW's stuff, someone else's, or disparate bitz from the hardware store/Walmarts toy aisles/local craft store is irrelevant.
I meant if you are actively in process of building and painting an army.. there's usually an actual unit that your army needs.. Could always do with one more XYZ etc..
I've been in the process of building & painting an army continuously for 30+ years. Oh, not the same army, & not just for 40k, or even GW games but....
And guess what? Our tables, be they the home tables or for the various shops, have still needed terrain. Basic stuff, more advanced stuff, specific stuff.... So now and then you just have to make the time & work on some terrain.
And if it's something that's applying directly to your army rules-wise (for example my Bad Moon Loonshrine in AoS for my goblins)? Then YES you will definitely spend the time building/painting it. Because it's part of your army.
The loss of scratchbashed terrain in this hobby (well, what is immediately visible to a newer gamer) is one of the greatest losses out there. I don't want to play on the same board every time with same models over and over.
Eh... I've seen the downside to this too often. Terrain that's absolutely dreadful and its still the same boards with same terrain over and over.
Not saying this particular move is good, but 'scratchbashed' terrain has a real variety. And sadly, it tends to range between really poor (Chunk-cut Styrofoam vaguely daubed with a color to badly flocked blocks of wood with corners shaved off) and vaguely acceptable, but not much more.
That's because too many don't put the same effort into their terrain as they do their models.
On the other hand there's plenty of fantastic stuff out there as well.
By having datacards defining the exact rules for specific terrain pieces, it’ll reduce, if not eliminate entirely, arguments about what’s what.
So I can see some sense in them.
I can see my group using these terrain rules for exactly this reason. It makes using the new terrain system easier, and it also gives you a bunch of parameters for terrain / building sizing.
Will download the terrain .pdf, and then make and paint our own terrain for free. GW doesn't deserve any money from us, not until they actually finish releasing all the rules for this edition that should have been released on day 1.
I feel the same, the table should add to the game.
Most of the focus in this topic is on the GW official terrain with it's data sheets, since our group plays 5th edition or epic scale with 8th edition rules for simplicity it really doesn't affect us.
Back in the day GWs suggestion was to quarter the table fill one entirely with terrain then spread it across the table.
This is how some of my tables look with the majority of it being my own personal terrain.
The only good thing is that it's not mandatory, but from what I've read, I bet that events at WHW (if there will ever be any in the future, lol) will enforce that.
Why it's bad:
*They feature newest terrain. This literally forces people to buy new terrain, because the older ones they have might have been built in different shapes.
*There are no boundaries of, say, how far the Engine Shed parts have to be apart. If there are none - this will eventually lead to waac arguments. If there are - old type terrain might not fit and people will have to buy new.
*How, on fething earth, are you supposed to carry 3 storey building alone? And, judging by point costs, you will have to bring like 3-4 of those to a larger game
And overall, this is just a dick move to sell more.
This actually makes their inspiring terrain make more sense... but terrain and bring it to the game declaring it inspiring and boom, free advantage?
That said as a guy with a 3d printer, a full size SUV and a bunch or terrain options its not going to be difficult to bring terrain with my army to make it match, just not going to claim anything that gives me an advantage for just matching terrain,
I do admit it is a little odd to be playign say a Craftworld vs Necrons game on a table full of imperium of man terrain or midevil looking stone ruins. Then again i have a home table and my FLGS also has a 3d printer and has made some really cool generic scifi modular terrain
Those two pieces of a building that is clearly destroyed magically rebuild D3 wounds a turn if a guardsmen is standing inside them?
So we can now get Admech characters hiding behind a unit in cover repairing 3D3 wounds a turn because it's... Rubble?
Great addition to the game.
Apparently this random shed in the middle of nowhere has all the components you need to fix a leman russ, baneblade, valkarie or chimera.
Honestly it's no sillier than Leon in RE4 going out to the backwater of Europe and finding frag, flash and incendiary grenades in boxes within every home. Game logic mate, it makes less sense the more you analyse it.
Not only that, it can also repair wraithbone, or a flyer as it flies past at supersonic speed - as long as it's wings don't go too far out so it ends up not "wholly within" the footprint.
Those two pieces of a building that is clearly destroyed magically rebuild D3 wounds a turn if a guardsmen is standing inside them?
So we can now get Admech characters hiding behind a unit in cover repairing 3D3 wounds a turn because it's... Rubble?
Great addition to the game.
Apparently this random shed in the middle of nowhere has all the components you need to fix a leman russ, baneblade, valkarie or chimera.
Honestly it's no sillier than Leon in RE4 going out to the backwater of Europe and finding frag, flash and incendiary grenades in boxes within every home. Game logic mate, it makes less sense the more you analyse it.
One of the pieces they showed off already does give reroll 1s to anything, as well as letting half the unit use grenades instead of only one model. Who knew that every random ruined ammo depo in the universe was well stocked with blight grenades!
beast_gts wrote: They made a comment on the preview webcast along the lines of - "lots of clubs & tournaments struggle to have enough terrain", but that's not a problem I've ever come across.
I like the idea of theming terrain to your army (ruins with GSC graffiti or Ork barricades, for examples), but I'm not keen on bringing half a tables' worth of stuff with me.
Hmm. I usually have the opposite experience. The store or tournament not having enough terrain is normal.
But bringing having each player bring their own raises a lot of issues.
Yeah, I agree that a general lack of terrain to supply all the tables is depressingly common among the places I've played, but I also agree that bringing it yourself raises a whole host of problems.
When playing at home, we each tend to contribute part of the board's worth of terrain from our collection, some of us contributing more than others, but like taking that approach at the store is just something that I don't think I would subscribe to.
IMO, they should have presented the terrain cards as 'a new resource for players to use if they want' and it would have gone over reasonably well. If they want people to buy more terrain make these terrain card bits purchasable for points as part of an army.
Just a word of warning for those thinking of picking up the Tactical Terrain book, it appears to contain zero rules for the various terrain types. You cannot play a Tactical Terrain game with the rulebook for said variant of 40k.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Just a word of warning for those thinking of picking up the Tactical Terrain book, it appears to contain zero rules for the various terrain types. You cannot play a Tactical Terrain game with the rulebook for said variant of 40k.
You have to get the cards.
LOL!!! I guess GW is going all in on the DLC sales model.
Despite 9th editions core rules looking solid I suspect that this edition overall will be terrible and we'll see a large retraction in actual game play. I'm sure it will be anecdotally blamed on the pandemic. After all how could the first ever official Tourny-Hammer edition be hot garbage?
H.B.M.C. wrote: Just a word of warning for those thinking of picking up the Tactical Terrain book, it appears to contain zero rules for the various terrain types. You cannot play a Tactical Terrain game with the rulebook for said variant of 40k.
You have to get the cards.
Like I said, the whole plan is to charge people three times: first for the expensive GW-branded terrain, second for the expensive GW-branded rulebook that doesn't actually have rules, and then a third time for the expensive GW-branded datacards that have said rules.
It's the most blatant cash-grab imaginable, and all coming at the expense of the integrity of the hobby, by actively encouraging people to select their terrain for advantage and promoting mixed boards where half the board looks like one thing and the other half looks like something completely different.
It's honestly the worst thing GW has done in a long, long time. And that's quite the achievement.
Jidmah wrote: What does the book have if it doesn't have rules?
Well it has the missions and the base rules for how the system works, I assume. But it doesn't have the rules for the individual terrain pieces you can then use in that system.
Kinda like how the 40k rulebook doesn't have unit stats in it.
Jidmah wrote: What does the book have if it doesn't have rules?
Lots of pictures I assume.
Those are called Advertisements.
Aye! Buy this terrain right here! You can bring it to the battle with you and it gives you bonuses to your army! Your opponents will love the fact that you place the terrain exactly where you need it and prevents them from doing pretty much anything. Loads of fun for everyone! Look how gothic this looks! Grimdak!!! Lots of smiling.
Jidmah wrote: What does the book have if it doesn't have rules?
1. How to play tactical terrain games. 2. How much terrain you can choose per the 4 various size of games. 3. The complete basic rules for 40K reprinted. 4. The above includes all the secondary objectives we already have, pus a few more building specific ones. 5. 6x4 missions, one set of 6 per size of game.
And that's it.
It contains none of the rules for the various buildings, so you cannot play this style of 40K game by buying the rulebook.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Just a word of warning for those thinking of picking up the Tactical Terrain book, it appears to contain zero rules for the various terrain types. You cannot play a Tactical Terrain game with the rulebook for said variant of 40k.
You have to get the cards.
What did i Tell people?
Gw starting to behave similarly to the Video Games industry?
Jidmah wrote: What does the book have if it doesn't have rules?
1. How to play tactical terrain games. 2. How much terrain you can choose per the 4 various size of games. 3. The complete basic rules for 40K reprinted. 4. The above includes all the secondary objectives we already have, pus a few more building specific ones. 5. 6x4 missions, one set of 6 per size of game.
And that's it.
It contains none of the rules for the various buildings, so you cannot play this style of 40K game by buying the rulebook.
Well, that kind of would have made sense if it came shrink-wrapped with the cards. Oh well, I guess this seems to be dead on arrival, so I don't have to bother with getting any of these rules. They simply don't understand how to properly market their niche rules.
Watch it still sell like hotcakes though. If GW has shown anything it's that people will still shovel money at them for garbage and say how awesome it is.
Wayniac wrote: Watch it still sell like hotcakes though. If GW has shown anything it's that people will still shovel money at them for garbage and say how awesome it is.
Not this one I think, especially with codex SM due for preorder next week. This will be a solid dud.
Yeah GW finally seems to have pushed it too far, I can't remember the last time a GW release got so roundly panned by almost everyone. Seems like at least 90% of the reaction is negative.
It's encouraging to see that there is some level of slop that not even GW can sell simply by slapping its logo on it.
Wayniac wrote: Watch it still sell like hotcakes though. If GW has shown anything it's that people will still shovel money at them for garbage and say how awesome it is.
Not this one I think, especially with codex SM due for preorder next week. This will be a solid dud.
I hope so. This one is really taking the piss so it needs to be just trashed to send a clear message.
then going over to the GW website...the prices, yikes. $40 for each little manual? Jog on. The terrain is priced high overall too, so glad I'm pretty stacked in terrain.
Since the codex and a few kits are expected the following week, absolutely no reason to be buying any of this.
According to Goonhammer even if you did buy everything, the rules are for their new terrain sets only and you have to build them in a specific way to use them with the datasheets.
I think the size of this product's target group might be in the single digits.
Wayniac wrote: Watch it still sell like hotcakes though. If GW has shown anything it's that people will still shovel money at them for garbage and say how awesome it is.
Hah, there is a long history of less-popular GW items sitting on shelves unsold for years. People just use that argument in place of understanding that subjective opinion of product =/= actual value of product.
On the face of it I like the idea of 'active' terrain. I wish more games had it. But... the long-standing issue of Imperium-centric kits, the packaging of building stats separately, and the current collapse of civilization as we know it means that it's probably going to struggle.
Likewise the Crusade book. I like the idea (I quite liked the 'Warzone' books of the second iteration of Apocalypse) but I agree with the grumpy reviewer, it needs a higher ratio of fluff/crunch. (Although I know that everyone's preferred ratio is probably different).
Nah, I don't need tons of fluff in a campaign book.
When playing narrative games I want my opponent and me to be the ones telling the story, I do not reenact someone else's story. In general the crusade book looks rather decent, a good candidate for getting out of shipping fees when the DG codex drops.
It makes sense from a certain angle that you have your "core rulebook" for Tactical Deployment and then you buy the actual datasheets for the respective Battlezone, just as you do with core rulebook and codizes. At the current price point and what is on offer though, I'll give it a pass.
Eventually I might pick up the terrain to use with the basic terrain rules, because I like the look. Here's hoping that future battlezones will have Xenos buildings. That would be sweet.
Argive wrote: Best 40k edition ever guys.. GW said so guys...
Because some additional rules that nobody has to bother with are clearly taking away from the actual core game and rules.
Bad rules shouldn't be celebrated nor given a pass. The "Tactical Terrain" book is worthless, especially given that it is unplayable out of the box (or shrink wrap, rather).
It should have had the terrain rules in there, rather than a complete reprint of the basic 40K rules.
a_typical_hero wrote: My bad, I meant to say "I will not buy it". I thought it to have the same meaning as "hard pass".
I'm a bit fuzzy on the "hard pass" thing. At first scan I thought it meant "I found it hard to pass it up" ie an individual gave it some thought and then reluctantly decided not to purchase said item. But it seems to be used to say "No way am I buying that piece of junk!"
H.B.M.C. wrote: Bad rules shouldn't be celebrated nor given a pass. The "Tactical Terrain" book is worthless, especially given that it is unplayable out of the box (or shrink wrap, rather).
I dunno, winter is coming and the panic buyers are stripping the shelves of bog roll once again. Someone might get desperate!
H.B.M.C. wrote: Bad rules shouldn't be celebrated nor given a pass. The "Tactical Terrain" book is worthless, especially given that it is unplayable out of the box (or shrink wrap, rather).
It should have had the terrain rules in there, rather than a complete reprint of the basic 40K rules.
Agreed. At the very leastGW could have bundled them together into a single product. Instead they took what was a whole product and split it into multiple pieces bought separately. It would be like selling the body for a new miniature in one box while all of its arms and weapon options come in a different box.
I'm happy they split it up for maximum cash grab effect, it makes it less likely to catch on and anything that increases the chances of the buy-GW-branded-terrain-for-competitive-advantage thing flopping is a good change in my book.
Nothing better than seeing GW get hoisted on its own petard on this one. They might have been successful if they hadn't been so transparently greedy, so it's good for people like me that they weren't able to control themselves.
I don't know, reading FB there's a lot of people that like this release. The real world is not as bitter as we are
Though there's a fair amount of people disappointed that it's going to be playable in Matched/Competitive, and that it's Imperium terrain AGAIN. But I wouldn't be so sure about the flop you hope for. Never forget the silent majority who don't read forums and just buy things they like because they think it's cool at first glance.
a_typical_hero wrote: My bad, I meant to say "I will not buy it". I thought it to have the same meaning as "hard pass".
I'm a bit fuzzy on the "hard pass" thing. At first scan I thought it meant "I found it hard to pass it up" ie an individual gave it some thought and then reluctantly decided not to purchase said item. But it seems to be used to say "No way am I buying that piece of junk!"
But I digress.
I think you've got the meaning now. It's an extra-strong version of "I'll pass, thanks".
Imagine if you will, that "I'll pass" is like politely saying no thank you to the salesman and smiling as you close the door, whereas "hard pass" is the equivalent of scowling and shutting the door before they've even finished their sentence.
Aaranis wrote: I don't know, reading FB there's a lot of people that like this release. The real world is not as bitter as we are
For people who only play in their own (or their buddy's) garage, 'bringing their own terrain' makes no difference at all. It simply isn't a factor, so they don't have to deal with any of the issues this generates.
Aaranis wrote: I don't know, reading FB there's a lot of people that like this release. The real world is not as bitter as we are
For people who only play in their own (or their buddy's) garage, 'bringing their own terrain' makes no difference at all. It simply isn't a factor, so they don't have to deal with any of the issues this generates.
Depending upon the group you're wrong on that.
And all of us who may choose to use this stuff have to deal with the co$t & any transport issues.
Aaranis wrote: I don't know, reading FB there's a lot of people that like this release. The real world is not as bitter as we are
For people who only play in their own (or their buddy's) garage, 'bringing their own terrain' makes no difference at all. It simply isn't a factor, so they don't have to deal with any of the issues this generates.
Depending upon the group you're wrong on that.
And all of us who may choose to use this stuff have to deal with the co$t & any transport issues.
No. 'For people who only play in their garage' is pretty clear.
'Everyone else' is obviously outside that group, and 'has to deal with any of the issues this stuff generates.'
Aaranis wrote: I don't know, reading FB there's a lot of people that like this release. The real world is not as bitter as we are
For people who only play in their own (or their buddy's) garage, 'bringing their own terrain' makes no difference at all. It simply isn't a factor, so they don't have to deal with any of the issues this generates.
Depending upon the group you're wrong on that.
And all of us who may choose to use this stuff have to deal with the co$t & any transport issues.
No. 'For people who only play in their garage' is pretty clear.
'Everyone else' is obviously outside that group, and 'has to deal with any of the issues this stuff generates.'
You're agreeing with me.
No, I'm not agreeing with you.
If I'm hosting a game & someones bringing this stuff they have to buy it, assemble it, paint it, transport it, & then we have whatever rules debates might ensue. As well as whatever future BSGW attaches. This is no different than if the game were occurring at one of the local shops - except we can enjoy a beer & masks aren't required.
Aaranis wrote: I don't know, reading FB there's a lot of people that like this release. The real world is not as bitter as we are
For people who only play in their own (or their buddy's) garage, 'bringing their own terrain' makes no difference at all. It simply isn't a factor, so they don't have to deal with any of the issues this generates.
Depending upon the group you're wrong on that.
And all of us who may choose to use this stuff have to deal with the co$t & any transport issues.
No. 'For people who only play in their garage' is pretty clear.
'Everyone else' is obviously outside that group, and 'has to deal with any of the issues this stuff generates.'
You're agreeing with me.
No, I'm not agreeing with you.
If I'm hosting a game & someones bringing this stuff they have to buy it, assemble it, paint it, transport it, & then we have whatever rules debates might ensue. As well as whatever future BSGW attaches. This is no different than if the game were occurring at one of the local shops - except we can enjoy a beer & masks aren't required.
Let me try again.
Aarinis mentioned that Facebook has a lot of people who like this release. And said it was due to 'the real world' being less bitter.
I replied that players and groups who have one garage location don't have any of issues of transporting terrain and the like- the obvious implication being that they keep all their stuff there all the time.
If YOU are not part of THAT GROUP, then I was not referring to YOU. You'd be in the 'everyone else' having issues with this release. You're in the group that has issues. And obviously you agree that you have issues with it.
How do you play in a garage? Wouldn't the owner just send police after you, I mean that is what happens here if someone tries to skateboard or sit around in a garage here.
Karol wrote: How do you play in a garage? Wouldn't the owner just send police after you, I mean that is what happens here if someone tries to skateboard or sit around in a garage here.
They mean a one-vehicle garage at a home, not a commercial garage.
Karol wrote: How do you play in a garage? Wouldn't the owner just send police after you, I mean that is what happens here if someone tries to skateboard or sit around in a garage here.
They mean a one-vehicle garage at a home, not a commercial garage.
I think is a bad move, a cash grab, and I don't (and won't) support it in any way. This include avoid any event that eventually will use this rule.
Coincidentally, it's already a fuss to move my army and our club has a big selection of terrain.
On the other hand: it's been some time that I wanted to create an Evangelion-style building as an hangar for my Cerastus... And now I'll probably scratch build it
psipso wrote: We already got the fortifications detachments right? I just see it as a way to make more appealing to bring fortifications like stuff on the list.
If they only made it optional then I would think that is a good thing.
Especially for some armies, it would make total sense to bring some own terrain in their list (e.g. imperial fist, necrons, astra militarum, ...)
Never invade a hostile alien planet without bringing your portable broken down garage with you!
Aaranis wrote: I don't know, reading FB there's a lot of people that like this release. The real world is not as bitter as we are
Though there's a fair amount of people disappointed that it's going to be playable in Matched/Competitive, and that it's Imperium terrain AGAIN. But I wouldn't be so sure about the flop you hope for. Never forget the silent majority who don't read forums and just buy things they like because they think it's cool at first glance.
The poor fools. Don't they know? Don't they understand?. Someone needs to tell them to stop.
Aaranis wrote: I don't know, reading FB there's a lot of people that like this release. The real world is not as bitter as we are
Though there's a fair amount of people disappointed that it's going to be playable in Matched/Competitive, and that it's Imperium terrain AGAIN. But I wouldn't be so sure about the flop you hope for. Never forget the silent majority who don't read forums and just buy things they like because they think it's cool at first glance.
The poor fools. Don't they know? Don't they understand?. Someone needs to tell them to stop.
Karol wrote: How do you play in a garage? Wouldn't the owner just send police after you, I mean that is what happens here if someone tries to skateboard or sit around in a garage here.
Uuh seriously? On what grounds police arrests you on your own private property?
Spoiler:
Poor picture but anyway that's garage. Not all have all space taken by cars and anyway you can temporarily move car away and lift table in if that's needed anyway.
Oh, okey private garages are something only for the very very rich here. Everyone else has to use the public ones or the ones that belong to the whole housing community, and you can imagine that people are generaly not okey for others to be close to their cars for longer time. Specialy when it is not related to cars.
Karol wrote: Oh, okey private garages are something only for the very very rich here. Everyone else has to use the public ones or the ones that belong to the whole housing community, and you can imagine that people are generaly not okey for others to be close to their cars for longer time. Specialy when it is not related to cars.
KRakarth wrote: Its not even hot garbage. Its half a bin of hot garbage.
Nah, it's warm garbage which was originally cold yet has sat in the bin for so long that nature has got fed up and started the composting process in your kitchen.
Karol wrote: How do you play in a garage? Wouldn't the owner just send police after you, I mean that is what happens here if someone tries to skateboard or sit around in a garage here.
They mean a one-vehicle garage at a home, not a commercial garage.
Jidmah wrote: Outside of large cities garages are a normal thing, even in Poland, Karol.
Yes and they have a harvesters, traktors and other stuff standing in it. There are very few people who can afford a one family house in Poland, even in a smaller city. Which to be honest isn't anything special, as we generaly lack housing for people here. There was a study shown just after the elections that said that 45% poles between 1-35 years old live with their parents, and that is with 2 milion people leaving the place to work in UK and Germany.
I thought that garage playing is some sort of playing in abandoned buildings or something.
Half my family is on the eastern part and i've visited quite many cities/villages.
Garages are a thing unless you live in a big apartment complex.
And no, having a house doesn't mean you're rich.
I have yet to see or hear about someone who doesn't live in a large city or town that plays w40k. Yes people in rural areas live in single houses. There rest is either people that build their houses in the 90s working in sweeden and germany, but those people are 60+ and their kids live in big cities. Or the realy rich people. Normal people don't have houses in Poland, specialy not in larger cities where you actualy have people to play with.
And all my families lives in easter and north eastern Poland. Between Goldap and Bialystok.
Jidmah wrote: Outside of large cities garages are a normal thing, even in Poland, Karol.
Yes and they have a harvesters, traktors and other stuff standing in it. There are very few people who can afford a one family house in Poland, even in a smaller city. Which to be honest isn't anything special, as we generaly lack housing for people here. There was a study shown just after the elections that said that 45% poles between 1-35 years old live with their parents, and that is with 2 milion people leaving the place to work in UK and Germany.
I thought that garage playing is some sort of playing in abandoned buildings or something.
Half my family is on the eastern part and i've visited quite many cities/villages.
Garages are a thing unless you live in a big apartment complex.
And no, having a house doesn't mean you're rich.
I have yet to see or hear about someone who doesn't live in a large city or town that plays w40k. Yes people in rural areas live in single houses. There rest is either people that build their houses in the 90s working in sweeden and germany, but those people are 60+ and their kids live in big cities. Or the realy rich people. Normal people don't have houses in Poland, specialy not in larger cities where you actualy have people to play with.
And all my families lives in easter and north eastern Poland. Between Goldap and Bialystok.
I mean, just look at Osiedle Starosielce in Bialystok. Its mainly houses and not many apartments there. You don't need to live downtown, theres always smaller villages around the big cities where there are tons of houses and not many aparments.
I don't know how many people play 40k in these areas but to be fair, i don't even know how many people play it in my area in Canada. Some groups are 3-4 players that never go to the shop except to buy models and they play in their garages/basement.
If you don't have a car then yeah, i get your point of "you have to live in a big city to play 40k"
Not to sound rude but i have a feeling like you have a tendency to think your reality is the reality of the majority. Best example of that is how you keep assuming that everyone has playgroups that are like yours.
I thought this topic was about bringing your terrain with you to gaming, not the quality of housing and provision of car parking spaces in eastern Poland.
Somehow we went from bringing your broken down car repair garage with you to each planet you fight on in 40k to talking about the number of non-broken-down garages in eastern Poland.
yukishiro1 wrote: Somehow we went from bringing your broken down car repair garage with you to each planet you fight on in 40k to talking about the number of non-broken-down garages in eastern Poland.
To be fair, that's a lot better than how most threads on dakka go
Whatever the game, we set the board first drawing from the terrain pool or building to a theme.
)?
Can't be besmirching the appearance of the game with chipboard and recycled items. Gotta flash the cash to let everyone know you play at your elite pro level tourney that will totally be a for realsies esport one day! I will mum I'll show you, then you'll be sorry!
