Switch Theme:

Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit  [RSS] 

What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/25 16:02:48


Post by: Tiberias


I am asking specifically because I think some things in the new system are very interesting, but I don't quite get other ones. For example initially I really liked the idea of the new combat system where attacker and defender get to choose between blocking attacks or doing damage, but in practice it seems to be more about fishing for crits, trying to accumulate chip damage you can't even to anything against, or trying to one-shot stuff. It just feels like there is a layer of saves missing or at least something along those lines.

I just think its strange that it doesn't matter if a guardsman hits an ork or a space marine, the first hit always goes through and does damage.



What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/25 17:00:11


Post by: AnomanderRake


I'm so irritated with how incredibly restrictive the list-building is I haven't bothered to read anything else about new KT. That used to be the home for conversions/kitbashes, now we're just stuck with the exact same "no instructions, no rules" crap that GW's slowly been pushing into the main game.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/25 17:00:50


Post by: Apple fox


It is a huge!! Improvement I think.
The ballance is still a bit off, and I think the systems work well enough.
The way damage works can be a pain, fishing for crits I think depends a lot on which factions.
Often it’s all you can do against custodes, they are a bit much and I think feel a bit oppressive on the small battlefield where monovering is difficult.
A good turn can be devastating.
If they added on any more defences, then for half the factions they could hear what you are playing and there only choice would be not bother to play game. And watch units not do anything.

The first hit is more a advantage hit, and the choices made I think does at least make CC feel more interesting as well.
I would be weary of changing that too much, maybe only banshee masks and a few bits of gear here and there.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/25 17:29:46


Post by: Turnip Jedi


“Hope Is The First Step On The Road To Disappointment”

I followed this one fairly closely as a new not 40k based ruleset seemed like a big step for daddy dubs

Then the compendium kind of let us have a peek behind the curtain, ho hum never mind then


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/25 17:30:59


Post by: ccs


I'll have to get back to you on this.
Not having read the system (or played the previousversion), I don't have an opinion on it.
Yet.
Come sat/sun though once my stuff arrives....


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/25 18:01:07


Post by: Gregor Samsa


The compendium situation is a nice reminder of how GW operates, but we will be playing a lot of KT as the combat system feels fluid and interesting. We needed a lot more thorough datasheets from the start however, including most or all of the models expected to be included in the game. This drip feed nonsense is, as usual, trash.


Lastly,

Drawing line of the sight from the model's head. Plain bad. I need someone to explain to me what GWs issue is with LoS? It is always a mess with them. I understand they want things to feel "cinematic" (which is a ridiculous misunderstanding on their part of what that means: a cinema is a 'moving picture', a board game is turn based strategy...) and so want to include the "model's perspective" in player decision making.

But battletech has sorted out LoS for 30 years, infinity has LoS that works....This is always such a classic GW problem where they convolute a mechanic that tons of other designers have produced adequate rules for, decades ago.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/25 19:06:26


Post by: the_scotsman


Honestly, Ive played a few games of it and I think it's one of the first times GW has actually successfully created a quick but not puddle-shallow skirmish system.

Necromunda is great and I love it, but the breadth and complexity is massive and daunting for new players. Kill Team you can teach in an hour, play with a few pieces of junk as terrain, but its still got enough depth to it that after the first couple games with two armies you don't go 'welp, I think we've basically plumbed the depths of how these two factions are going to interact.'

Which is IMO the main problem with warcry, old kill team, and every other edition of kill team that i've ever played - you basically have none of the spectacle present in 40k to distract you from the fact that you're not actually making that many meaningful decisions, your dudes kind of just do what your dudes do on autopilot and it doesnt have that simulationist chaos that creates zany wargaming moments that's present in Necromunda, Inq28 or Mordheim to break it up.

People who want "Necromunda, but 40k flavored" are going to hate it, because it just isn't that. It's not a system that gives you a billion little rules that you can apply to your lovingly crafted super-customized little 'mini RPG PCs' who you then throw into a zany complex simulationist system that lets you say "i want to do this" and gives you a complicated system of rules to resolve that action.

But as an entry product to the 40k universe that's fast to teach a newbie but fun to play even if you're a veteran? Brilliant. Huge improvement on the previous version.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I actually had an opportunity about a month ago to run a demo of the old edition of Kill Team for 10 brand-new fresh faced folks most of whom had never heard of 40k before. i used my own miniature collection and purposefully crafted 100-pt lists of 8 different factions, trying to capture the overall 'feel' of that faction as best I could. So the Deathwatch had 5 vets all with fancy wargear, the Eldar had exarchs and warriors from 3 different aspects, the Guard had a commissar and a single Ogryn backed up by a team of mostly basic duders, CSM had elite marines backed up by several mook cultists, etc.

Overall it was pretty good and people had a good time, but the biggest issue was it just plain took too long to resolve the choices you made, and you just didnt have enough choices to meaningfully make.

Most activations were pretty clear and obvious: this guy who is in range is gonna want to shoot, so I'll Ready him so I get to shoot first, and then I'll shoot him.

So now I roll to hit. And i roll to wound. And my opponent rolls to save. and then I roll to injure. And each time, I need to reference a different stat, and my opponent needs to know their stat, and on and on and on.

4 roll events for a single action is just MASSIVELY excessive for the uninitiated.

One roll, I only need to know my stats and my rules and I don't need to know anything about yours, we do a little mini-game where we re-roll and we compare the dice and maybe make a choice or two, and then it's resolved, done. Fantastic. Huge improvement.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/25 19:16:11


Post by: lord_blackfang


I, uh, I like how cover works?


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/25 19:20:54


Post by: the_scotsman


 Turnip Jedi wrote:
“Hope Is The First Step On The Road To Disappointment”

I followed this one fairly closely as a new not 40k based ruleset seemed like a big step for daddy dubs

Then the compendium kind of let us have a peek behind the curtain, ho hum never mind then


Ive heard this complaint a lot - is the lack of options the big turn off here with the compendium? Most of the teams seem to be at least reasonably balanced based on what I've played so far, havent seen too many super one-sided blowouts.

I've played with Tzeentch Daemons, Orks, Harlequins, GSC, Deathwatch, and Drukhari.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/25 19:21:03


Post by: Tiberias


 the_scotsman wrote:
Honestly, Ive played a few games of it and I think it's one of the first times GW has actually successfully created a quick but not puddle-shallow skirmish system.

Necromunda is great and I love it, but the breadth and complexity is massive and daunting for new players. Kill Team you can teach in an hour, play with a few pieces of junk as terrain, but its still got enough depth to it that after the first couple games with two armies you don't go 'welp, I think we've basically plumbed the depths of how these two factions are going to interact.'

Which is IMO the main problem with warcry, old kill team, and every other edition of kill team that i've ever played - you basically have none of the spectacle present in 40k to distract you from the fact that you're not actually making that many meaningful decisions, your dudes kind of just do what your dudes do on autopilot and it doesnt have that simulationist chaos that creates zany wargaming moments that's present in Necromunda, Inq28 or Mordheim to break it up.

People who want "Necromunda, but 40k flavored" are going to hate it, because it just isn't that. It's not a system that gives you a billion little rules that you can apply to your lovingly crafted super-customized little 'mini RPG PCs' who you then throw into a zany complex simulationist system that lets you say "i want to do this" and gives you a complicated system of rules to resolve that action.

But as an entry product to the 40k universe that's fast to teach a newbie but fun to play even if you're a veteran? Brilliant. Huge improvement on the previous version.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I actually had an opportunity about a month ago to run a demo of the old edition of Kill Team for 10 brand-new fresh faced folks most of whom had never heard of 40k before. i used my own miniature collection and purposefully crafted 100-pt lists of 8 different factions, trying to capture the overall 'feel' of that faction as best I could. So the Deathwatch had 5 vets all with fancy wargear, the Eldar had exarchs and warriors from 3 different aspects, the Guard had a commissar and a single Ogryn backed up by a team of mostly basic duders, CSM had elite marines backed up by several mook cultists, etc.

Overall it was pretty good and people had a good time, but the biggest issue was it just plain took too long to resolve the choices you made, and you just didnt have enough choices to meaningfully make.

Most activations were pretty clear and obvious: this guy who is in range is gonna want to shoot, so I'll Ready him so I get to shoot first, and then I'll shoot him.

So now I roll to hit. And i roll to wound. And my opponent rolls to save. and then I roll to injure. And each time, I need to reference a different stat, and my opponent needs to know their stat, and on and on and on.

4 roll events for a single action is just MASSIVELY excessive for the uninitiated.

One roll, I only need to know my stats and my rules and I don't need to know anything about yours, we do a little mini-game where we re-roll and we compare the dice and maybe make a choice or two, and then it's resolved, done. Fantastic. Huge improvement.


That's a great summary. The way you describe it, to me the old kill team sounds more interesting. With the new system it seems like you just throw varying weapon types at units that mostly differentiate from each other by varying health pools.
But yeah, like you say it seems properly streamlined and easy to learn. Maybe that is what was needed for kill team...idk.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/25 19:57:05


Post by: Turnip Jedi


 the_scotsman wrote:
 Turnip Jedi wrote:
“Hope Is The First Step On The Road To Disappointment”

I followed this one fairly closely as a new not 40k based ruleset seemed like a big step for daddy dubs

Then the compendium kind of let us have a peek behind the curtain, ho hum never mind then


Ive heard this complaint a lot - is the lack of options the big turn off here with the compendium? Most of the teams seem to be at least reasonably balanced based on what I've played so far, havent seen too many super one-sided blowouts.

I've played with Tzeentch Daemons, Orks, Harlequins, GSC, Deathwatch, and Drukhari.


Its more that the book is essentially an Index, for considerably more, yes it has more in but I don't want to pay for lots and lots of pages I'll never use, and the lack of options is fine as a start but kind of telegraphs the cool toys are going to be gated behind drip fed boxes, which will led to the rollercoaster of powerlevels like 40k


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/25 23:33:07


Post by: Cheex


I love about 90% of it.

The core rules look great and I really like how everything fits together. On the surface, some rules look strange (e.g. no armour saves in melee), but taken as a whole things make sense (e.g. the parry mechanic could easily represent the operative utilising their armour to deflect a blow).

The one thing I'm not keen on is list building for a couple of the factions, mainly Space Marines. I would've preferred that Primaris Marines get 2 smaller fire teams of 2 men each, and when you choose a leader it adds a model rather than upgrading one, for example. I just like the idea of even a Marine KT being a hand-picked force being selected for a special mission, rather than what essentially works out to be a combat squad.

Being a CSM player, though, I can't complain about our KT rules too much. I lament the loss of Berzerkers for my WE, but CSM will do for now.

The new campaign system more than makes up for the list building rules, though. I am so keen for this.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/26 04:39:33


Post by: ZebioLizard2


I love the little base building rules. I adore little systems like that.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/26 06:01:24


Post by: drbored


 AnomanderRake wrote:
I'm so irritated with how incredibly restrictive the list-building is I haven't bothered to read anything else about new KT. That used to be the home for conversions/kitbashes, now we're just stuck with the exact same "no instructions, no rules" crap that GW's slowly been pushing into the main game.


Your loss. I took a box of 10 chaos marines and dug into a my ol' bits box and have come up with 10 very distinct marines with flair from tons of different kits, including vampire counts, space marines, possessed, raptors, and even some resin night lords upgrade packs. Your conversions are only limited to your imagination.

The major difference from last edition to this one is that I don't have to worry about running 3 different Aspiring Champions to make my list function. I can focus on converting one or two for my roster and then can devote bodies to other weapons, like chainswords and bolters. "Oh no, the boring chainsword/pistol and bolter options!" I hear some cry. Sure, if you don't have any imagination. The regular chainsword/pistol and bolter guys can have JUST AS MUCH character as the champion with power weapon and plasma pistol. Oh, disappointed that the power axe isn't different from the power sword or the power maul? THAT'S A GOOD THING. It means you can give your power-weapon-toting guy ANY weapon you want, and as long as it's recognizable as a power weapon, it's good! It could be a power-trident or a power-nunchuck.

Bust open the bits box and open your brain. The system is good.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/26 06:13:52


Post by: lord_blackfang


drbored wrote:
The major difference from last edition to this one is that I don't have to worry about running 3 different Aspiring Champions to make my list function.


The fallacy here is assuming that cutting your strong options somehow made your weak options better.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/26 06:37:20


Post by: Karol


I don't think it will be a good expiriance for anyone playing an army which won't get updated very fast. There is a big difference in option in rules , that got the new kits eg.orks and the krieg veterans. And everyone else. One have different options, rules on dudes etc and the other have something take 5 intercessor the sgt can take this 4 upgrades, no special rules, no nothing. Which probably means that GW is going to spread those over multiple books. Same way they did with necromunda.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/26 07:37:38


Post by: tauist


I think the new system is great, as far as core rules are concerned anyways. Just wish they will eventually back down from fire teams and restore points values to the game, because I want to build custom teams which aren't tied to single faction and the current system makes this impossible.

But am I hyped to be playing some Octarius missions ASAP? You bet!


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/26 08:12:06


Post by: Vector Strike


Having played it yet, but the fact the base rules are way different than the previous one is a big plus for me (especially for alternate activation).

I'm yet divided about the way melee works, but I'll get into some games before judging that.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/26 09:45:57


Post by: SamusDrake


Putting aside crap list building and scandalous price for a moment...its alright. Infinite range for most ranged weapons is a definite improvement, along with cover and movement.

For £30, though, I'd expect to see a lot more game for the money such as alien beasts and a solo/coop feature for open play. A few factions to get started should be in there. In its current form it should have been a bundle with the essentials kit for £35.

The "launch box" is welcome enough, but not to the point where they bang on about it solid for three weeks. Its mainly aimed at Ork players( shout out to you, you magnificent people ) with some very niche Imperial Guard chaps who...sorry, but they ain't much to get excited about apart from...a friggin spade? Every other player has had nothing to be excited about apart from "expect new models once in a while" and a disgustingly high price tag for the rules and compendium.

Sadly, it has not been worth the wait and for now a hard pass.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/26 09:55:24


Post by: tauist


IMHO Octarius is the only reasonably priced way to get into KT2, assuming that everything in the box is something you happen to fancy.

Separate books, tokens etc were priced way too high.

As for melee, I think the implementation they ended up with worls better IRL than what one might think from just reading the rules. I've seen several batreps now and the overall lethality of shooting vs CC seems quite balanced.

BTW, someone on Reddit just homebrewed datasheets for The Gellerpox & Starstriders!
https://www.reddit.com/r/killteam/comments/pb9hld/homebrew_data_cards_for_starstriders_and_gellerpox/



What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/26 10:01:05


Post by: kirotheavenger


If there was a Killteam rulebook that contained all the rules and all the factions, I'd probably have bought it.
But as it is, that's not happening. Instead I've pulled the 4 datasheets I'm going to need to play a game from Youtube reviews and no GW doesn't get anything from me.

The rules themselves look quite good. The compendium is a bland disappointments. Although I look forward to the flavour of future 'Octarius style' teams, I'm disappointed that that flavour will only be available on a limited basis if GW happens to release a team you're interested in.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/26 10:03:37


Post by: H.B.M.C.


The terrain's cool.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/26 10:21:52


Post by: Jidmah


 H.B.M.C. wrote:
The terrain's cool.


I totally love that the six ork ruins "slot" into each other to form one massive structure. We need more terrain like this.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/26 10:23:37


Post by: The_Real_Chris


Even the compendium marines have a bunch of options. Look at the tacticals, what model are you missing?

Yes if they had their comms specialist and the like it would have been a lot better, yes that means their balance is off, yes balance will be awful in general because GW suck at that.

Indeed I would have liked less detail - take pistols. I get a choice of say 3 on my leader, but lets be honest the plasma is massively better than the rest. If it had just said 'pistol - plasma/las/bolt and given one stat line it would mean more modelling fun and not feeling you were taking nerfs.

Most of the moaning seems to be not being able to max out on special stuff and skip the low powered models.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/26 10:31:51


Post by: Slipspace


The game looks pretty decent from what I've seen of the rules in action. The pricing structure is a deal-breaker for me, both in terms of the non-Octarius offering for getting all the rules and the plan to release factions through their own books rather than all at once like the last KT did. That's just not a system I'm interested in buying into right now, especially with how bland the Compendium Fire Teams are.

The great thing about the previous KT was you could buy the core rulebook and get everything you needed to play, including full lists for each of the factions in the game. I think they've massively screwed up that accessibility with the new KT.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/26 10:33:33


Post by: kirotheavenger


I understand different stats for different pistols. If you distinguish between a plasmagun and a lasgun (which you need to do) you also kinda need to distinguish between the plasmapistol and the laspistol.

The question is how you balance those two against each other when you don't get any points to do so.
Perhaps taking the laspistol should give you an extra equipment point to spend or something.
But then this is literally just points with extra steps... why can't we have points.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/26 10:38:44


Post by: The_Real_Chris


 kirotheavenger wrote:
I understand different stats for different pistols. If you distinguish between a plasmagun and a lasgun (which you need to do) you also kinda need to distinguish between the plasmapistol and the laspistol.

The question is how you balance those two against each other when you don't get any points to do so.
Perhaps taking the laspistol should give you an extra equipment point to spend or something.
But then this is literally just points with extra steps... why can't we have points.


Once you have this style of team creation it is actually a boost to balance to have single stat lines (and it can reflect how a bolt pistol in the hands of a marine is used better than a guard sergeant). 'Pistol - Imperial guard sergeants can carry a variety including x,y,z - Stat line'. 'Rifle - Imperial Guard rely on the lasgun though some regiments use autoguns or local alternatives - Stat line' and so on.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/26 10:43:18


Post by: kirotheavenger


But then do you have "special weapon" as a profile or is a plasmagun identical to a lasgun?
If so, you've gone way too far on the simplification.

If not, why isn't a plasmapistol also sufficiently different to a laspistol?


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/26 11:21:10


Post by: The_Real_Chris


 kirotheavenger wrote:
But then do you have "special weapon" as a profile or is a plasmagun identical to a lasgun?
If so, you've gone way too far on the simplification.

If not, why isn't a plasmapistol also sufficiently different to a laspistol?


Main weapons with distinct differences you would still have there as that is part of your decision making. Do I want my melta weapon to take care of bulkheads, or plasma for unstable backup over distance?

But a rifleman is much of a muchness in such a system because the effect they bring isn't firepower but area control, threat, etc. (and maybe special abilities like a radio).

Making a decision about a sidearm is an RPG level thing and especially with GWs rules tends to be a bloody obvious choice. So you have to balance for the best pistol, the others are there why? Lots of groups insist on WYSIWYG rather than just letting everyone say they have the best option, so bake that into the rules for minor stuff like a sidearm.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/26 13:05:19


Post by: Eihnlazer


I really do like the new KT core game.

I also understand the complaints, but most stem from the army building which will get fixed once each army gets its specialist teams.

I play custodes and yes they are a bit strong atm, but the only way they could change them atm is to make their "Brotherhood of Demi-gods" strat be only shoot or fight twice instead of both.

If you mess with anything else they would quickly fall behind.

Being able to shoot and fight twice with each custode is a bit too good though.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/26 13:34:21


Post by: the_scotsman


 Eihnlazer wrote:
I really do like the new KT core game.

I also understand the complaints, but most stem from the army building which will get fixed once each army gets its specialist teams.


Honestly I'm kind of skeptical that there actually is THAT much imbalance between the octarius factions and the normal ones. Basically I've been playing mostly against Kriegers with various compendium teams, and it isn't like when SM 2.0 came out in 40k and marines were suddenly like 'we get doctrines and superdocs and you get....oh, nothing, how 'bout that?' - compendium teams have far fewer options but it's pretty easy to go "oh wtf veteran guardsman teams have this many options and regular guardsman teams only have this many options???" but like.

The veteran team gets 10 guys and the basic guardsman team gets 14 guys. With the same base stats, and the same base weapons. The Veterans team has all guys with little special powers and abilities, like the "Bruiser Veteran" is slightly better at close combat and the "comms veteran" can shift an AP over to an ally, but...if you play them against eachother the other team is going to be rocking almost a 1.5 numerical advantage, with again, the EXACT SAME BASE STATS AND GUNS.

So yeah, the basic gunner sniper has Heavy, and only hits on 3s, and only does 1mw on a crit instead of 3 like the Veteran sniper. Because he comes with an extra half a guy.

Orks vs Kommandos is definitely a much less favorable comparison, basically the only advantage regular orks teams seem to have is the ability to spam, say, 4 burnas in one kill team while the kommandos kill team can only ever have 1 of each special thing. Definitely wouldn't have hurt to let every regular ork boyz/clan kommandos fire team have 6 members instead of 5 though.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/26 13:40:27


Post by: kirotheavenger


Krieg have the option to field 14 guys as well. They can field either 14 guys or 10 guys plus artillery/air support.
Krieg also get orders for free (Guard have to pay CP to use orders), plus get a variety of their own strategems.
I think Krieg get fewer special weapons though.

It's difficult to say how balanced Compendium teams are at the moment.
Custodes stick out as an immediate problem. Pretty much everyone agrees that they shred any opposition and are unlikely to suffer significant casualties. Although some claim they're still 50/50 on winning because their opponents can claim objectives for a phyrric victory.
TBH that sounds like a lame game regardless of how close the W/L might be.

Genestealers have also come up as potentially problematic, but others claim their perfectly balanced.
Somewhat surprisingly Marines seem to be one of the worst factions, with Scouts seeming to be easily the best of the bunch.

We'll have to see.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/26 13:57:12


Post by: the_scotsman


Ah, yep, there it is. I was missing the fact you could take 4 guardsmen as an ancillary support choice instead of the various artillery barrages and such. That does seem for sure less balanced!

"Clan Kommandos" similarly seem like an utterly worthless choice, they're literally just the Kommandos team with zero special abilities at all.

I'm guessing "Flexibility" is the little fig leaf they're hiding behind, like you could go for 7 guardsmen and 5 Scions and have some guys with better base stats and the same special weapon choices twice. And similarly you could have an ork klan team with still only 10 guys and no special bonus kommando rules, but it seems like you've only got 1 burna boy maximum and, oh look, here I've got 4, so what I'm gonna do is put my crap boyz fighters and gretchins out in front and have each of my burnas hiding out behind them ready to one shot any of your fancy kommandos that come near.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 kirotheavenger wrote:

Genestealers have also come up as potentially problematic, but others claim their perfectly balanced.
Somewhat surprisingly Marines seem to be one of the worst factions, with Scouts seeming to be easily the best of the bunch.

We'll have to see.


Deathwatch felt pretty solid to me, and I feel like I honestly nerfed myself by not including any of the primaris teams with them (if you really wanted to power game 1 DWV fire team+1Heavy Intercessor fire team is probably the best pick technically? IDK) but man, even the basic deathwatch warriors were like "it slices, it dices, it chops, it screws, it shoots it roots it toots it does it all! which of these seventeen options would you like to use when you attack with your duder?"


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/26 14:28:04


Post by: Apple fox


Marines are fine power wise, as long as you pick your teams well.
But seem to have issues if you are limited or come up against tough opponents.

Right now I think Eldar are the team that needs the most extra care.
They are in a tough spot, with probably the entire team being just good enough too be brutal in a perfect matchup.
But outside of that, almost every unit falls short.
The heavy weapon seems to be way over valued at GW, and dire avengers I think could have had APL 3 and been fine.
Probably still be pushing mid with changes to both.



What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/26 14:56:24


Post by: Strg Alt


This thread should be in Specialist games. And new KT sucks because of "geometry class" and other reasons such as no armour in close combat.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/26 15:24:44


Post by: tauist


You haven't been paying attention. They are COLOURS, not shapes

"There are WHITE kinds of people; those who play Kill Team and those who don't. Some don't like that BLACK bit."



What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/26 15:49:07


Post by: H.B.M.C.


 Jidmah wrote:
I totally love that the six ork ruins "slot" into each other to form one massive structure. We need more terrain like this.
Why do you think I bought two?

And speaking of the Ork terrain, this video popped into my feed a few hours ago. It's a pretty interesting take on that terrain, put to some very unorthodox use (READ: A lot of cutting!). Not painted yet, but it looks amazing.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/26 16:13:53


Post by: Flinty


The_Real_Chris wrote:
Even the compendium marines have a bunch of options. Look at the tacticals, what model are you missing?

[snipped].


In the previous version, points allowing, you could have a team with a scout, an intercessor, a reiver, an infiltrator, a tactical marine. This meshes well with the idea that Marine kill teams are a mish-mash of individuals from different combat specialties being brought together to do something. In a marine force, the combat specialities are placed in different squad types, and with the splits between primaris, original marines and scouts it gives a range of different specialities, force organisations and specialities that could be tapped for a single team.

As I understand it, the new version you need to choose a fireteam all drawn from a single troop type. I haven't looked into what kid of weapon spreads you can provide within that squad, and of course you can create a highly customized set of models, but they are still from a single archetype. This will lead to a different visual feel to marine kill teams, compared to what you could do in the previous edition. Now whether this ws ever actually used in the previous version I don;t know, but the rules change leads to a player experience of change..

By contrast, with guard, all infantry is fundmentally the same, its the weapons that set the role. You could say that the special weapon troopers in your fire team have been drawn from a special weapon squad, while the lasgun mooks have been drawn from a few different regiments. this can all be smooshed into a single kill team. Its just a bit different with marines, and limiting them to a single fireteam restricts what you can put together into a single team, acknowledging that you can have a roster with a wider range of variation.

I'm not trying to argue one way or the other, just provide a bit of insight into my own thoughts


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/26 16:26:02


Post by: The_Real_Chris


I think that is an issue for Primaris as its quite stark there.

For tiny marines power armour is power armour and you can fool yourself into thinking it is a mix of assault, dev and Tac, even if there is no jump pack (do death watch get jump pack options?).

For all that Deathwatch are the marine kill team specialists, so perhaps it makes sense that for the regular chapters they delegate the task to a squad to sort as they see fit.

Still I would be happy to try out kill teams chosen from the below, as long as the opponent was being fluffy and not optimising the choices.

Tiny marine team
6 Tac OR
10 Scouts OR
3 Tac, 5 Scouts - 1 Sergeant, 1 Special OR heavy weapon, 1 Scout heavy weapon, 1 sniper.

Primaris version
1 Sergeant, 4 marines chosen from the following
Intercessors
Assault Intercessors
Incursors
Infiltrators
Reivers



What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/26 16:48:53


Post by: lord_blackfang


Apple fox wrote:
Marines are fine power wise, as long as you pick your teams well.


How do you pick a fixed team of 5 dudes with no options well?


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/26 16:55:10


Post by: The_Real_Chris


 lord_blackfang wrote:
Apple fox wrote:
Marines are fine power wise, as long as you pick your teams well.


How do you pick a fixed team of 5 dudes with no options well?


You have a roster of 20? I think so pick the appropriate team for the mission from that.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/26 16:56:32


Post by: Apple fox


 lord_blackfang wrote:
Apple fox wrote:
Marines are fine power wise, as long as you pick your teams well.


How do you pick a fixed team of 5 dudes with no options well?


You get a roster to pick from, they can counter pick well against a lot of teams. There issue is with diverse META. But as a set of rules, they are actually really good against a good deal of teams.
If you plan ahead well, only really teams like tyranids, Tau or tallens are a bit dicey in a campaign setting.
Basic units can be good, but marines don’t really have issues that elder don’t. And harlies are looking scary awesome with not really a huge choice :0

Lack of, or breadth of options is a bit of an illusion that 40k just sucks at, but kill team is a bit better about. It’s the space marines, and the tough custodes that kinda push the system.

Edit, Bolt weapons are actually good on the platform given.
And once they start getting there cool stuff :0 it could push them to quite nasty if a lot of the other factions don’t keep up well.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/26 17:08:05


Post by: lord_blackfang


Fair, I keep forgetting the roster thing.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/26 17:16:28


Post by: tauist


Marines aren't as inflexible as some might think. They have 3 different fire teams which all can be customized quite a bit - Deathwatch, Tacticals and Scouts. Even the primaris squads are more flexible than in 40K, since you can choose a different bolt rifle/heavy bolt rifle individually for every model, whereas in 40K all models in a unit must be equipped with the same type.

And then there's still the whole roster side of things. I'd say marines' weakness is not so much in their lack of options, but in their lack of numbers. I used to think scouts were the answer there, but scouts aren't really like marines, most ploys don't work on them, they are effectively closer to scions than proper Marines (which actually sounds kinda fluffy now that I think about it)

Remember, GW told us one big idea behind fire teams is the ability to slot your existing 40K (Crusade) units into games of Kill Team. So a mashup team from all over the place like in earlier Kill Team edition would have a hard time finding a place in 40K. While I don't love the idea, I have to admit I find the idea of combining 40K Crusade crusade & narrative spec ops KT2 games something I want to try with our group once we eventually get back to playing games.

EDIT: Forgot to vent about one more thing about the Compendium marines - Y no bolt pistols and combat knives? My Missile Launcher operative would greatly benefit from a pistol option, and if guardsmen have bayonets, I see no reason why the marines need to rely on fists instead of their combat knives.. You can't even buy them with the EP? Like wtf



What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/26 17:41:25


Post by: ZebioLizard2


Also given that you can buy equipment with the standard points, even the generic equipment options can help drastically.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/26 17:48:52


Post by: Tycho


 AnomanderRake wrote:
I'm so irritated with how incredibly restrictive the list-building is I haven't bothered to read anything else about new KT. That used to be the home for conversions/kitbashes, now we're just stuck with the exact same "no instructions, no rules" crap that GW's slowly been pushing into the main game.



Our group is not enjoying 9th, but we each spent the summer converting kill teams so we were pretty excited for the KT. We figured we could use KT to scratch the 40K itch while we take a break form actual 40k, but the build rules kind of killed it for us too. I think we generally like some of the new rules changes outside of the building, but man. We each have a lot of very lovingly crafted KT models that were bought/built/converted and painted specifically to play KT, that now can no longer participate in either KT or 40k unless we just proxy/house rule/count-as everything, or just bring the 40k models that would be "legal," and that's just not why we in particular play KT.

So now we're on hiatus from both games. Hoping the build situation improves once the armies start coming out and it's just a situation of trying to get everybody on the same page for the compendium. Guess we'll see.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/26 17:51:59


Post by: the_scotsman


 Flinty wrote:
The_Real_Chris wrote:
Even the compendium marines have a bunch of options. Look at the tacticals, what model are you missing?

[snipped].


In the previous version, points allowing, you could have a team with a scout, an intercessor, a reiver, an infiltrator, a tactical marine. This meshes well with the idea that Marine kill teams are a mish-mash of individuals from different combat specialties being brought together to do something. In a marine force, the combat specialities are placed in different squad types, and with the splits between primaris, original marines and scouts it gives a range of different specialities, force organisations and specialities that could be tapped for a single team.

As I understand it, the new version you need to choose a fireteam all drawn from a single troop type. I haven't looked into what kid of weapon spreads you can provide within that squad, and of course you can create a highly customized set of models, but they are still from a single archetype. This will lead to a different visual feel to marine kill teams, compared to what you could do in the previous edition. Now whether this ws ever actually used in the previous version I don;t know, but the rules change leads to a player experience of change..

By contrast, with guard, all infantry is fundmentally the same, its the weapons that set the role. You could say that the special weapon troopers in your fire team have been drawn from a special weapon squad, while the lasgun mooks have been drawn from a few different regiments. this can all be smooshed into a single kill team. Its just a bit different with marines, and limiting them to a single fireteam restricts what you can put together into a single team, acknowledging that you can have a roster with a wider range of variation.

I'm not trying to argue one way or the other, just provide a bit of insight into my own thoughts


My experience is definitely colored by the fact that I play deathwatch - primaris and all the other non option having factions like 'crons custodes and eldar guardians just seem boring as sin. Even with tzeentch daemons where admittedly the split mechanic was really fun goofy and cool I played one game and was like 'eh, ok, that's a neat little gimmick. mooooooooooooving on.' I could never see myself enjoying a daemon team long-term locked into just potentially 2 unit types.

IDK if there's really a way around that without making kill team something it's not intended to be, i.e., a companion game for people to play with one or two model kits total.

GW has a market for that with Necromunda and they absolutely do push for that market - even the monopose necromunda kits aren't 'no model, no rules' you have rules for a TON of stuff that has no kits available, but kill team is intended to be the 'entry game.'

The crazy thing to me is, as the entry game why, good lord WHY make the rules so unbelievably expensive in relation to the models? That's the thing that will sink this in my eyes if it does sink the same way it sank apocalypse. If 40k is going to be a product aimed at your whales to keep them in a purchasing loop then sure, gouge the absolute hell out of people for codexes that makes sense (business-wise, anyway, obviously it's ghoulish and gakky but, as a moneymaking method)...but to me Kill Team is absolutely a product where I would give the rules away....ALLLMOST for free. The only purpose of the kill team compendium is to have there be this "CHOOSE YOUR CHARACTER" type of feel where a customer can walk into a GW store and have a complete-feeling game where they can use alllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll these kits over here in their games of kill team.

.....but those rules should just be fething free. I should be able to roll over to GW's website and grab that compendium as a brand new player as a free PDF, that thing is selling fething 50 dollar a pop model kits and 6$ a pot paints and 30$ brushes, the game design and graphic design that went into the compendium is going to pay for itself so, so easy.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Tycho wrote:
 AnomanderRake wrote:
I'm so irritated with how incredibly restrictive the list-building is I haven't bothered to read anything else about new KT. That used to be the home for conversions/kitbashes, now we're just stuck with the exact same "no instructions, no rules" crap that GW's slowly been pushing into the main game.



Our group is not enjoying 9th, but we each spent the summer converting kill teams so we were pretty excited for the KT. We figured we could use KT to scratch the 40K itch while we take a break form actual 40k, but the build rules kind of killed it for us too. I think we generally like some of the new rules changes outside of the building, but man. We each have a lot of very lovingly crafted KT models that were bought/built/converted and painted specifically to play KT, that now can no longer participate in either KT or 40k unless we just proxy/house rule/count-as everything, or just bring the 40k models that would be "legal," and that's just not why we in particular play KT.

So now we're on hiatus from both games. Hoping the build situation improves once the armies start coming out and it's just a situation of trying to get everybody on the same page for the compendium. Guess we'll see.


awww, someone busted into your house and burned your 2017KT books as well? Damn, sucks.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/26 22:22:32


Post by: drbored


I've watched about a dozen batreps by now and it seems like a very tight and fun game.

Custodes aren't nearly as terrorizing as people make them out to be. Yeah the stats look bonkers on paper, but there's ways to whittle them down, whether they bring sisters + guard or just straight guard.

I just want to get my hands on the rules and start playing games already


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 lord_blackfang wrote:
drbored wrote:
The major difference from last edition to this one is that I don't have to worry about running 3 different Aspiring Champions to make my list function.


The fallacy here is assuming that cutting your strong options somehow made your weak options better.


It's less about cutting strong options and more about cutting not-fluffy options. IMO, the teams are much more lore-friendly than they were previously. It just didn't make sense to have 5 sgts from totally different space marine squads all running together, no matter how you sliced it.

Instead, what they did with this game is make bolters and other things worthwhile to take. They're not the crutch they are in 40k. In 40k (just as in KT18), you'd bring a squad of 8 bolters JUST to bring the 2 plasma guns (or whatever other special weapon). This is why things like Special Weapons teams, Retributors, Havocs, etc are so popular. There's no "wasted" bodies or shots, you're getting pure special weapon shooting and few points are spent on a bunch of "worthless" bolters.

In KT21, the bolters, chainswords, and other base weapons are far from worthless. A lasgun can chip wounds off of a Custodes. A Fleshborer can eat away at a space marine. We're dealing with a different beast in KT21, so your 40k logic simply doesn't apply the same way.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/27 10:44:19


Post by: kirotheavenger


I think KT21 is intended to be a game in it's own right, not just a gateway to 40k.

I also think the intention behind individual teams lacking flexibility is to encourage people to buy multiple different teams, rather than do one team very well.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/27 11:40:49


Post by: Turnip Jedi


 kirotheavenger wrote:
I think KT21 is intended to be a game in it's own right, not just a gateway to 40k.

I also think the intention behind individual teams lacking flexibility is to encourage people to buy multiple different teams, rather than do one team very well.


maybe, but how do the combat patrol boxes measure up in terms of Fire Teams, slow boil and all that


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/27 15:03:59


Post by: the_scotsman


 kirotheavenger wrote:
I think KT21 is intended to be a game in it's own right, not just a gateway to 40k.

I also think the intention behind individual teams lacking flexibility is to encourage people to buy multiple different teams, rather than do one team very well.


It's intended to be its own system, but the primary market goal is absolutely 'to have a game present that people can play with warhammer 40,000 miniatures that only requires the purchase of 1-2 kits'.

If the 'meta' build for any given army requires a build that makes a person who bought 1 kit just almost always lose vs a person who bought 3-4 kits or who ebays a bunch of extra pieces, that is a failure of the system in GW's eyes (See: a million guardsmen with plasma guns.)

I got to play a whole bunch of test games yesterday with a friend who plays Custodes, and I purposefully took what I figured would be just about the worst possible teams I had easy access to. We tried Custodes vs all Tzeentch Daemons, Custodes vs all chaos cultists, Custodes vs Storm Guardians, and Custodes vs Storm Guardians but this time with flamers instead of melta guns whoops.

other than the game vs the melta gun storm guardians, which was....um...not...fair, the games were all pretty close. We never had a game where less than 2/4 of the Custodes went down over the course of the game. The game with custodes vs storm guardians with meltas I wound up getting quite lucky with the meltaguns and I one-shotted a custode two activations in a row, which was both of the storm shield guys on his team allowing me to just drag down the two remaining custodes with storm guardians in melee which thanks to their 8 wounds can't be one-shot just by the custode player choosing to Strike with one successful guardian spear critical attack.

That was the main problem I ran into with the Cultists is the spear guys. Basically the easiest way to deal damage to custodes is just to charge in and hit them because it starts with the attacker and you can just resolve one of your crits or hits to deal instant damage - you've got 4 dice in melee so you'll usually have 1 crit to deal 3 damage to them. But custodes almost always have at least one crit in their pool (lethal 5+) and the spears deal 7 on a crit, which is just enough to one-shot a cultist or guardsman. Against the shield custodes, if you get 1-2 guys in Engagement Range you'll be fighting at WS3+ or WS2+ and you're pretty likely to have 4 hits and sometimes you just get lucky and have 2 crits. If that's the case, they have to eat 2 attacks - if they parry you still have an extra attack to Strike with, and if they Strike they don't down you in one shot, so you can meat grind the shield boys MUCH more efficiently with melee attacks. Shieldstodes are quite good defensively for blocking high quality melee attackers, but the shield is actually a liability when it comes to true chaff units with W7 who can be insta-killed by the spear.

Basically you've got your 3 krak grenades which you absolutely want to conceal until the exact moment you're gonna use them (give them to your otherwise less useful Cultist Fighters who helpfully also have GA2 so you can throw 2 kraks in a single activation which is extremely handy) and you've got the capability to sacrifice a chaos cultist to deal either 3 damage to a spear custode in melee or ~3-5 damage to a shield custode in melee.

Otherwise, you've got the choice between Reliability with a flamer gunner and "maybe will stay alive for more than one shot" with the heavy stubber gunner, and surprisingly the leader's shotgun is a decently effective weapon for chipping a few wounds as well. You've got 4 cultists for each custodian and generally it's a matter of "how many custodians should I bring down to make the mission un-winnable for my opponent?"

Just remember:

1) if you fight, the guy you fought with is just going to be dead. That's the reality of the situation, it's the best way to deal guaranteed damage to a custode but you are sacrificing any dude you fight with unless you're rolling up to finish off a custode who's almost dead (because remember, you as the attacker get the first pick of resolving hits and you can just choose to Strike for guaranteed damage to kill off a custode with 2-3 wounds left). Remember that you CAN use 'shoot' and then 'charge' in order to get a guy into engagement range with a custodian, which prevents that custode from using Overwatch and potentially sets you up for a +1WS for the guys you send in to make the glorious noble sacrifice later.

2) he's only got 3 save dice. They're 2+s, but there are only 3 of them and he still only crit saves on a 6. Any attack you make that you get 2 crits? You're probably doing damage. Any attack you can make that rolls 4 or 5 dice? That's also probably doing damage. Whittling down a custode is very do-able, and a weapon like a krak grenade is pretty likely to chunk off 8 or 9 damage.

The game with cultists was a very close defeat with 2 dead custodes, the game with the pink horrors was a pretty easy victory since Split and the horror's decent quality BS3+ 3/4 shooting attack just drowned the 'stodes in action economy, the game with the storm guardians with meltas was a hilarious stomp with all custodes dead, and the game with the storm guardians with flamers was a close win with 3 custodes down, one finally dying right at the end from being slowly whittled by Rend fishing and flamers.

Honestly, not having played them, I think the eldar guardians look like a pretty fething rad team albeit a pretty simple one. You get (effectively) a 4-man team, one of which is effectively a space marine heavy gunner who has a "second health bar" as an eldar guardian once your opponent kills the platform. And Eldar Guardians are not bad at all, 4A BS2+ 4/5 with rending is a pretty mean profile. It almost feels like why would I ever choose to play as Dire Avengers when they have the exact same statline just with Balanced on their guns and...better Overwatch, which as a bare minimum 8-man team you wonder when you'll really be making much use of that.

Rangers seem straight-up obnoxious, just a team of 4 snipers with Silent, thats gonna suck to deal with. Rangers+Anything else seems like a pretty solid team for Eldar. Rangers+Storm Guardians with a Flamer with a Ranger leader, Rangers + Guardians with a dakka platform with a ranger leader, Rangers+Dire Avengers with an Exarch maybe good though I think i'd prefer Avengers+Guardians with a platform.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/27 20:14:07


Post by: drbored


 the_scotsman wrote:
 kirotheavenger wrote:
I think KT21 is intended to be a game in it's own right, not just a gateway to 40k.

I also think the intention behind individual teams lacking flexibility is to encourage people to buy multiple different teams, rather than do one team very well.


It's intended to be its own system, but the primary market goal is absolutely 'to have a game present that people can play with warhammer 40,000 miniatures that only requires the purchase of 1-2 kits'.

If the 'meta' build for any given army requires a build that makes a person who bought 1 kit just almost always lose vs a person who bought 3-4 kits or who ebays a bunch of extra pieces, that is a failure of the system in GW's eyes (See: a million guardsmen with plasma guns.)



Ironically, that's a win in GW's eyes in terms of business perspective. Getting people to buy more kits to fill out more slots when a person only needs 1 model out of each kit is fantastic. That player might even be more likely to build the rest of the kit and have a 500 point force of something to play for 40k.

It's a failure in the Community's eyes, however, and to the 'skirmish wargaming' ethos of low investment need for your gaming fun.

What they've done now is create a system that still gets you to get 1-5 kits (depending on faction) and has aligned the Fire Team builds to be much more closely related to what you might find in a 40k game. A squad of Chaos Marines with 1 Gunner, 1 aspiring champion, 1 heavy gunner, 1 chaos icon, and 6 bolters is the same as you'd run in 40k as you would also have for a Kill Team Roster. It doesn't quite work out 1 to 1 in some cases, but the intention is definitely there. Every Space Marine squad resembles exactly what you'd have in 40k. It works the other way, too. Squads that you've built for 40k will likely slot right into Kill Team with little to no effort.

Now, this is just the Compendium, and judging by the responses of playtesters and a few others, they will be building on the Roster/KillTeam/FireTeam system, which hopefully will help the game feel more Skirmish and less 40k squad-lite, at least in terms of Roster build.

This is the challenge for GW if they want to see this game succeed, and for all intents and purposes, a business should be hoping that their investments succeed. They need to give people a reason to buy the upcoming books, kits, and terrain, and keeping the rules solid and fun, the balance steady, and the community happy is the way to do that.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/28 00:04:24


Post by: ZebioLizard2


I am somewhat curious what they'll do for Legion and Chapters and the like for the Compendium, since it'd be odd to make those keywords without addressing them at some point.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/28 03:00:35


Post by: drbored


 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
I am somewhat curious what they'll do for Legion and Chapters and the like for the Compendium, since it'd be odd to make those keywords without addressing them at some point.


My guess is the same as they do for 40k: x legion/chapter/forgeworld/order will get a re-roll 1 dice of 1 in the shooting phase. y legion/chapter/forgeworld/order will get a re-roll 1 dice of 1 in the fight phase. z legion/chapter/forgeworld/order can dash an extra inch.

I'd be pleasantly surprised if they actually gave some flare and flavor to a lot of the legion/chapter/etc traits. Night Lords, for example, really have nothing to do against morale in this edition (morale just isn't a thing) but they might instead have a once per turn thing that affects an opposing unit's APL while they cower in fear or something.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/28 06:41:51


Post by: thekingofkings


my opinion of the new killteam summed up in one word is : trash. I will continue with the last edition of it, I actually enjoyed that one.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/28 09:33:09


Post by: lord_blackfang


Having seen a few battreps now (GMG) I like it a lot more than I thought I would. Shapes are still dumb af of course. My other issue is there's some unnecessary moving parts to keep track of (too many subsystems like equipment, ploys, etc) and the secondary objective cards are clunky to pick and each seems to be a wall of text.

In the actual gameplay, it seems to go smooth, with the one weird rules artefact being that a model on their last 1-2 life will be automatically slain if melee'd as the attacker can apply even a single success first with absolutely no recourse no matter what the defender rolls.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/28 09:46:20


Post by: Flinty


Not sure if it’s that weird. More like a coup de gras of a trooper really on last reserves.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/28 13:00:30


Post by: tauist


Yeah, you need to remember than "1-2 wounds remaining" in Kill Team means the model has sustained heavy injuries already, is barely standing etc so kinda makes sense that anyone attacking them will make short work of them. When a model is down to half their wounds, they are already considered to be seriously injured.

Just returned from the local GW with my copy of Octarius. The box is heavy as sin! Metal gauge is actually quite decent looking IRL, wouldn't mind getting another one of those..


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/28 14:56:48


Post by: Tiberias


So since I've started the thread I've had the opportunity to try the new kill team. Thanks to everyone for giving their opinion.

I am personally not as fond of the new system. I do not like the combat system at all, because the parry option is in practice almost useless.
Most of the time it's just: I crit you, you almost die so you get one last hit in and then I kill you. Really boring.

Also custodes are seriously OP. Maybe me and my buddies don't grasp the system fully yet, but whenever I brought the golden boys it wasn't even a contest.
The fight/shoot twice and ignore crit dmg strats are just straight up bonkers.

Edit: the new ork terrain is awsome though. Gorgeously sculpted and really quite modular. The ork kommandos and kriegers are nice too. So just regarding models, the box is awseome imo.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/28 17:17:29


Post by: lord_blackfang


 tauist wrote:
Yeah, you need to remember than "1-2 wounds remaining" in Kill Team means the model has sustained heavy injuries already, is barely standing etc so kinda makes sense that anyone attacking them will make short work of them. When a model is down to half their wounds, they are already considered to be seriously injured.

Just returned from the local GW with my copy of Octarius. The box is heavy as sin! Metal gauge is actually quite decent looking IRL, wouldn't mind getting another one of those..


Well the same half dead dude dodges krak missles just as well as if he were at full health tho.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/28 18:50:18


Post by: Sherrypie


 lord_blackfang wrote:
 tauist wrote:
Yeah, you need to remember than "1-2 wounds remaining" in Kill Team means the model has sustained heavy injuries already, is barely standing etc so kinda makes sense that anyone attacking them will make short work of them. When a model is down to half their wounds, they are already considered to be seriously injured.

Just returned from the local GW with my copy of Octarius. The box is heavy as sin! Metal gauge is actually quite decent looking IRL, wouldn't mind getting another one of those..


Well the same half dead dude dodges krak missles just as well as if he were at full health tho.


Avoiding missiles by the virtue of lying half dead in a ditch is quite a bit easier than avoiding the dude standing on top of you with a stabby implement of violence in the same ditch when you are already weak. They are also slowed down and less able to relocate from under the fire when injured.

In the abstract, I like the dynamic that brings to the table in conjunction with the attrition heavy melee in general. You are encouraged to have a firefight that weakens targets which can then be dealt with a decisive charge. Full melee is mostly suicidal because you cannot easily escape being hurt yourself if there's no softening beforehand and going full shooting is in turn penalised by lacking the proper means for this swift breakthrough.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/28 21:01:12


Post by: NH Gunsmith


I REALLY wanted to like the new Kill Team system, as it would have been an excuse for me to throw a bit of money at GW for a few boxes of 40k models... but man, I couldn't even impulse buy the stuff for it after reading through downloaded rulebook PDFs, watching battle reports, and learning more about the system itself.

It really just feels like the rules writers just grabbed a bunch of stuff from Warcry, Star Wars: Legion, and Infinity without much understanding why those rules work in those systems.

The Kill Team construction is a huge missed opportunity, and the campaign system looks awful in comparison to the Soroth Kor campaign from Warcry... which isn't a 100% fair comparison since that was in the Tome Of Champions 2020 book, and before that Warcry campaigns really didn't interest me.

O give GW a lot of flak, but man I really wanted to love this release. Probably going to give the system a year or two to see if it even survives before I buy anything specifically for it. In the mean time, thankfully Stargrave has been a solid release for my gaming group.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/28 22:23:13


Post by: lord_blackfang


I haven't found any real netlists yet but I'll be very interested to see whether toolbox or raw power is the way to go. I kinda imagine Dark Eldar might be real good with Lethal 5+ spam.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/29 03:28:21


Post by: ZebioLizard2


Honestly I think people are sleeping on Eldar. Especially with the tricks they can pull.

Harlequins though just seem quite mean at the moment along with Custodes.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/29 04:12:39


Post by: drbored


 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Honestly I think people are sleeping on Eldar. Especially with the tricks they can pull.

Harlequins though just seem quite mean at the moment along with Custodes.


Custodes aren't nearly as scary as they seem in terms of playing the game. The Sisters of Silence are weaker than space marines in terms of defensive power, so they go down quick, and the custodes themselves can be chipped away at, especially in melee if you have the initiative. I can definitely see a Custodes going down to several charges from things like hormagaunts and cultists, and once one custodes is down, the other just won't be able to cap the objectives that it needs to to win the game.

IMO, Tyranid Warriors are much scarier, since they have lots of wounds as well, and can take a larger variety of weapons.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/29 11:15:05


Post by: tauist


Good points. I can see the Golden Bois having a hard time against a Tyranid + gaunt spam team


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/29 16:06:00


Post by: Crispy78


 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Honestly I think people are sleeping on Eldar. Especially with the tricks they can pull.

Harlequins though just seem quite mean at the moment along with Custodes.


Mean is right - run in teams of 8, sold in boxes of 6!



What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/29 18:26:30


Post by: tauist


I have some of those RT era metal harlies lying around.. could the old models still be used for KT2? Are the weapon loadouts too different these days?


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/29 19:07:40


Post by: Sherrypie


 tauist wrote:
I have some of those RT era metal harlies lying around.. could the old models still be used for KT2? Are the weapon loadouts too different these days?


Sure they can. It's pistols, swords and kisses all around, as in the olden days.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/30 04:40:25


Post by: Veldrain


My LGS only received part of their order, Fedex/UPS fault. 22 Kill team boxes. 7 Compendiums. A bunch of sad people at the store today.

I was hoping to actually get to test the seemingly lackluster marine teams today. But since no one had the rules.

Even when I try to give GW a chance Murphy's Law itself steps in to stop me.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/30 07:36:34


Post by: Vector Strike


Played it yesterday. It was really fun. I had Tau and my opponent was DG. Since the beginning I though it would be an uphill battle to deal with so many 5+++ and Marines with 12 wounds... but in the end, the Tau firepower managed to deal with it quite well. I was on the verge of being tabled by the end of turning point 4 (made some movement mistakes), but I had way more points.

I seriously recommend people giving it a go!

My only 3 pet peeves are: the LoS rules could be reworked a bit to make them more concise, the pentagon REALLY should've been a hexagon (the guy that taught us the game yesterday kept calling the pentagon a 'hexagon' because, well... 6 inches = six sides, right?) and we completely forgot about the Injured thing - I don't think it was a necessary addition to the game.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/30 08:13:18


Post by: tauist


SamusDrake wrote:
Putting aside crap list building and scandalous price for a moment...its alright. Infinite range for most ranged weapons is a definite improvement, along with cover and movement.

For £30, though, I'd expect to see a lot more game for the money such as alien beasts and a solo/coop feature for open play. A few factions to get started should be in there. In its current form it should have been a bundle with the essentials kit for £35.

The "launch box" is welcome enough, but not to the point where they bang on about it solid for three weeks. Its mainly aimed at Ork players( shout out to you, you magnificent people ) with some very niche Imperial Guard chaps who...sorry, but they ain't much to get excited about apart from...a friggin spade? Every other player has had nothing to be excited about apart from "expect new models once in a while" and a disgustingly high price tag for the rules and compendium.

Sadly, it has not been worth the wait and for now a hard pass.


FYI, someone on Reddit just posted their solo play rules
https://www.reddit.com/r/killteam/comments/pe9708/for_those_of_us_without_a_playgroup_or_busy/




Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Vector Strike wrote:
Played it yesterday. It was really fun. I had Tau and my opponent was DG. Since the beginning I though it would be an uphill battle to deal with so many 5+++ and Marines with 12 wounds... but in the end, the Tau firepower managed to deal with it quite well. I was on the verge of being tabled by the end of turning point 4 (made some movement mistakes), but I had way more points.

I seriously recommend people giving it a go!

My only 3 pet peeves are: the LoS rules could be reworked a bit to make them more concise, the pentagon REALLY should've been a hexagon (the guy that taught us the game yesterday kept calling the pentagon a 'hexagon' because, well... 6 inches = six sides, right?) and we completely forgot about the Injured thing - I don't think it was a necessary addition to the game.


I really recommend forgetting the shapes and just think of them as colours. Easier for my head to wrap around than shapes which dont make sense to the actual values. Black, White, Blue, Red.. much easier IMO



What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/30 11:45:26


Post by: xerxeskingofking


 tauist wrote:
SamusDrake wrote:
Putting aside crap list building and scandalous price for a moment...its alright. Infinite range for most ranged weapons is a definite improvement, along with cover and movement.

For £30, though, I'd expect to see a lot more game for the money such as alien beasts and a solo/coop feature for open play. A few factions to get started should be in there. In its current form it should have been a bundle with the essentials kit for £35.

The "launch box" is welcome enough, but not to the point where they bang on about it solid for three weeks. Its mainly aimed at Ork players( shout out to you, you magnificent people ) with some very niche Imperial Guard chaps who...sorry, but they ain't much to get excited about apart from...a friggin spade? Every other player has had nothing to be excited about apart from "expect new models once in a while" and a disgustingly high price tag for the rules and compendium.

Sadly, it has not been worth the wait and for now a hard pass.


FYI, someone on Reddit just posted their solo play rules
https://www.reddit.com/r/killteam/comments/pe9708/for_those_of_us_without_a_playgroup_or_busy/




Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Vector Strike wrote:
Played it yesterday. It was really fun. I had Tau and my opponent was DG. Since the beginning I though it would be an uphill battle to deal with so many 5+++ and Marines with 12 wounds... but in the end, the Tau firepower managed to deal with it quite well. I was on the verge of being tabled by the end of turning point 4 (made some movement mistakes), but I had way more points.

I seriously recommend people giving it a go!

My only 3 pet peeves are: the LoS rules could be reworked a bit to make them more concise, the pentagon REALLY should've been a hexagon (the guy that taught us the game yesterday kept calling the pentagon a 'hexagon' because, well... 6 inches = six sides, right?) and we completely forgot about the Injured thing - I don't think it was a necessary addition to the game.


I really recommend forgetting the shapes and just think of them as colours. Easier for my head to wrap around than shapes which dont make sense to the actual values. Black, White, Blue, Red.. much easier IMO



I have heard it was originally just colours, until someone pointed out that they'd be shipping a unpainted grey plastic ruler and that colours would be open to abuse/cause problems with colour blind players, etc, and the shapes were a later addition to the system


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/30 14:10:42


Post by: Kaffis


drbored wrote:
 the_scotsman wrote:
It's intended to be its own system, but the primary market goal is absolutely 'to have a game present that people can play with warhammer 40,000 miniatures that only requires the purchase of 1-2 kits'.

If the 'meta' build for any given army requires a build that makes a person who bought 1 kit just almost always lose vs a person who bought 3-4 kits or who ebays a bunch of extra pieces, that is a failure of the system in GW's eyes (See: a million guardsmen with plasma guns.)


Ironically, that's a win in GW's eyes in terms of business perspective. Getting people to buy more kits to fill out more slots when a person only needs 1 model out of each kit is fantastic. That player might even be more likely to build the rest of the kit and have a 500 point force of something to play for 40k.

It's a failure in the Community's eyes, however, and to the 'skirmish wargaming' ethos of low investment need for your gaming fun.

I see people make this mistake a lot, in that they assume that GW's audience has achieved market saturation and is loyal enough that they won't leave, either. In reality, the "win" from GW's business perspective should consider whether a given decision grows or shrinks their market of active players who buy products, and weighs that against how much the decision in question promotes buying new products (and the price at which they're bought).

Very clearly, GW wasn't happy with KT18's performance in expanding their customer base with a skirmish product that could get new people into their IP and buying their models at all. Yes, they were able to use it to milk the whales they already had into buying 5-6 kits per new faction they wanted to take up, but the KT21 model is clearly pitched at making people more willing to build additional factions and convert board gamers and skirmish gamers from competing games over to GW customers. The bet is that the 2 boxes or so they buy per team (or boxed sets) from a bunch of new players will bring in more profit than a smaller market buying 5 boxes a player.

And quite honestly, playing the new product, I think it's likely to prove out. KT21 definitely competes favorably in tactical interest and game flow with other skirmish games that I've played, like X-Wing Minis, Malifaux, WWX, and so on, despite the simpler intra-roster diversity of the Compendium lists.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/08/31 16:22:19


Post by: The_Real_Chris


 Vector Strike wrote:
... and we completely forgot about the Injured thing - I don't think it was a necessary addition to the game.


Whoops, we did too!


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/01 17:18:34


Post by: the_scotsman


 tauist wrote:
I have some of those RT era metal harlies lying around.. could the old models still be used for KT2? Are the weapon loadouts too different these days?


I run 'em in 40k.

Powerfist = Harlequin's Caress.
Hand Flamer = melta pistol

otherwise, basically, you're done.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/01 19:56:07


Post by: drbored


Kaffis wrote:
drbored wrote:
 the_scotsman wrote:
It's intended to be its own system, but the primary market goal is absolutely 'to have a game present that people can play with warhammer 40,000 miniatures that only requires the purchase of 1-2 kits'.

If the 'meta' build for any given army requires a build that makes a person who bought 1 kit just almost always lose vs a person who bought 3-4 kits or who ebays a bunch of extra pieces, that is a failure of the system in GW's eyes (See: a million guardsmen with plasma guns.)


Ironically, that's a win in GW's eyes in terms of business perspective. Getting people to buy more kits to fill out more slots when a person only needs 1 model out of each kit is fantastic. That player might even be more likely to build the rest of the kit and have a 500 point force of something to play for 40k.

It's a failure in the Community's eyes, however, and to the 'skirmish wargaming' ethos of low investment need for your gaming fun.

I see people make this mistake a lot, in that they assume that GW's audience has achieved market saturation and is loyal enough that they won't leave, either. In reality, the "win" from GW's business perspective should consider whether a given decision grows or shrinks their market of active players who buy products, and weighs that against how much the decision in question promotes buying new products (and the price at which they're bought).

Very clearly, GW wasn't happy with KT18's performance in expanding their customer base with a skirmish product that could get new people into their IP and buying their models at all. Yes, they were able to use it to milk the whales they already had into buying 5-6 kits per new faction they wanted to take up, but the KT21 model is clearly pitched at making people more willing to build additional factions and convert board gamers and skirmish gamers from competing games over to GW customers. The bet is that the 2 boxes or so they buy per team (or boxed sets) from a bunch of new players will bring in more profit than a smaller market buying 5 boxes a player.

And quite honestly, playing the new product, I think it's likely to prove out. KT21 definitely competes favorably in tactical interest and game flow with other skirmish games that I've played, like X-Wing Minis, Malifaux, WWX, and so on, despite the simpler intra-roster diversity of the Compendium lists.


This is exactly my hope. The bad press and toxicity of some of the community isn't able to suppress the reality: the new KT 21 is actually a good game, and it's likely to expand into more things in the future.

One measure of GW's ethos that I think people don't understand is that they CAN'T release EVERYTHING all at once.

Let's say, for example, they decide to update the Firstborn Space Marines, get them all into new plastic, redo any leftover resin or pewter kits, update any of the oldest kits in the range, etc. It is much more likely that they'd split that sort of project into 3 waves, spread across a few years. Let's take, for example, the old Scout Marine and Terminator kits. Kits, that, by a few different measures, are old enough to be updated by now, especially since the models are out of scale at the very least.

In the community's mind, both kits should be updated immediately, to get it over with instead of dragging it out. In GW's mind, better to update one kit, let's say the Scouts, and then leave the other kit to update later. This spreads the profits out and keeps people engaged. If they release everything at once, they'll A. have nothing else to release in that faction for a longer period of time and B. have to make a larger investment in design, time, and warehouse space for such a large thing. This is why we saw the Lumineth come out in larger waves over a larger spread of time. This is why no faction is ever 'complete', as there will always be room to add in new things to the various factions.

Similarly, they applied this method to the Kill Team release. The community has been loud and clear: having to buy the Compendium to play with bland rules is not the way they'd prefer to play the game. Many players would much rather have all of the special rules available for their specific faction, right out the gate. But what does this do? If GW were to do that, then people would have nothing to look forward to, the game would be 'complete' with little else to add. This is why KT18 released expansions for Commanders and Elites, instead of having everything right at the start.

Is this a 'good' thing? Well, if you're a player, no, of course it isn't. You want to play with all of your toys right away, with all of the flavorful options that you'd expect or feel entitled to based on past releases. For the company, however, it's a necessary evil. Time and time again, the DLC method of releases, spreading profits over longer periods of time, is HOW IT'S DONE. Meeting shareholder expectations, having a reliable source of income, being able to control profits quarter to quarter to make sure they don't screw themselves over in any particular quarter or in any particular year (the amount of importance on Year-to-Date and Quarter earnings, especially in comparison to the previous year is stunningly important to most international companies), are all things that the company has to consider in order to keep their business running smoothly and without hiccups. Hiccups, even something as simple as failing to meet a quarter profit margin by 0.5%, is enough to cause shareholders to shift their interest elsewhere, especially in this volatile time.

So, as in many things these days, you've got a community that's hungry for more content but the company is drip-feeding that content. This practice, and the community's response to it, is what could kill a game despite the game having a good playing system, even if it's with simpler 'index' style rules.

And at the end of the day, you gotta ask yourself: What would you rather have? A relatively predictable string of releases? Or a completely unhinged practice of dumping more content than your wallet can handle, followed by long stretches of silence?


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/01 21:46:44


Post by: lord_blackfang


Having, a number fully fleshed out factions at launch isn't more than my wallet can handle because I'm still going to just buy 1, but I'm a lot less likely to buy into a game in the first place if all it can offer is starter box duels instead of a healty and diverse metagame (looking at you, every specialist game). Having me not play, or play using bare bones get-you-by rules and wondering if my faction will even see a release during the lifespan of a game (or an edition of a main game) isn't what I'd call "keeping me engaged".


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/02 09:24:28


Post by: tauist


There's a flockton of stuff GW could add to KT2, even without introducing any new models whatsoever. The only justification for not releasing more rules & datasheets for the game that I can reasonably accept is that GW needs to see how the community takes the initial content, and what happens when a meta settles in. If they are releasing stuff periodically instead of everything at once, it gives them a chance to react/tweak new rules content based on the performance of the earlier stuff.

You can alredy see some meta forming for the game on Reddit, for example. Certain Tac Ops & team builds becoming auto-take etc



What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/02 15:34:42


Post by: generalchaos34


 tauist wrote:
There's a flockton of stuff GW could add to KT2, even without introducing any new models whatsoever. The only justification for not releasing more rules & datasheets for the game that I can reasonably accept is that GW needs to see how the community takes the initial content, and what happens when a meta settles in. If they are releasing stuff periodically instead of everything at once, it gives them a chance to react/tweak new rules content based on the performance of the earlier stuff.

You can alredy see some meta forming for the game on Reddit, for example. Certain Tac Ops & team builds becoming auto-take etc



I think a lot of this is true and is part of the reaction to the failure of Apocalypse. They went ahead and released pretty much everything out the gate and didn't do much else with the game and it ended up collapsing in on itself. Which is sad because it was a great system. I think the way to go is to drip feed and adjust as time goes on to nurture the game and make sure it stays relevant and fresh in the players minds. Does this suck for us? Yes it does. I can at least comprehend this line of thought since they are a company that needs to make money.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/04 05:56:20


Post by: drbored


 generalchaos34 wrote:
 tauist wrote:
There's a flockton of stuff GW could add to KT2, even without introducing any new models whatsoever. The only justification for not releasing more rules & datasheets for the game that I can reasonably accept is that GW needs to see how the community takes the initial content, and what happens when a meta settles in. If they are releasing stuff periodically instead of everything at once, it gives them a chance to react/tweak new rules content based on the performance of the earlier stuff.

You can alredy see some meta forming for the game on Reddit, for example. Certain Tac Ops & team builds becoming auto-take etc



I think a lot of this is true and is part of the reaction to the failure of Apocalypse. They went ahead and released pretty much everything out the gate and didn't do much else with the game and it ended up collapsing in on itself. Which is sad because it was a great system. I think the way to go is to drip feed and adjust as time goes on to nurture the game and make sure it stays relevant and fresh in the players minds. Does this suck for us? Yes it does. I can at least comprehend this line of thought since they are a company that needs to make money.


This ^

Sadly, the definition of 'support' for a game is to keep coming out with things. One-and-done games tend to not go very far, even if the content that they have is humongous.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/04 07:09:47


Post by: Blastaar


Spoiler:
drbored wrote:
Kaffis wrote:
drbored wrote:
 the_scotsman wrote:
It's intended to be its own system, but the primary market goal is absolutely 'to have a game present that people can play with warhammer 40,000 miniatures that only requires the purchase of 1-2 kits'.

If the 'meta' build for any given army requires a build that makes a person who bought 1 kit just almost always lose vs a person who bought 3-4 kits or who ebays a bunch of extra pieces, that is a failure of the system in GW's eyes (See: a million guardsmen with plasma guns.)


Ironically, that's a win in GW's eyes in terms of business perspective. Getting people to buy more kits to fill out more slots when a person only needs 1 model out of each kit is fantastic. That player might even be more likely to build the rest of the kit and have a 500 point force of something to play for 40k.

It's a failure in the Community's eyes, however, and to the 'skirmish wargaming' ethos of low investment need for your gaming fun.

I see people make this mistake a lot, in that they assume that GW's audience has achieved market saturation and is loyal enough that they won't leave, either. In reality, the "win" from GW's business perspective should consider whether a given decision grows or shrinks their market of active players who buy products, and weighs that against how much the decision in question promotes buying new products (and the price at which they're bought).

Very clearly, GW wasn't happy with KT18's performance in expanding their customer base with a skirmish product that could get new people into their IP and buying their models at all. Yes, they were able to use it to milk the whales they already had into buying 5-6 kits per new faction they wanted to take up, but the KT21 model is clearly pitched at making people more willing to build additional factions and convert board gamers and skirmish gamers from competing games over to GW customers. The bet is that the 2 boxes or so they buy per team (or boxed sets) from a bunch of new players will bring in more profit than a smaller market buying 5 boxes a player.

And quite honestly, playing the new product, I think it's likely to prove out. KT21 definitely competes favorably in tactical interest and game flow with other skirmish games that I've played, like X-Wing Minis, Malifaux, WWX, and so on, despite the simpler intra-roster diversity of the Compendium lists.


This is exactly my hope. The bad press and toxicity of some of the community isn't able to suppress the reality: the new KT 21 is actually a good game, and it's likely to expand into more things in the future.

One measure of GW's ethos that I think people don't understand is that they CAN'T release EVERYTHING all at once.

Let's say, for example, they decide to update the Firstborn Space Marines, get them all into new plastic, redo any leftover resin or pewter kits, update any of the oldest kits in the range, etc. It is much more likely that they'd split that sort of project into 3 waves, spread across a few years. Let's take, for example, the old Scout Marine and Terminator kits. Kits, that, by a few different measures, are old enough to be updated by now, especially since the models are out of scale at the very least.

In the community's mind, both kits should be updated immediately, to get it over with instead of dragging it out. In GW's mind, better to update one kit, let's say the Scouts, and then leave the other kit to update later. This spreads the profits out and keeps people engaged. If they release everything at once, they'll A. have nothing else to release in that faction for a longer period of time and B. have to make a larger investment in design, time, and warehouse space for such a large thing. This is why we saw the Lumineth come out in larger waves over a larger spread of time. This is why no faction is ever 'complete', as there will always be room to add in new things to the various factions.

Similarly, they applied this method to the Kill Team release. The community has been loud and clear: having to buy the Compendium to play with bland rules is not the way they'd prefer to play the game. Many players would much rather have all of the special rules available for their specific faction, right out the gate. But what does this do? If GW were to do that, then people would have nothing to look forward to, the game would be 'complete' with little else to add. This is why KT18 released expansions for Commanders and Elites, instead of having everything right at the start.

Is this a 'good' thing? Well, if you're a player, no, of course it isn't. You want to play with all of your toys right away, with all of the flavorful options that you'd expect or feel entitled to based on past releases. For the company, however, it's a necessary evil. Time and time again, the DLC method of releases, spreading profits over longer periods of time, is HOW IT'S DONE. Meeting shareholder expectations, having a reliable source of income, being able to control profits quarter to quarter to make sure they don't screw themselves over in any particular quarter or in any particular year (the amount of importance on Year-to-Date and Quarter earnings, especially in comparison to the previous year is stunningly important to most international companies), are all things that the company has to consider in order to keep their business running smoothly and without hiccups. Hiccups, even something as simple as failing to meet a quarter profit margin by 0.5%, is enough to cause shareholders to shift their interest elsewhere, especially in this volatile time.

So, as in many things these days, you've got a community that's hungry for more content but the company is drip-feeding that content. This practice, and the community's response to it, is what could kill a game despite the game having a good playing system, even if it's with simpler 'index' style rules.

And at the end of the day, you gotta ask yourself: What would you rather have? A relatively predictable string of releases? Or a completely unhinged practice of dumping more content than your wallet can handle, followed by long stretches of silence?

KT21 isn't a good game. You and others may enjoy playing, and that's fine. But it is not a well-written, coherent ruleset with a clear vision.

When the game was announced, I crossed my fingers that it would provide a solid skirmish experience- customizability, more granular rules, more stuff to do during an activation, etc. Some of that is there- kinda. As usual, GW had some good ideas buried in there and botched the execution. Why play Kill Team when Malifaux and Infinity exist? All KT has going for it is being "Warhammer 40,000."


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/04 07:51:56


Post by: Tiberias


Could a veteran of the old kill team explain to me what the weaknesses of the old ruleset were?
Only having played the new kill team and just having read the rules of the old kill team...the old system at least appears to be way more interesting.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/04 11:16:19


Post by: SamusDrake


Tiberias wrote:
Could a veteran of the old kill team explain to me what the weaknesses of the old ruleset were?
Only having played the new kill team and just having read the rules of the old kill team...the old system at least appears to be way more interesting.


The scout and morale phases could have been better, but otherwise well regarded and the saving grace of 8th edition. Save for one or two models( sometimes felt guilty taking a Lictor ) it was well balanced. Not a perfect game, but it was a solid skirmish ruleset for 40K - without the need for 40K itself.

If you do go for KT'18 then try and stick to the core manual where possible. The additional expansions are very mixed in what they bought to the game, but the 2019 annual was pretty decent, along with a copy of Blackstone Fortress( and the WD rules for indoor combat ).


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/04 11:21:50


Post by: Jidmah


Not a veteran myself, but the main difference to the new one for me is that you rolled a lot of dice that never amounted to anything. The new rules seem to take reducing the luck factor by giving models 10 wounds instead of 1 but in return making wounding them much more likely.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/06 08:35:26


Post by: tauist


I thought KT18 was a decent game, if the new edition wouldn't have came out I would still be playing it. But I must admit that KT2 seems to be even better than the old one, I like the 100% AA aspect and the Concealed/Engaged order paradigm.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/06 10:45:55


Post by: The_Real_Chris


 generalchaos34 wrote:
I think a lot of this is true and is part of the reaction to the failure of Apocalypse. They went ahead and released pretty much everything out the gate and didn't do much else with the game and it ended up collapsing in on itself. Which is sad because it was a great system. I think the way to go is to drip feed and adjust as time goes on to nurture the game and make sure it stays relevant and fresh in the players minds. Does this suck for us? Yes it does. I can at least comprehend this line of thought since they are a company that needs to make money.


To me Apoc was awful. I love big games. I have a big collection. I love Epic more than any other GW game. Apoc was dire. A big sprawling mass of very similar units. My Chimeras were the same survivability (bar the extra level of cards GW uses as a proxy for tactics) as my Leman Russ. I was expected to worry about whether I wanted to add a heavy stubber or not to a vehicle. There are many ways to do a mass battle game and retain the experience of commanding different types of units. Apoc failed to do so. According to one of the design staff this was because they were constrained by management decisions that wanted unit load out to matter and they used cards as a stand in for tactics given the small play area, proximity to the enemy and general saminess of the unit rules.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Blastaar wrote:
KT21 isn't a good game. You and others may enjoy playing, and that's fine. But it is not a well-written, coherent ruleset with a clear vision.

When the game was announced, I crossed my fingers that it would provide a solid skirmish experience- customizability, more granular rules, more stuff to do during an activation, etc. Some of that is there- kinda. As usual, GW had some good ideas buried in there and botched the execution. Why play Kill Team when Malifaux and Infinity exist? All KT has going for it is being "Warhammer 40,000."


So whilst no one will disagree with the clarity of the rules (you get what you pay for it seems with rules presentation).

But game wise it delivers what I want from a GW skirmish game. To wit a fast playing game with roughly a dozen models a side that allows for multiple iterations to be played of an evening. It has tactical choices and objectives suitable for an hours play and has a meta component as I pick models from the 20 strong roster. I am happy with a simple set of action choices, they capture broadly what I want to do. You can use some narrative to make firing from cover leaning gingerly round the corner and emptying the magazine blindly rather than explicit rules.

If I wanted a detailed play experience I would go grab a WW2 game (actually I lie, I would play crossfire for WW2) or something like infinity. Or perhaps play bloodbowl.


What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/06 14:24:15


Post by: solkan


Blastaar wrote:

KT21 isn't a good game. You and others may enjoy playing, and that's fine. But it is not a well-written, coherent ruleset with a clear vision.

When the game was announced, I crossed my fingers that it would provide a solid skirmish experience- customizability, more granular rules, more stuff to do during an activation, etc. Some of that is there- kinda. As usual, GW had some good ideas buried in there and botched the execution. Why play Kill Team when Malifaux and Infinity exist? All KT has going for it is being "Warhammer 40,000."


I'm not really familiar with KT19, but looking through the rules for KT21, I'd say that the big thing it has going for it that Infinity and Malifaux don't have is simplicity.


  • * Don't mess around with complicated movement, because if you try to move less than an inch for some reason that's going to get rounded up to a full inch.
    * "Obscuring" is essentially: Don't mess around trying to figure out whether you can see through the window gaps. You can see through it if your target is within 3", or if the shooter is within 1". Otherwise, it's in the way and you can't.
    * For the most part, you're just assumed to be in range.
    * If you get into a group combat, there's a slight bonus that you can determine without needing to count Side A vs. Side B's numbers.


  • So probably a person can learn all of the rules in a few practice activations (or the first turn), and by the end of the game they'll be ready for the campaign system.

    Infinity is a wonderful game, but it also has a huge front loaded amount of complexity that it exposes to the players. CB tried to make a simplified version of Infinity, and they ended up with something that still takes about a half dozen to a dozen games to understand.

    Malifaux's also a wonderful game, but it completely lacks a campaign system. And it's one of the games where the interactions between model abilities is key.

    Maybe GW's going to end up wrecking it with unnecessary complexity in expansions, or by not providing customizing for the Compendium factions fast enough.



    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/07 02:25:17


    Post by: drbored


     tauist wrote:
    I thought KT18 was a decent game, if the new edition wouldn't have came out I would still be playing it. But I must admit that KT2 seems to be even better than the old one, I like the 100% AA aspect and the Concealed/Engaged order paradigm.


    Literally the only thing I had a problem with about KT18 was the lack of support after the first year and a half. I know a lot of people talked about the issues of how many rolls you have to make to get nothing done, but I didn't see it as a huge issue, not game-breaking anyway.

    If GW continues to support this new system, I'm sure it'll do well.


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/07 09:59:18


    Post by: The_Real_Chris


    Playing again yesterday... I really look forward to a better laid out fan copy of the rules! I bet Wahpedia is as baffled as us currently!

    Played 'stealers

    The marine player hated it. I was essentially hidden the whole time until charging. I took heavy casualties when I wasn't hiding - (8 dead, 1 off the board), the marines lost 3, VP win was something like 12-9. But still he was just very frustrated. He couldn't flank my hiding spots thanks to the width of the board and my spacing, so it was just push up and charge.

    Oh and Overwatch should have been named 'reaction fire' or similar. The amount of times people wanted to 'overwatch' against charging 'stealers was tiresome.


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/07 11:12:29


    Post by: Rongar96


    Hey there

    I like the new KT rules and since I plan to stay with one of the factions from the Octarius box I don´t plan to buy the Compendium.
    What I read in its description and saw on Battlescribe I assume I can not play my Elucidian Starstrides, Gellerpox or Servants of the Abyss anyway.
    The latter work in some way with the Traitor Space Marines but not all of them.

    I guess there are no rumours about new datasheets for those guys?


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/07 11:28:27


    Post by: The_Real_Chris


    Only if they release the models, or you wait for some fan balanced lists. Main problem is getting a roster of 20 guys.


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/07 13:53:38


    Post by: tauist


    I liked the treatment the BSF minis got in the last edition, The models could be added to existing factions. I'd love something similar in this edition, being able to take that Rogue Trader with some scions or to mix gellerpox with chaos cultist/poxwalkers.. So they'd just bring extra flavour to an existing faction, not add entirely new standalone factions as such.

    Unfprtunately, without a points system, there isn't much hope for such a thing for KT2



    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/07 18:27:45


    Post by: The_Real_Chris


    I suppose you would split them into 5? fireteams and pick 2.
    CSM - Leader (Mallus) and 2 black legion bodyguards
    Traitor Guardsmen - 7 guys as per box
    Cultists - 7 guys as per box
    Scum - 4 guys chosen from Beastmen, Nega Voltists, up to 2 rogue Pyskers

    If you don't pick the CSM can upgrade one Guardsman to be a commissar, or one cultist to be a firebrand.

    The heroes aren't enough to take a full 20 man roster so if you did them would have to think up some kind of retainer. Or could combine with the Starstriders into some kind of set up. I reckon one fireteam of Voidsmen then a choice of 3? fireteams made up of the heroes grouped into three power levels for a team of 2, 3 or 4 members.

    So they would be stating and grouping up
    • Knosso Prond
    • Larsen van der Grauss
    • Sanistasia Minst
    • Elucia Vhane
    • Gotfret de Montbard
    • Pious Vorne
    • Rein and Raus
    • UR-025
    • X-101
    • Amallyn Shadowguide
    • Aradia Madellan
    • Daedalosus
    • Dahyak Grekh
    • Espern Locarno
    • Janus Draik
    • Neyam Shai Murad
    • Taddeus the Purifier
    Giving you a roster of 20 guys (the 6 voidsmen and choices from the above 18 people)

    Then I guess do a special made to order release window for the models.

    The Gellarpox are another too small faction, so either group in with deathguard as another 1 or 2 fireteam choices or add them to the blackstone guys.


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/10 06:39:17


    Post by: AllSeeingSkink


    I've only just finally got around to reading the rules.

    Is it just me, or are these books terribly written? I feel like the writer lives by the adage "Why write in a sentence what could be written in a paragraph?".

    The whole thing is just very cumbersome to read and feels like it could have been written in a fraction of the number of pages. And too often I come across a rule that references another rule but I don't know where to look for it.

    And reading the rules, I despise the circle square triangle bullgak even more than I thought I would. Every time I see a symbol I have to pause to remember which distance it actually refers to. I still haven't got my head around triangle < circle < square < pentagon.


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/10 07:17:04


    Post by: Jidmah


    AllSeeingSkink wrote:
    I still haven't got my head around triangle < circle < square < pentagon.


    Is anyone but me annoyed by the order of the shapes? It should be circle < triangle < square < pentagon or triangle < square < pentagon < circle.
    Triangle < circle < square < pentagon just makes no sense whatsoever.


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/10 07:24:53


    Post by: AllSeeingSkink


     Jidmah wrote:
    AllSeeingSkink wrote:
    I still haven't got my head around triangle < circle < square < pentagon.


    Is anyone but me annoyed by the order of the shapes? It should be circle < triangle < square < pentagon or triangle < square < pentagon < circle.
    Triangle < circle < square < pentagon just makes no sense whatsoever.


    I think I'm too annoyed by the very existence of them to get overly stressed about the order, but yes, it is illogical and makes me feel dumber every time I read it.

    If they omitted 2", they could have done circle = 1, triangle = 3, square = 4, hexagon = 6, then at least the number of edges would align with the number, but the whole system is so stupid to begin with.


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/10 07:29:38


    Post by: Jidmah


    I'm actually playing the game with my 5 year old daughter, so I can't say I'm not too miffed about that - though I seriously doubt that children in pre-school are an intended target audience.


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/10 10:43:41


    Post by: lord_blackfang


    Yeah, this shape nonsense, while mostly harmless, is definitely one of the most boneheaded concepts GW ever did.


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/10 10:51:13


    Post by: The_Real_Chris


    You do feel an idiot discussing shapes...

    But yes, atrocious rulebook layout and contents page.


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/10 14:30:13


    Post by: xerxeskingofking


    best theory i have seen for the shapes was that the original plan was to use the colours, not the shapes, as the primary element (ie WHITE circle, RED pentagon, etc), which is fine in and of itself, but when the range polygon idea came about, they either decided (or it was decided for them) that supplying a unpainted plastic shape that the user was required to paint in the correct order was much to open to accidental or deliberate misuse/abuse, and they tacked on the shapes part, but as it was still seen primarily as colour based they were more concerned about shapes that were distinct form each other as opposed to ones that could be linked back to distances.

    its the closest to a coherent theory as to why it is what it is that I have heard.


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/10 14:48:47


    Post by: Gregor Samsa


    xerxeskingofking wrote:
    best theory i have seen for the shapes was that the original plan was to use the colours, not the shapes, as the primary element (ie WHITE circle, RED pentagon, etc), which is fine in and of itself, but when the range polygon idea came about, they either decided (or it was decided for them) that supplying a unpainted plastic shape that the user was required to paint in the correct order was much to open to accidental or deliberate misuse/abuse, and they tacked on the shapes part, but as it was still seen primarily as colour based they were more concerned about shapes that were distinct form each other as opposed to ones that could be linked back to distances.

    its the closest to a coherent theory as to why it is what it is that I have heard.


    Yep this has all the hallmarks of an idea that gets 75% through development before a showstopping problem is discovered and then the scramble ensues to pull it out of the fire. I think another consideration was that at some point someone lowly in the "ideas room" said "what about people who are colourblind?" and then there was a panic.


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/10 15:14:06


    Post by: AllSeeingSkink


    xerxeskingofking wrote:
    best theory i have seen for the shapes was that the original plan was to use the colours, not the shapes, as the primary element (ie WHITE circle, RED pentagon, etc), which is fine in and of itself, but when the range polygon idea came about, they either decided (or it was decided for them) that supplying a unpainted plastic shape that the user was required to paint in the correct order was much to open to accidental or deliberate misuse/abuse, and they tacked on the shapes part, but as it was still seen primarily as colour based they were more concerned about shapes that were distinct form each other as opposed to ones that could be linked back to distances.

    its the closest to a coherent theory as to why it is what it is that I have heard.


    Maybe, a problem with colours is also some folk see colours differently, but I still don't get why they didn't just use numbers though. We already know that 1 is half the size of 2, why we have to learn that triangle is half the size of circle and black is half the size of white I have no idea

    But anyway, that was kinda just tangential to my gripe that the books as a whole just feel badly written, for what isn't a terribly complicated set of rules they're quite painful to read.


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/10 16:08:24


    Post by: Ian Sturrock


    I think again we end up in a situation where the most obvious problems boil down to, GW doesn't like to hire qualified or experienced game designers.

    The UK government has really good, clear, freely available guidance on Designing for Accessibility. When I teach game design to undergrads, I make them look at this in the first semester, in the board game design course: https://accessibility.blog.gov.uk/2016/09/02/dos-and-donts-on-designing-for-accessibility/

    And the badly written stuff also gets covered in Semester 1 (they have to hand me a rules sheet as part of the assignment, and I mark it based primarily on clarity), then again in third year for the Games Narrative module...

    But GW are still hiring game designers based primarily on ability to froth about Ultramarines.


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/10 16:14:55


    Post by: The_Real_Chris


     Ian Sturrock wrote:
    The UK government has really good, clear, freely available guidance on Designing for Accessibility. When I teach game design to undergrads, I make them look at this in the first semester, in the board game design course: https://accessibility.blog.gov.uk/2016/09/02/dos-and-donts-on-designing-for-accessibility/


    Amusingly (having known one of the authors) government internally doesn't follow this stuff at all internally in many departments!


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/10 16:45:48


    Post by: Tawnis


     Jidmah wrote:
    I'm actually playing the game with my 5 year old daughter, so I can't say I'm not too miffed about that - though I seriously doubt that children in pre-school are an intended target audience.


    I'm playing with my 5 year old son as well and he really likes the 3 circles to move as well. But yeah, totally agree that it wasn't their target audience. XD

    Overall, I really like the new Kill Team. I've got half a dozen games under my belt so far and they've all been really close.

    I get that it's a lot less customizable than what we're used to, but that will come in time. I think re-building the game from the ground up was the right way to go, even if we had to take a step back before we could take two steps forward. Throwing everything into the opening edition would have been impossible to balance, I like that they are taking their time with it. If you want a super customizable list, play the old version until the new one gets what you want, it's still there. All and all, a great move and a system I'm really enjoying.

    That being said, I do have some critiques that could have been fixed.

    1. Marines: While Tactical Marines, Scouts, and Deathwatch are all great, I think it would have made much more sense to bundle the others together. Ex: Intercessor Fire Team: Choose 5 out of Intercessors, Assault Intercessors, and Heavy Intercessors (Max 1). Phobos Fire Team: Choose 5 out of Incursors, Infiltrators, and Reivers. I don't think it would make them that much stronger overall, but would make them much more flexible and less boring to play.

    2. Close Combat: They got close, they really did, but I don't think it's quite there yet. What I thought would amount to strategic duels of dice play often turns into either a 1 shot kill, or a 2 shot kill and you take a little damage 9 times out of 10. What I think would work a lot better, is if you were allowed a single armor save in close combat. Then on the attack you'd have to consider going for that 1 or 2 shot kill vs playing it more safe and parrying. I think that would make it much more strategic and interesting without changing the system very much.

    3. Some other Oddball Fireteam Choices: There were some Fireteam options that seemed really strange not to be allowed. For example, why not be allowed to run two units of cultists? They even have stats for a cultist leader, but why would you ever take a cultists leader over a CSM one (lore or gameplay wise?). Why don't Grechin have their own fireteam instead of only being a 2 model swap into a Boyz team? You could even limit it to one so you had to have an actual Ork leader, but having a unit of 10 of the little guys seems plenty reasonable.

    4. Really wish the compendium had been included in the Octarius box.

    Okay, so after all that, I feel like I should talk about some things that I think they did really well.

    1. The overall design of the system: It's quick, sleek, and has a surprising amount of depth to it. There are a lot of things they can adjust and tweak to make the factions feel different and the units play different. I'm really liking this and think it's got a lot of room to expand on as future expansions come out.

    2. The thought behind some of the balance choices: The biggest example of this I can point out is the Kroot. They knew they had no special weapon options or fancy stuff to play with, so they made up for it by giving them a very strong tactical identity in their stratagems. Seriously, they are a blast to play. Perfect Ambush is one of the best stratagems in the game, but putting it a faction like Kroot not only makes it feel flavorful, but also more balanced. Also being able to conceal after shooting if they don't do anything else is really great too, makes you really consider hounds vs carnivores. It feels like they squeezed them for every bit of design space they could get without making new models and I hope that some of the less loved factions/teams get that as time moves on.

    3. The diversity in missions: In 40k most matches boil down to just get the objectives and do some other little things. Every match I've played feels totally different. I'm glad they aren't afraid to play with different ways to win and balancing how armies will play that. A great example of this is the sabotage one where one army has to use their Equip Points to take demo charges for the mission, but the other team only starts with half their force on the table. I love asymmetrical gameplay like this, especially when it still feels balanced. (The match I played on this mode ended 16-14 where 1 more point of damage on the objective would have changed the outcome.)

    4. The support it's getting: New Kill Team content every 3 months, now that's supporting a new game launch. I'm really looking forward to alternate combat zones with new rules and what armies will come with. I personally would love to see Kroot vs Catachan on a Death World. (Though we probably won't get Catachan since we just got Kreig so maybe Tyranids, oh, or Exodites since they have gone with some off the wall stuff in Kill Team before.)


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/13 19:52:31


    Post by: tauist


    The next Killzone will be announced during GenCon this week (Sept 16th-19th). Will be interesting to see it, as we can pretty much expect it to be the first one in a series to come every three months.

    Rumoured contents will be Sisters of Battle Acolytes vs Tau Pathfinders, and terrain from the Sector Imperialis range. The location of the killzone itself is unknown at this point.


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/13 20:38:06


    Post by: Kaffis


     Jidmah wrote:
    AllSeeingSkink wrote:
    I still haven't got my head around triangle < circle < square < pentagon.


    Is anyone but me annoyed by the order of the shapes? It should be circle < triangle < square < pentagon or triangle < square < pentagon < circle.
    Triangle < circle < square < pentagon just makes no sense whatsoever.

    It was a thing I commented on in a few locations the day they first featured it on WarCom (the Movement article?). Like, use shapes, whatever. But at least map them in a logical fashion/progression.


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/14 22:06:06


    Post by: lord_blackfang


    So the AdMech 2.0 list is out and I give it a solid 0/10. They literally made rules for two bits from the Ranger sprue and used this to fluff up the list to 16 pages with a couple new specialists and a mixed but semi-fixed roster ala Krieg. Nothing that couldn't have been in the Compendium already, but hey, enjoy having a month old book fully superseded already.


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/14 23:30:05


    Post by: Tastyfish


    Base movement being needed to traverse most terrain seemed a cool thing to me, you can run and then dash that last bit, but not if you need to jump a wall or ladder.

    When factoring the heavy rule it also works, the guy firing and lugging a heavy bolter can shuffle a few feet, but not traverse a barricade or climb a ladder.


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/15 00:52:31


    Post by: AnomanderRake


    xerxeskingofking wrote:
    best theory i have seen for the shapes was that the original plan was to use the colours, not the shapes, as the primary element (ie WHITE circle, RED pentagon, etc), which is fine in and of itself, but when the range polygon idea came about, they either decided (or it was decided for them) that supplying a unpainted plastic shape that the user was required to paint in the correct order was much to open to accidental or deliberate misuse/abuse, and they tacked on the shapes part, but as it was still seen primarily as colour based they were more concerned about shapes that were distinct form each other as opposed to ones that could be linked back to distances.

    its the closest to a coherent theory as to why it is what it is that I have heard.


    My theory is that they wrote the rules for tape measures like sensible people, and then someone at marketing said "hold on, what if we could add this extra measuring widget and tried to convince people it was special like all the FFG games?!!?," and they told the design team to go back and redo the whole thing for shapes half an hour before their deadline.


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/15 12:13:52


    Post by: kodos


    some rumours said the the first version was colours and not shapes until they got the memo that the default widget is grey plastic and not coloured cardboard


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/22 15:20:03


    Post by: tauist


    Yeah so I finally had my first game in last weekend and I did enjoy it! I think the system works quite well and results in games that feel "cinematic" enough for my sensibilities. I got that feeling from a GW scifi game last time when we played Necromunda around 10 years ago. So I am relieved that I can keep on being mostly a KillTeam fan, and just play 40K occasionally to appease our gaming group

    Only thing that's changed from KT18 is that playing on a larger board is no longer as straightforward as it used to be. If someone has a lot of slow moving melee only troops (poxwalkers), 4 turning points isnt even enough to get across the board.. I'd say 3 feet by 3 feet is perhaps the biggest board size that still works? Which is a bit of a prob for me personally because I've invested financially into 4x4 feet (realm of battle tiles, foldable 4x4 table). I suppose 4x4 can still work for shootier factions and certain missions, provided a turning point or two get added to the mission lenght. Not a prob, Open Play (Matched play with "houserules") is how we roll.


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/23 14:49:11


    Post by: SamusDrake


    BTW, Tauist, thanks for the earlier suggestion of solo rules( I'd overlooked it ). Its another vote of confidence for 5 Parsecs and will squirrel them away, just incase GW comes to their senses and releases an affordable edition of the new KT rules.


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/23 15:23:18


    Post by: Flinty


    Its pretty affordable if you camp on ebay. Lots of core rules going for a bit over £12.


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/23 15:44:40


    Post by: SamusDrake


     Flinty wrote:
    Its pretty affordable if you camp on ebay. Lots of core rules going for a bit over £12.


    Some good deals on there for the rulebook but sadly not the compendium - which is essentially the missing second half of the core book.

    I've moved on from it, but damn, GW really scored an own-goal with the book prices.



    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/23 16:23:32


    Post by: Flinty


    Fair point. I haven't worked out that part yet

    I was just keen to see the rules for cheap.


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/23 16:33:32


    Post by: SamusDrake


     Flinty wrote:
    Fair point. I haven't worked out that part yet

    I was just keen to see the rules for cheap.


    No worries. Its the thought that counts!



    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/23 16:54:17


    Post by: tauist


     Flinty wrote:
    Its pretty affordable if you camp on ebay. Lots of core rules going for a bit over £12.


    Ooh, that's a good price! The Compendium stats are covered pretty extensively online (by various compilation datasheets users churn out) so theoretically the rulebook + lots of research should get one started on the lowlow


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/27 05:06:21


    Post by: Tokhuah


    You should just buy boxes of Custodes.


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/27 15:32:09


    Post by: tauist


    Indeed. Seems like 4 custodes has become the swear word of the game. I wonder if their rules gets FAQd/errata'd down at some point?

    Still want to build a Talons Of The Emperor team at some point, but I'll probably be playing a 2+5 team most of the time instead of 2+2. To much cheese is bad for the game.





    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/27 16:56:36


    Post by: Tawnis


     tauist wrote:

    Only thing that's changed from KT18 is that playing on a larger board is no longer as straightforward as it used to be. If someone has a lot of slow moving melee only troops (poxwalkers), 4 turning points isnt even enough to get across the board.. I'd say 3 feet by 3 feet is perhaps the biggest board size that still works? Which is a bit of a prob for me personally because I've invested financially into 4x4 feet (realm of battle tiles, foldable 4x4 table). I suppose 4x4 can still work for shootier factions and certain missions, provided a turning point or two get added to the mission lenght. Not a prob, Open Play (Matched play with "houserules") is how we roll.


    Well, the game is balanced based on the 22x30 board, if you're going to increase it, you're going to end up with a host of problems, not to say it can't be done, but you'll want to think of how it changes things.
    1. As you said, some armies like Poxwalkers are slower. Maybe go to 5 turning points?
    2. Range is still infinite. Maybe put a cap of 18" for most weapons? This will keep melee from being shot off the table.
    3. Units more spread out. Some secondary objectives like Rob & ransack will be easier to achieve while others like Rout can be harder. Also ones that require you to reach your opponents DZ would be harder, but that could be modified again by changing to 5 turning points.
    4. Additional Turning Points. While this may solve some problems, it also makes progressive secondary objective that you can get one VP each turn better than those that cap at 2.

    My point with all this is really that changing up anything has vast ramifications and can easily unbalance the game if you're not careful. Honestly, if you're going to play 4x4, I'd just run 2-3 Kill Teams per person, I've been meaning to try that out myself, just haven't had a chance yet.


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/27 21:07:58


    Post by: tauist


    I think increasing the amt of turning points is a necessity if one wants to play on a bigger board. Unlimited range is not really a problem as long as there is enough terrain, because LOS will be limited and in most cases it is trivial to set up the board so that firing lines dont run from end to end of the board.

    Reaching the opponents DZ is a tricky one. Not concerned about progressive objectives becoming more valuable, since this will apply to both teams equally.

    I do realize that changing the board size has serious consequences, but that's kind of the point, because some of those consequences are exactly what I want in my games of KT (Intensifying of the action towards the end of the game). 22" x 30" is so small that pretty much everything, from melee to grabbing objectives, can happen on every turning point, and that flattens the experience IMO.

    I think I'll try 36" x 36" next time


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/27 21:56:27


    Post by: Tawnis


     tauist wrote:


    Reaching the opponents DZ is a tricky one. Not concerned about progressive objectives becoming more valuable, since this will apply to both teams equally.

    I do realize that changing the board size has serious consequences, but that's kind of the point, because some of those consequences are exactly what I want in my games of KT (Intensifying of the action towards the end of the game). 22" x 30" is so small that pretty much everything, from melee to grabbing objectives, can happen on every turning point, and that flattens the experience IMO.

    I think I'll try 36" x 36" next time


    Maybe slightly larger DZ's? But if they get too big, it somewhat defeats the purpose.

    Yeah, but then it makes some much more favorable than others and people will pick the same ones each game.

    Yeah, I agree. Right now, it feels like every turning point is the "end of the game" which is fine if that is the feel you want from your game. Personally, I think it would be fun to play some more maneuvering and strategy before getting stuck in the thick of things.

    I hope you'll let us know how it goes. I'm working on building a large scale Kill Team campaign for some friends that will have quite a few larger missions so any insights on balance / potential issues would be greatly appreciated.


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/27 22:38:50


    Post by: redux


    I keep wondering about playing double KT using matched play rules.

    Set up two different KZs next to each other. Long sides touching.

    Doube the KT sizes and start with 4 CP instead of 2. Still limit the CP in Initiative to 1.

    Players select one DZ in one KZ then get the DZ on the opposite side of the other KZ.

    Deploy KTs in whichever DZ you want.

    Play 8 turns. Draw 6 tac ops cards. Doube everything else I can't think of.


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/28 09:08:30


    Post by: tauist


     redux wrote:
    I keep wondering about playing double KT using matched play rules.

    Set up two different KZs next to each other. Long sides touching.

    Doube the KT sizes and start with 4 CP instead of 2. Still limit the CP in Initiative to 1.

    Players select one DZ in one KZ then get the DZ on the opposite side of the other KZ.

    Deploy KTs in whichever DZ you want.

    Play 8 turns. Draw 6 tac ops cards. Doube everything else I can't think of.


    so you mean a 44" x 30" board? That's okay as long as the "melee only" operatives in the teams arent slow moving (poxwalker slow).
    8 turning points? Should work as well. Drawing 6 tac ops cards is a pickle, since each tac ops category only has a maximum of 6 cards - this means that everyone will know 100% reliably which cards their opponent will have as long as they know the category a team chose.

    But by all means, give it a try! Learning by doing is often the best way to get a feel for these sort of things.


    Automatically Appended Next Post:
     Tawnis wrote:
     tauist wrote:


    Reaching the opponents DZ is a tricky one. Not concerned about progressive objectives becoming more valuable, since this will apply to both teams equally.

    I do realize that changing the board size has serious consequences, but that's kind of the point, because some of those consequences are exactly what I want in my games of KT (Intensifying of the action towards the end of the game). 22" x 30" is so small that pretty much everything, from melee to grabbing objectives, can happen on every turning point, and that flattens the experience IMO.

    I think I'll try 36" x 36" next time


    Maybe slightly larger DZ's? But if they get too big, it somewhat defeats the purpose.

    Yeah, but then it makes some much more favorable than others and people will pick the same ones each game.

    Yeah, I agree. Right now, it feels like every turning point is the "end of the game" which is fine if that is the feel you want from your game. Personally, I think it would be fun to play some more maneuvering and strategy before getting stuck in the thick of things.

    I hope you'll let us know how it goes. I'm working on building a large scale Kill Team campaign for some friends that will have quite a few larger missions so any insights on balance / potential issues would be greatly appreciated.


    Absolutely. I'm all about KT21, will keep on posting my experiences for sure!



    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/29 14:56:34


    Post by: Gregor Samsa


    Games Workshop is destroying Kill Team by releasing rules for factions in White Dwarf. Another classic move by GW to flush a what would otherwise be a vibrant and longlasting game community down the drain.


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/29 16:32:47


    Post by: tauist


     Gregor Samsa wrote:
    Games Workshop is destroying Kill Team by releasing rules for factions in White Dwarf. Another classic move by GW to flush a what would otherwise be a vibrant and longlasting game community down the drain.


    I'm 100% sure GW will release a new "Annual" style book with all the WD teams inside. You'll obvsly have to wait at least 6 months to a year to get it, but I'm sure it's coming.

    As much as it sucks, this tactic is making me want to buy WD mags again after decades of disinterest, so it's working for them. From GW's POV, KT factions are a great fit as magazine articles, they add significant value to the game but only take a reasonable page count from a single issue.



    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/29 16:54:08


    Post by: Tawnis


     tauist wrote:
     Gregor Samsa wrote:
    Games Workshop is destroying Kill Team by releasing rules for factions in White Dwarf. Another classic move by GW to flush a what would otherwise be a vibrant and longlasting game community down the drain.


    I'm 100% sure GW will release a new "Annual" style book with all the WD teams inside. You'll obvsly have to wait at least 6 months to a year to get it, but I'm sure it's coming.

    As much as it sucks, this tactic is making me want to buy WD mags again after decades of disinterest, so it's working for them. From GW's POV, KT factions are a great fit as magazine articles, they add significant value to the game but only take a reasonable page count from a single issue.



    Yeah, totally agree that it's working. This is the first time I've strongly considered getting a White Dwarf and I don't even play AdMech.


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/30 01:55:03


    Post by: Cheex


     Gregor Samsa wrote:
    Games Workshop is destroying Kill Team by releasing rules for factions in White Dwarf. Another classic move by GW to flush a what would otherwise be a vibrant and longlasting game community down the drain.

    How is putting out new content for a game via optional "DLC" a bad thing for a game? It's not like you're going to need to buy every single one of them if you're not planning to build those KTs yourself.

    It is a bit frustrating for players of those factions who just bought the Compendium, though. I would've preferred an article every couple of months with two factions, like a mini-campaign in between the quarterly supplement boxes. No new models, but an alternative kill team for each and some short lore about some conflict between them or something.

    But I don't see how these WD articles are "desotroying" the game.


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/30 03:35:55


    Post by: The_Real_Chris


    I would have thought more option through White Dwarf were a good thing? Or is your view being ‘forced’ to buy the magazine an unbearable expense?


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/30 05:39:17


    Post by: kodos


    Buying the compendium because "this is what you need" and now having "your factions rules are in White Dwarf, which is late in some countries and not available at all in others" out of the blue can be annoying for some

    If it would have been clear from the start that Teams are added via WD over time it would have been better


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/09/30 07:12:14


    Post by: tauist


     Tawnis wrote:
     tauist wrote:
     Gregor Samsa wrote:
    Games Workshop is destroying Kill Team by releasing rules for factions in White Dwarf. Another classic move by GW to flush a what would otherwise be a vibrant and longlasting game community down the drain.


    I'm 100% sure GW will release a new "Annual" style book with all the WD teams inside. You'll obvsly have to wait at least 6 months to a year to get it, but I'm sure it's coming.

    As much as it sucks, this tactic is making me want to buy WD mags again after decades of disinterest, so it's working for them. From GW's POV, KT factions are a great fit as magazine articles, they add significant value to the game but only take a reasonable page count from a single issue.



    Yeah, totally agree that it's working. This is the first time I've strongly considered getting a White Dwarf and I don't even play AdMech.


    New Thousand Sons team coming in next month's WD as well.. And who knows if there'll be a new team in November's issue as well?

    If anyone was getting into KT21 now, it might be a good idea to wait for a WD with the team you want to play and just get the Core Rules and that single issue of WD, instead of buying the Compendium. The WD teams will have faction Tacs Ops and more operatives & equipment choice than the Compendium teams, so more flavour for going Narrative Spec Ops with.

    A sensible KT fanboy like me should just wait patiently for the eventual Annual compilation book tho.. there's also that BS app which will probably get updated with the new stats



    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/10/13 09:32:27


    Post by: I-am-Kroot


     Gregor Samsa wrote:
    Games Workshop is destroying Kill Team by releasing rules for factions in White Dwarf. Another classic move by GW to flush a what would otherwise be a vibrant and longlasting game community down the drain.


    Is releasing regular additional material not classed as ongoing support?
    I rather like it.



    Automatically Appended Next Post:
     tauist wrote:
     Tawnis wrote:
     tauist wrote:
     Gregor Samsa wrote:
    Games Workshop is destroying Kill Team by releasing rules for factions in White Dwarf. Another classic move by GW to flush a what would otherwise be a vibrant and longlasting game community down the drain.


    I'm 100% sure GW will release a new "Annual" style book with all the WD teams inside. You'll obvsly have to wait at least 6 months to a year to get it, but I'm sure it's coming.

    As much as it sucks, this tactic is making me want to buy WD mags again after decades of disinterest, so it's working for them. From GW's POV, KT factions are a great fit as magazine articles, they add significant value to the game but only take a reasonable page count from a single issue.



    Yeah, totally agree that it's working. This is the first time I've strongly considered getting a White Dwarf and I don't even play AdMech.


    New Thousand Sons team coming in next month's WD as well.. And who knows if there'll be a new team in November's issue as well?

    If anyone was getting into KT21 now, it might be a good idea to wait for a WD with the team you want to play and just get the Core Rules and that single issue of WD, instead of buying the Compendium. The WD teams will have faction Tacs Ops and more operatives & equipment choice than the Compendium teams, so more flavour for going Narrative Spec Ops with.

    A sensible KT fanboy like me should just wait patiently for the eventual Annual compilation book tho.. there's also that BS app which will probably get updated with the new stats



    I have also bought my first White Dwarf for at least 20 years. The articles on KT factions are quite inspiring. I think the strategy of a set of core teams in the compendium plus regular releases of specific teams in WD is a great idea. I hope it continues and doesn't fade out though. There are some quite obvious characters missing from the compendium that would suit WD articles, Ogryns and Bulgryns spring straight to mind as a Guard player.
    I'm not overly keen on the big dual team boxsets as I have a lot of teams already and I may only be interested in one. I'll have to see what in the T'Au box. If it's a nice scenario book and some decent terrain then it might prove attractive, despite me having a nice T'Au kill team already.
    I have neen using the Battlescribe app, which seems to be up to date. It meshes very well with the Datacard.app to produce some lovely cards.

    Thanks for reading
    IAK


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/11/18 13:47:47


    Post by: Tiberias


    So I have done a bunch of games of the new kill team, also with the new kill team chalnath rules (which don't really add much in terms of general rules to be honest).....and I still hate it.

    Even with the recent nerf to talons it still feels shallow and uninteresting. I especially dislike the new combat system because in every single game I've played it went like this:
    -dedicated melee unit charges and does one hit (often a crit)
    -the enemy unit has no strategic options because even if it blocks one dice in 90% of cases the next hit would kill anyway. So enemy unit gets one hit in and then dies....rimse and repeat.

    It's just so dumb. I'll stick to the old kill team and probably houserule it a bit to feature alternating activations in the move phase.


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/11/18 16:10:20


    Post by: The_Real_Chris


    Tiberias wrote:
    So I have done a bunch of games of the new kill team, also with the new kill team chalnath rules (which don't really add much in terms of general rules to be honest).....and I still hate it.

    Even with the recent nerf to talons it still feels shallow and uninteresting. I especially dislike the new combat system because in every single game I've played it went like this:
    -dedicated melee unit charges and does one hit (often a crit)
    -the enemy unit has no strategic options because even if it blocks one dice in 90% of cases the next hit would kill anyway. So enemy unit gets one hit in and then dies....rimse and repeat.

    It's just so dumb. I'll stick to the old kill team and probably houserule it a bit to feature alternating activations in the move phase.



    The new melee system is a bit naff.

    It feels like they had opposed dice rolls as the system suggests that (every other game with roll dice pools and compare has variations of match dice to dice), but then couldn't balance it well (in a lot of situations the charger would simply die - or you go for only the attacks can cause damage, in which case CC slows down a lot) and went to the current model of take turns using a dice (so the person charging could always do some damage, and those about to die can at least chip away a bit). It is clearly an attempt to be dramatic, but outside of a narrow range of match ups (like guardsmen slugging it out) it doesn't work as you say. Perhaps if the pools were secret? But that just isn't going to work with GWs player base.

    The players who like it have the attitude that you can kill what you charge as a specialist and take some damage doing so, just with a bunch of faff.

    The one thing I like in the melee system is the ability to engage without having to fight. essentially wrestling your opponent and physically tieing them up to slow them down no mater how hopeless is quite cinematic.


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/11/18 23:01:45


    Post by: NinthMusketeer


    Thanks to the new kill team I now know that armor is of no use in melee combat.


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/11/18 23:52:34


    Post by: Cheex


    Having now played several more games, I love the new melee system. It's a huge risk with a huge potential for reward.


    Automatically Appended Next Post:
     NinthMusketeer wrote:
    Thanks to the new kill team I now know that armor is of no use in melee combat.

    That part made me uncomfortable at first, until I realised that most of the time an operative's WS is just as good - if not better - than its save anyway. A successful parry could easily represent the operative utilising their armour to block or divert an attack.

    You still have the question of the active operative's first attack being able to go through without response, but I don't mind that.


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/11/19 15:55:12


    Post by: Tiberias


     Cheex wrote:
    Having now played several more games, I love the new melee system. It's a huge risk with a huge potential for reward.


    Automatically Appended Next Post:
     NinthMusketeer wrote:
    Thanks to the new kill team I now know that armor is of no use in melee combat.

    That part made me uncomfortable at first, until I realised that most of the time an operative's WS is just as good - if not better - than its save anyway. A successful parry could easily represent the operative utilising their armour to block or divert an attack.

    You still have the question of the active operative's first attack being able to go through without response, but I don't mind that.


    Only that parrying is is useless in most cases. In a game like 40k you need differentiation between units, otherwise it does not matter what faction and what units you play. And the new kill team heavily goes into that direction...it more feels like a non tactical version of chess: I remove a piece, you remove a piece, I remove a piece...

    I'm glad you can enjoy it, honestly. I wish I could, but I just can't bring myself to like the base rules.


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/11/19 19:23:32


    Post by: Sherrypie


    It's not useless, though. I've had multiple encounters where occasional parries have made the difference between life and death. While most fights tend to be over before all dice are used, that's because they're started by people who are specialised towards being brutal in melee.

    This is fine, considering the level of granularity in the rest of the rules chassis.


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/11/22 14:57:13


    Post by: I-am-Kroot


    Every roll in the current combat sequence has a tactical and a strategic implication. I have played games of KT18 where I have been charged by the entire oppostion team and had every figure in melee removed before I could respond. How you plant your strikes and how you use your parry becomes a dance of death, a real combat rather than a static linear chain of rolls to attack and wound and save and injury, etc...
    Let's face it, you charge when you feel you have the advantage and are going to win, or you charge when you are just about going ot hang on and tie up the enemy by being slumped in their engagement area, pinning them for their first AP, maybe saving an objevtive and a VP with a glorious sacrifice.
    In the end, if you don't like the sytem, and Tiberius you keep telling us you hate it, then you are never going to like it. Best to either play something else or find another player who also likes the old stuff and get together.
    One of the things that really reinforces to me that this set is a better game that involves the player more is that I very rarely see anyone not wanting to have the initiative - in KT18 it was something you really didn't want, it was a reactive game. Wait and then react. In KT21 the initiative is key, players are itching to enact the plan they have, the tactics are key and they are ready every go. The whole old style wait for everyone else to move then you get to react, then wait for shooting, then react, is gone. Every round is a twisting, turnng maelstrom of tactical decisions and strategic plans.
    I do see players unhappy with the new version, and it seems to be when they are focussed on shooting everyone with massive guns or maxing out their plasma. If you focus on the mission, the VP and the TO opportunities it really has become an interesting game to play out. I never thought I'd say that of a GW game, but I have.


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/11/22 15:23:09


    Post by: Deadnight


    Just bought orktarius.great, great buy.

    Rules look really interesting however they could have been written a bit clearer. I'm confused as hell about engaged/conceal and would have much preferred cover to be a defense/save mod rather than one auto-save ' as it is, 2 shooting actions seems likely to me to kill a hell of a lot of things in thr game. Surely cover should be stronger?

    Regardless, I want this to be my skirmish game of choice. Love infinity models, hate its on plenty. Loved warcry. Here's hoping this is the perfect middle ground.



    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/11/22 15:43:23


    Post by: The_Real_Chris


    The rules do need a re-write by someone familiar with how English is commonly used and the flow of rules referencing in the game...


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/11/22 17:58:53


    Post by: tauist


    The only aspect of the rules I'm having probs with are the APL bonuses and the exact moments when they apply to your operative's APL value. Maybe the rules are easier to understand for us non-native English speakers, dunno..

    OTOH I admit reading every rules Q&A I happen to run into on r/KillTeam - that kinda helps

    Finally got myself a copy of the Hunter Clade rules, contemplating on building a team ATM but they have some hard choices! Is it better to go with the radiation skitarii or the non-rad ones? I love sicarians (the models are brill!) but their princeps is hard to pick over the skitarii ones as the pseudo 2GA ability of the skitarii alphas has deep synergy potential..



    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/11/22 21:49:06


    Post by: Cheex


    Tiberias wrote:
    Only that parrying is is useless in most cases. In a game like 40k you need differentiation between units, otherwise it does not matter what faction and what units you play. And the new kill team heavily goes into that direction...it more feels like a non tactical version of chess: I remove a piece, you remove a piece, I remove a piece...

    I'm glad you can enjoy it, honestly. I wish I could, but I just can't bring myself to like the base rules.

    It's honestly a shame that you aren't enjoying KT21. I guess it comes down to our individual priorities - I see parrying as absolutely essential at times (I've saved many an operative from certain death with a well-timed parry), I think the faction differentiation is fine (you don't need layers upon layers of rules to differentiate factions), and I don't think there's a problem with trading casualties (which can be avoided if you plan ahead for future enemy activations).

    KT21 has addressed every problem I had with KT18 and has easily reinvigorated the game for me.


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/11/23 05:26:42


    Post by: tauist


    If anything, I feel like many factions in KT21 actually play more faithful to the lore than in 40K. So we'll just have to agree to disagree on the whole "it does not matter which faction you play".


    What do you think about the new Kill Team system? @ 2021/11/23 09:10:08


    Post by: Sherrypie


     tauist wrote:
    If anything, I feel like many factions in KT21 actually play more faithful to the lore than in 40K. So we'll just have to agree to disagree on the whole "it does not matter which faction you play".


    Same. The difference between two and three APL troops is stark, likewise with things that have superhuman levels of Wounds. While everyone has analogous specialists that are reliably able to remove models in various ways (shoots well, fights well, sneaks well...), the faction identities do come through very well in my experience. Some factions with squishier troopers have to plan their approach in advance lest they get locally destroyed by a superior thrust while the more elite forces that can improvise on the spot need to choose their fights to have enough time to stay on top.

    Restricted Ploys also feel pretty fitting as they are, providing a simple nudge towards iconic strategies for the factions. Now if only GW can hold their horses and keep every team's pool of Ploys at the level they are instead of splurging 250+ bonus cards for everyone, that would be great...