StudentOfEtherium wrote: gonna carry over the rumor that the next teams after this are an ogryn/halfling team and a "heavy ork team with squigs" (possibly Tankbustas)
Hopefully that refers to 'Ard boyz rather than Tankbustas.
New box looks great, I'll happily add terrain that blends with Kill Zone Verdigras or whatever it was that launched with 9th edition starters and was OOP in record time.
A Galaxy spanning empire, 10,000s of years in the future, trillions of people spread across 1000s of worlds and everyone sounds like Gillian Anderson reading a DnD source book? Give over. I can sort of get Marines and having that High Gothic speech pattern because of the brain washing and all that.
** This does mean that kill teams from the Kill Team Compendium book will not have updated rules.
compendium teams aren't carrying over? wonder what'll happen for nids, talons, and anything else that doesn't have a KT equivalent
also, as a Cults player, the loss of GA is pretty interesting. wonder if there's going to be a secondary mechanic to supplant it
I assume GA2 will probably just be a special rule, same with anyone who has something other than three defense dice.
Hopefully we'll see another series of WD teams ready for a 2025 compendium for those that get left out of the next series of boxes.
It's probably unlikely, but I wouldn't be massively surprised if Talons got wrapped into Inquisition or perhaps found themselves included with more of a focus on co-op horde mode play rather than matched play as they have pushed up against the limits of the system of how few bodies you can take and still play the game.
compendium teams aren't carrying over? wonder what'll happen for nids, talons, and anything else that doesn't have a KT equivalent
They will vanish, only boxed ones remain = those that are easier to balance because of less choices possible.
i suppose that's fair. kill team doesn't necessarily need to represent everything in 40k since the game is trying to have a different scale and fantasy (tho i would appreciate if SoS got their own box at some point)
I can see why GW would prefer to only have to balance the self-contained boxes, but I still think the versions of Kill Team that allow for existing player to use a subset of their existing collection are more fun. It's the same way I prefer the open lists for Warcry over the self-contained lists. The more they move towards fixed lists for these small games, the more it feels like Warhammer Underworlds. Not necessarily a bad thing, but not what I would want from Kill Team.
i suppose that's fair. kill team doesn't necessarily need to represent everything in 40k since the game is trying to have a different scale and fantasy (tho i would appreciate if SoS got their own box at some point)
I think that in time every army will get 1+ choice of a boxed team that will include a unit which would usually be sent on special missions. Although entirely possible to have any unit doing any thing in a time of dire needs (like decimated or engaged elsewhere forces), you would normally not send a Gaunt when you have a Lictor etc.
i suppose that's fair. kill team doesn't necessarily need to represent everything in 40k since the game is trying to have a different scale and fantasy (tho i would appreciate if SoS got their own box at some point)
I think that in time every army will get 1+ choice of a boxed team that will include a unit which would usually be sent on special missions. Although entirely possible to have any unit doing any thing in a time of dire needs (like decimated or engaged elsewhere forces), you would normally not send a Gaunt when you have a Lictor etc.
It depends on what GW wants the scope of Kill Team to be (currently). Over it's history, Kill Team has covered everything from more-or-less regular frontline troops sent on patrols and raids into no mans land to crack teams of special operatives infiltrating through hordes of henchmen to take out key objectives. The current incarnation is somewhere in the middle of those two extremes. It seems GW wishes to move a bit more towards elite with the new edition.
GA is out, as is defence dice stat. Well, that probably means we will not be seeing bigger, tougher operatives than what exist now anytime soon. Terminators and Monstrous creatures will probably never be coming to this game.. Kind of shame, as I always wanted to see how Mr Hamer would have tackled those..
Joint Ops sounds like a blast though, and will be a wonderful opportunity for some narrative fun! There are actually quite a bit of teams in KT21/24 which can "team up" with some other team, and still make a ton of sense narratively. I think that aspect of the new edition will be the most interesting one for me. How about going even further, and playing a Joint Ops Narrative Campaign? Something about Joint Ops also reminds me of the old Kill Team rules of 40K 4th ed..
Kind of bummed to see Compendium teams getting axed. I liked the SM, Guard, Ork, GSC, T'au and Daemon teams, they offered nice alternatives to their bespoke team flavours. Especially bitter about losing Firstborn Marines forever! Counts as Primaris, here we go again...
With the loss of Compendium, I feel like Nids will probably be getting their bespoke team soon enough. OTOH its also possible that Kill Team will not be featuring all the 40K factions, ever-- and perhaps that is cool as well?
Yeah I'm not mega fussed. I like the focused boxes for Kill Teams, those that look clearly like a spec ops unit carrying out something well... spec ops...
I do hope to see an awesome nid team with some bizarre special hybrids, time will tell...
Solo and co-op play sounds like it'll be great. Looking forward to it. I hope they really iron out obscured and sight line rules!
tauist wrote: GA is out, as is defence dice stat. Well, that probably means we will not be seeing bigger, tougher operatives than what exist now anytime soon. Terminators and Monstrous creatures will probably never be coming to this game.. Kind of shame, as I always wanted to see how Mr Hamer would have tackled those..
Like said before - as these (in particular DEF that is not 3) turned out to be corner cases throughout the edition, they may be just a special rule for particular, relevant operatives, not a universal stat that is just identical for almost everyone.
Well, loosing the Compendium teams is a hard cut. That leaves entire factions with no KT at all (Tyranids, Death Guard, Custodes/SoS, Grey Knights, Daemons) while others have very limited and sometimes rather untypical (SoB) teams.
tauist wrote: Especially bitter about losing Firstborn Marines forever! Counts as Primaris, here we go again...
You can still take rather generic Firstborns, just not the loyal ones. I think the rules of the Legionaries or the Night Lords are more suitable than those of the Primaris.
I do hope to see an awesome nid team with some bizarre special hybrids, time will tell...
Yeah, would like to see something like that too. It could be a nice way to introduce some new (sub)species or ones found only in some obscure piece of old fluff etc. (kinda like they did with Ryans).
tauist wrote: GA is out, as is defence dice stat. Well, that probably means we will not be seeing bigger, tougher operatives than what exist now anytime soon. Terminators and Monstrous creatures will probably never be coming to this game.. Kind of shame, as I always wanted to see how Mr Hamer would have tackled those..
Like said before - as these (in particular DEF that is not 3) turned out to be corner cases throughout the edition, they may be just a special rule for particular, relevant operatives, not a universal stat that is just identical for almost everyone.
Yeah, really not surprised GA is disappearing; wasn't the original Veteran Guard team the only one that actually had any significant numbers of bodies with GA2? Yeah there were some random pets that needed to be activated by their designated controller but that can just as easily be a special rule.
Same for GA in general, actually: "Guardsman Warrior, Unique Ability: Fireteam - When this Operative is activated, activate another Ready operative with [keyword]. Both active operatives get their full allocation of AP and must complete all their actions before you pass the round. If there are no other Ready operatives with [keyword] then this operative acts as though they do not have this rule."
Odds are Def. is replaced by your Sv. characteristic but in combat. Maybe you have swords with a Parry type rule that boost melee saves.
Main concern with nids is that they end up primarily the NPC army for a fair amount of time.
Far as narrative games go, I don't think there is anything that would make the old compendium teams incompatible with the new edition. They're just not going to be supported for match play by the look of things (and you'll have needed to have the rules already).
Tastyfish wrote: Main concern with nids is that they end up primarily the NPC army for a fair amount of time.
Far as narrative games go, I don't think there is anything that would make the old compendium teams incompatible with the new edition. They're just not going to be supported for match play by the look of things (and you'll have needed to have the rules already).
They should be fairly easy to convert across, since there's not a vast amount of special rules that need updating.
Dryaktylus wrote: Well, loosing the Compendium teams is a hard cut. That leaves entire factions with no KT at all (Tyranids, Death Guard, Custodes/SoS, Grey Knights, Daemons) while others have very limited and sometimes rather untypical (SoB) teams.
tauist wrote: Especially bitter about losing Firstborn Marines forever! Counts as Primaris, here we go again...
You can still take rather generic Firstborns, just not the loyal ones. I think the rules of the Legionaries or the Night Lords are more suitable than those of the Primaris.
Ooh, good one! Legionary team rules it is going forward, then
List building aside, I'm looking forward to this new edition. Probably just the core book, but interested to see what they have for the starter set later on...
Olthannon wrote: I hope they really iron out obscured and sight line rules!
Yeah. I have never been able to wrap my head around those rules in KT. I hope they come up with something more intuitive.
Simply basing it on what something needs to count as either, rather than basing it on exceptions, would go a long way. It's non-intuitive that an object does not obscure someone if they're too close to it.
Almost every kill team released in a boxed set** from the Veteran Guardsmen of Kill Team: Octarius right up to the Hernkyn Yaegirs of Kill Team: Termination will have fully updated rules for the new edition and a pack of physical datacards to keep them close at hand
Wonder what boxed teams won't have updated rules & cards. I'm guessing either means they won't exist in the new edition or the team needs a new team composition?
Olthannon wrote: I hope they really iron out obscured and sight line rules!
Yeah. I have never been able to wrap my head around those rules in KT. I hope they come up with something more intuitive.
Quite the opposite for me - once I read them I was astounded so many people don't understand what is written in the rules, including some of my opponents.
The relations between light(low) cover, heavy cover, orders and vantage points should be pretty obvious to anyone who has played even one video game cover shooter in their life.
Obscuring is just "don't shoot with some tall terrain in the way unless either the shooter or the target are close to this terrain" with the obvious aim of stopping people from trying to find visibility across the entire table through tiny holes in walls.
All these rules together limit shooting heavily and that's why they make an interesting game which is more about positioning and maneuver so that you actually can attack than throwing dice at each other hoping they stick
Almost every kill team released in a boxed set** from the Veteran Guardsmen of Kill Team: Octarius right up to the Hernkyn Yaegirs of Kill Team: Termination will have fully updated rules for the new edition and a pack of physical datacards to keep them close at hand
Wonder what boxed teams won't have updated rules & cards. I'm guessing either means they won't exist in the new edition or the team needs a new team composition?
I'm guessing the Aspect Warriors will be one missing out, since their team isn't readily available in one box, as well as the Inquisition acolytes and the mutating Chaos Cult, each requiring multiple boxes to function.
Olthannon wrote: I hope they really iron out obscured and sight line rules!
Yeah. I have never been able to wrap my head around those rules in KT. I hope they come up with something more intuitive.
Quite the opposite for me - once I read them I was astounded so many people don't understand what is written in the rules, including some of my opponents.
The relations between light(low) cover, heavy cover, orders and vantage points should be pretty obvious to anyone who has played even one video game cover shooter in their life.
Obscuring is just "don't shoot with some tall terrain in the way unless either the shooter or the target are close to this terrain" with the obvious aim of stopping people for trying to find visibility across the entire table through tiny holes in walls.
All these rules together limit shooting heavily and that's why they make an interesting game which is more about positioning and maneuver so that you actually can attack than throwing dice at each other hoping they stick
Yeah, all of this. True the wording needs revision but the effect in total is ideal.
Also the general idea, for verisimilitude, is that its easier to not just spot but land a solid hit on someone who is silhouetted against a nearby window (unless they are specifically trying to hide), than it is to do the same for someone who is only visible through distant glimpses (unless they are in the wide open).
Olthannon wrote: I hope they really iron out obscured and sight line rules!
Yeah. I have never been able to wrap my head around those rules in KT. I hope they come up with something more intuitive.
Quite the opposite for me - once I read them I was astounded so many people don't understand what is written in the rules, including some of my opponents.
The relations between light(low) cover, heavy cover, orders and vantage points should be pretty obvious to anyone who has played even one video game cover shooter in their life.
Maybe that’s my problem. Didn’t play the right kinds of video games.
Olthannon wrote: I hope they really iron out obscured and sight line rules!
Yeah. I have never been able to wrap my head around those rules in KT. I hope they come up with something more intuitive.
Quite the opposite for me - once I read them I was astounded so many people don't understand what is written in the rules, including some of my opponents.
The relations between light(low) cover, heavy cover, orders and vantage points should be pretty obvious to anyone who has played even one video game cover shooter in their life.
Maybe that’s my problem. Didn’t play the right kinds of video games.
Yeah, this would definitely help. Conceal is really your "hug cover" mode button, so you stick your back to the wall and your enemy has to flank to get a clear shot. Then you lean out to take a shot and now you are in Engage and can be shot back.
If the wall is low (Light Cover) you can stick your back to it and crouch all you want, but if your opponent is on a Vantage Point they will still see your body over the low obstacle - while they wouldn't over a tall one (Heavy Cover).
Olthannon wrote: I hope they really iron out obscured and sight line rules!
Yeah. I have never been able to wrap my head around those rules in KT. I hope they come up with something more intuitive.
Quite the opposite for me - once I read them I was astounded so many people don't understand what is written in the rules, including some of my opponents.
The relations between light(low) cover, heavy cover, orders and vantage points should be pretty obvious to anyone who has played even one video game cover shooter in their life.
Maybe that’s my problem. Didn’t play the right kinds of video games.
Yeah, this would definitely help. Conceal is really your "hug cover" mode button, so you stick your back to the wall and your enemy has to flank to get a clear shot. Then you lean out to take a shot and now you are in Engage and can be shot back.
If the wall is low (Light Cover) you can stick your back to it and crouch all you want, but if your opponent is on a Vantage Point they will still see your body over the low obstacle - while they wouldn't over a tall one (Heavy Cover).
These relations are very logical and intuitive.
Counter-point - if your design/rules rely on you playing the wrong sort of video games to make sense on the tabletop, you screwed the pooch on your design/rules.
I doubt we want the equivalent rules in the upcoming edition of Kill Team to only make sense if you've played a lot of Candy Crush, Hearthstone, or Sonic Eraser, now, do we?
You unnecessarily exaggerate what I wrote - the video game analogy is just that, a helpful analogy, not a prerequisite for understanding.
You may as well make a comparison with real life situations because said video game represents them as well (and I did it with my descriptions which may refer to Nathan Drake hugging cover in Uncharted as well as a regular person hugging cover in real life).
It's not like you need to remember the inventions tree from Civilization to understand the logic behind KT's orders.
Almost every kill team released in a boxed set** from the Veteran Guardsmen of Kill Team: Octarius right up to the Hernkyn Yaegirs of Kill Team: Termination will have fully updated rules for the new edition and a pack of physical datacards to keep them close at hand
Wonder what boxed teams won't have updated rules & cards. I'm guessing either means they won't exist in the new edition or the team needs a new team composition?
I'm guessing the Aspect Warriors will be one missing out, since their team isn't readily available in one box, as well as the Inquisition acolytes and the mutating Chaos Cult, each requiring multiple boxes to function.
They've still released a box branded as Kill Team with just the Striking Scorpions in it though. I suspect you're right about the rest, it'll be the Ashes of Faith teams that don't get new rules - those teams were a bit more experimental and never got released individually either.
That said, I won't deny gaming literacy is a thing and a person with such literacy is going to pick up concepts faster with less explanation. As anyone who tried to play even the simplest video game with their grandparents can attest to
Automatically Appended Next Post: Some reference that someone may find helpful.
Light Cover, Conceal (the enemy sniper would still see Nate crouching, because the low wall is too low to hide him from that Vantage Point!)
Spoiler:
Light Cover, Engage
Spoiler:
Heavy Cover, Conceal
Spoiler:
Heavy Cover, Engage (ouch!)
Spoiler:
Vantage Point view - Joel would see somebody crouching behind the low wall (Light Cover) in the middle of the screen thanks to his higher position, but it wouldn't help with someone hugging cover behind the bus (Heavy Cover)
If there's a new edition, i'm assuming that means a new starter set? Is that this new Vespid VS scions box or not? The article say it's an expansion, but then it also says it's the launch of the new edition.
Mentlegen324 wrote: If there's a new edition, i'm assuming that means a new starter set? Is that this new Vespid VS scions box or not? The article say it's an expansion, but then it also says it's the launch of the new edition.
It's going to have the main rulebook, but I predict that like the original Krieg vs. Kommandos box, it will be replaced by a more 'evergreen' version with less terrain/lower price point.
Mentlegen324 wrote: If there's a new edition, i'm assuming that means a new starter set? Is that this new Vespid VS scions box or not? The article say it's an expansion, but then it also says it's the launch of the new edition.
I suspect there will be another starter set later, in the same way that Octarius was the first complete box for Kill team, but the smaller starter set came out later.
I even get the feeling that it might have Komandos in it, but less sure they'd be up against vet guard.
Am I misreading the Vespid rules preview, or do they have AP2 and P1 on their guns if they move!?
Unless they made significant rules changes, which they say they didn’t, I see nothing giving them AP 2. APL is Action Point Limit, not Armor Piercing Level.
alextroy wrote: Unless they made significant rules changes, which they say they didn’t, I see nothing giving them AP 2. APL is Action Point Limit, not Armor Piercing Level.
It's called Devastating now apparently.
" Even their most basic Warriors carry a gun with the Devastating** 2 rule, which inflicts extra guaranteed damage whenever a critical hit is retained
** The new name for the old AP weapon ability."
Ah now I read it that's the old Mortal wounds one isn't it. I've taken what was written at face value without reading it!
No Nids team means 0 reasons to move to new KT rules. Got a couple friends whose teams will be in the same situation. I guess it's more current KT time for us.
I need an article about Spec Ops in the new ed. Is it continuing? If so, have they added anything or taken anything away? Will it interact with solo and co-operative modes?
I hope we retain Asset and Base of Operation rules. Even the background generation stuff was cool, but it's all rules agnostic so we can keep using it if GW doesn't create a satisfactory equivalent in the new ed. Asset and Base of Operation rules could be at risk if solo and co-op play come at the expense of Spec Ops.
Miguelsan wrote: No Nids team means 0 reasons to move to new KT rules. Got a couple friends whose teams will be in the same situation. I guess it's more current KT time for us.
Money saved!
M.
Youll get the free rules as they get released, I'd say its ok for the price
Took a look at co-op/solo rules presented in the newest article, and I am not sure what to think
On one hand it is absolutely cool that this exists, and I will try it out for sure, especially when teaching the game. It is also a great excuse to paint some enemy models!
On the other, I wish GW had taken advantage of the experience of co-op board game designers, who have worked for decades on optimising the automa player in their games. As it is, I expect the problem of automa actions taking longer than actual player actions to arise quite frequently, resulting in a game where set up, tear down, upkeep and cranking the automa engine take up 80% of time spent with the game.
Board games have discovered quite a long time ago, that, for better flow and less downtime, it's ok for automa enemies to follow simpler rules than those for player characters (factions etc). It's the results that matter, not the processes.
Guess I will have to wait and see, my hopes for this mode are pretty high
They seen fine to me. Abstracting the specific models to just archetypes so you can use whatever you like for the enemies, and only two behaviour types - melee or shooting - and no complicated flow chart etc.
deano2099 wrote: I'm mostly disappointed that it's basically a solo mode with an optional "split the units between two players to play co-op".
Would have been nicer to just have it scale to one or two full KTs.
If popular - WD gets enough readers' letters praising how its non-competitive nature introduced spouse/child/dog to GW games - there will of course be further splatbooks with expanded rules for people to buy.
The new edition does look promising, most of the little changes i've seen so far look positive. The loss of some compendium teams will be unfortunate though. Custodes were great for people who just wanted to paint a few models and play quickly. And now there won't be a SoB team in proper power armor. Hopefully they remedy that with future releases.
It's Kill Team. The rules are going to be journeyman quality game design, nothing to make anyone go "OMG, I can't believe they thought of that for a game mechanic." But they'll have the tremendous advantage of being published in a book.
To be fair, the Conceal/Engage order mechanic was fairly innovative in KT’21 that really makes KT unique and is tactically interesting feature. I do think it was an OMG moment in design.
I agree with both of you, actually. KT bears the hallmarks of "same old, same old" of GW designs but also is surprisingly not-GW-like in enough areas to make me interested in it (orders are a good example of that, and indeed they are a nice way to represent sneaking and hiding - something previous iterations of the mode failed at).
That said, it would be nice for GW to sometimes outsorce game design talent from outside of their bubble - for example trying to hire David Turczi to design the solo mode. Or whomever designed the solo mode for Terra Mystica - this thing is a beauty! I never thought you can design an automa for such a complex game, that is very non-player like in its execution for much less friction and downtime but extremely player-like in its results, including being unpredictable but absolutely cunning and mean.
Well, I for one think that Elliott Hamer is among the best games designers in the GW roster at the moment. KT21 is his baby. I personally rate KT21 core rules a lot higher than 40Ks, at least the game gives you some choices of playstyles instead of "piles all the models at the centre of the board and roll as many 6s as possible" of the 40K meat grinder
In my fantasy skirmish game of my dreams, I could play something comparable to KT21 with 2nd ed 40K armies. But alas, I suppose it is never going to happen.. the game core rules still dont seem to be able to deal with vehicles and monsters, and probably never will
As for the lost Compendium teams, I always had a feeling they were a stopgap measure, and therefore temporary.. since each KT season introduces 8 new bespoke teams, it wont be long until those gaps will be filled again. However, maybe some 40K factions actually make more sense as "goons" than actual Kill Teams, at least in the narrative sense..?
I could sort of see Joint Ops as something that could mutate into Metal Gear Solid -esque playstyles as well.. Take those goons, add in the Sentries rules from KT: Moroch, and you're already well on your way into a sneaky sneaky infiltration game, wouldnt be far off anyway
tauist wrote: Well, I for one think that Elliott Hamer is among the best games designers in the GW roster at the moment. KT21 is his baby. I personally rate KT21 core rules a lot higher than 40Ks, at least the game gives you some choices of playstyles instead of "piles all the models at the centre of the board and roll as many 6s as possible" of the 40K meat grinder
Yup, I was very determined never to touch a GW game again, seeing how bad their designs were compared to the landscape of modern gaming, but some of my friends kept saying that I should try out KT21 and that it is not like other GW games - smart and decision based, not tedious, random and boring. I refused to believe that, but after a year or so I gave in and gave KT21 a try ... and what do you know?! My friends were right, to my profound surprise
I predict that the Compendium will either come back with an update or every single faction will get multiple bespoke teams.
They did this with Warcry- it was only going to be chaos war bands and then eventually opened it up to almost every model in the range. For balancing and competitive play the bespoke teams are better..
Jammer87 wrote: I predict that the Compendium will either come back with an update or every single faction will get multiple bespoke teams.
They did this with Warcry- it was only going to be chaos war bands and then eventually opened it up to almost every model in the range. For balancing and competitive play the bespoke teams are better..
the only factions missing bespoke kill teams are Talons, 'Nids, GK, DG, and WE (who don't even have a compendium team). Talons and GK i could see going without a team (although i'm pulling for a bespoke SoS team to bring some of the HH stuff to 40k)
I agree. 'Nids, DG and WE could easily get bespoke teams and I don't think it would be difficult to balance them. I didn't see GSC on their website, but I'm not sure if they were in a boxed set I missed or maybe already previewed?
I don't know enough about Talons or GK to know what elements in their armies would appear.
AdMec? SoB? Demons? I think KT has quite a few bands to put out if they're going to kill the compendium.
Jammer87 wrote: I agree. 'Nids, DG and WE could easily get bespoke teams and I don't think it would be difficult to balance them. I didn't see GSC on their website, but I'm not sure if they were in a boxed set I missed or maybe already previewed?
I don't know enough about Talons or GK to know what elements in their armies would appear.
AdMec? SoB? Demons? I think KT has quite a few bands to put out if they're going to kill the compendium.
GSC have two teams, a white dwarf team and a recent bespoke team
also i forgot about demons lol, but they could very easily lend to something weird and fun
Jammer87 wrote: I predict that the Compendium will either come back with an update or every single faction will get multiple bespoke teams.
They did this with Warcry- it was only going to be chaos war bands and then eventually opened it up to almost every model in the range. For balancing and competitive play the bespoke teams are better..
the only factions missing bespoke kill teams are Talons, 'Nids, GK, DG, and WE (who don't even have a compendium team). Talons and GK i could see going without a team (although i'm pulling for a bespoke SoS team to bring some of the HH stuff to 40k)
You can already include 5 SoS in an Inquisition team - all swords build contrasts nicely with the shooty inq agents, for example
tauist wrote: Well, I for one think that Elliott Hamer is among the best games designers in the GW roster at the moment. KT21 is his baby. I personally rate KT21 core rules a lot higher than 40Ks, at least the game gives you some choices of playstyles instead of "piles all the models at the centre of the board and roll as many 6s as possible" of the 40K meat grinder
Yup, I was very determined never to touch a GW game again, seeing how bad their designs were compared to the landscape of modern gaming, but some of my friends kept saying that I should try out KT21 and that it is not like other GW games - smart and decision based, not tedious, random and boring. I refused to believe that, but after a year or so I gave in and gave KT21 a try ... and what do you know?! My friends were right, to my profound surprise
Cyel, I’m glad you finally took the dive into KT’21. If you want another modern game design issued by GW, I highly recommend Warhammer Underworlds. It’s a boardgame, not a minis game, but man is it good. In my book, it surpasses KT’21 in certain aspects. I also believe Blitz Bowl fits the criteria and is a pretty good offering.
tauist wrote: Well, I for one think that Elliott Hamer is among the best games designers in the GW roster at the moment. KT21 is his baby. I personally rate KT21 core rules a lot higher than 40Ks, at least the game gives you some choices of playstyles instead of "piles all the models at the centre of the board and roll as many 6s as possible" of the 40K meat grinder
Yup, I was very determined never to touch a GW game again, seeing how bad their designs were compared to the landscape of modern gaming, but some of my friends kept saying that I should try out KT21 and that it is not like other GW games - smart and decision based, not tedious, random and boring. I refused to believe that, but after a year or so I gave in and gave KT21 a try ... and what do you know?! My friends were right, to my profound surprise
Cyel, I’m glad you finally took the dive into KT’21. If you want another modern game design issued by GW, I highly recommend Warhammer Underworlds. It’s a boardgame, not a minis game, but man is it good. In my book, it surpasses KT’21 in certain aspects. I also believe Blitz Bowl fits the criteria and is a pretty good offering.
Oh, I tried Underworlds soon after it came out but disliked it very much. The terrible P2W scheme (buy all teams to get OP cards) was enough to put me off, but gameplay also wasn't too exciting - the P2W (cards you had) and random elements felt like they had far more impact than player decisions and agency (it was easier and better to get lucky with dice than to, say, set up supporting models to increase the odds - which is kind of a theme in GW games). Sold it quickly and never looked back.
The game that fulfills my craving for intellectual challenge and creative problem solving the most is Warmachine, but it is pretty impenetrable to an average player, and has a lot of barriers of entry, unfortunately :( A board game with an absolutely perfect concept for combat mechanics (incredibly deep and interactive but easy to understand and implement) is IMO Gloomhaven, but it's a co-op.
Still waiting for something as genius as Gloomhaven in the world of miniature wargames
New Kill Team: Hivestorm Lore article – all about the Aquilons.
Interesting to note that they aren’t retconning regular Scions to being ground pounders only; Aquilons are just the section that never deploys on foot/tank.
** This does mean that kill teams from the Kill Team Compendium book will not have updated rules.
compendium teams aren't carrying over? wonder what'll happen for nids, talons, and anything else that doesn't have a KT equivalent
A terribly lazy move. For the price of an intern spending a week figuring out word, they have lost half the players in my area. No one was going to tournies, but they were playing odd games, buying the odd bit to use their death guard, custodes, 'stealers, grey knights, Deathwatch (actual kill teams) and Orks/grotz. And of course everyone else will be very grateful for the drop in opponents.
** This does mean that kill teams from the Kill Team Compendium book will not have updated rules.
compendium teams aren't carrying over? wonder what'll happen for nids, talons, and anything else that doesn't have a KT equivalent
A terribly lazy move. For the price of an intern spending a week figuring out word, they have lost half the players in my area. No one was going to tournies, but they were playing odd games, buying the odd bit to use their death guard, custodes, 'stealers, grey knights, Deathwatch (actual kill teams) and Orks/grotz. And of course everyone else will be very grateful for the drop in opponents.
so do you want well-written rules, or do you want rules that are written in half a week by someone still learning game design? people drag GW whenever they release rules that are anything less than perfect, but now that they're trying to tighten their focus for writing rules, they're getting gak for it. how can they win here?
I mean, simply porting over the Compendium army lists would have been simple enough to do if they wanted to. Clearly they felt that not enough people were using those lists for it to be worthwhile, but I suspect that The_Real_Chris's experience will be far from rare. To me this decision smacks of letting the trends of the high level competitive scene drive decisions that hurt the casual scene. Hopefully casual players will just continue having using the army lists from the Compendium, but I suspect that a lot of those players will just drop out of the game.
if an entire playgroup is so attached to the compendium teams as to quit over their removal, then wouldn't they simply collectively agree to keep playing the edition that still has those teams?
StudentOfEtherium wrote: if an entire playgroup is so attached to the compendium teams as to quit over their removal, then wouldn't they simply collectively agree to keep playing the edition that still has those teams?
Although you should be right, GW has trained us well, and outside well stablished playgroups people will want to move to the latest shinny splitting groups.
StudentOfEtherium wrote: if an entire playgroup is so attached to the compendium teams as to quit over their removal, then wouldn't they simply collectively agree to keep playing the edition that still has those teams?
Although you should be right, GW has trained us well, and outside well stablished playgroups people will want to move to the latest shinny splitting groups.
M.
The main reason is that they release some new models/teams/units with a new rule set, so if you want to use the new shiny, you need the new rules as people hate/can't make up rules for new models for older rulesets.
StudentOfEtherium wrote: if an entire playgroup is so attached to the compendium teams as to quit over their removal, then wouldn't they simply collectively agree to keep playing the edition that still has those teams?
Like anywhere its a mix. The keen ones get all the releases, a few get a fair bit, and then a bunch picked up what they needed to play with their existing models (normally the box set with the rules in and some scenery - though most clubs in area provide scenery so not as important to buy it). And they don't quit, they just don't play anymore. There isn't an announcement from them, there is just when you ask who wants a game of x less responses, and then you see them playing other games. Highly non confrontational lot, who just want to enjoy playing games, not making a fuss.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I should add the reaction to other GW games is similar. 9th saw a drop in 40k players in the area for a bunch of problems, mostly covid disruptions, 10th converted the hard core tourney guys, everyone else just drifted away. Now there arguably it is not as problematic - the tournie players could get a bit miffed at playing games verse the casual crowd because their tuned forces would win in short order and no one would enjoy it, but they are the ones buying all the plastic with the casual bunch just getting the odd models they like (and 3d printing a fair bit). So GW was still seeing the cash, but killteam wasn't as stark and easy balancing measures like a few extra EP for a compendium team was often used. With fewer players and less chance of games, and no tounry scene like 40k, I can't see it doing well round here.
For 40k we currently have more people using their BFG fleets than 40k now, with most of those players being former 40k regulars. They didn't say they were quitting, they just asked who fancies a game of X instead of 40k.
** This does mean that kill teams from the Kill Team Compendium book will not have updated rules.
compendium teams aren't carrying over? wonder what'll happen for nids, talons, and anything else that doesn't have a KT equivalent
A terribly lazy move. For the price of an intern spending a week figuring out word, they have lost half the players in my area. No one was going to tournies, but they were playing odd games, buying the odd bit to use their death guard, custodes, 'stealers, grey knights, Deathwatch (actual kill teams) and Orks/grotz. And of course everyone else will be very grateful for the drop in opponents.
so do you want well-written rules, or do you want rules that are written in half a week by someone still learning game design? people drag GW whenever they release rules that are anything less than perfect, but now that they're trying to tighten their focus for writing rules, they're getting gak for it. how can they win here?
I would rather have incredibly half assed rules that let people do more modelling options personally.
** This does mean that kill teams from the Kill Team Compendium book will not have updated rules.
compendium teams aren't carrying over? wonder what'll happen for nids, talons, and anything else that doesn't have a KT equivalent
A terribly lazy move. For the price of an intern spending a week figuring out word, they have lost half the players in my area. No one was going to tournies, but they were playing odd games, buying the odd bit to use their death guard, custodes, 'stealers, grey knights, Deathwatch (actual kill teams) and Orks/grotz. And of course everyone else will be very grateful for the drop in opponents.
so do you want well-written rules, or do you want rules that are written in half a week by someone still learning game design? people drag GW whenever they release rules that are anything less than perfect, but now that they're trying to tighten their focus for writing rules, they're getting gak for it. how can they win here?
I would rather have incredibly half assed rules that let people do more modelling options personally.
You know that well written rules and options are not mutually exclusive, right?
Modelling options being restricted, especially in GW’s flagship games, is completely orthogonal to the quality of the rules writing.
Open the spoiler and look at the foot of the dual pistols guy. There's a a tangle of barbed wire with aquillas, reliquaries, and a severed forearm with hand.
KidCthulhu wrote:Open the spoiler and look at the foot of the dual pistols guy. There's a a tangle of barbed wire with aquillas, reliquaries, and a severed forearm with hand.
Pariah Press wrote:I believe that barbed wire is one of the new pieces of equipment you can get?
Yup. You can see them in more detail on the 4th image in the first post in this thread (page 1).
I'm looking forward to the new edition, and the rules/formatting changes that have been mentioned all seem sensible, but what is this nonsense? That's one of the most insanely worded abilities I've ever read. Maybe the user-friendly writing they've promised only applies to the core rules.
cerebaton wrote: I'm looking forward to the new edition, and the rules/formatting changes that have been mentioned all seem sensible, but what is this nonsense? That's one of the most insanely worded abilities I've ever read. Maybe the user-friendly writing they've promised only applies to the core rules.
Would have been easier to just say 'your operatives have the following ability this turn, until half your operatives have activated'.
schoon wrote: Here's hoping that sees some editing...
It won't. You have to remember that since Robin Cruddace (who according to a White Dwarf interview studied math) became head of the 40k studio, rules text has been written by robots for robots. It's not an accident this is written to be mechanically precise but linguistically cumbersome. GW's writers's priorities are clearly established at this point.
this reads perfectly fine. you don't even need to reread it to understand. the first half of operatives you activate get the effect. what's the issue here? not like the game didn't require a basic understanding of numbers before this
StudentOfEtherium wrote: this reads perfectly fine. you don't even need to reread it to understand. the first half of operatives you activate get the effect. what's the issue here? not like the game didn't require a basic understanding of numbers before this
Eh, for whatever reason a lot of people struggle with algebra particularly, even folk who are otherwise competent at other forms of maths. I think some people struggle with the abstraction required for algebra and that's fine. Different people have different weak spots
Yeah I can understand the ability, I just think it's bizarrely phrased, even for tournament-proofed rules writing.
"... if they are the first friendly operatives activated this turning point equal to x." barely makes sense gramatically. It seems like this might have orignally read "... if they are the first x friendly operatives activated this turning point." but for whatever reason they decided it needed to be made even less open to interpretation.
At least they added a clear example at the end, but I'd prefer if these kind of things went the other way round - a plain language explanation of the rule first, then rules-speak at the end to clarify edge cases.
So long as you have activated fewer than x operatives this turning point - where x is equal to half the number of operatives you had at the start of the turning point, rounded up - your operatives' weapons have the Balanced rule during their activations.
There are videos on YT about that already. Quite a few cool changes. Ones I like in particular:
2CP for the loser of the initiative roll. Simple, elegant. I can see myself in a situation where I choose 2CP after winning the roll, having positioned myself well in the TP before.
More choice for actions instead of overwatch. Not just a needed boost for elites but in general replacing automated processes with player decisions and choices is always a good thing in my game design book.
Cyel wrote: There are videos on YT about that already. Quite a few cool changes. Ones I like in particular:
2CP for the loser of the initiative roll. Simple, elegant. I can see myself in a situation where I choose 2CP after winning the roll, having positioned myself well in the TP before.
More choice for actions instead of overwatch. Not just a needed boost for elites but in general replacing automated processes with player decisions and choices is always a good thing in my game design book.
Hearthkyn Salvagers and Phobos Team are showing as "sold out online" (rather than "temporarily out of stock"), is that likely to just be because they'll be repackaged for the new edition?
alextroy wrote: That's just a UK supply issue. Both are still available on the US Site not to mention those are the only 2 Kill Teams not available in the UK.
I thought "Sold Out Online" isn't just a temporary stock thing though, it's what's used when stock has sold out and there won't be any more coming.
Both still being available on the US site just means they haven't sold out of those specific ones yet, but the Breachers team says "sold out online" there.
Yeah they said Kill Teams will now come with a QR code to get current rules online.
Repackaging usually involves a new SKU / product code, and is therefore considered a 'new' product by the website even though the contents are mostly the same as before.
Yeah doesn't really make much sense. If it fired interstellar warp-capable warheads and could protect like an entire sector or whatever, sure that's be awesome. As it stands though the fluff is "we tried so hard to make it cool that we made it dumb"
chaos0xomega wrote: Yeah doesn't really make much sense. If it fired interstellar warp-capable warheads and could protect like an entire sector or whatever, sure that's be awesome. As it stands though the fluff is "we tried so hard to make it cool that we made it dumb"
If we use the BFG scale given by Andy Chambers of 1 cm = 1000 km, then the article seems to say the gun has a range of 500 cm. The ROF is not known, and neither is the shell velocity.
The way it is described, it would only be effective in protecting the planet itself...and then only from single targets or single fleets at a time (if the fleet is bunched up). The description of warheads also means it is not a purely kinetic energy projectile.
I guess it is the artwork that looks off, with the cannon's proportions looking odd. The cannon bore diameter looks too big I think.
Something less disproportionate like this might have looked better but less over the top Imperial grimdark:
Being planetside, it can also only target one hemisphere of the world at best. An enemy fleet could be in geostationary orbit on the opposite side of the world and be totally immune.
Given ships can make stealth approaches by running dark and drifting, and the rotation and orbit of a planet are entirely predictable, it seems possible to completely avoid this weapon by sneaking up until you can sprint to the lee side before the gun rotates into arc of fire.
May also lack an arc of fire at all if attacking from the correct angle, this doesn't look like it can depress to horizontal, let alone below horizontal.
This highly impractical and not particularly useful weapon is a perfect explanation on why the powers-that-be don't want to lose the asset and yet don't want to allocate any real resources to protecting it. The weapon doesn't do anything beyond protect one planet, but is iconic enough to be a major blow to sector morale should it fall.
It doesn't even protect the one planet all that well, plenty of ways to avoid it.
It also lacks a good explanation for why anyone would bother to invest the resources to build something that impractical in the first place (though that's I guess somewhat covered with the handwashed "nobody has any clue who built it or when or how, it's just there").
Likewise I cut think of any reason why the rest of the sector would care. It's established lore that the imperium isn't really an interplanetary society. The vast majority of folks will never leave their home planet and the concept of other worlds is a barely known fact. Most citizens will know Terra as a world of some legend and maybe be familiar with a couple of key planets they may have heard of like Cadia to the extent that they recognize the name or know some random fact about it without really knowing much of anything specific as to what it is or why it's important... would folks across the sector know of a random planet with a too large to be believed orbital defense cannon that does nothing for them?
alextroy wrote: This highly impractical and not particularly useful weapon is a perfect explanation on why the powers-that-be don't want to lose the asset and yet don't want to allocate any real resources to protecting it. The weapon doesn't do anything beyond protect one planet, but is iconic enough to be a major blow to sector morale should it fall.
It says in the article it uses the planet's gravity to slingshot bullets at anything attacking on the other side of the planet. With it being able to straight up destroy the planet's moon it at least has the power to threaten anything that gets too close. Too close in this case being "twice the distance from the earth of the moon."
alextroy wrote: This highly impractical and not particularly useful weapon is a perfect explanation on why the powers-that-be don't want to lose the asset and yet don't want to allocate any real resources to protecting it. The weapon doesn't do anything beyond protect one planet, but is iconic enough to be a major blow to sector morale should it fall.
It says in the article it uses the planet's gravity to slingshot bullets at anything attacking on the other side of the planet. With it being able to straight up destroy the planet's moon it at least has the power to threaten anything that gets too close. Too close in this case being "twice the distance from the earth of the moon."
A planetary body with a known orbit makes for an easier target compared to an actively maneuvering enemy ship.
at least in the past they tried to stay consistent within the unrealistic physics of the universe
I mean we had planetary defence guns in the past, they are not new and there is lore what they are, how they work and why they are the way they are.
which is all ignored to put numbers in that sound "big" but are not even of any practical use because the distance is too short to make any sense
twice the distance of earths moon means nothing as the shells either are fast enough to leave the gravity of the planet behind, than their range is the planetary system, or not and they are useless against anything that would be a danger
the same way they tried to make the biggest tank battle ever happened in the universe sound big and ended up with numbers that are less than we had in WW2
at least in the past they tried to stay consistent within the unrealistic physics of the universe
I mean we had planetary defence guns in the past, they are not new and there is lore what they are, how they work and why they are the way they are.
which is all ignored to put numbers in that sound "big" but are not even of any practical use because the distance is too short to make any sense
twice the distance of earths moon means nothing as the shells either are fast enough to leave the gravity of the planet behind, than their range is the planetary system, or not and they are useless against anything that would be a danger
the same way they tried to make the biggest tank battle ever happened in the universe sound big and ended up with numbers that are less than we had in WW2
Largely agree, although the range limitation can be taken to mean a targeting limitation- beyond 500,000 miles it may be very unlikely to hit anything. I'm too lazy to do the maths, but at those kinds of ranges you probably have to rotate the turret by fractions of a mm to make targeting adjustments. That is a huge amount of precision required for a collassal machine.
Don't agree with the tank bit. The (first...) Battle of Kursk is generally taken as the largest tank battle with ~6000 tanks. For all of WWII something like 160000 tanks were produced, many of which did not fight. The Battle of Tallarn is stated as having over a million tanks fighting. It would be low if comparing to armoured vehicle production in general, but taken at face value to mean actual tanks, then Tallarn is a much bigger battle.
at least in the past they tried to stay consistent within the unrealistic physics of the universe
I mean we had planetary defence guns in the past, they are not new and there is lore what they are, how they work and why they are the way they are.
which is all ignored to put numbers in that sound "big" but are not even of any practical use because the distance is too short to make any sense
twice the distance of earths moon means nothing as the shells either are fast enough to leave the gravity of the planet behind, than their range is the planetary system, or not and they are useless against anything that would be a danger
the same way they tried to make the biggest tank battle ever happened in the universe sound big and ended up with numbers that are less than we had in WW2
I think a more practical question is effective range against enemy ships. There would be an appreciable flight time and the true limitation might be the ability to predict and accurately target a moving enemy ship that could be actively evading. The description suggests there is a big blast radius, but even so, space is truly vast and trying to hit an erratically moving ship is different from trying to hit a moon that is moving along a known orbital path.
Haighus wrote: For all of WWII something like 160000 tanks were produced, many of which did not fight.
well, the classifications of "tank" might be different but all of WW2 was more like over 1 Million produced, with the allied forces had ~250k in combat and the axis 70k
and tank battles were mostly in Europe, having a Million tanks fighting over a planet is not impressive or even "large", but same as a million miles sounds big a million tanks does as well
Haighus wrote: For all of WWII something like 160000 tanks were produced, many of which did not fight.
well, the classifications of "tank" might be different but all of WW2 was more like over 1 Million produced, with the allied forces had ~250k in combat and the axis 70k
and tank battles were mostly in Europe, having a Million tanks fighting over a planet is not impressive or even "large", but same as a million miles sounds big a million tanks does as well
That sounds like numbers for armoured vehicles in general, rather than tanks specifically. If I broaden out from tanks specifically, the major tank-producing nations produced tanks (and tank chassis for self-propelled weapons like assault guns) in the tens of thousands with only the Soviets topping 100000 (unless you count the Universal carrier and variants, which I doubt many people would but is a tracked armoured vehicle). These include true tanks and vehicles typically considered tanks by the general public, which is probably the closest comparison to what GW might refer to as a tank.
To get to a million you have to include halftracks and armoured cars, and start including trucks. I don't think GW is talking about unarmoured supply lorries when they say a million tanks fought at Tallarn.
Edit: the WWII numbers are also spread over 6 years vs 1 year for Tallarn. It really is a noticeably bigger tank engagement than anything Earth has seen.
In a way though the use of "million" as a number that sounds big is just effective in conveying to us the audience that it's just a really big battle. Most of the time 40k numbers don't really hold water.
I think with this big gun it's past my suspension of disbelief, but then again I DO kind of like the idea that the irrationality of the Imperium is so massive.
kodos wrote: tanks and SPGs, the most build axis tank was the StuG which was classified as SPG
armoured vehicles in total were close to 6 millions during WW2
and still, even over 6 years this was a limited geographical theatre
a million tanks, over 1 year on a whole planet sound bigger than it is
the same way having a gun shooting a million miles into space, sounds bigger than it really is
the same way we have a million Space Marines, which just sounds big without the context
I haven't encountered anything suggesting as many as 6 million armoured vehicles in WWII. I found about 4.5 million for all military vehicles including soft-skinned lorries and other logistics gear, and less than 400,000 for tanks and SPGs combined.
I don't think the single geographic region is that relevant. Tallarn was also focussed around a few geographic points, because only the deep storage bunkers survived the virus bombing.
Scale has always been something many a setting could not get right and 40k has made the concept of a "million" feel useless alright.
But let's get back on topic and take that all to a thread of its own, the dashboard has lit up with several reports of things going OT harrrrrrrrrd, oh my.
I guess this new starter will be announced for pre-order next Sunday then?
They mention that each Kill Team will have their own equipment in addition to the generic stuff, and also poo-poo'd cardboard tokens. Does that mean we'll be getting Kill Team Equipment sprues for each faction?
Shakalooloo wrote: They mention that each Kill Team will have their own equipment in addition to the generic stuff, and also poo-poo'd cardboard tokens. Does that mean we'll be getting Kill Team Equipment sprues for each faction?
I'm assuming not for boxes already in existence but maybe for future teams?
Shakalooloo wrote: They mention that each Kill Team will have their own equipment in addition to the generic stuff, and also poo-poo'd cardboard tokens. Does that mean we'll be getting Kill Team Equipment sprues for each faction?
I'm assuming not for boxes already in existence but maybe for future teams?
i think they meant a sprue for each faction, so that all the imperium teams get one, all the csm teams get one, all the craftworld teams get one, etc, and then those bits of universal equipment are shared between them
Nobody in here played Kerbal Space Program and it shows.
Once a projectile is in orbit there is a lot it can do using very small adjustments that may be made planetside or made once it is in space. For all we know, each warhead has an onvoard tracking device and a number of thrusters that allow it to track to targets all across the system, and, yes, even to the other side of the planet.
i think they meant a sprue for each faction, so that all the imperium teams get one, all the csm teams get one, all the craftworld teams get one, etc, and then those bits of universal equipment are shared between them
It's funny that they say there is universal equipment, when all of us know that there is not a single thing created or used by Tyranids that looks even remotely like anything that the Imperium would use.
Sure, there might be stuff that serves the same purpose: there might be a smoke bug that can be thrown, there might be a living creature that functions like barbed wire (a tentacle mass or whatever; there could be a a bug with oversized plating that functions as a barricade. But for GW to suggest that using the sprue of supposedly "Universal Equipment" to represent the equipment used by Nids, even when the rules and effects of said gear are identical, is in fact the stupidest thing I've heard from GW in a long time.
And if the tyranid equipment sprue includes things meant to represent barbed wire or barricades, then it isn't really equipment that is unique to Nids... It's just barbed wire and barricades with a Nid makeover.
I'm not yet sold on this "New edition" of KT. I remain extremely skeptical. I think GW should use Specialist games to explore ways to make persistent edition games sell as well as their edition churn BS, in order to perfect a persistent edition business model for the more mainstream games.
Edition churn drives more existing players away from this game than any other factor. It is, and has always been the absolute worst aspect of GW products by a long shot. I suspect that just like it does with 40k, it will limit the amount of "new" that we see. How can a company put out anything new when the have to remake everything every three years? And for the record, I hate it just as much when D&D or World of Darkness pulls this crap too. In fact I stopped playing WoD specifically because of edition churn, and while I played fifth ed D&D, I refused to spend a single dime on it.
And finally, as anyone who reads my rants knows, my greatest fear is that all the new bells and whistles will push out the campaign play mode or compromise it. Anyone remember how boring, lackluster and dull campaign play in KT 2018 was? I suspect we're going back to that in order to make room for universal equipment, solo play and PVE. I will be incredibly happy if I'm wrong, but GW hasn't said anything at all about what campaign play will look like in KT 24, or even confirmed that it will continue to exist.
i think they meant a sprue for each faction, so that all the imperium teams get one, all the csm teams get one, all the craftworld teams get one, etc, and then those bits of universal equipment are shared between them
It's funny that they say there is universal equipment, when all of us know that there is not a single thing created or used by Tyranids that looks even remotely like anything that the Imperium would use.
This is not a problem since there are no Tyranid Kill Teams in KT24 (yet anyway).
The Vespid Stingwings and Tempestus Aquilons from Kill Team: Hivestorm are just the start of an awesome new range of miniatures, but their peers from the current edition aren’t going anywhere. Almost every kill team released in a boxed set** from the Veteran Guardsmen of Kill Team: Octarius right up to the Hernkyn Yaegirs of Kill Team: Termination will have fully updated rules for the new edition and a pack of physical datacards to keep them close at hand, while those Kill Teams found in the Kill Team Annual 2022 – including the Elucidean Starstriders and the Gellerpox Infected – will receive updated digital rules.
** This does mean that kill teams from the Kill Team Compendium book will not have updated rules.
I wouldn't be surprised if things like the Space Marine Scouts, Blades of Khaine, and Inquisitorial Agents boxes all get taken out of Kill Team and reboxed into regular boxes. We've already seen the Inquisitorial Agents put into a normal 40k-style box.
It'll help trim a bit of the bloat down while also prepping those things for regular 40k boxes. I'm fully expecting Scouts and Striking Scorpions to be reboxed into boxes of 5 models each.
Set rotation coming to a miniatures game near you!
I applaud GW for the transparency on this, it still gives me the ice but it's better than the surprise of having your stuff invalidated 2 years down the line without warning.
Set rotation coming to a miniatures game near you!
I applaud GW for the transparency on this, it still gives me the ice but it's better than the surprise of having your stuff invalidated 2 years down the line without warning.
Seems sensible, we're at 33 teams now? Can't be balancing 60 teams by the time next edition rolls around. And I'm honestly fine with wargames shifting slightly towards a "subscription" type experience where things can end and make room for new things without bloating beyond any manageable proportions.
Set rotation coming to a miniatures game near you!
I applaud GW for the transparency on this, it still gives me the ice but it's better than the surprise of having your stuff invalidated 2 years down the line without warning.
This sort of planned obsolescence is terrible. They've ensured that I will never touch this game and will be wary of purchasing GW miniatures in general.
Seems sensible, we're at 33 teams now? Can't be balancing 60 teams by the time next edition rolls around. And I'm honestly fine with wargames shifting slightly towards a "subscription" type experience where things can end and make room for new things without bloating beyond any manageable proportions.
only problem here is that "you can still play them" does not really work out of balance is not given and people hesitate to allow house rules or "Legends" in the first place
I don't see this as obsolescence. It only applies to a specific subset of tournaments, so probably just a fraction of the player base (who will probably by happy that understanding their meta
becomes somewhat managable).
All teams getting rules and updates for the next 4 (?) years? It just means my and my group's KT gaming is safe and sound for a looong time. Classified doesn't affect us one bit.
As for Angels of Death. I assume this is Intercession renamed. Do you think it means GW plans to broaden the range of options there to allow non-Intercessor Astartes?
Seems sensible, we're at 33 teams now? Can't be balancing 60 teams by the time next edition rolls around. And I'm honestly fine with wargames shifting slightly towards a "subscription" type experience where things can end and make room for new things without bloating beyond any manageable proportions.
only problem here is that "you can still play them" does not really work out of balance is not given and people hesitate to allow house rules or "Legends" in the first place
Difference is they are still getting balance updates though.
It seems pretty reasonable to me. Except for the bit where it basically codifies a new edition every three years.
But 3 seasons per edition, every team is valid for tournament play for 4 seasons, which means every team has rules for two editions. And continues to get updates until the end of it's second edition.
Which means everything is valid for tournament play for 3-4 years. Everything gets rules for 4-6 years. That seems fine for a box that is £35. It'd be different if we were doing this with full armies that can easily cost £1000 but for every nearly every team, worst case is two boxes if you want to build every unit. It seems fairly reasonable to me that after 3-4 years the ask is to buy another box of ten figures to keep playing.
(I mean we're at the point where the cost of things like the new rules and generic equipment and stuff is a bigger factor than having to buy a new team)
kodos wrote: so the season model is now not just scenarios but also teams
something similar as there was with Blood Bowl
but at least they don't remove it on day 1 but keep them the first year around
Haha, can you imagine GW removing BB teams? I bet they have considered it. Wonder if the fact the game is mostly run by others in terms of tournies and clubs has stopped that. Certainly surprising they tolerated all the legends team rules being out there while they had no models for them.
Seems sensible, we're at 33 teams now? Can't be balancing 60 teams by the time next edition rolls around. And I'm honestly fine with wargames shifting slightly towards a "subscription" type experience where things can end and make room for new things without bloating beyond any manageable proportions.
If I am a tourny gamer? Sure.
If I am a 'normal'/casual player, which in my experience most KT players were in local clubs. Pretty awful. Already have some dropping out as there easy to play compendium team is going. This just adds to that. MtG players are happy to only be able to use cards for a year or two. Wargamers despite GWs best efforts tend to be a bit more attached to the guys they had to paint. I suspect this announcement will stop a bunch more continuing with it.
They have done that with the re-release (as season model with not all teams being allowed each season) and there is a reason why the "official" version was not really replacing the community version that way
The_Real_Chris wrote: Wargamers despite GWs best efforts tend to be a bit more attached to the guys they had to paint. I suspect this announcement will stop a bunch more continuing with it.
Well, if it's time for a Kill Team to go, just build a 40k army around it. Then you can still play them and have even more models to paint and to be attached to.
They can't remotely shut down your models like video game companies are doing tho
You can always play your 2021 era Kill Teams against each other, just maybe not against a 2026 team
We are once again seeing this strange dichotomy in players saying they don't care about tournament play but at the same time not wanting to play anything that isn't legal for tournament play
I'll get some heat for this, but 2-4 years of being able to play the game off a single £40ish box and free rules? It's hardly unreasonable. Let's face it how many people are sat on a single kill team they bought years ago and are going to be squatted out the tounament scene *next year* but are upset now?
It's not just balance, it's also design space. Every game runs into this: there are only so many subtle variations on a theme you can have.
It's just the harsh reality of minis games: to make new rules they need to sell stuff, new stuff sells by far the most, and sometimes the best new thing to sell is a replacement for an old thing you sell. Yes, there are games that keep endlessly expansive rosters going forward with rules, but most games, especially ones built around tighter balance, struggle beyond a certain scope.
Rules for a mini game are like the wifi in a coffee shop. I expect it for a while after I buy something, but if I never buy anything more, I can't expect to keep getting it for free.
But having cheap (normally existing armies) simple to play teams (in this case the compendium) in existence has pretty much been half my KT games to date. Casual players happy to have a game using their models. Not interested to go and buy something to play. They don't help GWs profits, but they kept me playing and buying. If my opponents dry up, so do my purchases and we all go and play whatever people fancy now.
The_Real_Chris wrote: But having cheap (normally existing armies) simple to play teams (in this case the compendium) in existence has pretty much been half my KT games to date. Casual players happy to have a game using their models. Not interested to go and buy something to play. They don't help GWs profits, but they kept me playing and buying. If my opponents dry up, so do my purchases and we all go and play whatever people fancy now.
If you have multiple teams, lend yours to your opponent? If they enjoy playing the game with you, maybe they can support it with a purchase? Again, it's 1 box for 4 years of play.
kodos wrote: so the season model is now not just scenarios but also teams
something similar as there was with Blood Bowl
but at least they don't remove it on day 1 but keep them the first year around
Haha, can you imagine GW removing BB teams? I bet they have considered it. Wonder if the fact the game is mostly run by others in terms of tournies and clubs has stopped that. Certainly surprising they tolerated all the legends team rules being out there while they had no models for them.
There are already more KT teams than BB teams. They won't get rid of BB teams no. But they also won't create 8 new BB teams a year. That's the trade-off.
Seems sensible, we're at 33 teams now? Can't be balancing 60 teams by the time next edition rolls around. And I'm honestly fine with wargames shifting slightly towards a "subscription" type experience where things can end and make room for new things without bloating beyond any manageable proportions.
If I am a tourny gamer? Sure.
If I am a 'normal'/casual player, which in my experience most KT players were in local clubs. Pretty awful. Already have some dropping out as there easy to play compendium team is going. This just adds to that. MtG players are happy to only be able to use cards for a year or two. Wargamers despite GWs best efforts tend to be a bit more attached to the guys they had to paint. I suspect this announcement will stop a bunch more continuing with it.
It's just ten guys. And the compendium teams were designed so you didn't even have to build and paint those ten guys, you could just use minis you already had. I'm sure they exist but I honestly struggle to understand the mindset of someone who started playing a compendium team, enjoyed the game itself enough to keep playing it on a regular basis for three years and in all that time not a single one of the 22 boxed teams appealed to them in the slightest. I don't doubt they exist but I suspect they're quite rare.
Or maybe it's my mindset. I play a lot of campaign board games, I paint the minis for those. My painted Blinkblade miniature in Frosthaven got taken on about 15 missions and now sits in the cabinet with the other starting classes, likely to never be used again. And that's fine. I definitely don't have an expectation to be regualarly using minis I've painted forever.
IMO the real problem is that it's a one way street. There's no reason why a portion of the classified kill teams, say a quarter, can't be reserved for "reclassified" teams that had previously cycled out but are allowed to be cycled back in for a season. That means your legacy teams are never entirely defunct and will get a new lease on life every so often.
chaos0xomega wrote: IMO the real problem is that it's a one way street. There's no reason why a portion of the classified kill teams, say a quarter, can't be reserved for "reclassified" teams that had previously cycled out but are allowed to be cycled back in for a season. That means your legacy teams are never entirely defunct and will get a new lease on life every so often.
Sure, but I imagine the gap would need to be long enough to make re-issuing the kit financially worth it to GW.
Gellerpox and Starstriders have done a few cycles already, haven't they?
I barely managed to contain myself to one army in a given month and there are people out there who never branched beyond a single Kill Team? Damn, that's some intense willpower.
I just want GW to release a game and let people play it. I don't want to have to keep track of set rotations and errata and what's legal on any given day if I'm trying to get a pickup game.
Prometheum5 wrote: I just want GW to release a game and let people play it. I don't want to have to keep track of set rotations and errata and what's legal on any given day if I'm trying to get a pickup game.
The rotation is for comp play so you're good. Or in 1/2 editions time, far enough away from now for you to have that review.
People worried two editions ahead if they can still use the same 50€ box of plastic dudes when they should be worried if there will still be food and electricity
It's just ten guys. And the compendium teams were designed so you didn't even have to build and paint those ten guys, you could just use minis you already had. I'm sure they exist but I honestly struggle to understand the mindset of someone who started playing a compendium team, enjoyed the game itself enough to keep playing it on a regular basis for three years and in all that time not a single one of the 22 boxed teams appealed to them in the slightest. I don't doubt they exist but I suspect they're quite rare.
Must be something in the water, we have a bunch in London Lots of casual players playing a dozen+ systems who don't mind the odd game using the stuff they have (and yes some bought the odd team), but move on easily because the investment of changing for a casual game system is too much when there are other new opportunities.
Hopefully the new edition will entice new players, but for minimal effort they could have had a few more.
Sometimes I'm reminded of the Dennis Miller joke from 1989 about how you can't make everybody happy: "I'm sure there's a protest out where the wall once stood by the East Berliner Handball League"
It's just ten guys. And the compendium teams were designed so you didn't even have to build and paint those ten guys, you could just use minis you already had. I'm sure they exist but I honestly struggle to understand the mindset of someone who started playing a compendium team, enjoyed the game itself enough to keep playing it on a regular basis for three years and in all that time not a single one of the 22 boxed teams appealed to them in the slightest. I don't doubt they exist but I suspect they're quite rare.
Must be something in the water, we have a bunch in London Lots of casual players playing a dozen+ systems who don't mind the odd game using the stuff they have (and yes some bought the odd team), but move on easily because the investment of changing for a casual game system is too much when there are other new opportunities.
Hopefully the new edition will entice new players, but for minimal effort they could have had a few more.
A few more what? People that don't buy Killteam minis? Not taking a side in the argument of if it is right or not, but I'd wager GW doesn't care about losing players that don't buy the product.
If the faction/team rules are free going forward then its something I can live with. Its only a single unit's worth and therefore not as nasty a blow as losing the entire Sacrosanct Chamber in AoS.
Even if going with only Eldar teams, there'll still be others I can fall back on even when the Void Dancer team bows out. Quite excited on that one as I've seen a new Harlequins kit for KT in the crystal ball...
I don't play the tourney scene, preferring a more casual game. No one I play will care.
Neither am I so beholden to one team that it's retirement 3 years from now will crush my game mojo. Between now and then, one of the new teams will pique my hobby interest.
The optimistic take for me is that it creates space for new teams/kits for factions. If they cycle out older kits they can bring out a new killteam for that faction without the range getting too excessive. Maybe the option for more mixed kits specifically for KT rather than just a 40k unit. For example a Nid KT would really have a few different types of creatures. They could push the specialist models in a unit to be quite different ..
Always nice to get new kits for your favourite faction!
Prometheum5 wrote: I just want GW to release a game and let people play it. I don't want to have to keep track of set rotations and errata and what's legal on any given day if I'm trying to get a pickup game.
The contradiction in that is that if just stopped releasing stuff for it, people would declare the game "dead" and you're not going to be able to get a pick up game for it. My Netrunner cards are fine, the game still plays fine, got a bunch of pre-built decks I can play with friends at home, but I'm not going to be able to just drop by my local game store and get a game of it.
I mean I don't disagree with you, I want that too, it's just not really possible. (Might I dare suggest you're better off joining a board game group where that's precisely how games work?)
It's just ten guys. And the compendium teams were designed so you didn't even have to build and paint those ten guys, you could just use minis you already had. I'm sure they exist but I honestly struggle to understand the mindset of someone who started playing a compendium team, enjoyed the game itself enough to keep playing it on a regular basis for three years and in all that time not a single one of the 22 boxed teams appealed to them in the slightest. I don't doubt they exist but I suspect they're quite rare.
Must be something in the water, we have a bunch in London Lots of casual players playing a dozen+ systems who don't mind the odd game using the stuff they have (and yes some bought the odd team), but move on easily because the investment of changing for a casual game system is too much when there are other new opportunities.
Hopefully the new edition will entice new players, but for minimal effort they could have had a few more.
Could they? It's still a new system, there's still effort involved in learning the new rules. The only difference is they don't have to buy and paint up ten minis. If that's the only blocker then like others have said, just take one of your teams along and let them play that.
Honestly I'd suspect those are people who'd rather be playing one of the other 11 systems they're into and are just helping you out by playing a few games. Like I said, they can't enjoy the system that much if they're people actively buying and playing various systems but didn't want to spend £35 and paint up a box of ten minis to try a different team.
Think it's an awful change. GW must be fairly disconnected from the playerbase, seeing as how Legends is one of the biggest bugbears in the community rn.
RaptorusRex wrote: Think it's an awful change. GW must be fairly disconnected from the playerbase, seeing as how Legends is one of the biggest bugbears in the community rn.
I have no problems with Legends/Legacies, it's far better than having no rules at all - and that was usually the only other option in the past. I use them and would have no problems at all if someone else is using them too.
RaptorusRex wrote: Think it's an awful change. GW must be fairly disconnected from the playerbase, seeing as how Legends is one of the biggest bugbears in the community rn.
I agree.
I think it was a mistake in Underworlds too, and they still had valid rules to play with, they just weren't tournament safe.
This is a hobby where modelling and painting is too significant a creative endeavour for dumping support to ever feel good, especially on spurious balance concerns.
Dudeface wrote: I don't disagree, I don't think this is unreasonable at all, but there is a definite end point even for casual pay.
How? If it's casual then the fact that these Kill Teams are legal for tournament play doesn't make one iota of difference. The biggest hindrance will be that the kits won't be explicitly named as Kill Team boxes anymore as they will just get folded into regular 40k.
Dudeface wrote: I don't disagree, I don't think this is unreasonable at all, but there is a definite end point even for casual pay.
How? If it's casual then the fact that these Kill Teams are legal for tournament play doesn't make one iota of difference. The biggest hindrance will be that the kits won't be explicitly named as Kill Team boxes anymore as they will just get folded into regular 40k.
Depending on how significant edition-on-edition change will end up being, the fact that there is going to be an end point on rules support for teams - ignoring tounament support for now - is going to be the problem. Not today, not next week, but it's a problem that the recent article spelled out.
And the fact some of y'all are happy with that approach is... disappointing, to be polite.
Dudeface wrote: I don't disagree, I don't think this is unreasonable at all, but there is a definite end point even for casual pay.
How? If it's casual then the fact that these Kill Teams are legal for tournament play doesn't make one iota of difference. The biggest hindrance will be that the kits won't be explicitly named as Kill Team boxes anymore as they will just get folded into regular 40k.
Because the edition will change, rules will change and they won't publish updated rules for ever. They state as much: "From now on, every kill team will receive consistently updated rules for two editions".
If they introduce a new stat or something in that 3rd edition then they no longer are compatible with the current rulesset.
Dudeface wrote: I don't disagree, I don't think this is unreasonable at all, but there is a definite end point even for casual pay.
How? If it's casual then the fact that these Kill Teams are legal for tournament play doesn't make one iota of difference. The biggest hindrance will be that the kits won't be explicitly named as Kill Team boxes anymore as they will just get folded into regular 40k.
Depending on how significant edition-on-edition change will end up being, the fact that there is going to be an end point on rules support for teams - ignoring tounament support for now - is going to be the problem. Not today, not next week, but it's a problem that the recent article spelled out.
And the fact some of y'all are happy with that approach is... disappointing, to be polite.
Are you expecting them to make casual only rules for 70+ Kill Teams, all with unique functions?
I know it's not fantastic to hear but knowing you get 2 editions of support and that'll span 6 years-ish from here on out is more than a lot of people get.
If people never need to buy anything new they'll simply stop making it period, which will kill any enthusiasm much faster.
there is a difference between people want to buy something new and people must buy something new
and if there are too many teams, nobody asked GW to make a new one every 2 months or a new Edition every 3 years
they wanted to release more per year and now facing the problems that come with that
and forcing people to buy new stuff is only a solution for GW and a customer should never happily accept when he gets told that they must buy new stuff to keep going
practically, they just wrote down what was the case anyway, single models or units became obsolete over since forever with GW as their business model works that way, it is just the first time that they tell this to people instead of having white knights argue that technically you can still play with your old models if you have the right group
and there are people out there who still enjoy first edition Kill Team (the original one from 15 years ago) but this does not mean that everyone who build a KT during those days can still play it
that GW is now confident enough to write this down and most people don't care is a reason why they are the market leader
if any other game company would make such an announcement they can close their doors the next day
Dysartes wrote: Depending on how significant edition-on-edition change will end up being, the fact that there is going to be an end point on rules support for teams - ignoring tounament support for now - is going to be the problem. Not today, not next week, but it's a problem that the recent article spelled out.
Dudeface wrote: Because the edition will change, rules will change and they won't publish updated rules for ever. They state as much: "From now on, every kill team will receive consistently updated rules for two editions".
If they introduce a new stat or something in that 3rd edition then they no longer are compatible with the current rulesset.
If you're worried that a Kill Team you bought 3 years ago won't be tournament-legal in another 3 years, it seems like you have 3 years to maybe change that no?
Again the hypothetical here is that people have never bought anything other than one Kill Team that was released in 2020 and will never buy any other Kill Team ever.
You aren't even spending money on rules anymore literally all you have to do is get minis of which there are a hundred sources to get from.
It's such a non-issue but I guess having basic problem-solving skills makes me a white knight for GW.
You mean you don't like the appeal to probability fallacy argument that some future opponent at your LFGS is going to say no to a Kill Team match because your team isn't in the latest tournament approved list?
The pendulum always swings in either -
1. GW hasn't updated my army/models/characters in forever and hates me. Space marines always get updates and Dark Eldar never get updates.
2. GW just invalidated my awesome tournament list by releasing a new army/model/character and made my army underpowered. Now I have to start all over again with these new shiny models.
People are going to complain because it's what they do.
Jammer87 wrote: You mean you don't like the appeal to probability fallacy argument that some future opponent at your LFGS is going to say no to a Kill Team match because your team isn't in the latest tournament approved list?
The pendulum always swings in either -
1. GW hasn't updated my army/models/characters in forever and hates me. Space marines always get updates and Dark Eldar never get updates.
2. GW just invalidated my awesome tournament list by releasing a new army/model/character and made my army underpowered. Now I have to start all over again with these new shiny models.
People are going to complain because it's what they do.
You're talking like these are the same people, when they may well be two distinct groups. There is probably overlap, but I highly doubt the GW player population is homogenous.
I am not interested in a Kill Team re-boot at all. We really do not need new editions every 2-3 years. It's not like they are making the rules "better", just different. Does every US House of Representatives session need their own commemorative Kill Team edition?
Jammer87 wrote: You mean you don't like the appeal to probability fallacy argument that some future opponent at your LFGS is going to say no to a Kill Team match because your team isn't in the latest tournament approved list?
You can belittle it as fallacy all you want, but the fact remains that many communities do as a whole or individually have players that refuse to play against Legends specifically because they're not tournament legal.
That is a reality players deal with regularly, whether right or wrong.
kodos wrote: there is a difference between people want to buy something new and people must buy something new
and if there are too many teams, nobody asked GW to make a new one every 2 months or a new Edition every 3 years
Yeah, so imagine GW came out and said "there's enough Kill Teams, we don't need to make any more, we're happy with the rules, keep playing what you have" ?
We'd have a far worse problem, because the game would be declared "dead" and people would moan that *all* of their Kill Teams were obsolete.
Gert wrote: Good lord the need for drama for Warhammer players is beyond a joke. You act like GW has sent hitmen to your home to burn your older models.
God forbid you spend £40 on a Kill Team every four years.
FWIW I tend to agree.
I think every GW game has this weird cultural clash between people who buy models they'll use to play every week for say a summer. And people who are (theoretically) slowly accumulating stuff that they expect to use in the "big game", earmarked for sometime in the 2030s.
that GW is now confident enough to write this down and most people don't care is a reason why they are the market leader
if any other game company would make such an announcement they can close their doors the next day
Not really. LCGs and CCGs have had set rotation for decades. More broadly, in board games I can buy a game and whole bunch of expansions (often including minis that I paint up) and then one day they announce a second edition and nothing I have is compatible any more. Arkham Horror. Summoner Wars. Descent. It's something that happens in board games pretty regularly. Those companies don't end up closing their doors.
Plus you can't keep making rules for everything indefinitely. When does it stop? In 2030 they still have to make rules for minis that haven't been available for sale in over a decade? And the rules aren't exactly trivial, Kill Team rules are fairly complex. Could they make something up but not really test it or care about if it's playable? Sure, like Legends then?
I'd rather have rules for 30 teams at a time that were reasonably well balanced and tested than rules for 90 teams that they'd just crapped out because 40K players actually see that as acceptable.
Jammer87 wrote: You mean you don't like the appeal to probability fallacy argument that some future opponent at your LFGS is going to say no to a Kill Team match because your team isn't in the latest tournament approved list?
The pendulum always swings in either -
1. GW hasn't updated my army/models/characters in forever and hates me. Space marines always get updates and Dark Eldar never get updates.
2. GW just invalidated my awesome tournament list by releasing a new army/model/character and made my army underpowered. Now I have to start all over again with these new shiny models.
People are going to complain because it's what they do.
You're talking like these are the same people, when they may well be two distinct groups. There is probably overlap, but I highly doubt the GW player population is homogenous.
I never said it was the same people. I'm just saying that when GW goes a while without releasing anything people tend to freak out and when they release a higher number of kits people also tend to freak out. I'm sure there are people feeling that way right now with their specific collection. I wish they would release more Kroot diversity and I'm also tired of the fact that they just updated SCE AGAIN. See I'm someone who is complaining about the same thing. But in all honesty I just just appreciate that both of those games are supported and GW keeps its rules and production of miniatures in full swing.
Platuan4th wrote:
Jammer87 wrote: You mean you don't like the appeal to probability fallacy argument that some future opponent at your LFGS is going to say no to a Kill Team match because your team isn't in the latest tournament approved list?
You can belittle it as fallacy all you want, but the fact remains that many communities do as a whole or individually have players that refuse to play against Legends specifically because they're not tournament legal.
That is a reality players deal with regularly, whether right or wrong.
Yeah that sucks for those communities. I'd be interested to see if those communities were LGS or Warhammer stores?
Dudeface wrote: Are you expecting them to make casual only rules for 70+ Kill Teams, all with unique functions?
::Takes quick glance at 40k's Legends section::
Um, yes? Yes.
I take it that was indeed a quick glance. You're asking them to produce bland generic profiles for something, which will undoubtedly sort of half work in the game, never be updated. Youd find a small minority of the game moaning they're not "tournament legal" because a larger minoirty refuses to acknowledge they exist. All while a new team came out that does the exact same thing as the Legends team but with all the contemporary bells and whistles.
That's ignoring the fact that these Kill Teams can't be purchased, that the games development and ongoing support requires a cash flow. Hence if people ardently stuck to playing their Legends teams, the game dies anyway.
When you buy a copy of any annual video game series, how many years do you demand to be able to find full lobbies and have the servers running for?
Dudeface wrote: When you buy a copy of any annual video game series, how many years do you demand to be able to find full lobbies and have the servers running for?
See, I don't play video games that have annual releases, partly for that reason.
The key difference, however, is the hobby investment. I was somewhat irked when, after converting my Chosen Marines to all have thunder hammers, GW went and just gave them all 'accursed weapons'. Ditto for my Vanguard Veterans. I have a lovingly crafted Sorcerer Lord of On Disc (see avatar, left) I kitbashed from several kits to use as my general in Warhammer Fantasy who currently can't be fielded in any system because Age of Sigmar is now enforcing round bases and the Disc has no actual rules in Old World (and its base size is off to just be a Daemonic Mount).
The key difference, however, is the hobby investment. I was somewhat irked when, after converting my Chosen Marines to all have thunder hammers, GW went and just gave them all 'accursed weapons'. Ditto for my Vanguard Veterans. I have a lovingly crafted Sorcerer Lord of On Disc (see avatar, left) I kitbashed from several kits to use as my general in Warhammer Fantasy who currently can't be fielded in any system because Age of Sigmar is now enforcing round bases and the Disc has no actual rules in Old World (and its base size is off to just be a Daemonic Mount).
Congrats, I converted an entire R&H army that now doesn't exist in 40k.
Do you know what I did? Got over it and used Guard/GSC rules in 40k and the Militia rules in HH instead.
You gave two units identical weapons, the rules changed, and the weapons are still all identical. Zero sum change in the usability of the models.
You've chosen not to rebase your Sorcerer despite having every possible sign shown that squares were not going to be used for AoS and ignored it, then blamed the rules saying to use circle bases.
The point about TOW is laughable at best unless you've mounted this Sorcerer on a base half the size it should be.
Ok, so this is what the WarCom article actually says:
From now on, every kill team will receive consistently updated rules for two editions – updates will be quarterly, while smaller adjustments may be made as required. Every team will remain in the product range for four full seasons – seasons generally last 12 months, though they can be longer or shorter as required. This is to ensure a manageable range that we can keep in stock.
Classified Kill Teams
Teams that are currently available in the Kill Team product range are labelled Classified, which indicates that they are the ones currently recommended for tournament play. The teams below are currently Classified, and this list will be updated after the first season of the new edition comes to a close. When a team leaves the product range it leaves the Classified list.
So what is Classified for? The list will be used to ensure fairness, stability, and availability for major Warhammer events such as US Opens and the World Championships of Warhammer. We will provide an Event Companion document containing all the guidance you need to run your own tournaments in a similar way. But that doesn’t mean that your favourite team won’t be playable!
For example, Kommandos will be Classified throughout the first season of the new edition. The box will leave the Kill Team range when the season comes to a close, and the Kommandos kill team will leave the Classified list. You can still enjoy playing them in all other settings except for Classified tournament play – and they will continue to receive updates (including for balance) until the end of this edition.
Editions are ~3 years, and Seasons are ~1 year. I think it is quite clear that a Kill team unit will be fully supported for 3-4* years and boxed as a Kill Team unit, and will have further rules support for between 0 to 2 years for casual play before receiving no further updates in the subsequent edition.
They are clear a unit will only get rules for 2 editions, so a team released at the end of the 3rd season of an edition will only get a little more than 3 years of support before being dropped from Kill Team, although all of that will be "Classified". If you want to continue using unsupported teams for the next edition, you/your group will need to use houserules to adapt to the new edition. The level of work this will require is entirely unpredictable.
Where this gets wonky is that some absolutely classic units within the infiltration role will be getting retired from Kill Team. For example, Ork Kommandoes and Tau Pathfinders will no longer be part of Kill Team in about 3 years. These are very thematic units for Kill Team missions, and it feels very odd that they will loose support. I can see the (economic) logic of range rotation for Kill Team, but I do think that each faction should retain their "core" infiltration unit. No other Ork unit makes as much sense doing Kill Team missions as Kommandos (except their feral Ork equivalent Trackas), and clearly GW agrees because they haven't released any other bespoke Ork kill teams to date. These units are not detached from the rich background of 40k.
All round this seems like an inflexible approach that will bite them in a couple of years, especially if they continue to have significant faction imbalances in the release schedule.
*If a team is released after the beginning of a season, you will only get a fraction of a year to play in that season. If the last team released in that season, it will be a small fraction.
There's essentially two problems. You can't infinitely expand a game and ruleset while still keeping it balanced and fun. It's why LCGs have set rotation. It's why you won't find a board game with 50+ asymmetric sides. It's why 40K is what it is (not a great game).
Problem two is wargamers stop playing a game if nothing new comes out. The game is dead. You can't just declare Kill Team complete and expect to keep up continued sales and play of older teams. People would stop playing it. You'd have just as much luck finding someone to play KT21 at the FLGS if GW stopped making new stuff for it as you will now with KT24 out.
They made a choice to prioritise the game with this, which is actually an interesting departure for GW. To prioritise the balance of a game system over having a system that's primarily just a showcase for painted models. It further marks out KT as its own thing, not a value-add for 40K players or a gateway to said game.
So accepting that a rotation is inevitable would people be less angry if GW guarantees that the newest Kill Team of a faction will always stays in until the faction gets another one?
So for example Kommandos won't be removed until another Ork Kill Team is released but Krieg get removed since Guard had Kasrkin afterwards.
Of course that also has problems since Pathfinders, Kroot and Vespids are pretty different even if they are all Tau but still the best compromise I could think of to at least not exclude entire factions until they might get another Kill Team sometime in the future
deano2099 wrote: There's essentially two problems. You can't infinitely expand a game and ruleset while still keeping it balanced and fun. It's why LCGs have set rotation. It's why you won't find a board game with 50+ asymmetric sides. It's why 40K is what it is (not a great game).
Problem two is wargamers stop playing a game if nothing new comes out. The game is dead. You can't just declare Kill Team complete and expect to keep up continued sales and play of older teams. People would stop playing it. You'd have just as much luck finding someone to play KT21 at the FLGS if GW stopped making new stuff for it as you will now with KT24 out.
.
This, and also:
- b&m stores may be not willing to keep a range that requires an area the size of a football field. Warmachine run into this problem and even when their models were actually available in stores, taking up a lot of space, the chances that it would be exactly what a customer is looking for were still slim, due to the immense size of the range
-if I were a tournament player I would actually appreciate the fact that I can get my head around a limited meta instead of trying to learn the tricks of a hundred different Kill Teams. That's why I preferred Standard during my short adventure with MtG Arena - I could concentrate on efficient play and strategy, not on reading every single card my opponents played in formats with a much wider range of cards.
As a casual player I am not going to affected by Classified anyway, but even if I was, I can see the positives.
deano2099 wrote: There's essentially two problems. You can't infinitely expand a game and ruleset while still keeping it balanced and fun. It's why LCGs have set rotation. It's why you won't find a board game with 50+ asymmetric sides. It's why 40K is what it is (not a great game).
Problem two is wargamers stop playing a game if nothing new comes out. The game is dead. You can't just declare Kill Team complete and expect to keep up continued sales and play of older teams. People would stop playing it. You'd have just as much luck finding someone to play KT21 at the FLGS if GW stopped making new stuff for it as you will now with KT24 out.
They made a choice to prioritise the game with this, which is actually an interesting departure for GW. To prioritise the balance of a game system over having a system that's primarily just a showcase for painted models. It further marks out KT as its own thing, not a value-add for 40K players or a gateway to said game.
Or they could make everybody happy with the classic GW unofficial rotation of just making new teams strictly better than old teams, so they're technically legal, but you're an idiot for using them.
Dudeface wrote: Are you expecting them to make casual only rules for 70+ Kill Teams, all with unique functions?
::Takes quick glance at 40k's Legends section::
Um, yes? Yes.
When you buy a copy of any annual video game series, how many years do you demand to be able to find full lobbies and have the servers running for?
Wargaming is not the same as COD, unless you're playing grey plastic.
Give me a break.
Why?
Both are products provided by the retailer, you take them home, you use them for whatever purpose, their intended support isn't finite.
Just like wargames, you can play your favourite release indefinitely as long as you have enough people to play with, but eventually it stops making them money and they need to do something to refresh it, a new edition.
Your paint scheme/conversions/assembly, whatever is utterly irrelevant here. If anything CoD or whatever being £60+ with an online subscription for consoles and only having 12-18 months of lifespan is a categorically worse deal than GW offers here.
The writing has been on the wall for nearly a decade now that GGw is moving to LCG/video game style release patterns but spread over much longer cycles.
They're now telling you in advance so you can plan, instead of just doing it.
Dislike it, dislike them, dislike me, whatever. Nothing is stopping anyone continuing to play current killteam, nobody will remove your minis from your possession. But this is how GW will continue to operate, which if they do it, likely orhers will follow.
Matrindur wrote: So accepting that a rotation is inevitable would people be less angry if GW guarantees that the newest Kill Team of a faction will always stays in until the faction gets another one?
So for example Kommandos won't be removed until another Ork Kill Team is released but Krieg get removed since Guard had Kasrkin afterwards.
Of course that also has problems since Pathfinders, Kroot and Vespids are pretty different even if they are all Tau but still the best compromise I could think of to at least not exclude entire factions until they might get another Kill Team sometime in the future
I think they will probably ensure to release an Ork team by the end of this season to replace Kommandos IMO. I am pretty sure such a strategy is in place for the core factions already, but GW could publicly confirm it.
Personally, I'd prefer (under the caveat GW is going to do range rotation) to have core teams and rotational teams- maybe one core team per faction that always remains in the ruleset, that is their most iconic unit for the infiltration/scouting/raiding role.
Jammer87 wrote: You mean you don't like the appeal to probability fallacy argument that some future opponent at your LFGS is going to say no to a Kill Team match because your team isn't in the latest tournament approved list?
You can belittle it as fallacy all you want, but the fact remains that many communities do as a whole or individually have players that refuse to play against Legends specifically because they're not tournament legal.
That is a reality players deal with regularly, whether right or wrong.
Yeah that sucks for those communities. I'd be interested to see if those communities were LGS or Warhammer stores?
LGS. GW stores aren't as common in the US as LGS are and many states have maybe one GW store if any.
because than it is not a wargame any more but a miniature livestyle game
and any other company but GW doing that thing with miniatures can close their doors after the announcement for a wargame
My word, a miniature lifestyle game? It's 6 years to paint and play with a box of roughly 10 duders. It's hardly a lifestyle choice.
Technically 3-6 years. You get a lot more use out of a season 1 team than a season 3 team, especially the last team of the edition.
Yes that's a valid stance so 37 - 72 months of usage as a minimum. I stand by a 3+ year return is hardly a lifestyle choice, certainly no more than any if the other games.
As another thread to pull at, does killteam really have to be 40k-lite? Does each 40k scale force need to be represented, or can this game opt to represent some of the unusual and weird/wonderful choices as has been shown?
it should be, but the last teams we got were just "not enough slots for that game at the factory so we just use the slots for the other game to make it"
kodos wrote: it should be, but the last teams we got were just "not enough slots for that game at the factory so we just use the slots for the other game to make it"
There had been a thread of that happening for sure, it's still better than no releases if it pumps up the Kill Teams sales numbers and makes it look popular however, especially if it ends up with a mix of kooky and "stock 40k squad with more stuff".
Dudeface wrote: As another thread to pull at, does killteam really have to be 40k-lite? Does each 40k scale force need to be represented, or can this game opt to represent some of the unusual and weird/wonderful choices as has been shown?
I can think of two factions straight off the bat who've never had a Kill Team, and a couple of others where I can't recall either way if they had.
That would imply the answer to your theoretical is that no, not all 40k forces need to be represented.
Dudeface wrote: As another thread to pull at, does killteam really have to be 40k-lite? Does each 40k scale force need to be represented, or can this game opt to represent some of the unusual and weird/wonderful choices as has been shown?
I can think of two factions straight off the bat who've never had a Kill Team, and a couple of others where I can't recall either way if they had.
That would imply the answer to your theoretical is that no, not all 40k forces need to be represented.
Yet people keep asking for it as a core of the games range.
kodos wrote: it should be, but the last teams we got were just "not enough slots for that game at the factory so we just use the slots for the other game to make it"
There had been a thread of that happening for sure, it's still better than no releases if it pumps up the Kill Teams sales numbers and makes it look popular however, especially if it ends up with a mix of kooky and "stock 40k squad with more stuff".
with the result that there are now too many teams and we need to accept that generic Teams are gone and the dedicated Teams are also not there to stay
I would have preferred less releases but therefore dedicated Kill Teams rather than 40k lite as that it was kills the game, if it is just a vehicle to release new 40k boxes and not its own game, people lose interest
kodos wrote: it should be, but the last teams we got were just "not enough slots for that game at the factory so we just use the slots for the other game to make it"
There had been a thread of that happening for sure, it's still better than no releases if it pumps up the Kill Teams sales numbers and makes it look popular however, especially if it ends up with a mix of kooky and "stock 40k squad with more stuff".
with the result that there are now too many teams and we need to accept that generic Teams are gone and the dedicated Teams are also not there to stay
I would have preferred less releases but therefore dedicated Kill Teams rather than 40k lite as that it was kills the game, if it is just a vehicle to release new 40k boxes and not its own game, people lose interest
And here in this thread are a lot of complaints people can't just slap down some Intercessors and play now.
There's clearly a lot of very opposing view points and opinions on this and seemingly people are just annoyed for whatever subjective personal reason whilst not swaped by the objective reasoning for it.
I suppose a niche game by GW will always bring people with more diverse expectations.
Imagine if Necromunda did this "to keep the game balanced for competitive play, we're going to retire your gang after 3 years" thing. It's insanity. Just release stuff, make rules for it, let people play it. If the competitive players don't like something let them ban it in their event pack. Commercially this is an insane thing to do. You aren't maintaining a live service video game.
Billicus wrote: Imagine if Necromunda did this "to keep the game balanced for competitive play, we're going to retire your gang after 3 years" thing. It's insanity. Just release stuff, make rules for it, let people play it. If the competitive players don't like something let them ban it in their event pack. Commercially this is an insane thing to do. You aren't maintaining a live service video game.
The difference is, Necromunda keeps releasing new stuff for each gang, adding brutes, vehicles, hired guns etc. rather than swathes of new factions.
I'm just wondering what they'll be doing for the solo-coop material later on, and whether Necromunda will follow suit. Hive Secundus was quite the lost oppertunity unless they have a solo-coop supplement in the works, given the "bug hunt" theme the game currently has.
I certainly hope there are more options for Craftworlds and Tyranids in the near future. I'd love to have a team that might include units such as the Neurogaunts, Neurolictor or Von Ryan's Leapers. Eldar wise I'm up for a Spiritseer leading some Wraithguard, or a Farseer and Warlock leading some guardians that can be either Defenders or Stormies - ideal for representing both Iyanden and Ulthwe teams.
SamusDrake wrote: I'm just wondering what they'll be doing for the solo-coop material later on, and whether Necromunda will follow suit. Hive Secundus was quite the lost oppertunity unless they have a solo-coop supplement in the works, given the "bug hunt" theme the game currently has.
I certainly hope there are more options for Craftworlds and Tyranids in the near future. I'd love to have a team that might include units such as the Neurogaunts, Neurolictor or Von Ryan's Leapers. Eldar wise I'm up for a Spiritseer leading some Wraithguard, or a Farseer and Warlock leading some guardians that can be either Defenders or Stormies - ideal for representing both Iyanden and Ulthwe teams.
I guess White Dwarf might start doing articles on new teams again?
Billicus wrote: Imagine if Necromunda did this "to keep the game balanced for competitive play, we're going to retire your gang after 3 years" thing. It's insanity. Just release stuff, make rules for it, let people play it. If the competitive players don't like something let them ban it in their event pack. Commercially this is an insane thing to do. You aren't maintaining a live service video game.
The difference is, Necromunda keeps releasing new stuff for each gang, adding brutes, vehicles, hired guns etc. rather than swathes of new factions.
How many factions are in Necromunda now?
Six Great Houses
Mercenary/bounty hunters
Genestealer cult
Totally-not-khorne meat cult
Other Genestealer cult
Enforcers
Wastelanders
Squats
Spyrers
So fourteen? Any more?
Need at least two more to get to even half as many as current KT factions. And Necromunda gangs have much less in the way of unique special rules.
The numbers are arbitrary since the rubric is "how much effort is this to balance" and that's entirely subjective. The reason they'd never do it is because everyone would just tell them to F off and go back to community rules like we did for all the years they couldn't be bothered to support munda. That context doesn't exist for kill team so they feel safer taking the piss. See also: stormcast eternal sacrosanct chamber
The difference is, Necromunda keeps releasing new stuff for each gang, adding brutes, vehicles, hired guns etc. rather than swathes of new factions.
Necromunda also clearly exists (along with some other specialist games) in part to cater to the audience who don't want to have regularly changing rules they have to keep checking online. That is literally a selling point to some people.
kodos wrote: it should be, but the last teams we got were just "not enough slots for that game at the factory so we just use the slots for the other game to make it"
There had been a thread of that happening for sure, it's still better than no releases if it pumps up the Kill Teams sales numbers and makes it look popular however, especially if it ends up with a mix of kooky and "stock 40k squad with more stuff".
with the result that there are now too many teams and we need to accept that generic Teams are gone and the dedicated Teams are also not there to stay
I would have preferred less releases but therefore dedicated Kill Teams rather than 40k lite as that it was kills the game, if it is just a vehicle to release new 40k boxes and not its own game, people lose interest
And here in this thread are a lot of complaints people can't just slap down some Intercessors and play now.
There's clearly a lot of very opposing view points and opinions on this and seemingly people are just annoyed for whatever subjective personal reason whilst not swaped by the objective reasoning for it.
Wich is what I said, the generic teams, like Intercessors as Compendium and the special ones like Exotides as boxed team
Releasing 40k units as KT was a mistake and now removing all generic ones is one too
kodos wrote: it should be, but the last teams we got were just "not enough slots for that game at the factory so we just use the slots for the other game to make it"
There had been a thread of that happening for sure, it's still better than no releases if it pumps up the Kill Teams sales numbers and makes it look popular however, especially if it ends up with a mix of kooky and "stock 40k squad with more stuff".
with the result that there are now too many teams and we need to accept that generic Teams are gone and the dedicated Teams are also not there to stay
I would have preferred less releases but therefore dedicated Kill Teams rather than 40k lite as that it was kills the game, if it is just a vehicle to release new 40k boxes and not its own game, people lose interest
And here in this thread are a lot of complaints people can't just slap down some Intercessors and play now.
There's clearly a lot of very opposing view points and opinions on this and seemingly people are just annoyed for whatever subjective personal reason whilst not swaped by the objective reasoning for it.
Wich is what I said, the generic teams, like Intercessors as Compendium and the special ones like Exotides as boxed team
Releasing 40k units as KT was a mistake and now removing all generic ones is one too
I'm confused at this point. How can releasing Kill Teams based on 40k units be a mistake, but then removing Kill Teams based on 40k units also be a mistake?
At least the mandrakes and most others have specialists, wargear and sculpts designed to make some minis stand apart as a Kill team. The Compendium teams are very literally 'what if my 40k army, but Kill team'.
because than it is not a wargame any more but a miniature livestyle game
and any other company but GW doing that thing with miniatures can close their doors after the announcement for a wargame
And maybe (whisper it...) that is the case. Maybe Kill Team isn't a wargame. Small number of figures, limited list-building options, new edition introducing more in ways of card play... at the very least it exists somewhere on the border between a traditional wargame and a mins-based board game. And there's this continuing push for it to be more like the former when actually it'd be a more enjoyable experience all around if it was more like the latter.
kodos wrote: it should be, but the last teams we got were just "not enough slots for that game at the factory so we just use the slots for the other game to make it"
There had been a thread of that happening for sure, it's still better than no releases if it pumps up the Kill Teams sales numbers and makes it look popular however, especially if it ends up with a mix of kooky and "stock 40k squad with more stuff".
with the result that there are now too many teams and we need to accept that generic Teams are gone and the dedicated Teams are also not there to stay
I would have preferred less releases but therefore dedicated Kill Teams rather than 40k lite as that it was kills the game, if it is just a vehicle to release new 40k boxes and not its own game, people lose interest
And here in this thread are a lot of complaints people can't just slap down some Intercessors and play now.
Of course there are. If I'm a big 40K fan, Kill Team previously offered a cheap alternative way to play a different sort of game over a smaller time period with fewer figures. For free if I already had the minis and terrain and could get the rules online. It's absolutely 100% understandable why such people would be annoyed that that is going away.
But what I'm less a fan of is the argument that this is therefore bad for Kill Team, the game itself. For people who actually enjoy playing it for what it is. It does throw up a barrier to entry for sure. Which might reduce the player base. That's fair. But there's a point that if you want the game to be taken seriously, it has to put on its big boy pants and stand up on its own as its own game, on its own merits. Not as a value add for players of 40K. That's what is happening now. And that yes, that means 40K players are losing a value-add. Though one can argue the niche of smaller, quicker 40K games with limited list building is now fulfilled by Combat Patrol.
The discussion of "factions" is coming from the same place. Kill Team literally redefines factions as teams in the rules. Kommando is a faction. Karskin is a faction. At no point anywhere in the Kill Team rules is the 40K "parent" faction referenced. Nothing special happens if Scout Squad fights Intercession. They don't interact at all. There's not even a keyword in the dataslates to allow them to interact in some theoretical future release.
I do appreciate that existing players (and even lapsed players) will have preference for certain 40K factions based on nostalgia or liking the lore or whatever, but again, if the game is to truly stand alone, that's much less relevant. And the further we get away from this the greater the chance we can get a few more properly weird Kill Teams that don't fit into the traditional factions at all.
The relevance of major factions to Kill Team is that those factions have a presence outside of the game systems of W40k and Kill Team, and Kill Team is favourable to new GW wargamers due to its low starting investment.
For example, Space Marine 2 is a new game featuring Space Marines and Tyranids. Someone plays this cool hack-and-slash game and thinks the Tyranids are awesome. They do a bit of searching- turns out you can get models of these, and there are rules to play them! Also, some of the rules are for a small skirmish game called Kill Team that looks a bit easier to start with. Hang on... where are the Tyranids? Maybe I'll do something else...
Covering the core factions of the 40k setting is a good idea to me. Plenty of players found out about 40k from video game sources, there is a whole generation from Dawn of War for example.
The_Real_Chris wrote: Hopefully the new edition will entice new players, but for minimal effort they could have had a few more.
A few more what? People that don't buy Killteam minis? Not taking a side in the argument of if it is right or not, but I'd wager GW doesn't care about losing players that don't buy the product.
Players. Why? Because even though GW has backed off the idea the games don't matter at all, a lot of people will pick up games others play. Why do people play 40k? The stunning rules? Or because that is what people locally play. I would care about new sales. To do that I want new customers to see the game being played and have a chance to play it. Bonus if there is a power imbalance to give the new guys more of a chance.
Are you expecting them to make casual only rules for 70+ Kill Teams, all with unique functions?
I mean I could literally convert all the needed (i.e. no equivalent) legacy teams in a single work week with a spot of playtesting, aiming at a 45% win rate to put them into a second tier, to enable casual players to continue and make my product more attractive to new purchasers, with a secondary task of converting them into customers. Strip out most of the complicated rules for them and leave them as simple, rules light and easy to pick up teams. As a company with GWs turnover I reckon I could outsource that for a grand and not be too fussed.
That's ignoring the fact that these Kill Teams can't be purchased *snip*
The 'core' compendium teams normally can be and those are the ones disappearing first. For the bespoke stuff that doesn't otherwise get made, sure. Again this is about upping player counts to make a game viable and sales better.
Haighus wrote: Where this gets wonky is that some absolutely classic units within the infiltration role will be getting retired from Kill Team. For example, Ork Kommandoes and Tau Pathfinders will no longer be part of Kill Team in about 3 years. These are very thematic units for Kill Team missions, and it feels very odd that they will loose support.
Yes - its odd that 'core/traditional' team team options would go.
In terms of 'evergreen/core teams' I would of thought given the background Deathwatch kill teams (funniest omission), Scouts, Scions, pathfinders, Kommandos, whatever those AdMech inilftrator/scouts are, scorpions+rangers, CSM chosen, 'Nid infiltrators and flayed ones or whatever Necrons use for infiltration. 10 core units, all using 40k boxes, no extra SKUs. Have whatever cast of rotating teams built around them.
(Personally why they didn't do terminators and stealers for the hulk season is totally beyond me.)
They don't have to be in the current tournament rotation, but should surely always have rules, and those rules should be pretty straightforward and lite so they can be gateway teams into the game and a source of casual players to ensure the game doesn't disappear and your sales go down with it.
So, no KT preorder next week (TOW chaos MTO instead) - when do we think this is happening? They’ve been doing previews so t should be soon but I guess they haven’t gone into super detail yet either. Week after next? 21/09?
The_Real_Chris wrote: Hopefully the new edition will entice new players, but for minimal effort they could have had a few more.
A few more what? People that don't buy Killteam minis? Not taking a side in the argument of if it is right or not, but I'd wager GW doesn't care about losing players that don't buy the product.
Players. Why? Because even though GW has backed off the idea the games don't matter at all, a lot of people will pick up games others play. Why do people play 40k? The stunning rules? Or because that is what people locally play. I would care about new sales. To do that I want new customers to see the game being played and have a chance to play it. Bonus if there is a power imbalance to give the new guys more of a chance.
That's definitely one way to do it. You can try and essentially entice people to play it by letting them use their existing models.
There is another way though. You can just make a really good game. Sometimes, those two options are in conflict. I'm pleasantly surprised when any company takes the "make a good game" route over the easier one.
(And frankly, playing with compendium teams, beyond anything else, is *such* a different gaming experience to playing with bespoke teams. I suspect that's why it's actually gone. I know there's a mindset that says simpler = easier to get into = good introduction to the game. But it can also just as quickly lead people to dismiss the game as too simple and boring. That could well be the real reason that they are gone. That the designers don't want that experience to be what Kill Team is.)
The problem is, if you want the game to provide diverse playstyles and unique gimmicks for the factions, you need to keep the total number of teams manageable or the barrier to entry of the game is too high. If every team has such a unique mechanic that your first time against them you lose until you “get” how they function and you have 70 teams, that’s a lot of losses for a new player. Alternatively you can have a huge number of teams but they’ll need to be more similar mechanically.
Another way to minimise rules bloat is not creating new rules for new models when it is unnecessary.
Do Kasrkin, Scions, and Aquilons need different rules? No. They are fundamentally the same unit (elite stormtroopers in carapace armour) and a unified entry could encompass all their options.
The Scion rules from Ashes of Faith were essentially identical to the Kasrkin rules, with a couple of options removed that weren't present in the Scion kit (like the demo charge and sniper hotshot). They could easily be consolidated.
GW doesn't like doing this these days, but it is a valid approach.
Mr_Rose wrote: So, no KT preorder next week (TOW chaos MTO instead) - when do we think this is happening? They’ve been doing previews so t should be soon but I guess they haven’t gone into super detail yet either. Week after next? 21/09?
I think they mentioned pre-order in September and shipping early October. With the usual 2 weeks pre-order window, that would mean pre-orders on Sept 21 or Sept 28 (Sept 14 pre-orders will ship on Sept 28).
This might be copium, but when they announced the slower paced schedule for the rest of 2024 my first thought was that GW are trying to return to 1-week preorders again. Doing that would first require at least one filler/MTO release week, and here we are...
However I kinda expect to see Blood Angels first. If announced next Sunday that would put them 4 weeks after the army box, which is fairly typical for marines. Kill Team preorder on Sept 28th feels most likely to me.
One thing I do find a little peculiar - they have literally announced the expiration date of some kill teams (Night Lords and Mandrakes, possibly others?) before they've actually announced the release date - aside from the starter box that was on pre-order for all of an hour or so before selling out...
If you make teams fundamentally the same rules wise, you've no need to buy the new ones, if you want to up player count that will only be relevant in a world where that translates to sales. Regards balancing all teams in a weekend for a grand, crack on, your gaming group will be well covered.
There's isn't another manageable outcome that doesn't leave the game stagnating or bloated and hemorrhaging investment to players just plucking some models out their 40k army.
I'd argue 40k suffers from stagnating, bloating and often hemorrhaging investment, but then people are always quick to remind how it's not a great game for those reasons.
That is assuming that new rules are the only reason to buy new models... yet GW supported multiple lines for purely cosmetic variants of units for over two decades when it was a much smaller company.
I think it is likely that changing rules encourages more purchases of models in the short term, but churn also burns customers out in the long term and it clearly isn't necessary based on GW's own product history.
I'd argue 40k suffers from stagnating, bloating and often hemorrhaging investment, but then people are always quick to remind how it's not a great game for those reasons.
Yup, and it's understandable to an extent because it has to support decades worth of players with investments of £1000s in models and painting time. I don't think it's okay what they did with Stormcast Sacrosanct to be honest. The hobby of large scale wargaming as a whole includes the whole modelling/collecting/painting aesthetics to a huge degree and it *has* to balance those.
Kill Team is different. A team is 5-10 models. It's okay not to support those indefinitely. And it's never going to look amazing on the table at that scale anyway, not in the same way. They can focus more on the game instead.
The one group of people most impacted with this change is the people who brought all of the season 1 Kill Teams. All of the Octarius teams from start to finish. They've built and painted all of them (and the terrain) and it's all going away in three years. Those 10 Kill Teams probably took similar effort to a small army.
And yet, that's the one group you are not seeing complain. Or at least, I'm not. Most of those people, the people actually "losing" loads of teams they painted, are also invested enough in the game to understand it's a good move in the longer term.
Haighus wrote: The relevance of major factions to Kill Team is that those factions have a presence outside of the game systems of W40k and Kill Team, and Kill Team is favourable to new GW wargamers due to its low starting investment.
For example, Space Marine 2 is a new game featuring Space Marines and Tyranids. Someone plays this cool hack-and-slash game and thinks the Tyranids are awesome. They do a bit of searching- turns out you can get models of these, and there are rules to play them! Also, some of the rules are for a small skirmish game called Kill Team that looks a bit easier to start with. Hang on... where are the Tyranids? Maybe I'll do something else...
Covering the core factions of the 40k setting is a good idea to me. Plenty of players found out about 40k from video game sources, there is a whole generation from Dawn of War for example.
From GW's perspective, this is what Combat Patrol is for. They want new players to buy the bigger army in a box for 'cut down 40k'.
Mr_Rose wrote: Today’s article is a compilation of micro-previews for various imperial kill teams.
Curious about renaming the veteran guard team; makes me wonder if other named regiments are going to get their own Teams.
We must SURELY get a Catachan Kill Team at some point, more knife-y than the regular team.
I think it is likely we will see more specific Guard teams given the renaming of the vet guardsmen to DKoK. That also feels like preparation for the DKoK kit to be repacked into a 40k box for the DKoK unit in 40k, which doesn't currently have a box labelled as such.
[quote=Haighus 814445 11695517 5cb629f12cb23744a3f9b727773e6842.jpg
Do Kasrkin, Scions, and Aquilons need different rules? No. They are fundamentally the same unit (elite stormtroopers in carapace armour) and a unified entry could encompass all their options.
I don't disagree that it could be done; it could be.
But come on Haighus, you don't really want this, do you? This idea is so bad it could suck the chrome off a trailer hitch.
And not just in terms of the game or creativity, but in a business sense. If you've got one profile that can be served by 3 different models, you'll sell 1/3 of the models. And the team that sells the least will ALWAYS be on the block.
Do Kasrkin, Scions, and Aquilons need different rules? No. They are fundamentally the same unit (elite stormtroopers in carapace armour) and a unified entry could encompass all their options.
I don't disagree that it could be done; it could be.
But come on Haighus, you don't really want this, do you? This idea is so bad it could suck the chrome off a trailer hitch.
And not just in terms of the game or creativity, but in a business sense. If you've got one profile that can be served by 3 different models, you'll sell 1/3 of the models. And the team that sells the least will ALWAYS be on the block.
I would absolutely want this.
But ultimately I want Kill Team v1 back, and the breadth of modelling and team options it had.
Yeah...got a feeling the Void-Dancer team will be replaced in the near future.
some sort of new harlequin kill team would certainly be fun. maybe we finally get a mime kit, or more restrainedly, i would be interested in seeing what an upgrade sprue could do for troupes
Bring back Mimes, but lean into it. Give them psychic barriers that block movement and projectiles but not line of sight. Let them trap people in transparent boxes and pull themselves up walls using invisible rope. One Specialist can be a Hush that reduces enemy APL by making it so they can’t hear anything.
Harlequins are like a mocking reflection of Slaanesh- give them a band. Weaponized and psychic wraithbone instruments that could fit in to give harlequins more special and heavy weapon options than just fusion pistols and the Death jester
Yeah...got a feeling the Void-Dancer team will be replaced in the near future.
Hopefully not too soon, a bunch of factions are going to have no kill teams while the extended Aeldari have four even with Void-Dancers getting retired. Sisters of Silence seem like a hint for an upcoming Imperial one.
Yeah...got a feeling the Void-Dancer team will be replaced in the near future.
Hopefully not too soon, a bunch of factions are going to have no kill teams while the extended Aeldari have four even with Void-Dancers getting retired. Sisters of Silence seem like a hint for an upcoming Imperial one.
While I agree that Tyranids could do with earlier factions and Orks really need something this season given that Kommandoz rotate out, I think categorising Drukhari as part of an overall 40k Aeldari faction (leaving aside that Kill Team mechanically doesn't care) is like saying that, since Imperium has 6 kill teams (and that's leaving aside Astartes) and Chaos has 4 and 2 digital, AdMech, Thousand Sons and Death Guard should be later. I get that since the Ynnari GW seems like it doesn't quite know what to do with the Eldar as a whole, but going down the route of "all elves same" seems like it furthers that feeling of disinterest. At least to me it seems like we have 2 craftworld (ish, given corsairs are weird) and 2 commorite teams, though I understand why non-elf players would collapse it all.
Of course Imperium sells and Chaos probably sells the next most so there's that whole thing to contend with.
A quick aside on designers intent, difficulty of learning a team, bespoke rules, balance etc. Blood Bowl. Admittedly GWs worse design instincts are creeping in, especially with stars (who often get banned for that reason), the game does remarkably well with a series of universal rules and limited stat variance. Obviously that is eroding because GW can't help but have unique skills (I can only imagine every GW designer is a special snowflake and wishes everything was too). But at its core for a very long time it achieved an awful lot of complexity with very little complication.
OK, so its GW so complication is now compulsory, but Kill team would still benefit from a few 'intro' teams that didn't rely on gimmicks just core rules to play. Because they are great to teach people how to play and also a relief sometimes when you want a simple game.
One of my favourite teams was the 'Stealer compendium team. Everything pretty much identical, but with uniformity across the models the oppo could focus more on what they were doing and I could sneak around and leap out at the enemy.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
deano2099 wrote: That's definitely one way to do it. You can try and essentially entice people to play it by letting them use their existing models.
There is another way though. You can just make a really good game. Sometimes, those two options are in conflict. I'm pleasantly surprised when any company takes the "make a good game" route over the easier one.
Yeah, lets not have an unreachable expectation for GW
Yes - its odd that 'core/traditional' team team options would go.
In terms of 'evergreen/core teams' I would of thought given the background Deathwatch kill teams (funniest omission), Scouts, Scions, pathfinders, Kommandos, whatever those AdMech inilftrator/scouts are, scorpions+rangers, CSM chosen, 'Nid infiltrators and flayed ones or whatever Necrons use for infiltration. 10 core units, all using 40k boxes, no extra SKUs. Have whatever cast of rotating teams built around them.
Still think having a stable core for the new teams to be measured against and rotate around, each evocative of that races classic options, is the way to go...
The_Real_Chris wrote: OK, so its GW so complication is now compulsory, but Kill team would still benefit from a few 'intro' teams that didn't rely on gimmicks just core rules to play. Because they are great to teach people how to play and also a relief sometimes when you want a simple game.
Hopefully that's what the Space Marine team should be like.
I thought KT could be fun to get into with the new edition, but I've found the rules samples from this week's articles incredibly difficult to parse. I never got around to KT21, but had a great time with KT18... KT24 does not seem to be for me at all.
Prometheum5 wrote: I thought KT could be fun to get into with the new edition, but I've found the rules samples from this week's articles incredibly difficult to parse. I never got around to KT21, but had a great time with KT18... KT24 does not seem to be for me at all.
It is odd they are showcasing rules without saying how the game works first.
OK, so its GW so complication is now compulsory, but Kill team would still benefit from a few 'intro' teams that didn't rely on gimmicks just core rules to play. Because they are great to teach people how to play and also a relief sometimes when you want a simple game.
One of my favourite teams was the 'Stealer compendium team. Everything pretty much identical, but with uniformity across the models the oppo could focus more on what they were doing and I could sneak around and leap out at the enemy.
.
The KT starter set available for ages had a bunch of missions that let you play through simplified starter games... and both those teams made it perfectly legal to just take a leader a bunch of regular, non specialist units.
That's basically the answer. If you want to play a non-competitive team with simpler rules (like the compendium teams are now) just play any team but take all the basic troops.
Yes, the most competitive lists mean taking as many different operatives as possible so you can deal with anything, but most teams do have the option for far simpler play. Folks just ignore it because they also have the shiny stuff.
(Admittedly there's an issue with how you build them but you can build the different operatives and just say "they are all basic Kommando Boyz today")
Do Kasrkin, Scions, and Aquilons need different rules? No. They are fundamentally the same unit (elite stormtroopers in carapace armour) and a unified entry could encompass all their options.
I don't disagree that it could be done; it could be.
But come on Haighus, you don't really want this, do you? This idea is so bad it could suck the chrome off a trailer hitch.
And not just in terms of the game or creativity, but in a business sense. If you've got one profile that can be served by 3 different models, you'll sell 1/3 of the models. And the team that sells the least will ALWAYS be on the block.
Are you saying that the only reason to buy Aquilons is because they have slightly different rules to Kasrkin or Scions? They are pretty much cosmetic variants already.
For what its worth, I am very happy to own cosmetic variants of the same unit. I have 9 different aesthetics for infantry squads (3 converted) and models with 3 different stormtrooper aesthetics. A lot of people like having choice. GW managed to support 6+ different Guard aesthetic ranges for 2 decades when they were smaller. I don't see why this is a terrible option.
Are you saying that the only reason to buy Aquilons is because they have slightly different rules to Kasrkin or Scions?
No, I'm saying that if the rules for the three factions/ teams aren't different, a significant portion of the players who already have 2/3 of them may opt not to buy the third, which would be bad for the bottom line of the game, which limits the amount GW can invest in it without haemorrhaging shareholders.
For what its worth, I am very happy to own cosmetic variants of the same unit. I have 9 different aesthetics for infantry squads (3 converted) and models with 3 different stormtrooper aesthetics. A lot of people like having choice. GW managed to support 6+ different Guard aesthetic ranges for 2 decades when they were smaller. I don't see why this is a terrible option.
Which is totally cool, but GW doesn't have to make the game more bland for people who like mechanical variety between factions/teams and risk the business consequences of that in order for you to keep doing it the way you like it. Heck, I want my Inquistorial Agents from each of the three Ordos to look different whether or not their profiles are different... But I would also PREFER their profiles to be different because I DO think that an Inquisitor would bring different tools depending on what they're fighting.
Now, GW isn't going to do that, and that's okay: I will build the Inquisitorial Agent unit as is, and use it for my Hereticus dudes. If the Inquisitor leading them is Radical, I might add a Daemonhost. For Xenos, I want to use converted Van Saar because a body suit that has multiple eye lenses in their helmets look more alien. And when their Inquisitor is a radical, I might add a Jokaero (and my unaligned Zoat, though he won't be in the IA unit). Not sure what I'm going to use for my Malleus yet- the Breacher models with their classic BSG Cylon Raider helmets would be a good fit... But I don't want to proxy one IA unit for another- if my Malleus need to hitch a ride for narrative reasons, there would be ACTUAL Breachers in the battle and that would get confusing.
Maybe Enforcers, but I want them to have a more archaic look, in the same way that GK are archaic looking.
I never used shapes in this edition, always inches, but I really appreciated that the side effect of these shapes existing was unification of ranges. You just know a short range weapon or ability works in 6", a very short range one in 3" for example. Neat, elegant.
I can see now they are going for more granularity, but I think it is unnecessary complication and mental load for the sake of mental load. This guy's pistol is 8" RNG, but that guy's is 9". What for ? So that players spend more time looking up stats instead of playing the game?
I'll add, that I think shorter ranges in miniature wargames in my experience lead to more interesting gameplay, as your positioning needs to be that much sharper. The last thing is, that the longer the range, the harder it is to measure it correctly in close calls in the type of environment KT is usually played in (terrain heavy). This edition it was 6" or no measuring at all - easy.
All in all I am not a fan of the change to pistols (and probably other limited range weapons).
I'll add, that I think shorter ranges in miniature wargames in my experience lead to more interesting gameplay, as your positioning needs to be that much sharper.
You should try playing cross fire. Unlimited range, as its 28mm. As a consequence your positioning gets extremely important as when you expose yourself the enemy gets to shot and potentially kill or supress you. It really is an awesome game but needs a good terrain set up.
RaptorusRex wrote: Ok, the basic SM team got me interested. Tell me how KT works in terms of turn sequence. Is it still Movement-Shooting-Assault, or...?
It's alternate activation - you choose a single model, perform 2 or 3 actions from the list of actions with it in any order you want and pass play to your opponent.
RaptorusRex wrote: Ok, the basic SM team got me interested. Tell me how KT works in terms of turn sequence. Is it still Movement-Shooting-Assault, or...?
It's alternate activation - you choose a single model, perform 2 or 3 actions from the list of actions with it in any order you want and pass play to your opponent.
Each “turning point” (aka battle round in other GW games) has a common set of starting turn phases where the players activate global strategies in turn and set their operatives’ orders for the turn (conceal or engage) which determines what sort of actions they can take and how terrain affects them.
Then all combat proceeds as described above. Generally you can only do one of each action per operative ( so move and shoot, not shoot and shoot or move and move. But since actions can happen in any order you can fight combat, kill the opponent, then choose to shoot a more distant one.
Mr_Rose wrote: ...and set their operatives’ orders for the turn (conceal or engage) which determines what sort of actions they can take and how terrain affects them.
Unfortunately, that's not the case. When I first started reading about KT I thought it was like that and I liked the idea because I love programming moves in games (secret orders in aGOT or Starcraft were one of my first encounters with modern board games and I loved them!). Currently you only do this in the first turn of the game and even this is going to change in the incoming edition.
For the rest of the turns you do not choose the order at the start of the turn, but at the start of the model's activation. You still need to take into account that this model will keep this order until its next activation, which has various consequences. It isn't programming, but still an interesting decision to make.
As in “attempt to kick this guy’s head in, move, then shoot someone”.
Or do you do it one at a time?
One at a time. So, for example, you can see the result of your shot, and then decide whether to grab an objective or hide or charge in to finish the job.
It's choose as you go. Inquisitor was the one where you declare everything up front.
I loved the "Pause for Breath" mechanic in the game- it made the pre-declaration thing work, because if you had five actions, you could declare 2 + Pause for Breath, which meant you could decide what to do for actions four and five (which would be declared together during your Pause.
Super cool system- I actually applied it to Celerity actions in Vampire the Masquerade because I thought it was that cool.
Unfortunately, that's not the case. When I first started reading about KT I thought it was like that and I liked the idea because I love programming moves in games (secret orders in aGOT or Starcraft were one of my first encounters with modern board games and I loved them!). Currently you only do this in the first turn of the game and even this is going to change in the incoming edition.
It is one of those odd bits about the wording choices in KT21 like Turning Point. The order tokens aren't quite like perhaps more commonly used order tokens in other games. Nothing insurmountable (and certainly, "orders" gets used differently in different games) but it was a momentary blip for me when I was getting used to the rules.
It is one of those odd bits about the wording choices in KT21 like Turning Point. The order tokens aren't quite like perhaps more commonly used order tokens in other games. Nothing insurmountable (and certainly, "orders" gets used differently in different games) but it was a momentary blip for me when I was getting used to the rules.
Oh, no, I got this impression after watching gameplay on YT. When I actually read the rules it was pretty clear how it works. I like KT rules most of the time, and I do not wish to go back to wording like when I started playing WFB 5th edition, where rules were like poetry and you had to guess what the author meant. Warmachine got me used to "if you don't know read, the rule and it works exactly as it is written" and I am happy to see it in KT too.
Dysartes wrote: All the teams are gone, or just the bigger boxes?
Rebranded boxes to have the QR codes to link to the online rules on them. There's a been a couple of pictures floating around from one of the recent Warhammer+ battle reports or something, where some of the new style boxes were in the background on top of a shelf.
They're also rereleasing Bheta Decima and the Gallowdark in the same style.
Awww, bugger. Next Saturday at 10 I am doing to be part way through a 100 mile run in a complete dead zone for mobile reception. I had really hoped it would be the week after. Hopefully there are actually good stock levels so I can pick it up later in the day.
