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

I've never seen anyone use the rules but it seems everyone and his uncle bought the buildings.

Anyone know if they were big sellers?

What about the fantasy buildings?

The fantasy buildings look good, when I start getting my Dark Elf army built up I might buy a few.

Well KK if

Kid_Kyoto wrote:everyone and his uncle bought the buildings.

then logically they had alot of sales...

It sold a lot of books and a lot of building sets. It wasn't a hit like Apocalypse, which seems to have been bought by about half the players and continues to stimulate useful sales of super-heavy kits.

I bought the 'dex, but have never played it.

I have played Cities of Death and its awsome i love to be honest, it addeds another level to the game. I like it more than just normal battles.

So much more strategy is required and i love buildings more than woods or lava.

I have played 14 games with it and wont stop there

Played lots of games when it was released, got the £50 pound box. Play it less now, but I think it's great for different 40K!

I personally havnt played it. But then 40K has been waning in popularity at my local gaming group so I haven't had much of a chance.

However from what I understand its very popular amongst the older players in the LFGS and adds allot of strategty to 40K.

One gamer plays it almost exclusively.

I think Cities of Death is how 40k should be, all the time.

The way it changes the metagame is wonderful. Power Armour is arguably less of an advantage thanks to bucket loads of cover saves, and the dense terrain really make you consider how best to approach the enemy.

Strategic Assests add yet more depth to the game, and if used right, can turn a normally mediocre unit into your opponents nightmare. Kroot for example. Get them into a fortified structure, with a Medicare unit, and the enemy is going to have a helluva job shifting them.

Well worth buying and playing. You may not find it as a satisfying as I do, but I do wager confidentally you will enjoy it!

It's well worth getting and playing. The book adds quite a lot to the game.

As to the original question, yes, it was a huge hit for GW. They sold a very substantial amount of books and buildings, with good continueing sales on the buildings.

To echo others' comments, CoD turned a lot of the 4th edition metagame on its head. I imagine the design team noticed and that's one reason cover is so plentiful in 5th. I haven't tried to play CoD in 5th, but I'm sure it'd still be interesting even if the current edition has stolen some of its thunder.

I had a lot of fun playing CoD. The games were both tactical and cinematic. I don't feel that way about Apoc.

I've got a whole table of CoD terrain, including roads, etc. I've been having a blast with it, really makes games a ton of fun, and avoids the boring, generic, agra-world fight that 40K usually is.

I've gotten in about 5 games so far with the terrain, but I've yet to try the CoD rules. A large part of this is the fact that the people I end up playing against usually don't know the CoD stuff, so it's easier just to play normal 40K with building terrain than to try to incorporate the additional stratagems.

Hopefully the next game or two will be like that.

My gaming group regularly plays on a city table, but rarely with the actual City Fight rules.

I think Cities of Death is how 40k should be, all the time.

The way it changes the metagame is wonderful. Power Armour is arguably less of an advantage thanks to bucket loads of cover saves, and the dense terrain really make you consider how best to approach the enemy.

Strategic Assests add yet more depth to the game, and if used right, can turn a normally mediocre unit into your opponents nightmare. Kroot for example. Get them into a fortified structure, with a Medicare unit, and the enemy is going to have a helluva job shifting them.

Well worth buying and playing. You may not find it as a satisfying as I do, but I do wager confidentally you will enjoy it!

This sounds really interesting to me. I haven't started playing 40k yet but i've looked into 40k and it seems to add the kind of extra detail that would make the game exactly what I'm looking for.

The building kits are really great. It would be awesome if GW came out with some more, especially non-imperial ones.

I like Cities of Death. I'm also eagerly awaiting Planet Strike so that I can play games of "Cities of Planet Apocalypse Death Strike". Or CoPADS for short.

Or maybe PlanApocaDeath.

My group loves the terrain, but I'm the only one who ever wants to play an actual CoD game.

Wussies.


Eric

Platuan4th wrote:I like Cities of Death. I'm also eagerly awaiting Planet Strike so that I can play games of "Cities of Planet Apocalypse Death Strike". Or CoPADS for short.

Or maybe PlanApocaDeath.

Planet Strike into the Cities of Death - APOCALYPSE EDITION!!!

- Human wrote:
The building kits are really great. It would be awesome if GW came out with some more, especially non-imperial ones.

YES! I do wonder if the non human buildings are going to be much of a seller though. Orky adobies you can do fairly easily using foam core and something in the paint to give it texture. Eldar would be WAY cool, but I don't see them living in cities or anything as modular as the imperial cities. Nids don't need it, Tau are a minor race, Chaos doesn't build anything, Necrons would be interesting, but again minor race. The value add on the imperial city sprues is lots of hard to add detail for something that's very unique. The rest of the race's buildings can be either easily made, or wouldn't sell much. Really I guess I'd like to see a second version of the CoD stuff, and maybe so smaller item sort of kits. Imperial generators, repair stations, etc.

Platuan4th wrote:I like Cities of Death. I'm also eagerly awaiting Planet Strike so that I can play games of "Cities of Planet Apocalypse Death Strike". Or CoPADS for short.

Or maybe PlanApocaDeath.

I like CoPADS. Sounds like an adult diaper.

"Thanks CoPADS!"

Cities of Death is something that actually really interests me about 40k, and if I ever get back into it seriously, I'll probably pick it up.


Here's a sort of related question - Has anyone here used the Cityfight rules (you know, back in 3rd edition)? How does Cityfight compare to Cities of Death? Is it basically the same thing, except with 3rd edition rules? How was the balance?

Cityfight had too many extra rules and whatnots, it totally changed the core rules at the time for the worst, something the developers acknowledged and admitted was an extremely stupid thing to do. What they did to template weapons was especially idiotic.. Plus each army released at that time got a slew of extra rules / options that were supposed to benefit them. Like splitting guard squads into more "flexible" 5 man teams.

The only good things from that book are the missions, the armouries for the attackers and defenders and the city fighting campaign ideas.

I bought £150 worth of buildings... and never ever used them. Not once.

Did you put them together?

I bought the boxed game, 3 Imperial Cities, 2 Sectors, 6 Manufactorums and about 6 total of the other two. Plus about 40 extra floor sprues.

CoD was a success in Australia simply because of me.

One of the FLGS' up here runs a Cityfight tournament every year during the summer (well for the last 2 years anyhow.) They do seem to get a decent turnout each time. Otherwise, don't hear about cityfight throughout the rest of the year.

My gaming group uses CoD terrain rules even in regular games of 40k....

I spent $300 bucks on the buildings and never regret the cost.

BrookM wrote:Like splitting guard squads into more "flexible" 5 man teams.

While I agree concerning the normal 10 man squads, I disagree concerning the ability to split Heavy Weapon and Sniper Rifle armed Special Weapon squads, if only because it was sometimes easier to find places to deploy a single heavy fully in cover with a decent firing lane than it was for the entire squad all at once and I like the imagery of 2 man sniper/spotter teams hiding out in buildings hunting targets.

robertsjf wrote:My gaming group uses CoD terrain rules even in regular games of 40k....

Yup, for us it was essentially the 4.5 rules.