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.

 Lobomalo wrote:


Did this one before Maelstrom missions and while it is still fun, it works even better for turtle armies in all honesty, well when you're not playing against gun lines. Gun lines excel here as they can simply not make an actual engagement and still win. Both have their merits, the tactical objectives add more of a challenge t the game though. For example, you hold 3 objectives on your side and I have 3 on mine, playing Eternal War style, there is no real benefit to actually moving from these objectives. The cards can force players to move around and secure other objectives, to actually go after an opponent.

I've noticed that even with Eternal War, you've still home brewed a lot of the rules which begs the question, why are you paying money for a game in which you change the rules to fit how you want to play.

Considering Maelstrom missions also contain the secondary objectives in them as well, what difficulty is there in transitioning over, besides your hatred for randomness?

Which begs another question, if you hate randomness so much, why play a game that boils down to pure dice rolls. Especially as you play Eldar.

I agree that the Eternal War missions are equally bad. Hence many tournaments made their own or developed a circuit set of missions. Feast of Blades still used book missions, and while I love those dudes, I don't much care for that choice. Asymmetrical seems to be the new hotness or perfect symmetrical. Meaning either give players a wider range of freedom of choice in the game they play (Malifaux) or lock down a very well defined arena to hold the fight (Warmachine Steamroller Missions). The waffling of GW in between with their missions is where it falls apart.

I am not paying money for the game right now. You are correct in that assertion. The secondary objectives are too minuscule, hence the escalation sense, and first blood is routinely a game decider when a natural conclusion can and should be a draw. Winning because you went first or seized the initiative isn't rewarding. I have not seen anyone happy about winning a game because of first blood.

Because dice rules, as stated previously, are a system of weighted probability reinforced with a RNG. It's a controlled means to have a sense influence on actions that would otherwise be random. The game also still includes absolutes. A weapon that is range 24" will never hit a model 24"+ away. You still have plenty of control over that. Versus something like the Warp Storm table, which can go from hard swings of winning or losing a game for daemons players or just being a tepid breeze. It's why a great deal of them include Fateweaver in their army lists to give a better probability to controlling it.

And to date, I have not started my Eldar. It's still in boxes. I was excited to build them as they are a painters army (and I hobby lots, check my gallery!), but I have no interest in getting the "Oh, Eldar... *sigh + eye roll*" that is the usual response to our pointy eared friends. My list has strong units it, but I have nothing over 2 of anything save 3 man jet bike squads.

Again I really don't think that 'house rule' is necessary, the rules already cover that ...but I'm not going to keep repeating myself, just read back a bit.

Our experience, playing many games so far (I have pictures from several different days in my blog and many more to put up) have not been these hypothetical horror stories the internets have dreamed up. Maybe we've just been lucky so far...

I also play and love Infinity (Haqqislam)... but so far 7th ed has been too much fun to put down.

 Gunzhard wrote:
Again I really don't think that 'house rule' is necessary, the rules already cover that ...but I'm not going to keep repeating myself, just read back a bit.

Our experience, playing many games so far (I have pictures from several different days in my blog and many more to put up) have not been these hypothetical horror stories the internets have dreamed up. Maybe we've just been lucky so far...

I also play and love Infinity (Haqqislam)... but so far 7th ed has been too much fun to put down.

I know you can discard one card per turn, but if you get a hand of cards that you literally cannot perform, then you are at a severe disadvantage as you can only cycle one per turn AND you cannot cycle them faster by achieving them.

And please don't dismiss them as "dreamed up" unless you consider all the stories here and other places as all equally made up and the only valid response is what you see and experience. Which we know is not the case, otherwise we wouldn't have an education system anywhere. I will gladly let the community work out the kinks and then purchase a means of rules when Games Workshop gets smart and stop charging far too much something that requires an associates in games design, minimum, to correct. I would rather spend my dollars on games and models where there are not rules disputes.

 TheKbob wrote:

 Gunzhard wrote:
Again I really don't think that 'house rule' is necessary, the rules already cover that ...but I'm not going to keep repeating myself, just read back a bit.

Our experience, playing many games so far (I have pictures from several different days in my blog and many more to put up) have not been these hypothetical horror stories the internets have dreamed up. Maybe we've just been lucky so far...

I also play and love Infinity (Haqqislam)... but so far 7th ed has been too much fun to put down.

I know you can discard one card per turn, but if you get a hand of cards that you literally cannot perform, then you are at a severe disadvantage as you can only cycle one per turn AND you cannot cycle them faster by achieving them.

And please don't dismiss them as "dreamed up" unless you consider all the stories here and other places as all equally made up and the only valid response is what you see and experience. Which we know is not the case, otherwise we wouldn't have an education system anywhere. I will gladly let the community work out the kinks and then purchase a means of rules when Games Workshop gets smart and stop charging far too much something that requires an associates in games design, minimum, to correct. I would rather spend my dollars on games and models where there are not rules disputes.

Ok first, are you saying you consider Dakka an accurate data pool (for anything lol)? ...where are these batreps?

This "cannon perform" idea doesn't make any sense to me, you are still trying to kill, outmaneuver, and contest your opponent. You can still go for 'slay the warlord' and 'first blood' etc... or just win by a 'wipe-out' while your opponent spreads himself to grab objectives. I've yet to experience this drastic advantage/disadvantage. Sometimes you don't get everything you want - but it usually works out pretty fairly. Anyway you don't even plan to try so I'm not sure why I'm wasting my time here.

Its funny I been wargaming since the late 60's (started very young but my local library had books from Grant and Featherstone). The game is not as random as people claim (you do have to think differently). Used to play Piquet for historical wargames which people cried it was to random due to the use of cards to determine what phase and what player could move. (in theory and it did happen you cold move a unit multiple times and shoot before the other side did).

Well the same people won all of the time in that game.

This is a big change and those that want precise measurement are out of luck with this version. I have also played at least 80 different rule types and read many others. Playtested a dozen so maybe I can call myself an expert like you as my experience is the same. (now we have the old court case with experts contradicting themselves.)

No ones ever talks about denying the otherside victory points so if you have a bad hand you need to stop your opponent. These types of cards go back to the 50's.

I dislike games like Malifaux as it is to much like magic with buffing cards and warmachine are exactly like the old historical ironclad games and Starfleet games. (ships on land).

So I guess we can disagree but those with more open minds and who can think on their feet (does not mean your main plan is not followed just tweeked) will win in this edition.

 Gunzhard wrote:

Ok first, are you saying you consider Dakka an accurate data pool (for anything lol)? ...where are these batreps?

This "cannon perform" idea doesn't make any sense to me, you are still trying to kill, outmaneuver, and contest your opponent. You can still go for 'slay the warlord' and 'first blood' etc... or just win by a 'wipe-out' while your opponent spreads himself to grab objectives. I've yet to experience this drastic advantage/disadvantage. Sometimes you don't get everything you want - but it usually works out pretty fairly. Anyway you don't even plan to try so I'm not sure why I'm wasting my time here.

So your logic is then to dismiss every argument, those on Dakka and other sites, both for and against Maelstrom of War, let alone other topics? Well, then there's no point in talking as you seem to have fallen into the trap that you can't trust or learn anything from anyone else. Or that everyone is making up everything.

Just because you haven't experienced it doesn't negate that it exists. Or that knowledge thus far dictates that the cards determine the game. So your solution is for me to play a statistical significant number of games myself to determine whether or not a mechanic is good, yes? Right, that's smart.

But sure, let's throw out all reason in discussion, you're right.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

tiger g wrote:

So I guess we can disagree but those with more open minds and who can think on their feet (does not mean your main plan is not followed just tweeked) will win in this edition.

I can respect your opinion on the other games, but I don't see pure random chance as "thinking on your toes."

 TheKbob wrote:

 Gunzhard wrote:

Ok first, are you saying you consider Dakka an accurate data pool (for anything lol)? ...where are these batreps?

This "cannon perform" idea doesn't make any sense to me, you are still trying to kill, outmaneuver, and contest your opponent. You can still go for 'slay the warlord' and 'first blood' etc... or just win by a 'wipe-out' while your opponent spreads himself to grab objectives. I've yet to experience this drastic advantage/disadvantage. Sometimes you don't get everything you want - but it usually works out pretty fairly. Anyway you don't even plan to try so I'm not sure why I'm wasting my time here.

So your logic is then to dismiss every argument, those on Dakka and other sites, both for and against Maelstrom of War, let alone other topics? Well, then there's no point in talking as you seem to have fallen into the trap that you can't trust or learn anything from anyone else. Or that everyone is making up everything.

Just because you haven't experienced it doesn't negate that it exists. Or that knowledge thus far dictates that the cards determine the game. So your solution is for me to play a statistical significant number of games myself to determine whether or not a mechanic is good, yes? Right, that's smart.

But sure, let's throw out all reason in discussion, you're right.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

tiger g wrote:

So I guess we can disagree but those with more open minds and who can think on their feet (does not mean your main plan is not followed just tweeked) will win in this edition.

I can respect your opinion on the other games, but I don't see pure random chance as "thinking on your toes."

Your first premise is wrong. Cards are not determining the game, how a player reacts to them does.

Your second premise is also flawed. You cannot learn anything from a gaming forum, people use them to vent and spout their own brand of truth and vehemently fight against anyone who brings something positive or logic to any discussion, as is the case with Dakka.

Your third premise is also mistaken as well, you cannot have accurate data without actually going and collecting it, meaning, you cannot say Maelstrom is bad without first trying it, you also have no basis in condemning it based on opinions gather in a forum. There are reasons why the cards are back order for the next month, literally, we cannot buy more until late July. People like them, otherwise they would not buy them as you really do not need them to play the new objectives

 TheKbob wrote:

 Gunzhard wrote:

Ok first, are you saying you consider Dakka an accurate data pool (for anything lol)? ...where are these batreps?

This "cannon perform" idea doesn't make any sense to me, you are still trying to kill, outmaneuver, and contest your opponent. You can still go for 'slay the warlord' and 'first blood' etc... or just win by a 'wipe-out' while your opponent spreads himself to grab objectives. I've yet to experience this drastic advantage/disadvantage. Sometimes you don't get everything you want - but it usually works out pretty fairly. Anyway you don't even plan to try so I'm not sure why I'm wasting my time here.

So your logic is then to dismiss every argument, those on Dakka and other sites, both for and against Maelstrom of War, let alone other topics? Well, then there's no point in talking as you seem to have fallen into the trap that you can't trust or learn anything from anyone else. Or that everyone is making up everything.

Just because you haven't experienced it doesn't negate that it exists. Or that knowledge thus far dictates that the cards determine the game. So your solution is for me to play a statistical significant number of games myself to determine whether or not a mechanic is good, yes? Right, that's smart.

But sure, let's throw out all reason in discussion, you're right.

Dismiss every argument? ...whoa now don't put words in my mouth. Realistically now, as Engineer, do you have any idea sort of who/what exactly makes up the Dakka population? ...what percentage of casual onlookers, hard core tournament types, hard core casual gamers, very young kids, stubborn old farts, people that are actually playing, people that have an opinion without any experience... I'm not dismissing any argument - but given that I cannot get any sort of accurate estimate of the data - I choose to at least try for myself. You don't - cool, we are done.

And for the record - Yes, I do think it's smart to play a bunch of games to really know for yourself.

Hopefully we are not using any equipment he developed in his career because once it is designed and made if people have an opinion on it he would never have it use it himself.

As for the random cards you know what is in the deck and can plan for it.

Wow. I came to read this thread to see why everyone loves the new edition just as much as I do. In return, I've just read through 7 pages of complete crap. Seriously guys, this is why I stopped reading 40k forums...

Yeah it does tend to degenerate after a while. But the silver lining is....there are still people enjoying the game!

Greggy wrote:
Wow. I came to read this thread to see why everyone loves the new edition just as much as I do.

Welcome to Dakka, a forum that *isn't* an echo chamber - enjoy your stay!

 Yonan wrote:

Greggy wrote:
Wow. I came to read this thread to see why everyone loves the new edition just as much as I do.

Welcome to Dakka, a forum that *isn't* an echo chamber - enjoy your stay!

Hah I was gonna let this go, but the irony... "that *isn't* an echo chamber", says the guy not playing the game for himself but just echoing the stuff other kids are complaining about on the forum hahaha. I needed that, thank you sir.

Thankyou for proving my point? You have a differing opinion from me, ergo this isn't an echo chamber?

Well ...touche' hah. I'll give you that one Yonan.

 Gunzhard wrote:

 Yonan wrote:

Greggy wrote:
Wow. I came to read this thread to see why everyone loves the new edition just as much as I do.

Welcome to Dakka, a forum that *isn't* an echo chamber - enjoy your stay!

Hah I was gonna let this go, but the irony... "that *isn't* an echo chamber", says the guy not playing the game for himself but just echoing the stuff other kids are complaining about on the forum hahaha. I needed that, thank you sir.

Because we're intelligent beings capable of rational thought, have a reading comprehension higher then that of Games Workshop's writing ability level, and don't particularly care for $85 rule sets?

I dunno, seems like a sound and reasonable thing to consider. Or just label us as 'Whingers and Moaners™' and move on (not implying you are, just the vast majority of people who can't fathom why someone would ever disagree with the great and powerful Gee Dubyah).

 TheKbob wrote:

 Gunzhard wrote:

 Yonan wrote:

Greggy wrote:
Wow. I came to read this thread to see why everyone loves the new edition just as much as I do.

Welcome to Dakka, a forum that *isn't* an echo chamber - enjoy your stay!

Hah I was gonna let this go, but the irony... "that *isn't* an echo chamber", says the guy not playing the game for himself but just echoing the stuff other kids are complaining about on the forum hahaha. I needed that, thank you sir.

Because we're intelligent beings capable of rational thought, have a reading comprehension higher then that of Games Workshop's writing ability level, and don't particularly care for $85 rule sets?

I dunno, seems like a sound and reasonable thing to consider. Or just label us as 'Whingers and Moaners™' and move on (not implying you are, just the vast majority of people who can't fathom why someone would ever disagree with the great and powerful Gee Dubyah).

*reading comprehension higher *than* that of Games Workshop...*

 Gunzhard wrote:


*reading comprehension higher *than* that of Games Workshop...*

But you at least understood my intent...

((I'm a math type and I have to proofread my posts several times, so yea, I'm not infallible and admit my terrible writing mistakes))

Greggy wrote:
Wow. I came to read this thread to see why everyone loves the new edition just as much as I do. In return, I've just read through 7 pages of complete crap. Seriously guys, this is why I stopped reading 40k forums...

Perhaps this is better?

Actual tactics and stuff

Forums are good for all kinds of reasons. One of them is finding resources to learn and make up your own mind. =)

 Jancoran wrote:

Greggy wrote:
Wow. I came to read this thread to see why everyone loves the new edition just as much as I do. In return, I've just read through 7 pages of complete crap. Seriously guys, this is why I stopped reading 40k forums...

Perhaps this is better?

Actual tactics and stuff

Forums are good for all kinds of reasons. One of them is finding resources to learn and make up your own mind. =)

Good article! But sadly I think the author missed the part where you can't hide models from barrage anymore, thus Thunderfire Cannons and Wyverns could rock such a strategy. But I loved what I believe was called "Beta Strike" by the end of 5th edition, or the full reserve versus nonsense like Dark Eldar who won the roll to go first.

Greggy wrote:
Wow. I came to read this thread to see why everyone loves the new edition just as much as I do. In return, I've just read through 7 pages of complete crap. Seriously guys, this is why I stopped reading 40k forums...

The disaffected usually start to move in by page two or three, they can't let an "I like 40k" post go unanswered. Anyway, I'm just happy that one of my threads made 10 pages, even if most of it is moaning. Woot!

So why do you dislike it when people have different opinions from you?

It i s a natural human reaction to dislike that which different , and the reaction is the stronger the more the same both parties are. That is why civil wars are always the bloodiest and splits between factions of same groups are always so rough.

Actually I find that the conflict gets worse when personal attacks are incorporated into the discussion. Not directly most times but snide/snarky posts just escalates quickly.

 milkboy wrote:
Actually I find that the conflict gets worse when personal attacks are incorporated into the discussion. Not directly most times but snide/snarky posts just escalates quickly.

Well, yes. As a prime example, dismissing different opinions to your own as 'whining' is fairly guaranteed to send a thread downhill.


Either way, this thread seems to have run it's course, and is turning into a less civil version of the GW can't win thread, so I think we're done here.