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.

 ArbitorIan wrote:


The 7ed thing and the loss of cheap starter sets really decreases that selling point. For the part of the existing HH playerbase who don't like 40k 8ed anyway, that's fine - they can keep playing and griping about how 8ed is 'kiddy hammer'. But If they want to play 40k too (for whatever reason, including local game availability) then the split of rules makes just playing 8ed 40k a more attractive option, and obviously if they're completely new players, Heresy is back to being the expensive, specialist game that less people want to buy into.
.

The common talking point among HH enthusiasts about how 7th edition is the only way to keep the complexity of the game in tact always amused me. On average 30k players are awful at the game. Most of them started playing 30k to get away from 40k so they could focus on painting/modelling and less on the power gaming and rules lawyering. Which also means that most 30k players have a very tenuous grip on the rules and their insistence to cling to them is very confusing to me.

The way I see it, people who are left playing 30k right now are in it no matter what the rules are. If the rules get updated to 8th edition, only a modest amount of current players might bail. This would be offset by an influx of new players who want a game where marines aren't terrible and balance is easier to achieve by everyone having the same base units.

 Eldarsif wrote:


To be honest I feel like Templates, Vehicle Facing, and Cover are the biggest thing going for HH for people who are really into that.

In a game of basically Marines vs Marines such things are important

Does it make the game more complex? Hmm... i doubt it.
Does it make the game more realistic? It sure does!

If not the more mature and generally better written, more climactic storyline i wouldnt give a rats ass about Horus Heresy if i also had 40k.

So in order to make use of more mature storyline and make Marines vs Marines more engaging it benefits from having more "realistic" rules.

On the other hand conversion to 8th edition may work. Especially if you would be able to play against 40k armies but i wish for something more. Something in beetwen taking the best things from both systems.

If FW dont want the Horus Heresy to slowly die and wither they have to either convert to 8th or make a new opening. To attract new blood.

bogalubov wrote:

 ArbitorIan wrote:


The 7ed thing and the loss of cheap starter sets really decreases that selling point. For the part of the existing HH playerbase who don't like 40k 8ed anyway, that's fine - they can keep playing and griping about how 8ed is 'kiddy hammer'. But If they want to play 40k too (for whatever reason, including local game availability) then the split of rules makes just playing 8ed 40k a more attractive option, and obviously if they're completely new players, Heresy is back to being the expensive, specialist game that less people want to buy into.
.

The common talking point among HH enthusiasts about how 7th edition is the only way to keep the complexity of the game in tact always amused me. On average 30k players are awful at the game. Most of them started playing 30k to get away from 40k so they could focus on painting/modelling and less on the power gaming and rules lawyering. Which also means that most 30k players have a very tenuous grip on the rules and their insistence to cling to them is very confusing to me.

The way I see it, people who are left playing 30k right now are in it no matter what the rules are. If the rules get updated to 8th edition, only a modest amount of current players might bail. This would be offset by an influx of new players who want a game where marines aren't terrible and balance is easier to achieve by everyone having the same base units.

GW games aren't as inbalanced as they are because they have too many armies, they're inbalanced because the rule makers aren't good at their job.

I don't see how a dislike of rule lawyers equals being bad at the game either.

pm713 wrote:

GW games aren't as inbalanced as they are because they have too many armies, they're inbalanced because the rule makers aren't good at their job.

Doesn't really matter why they're not balanced. Harder to feth up balance when you have 18 versions of the same thing though.

I don't see how a dislike of rule lawyers equals being bad at the game either.

To engage in rules lawyering, you have to know the rules you're arguing. 30k players in general don't know the rules, so can't effectively engage in rules lawyering. I think the general fear in the pro-7th crowd is that they'll be forced to learn new rules when they didn't even really know the current ones.

bogalubov wrote:

pm713 wrote:

GW games aren't as inbalanced as they are because they have too many armies, they're inbalanced because the rule makers aren't good at their job.

Doesn't really matter why they're not balanced. Harder to feth up balance when you have 18 versions of the same thing though.

I don't see how a dislike of rule lawyers equals being bad at the game either.

To engage in rules lawyering, you have to know the rules you're arguing. 30k players in general don't know the rules, so can't effectively engage in rules lawyering. I think the general fear in the pro-7th crowd is that they'll be forced to learn new rules when they didn't even really know the current ones.

They really aren't the same thing at all. That's why they all play differently.

Shocking idea here - You can be fully aware of what the rules are without being a rules lawyer!

By the by do you have anything at all backing up your generalisations?

pm713 wrote:

By the by do you have anything at all backing up your generalisations?

Yeah, I have 30 minute power point presentation with graphs and everything. Send me your email address and i'll send it along. Jokes aside, it's clear that everything that is being discussed is based on our personal experience and the generalizations we make to convey that personal experience.

That general experience has involved a lot of telling people in 30k games things like: "No, you can't do that, that's not how disembarkation works"; "That's not how wound allocation works".

I reckon if GW want Heresy to survive, they'll rebox a bunch of the plastic kits from Calth and Prospero into one Starter box for Heresy. Lets them condense down to one SKU from two, get rid of all the cardboard in those sets that nobody wanted anyway and still provide a tempting starting point. A few people around the internet have suggested that they have some insider knowledge that's what's happening, though I take any such claims of insider knowledge with suspicion.

I don't play 30K, but I bought one Calth set for my 40K Salamanders. I always had my eye on Prospero, never quite buying it but happy to know it was there if I fancied adding some Mark III and Tartaros. If I'd known it was going to disappear I would have bought one, and been mighty tempted to get another Calth.

OK, so I kept my eye very close on most if not all of the boxed games that GW came out with since mid 2015 when I started playing. That said, I haven't seen any other boxed games (besides the starter sets) stay on shelves anywhere near as long as Betrayal at Calth (and maybe Burning of Prospero).

That box, which has been available for longer than any other boxed game that I've seen in my time in Warhammer, just got pulled off the shelf. Several HH models have just started disappearing from FW's site.

That seems like more than a coincidence to me, but that's just my $0.02.

SG

bogalubov wrote:

pm713 wrote:

By the by do you have anything at all backing up your generalisations?

Yeah, I have 30 minute power point presentation with graphs and everything. Send me your email address and i'll send it along. Jokes aside, it's clear that everything that is being discussed is based on our personal experience and the generalizations we make to convey that personal experience.

That general experience has involved a lot of telling people in 30k games things like: "No, you can't do that, that's not how disembarkation works"; "That's not how wound allocation works".

Seems somewhat harsh to assume most 30k players don't know the rules because ones around you don't in the same way it would be harsh for me to say all 40k players are TFG pains.

 ServiceGames wrote:
That box, which has been available for longer than any other boxed game that I've seen in my time in Warhammer, just got pulled off the shelf.

Stop thinking of it as a boxed game. It wasn't. It was a bundle deal on space marine kits. All of its contents can still be bought, just not with the bundle discount.

Several HH models have just started disappearing from FW's site.

Only redundant ones with very low sales volume now that plastic equivalents exist. None of the important stuff has disappeared, and FW is still releasing new 30k kits.

 Peregrine wrote:
Stop thinking of it as a boxed game. It wasn't. It was a bundle deal on space marine kits. All of its contents can still be bought, just not with the bundle discount.

Gangs of Commorragh was a "boxed game" that was a huge bundle deal on Dark Eldar (now Drukhari) Reavers and Hellions. You got two sets of Reavers (which are online-only) and 10 Hellions plus the rest of the stuff in the box for like $60. HUGE deal. Massive deal! Same kind of thing that Betrayal at Calth was. Reavers and Hellions are also still available. But, Gangs of Commorragh is no loner available. That said, Gangs of Commorragh was and still is considered a "boxed game" and not just a deal on models.

SG

 ServiceGames wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
Stop thinking of it as a boxed game. It wasn't. It was a bundle deal on space marine kits. All of its contents can still be bought, just not with the bundle discount.

Gangs of Commorragh was a "boxed game" that was a huge bundle deal on Dark Eldar (now Drukhari) Reavers and Hellions. You got two sets of Reavers (which are online-only) and 10 Hellions plus the rest of the stuff in the box for like $60. HUGE deal. Massive deal! Same kind of thing that Betrayal at Calth was. Reavers and Hellions are also still available. But, Gangs of Commorragh is no loner available. That said, Gangs of Commorragh was and still is considered a "boxed game" and not just a deal on models.

SG

I think you're both saying the same thing. Virtually no one plays any of these boxed games. They are a delivery vehicle for discounted models. In fact I'm not sure why they bother investing resources to make these mini games that no one wants to play when they could just offer sales that would make us flock to their website. I guess this way both GW and the physical stores get a cut of the profit, otherwise I'm not sure what possible reason there is.

What’s really sad is the elitist Heresy snobs that didn't give the games a chance - Betrayal at Calth was an excellent board game. Prospero, not so much. Your loss.

 totalfailure wrote:
What’s really sad is the elitist Heresy snobs that didn't give the games a chance - Betrayal at Calth was an excellent board game. Prospero, not so much. Your loss.

I personally didn't play it not due to my eliticism, but because I don't have the time to play these side games and 30k/40k at the same time. I imagine that's the case for most people who skip these games.

Still Betrayal at Calth is a really nice game. I played with my friends who dont play wargames and they enjoyed it.

 Eldarsif wrote:

They wouldn't have to do too much.

Convert the thing to 8th, then expand the cover rules, make some of the existing abilities USR(should be easier to handle in 8th HH due to all marine armies). The only thing I would be concerned about lashback is templates and vehicle facing. Vehicle Facing is an easy addon rule, but templates kinda go against 8th edition rules.

To be honest I feel like Templates, Vehicle Facing, and Cover are the biggest thing going for HH for people who are really into that.

Yeah, agreed. One of the things in the current fan-rules HH 8ed is the general suggestion that people use the expanded cover rules in the rulebook. TBH, I could totally see an expanded cover rules cropping up in a Chapter Approved anyway at some point.

I think a general bonus to hit the rear of vehicles or something similar, and expanding the cover rules regarding vehicles and line of sight would placate a lot of 7ed players (even if you don't do templates).

Dont underestimate templates or vehicle facings or even 7th edition random deep striking.

I play 8th for fun with friends and what i actually observed (and i cant believe this observation myself 100%) is that i would like to have my own deep striking units to sometimes fail their deep strike by some inches. If you play for fun (and i mean fun, not really competetive) the game's randomness is to the benefit of the game itself. 8th introduced more more dice in shooting and rerolls. In other words more predictability, less randomness. Deep striking goes where you put it always 9+ inches away. Game became more competetive focused (because more things are predictible for an owner of the army) but if you play just for fun its actually better (im saying this from my perspective) to have some more randomness involved.

Ask yourself - why some people are still playing 2nd edition? I only played it once myself but people always tell about whacky craziness of that edition where vehicles lose their steering and crash into Dreadnoughts (sometimes killing the ancient warrior inside). Sometimes a template hits your own warriors or a powerful psyker is consumed by unfortunate roll. This is why some people stick with that old edition because they (i assume so) play for fun and unpredictability that makes certain moments memorable is important for them.

P.S. Does that makes 8th bad? No. Just different.

8th ed deep strike is unrealistically accurate. It also makes melta pretty much useless and hurts flamers as well. No surprise melta has died to extinction and flamers are purely for overwatch.

False nostalgia. Flamers and melters haven't been competitive since 5th edition.

They were lot more competive before when you could actually shoot them when you come out. Especially drop pods it was fairly easy actually. 8th ed they are 100% useless except flamer for overwatch and even for that the price makes it fairly rare. Melta? Only idiot takes it. At least before it saw some use.

bogalubov wrote:
I think you're both saying the same thing. Virtually no one plays any of these boxed games. They are a delivery vehicle for discounted models. In fact I'm not sure why they bother investing resources to make these mini games that no one wants to play when they could just offer sales that would make us flock to their website. I guess this way both GW and the physical stores get a cut of the profit, otherwise I'm not sure what possible reason there is.

I trust my local GW manager. He's a good guy... not just there to shove models in your face to get you to buy them. He mentioned that either GW or some stores had taken up playing Gangs of Commorragh and even keeping score across the country. It was essentially a "take an area and hold it from another gang" type game. You could have store competitions to see which gangs could hold which areas, and if I'm not mistaken, while it may not have been advertised or widely known about, there was some kind of either global or North American war amongst the gangs. So, again, if I'm not mistaken, Gangs of Commorragh was a boxed game that was played as a boxed game.

SG


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Glumy wrote:
I play 8th for fun with friends and what i actually observed (and i cant believe this observation myself 100%) is that i would like to have my own deep striking units to sometimes fail their deep strike by some inches. If you play for fun (and i mean fun, not really competetive) the game's randomness is to the benefit of the game itself. 8th introduced more more dice in shooting and rerolls. In other words more predictability, less randomness. Deep striking goes where you put it always 9+ inches away. Game became more competetive focused (because more things are predictible for an owner of the army) but if you play just for fun its actually better (im saying this from my perspective) to have some more randomness involved.

While I don't know this for sure as I'm not a GW employee, I'm about 99.9% sure that GW changed the Deep Strike rules to make it so that 1) it's easier for new players to get into the game and 2) so that games would move more quickly. I personally have an attention span (even for games I enjoy) of about 90 minutes. Past that, I just want it to be over. So, speeding this up is a good thing to me.

SG

 ServiceGames wrote:
So, again, if I'm not mistaken, Gangs of Commorragh was a boxed game that was played as a boxed game.

I've never seen anyone play it, but that is an observation that's limited to my area. I can't speak to folks playing it somewhere.

While I don't know this for sure as I'm not a GW employee, I'm about 99.9% sure that GW changed the Deep Strike rules to make it so that 1) it's easier for new players to get into the game and 2) so that games would move more quickly. I personally have an attention span (even for games I enjoy) of about 90 minutes. Past that, I just want it to be over. So, speeding this up is a good thing to me.

Having your deep strike models die in a deep strike accident is a very fast process, so I don't think it was a change to speed up the game. Having your models die or be placed somewhere they wouldn't affect the game was incredibly deflating though. I've definitely had my jump pack praetor scatter off the table and then immediately die. That did not make the game more fun. It just makes it hard to have narrative games when you're writing a bunch about your heroes and terminators dying randomly. The change to no-scatter deep strike was a way to give more agency to the players where deep strike units are a tactical tool instead of a spin of the wheel of fortune.

things like deep strike, removal of scatter where because of a very vocal section of the player base decrying random, any random, as "bad"

 ArbitorIan wrote:
The 7ed thing and the loss of cheap starter sets really decreases that selling point. For the part of the existing HH playerbase who don't like 40k 8ed anyway, that's fine - they can keep playing and griping about how 8ed is 'kiddy hammer'. But If they want to play 40k too (for whatever reason, including local game availability) then the split of rules makes just playing 8ed 40k a more attractive option, and obviously if they're completely new players, Heresy is back to being the expensive, specialist game that less people want to buy into.

I think this is a little bit unfair. I started Heresy last year, following on from playing 8th Edition 40K for a little bit as my first return to 40K in a decade or so. Before that, I was playing Age of Sigmar for about 6 months. I like both Age of Sigmar and 40K 8th, but I definitely have the most fun playing 7th in Heresy.

The "complexity" of 7th Edition 40K for Heresy isn't the draw for me. I'm still learning my way around that system and figuring out what all the USRs and stuff do as I go along. I'm not and will never be a competitive player or particularly obsessed with complexities of a game.. but I like 7th Edition because it's about the only Warhammer game that I can play right now that's actually reminiscent of the game I used to play back in 3rd. The psychic phase being a little like 6th Ed WHFB magic like I remember, having combat resolution and sweeping advances, armour values and weapon facings on vehicles, templates and all of that is stuff that I enjoy not for the supposed "complexity" that it adds, but because it's closer to the Warhammer I played the most of back in the day. Given that Horus Heresy is so rich with nostalgia in the fluff and the miniatures, that just feels "right" to me in a way that 8th Edition never did, as a returning player.

I wouldn't have minded if they stripped down some of the more complex areas of the 7th ruleset - some of the intricacies of charging and wound allocation were confusing for me, for example - but 8th Edition with it's abundance of re-rolls, 'area denial' deep strike play, and rending weapons taking away that old school 'feel' that Marines used to have just doesn't have the same feel as 7th, and as such I'd rather Heresy live on as a 'Specialist Game' like Middle-Earth SBG than a mainline game if it means holding onto that.