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.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Kroem wrote:
Fundimentally I think that 40k should be a game about battelines clashing in combat with a bit of shooting beforehand, when at the moment it is a shooting match with a bit of close combat.
So if I were to fix something it would be to change the game's emphasis.

Agreed here.

Then play WHFB/AOS. 40k is a game full of guns and should be primarily about shooting with occasional melee to finish off the survivors. A game full of tanks/aircraft/artillery/etc should not revolve around your entire army running up and punching people.

Lmao well said. Although themed close combat armies can exist. They still have guns

warpedpig wrote:
Lmao well said. Although themed close combat armies can exist. They still have guns

Nurgle Daemons.

Are you saying I’m wrong to play the army I enjoy?

 JNAProductions wrote:

warpedpig wrote:
Lmao well said. Although themed close combat armies can exist. They still have guns

Nurgle Daemons.

Are you saying I’m wrong to play the army I enjoy?

Your army is bad for the game and should be consolidated back into the CSM codex. Demons should be summoned allies for a CSM and/or chaos cultist army, not an opportunity to use your WHFB army on round bases.

I never played fantasy, and don’t play Sigmar.

Why is my army lesser than yours?

 JNAProductions wrote:
I never played fantasy, and don’t play Sigmar.

Why is my army lesser than yours?

Because it shouldn't be a stand-alone army, along with Harlequins, Custodes and Grey Knights.

 JNAProductions wrote:
I never played fantasy, and don’t play Sigmar.

Why is my army lesser than yours?

Because pure demons are literally a WFHB army on round bases. It's questionable fluff-wise to have them exist independently from conventional chaos forces, it breaks the theme of 40k to have a bunch of WHFB monsters running up to punch things in a game where everyone else is using conventional modern-style armies, and it creates significant difficulties from a rules support point of view when you have a WHFB army that can't participate in the major offensive phase needing to be balanced with armies more in line with the shooting-focused game mechanics.

Fluffwise, there are about one million traitor marines. Probably less, given attrition and whatnot. How many Daemons are there?

Mechanics, there are multitudes of varied Daemons. Give them all shooting, if an army needs shooting to be “legit”.

 Peregrine wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

warpedpig wrote:
Lmao well said. Although themed close combat armies can exist. They still have guns

Nurgle Daemons.

Are you saying I’m wrong to play the army I enjoy?

Your army is bad for the game and should be consolidated back into the CSM codex. Demons should be summoned allies for a CSM and/or chaos cultist army, not an opportunity to use your WHFB army on round bases.

So I'm curious, is there anything you actually like about 40k Peregrine?

warpedpig wrote:
What’s the solution to igougo

Alternating activation.

BrianDavion wrote:
So I'm curious, is there anything you actually like about 40k Peregrine?

Lots of things. In fact, I even like demons just fine when they're part of a chaos army with marines/cultists/traitor IG/etc. But demons as an independent army are not acceptable.

Why not? Why are magical space Daemons any less acceptable than magical space elves, or space soccer hooligan mushrooms?

I dont agree with peregrine that chaos deamons are necessarily a problem. But i do agree that it doesnt matter what fluff you have, some armies are problems for their design philosophy and the available design space for making armies unique.

40k has a lot of overlap. Or useless design directions. Nightlords being morale abusers in a game were morale is basically useless is a good example.

Some armies should be collapsed into others or just removed. They dont serve a purpose being their own thing.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Why not? Why are magical space Daemons any less acceptable than magical space elves, or space soccer hooligan mushrooms?

Because "soccer hooligans" and "elves" are just minor elements on top of conventional forces. The "space elves" are using tanks and guns and calling in air strikes, not running around on unicorns with swords. The "soccer hooligan mushrooms" are going to chop you up with swords, but they're also going to shoot you with normal guns. Put them in WHFB and they'd be completely out of theme. But pure demons, on the other hand, are literally a WHFB army on round bases.

The most broken?

The online community.

To be fair, the game is not in a real bad place at the moment, with a few exceptions. I do agree with Elbows that the sheer number of rolling is getting ridiculously out of hand, having to use a bucket for dice is basically the same as having a meal in a bucket. If you are using a bucket, it has probably gone too far.

At 2000pts we're basically playing Apocalypse anyway with what is on the table. Of course, this sells models for GW and they don't want to see that decline. Hordes need to be reigned in a little bit, It gets to be a nightmare to manage that on a 6x4 table, which means points should be adjusted. I know then we'll hear that knight players can't play their knights, but how about just start playing with one knight. Leave the handful of knights to larger games.

Overall, the game is fine when 2 people can have a conversation about the type of game you want to play.

 Peregrine wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
Why not? Why are magical space Daemons any less acceptable than magical space elves, or space soccer hooligan mushrooms?

Because "soccer hooligans" and "elves" are just minor elements on top of conventional forces. The "space elves" are using tanks and guns and calling in air strikes, not running around on unicorns with swords. The "soccer hooligan mushrooms" are going to chop you up with swords, but they're also going to shoot you with normal guns. Put them in WHFB and they'd be completely out of theme. But pure demons, on the other hand, are literally a WHFB army on round bases.

So which is better:

1) Removing an army that a lot of people have invested a good deal of time, effort, and money into.

2) Adding more units, such as (for Nurgle) massive bile-spurting monsters that act similarly to tanks, Plaguebearers that carry hives of toxic insects they can use as a ranged attacks, living artillery towers of noxious projectiles, and other such units.

 JNAProductions wrote:
So which is better:

1) Removing an army that a lot of people have invested a good deal of time, effort, and money into.

2) Adding more units, such as (for Nurgle) massive bile-spurting monsters that act similarly to tanks, Plaguebearers that carry hives of toxic insects they can use as a ranged attacks, living artillery towers of noxious projectiles, and other such units.

The one that is more likely to happen, and that is consolidating demons back into the CSM codex where they belong instead of having to create four new armies worth of models to continue supporting them as they are now.

 Peregrine wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
So which is better:

1) Removing an army that a lot of people have invested a good deal of time, effort, and money into.

2) Adding more units, such as (for Nurgle) massive bile-spurting monsters that act similarly to tanks, Plaguebearers that carry hives of toxic insects they can use as a ranged attacks, living artillery towers of noxious projectiles, and other such units.

The one that is more likely to happen, and that is consolidating demons back into the CSM codex where they belong instead of having to create four new armies worth of models to continue supporting them as they are now.

Oh no, more models! THE HORROR!

Do you want all armies to be as bland as Necrons, with virtually no customization? Or do you want armies to be more like Space Marines, with plenty of options to make your army unique?

Because, despite being a big advocate for balance, 40k would be NOTHING if you couldn't make your army your army.

 Peregrine wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
So which is better:

1) Removing an army that a lot of people have invested a good deal of time, effort, and money into.

2) Adding more units, such as (for Nurgle) massive bile-spurting monsters that act similarly to tanks, Plaguebearers that carry hives of toxic insects they can use as a ranged attacks, living artillery towers of noxious projectiles, and other such units.

The one that is more likely to happen, and that is consolidating demons back into the CSM codex where they belong instead of having to create four new armies worth of models to continue supporting them as they are now.

you think GW Squatting an army is more likely then GW giving a popular army a new series of models? ......... yeah right.

I still say get rid of some power armor armies. There's too many, so get rid of the caricature armies like BA and SW. And it would be nice if chaos ran out of marines at some point. Losses happen.

Martel732 wrote:
I still say get rid of some power armor armies. There's too many, so get rid of the caricature armies like BA and SW. And it would be nice if chaos ran out of marines at some point. Losses happen.

I'd much rather see GSC, Knights and harlequins go (and I'm a harlequin player) than lose BA, SW, and DA. However, I don't see how losing variety really helps the game, it's the mechanics that are the problem, not the selection of armies.

They aren't true variety, though. Mechanically, SW are on life support via index trickery and BA are already dead. It would be more intellectually honest to get rid of BA then let them live on as a joke. I don't know why DA are doing so poorly. I guess lack of Gman, since that's the only build that consistently does anything for marines.

Martel732 wrote:
They aren't true variety, though. Mechanically, SW are on life support via index trickery and BA are already dead. It would be more intellectually honest to get rid of BA then let them live on as a joke. I don't know why DA are doing so poorly. I guess lack of Gman, since that's the only build that consistently does anything for marines.

Yup.

There is a concept in game design called the illusion of choice. In Vanilla World of Warcraft every class had like 3-4 dozen talents to choose from. But only certain ones were actually viable for builds in the game that had any chance of being effective. So did all those other options actually provide you with a variety of options or were they simply the illusion of choice?

Every time GW gives these armies these options that have no chance of getting anything done it's a wasted option. BA, DA, and SW have a couple unique units that could just be flavor when they get folded into regular space marines and given a chapter tactics rule. You don't have more armies because they come in more books. You just have more books. The Nightlords are a wasted CSM option. Blacktemplar are a joke SM option. So on and so forth. The game has everything to gain by trimming the fat and getting rid of every illusion of choice option for the sake of tightening up the options into all being legitimate real choices. That goes not just for armies but units and wargear too.

False choice is everywhere in gaming.

I don't even like Peregrine, but I will agree. Close-combat dedicated armies have little to no room to exist in 40K, unless your particular narrative or game type (perhaps Zone Mortalis style) suits them.

Daemons only exist in 40K so GW can sell more of that fantasy line of models, full stop. Just because you chose to buy into them does not mean the game "should" be based around close combat. As mentioned there is literally an entirely other game intended for that exact purpose...and you can even use the same models.

Daemons should not be their own army, and should have been combined with CSM (and Renegades while we're at it). The only reason they're a separate army is so that they can bait AoS players into 40K and occasionally sell an additional codex or deck of stratagem cards. If you're electing by choice to run an army with no shooting...in a universe filled with guns - that's entirely on you.

Thing is, WoW eventually learned and got rid of talents (supposedly... I haven't played in YEARS so I am going off of what I have heard for this part). Now when you level up you are given a couple distinct choices that all have real impact. You choose the one and move on to the next choice. You are not accumulating and spending points just to gain access to another tier of "choices" so you can get the thing you really want. You have this 1 choice no matter what and each option has it's distinct pros and cons.

The Illusion of Choice that is so prevalent in games is sloppy bad game design. Be it guns that have no distinct purpose or are clearly inferior to all the other options in it's class. Classes that can't carry their weight or compete. Armies that are not distinct enough to be their own army. Or units that get over shadowed by other options within the army. Having more options that are not real options does hurt the game.

warpedpig wrote:
What’s the worst stuff that needs fixing. Cover. Armor saves. Charging. Units. Etc. I’m gonna make an improved rule set and post it later

The edition.

Martel732 wrote:
They aren't true variety, though. Mechanically, SW are on life support via index trickery and BA are already dead. It would be more intellectually honest to get rid of BA then let them live on as a joke. I don't know why DA are doing so poorly. I guess lack of Gman, since that's the only build that consistently does anything for marines.

Martel "the codex doesn'tautowin games" maens jack gak. seriously, do you even play warhammer 40k? because I styrongly suspect you do not, and instead you just run around spewing whatever nonsense you see on 1d4chan etc. There are a lot of ways to play warhammer 40k.

Why do you think i don't play? Seems rather important to you.

I play plenty of games without access to "autowin". Which the ba are so far from. I really dont understand your leap to autowin. Middle would be fine.