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.

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
I assume the description "sanitized" is being used somewhat pejoratively? Like the game has lost some flavour or chrome? Each game edition has changed things, and sometimes things have gone away. I found the change from 2nd to 3rd very jarring as much of the flavour I liked disappeared. But I still enjoyed the gameplay so I soldiered on. I can understand that if someone really really like Armour Values, vehicle facings, templates and scatter dice that the shift from 7th to 8th would have been very negative. I get that, but I don't find myself missing those things and when I play Horus Heresy I am reminded of the problems. So if "sanitized" means a "cleaner" tabletop experience I suppose 40K is more sanitized than it was in early 2017. I am reminded of that when I do play Flames of War or Horus Heresy and we get into discussions of rules interactions and LOS. I don't mind losing some rules chrome as long as we keep faction chrome. If that makes sense. Other will have a different view that will also be valid.

Returning to today, if someone's only exposure to 10th Ed 40K is from livestreams of tournament games then it might look off-putting and indeed, sanitized. The symmetrical layout of terrain consisting of large LOS-blocking L-shaped ruins could look bland, as would the neoprene objective markers denoting where a model has to be to contest an objective. The speed of play and throwing around of terms such as "Lethal and Sustained on 5s due to Fire Discipline" might also seem off-putting to an observer from a past edition. I just wouldn't base your judgement of 10th Ed from Youtube videos - they are very useful and can be engaging, but watching is not the same thing as playing.

I've played since 2nd Ed, and I would much rather play a pickup game on a symmetrical board drawn from a bank of layouts that suit the mission. Spending three hours of leisure time on a "tilted table" is not my cup of tea for a given Saturday unless we have both agreed to play some "narrative" mission with an unfair terrain layout that is compensated somehow by special rules for the battle. I do play in local tournaments (five 40K tourneys a year), but this is more to be able to pick a weekend in my busy life and say "I am playing Warhammer all weekend, I will make it up to you for the rest of the month!"

I initially found the WTC format for player-placed terrain off-putting, but I found myself liking them after a while. I think that 10th Ed terrain rules for Ruins are finally in a place where you can have windows and still have functional terrain. We are a long-way from the Magic Boxes of late-8th and those Knight-high sheets of MDF.

In terms of 10th Ed being "sanitized", I do mourn the loss of Space Marine units to Legends. Having said that, we didn't lose any Chapters or Factions that I am tracking, and we recently saw Votann added at the end of 9th and World Eaters as a distinct faction. I feel that there is still lots of flavour in the game.

I'll reply to this to get us somewhat back on topic:

Perjoratively? That's in the eye of the beholder. If you like sanitized, no, if you don't, probably.
I think you'll also find a lot of "chrome" as you call it being lost is at the faction/subfaction level. The change from AV to T for vehicles ship has pretty much sailed because 1, its been a while, 2 both systems are relatively workable. I mean both systems are flawed - especially when comparing monsters vs vehicles - but neither solves the shortcomings without introducing new ones of its own with relatively similar impact.

I'm actually pretty happy with my table options being two sets of the Fronteris set. I'd like to be able to do 1 Fronteris, 1 Xenos/Chaos Coverted set, but GW listen to me on that one, and it might not be economically feasible. But the Fronteris Set doesn't have the Giant Center Building, just two small habs, and some ruins most of which aren't L Shaped. The MegaZord aspect of things like Charadon also have some appeal. I've also got a 3D Printer and assorted Dawn of War Space Marine Building/STCs.

Legends (recently) is a one-two punch problem caused by GW shooting themselves right below the belt buckle - In a sense the left hand didn't know what the right hand was doing in essence they released a bunch of detachments that would sell Bike Captains, Librarian with Jump Pack, at the same time they moved them all to Legends. So now people are looking at the Detachments, and thinking what could have been if they could still buy a generic bike captain or a Librarian with Jump Pack. They released a Det that was about mounted and mechanized (Infantry) units and then self-destructed all but one of the Enhancement eligible targets for Mounted HQ. In the Same book. Jump Packers fare only slightly better. Same with the Anvil Strike Force supposedly representing an Imperial Fists Gravis list.

As for "we didn't lose any Chapters or Factions that I am tracking" I'd say we lost them all. I mean a few are hanging on with bespoke units and epic heroes, but without those they're all the same. For the sake of the hypothetical - lets say we're building a full CHAPTER company list Captain, Chaplain, two Lieutenants (or I think it could/should also be Cap, Chap, LT, Judiciar but that's neither here nor there for this other than more flavor that's now gone.) - so we've got the Headquarters - there may or may not be a Command Squad with an illegally attached Apothecary. Beyond that you've got your 6 Battleline Squads - 10 Heavy Ints, 20 Ints, 20 Tacs, 10 Infiltrators (based on shoulderpads not keywords which are also screwed up for fluffy./flavor). Beyond that you've got 10 Assault Intercessors with Jump Packs, and 10 Incursors, then you've got 5 overpriced (because they're now 3 or 6 instead of something that divides into 10/100) Aggressors, 5 Desolators, and 10 Devastators. 100 Marines. No bespoke chapter units, just a theoretically typical/archtypal Space Marine Chapter Battle Company from any of the Chapters in existence. Maybe the quartermaster shakes this up and 10 incursors turn into 5 Outriders, 1 ATV and 1 Storm Speeder.. whatever.

The "sanitized" part is two fold.
You can't do this with the other Dets in a non-standard theme list with non-standard armor keywords. Terminators/Bikers/Gravis/Jump/etc are all missing some/most of the HQ's
The Chapter fluff twist is now absent. Thus the blacksheep of the Ravenguard leading the First Company in all Terminator Armor is not only missing his subordinate HQs, he's also now missing the centuries of experience, tendencies and genetic instinct from Corax.

Sweaties as in men who sweat. Perhaps they are trying incongruously hard and act uncomfortably intense, perhaps they have poor hygiene and physical conditioning, perhaps their dress is slovenly.

The way sweaties is spelled is so visually ugly.

pelicaniforce wrote:
Sweaties as in men who sweat. Perhaps they are trying incongruously hard and act uncomfortably intense, perhaps they have poor hygiene and physical conditioning, perhaps their dress is slovenly.

The way sweaties is spelled is so visually ugly.

I just took it to mean "try hards" or WAAC comp players.