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.

PP's "excuse" is that people will buy $100 cav. Is that really so hard to understand?

I haven't bought any PP stuff in over a year. Not because it isn't good, but because I don't like where the games have been going. The rules are bloated with special rules and exceptions and the game, while always about combos, has gotten really degenerate IMHO, and really relies too heavily on special rules and combos over basic tactics. Similar reason to why I stopped my 40K purchases- liked the models, hated the rules.

So there was an interesting article in Car & Driver (of all places) saying that the diecast car industry is hurting right now, especially viz. the highend stuff ($20+) because of the costs of fuel (to run the plants and ship the toys) and materials. The article actually said that toys in the $20-40 price range make no profit. It's interesting background to the discussion we're having here over prices.

As to combos etc., some of the figs are getting out of whack (Gudrun is BROKEN, period), it's always seemed kind of twinkie to me. The problem is that a lot of the scenarios beyond caster kill are just not that flushed out. they're better than they were, but people really seem to prefer headhunting to capturing objectives etc.

EDIT: wrong car magazine. Fixed.

It's built into the mechanics of the game. Even if Caster Kill doesn't end the game, it inerts all the jacks and makes the beasts run off.... so it still basically pulls the rug out on the other army.

Basically because of the way Casters and the rest of the force interact... it's ALWAYS a valid tactic (and worth pressing) no matter the mission.

There are other objectives besides killing the Caster?!? Really?

Depends, but sometimes, yes. If both players use their casters defensively, caster killing is impossible. Hence secondary victory conditions kick in.

JohnHwangDD wrote:There are other objectives besides killing the Caster?!? Really?

Not sure if that was sarcasm or not, but the answer is yes absolutely.
This is why there are all kinds of rules for what happens to jacks and beasts when all of the Warcasters/Warlocks have been killed.

Assassination is still the most prevalent victory condition, just as Cleanse has always been the most prevalent type of 40k mission, but its definitely not the only way to play.

Most tournaments use the Steamroller rules pack which includes a variety of missions, each with different victory conditions (holding control points, quadrants, etc..). I've also played in games where there was an objective that a model had to retrieve and bring back to it's deployment area, or in which each side had a structure that the enemy needed to destroy. Assassination is usually a victory condition in addition to these, but it's not the only way to win.

@Skorne Cyclops

Welcome to the show, the three-part-design of hands and arms drove me insane and then I was praying for a third hand to hold the whole thing together.

@Bloated Rules
That´s why I have to applaud Rackham, they had the balls to make the cut and completely redesign the by then bloated rules. I wish GW had the balls.

Actually, I see Assaassination as PP's version of scoring "Victory Points", and can't wait for WM3 to break from that to something more tactical.

JohnHwangDD wrote:Actually, I see Assaassination as PP's version of scoring "Victory Points", and can't wait for WM3 to break from that to something more tactical.

????

Warmachine and Hordes already use a victory point mechanic. Every model/unit has an associated victory point value. You gain that number of VPs for killing that model/unit. Many scenarios use this mechanic to determine the winner if primary victory conditions are not met (i.e. tie-breaker).

Also, some tournament environments use a VP threshold system where, if the Primary Victory condition is not met (this can happen often in timed games), the game is ruled a tie unless there is a difference of X VPs between the two players totals. This is a good system for the prevention of VP sniping (killing a single solo for example and then refusing to engage the enemy until time runs out).

Assassination, when compared to 40k, would be more akin to a victory condition where your primary objective was to destroy your opponents HQ choices.

I agree that Assassination is the dominate scenario in WH/H, and I think that this is primarily due to the fact it is very much a character driven/focused game. A very sizable portion of any WM/H army is concentrated in it's Warcasters/Warlocks, there really is no way around that, and that makes assassination a logical objective. However, there are plenty of other scenarios to use (control points, objective markers, etc...) if the players choose to utilize them.

Duncan_Idaho wrote:
@Bloated Rules
That´s why I have to applaud Rackham, they had the balls to make the cut and completely redesign the by then bloated rules. I wish GW had the balls.

Too bad they also revamped the Confrontation miniatures range, alienating their pre-existing fanbase. The rule adaptations weren't much better received, I understand. Personally, I dislike the new Rackham for their consistent use of studio paintjobs to market pre-painted miniatures, which to me feels somewhat dishonest. If those factory paintjobs are too poor for them to show me, they're too poor for me to buy.

In their situation, I still think some kind of redesign was in order, but the way they chose pretty much sealed their fate for me. Whereas before I was interested in getting into Confrontation, nowadays I am content to pick off those beautifully sculpted metal figures when I can still find em.

loki, you're missing my point.

40k has been dominated by VPs since 3rd Edition has been released, resulting in stale and unimaginative tactical play revolving around VP denial.

WM has been dominated by assassination since the inception of the game. It's kinda boring now. VPs are nice, but it's usually easier to play for the caster kill.

Just as 40k5 replaced VPs with KPs and pushed for Objectives to shake things up, it would be good if PP were to push players into finding another way to win.

Agamemnon2 wrote:Personally, I dislike the new Rackham for their consistent use of studio paintjobs to market pre-painted miniatures, which to me feels somewhat dishonest. If those factory paintjobs are too poor for them to show me, they're too poor for me to buy.

How is that any different from GW's use of Heavy Metal?

In the Rackham case, at least they do the work of priming and basecoating the models for you, so you don't ever have the shame of fielding bare plastic.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Agamemnon2 wrote:Personally, I dislike the new Rackham for their consistent use of studio paintjobs to market pre-painted miniatures, which to me feels somewhat dishonest. If those factory paintjobs are too poor for them to show me, they're too poor for me to buy.

How is that any different from GW's use of Heavy Metal?

In the Rackham case, at least they do the work of priming and basecoating the models for you, so you don't ever have the shame of fielding bare plastic.

Because GW products are aimed for painters and sold unpainted and Not prepainted! If your selling paintjobs you dont make publicity with diferent paintjobs! Surelly your just fishing for some debate...
Last time I checked I Prime and basecoat without mouldlines! and at the fraction of the price of rakham stuff! Thank you sir but I will pass the basecoating of uncleaned plastics service.

Rackham appealed to people not because of the rules or universe but because of the minis and the concept of skirmish fighting warbands... both changed for the worse... yes they did a cut... and its called harakiri.

Huh? There's no rule saying that prepaints must be fielded as-is.

I think that repaints are a good thing, and a valid display point, given the history of Rackham.

Rackham is selling models, and showing their potential.

Personally, I think GW would do better if their starters were prepainted, but that's just me.

JohnHwangDD wrote:loki, you're missing my point.

40k has been dominated by VPs since 3rd Edition has been released, resulting in stale and unimaginative tactical play revolving around VP denial.

WM has been dominated by assassination since the inception of the game. It's kinda boring now. VPs are nice, but it's usually easier to play for the caster kill.

Just as 40k5 replaced VPs with KPs and pushed for Objectives to shake things up, it would be good if PP were to push players into finding another way to win.

PP has moved away from pure 'caster kill since I'd say, early 2007. That's when they started the league system. This system provides players with VERY innovated missions that involve a lot more than caster kill.

Recent tournies are much the same, Steamroller events all have great missions, that add a lot of tactical depth. At the tourny I attended two weeks ago I was forced into a great pickle by my opponent. I could keep my caster safe and loose the game on victory conditions (more models near an objective) or I could bring my caster up to contest the objective and risk him.

Removing the need to protect your leader would not make the game more tactical, it would make it less so. IMHO the best part of WM/Hordes is that your most powerful model is also your Achillies heel. This fundamental game design will not change. It would be like asking someone to play chess without that annoying 'check mate' mechanic.

JohnHwangDD wrote:Huh? There's no rule saying that prepaints must be fielded as-is.

I think that repaints are a good thing, and a valid display point, given the history of Rackham.

Rackham is selling models, and showing their potential.

Personally, I think GW would do better if their starters were prepainted, but that's just me.

By that line of ideas theres no rule saying its not acceptable to put tyranid gaunt sprues on a space marine regiment box instead of the SM's its called common sense... if you want to sell something painted then publicity should be according to what its offered... Its like you see a customed paint job on a harley add... but the reall deal is a rusty fueldeposit! "hey theres no rule"

Rackham is selling Painted models and not models, big diference and rackham history is long gone... this has nothing to do with those great times.

GW prepainted starters... Personally I think you just gave the worst idea of the year, but thats just me.

BTW isnt this about PP?
Will the draco european prices be converted? any word on that?

NAVARRO wrote:Rackham appealed to people not because of the rules or universe but because of the minis and the concept of skirmish fighting warbands... both changed for the worse... yes they did a cut... and its called harakiri.

Actually, they're not that unwell. AT-43 has been outselling all expectations, apparently, and the new Confrontation is supposedly progressing per the plan. I expect them to continue for a long time yet to come. Compared to some non-prepainted companies (Mongoose comes to mind) that's nothing to scoff at.

Just because I don't like it doesn't mean their business model is without merit. They lost the patronage of a lot of people, but they gained more.

Mongoose is going over to prepainted.

Agamemnon2 wrote:

NAVARRO wrote:Rackham appealed to people not because of the rules or universe but because of the minis and the concept of skirmish fighting warbands... both changed for the worse... yes they did a cut... and its called harakiri.

Actually, they're not that unwell. AT-43 has been outselling all expectations, apparently, and the new Confrontation is supposedly progressing per the plan. I expect them to continue for a long time yet to come. Compared to some non-prepainted companies (Mongoose comes to mind) that's nothing to scoff at.

Just because I don't like it doesn't mean their business model is without merit. They lost the patronage of a lot of people, but they gained more.

I believe at43 is and was much diferent of the new conf in every way... when they came there was no metal counterparts on R range to caompare with, it was a new universe, a new game and R was enjoying good relations with old players base and hobbyiest... it was like a new thing that didnt interfere directly with established mainstream game.
New conf is yet to deliver something half good as at43 plastics in terms of appeal... maybe its because people were used to metal quality... Same thing could happen to PP if they switch to plastics in a less carefull way.

Point is, some( looking at forums now and back then i dare to say most of them) old players and painters left the boat pissed... on a company small as this that relies mostly on word of mouth to make publicity is a bad move... to me its dead since i cant get myself interested anymore...