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.

So, I'm a 30k noob, and I'm finding the sheer number of missions a little intimidating. For 40k casual play it's easy, decide cards or no cards, then roll on the table. What do you guys most commonly do for 30k casual play?

For standard non campaign games, check out the Age of Darkness Core missions, which can be found in either the Taghmata Red book or in Book 6. There are just six that you can roll for. All fluffy HH missions but non of the ones that are specific to certain campaigns, and they fit a little better than just playing the 40k core missions.

Thanks! Weird that they'd stick that in book 6, but there ya go!

 Walnuts wrote:
Thanks! Weird that they'd stick that in book 6, but there ya go!

Remember that book one was originally released during sixth edition when there were no objective cards etc. The new heresy era missions didn't appear until seventh edition was published.

 Walnuts wrote:
So, I'm a 30k noob, and I'm finding the sheer number of missions a little intimidating. For 40k casual play it's easy, decide cards or no cards, then roll on the table. What do you guys most commonly do for 30k casual play?

30k = casual play
No WAACAH and TFGs allowed.

Casual play, ie non-tournament play

Also the fact that one of you has shown up in almost every thread I've started here is literally more annoying than any actual TFG I've encountered in 18 years of warhamming

Guess I shouldn't be asking for advice on how to play a game with rules :/

 Walnuts wrote:
Casual play, ie non-tournament play

Also the fact that one of you has shown up in almost every thread I've started here is literally more annoying than any actual TFG I've encountered in 18 years of warhamming

Guess I shouldn't be asking for advice on how to play a game with rules :/

OR, instead of whining that most 30k players are really encouraging a non ass-hole play style in a largely non-competitive game, you could stop actively trying to min-max (not sure if you are, but a few of your posts have come off that way.) The single largest flaw with 40k (imo) is the apparently huge number of players who are willing to bend the rules or abuse possible oversights for the sake of winning. It's an attitude that causes people to leave a game and brings about that 'arms race' so many love to complain about.

as for the missions, if you can hunt them down (I know they are in all the black books and the mechanicum red book) there's a set of 6 missions and deployments meant to be used in standard games. the rest are all for playing more specific situations (smaller battles, fights in small outposts, legendary clashes, etc.)

The problem with 40k is that the rules are so unbalanced that a tiny fraction of armies have access to a few specific builds that work in competitive tournaments.
I have no problem with people playing to win in a strategy game, as I think that's the point of a strategy game, but when a game has all these cool, detailed, interesting armies with tons and tons of models, 75% of which will never show up in competitive settings, that's a snore fest. When you own enough models to cover an entire empty gaming table with everything base to base (some of which you've owned since the 90s) with three different factions, and can't make a tournament viable army, that's enraging and a sign of absurdly sloppy game design.

Like, I was initially put off by 30k because I thought only fighting marines, mechanicus, and sometimes IG equivalents and deamons, would be boring. That's essentially 4 factions. Well, in 40k competetive play, it's just Tau, Eldar, Necons, and loyal non-ba marines. Great. Time to jump ship.

I quit warhammer for almost a decade when the 4th ed blood angel codex dropped. I took one look through it, realized the only viable army I could make would be 100% assault marines and terminators, and while I would be able to win with that, it'd be soooooo boring, and 90% of my model collection that I lovingly built and painted would just be gathering dust anyway, so I said bye GW.

I feel even worse about 40k now than I did then, as while I do do casual games against ork and chaos marine players with my blood angels, I know I can't bring them to tournaments against randos unless I play them 'counts as', which I don't like doing at all, and consequently have played exactly one game at a flgs in the last year and that's sad.

30k has gotten me more hyped on the hobby than I've been in half a decade, and I've actually started building and painting stuff again for the first time since last summer.

Still, it's a new-ish system for me, and I want to know what works and what doesn't before I start chopping my models apart for the millionth time, because I'm getting pretty sick and tired of that. I can't believe this is something I have to justify.

Well then that's easy; pretty much everything works except assault and destroyer marines which are both overpriced. But even then it's not too bad.

What has a really hard time working is hyperfocus on one thing; most assault-y elements are just durable or sneaky enough to get to a gun line battered but effective enough but will fail without support, and a gun line without some kind of close in defence can get rolled up if the enemy times their charges right.

Thus; a good rule of thumb is to never have just one of anything (except consuls) and think really hard if you're going to have more than three of something.

 Walnuts wrote:
Still, it's a new-ish system for me, and I want to know what works and what doesn't before I start chopping my models apart for the millionth time, because I'm getting pretty sick and tired of that. I can't believe this is something I have to justify.

that is the thing you're still missing, even after all these posts. In 30k the ONLY thing that arguably doesn't work is rotor cannons, and I've even seen them used effectively in a list. EVERYTHING else is viable since this is NOT a competitive game and fluff should be the focus. Even assault and destroyer marines have amazing uses, even with their costs. Build what you think looks cool or is justified by the fluff, NOT what you think is the most 'WAAC-worthy' or efficient unit loadout. even with an army of only the weakest units and weakest war gear still has a fair chance in 30k since that army could still be effective. If you try and play 30k with a 40k mind set you will probably end up dissapointed because you will hear a lot of "build fluffy/fun, not competitive" or when you do bring your competative, near min-max list, you will find that it's not as face-roll as you want it to be.

 Brennonjw wrote:

 Walnuts wrote:
Still, it's a new-ish system for me, and I want to know what works and what doesn't before I start chopping my models apart for the millionth time, because I'm getting pretty sick and tired of that. I can't believe this is something I have to justify.

that is the thing you're still missing, even after all these posts. In 30k the ONLY thing that arguably doesn't work is rotor cannons, and I've even seen them used effectively in a list. EVERYTHING else is viable since this is NOT a competitive game and fluff should be the focus. Even assault and destroyer marines have amazing uses, even with their costs. Build what you think looks cool or is justified by the fluff, NOT what you think is the most 'WAAC-worthy' or efficient unit loadout. even with an army of only the weakest units and weakest war gear still has a fair chance in 30k since that army could still be effective. If you try and play 30k with a 40k mind set you will probably end up dissapointed because you will hear a lot of "build fluffy/fun, not competitive" or when you do bring your competative, near min-max list, you will find that it's not as face-roll as you want it to be.

Exactly correct. You could literally take ANYTHING, and it'll be fine. There's not really a huge need to chop anything up.

 Walnuts wrote:
The problem with 40k is that the rules are so unbalanced that a tiny fraction of armies have access to a few specific builds that work in competitive tournaments.
I have no problem with people playing to win in a strategy game, as I think that's the point of a strategy game, but when a game has all these cool, detailed, interesting armies with tons and tons of models, 75% of which will never show up in competitive settings, that's a snore fest. When you own enough models to cover an entire empty gaming table with everything base to base (some of which you've owned since the 90s) with three different factions, and can't make a tournament viable army, that's enraging and a sign of absurdly sloppy game design.

Like, I was initially put off by 30k because I thought only fighting marines, mechanicus, and sometimes IG equivalents and deamons, would be boring. That's essentially 4 factions. Well, in 40k competetive play, it's just Tau, Eldar, Necons, and loyal non-ba marines. Great. Time to jump ship.

I quit warhammer for almost a decade when the 4th ed blood angel codex dropped. I took one look through it, realized the only viable army I could make would be 100% assault marines and terminators, and while I would be able to win with that, it'd be soooooo boring, and 90% of my model collection that I lovingly built and painted would just be gathering dust anyway, so I said bye GW.

I feel even worse about 40k now than I did then, as while I do do casual games against ork and chaos marine players with my blood angels, I know I can't bring them to tournaments against randos unless I play them 'counts as', which I don't like doing at all, and consequently have played exactly one game at a flgs in the last year and that's sad.

30k has gotten me more hyped on the hobby than I've been in half a decade, and I've actually started building and painting stuff again for the first time since last summer.

Still, it's a new-ish system for me, and I want to know what works and what doesn't before I start chopping my models apart for the millionth time, because I'm getting pretty sick and tired of that. I can't believe this is something I have to justify.

just for clarity the armies available in 30k are

16 of the 18 legions

Solar auxilia

Imperial militia and cults (soooo many different builds)

Deamons

Necrons fit ok

Orks fit ok

Eldar are a bit too powerful under 3k, then legion can also bring the pain

you could even shoe horn Tau and tyranids in if you try, its all down to the imagination, there is a reason for almost all the current 40k forces to play in 30k.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Exactly correct. You could literally take ANYTHING, and it'll be fine. There's not really a huge need to chop anything up.

No, but there is. My models are all armed for 40k. You can guess how many jump pack marines I own with melta guns and/or storm shields. These aren't allowed in 30k. Same goes for all my guys toting grav (not graviton) weaponry. Also where I can I'm removing Mk VII bits to add on older armor bits (I know mk VIII armor was in limited use at the end of the crusade, and blood angels def would have had access to it, but I'm trying to minimize how much of it appears in my force to make it look more 30k appropriate). I've got to do a lot of chopping up of my dudes, the same way I did when I picked the game back up at the dawn of sixth, the same way I did when the 7th ed codex came out, and the same way I did when I decided I'd rather play my guys as counts-as raven guard than lose EVERY game.

I'm getting very sick of this so for 30k I'd like to build my army right, one try.

Again: there really is no "wrong" build so long as you follow rules since every unit and wargear has a use and can be effective in 30k. Build them as what you think looks cool or follows the fluff for blood angels. no matter what unit or load-out you can think of asking, this is the answer to the question: build what you like the fluff/look/play-style of. There. Is. No. Wrong. Answer. In 30k: everything is generally useful unlike regular 40k. As you said: "I'd like to build my army right" and 'right' is by the fluff and what you think looks cool.


If you're honestly worried about NEEDING to play a strong army, you may as well switch to iron hands and spam Spartans.

Well yeah, so I'd like to be sure I'm holding my own against that sort of army. But as it stands I'm basing my force around 20 assault Marines, 20 tacticals, 20 breachers, a praetor, a moritat, a primus Medicae, some contemptors, a Leviathan, terminators with assault cannons, a fire raptor, a sicaran, a rapier laser, and an assault cannon speeder and attack bike. It's fluffy. It looks cool. It's 90% models I own. I just want to make sure it fights as well as it can.

Don't worry, Walnuts, you're in the right here. Your questions are totally reasonable.

This is an outsider's perspective, but I think what you're seeing is fear.

30k has always had the illusion of balance. Up till recently, the game community was small due to high cost of entry, and was dominated by fluff bunnies who built armies by rule of cool. Note that I only care about warhammer for fluff these days, so no insult is intended. My point is that it only seems like you can take anything and have a fun time because that's been the prevailing attitude: as long as the other guy is running suboptimal stuff too, you're both OK.

If 30k was as well balanced as people say, there would be no need to worry about an influx of new players who want to know what works before they buy. Instead I think a lot of older players are worried about the arms race that's clearly going. Lots of new players are coming in, and people are really looking at what works and what doesn't.

Hence the knee-jerk reaction to any posts asking about using units effectively: "use random models, it all works!" This is how people have played up till now, and it only works because very few players gravitate towards power builds. If that became common, I think you'd see a balkanization of 30k communities the same way you see 40k players unable to agree on what's a fair power level, or what makes for a fun game. 30k may be better off than 40k, but there are still clunkers and there's still cheese (unit by unit and army by army). As more people build their armies based on what's most effective, you'll see less diversity, and some of the weaker fluff builds will more often have an uphill battle.

 CalgarsPimpHand wrote:
Don't worry, Walnuts, you're in the right here. Your questions are totally reasonable.

This is an outsider's perspective, but I think what you're seeing is fear.

30k has always had the illusion of balance. Up till recently, the game community was small due to high cost of entry, and was dominated by fluff bunnies who built armies by rule of cool. Note that I only care about warhammer for fluff these days, so no insult is intended. My point is that it only seems like you can take anything and have a fun time because that's been the prevailing attitude: as long as the other guy is running suboptimal stuff too, you're both OK.

If 30k was as well balanced as people say, there would be no need to worry about an influx of new players who want to know what works before they buy. Instead I think a lot of older players are worried about the arms race that's clearly going. Lots of new players are coming in, and people are really looking at what works and what doesn't.

Hence the knee-jerk reaction to any posts asking about using units effectively: "use random models, it all works!" This is how people have played up till now, and it only works because very few players gravitate towards power builds. If that became common, I think you'd see a balkanization of 30k communities the same way you see 40k players unable to agree on what's a fair power level. 30k may be better off than 40k, but there are still clunkers and there's still cheese (unit by unit and army by army).

you pretty much hit the nail on the head, though I honestly believe that there's very few 'clunkers' overall