Switch Theme:

Kill Team 2021 news & rumours  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in gb
Ship's Officer





Bristol (UK)

Yes, it was mentioned on the Dire Avengers datacard.
   
Made in us
Veteran Knight Baron in a Crusader





 Sledgehammer wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
Apple fox wrote:
 Sledgehammer wrote:
What's stopping someone from picking the commando grot as an interloper and getting a free 2 points? I mean it sounds like the grapple has infinite range.


It would need terrain in position to work, so it works once. And no one plays you where it works again.


Also, overwatch. I really like the decisions you have to make to be able to stop something like that. You're going to be working hard to get an angle on that grot before he gets line of sight to a clear spot on your board edge.
Have they confirmed overwatch is in the game yet?


There's a unit with a special rule that specifically mentions Overwatch (Dire Avenger)
   
Made in au
Longtime Dakkanaut




Rihgu wrote:
 Sledgehammer wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
Apple fox wrote:
 Sledgehammer wrote:
What's stopping someone from picking the commando grot as an interloper and getting a free 2 points? I mean it sounds like the grapple has infinite range.


It would need terrain in position to work, so it works once. And no one plays you where it works again.


Also, overwatch. I really like the decisions you have to make to be able to stop something like that. You're going to be working hard to get an angle on that grot before he gets line of sight to a clear spot on your board edge.
Have they confirmed overwatch is in the game yet?


There's a unit with a special rule that specifically mentions Overwatch (Dire Avenger)


I don’t think we know how it works yet, do we ?
   
Made in gb
Ship's Officer





Bristol (UK)

I think we know it's an action, beyond that, nothing.

It does concern me as a concept though.
It may totally discourage aggressive action both sides turtle up and wait to get the first shot off.

On the other hand it would remove a lot of the advantage of going last in an AA game.
   
Made in us
Powerful Pegasus Knight





 kirotheavenger wrote:
I think we know it's an action, beyond that, nothing.

It does concern me as a concept though.
It may totally discourage aggressive action both sides turtle up and wait to get the first shot off.

On the other hand it would remove a lot of the advantage of going last in an AA game.
Indeed. The last edition of kill team made it feel like if you weren't readying all of your ranged weapons you were at a huge disadvantage to someone who was. I'm looking forward to this with the hope that fire and maneuver is more viable than it has been.
   
Made in si
Ravenous Beast Form







Interlopers gonna Interlope


Still haven't seen a single use of distance shapes that couldn't have been done the same or better with a number.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/28 15:31:47


Posters on ignore list: 34

40k Potica Edition - 40k patch with reactions, suppression and all that good stuff. Feedback thread here.

Gangs of Nu Ork - Necromunda / Gorkamorka expansion supporting all faction. Feedback thread here
   
Made in us
Hacking Shang Jí





Fayetteville

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Interlopers gonna Interlope


Still haven't seen a single use of distance shapes that couldn't have been done the same or better with a number.


Oh, ye of little faith, just you wait. There will be a mind-blowing mechanic that uses these shapes to maximum effect and it will be clear that it couldn't be done any other way.

The Imperial Navy, A Galatic Force for Good. 
   
Made in us
Veteran Knight Baron in a Crusader





 lord_blackfang wrote:
Interlopers gonna Interlope


Still haven't seen a single use of distance shapes that couldn't have been done the same or better with a number.


Yea, so far they have absolutely wasted the design space they opened up here. I almost feel like they started doing something "good" and at some point were told to divert away from that, but left half of the "good" stuff in.
   
Made in us
Boosting Black Templar Biker






Man these shapes instead of distances are extremely hard to read. I'm with Kiro here, I have to pause when reading when I come to the shape then remember it's referring to a distance.

I also really enjoy BSF which uses shapes to represent the die you are using, so reading these is extra painful.

The Secondaries look interesting, but I'm not a big fan of what they described with bringing your Kill Team. Sounds a lot like "Well if you're bringing that, then I'm bringing this" which in my opinion puts a speedbump on just starting and playing the game.
   
Made in ca
Regular Dakkanaut





Listen I am as salty and bitter as they come but i honestly think this new KT is going to be GWs best product released in more than two decades.

Skirmish games have developed a lot through this time. And since we know GW doesn’t pay their game designers, they best they can do is to grab other people’s ideas and bolt them onto GW models.

Thus we have the new KT. Which for all its legalese looks to have a great interaction system.

What will drag the game under is the fact that the range of models available for use is tiny and that will assuredly be expanded through paywalled released randomly thrown out every couple years that eventually breaks the game with power creep and other poorly thought out design choices.

But KT2 is going to be such a breath of fresh air in comparison to the trash fire of 9th edition 40K and all tedium that game entails.
   
Made in ca
Oberleutnant




Hogtown

 Gregor Samsa wrote:


What will drag the game under is the fact that the range of models available for use is tiny and that will assuredly be expanded through paywalled released randomly thrown out every couple years that eventually breaks the game with power creep and other poorly thought out design choices.


I agree with everything you've said, but really don't understand this point. I see it cropping up over and over again.

Am I missing something? I don't see how this game won't be 100% playable with standard 40k kits.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/28 17:43:46


 
   
Made in ca
Regular Dakkanaut





 Las wrote:
 Gregor Samsa wrote:


What will drag the game under is the fact that the range of models available for use is tiny and that will assuredly be expanded through paywalled released randomly thrown out every couple years that eventually breaks the game with power creep and other poorly thought out design choices.


I agree with everything you've said, but really don't understand this point. I see it cropping up over and over again.

Am I missing something? I don't see how this game won't be 100% playable with standard 40k kits.



I am just assuming they will follow the path of old kill team and expand the units with an "elites" and "commanders" expansions which, if not properly designed into the game at the start, can throw the whole meta out of order.

For example Tyranids have no units in KT2 that have psychic abilities (based upon how they work in 40k anyway). It seems reasonable to assume they will eventually get some. I just would have liked to see more units available for play at the game's release instead of them being expanded over time to keep sales flowing.
   
Made in gb
Ship's Officer





Bristol (UK)

I do wonder how they will fit Elites into Killteam with this list building.

I don't actually think they designed this game with shapes in mind, at all.
I think they designed this game to use a 'combat gauge', which seems a logical decision. Then someone thought "how can we make sure that people buy our combat gauge? I want you to use shapes".
So they went back through and replaced every number with a shape.
   
Made in us
Exalted Beastlord




Rihgu wrote:
 lord_blackfang wrote:
Interlopers gonna Interlope


Still haven't seen a single use of distance shapes that couldn't have been done the same or better with a number.


Yea, so far they have absolutely wasted the design space they opened up here. I almost feel like they started doing something "good" and at some point were told to divert away from that, but left half of the "good" stuff in.


I think its more like the 'keywords' they introduced into the main game. Someone told GW devs they're a big trend in modern game design, but they didn't actually go and look at how people use them. So they just hover out there, used for a handful of subsystems and a lot of wasted potential. Or in some cases (like marks of chaos) killing off lore/flavor subsystems entirely.

It feels like an alarm program that doesn't send out any alerts when the sensor is tripped, because no one bothered to write the 'send alert' part of the code. They have the sensor, and they can detect when it gets flipped, but... nothing actually happens because they didn't take the next step.

Efficiency is the highest virtue. 
   
Made in ca
Oberleutnant




Hogtown

 Gregor Samsa wrote:
 Las wrote:
 Gregor Samsa wrote:


What will drag the game under is the fact that the range of models available for use is tiny and that will assuredly be expanded through paywalled released randomly thrown out every couple years that eventually breaks the game with power creep and other poorly thought out design choices.


I agree with everything you've said, but really don't understand this point. I see it cropping up over and over again.

Am I missing something? I don't see how this game won't be 100% playable with standard 40k kits.



I am just assuming they will follow the path of old kill team and expand the units with an "elites" and "commanders" expansions which, if not properly designed into the game at the start, can throw the whole meta out of order.

For example Tyranids have no units in KT2 that have psychic abilities (based upon how they work in 40k anyway). It seems reasonable to assume they will eventually get some. I just would have liked to see more units available for play at the game's release instead of them being expanded over time to keep sales flowing.


Ah, I see what you're saying. I was confused. Agree that that's probably going to be the route.

 kirotheavenger wrote:
I do wonder how they will fit Elites into Killteam with this list building.

I don't actually think they designed this game with shapes in mind, at all.
I think they designed this game to use a 'combat gauge', which seems a logical decision. Then someone thought "how can we make sure that people buy our combat gauge? I want you to use shapes".
So they went back through and replaced every number with a shape.


100% this is exactly what happened.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/28 19:44:09


 
   
Made in us
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Right behind you.

Ehh...it's possible that they came up with the abstraction first and were told to "go easy" on doing things too out there.

Wouldn't be the first time.
   
Made in us
Battle-tested Knight Castellan Pilot




Oakland, CA

 Gregor Samsa wrote:
I am just assuming they will follow the path of old kill team and expand the units with an "elites" and "commanders" expansions which, if not properly designed into the game at the start, can throw the whole meta out of order.

While they are absolutely sure to expand this, they've taken far more care for balance in this edition than they ever have, so I'm thinking a far more measured approach this time.
   
Made in gb
Enginseer with a Wrench




Bath

 schoon wrote:
 Gregor Samsa wrote:
I am just assuming they will follow the path of old kill team and expand the units with an "elites" and "commanders" expansions which, if not properly designed into the game at the start, can throw the whole meta out of order.

While they are absolutely sure to expand this, they've taken far more care for balance in this edition than they ever have, so I'm thinking a far more measured approach this time.


I agree, despite my grumbling about the range symbols. they've made a clear and deliberate choice to divorce themselves form the basic 40K mechanics, and to effectively start again form the ground up, with the hope that this will create a system that has better internal balance at the expected model counts than one that was basically vanillia 40K forced down to a lower model count than it was designed for and alternating activations bodged into it.

the mechanics of this game are not new to wargaming in general, certainly, but they are, mostly, new to games workshop*, so its clear they are willing to move this out of their comfort zone to use what they think are good ideas form other systems. I dont think the removal of limits to long range fire, or the lack of points, or even the symbols im bitching about are Bad Ideas That Will Ruin The Game, just different that how 40K does things, and I honestly hope this works well and creates a fun, fast paced skirmish game that becomes a nice little profit maker for GW and something i can reliably find games of in my local stores and wargaming clubs for when i cant be bothered to lug a huge army around or havent got 3 hours to spare.


* for example, the only other GW game i can think of where fights were opposed rolls, rather than hit/wound/save, is LOTR.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/29 09:07:51


Then it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an` Tommy, 'ow's yer soul? "
But it's " Thin red line of 'eroes " when the drums begin to roll
The drums begin to roll, my boys, the drums begin to roll,
O it's " Thin red line of 'eroes, " when the drums begin to roll.
"Tommy", Rudyard Kipling
Exporitor force kappa-Tercia 500pts Coven of XVth 1000pts
Western Host 1000 pts
 
   
Made in gb
Ship's Officer





Bristol (UK)

I don't think any single mechanic here is new to GW, only the combination thereof. It seems mostly based on Warcry.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/29 09:11:52


 
   
Made in gb
Enginseer with a Wrench




Bath

 kirotheavenger wrote:
I don't think any single mechanic here is new to GW, only the combination thereof. It seems mostly based on Warcry.


wouldnt know, not played that. i stand corrected if that is the case. still, i hope this combination works well for them.

Then it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an` Tommy, 'ow's yer soul? "
But it's " Thin red line of 'eroes " when the drums begin to roll
The drums begin to roll, my boys, the drums begin to roll,
O it's " Thin red line of 'eroes, " when the drums begin to roll.
"Tommy", Rudyard Kipling
Exporitor force kappa-Tercia 500pts Coven of XVth 1000pts
Western Host 1000 pts
 
   
Made in gb
Ship's Officer





Bristol (UK)

Warcry uses AA (although so does Necromunda). The thing that reminds me of Warcry is the attack sequence.
Always rolling 3-4 dice, 6s cause crits, defence mostly comes from wounds.

From what I've seen so far though, I prefer Warcry's execution. In Warcry units have an "attack" and "defence" value, 'to-hit' is based off of the interaction of those (just like strength vs toughness in 40k). Any hits deal damage, 6s dealing critical damage.

I think having a fixed to-hit and separate defence roll is likely to just slow things down without materially changing things, whilst also surely leading to the oddity of armour providing no protection at all in melee.

But that doesn't rule out Killteam being fun in it's own right of course.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/29 10:12:21


 
   
Made in vn
Longtime Dakkanaut




Warcry is a tedious slap fight until someone manage to crit more than the other guy and knock him out, crit deal absurdly high damage compare to the non-crit slap attack. Only a handful of fighters have a decent non-crit attack.

The toughest fighter in KT is probably a Cusrodian Guard and he only has 18 wounds, in Warcry a tough guy can have 30 to over 40 wounds! The damage in Warcry is lower than KT and mostly from melee. They probably realized that people want to see things killed instead of watching a slapping competition reenactment.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/07/29 11:59:58


 
   
Made in gb
Ship's Officer





Bristol (UK)

Ive enjoyed my games of Warcry, that's not been my impression of it. The ability dice are also pretty cool imo.
My main issue with the game was the random nature of mission draws meant that fairly often one player would win basically as soon as the mission was drawn. "Seize and keep the objective? I have fly, you don't, I win!".

Given a Custode's save, I imagine they're going to be very tough to bring down with shooting.
How vulnerable they'll be to melee remains to be seen, but certainly in 1v1 combat they're going to be pretty impervious, especially if equipped with a stormshield.
   
Made in us
Boosting Black Templar Biker






Chopstick wrote:
The toughest fighter in KT is probably a Cusrodian Guard and he only has 18 wounds, in Warcry a tough guy can have 30 to over 40 wounds! The damage in Warcry is lower than KT and mostly from melee. They probably realized that people want to see things killed instead of watching a slapping competition reenactment.

That's interesting, so about 1/2 the wounds of a tough model in War Cry and the damage is much higher. Sounds like they want to keep 40k Kill Team very killy.

I'm really looking forward to trying my first game with the new rules, since this is a specialist game now for the most part its shaping up to a having a unique feel of play. Here's hoping it's not turbo-killy though.
   
Made in us
Da Head Honcho Boss Grot




New Jersey, State of Perfection

xerxeskingofking wrote:
i've complained about this before in another thread on this forum, but the way they are using the shapes rather than the actaul distances is frankly annoying. I get it, they've eliminated long range measuring and brought everything down to something you can fit on their new measuring tool, which if fine, it might well be easier to use than a tape measure (i'm giving them benefit of the the doubt, and withholding judgement on that until i've actually tried playing with it), but i wish for god-emperors sake, they'd put the real world distances next to those symbols, because i am reading those tactical objectives and i'm having to stop, load up the page where they explain the conversation chart to actaully understand those orders. I mean, how hard is it, really, to go "within SQUARE(2") of enemy"?

it doesnt help the shapes chosen dont (in my mind) bear any resemblance to the distances. why triangle for 1", circle for 3"? i'd have put those the other way around, circle for 1", a triangle for 3", and swapped the square/2" with a large X (ie two lines) and the pentagon/6" with a hexagon (six sides). That to, me makes more sense, and creates a "sides = distance" relationship that works better for tying the two together.



anyway, rant over, onto the actual rules:

I havn't played many games with secret objectives like this, so it will be intresting to see how easy (or not) this is to implement. the existence of at least one objective that requires the enemy to get behind you might incentivise players to care more about flanks and trying to prevent breakthoughs, which i suppose is more "realistic" in that troops should be worried about being flanked. that said, it sounds like it might punish more elite factions slightly if they can't get enough bodies on the field to block all lines of approach. I can pretty much guarantee that custodes are going to be putting at most 3 bodies on the feild, for example, so sneaking around them in a suitable crowded battlefield is going to be easy 2VP for a more numerous enemy. I suppose the question then becomes if thier are secondary objectives that play to the strenghts of a elite army, like "hold this postion" or something. We might well see some objectives becoming auto-includes on some factions (a very fast army might love the interloper objective, etc)


If you're using the measuring tool, why do you need to know what the numeric distance each shape corresponds to is? All you really need to know is the distances in relation to one another (i.e. whats shorter/longer than what). This is really where better "logic" in the allocation of shapes would have helped (i.e. an increasing number of sides on the shapes instead of the seemingly random pattern they selected).

This ain't no pansy GW Armor, son - Digital Sculpting Plog, Now with Heavy Weapon Platforms!
Sympathy for the Devil, or: The Project Log from Hell

Ma55ter_fett wrote:It reads like the ramblings of a Nigerian lobotomized Shakespeare typed into a cellphone with a very aggressive autocomplete function.
 
   
Made in us
Exalted Beastlord




If you're using the measuring tool, why do you need to know what the numeric distance each shape corresponds to is?

Same reason there are different teaching and learning methods. People learn and retain information in different ways, but the most important thing is context. With wargames, the most common context is distance.

Lots of people like their numbers and use them to ground themselves in the system. Suddenly taking that away for a new system (and, importantly replacing it with an illogical system of unrelated colors and shapes) actively interferes with the ability to understand and relate to the game.

Its one of the big reasons why new games get a lot of crap for not being in Imperial or Metric measurements (or both). The game company has suddenly lost a good chunk of the audience on one side of the Atlantic or another.

Rule systems in overt legalese and naming systems in gibberish rather than natural language are similar problems that come up a lot. Undercutting nearly everybody with something as basic as numbers is a _really_ puzzling decision.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/07/29 22:46:38


Efficiency is the highest virtue. 
   
Made in pl
Longtime Dakkanaut




Germany

chaos0xomega wrote:

If you're using the measuring tool, why do you need to know what the numeric distance each shape corresponds to is? All you really need to know is the distances in relation to one another (i.e. whats shorter/longer than what). This is really where better "logic" in the allocation of shapes would have helped (i.e. an increasing number of sides on the shapes instead of the seemingly random pattern they selected).


Because forcing people to use a proprietary gauge to make any sense out of your system is a stupidly greedy decision and I imagine people don't want to bend the knee to GW in this particular case.

Games Workshop are not your friends. They are not a small dev trying their best. They are a multibillion dollar company making calculated decisions about how many costs they can cut, how lazy they can be about relases, and how much they can paywall. They will do it again. Stop giving them money for this. 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut







Voss wrote:
If you're using the measuring tool, why do you need to know what the numeric distance each shape corresponds to is?

Same reason there are different teaching and learning methods. People learn and retain information in different ways, but the most important thing is context. With wargames, the most common context is distance.

Lots of people like their numbers and use them to ground themselves in the system. Suddenly taking that away for a new system (and, importantly replacing it with an illogical system of unrelated colors and shapes) actively interferes with the ability to understand and relate to the game.

Its one of the big reasons why new games get a lot of crap for not being in Imperial or Metric measurements (or both). The game company has suddenly lost a good chunk of the audience on one side of the Atlantic or another.

Rule systems in overt legalese and naming systems in gibberish rather than natural language are similar problems that come up a lot. Undercutting nearly everybody with something as basic as numbers is a _really_ puzzling decision.


Where's the vitriol and complaining about games like Star Wars using a measuring rod, and the variously sized movement rods?

   
Made in fi
Dakka Veteran





 solkan wrote:

Where's the vitriol and complaining about games like Star Wars using a measuring rod, and the variously sized movement rods?


Maybe it has something to do with Star Wars Legion and other games using the rods in way that is logical instead of confusing and pointless.

I don't know how long Legion rods are in inches or centimeters because I don't need to. The rods are named Range 1, Range 2 and Range 3 and it isn't difficult to guess which one is shortest and which one is longest. Also separate rods are probably more convenient to use instead of sides of a trapezoid, three of which are used to measure distances and one is not.

I believe GW had good intentions but the choice of symbols was terrible and the whole system feels pointless when symbols refer to actual distances in inches anyway. This is what people are complaining about.

Personally I think that basing Kill Team gameplay on preset distances was a good idea, just poorly implemented.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/07/29 23:58:34


That place is the harsh dark future far left with only war left. 
   
Made in gb
Ship's Officer





Bristol (UK)

Legion feels like you mechanically gain from using their movement rulers. They don't feel like they were crowbarred in just to sell those rulers.
Additionally, there's a starter set for every faction that has a good selection of units at good value, pretty much everyone starts there and gets movement rulers anyway. So they don't have to specifically buy these tools it's much less of an issue anyway.

For range you have more of a point. Each range band of Legion is just 6" and I tend to use a tape measure anyway, this does feel a little forced.
However, they still use logical numbers (1-5). This is a big deal as when reading rules my brain doesn't have to pause to process ("circle = 3, is bigger than square") which gets really annoying when reading Killteam rules and genuinely hurts my comprehension of the system as it's just harder to read.
And again, everyone starts with a starterset so they don't really have to buy range rulers. With Killteam a lot of people aren't going to be interested in Krieg, Kommandos, or Ork Terrain so aren't going to want the starter set.

I agree that discarding distances beyond 6" and working around a combat gauge is a solid idea. They just made a terrible decision using shapes.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/30 07:24:06


 
   
 
Forum Index » News & Rumors
Go to: