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.

Sgt. Cortez wrote:
At least 8th needs more tactics than the last two editions and is better balanced than prior editions have ever been. It really depends on what you make out of it, but that's the case with most games, really.
It's a game about war... with soldiers that simulate a battle. Therefor it's a wargame, no?

I think you meant to type "has more tactics" but if that is the case then I strongly disagree. 6/7th was a game with elements that placed value on angle of attack, placement of critical models with a unit, intervening terrain, spacing, proximity of units around other units, firing arcs and facings on vehicles, etc which had a major outcome on results. The risk/reward of reserves, deep striking (and more importantly how close and thus how risky the deep strike would be to get that ideal shot off), using cover (it slows you down but also gives protection), using reactive abilities like going to ground or jinking, etc gave more decision making and risk management to your actions. 6/7th had a lot of tactical depth that came from the core rules of the game unlike 8th where most of your depth really comes from stratagems which feel A LOT more CCG or MOBA like (the closest parallel is probably the munition system in Company of Heroes).

The game (8th) is better balanced sure but it was at the cost of most of the meat and fat of 7th which left a very bland rule set with far less depth. Also by your description you could say Risk is a Wargame which isn't exactly scratching that strategic, let alone any sort of tactical, itch.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

barboggo wrote:
I have literally zero familiarity with other wargames (not even WFB) but I'd be curious to hear what characteristics you guys think makes other wargames particularly "uniquely wargame-y ".

IMO the defining thing that makes a wargame is what other games don't have: unit positions on the table being "real". In a CCG you just put your cards on the table in a row and exchange attacks. In a board game you have your pieces on an abstract map, with spaces and the physical distance between them having no meaning. In a wargame your units are accurately represented by their positions on the table. If unit A is 6" away and to the left of unit B then the "real" distance between them is 6" multiplied by the scale factor (28mm, etc) and the attack is resolved from the left. If you want to move unit A behind unit B and close to 50m for short-range weapons you have to actually measure the appropriate distances and move the model to that position. Even in wargames with hex grids or similar mechanics the real positioning aspect is still the same, you just have a fixed distance increment (one hex) instead of being able to move fractional inches.

The reason 8th edition 40k is more of a CCG than a wargame is how it fails to make positioning matter. Most of the time you're just lining up your respective combos and stat lines CCG-style and exchanging attacks until someone wins, it hardly matters where the models are on the table.

If you feel positioning doesn't matter, feel free to not screen your IG tanks.

I think its fair to say that while positioning does matter, the importance has been greatly been reduced due to the elimination and/or minimized impact of area of effect, scatter, firing arcs, vehicle facings, closest casualties, terrain rules, cover mechanics, etc. Bubble wrapping does remain a valid tactic but the number of positioning based factions to consider has gone down dramatically in the edition change.