Switch Theme:

Tried the new Apoc - it's a better game than 8th  [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 us
Speedy Swiftclaw Biker





I love the new turn structure of Apoc and hope it signals a change for the future of 40k.

Issuing orders and then taking turns activating units is extremely engaging and much better than IGOUGO. Having both players able to use all of their units before determining damage is also great. You are never blasted off of the table before you get to do something with your toy soldiers.

I also think the command asset cards are better than the CP/stratagem system in 8th. Cards are drawn randomly and each asset can only be used once per game (apart from re-rolls which show up on several cards, although you are not guaranteed to draw any cards with rerolls on them).

The only problem I have with Apoc is the lack of wargear options when building units, but I understand why it was removed for a game meant to be played at large scale. If they used these rules for 40k, you could add some of that customizing back in pretty easily.

I think I'm going to just play 150PL Apoc games from here on out and wait for the 40k rules to catch up.
   
Made in us
Dominating Dominatrix






Side note on the rules. You can only have 1 of each card in your deck. But if you draw your last card you shuffle your discard pile and can draw those cards again. Some cards can potentially end up being used multiple times in a game.


These are my opinions. This is how I feel. Others may feel differently. This needs to be stated for some reason.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

The Nazis were right. It's better to be a Nazi than a fan.

Thank you for getting me on the side of Milo and the Nazis.

 
   
Made in us
Land Raider Pilot on Cruise Control






Across the Rubicon

wrong thread

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/07/07 15:14:21


   
Made in gb
Battleship Captain




 Lance845 wrote:
Side note on the rules. You can only have 1 of each card in your deck. But if you draw your last card you shuffle your discard pile and can draw those cards again. Some cards can potentially end up being used multiple times in a game.


Indeed.

3 x Infantry Squad + Platoon Commander draws 2 cards per turn and is only 11 power; bolt several onto an army and in addition to a guard company for board control, skirmish screens, etc, you're drawing enough extra cards to reliably chew through your deck at least once, and to get any given card reasonably quickly.

Termagants expended for the Hive Mind: ~2835
 
   
Made in us
Fresh-Faced New User




Earth

Forgive the n00b question. Are you talking about this?

https://warhammer40000.com/apocalypse/

If I were to ask you a hypothetical question, what would you like it to be about? 
   
Made in us
Speedy Swiftclaw Biker





 ishpeck wrote:
Forgive the n00b question. Are you talking about this?

https://warhammer40000.com/apocalypse/


Yes.

Also, a note on the concerns over Card Farming with IG - there are no character targeting rules in this game, so you can just snipe out the weak company commanders providing the 2 cards per turn if you are really concerned about it.
   
Made in gb
Fresh-Faced New User





 beir wrote:
 ishpeck wrote:
Forgive the n00b question. Are you talking about this?

https://warhammer40000.com/apocalypse/


Yes.

Also, a note on the concerns over Card Farming with IG - there are no character targeting rules in this game, so you can just snipe out the weak company commanders providing the 2 cards per turn if you are really concerned about it.


There is a character targeting rule, but it simple states that light characters count as obscured, if they are not the closest character. So your point stands, but worth clarifying nonetheless.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/07/07 15:52:18


 
   
Made in us
Dominating Dominatrix






And obscured is just a -1 to hit. Sniper weapons ignore that. So Deathmarks, Sniper Drones etc etc... they all now have things to really do.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/07/07 16:31:22



These are my opinions. This is how I feel. Others may feel differently. This needs to be stated for some reason.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

The Nazis were right. It's better to be a Nazi than a fan.

Thank you for getting me on the side of Milo and the Nazis.

 
   
Made in us
Awesome Autarch






I have a feeling this is going to be an amusing next month or two with a lot of 40K players having some kind of epiphany about rules...

Apoc seems a bit boring having watched several battle reports, but there's nothing new or innovative about any of the rules in the box - it's all old-hat from a dozen other game systems. If it helps people realize there are other games/systems/game mechanics outside of 40K though, that's a start.

I play 40K (less and less) for the models and the lore...but rules has never, ever been a strong point for the game. If Apoc helps people swarm GW with plees of better game design, cool. I'm shocked, though, at how many people play 40K and don't play other wargames.

 
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Chaplain with Hate to Spare






I like the way the game plays better but the cards....these cards are to much.

If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder 
   
Made in us
Speedy Swiftclaw Biker





 Elbows wrote:
I have a feeling this is going to be an amusing next month or two with a lot of 40K players having some kind of epiphany about rules...

Apoc seems a bit boring having watched several battle reports, but there's nothing new or innovative about any of the rules in the box - it's all old-hat from a dozen other game systems. If it helps people realize there are other games/systems/game mechanics outside of 40K though, that's a start.

I play 40K (less and less) for the models and the lore...but rules has never, ever been a strong point for the game. If Apoc helps people swarm GW with plees of better game design, cool. I'm shocked, though, at how many people play 40K and don't play other wargames.


It's not like I didn't know these rules existed in other games. I have played them and there's really nothing new here. Almost all of these rules are found in other GW games even (Kill Team, AoS). It's just being able to play a game in the 40k setting with my large 40k collection against a very large pool of potential opponents (which 40k has more than any other wargame) that makes this rule set great imo.
   
Made in us
Dominating Dominatrix






 Elbows wrote:
I have a feeling this is going to be an amusing next month or two with a lot of 40K players having some kind of epiphany about rules...

Apoc seems a bit boring having watched several battle reports, but there's nothing new or innovative about any of the rules in the box - it's all old-hat from a dozen other game systems. If it helps people realize there are other games/systems/game mechanics outside of 40K though, that's a start.

I play 40K (less and less) for the models and the lore...but rules has never, ever been a strong point for the game. If Apoc helps people swarm GW with plees of better game design, cool. I'm shocked, though, at how many people play 40K and don't play other wargames.


Its a lack of opponents. People dont invest into other games because opponents are not reliable.


These are my opinions. This is how I feel. Others may feel differently. This needs to be stated for some reason.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

The Nazis were right. It's better to be a Nazi than a fan.

Thank you for getting me on the side of Milo and the Nazis.

 
   
Made in us
Awesome Autarch






Oh, I'm well aware of why 40K is popular.

People do invest in other wargames, a lot of them, just not in the numbers of GW games.

 
   
Made in us
Dominating Dominatrix






Tau is going to take a lot adjustments for tau players. Drones are not models unless you take a drone unit. They might as well be grenades or something for everyone else. Just little inherent wargear bonuses for units. Which also means savior protocols are going to not really exist. It is a card. But a card you need an actual unit of drones to do. And even then still only 1 card.

It also means buff drones cant impact other units. No pulse accelerator drones buffing firewarriors.

Im interested to see what happens.


These are my opinions. This is how I feel. Others may feel differently. This needs to be stated for some reason.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

The Nazis were right. It's better to be a Nazi than a fan.

Thank you for getting me on the side of Milo and the Nazis.

 
   
Made in gb
Fresh-Faced New User





Is it just me or are there no rules for the flying cryptek variant, just the standard non flying one? Even though the new apocalypse necron box includes one! I know the rules are simplified, but the model is clearly flying lol.
   
Made in de
Longtime Dakkanaut





 beir wrote:
I love the new turn structure of Apoc and hope it signals a change for the future of 40k.

Issuing orders and then taking turns activating units is extremely engaging and much better than IGOUGO. Having both players able to use all of their units before determining damage is also great. You are never blasted off of the table before you get to do something with your toy soldiers.

I also think the command asset cards are better than the CP/stratagem system in 8th. Cards are drawn randomly and each asset can only be used once per game (apart from re-rolls which show up on several cards, although you are not guaranteed to draw any cards with rerolls on them).

The only problem I have with Apoc is the lack of wargear options when building units, but I understand why it was removed for a game meant to be played at large scale. If they used these rules for 40k, you could add some of that customizing back in pretty easily.

I think I'm going to just play 150PL Apoc games from here on out and wait for the 40k rules to catch up.


Issuing orders and then taking turns activating units?

That´s nothing new as it is a mechanic already used in Space Marine aka Epic in the 90s.
   
Made in us
Speedy Swiftclaw Biker





I am not sure why people keep commenting that the rules in this game are not new. I know that and that was not the point of this post.

I said that these rules are better than 8th edition 40k and I hope they incorporate them into the next edition.
   
Made in au
Freaky Flayed One



Sydney, Australia

Lbspeller wrote:
Is it just me or are there no rules for the flying cryptek variant, just the standard non flying one? Even though the new apocalypse necron box includes one! I know the rules are simplified, but the model is clearly flying lol.


Yeah, I noticed this too. Quite disappointing, esp with the box release. How hard can "10 inch move" be?



 beir wrote:
I love the new turn structure of Apoc and hope it signals a change for the future of 40k.

I'm totally with you there, especially having gone to KT after 40k.

In your experience with Apoc, have you come across any reason for some of the stranger power cost choices? That is, many units get 'cheaper' (per model) as they get bigger - which makes sense, as they are a large blob that can have a lot of focus fire. Smaller units would force more choices, and remove 'spill over' damage. But here and there, units get *more* expensive as they get bigger (eg, a large unit of 20 necron warriors = 14 pw, but two squas of 10 each = 6+6 = 12 pw). Any reason for that, or just a stuff-up in the maths department?
   
Made in us
Speedy Swiftclaw Biker





In your experience with Apoc, have you come across any reason for some of the stranger power cost choices? That is, many units get 'cheaper' (per model) as they get bigger - which makes sense, as they are a large blob that can have a lot of focus fire. Smaller units would force more choices, and remove 'spill over' damage. But here and there, units get *more* expensive as they get bigger (eg, a large unit of 20 necron warriors = 14 pw, but two squas of 10 each = 6+6 = 12 pw). Any reason for that, or just a stuff-up in the maths department?


I'm not sure - how do reanimation protocols work in Apoc? I don't have the book in front of me (used a story copy for my game yesterday). It could be that a larger block is more likely to survive due to some RP interactions.

I did notice that my Wolf Priest cost a LOT more than in 40k and was scratching my head during list building. Then I saw just how powerful its ability to remove a damage marker from a unit can be in this game compared to 40k.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/07/07 22:34:16


 
   
Made in us
Da Head Honcho Boss Grot




hvg3akaek wrote:
Lbspeller wrote:
Is it just me or are there no rules for the flying cryptek variant, just the standard non flying one? Even though the new apocalypse necron box includes one! I know the rules are simplified, but the model is clearly flying lol.


Yeah, I noticed this too. Quite disappointing, esp with the box release. How hard can "10 inch move" be?



 beir wrote:
I love the new turn structure of Apoc and hope it signals a change for the future of 40k.

I'm totally with you there, especially having gone to KT after 40k.

In your experience with Apoc, have you come across any reason for some of the stranger power cost choices? That is, many units get 'cheaper' (per model) as they get bigger - which makes sense, as they are a large blob that can have a lot of focus fire. Smaller units would force more choices, and remove 'spill over' damage. But here and there, units get *more* expensive as they get bigger (eg, a large unit of 20 necron warriors = 14 pw, but two squas of 10 each = 6+6 = 12 pw). Any reason for that, or just a stuff-up in the maths department?


TBH, i think it's kind of smart pricing.

Units that get exponentially more potent as they get larger....as you said, like Necron warriors, who have sky-high morale and Reanimation Protocols to help them heal wounds - are more expensive at higher unit sizes.

Units that get weaker at larger unit sizes than the same number of models in MSU - like most Elite stuff, where higher unit sizes means an opponent can concentrate fire and do damage through morale regardless of their save characteristic - get discounts for upping the unit size.

That's not bad design, that's the opposite. I'm not saying balance is perfect here, and I am damn sure there will be units that are OP and units that are bad, but it is a good sign to see at least some attention paid to this kind of stuff.
   
Made in us
Dakka Veteran






Point costs are because the rules of this game are completely different. Costs take into consideration special rules, unit durability, how they mitigate critical damage, etc. It's a nice system.

Reanimation protocol removes a damage marker from a unit, it makes those units rather durable.
   
Made in au
Freaky Flayed One



Sydney, Australia

 lazarian wrote:
Reanimation protocol removes a damage marker from a unit, it makes those units rather durable.

But two smaller units could effectively both remove a damage, right?

the_scotsman wrote:
Units that get exponentially more potent as they get larger....as you said, like Necron warriors, who have sky-high morale and Reanimation Protocols to help them heal wounds - are more expensive at higher unit sizes.

(is Ld 8 really "Sky High"?)

But if it was because of Reanimation Protocols, surely 10 Immortals (8pw) would be more than 2x5 Immortals (4+4pw)?

Likewise, Lychguard are 5 for 7pw, or 10 for 14pw.

Deathmarks get cheaper (5 for 7pw, 10 for 13pw).

Flayed Ones go down rapidly (5 for 5pw, 10 for 8pw, 15 for 11pw, 20 for 14pw).


If it were a RP thing, then it would be constant across the board. As it stands, I cannot work out why I'd take 20 warriors over 2x10, ever.



And, it happens in other armies, too.

Eldar Guardians, Rangers, Howling Banshees and Striking Scorpions are more expensive with 10 than with 2x5, but Dire Avengers, Fire Dragons, Swooping Hawks, Warp Spiders and Wraithguard are cheaper. Wraithblades and Storm Guardians are the same per model at their various sizes.

Vespids become more expensive, Strike and Breacher teams remain constant; Carnivores, Pathfinders, Broadsides, Stealth Suits and Crisis Suits become cheaper.


   
Made in us
Speedy Swiftclaw Biker





Well, when you have 2x10 warriors and they take a wound and die, that squad of 10 doesn't get to do anything for the rest of the game.

When you have 20 warriors and they take a wound, they are still alive and shooting, etc. (albeit at -1 to hit and half melee for being wounded).

Having your shots cut in half is worse than having the same number of shots but at -1.

Taking bigger units is clearly better than smaller ones because they can keep fighting at almost full capacity when they've taken damage while smaller units are just removed.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/07/08 01:37:52


 
   
Made in us
Dakka Veteran






The game is not 40k, the rules for units are different, thus the points are in place for a reason. It may not be uniformly perfect but larger units may be more or less for a variety of reasons.

Does the unit have a durable special rule? Does critical damage hurt the unit? Who knows, different choices mean different things.
   
Made in us
Dominating Dominatrix






Some of the things don't scale evenly. For instance Tau firewarriors are 3 pl for 5, 6 PL for 10, and 7 PL for 12. The extra point for 12 only gives you an extra shot. Not an extra wound.


These are my opinions. This is how I feel. Others may feel differently. This needs to be stated for some reason.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

The Nazis were right. It's better to be a Nazi than a fan.

Thank you for getting me on the side of Milo and the Nazis.

 
   
Made in au
Freaky Flayed One



Sydney, Australia

 beir wrote:
Well, when you have 2x10 warriors and they take a wound and die, that squad of 10 doesn't get to do anything for the rest of the game.

When you have 20 warriors and they take a wound, they are still alive and shooting, etc. (albeit at -1 to hit and half melee for being wounded).

Having your shots cut in half is worse than having the same number of shots but at -1.

Taking bigger units is clearly better than smaller ones because they can keep fighting at almost full capacity when they've taken damage while smaller units are just removed.

I thought the larger unit would lose shots too, since shots trigger off of the unti's attacks?

In that case, the large unit would shoot as much as the non-shot-at unit.

But if the small unit took two damage, it would be dead, and the undamaged unit would remain. The large unit taking two damage would also be dead, meaning the MSU is better value?
   
Made in us
Dominating Dominatrix






There are many factors for MSU or not.

Pro MSU

-More units in a detachment to be effected by detachment wide cards

-More detachments to generate more cards

-Able to "split fire" since a unit shoots all of it's attacks from a single weapon at a single target having 2 units lets you split that if you want.

-More detachments also means more orders being issued which can help you out maneuver an opponent.

Pro Larger Units

-Cards that effect units have more impact

-Larger units drastically increase survivability (with wounds being as low as they are there is a huge difference between 2w hormagaunts and 6w hormagaunts)

-Detachment wide effecting cards can have MASSIVE impact on a detachment that is both many units and full sized units

-Many units have perks that increase with larger unit sizes (tyranid warriors can get a bio canon for every 3 models / Hormagaunts and termagants get to reroll 1s when in units of 30) and unit wide buffs get more cost effective for bigger effect (for 1 PL firewarriors get 2 drones (marker drones reroll 1s to hit for the unit gun drones reroll 1s to wound) which means 3 units of firewarriors (1 attack each) with drones at MSU costs 12 PL instead of 1 max sized unit (3 attacks on it's own) with drones costing 8.)

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/07/08 04:41:49



These are my opinions. This is how I feel. Others may feel differently. This needs to be stated for some reason.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

The Nazis were right. It's better to be a Nazi than a fan.

Thank you for getting me on the side of Milo and the Nazis.

 
   
Made in gb
Norn Queen






My initial excitement has made way for yet more disappointment. The extremeness of the cards just kills any hope of it being balanced.


Add me on Discord: BaconCatBug#0294
+++++There are currently ONE HUNDRED AND SIX (106) documents required to play Warhammer 40,000 8th edition+++++
+++++List of "broken" RaW in Warhammer 40,000 8th edition+++++
Disclaimer: My YMDC answers are from a "What the rules, as written (or modified by Special Snowflake FAQ) in the rulebooks, actually say" perspective, not a "What I wish the rules said" perspective. Even GW agrees with me, send an email to 40kfaq@gwplc.com for a confirmation reply "4. Apply The Rules As Written. If you still don’t have a satisfactory answer, use the rule just as it is written if you possibly can, even if you are not completely happy with the effect the rule has."
Mathhammer tables for 2D6 and 3D6 Charging with various re-roll abilities
Stylus CSS theme for DakkaDakka forums to hide black avatar background and fully hide ignored users.
Userscript to add a button to open all "[First Unread]" links on the page, hides the "[Blog View]" links, and adds a "Subscribed Threads" link to forum pages.  
   
Made in us
Dominating Dominatrix






I really don't get the hate on the cards. The cards worked fine in the game I played today. Even when my opponent stacked a couple cards to make his tau guns REALLY incredible (adding 12" to their range and making one of those units gun become Destroyer) I had cards of my own that countered aspects or effeciency of it (I got some venomthropes near their preferred targets and got the Destroyer unit's an additional -1 to hit).

The general lower amounts of dice with the general lower amounts of wounds works well with the big boosts of the cards and their big counters from other cards.

The cards get gak done. So far, I like it. I may change my mind after a few more games and I see more things happen but so far it works in fun ways.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/07/08 05:06:23



These are my opinions. This is how I feel. Others may feel differently. This needs to be stated for some reason.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

The Nazis were right. It's better to be a Nazi than a fan.

Thank you for getting me on the side of Milo and the Nazis.

 
   
Made in si
Steady Stonecleaver







Looks to me like the cards are like spells in AoS: 300 differently worded ways to deal a blast marker.

Posters on ignore list: 33

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
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: