Switch Theme:

Over complication slowing the game?  [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
Deathwing Terminator with Assault Cannon





I will caveat this by saying I do love depth in the 40K setting, but I also appreciate that the game should be playable in 2 1/2hrs.

After watching a BR this morning, watching an Admech command phase seemed like an absolute nightmare. Way too many effects to keep track of. I don't want this to turn into a pseudo tabletop/card game.

Anyone else feel the same way, or is everyone enjoying the extra layers of complexity being added?
   
Made in us
Gore-Soaked Lunatic Witchhunter







If you scroll down a bit to the "how do you feel about the state of 40k?" thread you'll find twenty pages of argument on this and related subjects.

Balanced Game: Noun. A game in which all options and choices are worth using.
Homebrew oldhammer project: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/790996.page#10896267
Meridian: Necromunda-based 40k skirmish: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/795374.page 
   
Made in us
Deathwing Terminator with Assault Cannon





 AnomanderRake wrote:
If you scroll down a bit to the "how do you feel about the state of 40k?" thread you'll find twenty pages of argument on this and related subjects.


Oh sorry, I haven't been following that thread. Will look now.
Mods, please feel free to lock.
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut



London

 bullyboy wrote:
I will caveat this by saying I do love depth in the 40K setting, but I also appreciate that the game should be playable in 2 1/2hrs.

After watching a BR this morning, watching an Admech command phase seemed like an absolute nightmare. Way too many effects to keep track of. I don't want this to turn into a pseudo tabletop/card game.

Anyone else feel the same way, or is everyone enjoying the extra layers of complexity being added?


Yes - but 40k has always had variations of this. It uses complexity to make up for the game not being particularity complex. A regular wargame would strip out most of the minor decisions in equipping units (how many CC options does a space marine need in the deathwatch?) and try and up the tactical decisions on the tabletop. The 40k system and model density doesn't really allow that, so instead cards, CPs, aura, orders etc give more of a tactical level to the game.
   
Made in de
Ork Admiral Kroozin Da Kosmos on Da Hulk






 bullyboy wrote:
 AnomanderRake wrote:
If you scroll down a bit to the "how do you feel about the state of 40k?" thread you'll find twenty pages of argument on this and related subjects.


Oh sorry, I haven't been following that thread. Will look now.
Mods, please feel free to lock.


I think this a completely different topic and deserves it own thread.

And yes, I think there are quite some things that could have been done in less time consuming ways.

Earth is not flat
Vaccines work
We've been to the moon
Climate change is real
Chemtrails aren't a thing
Evolution is a fact
Orks are not a melee army
Stand up for science!
 
   
Made in us
Quick-fingered Warlord Moderatus




 Jidmah wrote:
 bullyboy wrote:
 AnomanderRake wrote:
If you scroll down a bit to the "how do you feel about the state of 40k?" thread you'll find twenty pages of argument on this and related subjects.


Oh sorry, I haven't been following that thread. Will look now.
Mods, please feel free to lock.


I think this a completely different topic and deserves it own thread.

And yes, I think there are quite some things that could have been done in less time consuming ways.


Agree this is probably its own topic since it's more narrowly focused.

Yeah, I have to say, the Admech book is a bit of a nightmare for in-game book-keeping. Our group ended up not enjoying Crusade because it's essentially just match-play w/more note taking, and playing Admech is feeling about the same for me right now. I like a lot of what they did, but honestly, it's too much to keep track of. It sort of reminds me of the 7th ed Demon book in that regard.

Edit: I just googled ablutions and apparently it does not including dropping a duece. I should have looked it up early sorry for any confusion. - Baldsmug

Psiensis on the "good old days":
"Kids these days...
... I invented the 6th Ed meta back in 3rd ed.
Wait, what were we talking about again? Did I ever tell you about the time I gave you five bees for a quarter? That's what you'd say in those days, "give me five bees for a quarter", is what you'd say in those days. And you'd go down to the D&D shop, with an onion in your belt, 'cause that was the style of the time. So there I was in the D&D shop..." 
   
Made in us
Steadfast Grey Hunter





It takes (potentially) four individual rolls to complete a single attack sequence. To hit > to wound > to save > feel no pains. So any single model has to go through the sequence any time it wants to do something offensively, and you can do this twice in your turn and once on your opponent's in specific circumstances. Now add rerolls to the first two sets of rolls (and possibly the latter two if something is wonky, not currently a thing but the space is there.) Now multiply that across the hundred odd models you tend to run in a single 2k army. Now add the branching decision points (which take time to determine), shuffling around models (which should be measured carefully and precisely), and all the other minutiae that crop up in game (counting dice, checking stats, reading out stratagems, cleaning up between rolls, removing casualties)... This is why 40k takes three hours or more at 2k points per side.

Compare to Warcry, where a given attack sequence is a single roll. Granted, there are other issues in Warcry, but man alive, I wish there were about half as many rolls in 40k than there currently are. A simple to injure > to save sequence, for instance.
   
Made in us
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba






ryzouken wrote:
It takes (potentially) four individual rolls to complete a single attack sequence. To hit > to wound > to save > feel no pains. So any single model has to go through the sequence any time it wants to do something offensively, and you can do this twice in your turn and once on your opponent's in specific circumstances. Now add rerolls to the first two sets of rolls (and possibly the latter two if something is wonky, not currently a thing but the space is there.) Now multiply that across the hundred odd models you tend to run in a single 2k army. Now add the branching decision points (which take time to determine), shuffling around models (which should be measured carefully and precisely), and all the other minutiae that crop up in game (counting dice, checking stats, reading out stratagems, cleaning up between rolls, removing casualties)... This is why 40k takes three hours or more at 2k points per side.

Compare to Warcry, where a given attack sequence is a single roll. Granted, there are other issues in Warcry, but man alive, I wish there were about half as many rolls in 40k than there currently are. A simple to injure > to save sequence, for instance.


I wish there was a way to retroactively apply the structure from Apoc. Making all saves at the end of the turn not only provides mechanical benefits but seems to speed the game up immensely.

"I can't believe all these tryhard WAACs out there just care about winning all the time when it's supposed to be a game for fun!!!!!!! Also here's my 27 page essay on why marines are OP and Orkz should get a bunch of OP rules so I can win more games

-the_scotsman"

-ERJAK 
   
Made in us
Boosting Black Templar Biker






I think when it comes to over-complication it slows down the game but has a disproportionately larger effect on new players or people who don't play often enough to memorize the many bits of the rules in their codex. Y'know, like the people you're most likely to find in an FLGS on a weekend, the fresh faced newcomers to the hobby or the parent who games maybe twice a month on Sundays.

I personally like the breadth of rules available but there are an excess of options for the player. On top of that each model has layers and layers of rules that stack on top of it (Faction, Subfaction, Doctrine-equiv, Unit Special Abilities, Auras, Relics, Warlord Traits etc.). Individually most of these rule layers are fun and/or fluffy but we have reached peak onion when it comes rules layers. Holy moly, reading the Admech Codex review made me happy I don't play Admech outside of Kill Team. As a result of all these rules layers it becomes much harder to introduce a new player to the game since the amount of things they need to keep track of on a unit by unit basis is considerable.

The easiest time I've had teaching someone how to play 40k was early 8e, the complexity has ramped up significantly since then and doesn't look like it will be slowing down anytime soon.



   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





Halifax

 the_scotsman wrote:
ryzouken wrote:
It takes (potentially) four individual rolls to complete a single attack sequence. To hit > to wound > to save > feel no pains. So any single model has to go through the sequence any time it wants to do something offensively, and you can do this twice in your turn and once on your opponent's in specific circumstances. Now add rerolls to the first two sets of rolls (and possibly the latter two if something is wonky, not currently a thing but the space is there.) Now multiply that across the hundred odd models you tend to run in a single 2k army. Now add the branching decision points (which take time to determine), shuffling around models (which should be measured carefully and precisely), and all the other minutiae that crop up in game (counting dice, checking stats, reading out stratagems, cleaning up between rolls, removing casualties)... This is why 40k takes three hours or more at 2k points per side.

Compare to Warcry, where a given attack sequence is a single roll. Granted, there are other issues in Warcry, but man alive, I wish there were about half as many rolls in 40k than there currently are. A simple to injure > to save sequence, for instance.


I wish there was a way to retroactively apply the structure from Apoc. Making all saves at the end of the turn not only provides mechanical benefits but seems to speed the game up immensely.

Agreed. It's a simple change that really improves all sorts of issues with the game.

   
Made in ca
Longtime Dakkanaut





I design a lot of tracking sheets and cards to print before game to help me; it's particularly important in Crusade, where there's even more book keeping.

Personally, I don't mind it because I'm a detail oriented Uber-Nerd, but this is definitely one area where I can acknowledge the legitimacy of complaints.
   
Made in us
Dive-Bombin' Fighta-Bomba Pilot






honestly on the time consuming and over complication of the game... I like the idea that each chapter/kulture/sept/coven etc gets their own cool rules. However now they have their own faction rules, plus their own relics, plus their own specific stratagems (and maybe matching pumps and handbags). This along with more and more overlapping rules/buffs makes for more complicated army rules, effects, etc. It all has to be remembered and or looked up during the game slowing things down.

I think there is a balance to be had between everything is the same and an overcomplicated mess. I sadly think we have jumped the shark into overcomplication here. I know my ork codex but trying to explain everything i can do and what relics/strategems can do and having to open books to show the opponent who thinks "that seems too good" etc sure does slow things down. As an example i just go ahead an open the book and relics to show here is the killer klaw, here is what it does, here is why it is paired with brutal but kunnin so later they don't complain about a reroll to hit reroll to wound D4 pk if he charged that turn and try to pick apart every word in the rules there to try and say why it shouldn't work like that before 5 min later realizing oh wait yes it does.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/18 16:52:26


10000 points 7000
6000
5000
5000
2000
 
   
Made in us
Arch Magos w/ 4 Meg of RAM






Mira Mesa

As an AdMech player, I've got two points about complexity. I enjoy the weird rules complexity of the faction, it feels fluffy and fun. In practice, like Jake, I have a notebook with all my information in short-hand and a guide for my turn. I don't forget any activations or rules, I just look at my guide and rattle off some effects. After some practice, it takes 30 seconds and I'm straight into the movement phase. I think pretty much every player would benefit from having notes and a guide on hand. You spend dozens of hours assembling and preparing the models, and dozens pouring over the rules to build the list, you can spend an hour or two making a cheat-sheet for yourself to actually play the game.

Regarding the complexity for my opponents, the fact is that they don't need to know every nuance of my rules. It doesn't matter that my commander can spend an action to transform its aura, or what every single one of my rotating buffs does. They don't generally need to know the specifics of ranges and activation requirements. Of course I answer any question they have. I give them a heads-up that I have buffs and here are the couple you need to be worried about. In practice, it's sufficient to say "my commander buffs this infantry squad's range and AP to this, and they ignore AP1&2". If I have something that'll cause a problem for their plan, I try to be proactive to point it out (like shooting arriving reserves, or inflicting fight last). Explaining my army is generally only a couple minutes before the game, like normal.

I don't think AdMech being complex is bad for beginners because they aren't a beginner army anyway, in the same way you wouldn't recommend a new player start with Harlequins. They're complicated to play and extremely punishing to misplay.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/06/18 17:12:06


   
Made in au
Repentia Mistress




You're going to start a fight with that second paragraph DH...

I think Command Phase stuff is excessively messy. But that could be me not being use to it...

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/18 17:56:27


   
Made in us
Dive-Bombin' Fighta-Bomba Pilot






you kind of do need to know the basics of the other person's rules though. heck even in tournaments i have had players try to use layers of rules to make up or say things stack/ do things they don't. Have done the same in plenty of friendly pickup games to where a person says a thing is how their army works and then you later look it up because it seemed too good to be true and turns out it was. most of the latter cases are genuine mistakes but sometimes they will next game dig in their heels that their interpretation is correct despite any an all evidence and possibly FAQs later stating otherwise (more to do with gw editors in that case)

10000 points 7000
6000
5000
5000
2000
 
   
Made in us
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba






I suppose I can't help but compare the current rule structures within 40k to the rule structures within the most recent 'bucket o' D6s' wargame I played, that being Battlegroup.

Within Battlegroup, in terms of special rules the only thing that separated my Russians from my opponent's Germans was:

-A special order the russians can use to cause multiple units to activate using a single order. If you're playing Infantry, that's "all your infantry units within a particular radius of your Officer charge" and if you're playing a tank company, that's "d6 tanks charge."

-A rule representing the improved suspension of the T-34 tank chassis over other contemporary tanks.

That's it. Every other distinction between my tanks, my infantry, my guns, my artillery, and his respective stuff for his germans was entirely represented by the core stats of the game: the ranges of the guns, the number of men in a unit, the 'unit experience level' roll, the armor values of the tanks.

In spite of all that, though, the rules were structured to create many more 'authentic-feeling' moments of world war 2 combat than the rules of warhammer 40k are able to generate authentic moments that feel like the fluff of warhammer.

German panzergrenadiers holding fast in a captured farmhouse, firing their rifles and MG42 out into the fields while the first wave of Russian tank riding infantry took cover and fell back and the line of T-34s advanced undeterred, until a truck containing a sapper team jumped out and cleared them out with a flamethrower while the MGs from a lend-lease tank pinned them down.

Russian tanks lighting up like firecrackers while the russian army of 1943 unleashed all hell and creation to try to bring down the few tiger tanks standing firm amid the wreckage of the outdated Panzer IIIs and panzergrenadier halftracks that the T-34s were able to bring down.

The battle resolving in an operational victory for the Russians despite massive casualties, as the germans took attritional losses from needing to keep their much fewer tanks unpinned and firing against the unending waves of T-34 tanks.

The hit-wound-save IGOUGO structure I was familiar with from 40k was present, but with so much of the pointless bloat of unending special rules and complex statlines carved away in favor of just...having more options of things to do. I could set up overwatch actions to fire or move in my opponent's turn, shoot to pin the enemy down rather than kill them which was more reliable but less effective, engage in flanking maneuvers and mass assaults or defensive holding patterns, target more vulnerable units to try and drive up my victory points while I protected my cheap transport trucks or choose to sacrifice multiple pieces to try and bring down one of the few super-deadly tigers.

Multiple times I actually felt clever for having pulled off a trick that was more about deception than just...my opponent not knowing how the rules of my army worked. A couple of turns in a row I used 'reserve move' orders on my tanks to sneak them out of line of sight of the pieces I knew were the most important thing for my opponent to keep firing, so on one of my turns when I had extra orders to spare, I put a couple more onto my faster light tanks, so my opponent didn't target them. Instead at the end of his turn, I used those reserve moves to charge all those tanks up the board into the perfect firing positions to target one of the up-armored, up-gunned panzer 4 tanks containing a senior officer, and then I could issue them the 'stand still and shoot twice' order on my turn to blow the panzer away. Just an absolutely fantastic feeling of having done a cool tactical thing.

"I can't believe all these tryhard WAACs out there just care about winning all the time when it's supposed to be a game for fun!!!!!!! Also here's my 27 page essay on why marines are OP and Orkz should get a bunch of OP rules so I can win more games

-the_scotsman"

-ERJAK 
   
Made in us
Arch Magos w/ 4 Meg of RAM






Mira Mesa

Lammia wrote:
You're going to start a fight with that second paragraph DH...

I think Command Phase stuff is excessively messy. But that could be me not being use to it...
My second paragraph comes off a bit harsh on re-reading. I meant they don't need to know about obscure niche rules up front. It's not a worthwhile time investment to explain if it never comes up. Actually dealing with the command phase should just be "this squad is getting these two buffs from here, and this squad's getting this buff" and then you move on.
 G00fySmiley wrote:
you kind of do need to know the basics of the other person's rules though. heck even in tournaments i have had players try to use layers of rules to make up or say things stack/ do things they don't. Have done the same in plenty of friendly pickup games to where a person says a thing is how their army works and then you later look it up because it seemed too good to be true and turns out it was. most of the latter cases are genuine mistakes but sometimes they will next game dig in their heels that their interpretation is correct despite any an all evidence and possibly FAQs later stating otherwise (more to do with gw editors in that case)
Yeah, I thought about mentioning that cheaters can use complexity as a shroud, but it seemed tangential to the topic. It's pretty much impossible to know all the rules, so you have to trust your opponent is acting in good faith. There are always going to be cheaters. If you think there's a funky rules interaction, pull up Wahapedia on your phone or ask to see their codex. In a casual environment, point it out, and if they double down then you can refuse to play. In a tournament, just call a judge.
 the_scotsman wrote:
The hit-wound-save IGOUGO structure I was familiar with from 40k was present, but with so much of the pointless bloat of unending special rules and complex statlines carved away in favor of just...having more options of things to do.
I felt that same way going from D&D5e to Dark Heresy. In D&D, you interact with combat mostly by making single attack actions and moving around (there are other options, but they're situational). D&D introduces complexity by piling on special abilities and spells from your class as you level up, but the game still boils down to "kill the enemy efficiently". Dark Heresy has a bunch of meaningful combat actions, such as suppressive fire, overwatch, shooting fully automatic versus aimed shots, taking partial or full cover. You have to combine several actions together for your turn. The classes increase effectiveness and specialization as they level up, but they don't pile on more abilities. Because there isn't a simple "just attack them" action in Dark Heresy, you use the base mechanics to engage with the specific situation (which is more immersive).

The problem is that 40k is such a big, diverse setting that it's harder to distill universal actions. Not impossible, mind, but it would take a total rewrite. They're moving in a better direction with the introduction of actions. If we get Kill Team's rules scaled up, we could get Readied Shots and Overwatch as choices. I do agree it's an ideal to head towards.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/18 18:41:07


   
Made in au
Repentia Mistress




I didn't think it too harsh, I just know Dakka will have someone disagree.

I've said it harshly enough myself to know.

   
Made in us
Quick-fingered Warlord Moderatus




 DarkHound wrote:
As an AdMech player, I've got two points about complexity. I enjoy the weird rules complexity of the faction, it feels fluffy and fun. In practice, like Jake, I have a notebook with all my information in short-hand and a guide for my turn. I don't forget any activations or rules, I just look at my guide and rattle off some effects. After some practice, it takes 30 seconds and I'm straight into the movement phase. I think pretty much every player would benefit from having notes and a guide on hand. You spend dozens of hours assembling and preparing the models, and dozens pouring over the rules to build the list, you can spend an hour or two making a cheat-sheet for yourself to actually play the game.

Regarding the complexity for my opponents, the fact is that they don't need to know every nuance of my rules. It doesn't matter that my commander can spend an action to transform its aura, or what every single one of my rotating buffs does. They don't generally need to know the specifics of ranges and activation requirements. Of course I answer any question they have. I give them a heads-up that I have buffs and here are the couple you need to be worried about. In practice, it's sufficient to say "my commander buffs this infantry squad's range and AP to this, and they ignore AP1&2". If I have something that'll cause a problem for their plan, I try to be proactive to point it out (like shooting arriving reserves, or inflicting fight last). Explaining my army is generally only a couple minutes before the game, like normal.

I don't think AdMech being complex is bad for beginners because they aren't a beginner army anyway, in the same way you wouldn't recommend a new player start with Harlequins. They're complicated to play and extremely punishing to misplay.



Agree with this. For me personally, I'm just at a point where I don't want to deal with the extra game aids, so they're probably not "for me" anymore, but I like this take on it.

Edit: I just googled ablutions and apparently it does not including dropping a duece. I should have looked it up early sorry for any confusion. - Baldsmug

Psiensis on the "good old days":
"Kids these days...
... I invented the 6th Ed meta back in 3rd ed.
Wait, what were we talking about again? Did I ever tell you about the time I gave you five bees for a quarter? That's what you'd say in those days, "give me five bees for a quarter", is what you'd say in those days. And you'd go down to the D&D shop, with an onion in your belt, 'cause that was the style of the time. So there I was in the D&D shop..." 
   
Made in us
Deathwing Terminator with Assault Cannon





I like the concept of the Command Phase to determine actions, but perhaps an army should be limited to only performing 2 (maybe 3 tops) Command Actions, therefore if they have more, they will need to choose what buffs to apply that turn. It's easier for an opponent to remember (great if you have a cheat sheet for your army, but what about every other army you will be facing), and is less overwhelming. It almost feels that someone who doesn't live and breathe the game is going to get beat by rules rather than skill (even more than normal). I also don't want to be the guy that keep going "hang on, what does that do again? what about that buff you applied over here?".
   
Made in us
Agile Revenant Titan





Florida

I'm learning a new 9th edition army (Necrons), but played a lot of 9th edition with Craftworld. The Necrons feel much more complex to play based on the command phase, among other phases. It does help me appreciate newer player challenges and to ensure I can help them through any games I play with them.

No earth shattering, thought provoking quote. I'm just someone who was introduced to 40K in the late 80's and it's become a lifelong hobby. 
   
Made in nl
[DCM]
Secret Inquisitorial Eldar Xenexecutor






your mind

You want a shorter game? Play with fewer points.

You want a better game? Play a different edition.

You want both? Play Necromunda.

   
Made in us
Terminator with Assault Cannon




San Jose, CA

Tycho wrote:
Yeah, I have to say, the Admech book is a bit of a nightmare for in-game book-keeping. Our group ended up not enjoying Crusade because it's essentially just match-play w/more note taking, and playing Admech is feeling about the same for me right now. I like a lot of what they did, but honestly, it's too much to keep track of. It sort of reminds me of the 7th ed Demon book in that regard.


It's matched play with extra steps, but apparently that's equal to Hella narrative.
   
Made in us
Humorless Arbite





California

Some of the stuff highlighted in this thread is why i'll never play 40k at 2k points. 1000 points is as high as i'll go, anything more than that and it becomes a bigger headache. I don't really like games that last more than 1-2 hours anyway.


 
   
Made in de
Prescient Cryptek of Eternity






Germany

I never understood why you have to roll to wound. When a model gets hit successfully by a gun a wound roll shouldnt be necessary, at least not when gun strength is way, way above toughness. When a T3-5 model is hit by a S16 gun there shouldnt be a wound roll, it should wound automatically. There is a 1/6 chance that nothing happens. Thats just not right.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/19 05:35:38


 
   
Made in pl
Fixture of Dakka




 G00fySmiley wrote:
you kind of do need to know the basics of the other person's rules though. heck even in tournaments i have had players try to use layers of rules to make up or say things stack/ do things they don't. Have done the same in plenty of friendly pickup games to where a person says a thing is how their army works and then you later look it up because it seemed too good to be true and turns out it was. most of the latter cases are genuine mistakes but sometimes they will next game dig in their heels that their interpretation is correct despite any an all evidence and possibly FAQs later stating otherwise (more to do with gw editors in that case)


This. I have seen people play GK online, change tides , but still play the next turn as if they had the old activated, making them play with something kin to all three marine doctrines at the same time by turn 3. GK are rare enough and bad army for people to not know that. Not to mention logical stuff, like playing them or csm as if they had +1W etc.

I never understood why you have to roll to wound.

technically it is so that a space marine and ork don't run around with 2Ws and a +3sv. Practically I think GW goes with the mind set that the more time you spend on something, the more will you care about it. Making quiting much harder if you spend hours painting and playing. If the game was just hit and save, it would be much shorter time wise. Plus it would start people rising question like, why do we have to roll for psychic powers, but ad mecha characters use theirs automatically.

If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain. 
   
Made in ca
Longtime Dakkanaut





Racerguy180 wrote:
Tycho wrote:
Yeah, I have to say, the Admech book is a bit of a nightmare for in-game book-keeping. Our group ended up not enjoying Crusade because it's essentially just match-play w/more note taking, and playing Admech is feeling about the same for me right now. I like a lot of what they did, but honestly, it's too much to keep track of. It sort of reminds me of the 7th ed Demon book in that regard.


It's matched play with extra steps, but apparently that's equal to Hella narrative.


Not all dexes' bespoke content is equal. Drukhari have the best Crusade content- there's a Necromunda style minigame built right into the dex- it's frickin exquisite. Sisters are a very, very close second- the Living Saint thing is awesome, but I'm actually am more into the Redemption points and oaths of penance- combining the two makes for a hell of a story. Admech is decent, but it's basically just questing for equipment and building Uber machines- it's good, but it doesn't feel like there is an endgame to it the way there is with sisters and Drukhari.

The SM dex allows your basic HQs to grow into Master level HQs, but that's pretty much the only real schtick, so there isn't much to it. Deathwatch builds on it with Masters of the specialisms though, and it also allows Primaris units to earn their Special Issue Ammo as a battle honour- this is one of the things that DW players didn't like about the Primaris KTs, so having it there is a big deal. The fact that Primaris have to earn it when Old Marines just get it is this neat little distrust of Primaris thing- very fluffy for the beginning of the Indomitus Crusade. Still nowhere near as cool as Drukhari or Sisters though, and I think even Admech still come out ahead.

I haven't read DA, but I know there's Fallen stuff in there, and probably promotion to the specialist wings. I think GW missed a heck of an opportunity to give DA Crusade content a boost by doing a poor job with the White Dwarf Fallen. I haven't read Blood Angels, but it's probably all about the Red Thirst or whatever.

The Death Guard stuff is probably cool, because the diseases you make could impact the story fairly profoundly if you wanted them too- many of the Plague Purge/ Charadon missions have disease effects built into Theatres of War and missions, so connecting that to the diseases you build via Crusade could give you a real story arc.

From my perspective, if you want to argue that Crusade isn't narrative, you can't also claim that Kill Team or Necromunda are- the stuff in Crusade is no more or less narrative than what you get in those games. And you also have to keep in mind that some of the things that core 40k does- like scaling game sizes, Imperial Agents, Unaligned units and detachment structures synergize with Crusade, so that you have a total package. I've had people try to argue that because these things are a part of the main game, they shouldn't enter into discussions about Crusade... Not very well thought out as an argument- Imperial Agents like the Inquisition are particularly cool in Crusade, because they only really show up when the main army is fighting their Quarry.

It isn't for everybody, but it's certainly the highlight of 9th edition for me.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





It is the GW way and has been for awhile. Complexity in games rules it was for a bit, then complexity in unit rules, now we have all the faction rules, traits, strats and a zillion bespoke rules which can often mimic other bespoke rules.

As opposed to make the system itself good, they just slap a bunch of stuff around till you need a notebook to keep track of all your current conditions from phase to phase. Which I don't know maybe I'm just getting told but it feels bad man.
   
Made in it
Gargantuan Gargant




Italy

To many datasheets and rules bloat, that's the over complication. Core rules are pretty simple compared to older editions. Codexes are the issue.


 
   
Made in dk
Pyro Pilot of a Triach Stalker






I made a thread discussing it a while ago. https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/785378.page

GW have improved some aspects of the game that were slowing things down. Choosing which unit to buff with your 10 different buffs is at least a choice, rolling FNP on Blightlords was not.

The change to auto-wound on hit rolls of 6 is a really neat change in the new AdMech codex. You roll 10 6s, 10 5s... You re-roll the 1s for your character aura. Now you take out the 1s and 2s, roll to wound for the 3s, 4s and 5s and just let the 6s sit, it is very easy.

AdMech holy orders and Doctrina Imperatives should just have been crusade content, crusaders love extra rules but matched play should not be that complicated. The answer to Holy Order WL traits being OP is not to give access to WL traits and Holy Order bonuses at the same time.

 Sarigar wrote:
I'm learning a new 9th edition army (Necrons), but played a lot of 9th edition with Craftworld. The Necrons feel much more complex to play based on the command phase, among other phases. It does help me appreciate newer player challenges and to ensure I can help them through any games I play with them.

The game definitely isn't meant to be picked up by two people that have never played the game and then learn it together. Command Protocols being automatic if you make the simplest possible army is silly, you should have to jump through a few hoops to get them.

Personally, I think Command Protocols and other Combat Doctrines and Super Doctrines should be mission specific.

Have a mission telling the narrative of a Necron Tomb reawakening and going through different protocols to fend off invaders, give the Necrons Command Protocols and the invaders something to make up for the difference in terms of easier to score missions or extra points or something like that.

Have the mission give the player playing against Salamanders a reason to take both lightly armoured hordes and heavily armoured vehicles, now melta and flamers become neat and the Salamanders player can feel good about their fluffy weapon choices in that mission.
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: