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.

Jayden63 wrote:

sebster wrote:
At this point, there’s only one marginal army that’s really hurt by VPs, the IG, and while it sucks for them, the answer isn’t to move to samey, repetitive scenarios. The answer is to make IG a solid army with greater flexibility.
.

Any fully mechanized army gets screwed by KPs as well. My Tau with detachable gun drone D-fish really hate it. My speed freek orks with av10 open topped trukks and buggies hates it. When you get a chaos list with a grand total of 9 KPs vs my 17 in my ork list, it really makes life difficult for us to even want to show up.

You've assumed the only alternative list possible is a mechanised list. I hope that 'list full of ground pounding squads' and 'list full of mechanised squads' isn't the complete range of possible IG armies in the next codex. Forget balance and KP problems that codex would have a far greater problem; it'd be boring.

Stelek wrote:My opponents give me army lists, and most of those I do play I know what's in their list and can recreate it without the army list if needed.

The old system worked better for me and my preferred style of play therefore it is utterly superior to the new system in all ways, and anyone who like the new system must be an idiot incapable of basic maths.

Nothing narcissistic going on at all here people, not at all.

Seb, you're a gamer like the rest of us.

If you can't do basic math, you fail at the hobby.

[No I don't mean you personally, I mean any gamer that finds it too confusing to do simple math in their head on the fly. Being drunk is not a good enough reason that my gameplay should be affected. Drink less, go to college, get a calculator and a pen...I mean really.]

It's that simple.

Sometimes TOO simple really is bad.

KP's are an example of this kind of oversimplification taken to the extreme.

sebster wrote:

Stelek wrote:My opponents give me army lists, and most of those I do play I know what's in their list and can recreate it without the army list if needed.

The old system worked better for me and my preferred style of play therefore it is utterly superior to the new system in all ways, and anyone who like the new system must be an idiot incapable of basic maths.

Nothing narcissistic going on at all here people, not at all.

Actually Seb, for whatever it's worth...

I have always ignored peoples armor saves, cover saves, it meant nothing to me.

I never favored blasts, ordnance, or flamers.

It's always been (since 3rd edition came out) how many shots or CC attacks can I get?

5 BAZILLION? Why yes, I'll take THAT unit then.

My personal play style is the way all of you will soon be playing.

You go for the largest number of hits you can, and who cares if they have a 2+/3+/4+/5+?

I never have.

You shouldn't either.

AP? Meaningless.

Blasts? Meaningless.

50 shots? Meaning.

I'm just here to roll dice, and make you roll dice.

If you aren't here to do the same, you're going to have one hell of a time beating my armies.

Oh and for the record, I've never been one to take torrent of fire units like War Walkers with Scatter Lasers.

I run other kinds of units. I've posted enough lists, you should know what they are like.

Narcissist? Sure. How about you? You post just to save a tree, or what?

Stelek wrote:My personal play style is the way all of you will soon be playing.

Congratulations. You have officially reached a level of self-parody no one at this board - not even Drew Riggo - has ever managed to achieve. Well done. I applaud your effots.


Can we get some sort of trophy made for Stelek? A comment like his above simply must be etched in brass somewhere.



But to back off a bit, Stelek, your playing style is basically using the law of averages as best you can. News flash. That's how you win at 40K - it's a dice based system so being 'good' at it can only go so far as the dice are on nobody's side. So you do what you can to 'stack the deck' in your favour. One of the easiest wasy to do this is to use the law of averages to your advantage. The more dice you roll, the more dice they have to roll. This isn't rocket surgery. It's probability 101. You're not a pioneer. You're just loud.

BYE

Stelek… again, it isn’t that people can’t do triple digit addition. That’s your invention, and one you keep returning to whenever the line of conversation ends up in a place you can’t respond to. So stop bringing it up.

People don’t like being unable to calculate VPs each turn. This isn’t necessarily their inability to do math, but them not knowing the exact unit count, upgrades and points costs of every unit they’ve killed. It really sucks to get to the end and have a ‘great game… who won?’ situation.

While people can be capable of doing the addition necessary with victory points, a lot of people just don’t want to. This can often be the result of games ending late at night, or when the players have already had a bit to drink, or people being a lot less enthusiastic for maths at the end of a game than at the start.



It’s also likely you don’t understand the meaning of the word narcissist, you seem to be assuming narcissism seems to have some relation to altruism or some other tree saving something or other. It means you hold an excess of preoccupation, to the point where you might conclude that because something is important to you it is, or should, be important to everyone else.

I never really worried about counting points turn by turn. I knew "vaguely" what things cost - I don't know the points value of everything but I know 10 marines is about 170 points - 200 with a veteran sergeant. 5 terminators will be about 240 points, 10 guardsmen is about 75, transports are 50-100, battle tanks are about 150, independent characters are about 150. But I generally just went by what was on the table.

10 terminators? I could care less how many points they're worth, all I know is they are a massive threat to my army with lots of firepower and deadly close combat ability, so they've got to die! Luckily for me, doing what I knew I needed to do anyway results in me getting lots of vps. Pretty much, anytime you eliminate a big threat to your army you're bound to also get lots of VPs for it [except for Last Chancers squads with 5 meltaguns for cheap or something], so just play normally and let game balance [deadly unit = high vp] sort it out.

Spellbound wrote:I never really worried about counting points turn by turn. I knew "vaguely" what things cost - I don't know the points value of everything but I know 10 marines is about 170 points - 200 with a veteran sergeant. 5 terminators will be about 240 points, 10 guardsmen is about 75, transports are 50-100, battle tanks are about 150, independent characters are about 150. But I generally just went by what was on the table.

10 terminators? I could care less how many points they're worth, all I know is they are a massive threat to my army with lots of firepower and deadly close combat ability, so they've got to die! Luckily for me, doing what I knew I needed to do anyway results in me getting lots of vps. Pretty much, anytime you eliminate a big threat to your army you're bound to also get lots of VPs for it [except for Last Chancers squads with 5 meltaguns for cheap or something], so just play normally and let game balance [deadly unit = high vp] sort it out.

Nah, you’ve missed the point. It isn’t about prioritising what needs killing, but knowing where the scores are with a turn or two left to play.

So you’ve killed his terminators, his assault marines and chaplain, killed one six man las plas and brought the other under half strength, and are holding one of the three objectives. He’s killed your leman russ tank, wiped three IG squads with las plas, and brought you melta gun squad under half strength, and is holding two objectives. Are you winning or losing, and by how much? It’s good to know how much you’re winning by in order to know what you can risk in order to steal another objective, and whether you need to steal an objective at all. It wasn’t very practical to keep a running track of the score in the old system.

Thanks Seb. Articulated it perfectly.