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.

Lanrak wrote:
@as it is a bit harsh on the game devs at GW towers...

Actually it isn't harsh enough. Every person involved in writing GW's rules should be fired for incompetence. It's bad enough that "sleeping with the CEO" becomes a plausible explanation for why these idiots are still employed.

And I disagree with your "corrections". GW certainly believes stupid things about their market, but if you look at the statements from their game designers you'll see that they're "casual at all costs" types who believe that wargames should be played by creating a "fluffy" army and then using the rules to put it on the table, and anyone who builds an army based on how effective it is at winning games is doing it wrong. This has been true for a lot longer than GW's current market research idiocy, they've always made a big deal about how superior "beer and pretzels"* play is to all those WAAC TFGs who dare to defile the sacred ideal of a "casual" game.

*This is especially amusing because 40k is not even close to a "beer and pretzels" game.

 Peregrine wrote:
*This is especially amusing because 40k is not even close to a "beer and pretzels" game.

It can be if someone hosts/GM's it. There's almost no tactical depth to it, and if someone is telling you what rolls you need to make there's very little work to it either.

Of course, if having someone GM the game is the only way for it to work, there's almost no point having the game anyway.

No game as esoteric and poorly written as 40k can be considered a "Beer and Pretzels" game.

Despite almost completely lacking in tactical depth, and essentially being a glorified version of Yahtzee, it's a massively convoluted mess that flies right in the face of everything that makes a game good for such play.

Herzlos wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
*This is especially amusing because 40k is not even close to a "beer and pretzels" game.

It can be if someone hosts/GM's it. There's almost no tactical depth to it, and if someone is telling you what rolls you need to make there's very little work to it either.

Of course, if having someone GM the game is the only way for it to work, there's almost no point having the game anyway.

Tactical depth has nothing to do with a game being a "beer and pretzels" game. The reasons why 40k is not a "beer and pretzels" game in any way is because you have to read several hundred pages of rules to be able to play it, spend tens of hours assembling and painting miniatures and perhaps more important, spend several hundred dollars to have anything resembling a playing force.

Beer and pretzels games are supposed to be cheap, fast to learn and fast to play. 40k is none of those.

That's why I said if it was hosted/GM'd, then the players don't need to learn anything beyond what the units are; "those are regular guys, those are super-armoured guys, that's a transport and that's a big tank". The GM can then tell them "with those guys you need a 4 to hit on 20 dice" and so on.

Without that hand holding it's about as far away from a beer and pretzel game as is possible without going for something like DBA or the table heavy Naval games.


For perspective; I've been playing 40K on and off for 18 years and I still don't quite know how it works. By my 2nd game of Bolt Action (the same author) I was helping my opponent play, because it's just so much clearer and has less pointless options (weapons are in classes - pistol,rifle,light-mortar, light anti-tank, medium anti-tank and so on -so there's only about 15 of them). You get better balance and the options are still there (you just don't get a choice of 4+ more (las,auto,bolt,plasma) or less similar pistols).

In terms of gaming, BA manages to be both more balanced and more casual, whilst having more strategy and tactical depth.

Herzlos wrote:
In terms of gaming, BA manages to be both more balanced and more casual, whilst having more strategy and tactical depth.

Highly ironic that Bolt Action is, for all intents and purposes, a better 40k than 40k right now. Meaningful choices, tactical depth, clear and interesting rules, the normal game size is that sweet spot between "too small" and "too large" and a normal sized force is reasonably priced ($125USD for a 1,000 point Bolt Action army). Everything 40k fails to hit.

I'd certainly be up for trying to play BA 40K - I think even the order dice alone would revolutionise the game.

Herzlos wrote:
That's why I said if it was hosted/GM'd, then the players don't need to learn anything beyond what the units are; "those are regular guys, those are super-armoured guys, that's a transport and that's a big tank". The GM can then tell them "with those guys you need a 4 to hit on 20 dice" and so on.

At which point, why the hell are you even trying to play 40k?

The fluff, just like everyone else. Or beer and pretsels. Hosted narrative games with home brew rules seem to be what the studo do.

I see that you haven't read or taken into account any of the previous points.

How so?

As much as people claim 40K is a casual game (because the rules aren't important) it's a terrible example of one - it's convoluted and unclear whilst providing no real in game decision making. In terms of game play it's pretty casual (once you ignore the mess of the rules) in that all you can really do is move forward, shoot and then assault. The in-game decisions boil down to "These guys will shoot those guys".

You can make it casual by hosting it - taking all of the rules decisions out of the players hands and doing all the work for them, leaving them the casual element. I get the impression from reading WD's from the last year or 2 that that's largely how the design studio play 40K - someone sets it up, decides on the mission and any special rules, then the others come over and roll some dice.

That's fine - but if you're doing that you can do it with pretty much any other game more easily, and it really doesn't fit in with how most games, especially those that play in stores/clubs play.

@Peregrine.
Professional games developers develop the game in the way they are instructed to by their employer.(If they want to remain employed.)

So when the 'sales department' is put in charge of a game development studio, the focus can becomes 'short term sales pitches', rather than long term growth.

And ALL game developers seem to improve their quality of game design massively , when they are free from the idiocy at GW towers.
(Andy Chambers,Alessio Cavatore, Jake Thornton, etc.)

So the game developers developers realize 40k rules are rubbish, and they want to improve them.
(There has been constant call for major changes to the 40k rules by the game devs ,every edition since 3rd ed.No major changes to fix core problems have ever been approved!)

They can get fed up of the constant aggravation/frustration trying to get higher ups to listen and approve changes needed, and leave GW .
Or they keep trying , (and failing) to improve the 40k rules .

I am not saying that 'Kirby Kulture' is totally responsible for the horrid state of the 40k rules.But it has a massive impact on what changes the devs could actually make.

I prefer to judge game developers on work they produce free of GW influence, as this seems to be a better measure of their capability.

Just wanted to add that 40k is only beer and pretzels if you're regular games are Tractics and Starfleet Battles and Advanced Squad Leader is your idea of light fare.
40k has to many rules to be beer and pretezels. Beer and Pretzels games need to be simple enough to be playable while drunk and 40k just has too much going on.

Herzlos wrote:
I'd certainly be up for trying to play BA 40K - I think even the order dice alone would revolutionise the game.

You should check out "Gates of Antares" from Warlord. It's very much based on the Bolt Action game with additional rules for the sci-fi setting. You can get the beta for free by signing up at their forums.

I interpret "beer and pretzels" in the context of 40k to mean "you can only enjoy it while drunk"

The last thing I want to do when drunk is begin arguing over convoluted rules with ambiguous ruling.

I guess it depends what sort of drunk you are, I tend to be more easy going when drunk, some of my friends are angry drunks and I imagine there would be models and tables broken by the end of the game