Switch Theme:

What do you think about the new Kill Team system?  [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 de
Fresh-Faced New User




Hey there

I like the new KT rules and since I plan to stay with one of the factions from the Octarius box I don´t plan to buy the Compendium.
What I read in its description and saw on Battlescribe I assume I can not play my Elucidian Starstrides, Gellerpox or Servants of the Abyss anyway.
The latter work in some way with the Traitor Space Marines but not all of them.

I guess there are no rumours about new datasheets for those guys?
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut



London

Only if they release the models, or you wait for some fan balanced lists. Main problem is getting a roster of 20 guys.
   
Made in us
Shas'ui with Bonding Knife






I liked the treatment the BSF minis got in the last edition, The models could be added to existing factions. I'd love something similar in this edition, being able to take that Rogue Trader with some scions or to mix gellerpox with chaos cultist/poxwalkers.. So they'd just bring extra flavour to an existing faction, not add entirely new standalone factions as such.

Unfprtunately, without a points system, there isn't much hope for such a thing for KT2

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/09/07 13:55:06


 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut



London

I suppose you would split them into 5? fireteams and pick 2.
CSM - Leader (Mallus) and 2 black legion bodyguards
Traitor Guardsmen - 7 guys as per box
Cultists - 7 guys as per box
Scum - 4 guys chosen from Beastmen, Nega Voltists, up to 2 rogue Pyskers

If you don't pick the CSM can upgrade one Guardsman to be a commissar, or one cultist to be a firebrand.

The heroes aren't enough to take a full 20 man roster so if you did them would have to think up some kind of retainer. Or could combine with the Starstriders into some kind of set up. I reckon one fireteam of Voidsmen then a choice of 3? fireteams made up of the heroes grouped into three power levels for a team of 2, 3 or 4 members.

So they would be stating and grouping up
• Knosso Prond
• Larsen van der Grauss
• Sanistasia Minst
• Elucia Vhane
• Gotfret de Montbard
• Pious Vorne
• Rein and Raus
• UR-025
• X-101
• Amallyn Shadowguide
• Aradia Madellan
• Daedalosus
• Dahyak Grekh
• Espern Locarno
• Janus Draik
• Neyam Shai Murad
• Taddeus the Purifier
Giving you a roster of 20 guys (the 6 voidsmen and choices from the above 18 people)

Then I guess do a special made to order release window for the models.

The Gellarpox are another too small faction, so either group in with deathguard as another 1 or 2 fireteam choices or add them to the blackstone guys.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/09/07 18:30:50


 
   
Made in au
Grizzled Space Wolves Great Wolf





I've only just finally got around to reading the rules.

Is it just me, or are these books terribly written? I feel like the writer lives by the adage "Why write in a sentence what could be written in a paragraph?".

The whole thing is just very cumbersome to read and feels like it could have been written in a fraction of the number of pages. And too often I come across a rule that references another rule but I don't know where to look for it.

And reading the rules, I despise the circle square triangle bullgak even more than I thought I would. Every time I see a symbol I have to pause to remember which distance it actually refers to. I still haven't got my head around triangle < circle < square < pentagon.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/09/10 06:39:44


 
   
Made in de
Ork Admiral Kroozin Da Kosmos on Da Hulk






AllSeeingSkink wrote:
I still haven't got my head around triangle < circle < square < pentagon.


Is anyone but me annoyed by the order of the shapes? It should be circle < triangle < square < pentagon or triangle < square < pentagon < circle.
Triangle < circle < square < pentagon just makes no sense whatsoever.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/09/10 07:17:26


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 au
Grizzled Space Wolves Great Wolf





 Jidmah wrote:
AllSeeingSkink wrote:
I still haven't got my head around triangle < circle < square < pentagon.


Is anyone but me annoyed by the order of the shapes? It should be circle < triangle < square < pentagon or triangle < square < pentagon < circle.
Triangle < circle < square < pentagon just makes no sense whatsoever.


I think I'm too annoyed by the very existence of them to get overly stressed about the order, but yes, it is illogical and makes me feel dumber every time I read it.

If they omitted 2", they could have done circle = 1, triangle = 3, square = 4, hexagon = 6, then at least the number of edges would align with the number, but the whole system is so stupid to begin with.
   
Made in de
Ork Admiral Kroozin Da Kosmos on Da Hulk






I'm actually playing the game with my 5 year old daughter, so I can't say I'm not too miffed about that - though I seriously doubt that children in pre-school are an intended target audience.

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 si
Ravenous Beast Form







Yeah, this shape nonsense, while mostly harmless, is definitely one of the most boneheaded concepts GW ever did.

Posters on ignore list: 34

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
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut



London

You do feel an idiot discussing shapes...

But yes, atrocious rulebook layout and contents page.
   
Made in gb
Enginseer with a Wrench




Bath

best theory i have seen for the shapes was that the original plan was to use the colours, not the shapes, as the primary element (ie WHITE circle, RED pentagon, etc), which is fine in and of itself, but when the range polygon idea came about, they either decided (or it was decided for them) that supplying a unpainted plastic shape that the user was required to paint in the correct order was much to open to accidental or deliberate misuse/abuse, and they tacked on the shapes part, but as it was still seen primarily as colour based they were more concerned about shapes that were distinct form each other as opposed to ones that could be linked back to distances.

its the closest to a coherent theory as to why it is what it is that I have heard.

Then it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an` Tommy, 'ow's yer soul? "
But it's " Thin red line of 'eroes " when the drums begin to roll
The drums begin to roll, my boys, the drums begin to roll,
O it's " Thin red line of 'eroes, " when the drums begin to roll.
"Tommy", Rudyard Kipling
Exporitor force kappa-Tercia 500pts Coven of XVth 1000pts
Western Host 1000 pts
 
   
Made in ca
Regular Dakkanaut





xerxeskingofking wrote:
best theory i have seen for the shapes was that the original plan was to use the colours, not the shapes, as the primary element (ie WHITE circle, RED pentagon, etc), which is fine in and of itself, but when the range polygon idea came about, they either decided (or it was decided for them) that supplying a unpainted plastic shape that the user was required to paint in the correct order was much to open to accidental or deliberate misuse/abuse, and they tacked on the shapes part, but as it was still seen primarily as colour based they were more concerned about shapes that were distinct form each other as opposed to ones that could be linked back to distances.

its the closest to a coherent theory as to why it is what it is that I have heard.


Yep this has all the hallmarks of an idea that gets 75% through development before a showstopping problem is discovered and then the scramble ensues to pull it out of the fire. I think another consideration was that at some point someone lowly in the "ideas room" said "what about people who are colourblind?" and then there was a panic.
   
Made in au
Grizzled Space Wolves Great Wolf





xerxeskingofking wrote:
best theory i have seen for the shapes was that the original plan was to use the colours, not the shapes, as the primary element (ie WHITE circle, RED pentagon, etc), which is fine in and of itself, but when the range polygon idea came about, they either decided (or it was decided for them) that supplying a unpainted plastic shape that the user was required to paint in the correct order was much to open to accidental or deliberate misuse/abuse, and they tacked on the shapes part, but as it was still seen primarily as colour based they were more concerned about shapes that were distinct form each other as opposed to ones that could be linked back to distances.

its the closest to a coherent theory as to why it is what it is that I have heard.


Maybe, a problem with colours is also some folk see colours differently, but I still don't get why they didn't just use numbers though. We already know that 1 is half the size of 2, why we have to learn that triangle is half the size of circle and black is half the size of white I have no idea

But anyway, that was kinda just tangential to my gripe that the books as a whole just feel badly written, for what isn't a terribly complicated set of rules they're quite painful to read.
   
Made in gb
Stubborn Dark Angels Veteran Sergeant





Teesside

I think again we end up in a situation where the most obvious problems boil down to, GW doesn't like to hire qualified or experienced game designers.

The UK government has really good, clear, freely available guidance on Designing for Accessibility. When I teach game design to undergrads, I make them look at this in the first semester, in the board game design course: https://accessibility.blog.gov.uk/2016/09/02/dos-and-donts-on-designing-for-accessibility/

And the badly written stuff also gets covered in Semester 1 (they have to hand me a rules sheet as part of the assignment, and I mark it based primarily on clarity), then again in third year for the Games Narrative module...

But GW are still hiring game designers based primarily on ability to froth about Ultramarines.

My painting & modelling blog: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/699224.page

Serpent King Games: Dragon Warriors Reborn!
http://serpentking.com/

 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut



London

 Ian Sturrock wrote:
The UK government has really good, clear, freely available guidance on Designing for Accessibility. When I teach game design to undergrads, I make them look at this in the first semester, in the board game design course: https://accessibility.blog.gov.uk/2016/09/02/dos-and-donts-on-designing-for-accessibility/


Amusingly (having known one of the authors) government internally doesn't follow this stuff at all internally in many departments!
   
Made in ca
Kroot Carnivore





 Jidmah wrote:
I'm actually playing the game with my 5 year old daughter, so I can't say I'm not too miffed about that - though I seriously doubt that children in pre-school are an intended target audience.


I'm playing with my 5 year old son as well and he really likes the 3 circles to move as well. But yeah, totally agree that it wasn't their target audience. XD

Overall, I really like the new Kill Team. I've got half a dozen games under my belt so far and they've all been really close.

I get that it's a lot less customizable than what we're used to, but that will come in time. I think re-building the game from the ground up was the right way to go, even if we had to take a step back before we could take two steps forward. Throwing everything into the opening edition would have been impossible to balance, I like that they are taking their time with it. If you want a super customizable list, play the old version until the new one gets what you want, it's still there. All and all, a great move and a system I'm really enjoying.

That being said, I do have some critiques that could have been fixed.

1. Marines: While Tactical Marines, Scouts, and Deathwatch are all great, I think it would have made much more sense to bundle the others together. Ex: Intercessor Fire Team: Choose 5 out of Intercessors, Assault Intercessors, and Heavy Intercessors (Max 1). Phobos Fire Team: Choose 5 out of Incursors, Infiltrators, and Reivers. I don't think it would make them that much stronger overall, but would make them much more flexible and less boring to play.

2. Close Combat: They got close, they really did, but I don't think it's quite there yet. What I thought would amount to strategic duels of dice play often turns into either a 1 shot kill, or a 2 shot kill and you take a little damage 9 times out of 10. What I think would work a lot better, is if you were allowed a single armor save in close combat. Then on the attack you'd have to consider going for that 1 or 2 shot kill vs playing it more safe and parrying. I think that would make it much more strategic and interesting without changing the system very much.

3. Some other Oddball Fireteam Choices: There were some Fireteam options that seemed really strange not to be allowed. For example, why not be allowed to run two units of cultists? They even have stats for a cultist leader, but why would you ever take a cultists leader over a CSM one (lore or gameplay wise?). Why don't Grechin have their own fireteam instead of only being a 2 model swap into a Boyz team? You could even limit it to one so you had to have an actual Ork leader, but having a unit of 10 of the little guys seems plenty reasonable.

4. Really wish the compendium had been included in the Octarius box.

Okay, so after all that, I feel like I should talk about some things that I think they did really well.

1. The overall design of the system: It's quick, sleek, and has a surprising amount of depth to it. There are a lot of things they can adjust and tweak to make the factions feel different and the units play different. I'm really liking this and think it's got a lot of room to expand on as future expansions come out.

2. The thought behind some of the balance choices: The biggest example of this I can point out is the Kroot. They knew they had no special weapon options or fancy stuff to play with, so they made up for it by giving them a very strong tactical identity in their stratagems. Seriously, they are a blast to play. Perfect Ambush is one of the best stratagems in the game, but putting it a faction like Kroot not only makes it feel flavorful, but also more balanced. Also being able to conceal after shooting if they don't do anything else is really great too, makes you really consider hounds vs carnivores. It feels like they squeezed them for every bit of design space they could get without making new models and I hope that some of the less loved factions/teams get that as time moves on.

3. The diversity in missions: In 40k most matches boil down to just get the objectives and do some other little things. Every match I've played feels totally different. I'm glad they aren't afraid to play with different ways to win and balancing how armies will play that. A great example of this is the sabotage one where one army has to use their Equip Points to take demo charges for the mission, but the other team only starts with half their force on the table. I love asymmetrical gameplay like this, especially when it still feels balanced. (The match I played on this mode ended 16-14 where 1 more point of damage on the objective would have changed the outcome.)

4. The support it's getting: New Kill Team content every 3 months, now that's supporting a new game launch. I'm really looking forward to alternate combat zones with new rules and what armies will come with. I personally would love to see Kroot vs Catachan on a Death World. (Though we probably won't get Catachan since we just got Kreig so maybe Tyranids, oh, or Exodites since they have gone with some off the wall stuff in Kill Team before.)

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/09/10 16:47:29


15000 4000 3500 2500 :tyranid: 2500 1000 1000
1000 1000 1000 1000  
   
Made in se
Shas'ui with Bonding Knife






The next Killzone will be announced during GenCon this week (Sept 16th-19th). Will be interesting to see it, as we can pretty much expect it to be the first one in a series to come every three months.

Rumoured contents will be Sisters of Battle Acolytes vs Tau Pathfinders, and terrain from the Sector Imperialis range. The location of the killzone itself is unknown at this point.
   
Made in us
Pragmatic Collabirator



Dayton, OH

 Jidmah wrote:
AllSeeingSkink wrote:
I still haven't got my head around triangle < circle < square < pentagon.


Is anyone but me annoyed by the order of the shapes? It should be circle < triangle < square < pentagon or triangle < square < pentagon < circle.
Triangle < circle < square < pentagon just makes no sense whatsoever.

It was a thing I commented on in a few locations the day they first featured it on WarCom (the Movement article?). Like, use shapes, whatever. But at least map them in a logical fashion/progression.
   
Made in si
Ravenous Beast Form







So the AdMech 2.0 list is out and I give it a solid 0/10. They literally made rules for two bits from the Ranger sprue and used this to fluff up the list to 16 pages with a couple new specialists and a mixed but semi-fixed roster ala Krieg. Nothing that couldn't have been in the Compendium already, but hey, enjoy having a month old book fully superseded already.

Posters on ignore list: 34

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
   
Made in gb
Dakka Veteran





Base movement being needed to traverse most terrain seemed a cool thing to me, you can run and then dash that last bit, but not if you need to jump a wall or ladder.

When factoring the heavy rule it also works, the guy firing and lugging a heavy bolter can shuffle a few feet, but not traverse a barricade or climb a ladder.
   
Made in us
Gore-Soaked Lunatic Witchhunter







xerxeskingofking wrote:
best theory i have seen for the shapes was that the original plan was to use the colours, not the shapes, as the primary element (ie WHITE circle, RED pentagon, etc), which is fine in and of itself, but when the range polygon idea came about, they either decided (or it was decided for them) that supplying a unpainted plastic shape that the user was required to paint in the correct order was much to open to accidental or deliberate misuse/abuse, and they tacked on the shapes part, but as it was still seen primarily as colour based they were more concerned about shapes that were distinct form each other as opposed to ones that could be linked back to distances.

its the closest to a coherent theory as to why it is what it is that I have heard.


My theory is that they wrote the rules for tape measures like sensible people, and then someone at marketing said "hold on, what if we could add this extra measuring widget and tried to convince people it was special like all the FFG games?!!?," and they told the design team to go back and redo the whole thing for shapes half an hour before their deadline.

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 at
Discriminating Warrior





Austria

some rumours said the the first version was colours and not shapes until they got the memo that the default widget is grey plastic and not coloured cardboard

Harry, bring this ring to Narnia or the Sith will take the Enterprise

M41 - Alternative Rules for Battles in the 41st Millennium (40k LRB Project) 
   
Made in fi
Shas'ui with Bonding Knife






Yeah so I finally had my first game in last weekend and I did enjoy it! I think the system works quite well and results in games that feel "cinematic" enough for my sensibilities. I got that feeling from a GW scifi game last time when we played Necromunda around 10 years ago. So I am relieved that I can keep on being mostly a KillTeam fan, and just play 40K occasionally to appease our gaming group

Only thing that's changed from KT18 is that playing on a larger board is no longer as straightforward as it used to be. If someone has a lot of slow moving melee only troops (poxwalkers), 4 turning points isnt even enough to get across the board.. I'd say 3 feet by 3 feet is perhaps the biggest board size that still works? Which is a bit of a prob for me personally because I've invested financially into 4x4 feet (realm of battle tiles, foldable 4x4 table). I suppose 4x4 can still work for shootier factions and certain missions, provided a turning point or two get added to the mission lenght. Not a prob, Open Play (Matched play with "houserules") is how we roll.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/09/22 15:26:18


 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut





BTW, Tauist, thanks for the earlier suggestion of solo rules( I'd overlooked it ). Its another vote of confidence for 5 Parsecs and will squirrel them away, just incase GW comes to their senses and releases an affordable edition of the new KT rules.

Casual gaming, mostly solo-coop these days.

 
   
Made in gb
Wise Ethereal with Bodyguard







Its pretty affordable if you camp on ebay. Lots of core rules going for a bit over £12.

Please excuse any spelling errors. I use a tablet frequently and software keyboards are a pain!

Terranwing - w3;d1;l1
51st Dunedinw2;d0;l0
Cadre Coronal Afterglow w1;d0;l0 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut





 Flinty wrote:
Its pretty affordable if you camp on ebay. Lots of core rules going for a bit over £12.


Some good deals on there for the rulebook but sadly not the compendium - which is essentially the missing second half of the core book.

I've moved on from it, but damn, GW really scored an own-goal with the book prices.


Casual gaming, mostly solo-coop these days.

 
   
Made in gb
Wise Ethereal with Bodyguard







Fair point. I haven't worked out that part yet

I was just keen to see the rules for cheap.

Please excuse any spelling errors. I use a tablet frequently and software keyboards are a pain!

Terranwing - w3;d1;l1
51st Dunedinw2;d0;l0
Cadre Coronal Afterglow w1;d0;l0 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut





 Flinty wrote:
Fair point. I haven't worked out that part yet

I was just keen to see the rules for cheap.


No worries. Its the thought that counts!


Casual gaming, mostly solo-coop these days.

 
   
Made in se
Shas'ui with Bonding Knife






 Flinty wrote:
Its pretty affordable if you camp on ebay. Lots of core rules going for a bit over £12.


Ooh, that's a good price! The Compendium stats are covered pretty extensively online (by various compilation datasheets users churn out) so theoretically the rulebook + lots of research should get one started on the lowlow
   
Made in us
Wicked Canoptek Wraith




Sentient Void

You should just buy boxes of Custodes.

Member of the Coalition for an Asmodee buy out of Games Workshop 
   
 
Forum Index » Games Workshop Board Games & Specialist Games
Go to: