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.

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:

 RobPro wrote:
GW Rep at my local store told the owner, emphatically, three times on the phone that Escalation is meant to be used as part of the regular rulebook all the time. Obviously, I can't provide a source for that because how do you source word of mouth?

Of course, you can agree not to use it in an individual game, but it's something you should expect people to use unless you agree not to use it.

The Rep told him?


Oh, ok, I was obviously wrong.


I mean if a regional salesman told him...

I think everyone is taking this argument far past its logical conclusion, if we arent talking about tourneys, then surely its a moot point, because for casual games you can just feth people off for any reason you like!

I mean, I've played a few random games lately, and because its casual people are usually really sound. Funny thing they don't talk to you like a fething ape unless you are on dakka or the internet. Last week a lad asked me if he could bring a flyer, so I said he could, and if Id have said no, so be it, I'm sure he would have dropped it from his list and took another squad of termies or what have you, where is the issue?

As a result of that game (first time I've played against one!) I would of course say "get fethed!" if some bloke turned up with 3 next week considering I've got feth all with "skyfire" or flak or what have you!

See what I mean? If we arent talking about hardcore competitive rules, and even if we are they always have their own tourney rules anyway, then who gives a gak, because you can refuse to play someone for any reason you like, you can say "feth it you have ten assault termies and I don't like them so I want you to drop 5 of we don't play" right?

I mean, personally I think that would be a bit silly, but each to their own, I wouldn't mind changing my list if someone got freaked out by a certain unit for whatever silly reason, so why does there need to be an enormous debate about the point when you can readily play or not play for absolutely any reason at all?

Am I missing something?

Not really, Matty.

The crux of the problem is trying to determine the 'ground state' for a game of 40K. Just look at the furore over the inclusion of FW into the game, and lo and behold GW introduces an official expansion/supplement that makes FW seem tame by comparison.

Now the issue will be for tourney organisers to decide on what they should or should not include in their events, a thankless task at any time, and now they'll be getting agro over dataslates or the inclusion of superheavies, "because they're official GW material"

Much as I hate to say it the 'beer and pretzel players' are having a field day at the moment.

Cheers

Andrew

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 kronk wrote:
Outside of the four points above, I REALLY like the Stronghold Assault book, to be perfectly honest. I'd like to play some of the missions in the back (either defender or attacker) Sons of Dorn!

I got my copy today, and it's a lovely book. It's problems though aren't really it's problems, they're problems that have attached themselves to the book. Strength D is the problem, not the Aquila Strongpoint itself.

That's pretty much my feelings. Str D and AV15 aside, the book is good.

 AndrewC wrote:

Much as I hate to say it the 'beer and pretzel players' are having a field day at the moment.

Cheers

Andrew

I am not a tourney player, I am a 'beer and pretzels' player. I am really disappointed in this release because it screws with the game, makes it ridiculous and daft and further diminishes my reasoning that I'm playing a strategic game that requires a brain and some skill to win. Instead we will now have 'AHA! I spend hundreds on this one model and now I dump it on the table and win on the first turn!' which, we all know, will be replaced in a couple of months of an FAQ and or another supplement with 'But now I spent hundreds of dollars more on this other giant model, which takes up a quarter of the table and can now beat your previous auto-win model'.

If this is a permanent change, if we are really to see 'the most toys' winning a game so utterly dumbed down that it's a simple coin toss to see who wins, then it's the end of the line for me and that's really bloody sad, after 25 years of this hobby.

But the B&P Guys have a modicum of common sense and are prepared to change their lists so that they all have fun, with a degree of challenge to win the game.

I agree wholeheartedly, it looks like these are simply going to kill the game. Its expensive enough at the moment, I certainly can't afford to keep up. I am not looking forward to getting back to civilisation to play a game where Ive probably lost before we even start.

Like you, I'm an oldtimer who has followed this game from Rogue Trader Days, and I wanted to introduce my children to it as well. I guess that that will be a wasted effort then. I suppose, like the abused spouse, I'll stick around until the next set of rules, and hopefully they will be better.

Cheers

Andrew

You can still introduce your children to the game, as long as you just play as a family and they don't find any other kids in the neighborhood to play with that might have more generous family members when it comes to birthdays.

I started playing in sixth grade way back when second edition was just about to make way to third edition. Most of my games with other kids in the neighborhood were during third edition. Those were the days where every kid had to save their allowance for a month or so in order to buy a big model. I remember the kid that bought a Carnifex first began to win a lot until I bought an Eldar Dreadnought. Then, my little brother bought an Ork Dreadnought, the marine players picked up their own dreadnoughts, and eventually everyone had a similar large model to use in their army. It was an Arms Race, in a way.

Now, I'd be worried that the kid in the neighborhood that gets $300 for Christmas is going to be using a Revenant Titan come January. That sounds horrible...

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:

I am not a tourney player, I am a 'beer and pretzels' player. I am really disappointed in this release because it screws with the game, makes it ridiculous and daft and further diminishes my reasoning that I'm playing a strategic game that requires a brain and some skill to win. Instead we will now have 'AHA! I spend hundreds on this one model and now I dump it on the table and win on the first turn!' which, we all know, will be replaced in a couple of months of an FAQ and or another supplement with 'But now I spent hundreds of dollars more on this other giant model, which takes up a quarter of the table and can now beat your previous auto-win model'.

If this is a permanent change, if we are really to see 'the most toys' winning a game so utterly dumbed down that it's a simple coin toss to see who wins, then it's the end of the line for me and that's really bloody sad, after 25 years of this hobby.

As much as I wish it wasn't so, I think it is the case. Current GW has proven that they are willing to destroy game play at the expense of selling models. I fully expect the next book to contain some obscenity that makes a mockery of this book.

And, in all seriousness, I expect it to be something related to superheavy flyers with a strong likelihood for a plastic Thuderhawk to be the hook. Direct Only.

I made a joke a few months ago that GW would introduce a new unit type, 'Orbital'. It's basically a unit that doesn't have a model, because it's purchased to orbit the planet that the conflict is occuring on, but it costs $30 to download the rules. This unit cannot be assaulted or shot at.

 Oaka wrote:
I made a joke a few months ago that GW would introduce a new unit type, 'Orbital'. It's basically a unit that doesn't have a model, because it's purchased to orbit the planet that the conflict is occuring on, but it costs $30 to download the rules. This unit cannot be assaulted or shot at.

You're behind the times. In the days of the previous apoc edition, you could field an army of nothing but orbital strikes and it was the cheapest 40k army every to buy. You just need dice, templates, and the old $15 GK codex.

Can anyone remeber the game that allowed you to use nukes? The rule was you soaked the board in lighter fluid and then applied a match. It was mentioned in Murphys Rules but I can't remember the name.

Cheers

Andrew

 AndrewC wrote:
Much as I hate to say it the 'beer and pretzel players' are having a field day at the moment.

Cheers

Andrew

Unless they buy this supplement / optional rules / whatever this is because they want to field a wicked cool giant tank or giant robot model and then find that nobody wants to play against it because the rules are busted.

 Oaka wrote:
I made a joke a few months ago that GW would introduce a new unit type, 'Orbital'. This unit cannot be assaulted or shot at.

Yeah - that was called the Slaanesh "Siren Lord" and his "Siren Lieutenant" buddy. A lot of people were mad as hell at those two units in the Chicago GT the last year they just let everything go. It was quite fun.

Expanding on that idea.. What if GW went to a LEASING program where you only leased the rights to your units rules for say a month at a time?

You could buy your Inquisition Mini-Codex for 35$ digitally OR you could lease it for a month for 15$ per month. If you tried to use it during an event and your lease would up then GW Ninjas would jump out, take your money and give you a new license key.

I can't believe they aren't jumping on the idea of subscriptions as it's been proven.. we'll buy ANYTHING they produce no matter how bad it is.

Cheer up, Warpath Kickstarter next year.

 Kirasu wrote:
Expanding on that idea.. What if GW went to a LEASING program where you only leased the rights to your units rules for say a month at a time?

Isn't that what we do anyways since most armies get regular 4-5 year updates?

I'd pay $10 a month to have access to every GW and FW book. I'd never have to buy another one for $50+ and save lots of money in the long run as things get updated.

 RobPro wrote:
I'd pay $10 a month to have access to every GW and FW book. I'd never have to buy another one for $50+ and save lots of money in the long run as things get updated.

They'll never do a subscription fee that saves you money.

"With the publication of Warhammer 40,000: Escalation, players now have the option of taking Lords of War choices in their armies. The following is a list of Forge World models that should be considered Lords of War choices and may therefore be taken using the guidelines detailed in Warhammer 40,000: Escalation, along with the publication in which the model’s most up to date rules can be found."

http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Downloads/Product/PDF/L/lordsofwar.pdf

NOTHING IS SECRET. EVERYTHING IS PERMITTED.

This is just getting stupider and stupider by the day. Because now this opens the door to Forgeworld being standard.

Mmm damn now i really do want a Tigershark ax 1-0

That's pretty funny that they're allowing the Kustom Stompa from IA8.. It is fundamentally different than the current Stompa by such a degree that they aren't really even the same vehicle.

The new Apoc stompa was nerfed beyond oblivion but the Kustom one is still quite amazing and horribly annoying with its random blast radius weapons!

GW has always had a policy since the start of players policing themselves. They try to give you as many options as possible and it is up to YOU to take them.

Some people might like rules for fighting a rogue baneblade and few infantry elements which are all that remain without having to buy the apocalypse. One thing I learned over a decade ago after talking to Jervis Johnson is that they really dont care about the rules to the same extent competitive people do, they just don't. They want rules that allow you to roleplay out cool things.

So once you understand that then it is up to the players to decide:

"Is this is game we want to play"

I could go out and build a super optimized list and play it. But that is not the army, and thus game, I want to play, nor would my opponents enjoy playing it.

Same when I played magic, none of my friends or I went hyper competitive. No reason we couldn't, but just decided not to because we had more fun with 30+ turn games of magic than 5-6 turn games.

Which is fine for Garage/small group gaming. In open gaming (pick-up and tournaments) it sucks...Because then you have people rage out about how they should be able to play x, y, or z because they should be able to play what they want....leaving up to the players pisses people off. They should care about the rules because small groups can decide to break the rules all they want, they did not need escalation to add superheavies to regular games, I've done that before.

Maybe instead of lowering points for GTs to 1500, we should raise them to 3k? I think the game balances out a lot more when everybody can bring a giant goofy toy or two, or some really cool expensive units that are good at killing them.

The problems with that are many but time is the biggest. At 3k you probably need at least 4 hours per round.

Breng77 wrote:
The problems with that are many but time is the biggest. At 3k you probably need at least 4 hours per round.

Not necessarily...D weapons do speed things up a bit.

2.5K seems to be a reasonable limit.

That assumes everyone will have D weapons....they won't some guys will run things like horde orks or tervigon spam and will only get to turn 2 or 3 in regular tournament time.

In theory, armies would have to adapt to bring things to kill super heavies now or run their own (like they did for fliers, riptides, wave serpents, screamerstar, etc). Some of the best things are killing super heavies are expensive (points wise) units that cut down on the number of points leftover to bring hordes.

I bet you 3 hour roundtime is fine at 3k if you're letting all the big toys in. I've only found one hole in the movement for super heavy walkers/gargantuans that I'd like answered but for the most part the rules are pretty tight.

 RobPro wrote:
In theory, armies would have to adapt to bring things to kill super heavies now or run their own (like they did for fliers, riptides, wave serpents, screamerstar, etc). Some of the best things are killing super heavies are expensive (points wise) units that cut down on the number of points leftover to bring hordes.

I bet you 3 hour roundtime is fine at 3k if you're letting all the big toys in. I've only found one hole in the movement for super heavy walkers/gargantuans that I'd like answered but for the most part the rules are pretty tight.

What hole would that be?

It says the move 12" and have move through cover. It doesn't say they ignore terrain. If they get a toe in difficult, does that mean they just roll 3d6 and take the highest? Or would you double the highest?

Breng77 wrote:
Which is fine for Garage/small group gaming. In open gaming (pick-up and tournaments) it sucks...Because then you have people rage out about how they should be able to play x, y, or z because they should be able to play what they want....leaving up to the players pisses people off. They should care about the rules because small groups can decide to break the rules all they want, they did not need escalation to add superheavies to regular games, I've done that before.

Which is why it's so baffling to me that people think GW's playing fast and loose with the rules is a "good thing", because it "opens up options". It really doesn't! You always had that option before, all you needed was a willing opponent and you can break the game all you want to. You never needed GW's permission to do that.

All this kinda crap does is make things harder for the rest of us, the guys who really aren't interested in that kind of thing and want a game they can play "out of the box". Our only "options" are putting up with the bs or finding a new game: neither are acceptable.