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.

AnonAmbientLight wrote:

That's not what i mean. I don't mean to come off as "i only buy models that are good." I mean to say, i wouldn't want to buy a $45 shadowsun unless i have a play thru and see how she handles in my army, or how i want to use her. This circles back to the argument that "counts as" is a valid way to play and only TFG would have a problem with it. Sometimes people want to play test before they drop money on this expensive game, and that's ok too.

I'm a poor college kid, so i'm trying to spend money on things that i know i will use a lot, and try not to get too much "extra", if that makes sense.

Oh I understand. I'm just a cranky old fart.

I met a guy that said he absolutely loved playing 40k. Didn't care about winning/losing so much. Enjoyed trying out new tactics, even 'just for the lolz' lists but... he hated painting his miniatures lol. I almost told him he should find a new hobby but he loved playing and hanging out with his friends so much I figured it made up for the hours of 'tedious' painting for him.

A friend of mine barely plays at all and spends most 40k nights just painting and modeling.

Everyone has their own reasons for playing and none of them are wrong IMO so long as it's in a spirit of mutual enjoyment and good times.

I wish i could find a game that lasted 9 hours. I would love a 4 or 6 player match with 6000-9000 points per player (with no apocalypse or escalation rules/units) on a 6" x 18" board. unfortunately everyone always plays tournament style with nothing over 2000 and plays the tournament lists. I love to run units like Maugun Ra, Khandras, Vypers, guardians, striking scorpions, and even Dark Reapers. I have never seen anyone else run some of the units that I do and I have been playing for about 3 years now. One day I hope to get in a large game mentioned above. thats how wars are meant to be fought. with armies. what we have nowadays are little skirmishes.

 Xerics wrote:
I wish i could find a game that lasted 9 hours. I would love a 4 or 6 player match with 6000-9000 points per player (with no apocalypse or escalation rules/units) on a 6" x 18" board. unfortunately everyone always plays tournament style with nothing over 2000 and plays the tournament lists. I love to run units like Maugun Ra, Khandras, Vypers, guardians, striking scorpions, and even Dark Reapers. I have never seen anyone else run some of the units that I do and I have been playing for about 3 years now. One day I hope to get in a large game mentioned above. thats how wars are meant to be fought. with armies. what we have nowadays are little skirmishes.

You don't need BIG battles the have long ones. You just need plenty of old school narrative mechanics. Such as a medic that can actually revive downed troops. A stiff defensive position with an objective to last it out. 3rd party figures controlled by the GM to throw a pipe-wrench into someones well-laid-plans. A robot with a chance to get stuck due to poor programming. Dis-mountable bike riders.

Ever since 3rd ed the 40k rules have been stripped of any flavor in an effort to make them more tournament-friendly and Game-Master free. To make a good skirmish game truly enjoyable and long lasting, simply make the effort to put those mechanics BACK IN. And STOP observing the meaningless Turn Numbers and Victory Points.

There is also nothing wrong with making a battle so cumbersome that you must leave it set up to come back to the next day. If your GM has done a good job of making a unique and memorable NARRATIVE, it'll be a battle worth coming back to later.

 Live2sculpt wrote:

 Xerics wrote:
I wish i could find a game that lasted 9 hours. I would love a 4 or 6 player match with 6000-9000 points per player (with no apocalypse or escalation rules/units) on a 6" x 18" board. unfortunately everyone always plays tournament style with nothing over 2000 and plays the tournament lists. I love to run units like Maugun Ra, Khandras, Vypers, guardians, striking scorpions, and even Dark Reapers. I have never seen anyone else run some of the units that I do and I have been playing for about 3 years now. One day I hope to get in a large game mentioned above. thats how wars are meant to be fought. with armies. what we have nowadays are little skirmishes.

You don't need BIG battles the have long ones. You just need plenty of old school narrative mechanics. Such as a medic that can actually revive downed troops. A stiff defensive position with an objective to last it out. 3rd party figures controlled by the GM to throw a pipe-wrench into someones well-laid-plans. A robot with a chance to get stuck due to poor programming. Dis-mountable bike riders.

Ever since 3rd ed the 40k rules have been stripped of any flavor in an effort to make them more tournament-friendly and Game-Master free. To make a good skirmish game truly enjoyable and long lasting, simply make the effort to put those mechanics BACK IN. And STOP observing the meaningless Turn Numbers and Victory Points.

There is also nothing wrong with making a battle so cumbersome that you must leave it set up to come back to the next day. If your GM has done a good job of making a unique and memorable NARRATIVE, it'll be a battle worth coming back to later.

OP you would be better off taking your 40k minis and playing 28mm Inquisitor, dragging RT back out or looking at the myriad of of other rule-sets that are out there that will cater to your needs. You could of course adapt the current ruleset and add your own flavour.

According to Gw themselves they really are catering to what you want rather than the hardcore tournament scene, you must be playing their game wrong!

 Mr. Burning wrote:

 Live2sculpt wrote:

 Xerics wrote:
I wish i could find a game that lasted 9 hours. I would love a 4 or 6 player match with 6000-9000 points per player (with no apocalypse or escalation rules/units) on a 6" x 18" board. unfortunately everyone always plays tournament style with nothing over 2000 and plays the tournament lists. I love to run units like Maugun Ra, Khandras, Vypers, guardians, striking scorpions, and even Dark Reapers. I have never seen anyone else run some of the units that I do and I have been playing for about 3 years now. One day I hope to get in a large game mentioned above. thats how wars are meant to be fought. with armies. what we have nowadays are little skirmishes.

You don't need BIG battles the have long ones. You just need plenty of old school narrative mechanics. Such as a medic that can actually revive downed troops. A stiff defensive position with an objective to last it out. 3rd party figures controlled by the GM to throw a pipe-wrench into someones well-laid-plans. A robot with a chance to get stuck due to poor programming. Dis-mountable bike riders.

Ever since 3rd ed the 40k rules have been stripped of any flavor in an effort to make them more tournament-friendly and Game-Master free. To make a good skirmish game truly enjoyable and long lasting, simply make the effort to put those mechanics BACK IN. And STOP observing the meaningless Turn Numbers and Victory Points.

There is also nothing wrong with making a battle so cumbersome that you must leave it set up to come back to the next day. If your GM has done a good job of making a unique and memorable NARRATIVE, it'll be a battle worth coming back to later.

OP you would be better off taking your 40k minis and playing 28mm Inquisitor, dragging RT back out or looking at the myriad of of other rule-sets that are out there that will cater to your needs. You could of course adapt the current ruleset and add your own flavour.

According to Gw themselves they really are catering to what you want rather than the hardcore tournament scene, you must be playing their game wrong!

Inquisitor rules provides battlefield rules for Orcs and Eldar and Tanks? News to me.

There's nothing wrong with the core mechanics of 6th ed.. They are very well worked out and benefit greatly from several years of playing experience (just look at the broken old RT rules for bike movement. *shudders! ). But any battle that is measured using Victory Points and Turn Limits IS definitively derived from a Tournament approach, whether the contemporary 'hardcore tournament scene' gaming is different or not .

Adding a 3rd player who finds fun in mediating the battle and narrating the objectives, quickly eliminates the need for those things such as turn limits etc. and makes adding in small tweaks such as dismounted bikers a rather simple matter. If there is a fuzzy issue, the GM calls it. And if the players aren't hung up on VP nonsense, they will have no cause to be upset with the GM's choice.

The core notion to make the 40k rules a simpler 2+ player game, rather than a 3+ player game was more of a marketing device than anything else, in my opinion. Some people see no need for a Game Master. Well I see no need for Turn Limits and Victory Points. But I certainly wouldn't recommend trying to play without either.

Then make your own rules up. mash up the Gw rulesets if you still intend to stay loyal to GW.

I also ask why can't 2 players decide a narrative and set up some rules modifications before playing? They don't have to use turn limits or VP's - no one does.

Basically the game is what it is but, play how you want to play with like minded players.