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.

 BoomWolf wrote:

Never said anything about the wave serpents not being OP, as for riptides, it might be taken a bit out of context.

I said the problem lies not in the riptide itself, but in the ion accelerator, and without THAT, the riptide is ok.


Back to skysheild, while highly illogical as to the WHY on earth it works the way it works, the HOW it works seems pretty clear, at least to me and the people I play with. we never had trouble there. (not that he is that much of a common sight)

I'm curious, do you mostly play within a small group of friends?

What happened to the design studio at GW?

Did they decide not to employ (enough) competent designers, or is there just a myopic focus on new content without any regard to quality?

I think the prevailing theory is that they are a buch of friends sitting around, playing together, who are entierly unaware of the wider meta or even the murkiness of the rules because it's the same 6 people who only play against those other 5 people and it all makes perfect sense in their heads and none of them would dream of spamming any particular unit simply to win the game.

 jonolikespie wrote:
I think the prevailing theory is that they are a buch of friends sitting around, playing together, who are entierly unaware of the wider meta or even the murkiness of the rules because it's the same 6 people who only play against those other 5 people and it all makes perfect sense in their heads and none of them would dream of spamming any particular unit simply to win the game.

The terms echo chamber, old boys club and greedy bastards come to mind.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

znelson wrote:
a myopic focus on new content without any regard to quality?

Bingo. That's been the release schedule since nov 13, it's all "better now than never, better loud than clever" . They're hoping the bloat can hide the rot.


And that's the crux of the marketing side of things, white dwarf is more about fitting as many subjective adjectives as possible. To infer 7th will be better than 6 is to be avoided, it would infer that 6 had problems. The release is cynical for a few reasons, it's a last big bump on their financial year and it was obviously rushed seeing as they're just putting 7th ed rulebooks into the same old starter box. That doesn't exactly scream "this was the plan all along".

I'm not sure if greedy is the right word..

Incompetent is probably more accurate. If any company starts selling a garbage product to their loyal customers, it won't be long before there aren't any left.

 Crablezworth wrote:
it's a last big bump on their financial year and it was obviously rushed seeing as they're just putting 7th ed rulebooks into the same old starter box.

Is that confirmed? It actually is somewhat sensible in a lot of ways for them to do that, but I hadn't heard anyone come out and say that before now.

For the record, Crablezworth idea for the cards and using them as shared objectives is great. The give and take of trying to achieve an objective and/or denying your opponent, all while still playing a primary, is what make Malifaux an interesting game.

Yep, a game already does this concept. And it's completely crazy to get used to but can make rewarding games!

znelson wrote:
What happened to the design studio at GW?

Did they decide not to employ (enough) competent designers, or is there just a myopic focus on new content without any regard to quality?

Yes.

Yes, but, nothing 'happened' -- that's just how it's been for as long as most of us can remember.

 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

 Crablezworth wrote:
it's a last big bump on their financial year and it was obviously rushed seeing as they're just putting 7th ed rulebooks into the same old starter box.

Is that confirmed? It actually is somewhat sensible in a lot of ways for them to do that, but I hadn't heard anyone come out and say that before now.

It's a rumour till we see it. I agree that it's sensible, but it would indicate a rush job.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 TheKbob wrote:
For the record, Crablezworth idea for the cards and using them as shared objectives is great. The give and take of trying to achieve an objective and/or denying your opponent, all while still playing a primary, is what make Malifaux an interesting game.

Yep, a game already does this concept. And it's completely crazy to get used to but can make rewarding games!

I still think to make it work you'd need to take a long hard look at all 36 cards and maybe cut some of the less inspired ones. My fear is a bit like what has always been a concern in the scouring, if one side just has a huge vp advantage out the gate it can be a bit daunting. I think the games I remember the most are the ones that were fairly back and forth and filled with tension, never the ones where a mixture of bad luck and terrible imbalance just turned the game into a foregone conclusion for either side. In fact the best games are ties, and that's my biggest fear about adding a random amount vp's to the game, it will make ties even more of a rarity.

Crusade is the best mission by a mile. Imagine if instead of each objective being worth 3vp's GW had decided on D3. That would have sucked, hard.

Star Trek Fleet Captains uses pretty much exactly this same system and it works really well.

 jonolikespie wrote:

 BoomWolf wrote:

Never said anything about the wave serpents not being OP, as for riptides, it might be taken a bit out of context.

I said the problem lies not in the riptide itself, but in the ion accelerator, and without THAT, the riptide is ok.


Back to skysheild, while highly illogical as to the WHY on earth it works the way it works, the HOW it works seems pretty clear, at least to me and the people I play with. we never had trouble there. (not that he is that much of a common sight)

I'm curious, do you mostly play within a small group of friends?

He plays Tau and hasn't assembled his one Riptide yet.

There are two players with Riptides other than him that I'm aware of in our FLGS but neither of them spams them (and one of them tends to play rather underwhelmingly).

I haven't been keeping track of his match ups, but I suspect he hasn't been exposed to just how frustrating it can be to face a Riptide, even a Burst Cannon Riptide, for most armies.

Its not the riptide that is the problem. Riptides are kinda Meh by themselves. It is the buff commander that makes them annoying.

Also the card does not require that you be good at challenges, only that you issue one.

 Selym wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

 BoomWolf wrote:

And sure, an all-knight army cant cast powers or issue challanged, but why on earth do you play only knights? they fact its a legal army does not mean its not clearly intended to be used as allies, just like LotD, rather then stand-alone.

An army of Knights or similarly weird armies like...Tau..or Necrons.

Tau = Powerful army that is no good for challenging, and has no psykers
Necron = Powerful army that is only somewhat good for challenging, also has no psykers.

CSM = Utterly terrible army that is all about the challenging and psychic powers.

Maybe it's a "balance" thing?

sensible comment brain melting...

 Zognob Gorgoff wrote:

 Selym wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

 BoomWolf wrote:

And sure, an all-knight army cant cast powers or issue challanged, but why on earth do you play only knights? they fact its a legal army does not mean its not clearly intended to be used as allies, just like LotD, rather then stand-alone.

An army of Knights or similarly weird armies like...Tau..or Necrons.

Tau = Powerful army that is no good for challenging, and has no psykers
Necron = Powerful army that is only somewhat good for challenging, also has no psykers.

CSM = Utterly terrible army that is all about the challenging and psychic powers.

Maybe it's a "balance" thing?

sensible comment brain melting...

Pretty sure it has nothing to do with balance because GW detest the word.

I have a better idea, instead of these objective cards why don't we take it in turns to draw straws instead. The one who draws the shortest straw loses the game.

Think of all the freedom you then have to forge the narrative about your game you could have played.

 Mij'aan wrote:
I have a better idea, instead of these objective cards why don't we take it in turns to draw straws instead. The one who draws the shortest straw loses the game.

Think of all the freedom you then have to forge the narrative about your game you could have played.

In fact, why bother with a second player? They're all just WAAC TFGs that do nothing but ruin your fun anyway!

Play the game as it was obviously meant to be played! Buy two armies and then forge a narrative of glorious war between them in your basement. Alone...

If 40k was a narrative game, It would have some RPG elements. But it doesn't. It's like any other strategy game except with abysmal balance.

Looking forward to giving the cards a test run this saturday, already got a game lined up....Just hope I am not exhausted from being up all night....

I wonder at the legal ramifications of a fan-written BRB.

 Xendarc wrote:
I wonder at the legal ramifications of a fan-written BRB.

As long as there is no money being made, there are no grounds for a lawsuit.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Xendarc wrote:
I wonder at the legal ramifications of a fan-written BRB.

As long as there is no money being made, there are no grounds for a lawsuit.

GW will try anyways, on the grounds that having a fanbase reduces profits.

They will try to ban people from talking about 40k.

 Selym wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Xendarc wrote:
I wonder at the legal ramifications of a fan-written BRB.

As long as there is no money being made, there are no grounds for a lawsuit.

GW will try anyways, on the grounds that having a fanbase reduces profits.

They will try to ban people from talking about 40k.

I can already see it in my head...

GW legal department: "Every fan that talks about our product is a fan that isn't at that very moment standing in front of a GW sales counter pulling money out of his wallet to buy our products! We're losing a lot of profit here!"

 MWHistorian wrote:
If 40k was a narrative game, It would have some RPG elements. But it doesn't. It's like any other strategy game except with abysmal balance.

THAT SAID;
GW really should come up with a campaign narrative rule set (a proper one, where your characters get upgraded war gear based on performance) - Except everyone will just abuse it and ...
The players are just as bad as GW sometimes.

They used to have one built into the rulebook in third.....good times. Holy crap, I just looked at the two sample missions released today.

That has potential for some serious tactical play during the game.

For one you get 3 cards and then fill up to three.

For the other you get 1 card to start than on every turn get more cards based on the number of objectives you control up to 6.

So it really does reward game play during the game, giving you many more opportunities to get cards based on how well you play the game, minimizing the impact of "bad cards" during the game.

Interested in seeing how the other 4 play out but I like it.

 Selym wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Xendarc wrote:
I wonder at the legal ramifications of a fan-written BRB.

As long as there is no money being made, there are no grounds for a lawsuit.

GW will try anyways, on the grounds that having a fanbase reduces profits.

They will try to ban people from talking about 40k.

We already have people making fan rules. DakkaDakka even has their own FAQs which are all fan made. I don't think GW has gone after them or any other Tourney Organization which has their own 40K FAQs to go by, and the tourneys do make money and profit from 40K.

Davor wrote:

 Selym wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Xendarc wrote:
I wonder at the legal ramifications of a fan-written BRB.

As long as there is no money being made, there are no grounds for a lawsuit.

GW will try anyways, on the grounds that having a fanbase reduces profits.

They will try to ban people from talking about 40k.

We already have people making fan rules. DakkaDakka even has their own FAQs which are all fan made. I don't think GW has gone after them or any other Tourney Organization which has their own 40K FAQs to go by, and the tourneys do make money and profit from 40K.

Yet.

Pessimism = Win.

From this thread: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/6810/592379.page#6842809

 tdwg83 wrote:
FYI, I was at my LFGS when they got the bad news. Card sets have been under printed.
Local store is receiving 120 Rulebooks, 14 sets of psychic cards and 8 sets of the Objective cards.

 Mij'aan wrote:
From this thread: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/6810/592379.page#6842809

 tdwg83 wrote:
FYI, I was at my LFGS when they got the bad news. Card sets have been under printed.
Local store is receiving 120 Rulebooks, 14 sets of psychic cards and 8 sets of the Objective cards.

Just grab a friend, blindfold them and then force feed them a 26er of vodka and have them randomly demand that you do things thoughout the game. Seems to be about the same.