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. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/16 09:27:58
Subject: How does one even play this game anymore?
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
I had a similar problem to the OP, and was very close to giving up on the whole tabletop wargaming thing.
Step 1 - Ebayed my 40k models.
Step 2 - Re-invested the money in a balanced game with a tight ruleset [my choice was Infinity].
Step 3 - Had lots of fun and re-discovered my passion for this strange little hobby.
Step 4 - Mentally berated myself for all of the time wasted in preparing for and playing a game with a shockingly bad ruleset [including all of the time trying to negotiate how the game was going to be played on each occasion].
It's difficult to appreciate just how outdated and poorly thought out the 40k ruleset is until you try something new.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/16 09:41:51
Subject: How does one even play this game anymore?
|
 |
Battlewagon Driver with Charged Engine
|
Frozocrone wrote: Runic wrote:There you have it. Just communicate and be ready to compromise and you'll be fine. The end.
AKA exactly what the rulebook tells players to do.
When I'm forced to pay £50 to buy the rulebook I expect clear, concise rules, not having to spend the money and then my time to fix what I bought.
jonolikespie wrote: Runic wrote:There you have it. Just communicate and be ready to compromise and you'll be fine. The end.
AKA exactly what the rulebook tells players to do.
Yeah but given the choice between doing that and not having to do that, all else equal I think I'll play the game that doesn't make me do that.
It's a legitimate fix certainly, but it's still a fix, meaning something is broken.
Well, it is what it is atleast for now. Too bad.
For me it went the other way around. I got plain bored of Warmachine & Hordes, with scenarios ending with a casterkill 80% of the time, atleast in tournaments, and the games occasionally being cut to few turns in length. I tried getting a few friends to play aswell, but they decided to quit as they realized they would be in for hundreds of those matches, until they basically knew what every model in the game does so they won't get surprised in a match ending way (the infamous "Gotcha!" -factor of WM/H, in my experience the biggest turnoff for new players.)
|
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2016/01/16 10:12:35
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/16 09:48:12
Subject: How does one even play this game anymore?
|
 |
Norn Queen
|
tyrannosaurus wrote:I had a similar problem to the OP, and was very close to giving up on the whole tabletop wargaming thing.
Step 1 - Ebayed my 40k models.
Step 2 - Re-invested the money in a balanced game with a tight ruleset [my choice was Infinity].
Step 3 - Had lots of fun and re-discovered my passion for this strange little hobby.
Step 4 - Mentally berated myself for all of the time wasted in preparing for and playing a game with a shockingly bad ruleset [including all of the time trying to negotiate how the game was going to be played on each occasion].
It's difficult to appreciate just how outdated and poorly thought out the 40k ruleset is until you try something new.
This is about how it went for me. Except I didn't ebay my stuff because I still think Tyranids are the best realised range of aliens a company has made. I just wish I could afford some of the new stuff.
Then additionally, when I realised how much I was getting for Infinity with the money I used to spend on 40k, I had two very sizeable collections for different armies, so I branched into another game. Then another. Then board games.
40k is so, so expensive to keep up with. You can fuel multiple games with the same money.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/16 11:35:47
Subject: How does one even play this game anymore?
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
England
|
The game is fethed amd completely unbalanced. Unless you arrange with your opponent what you will both be using before the game. Which is sad an rules out tourney play for all but the uber-competative who get to play all the time.
Sometimes your army just cant beat the opponents too.
Most advice seems to point towards expensive FW stuff too, how are you supposed to know all their rules too? Rather than the codex being useful its now only half of it, yet it is the only readily available book to flick through at the store.
Oh well, the Warmachine rulebook is free atm so thats a better option for high end events.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/16 12:12:39
Subject: How does one even play this game anymore?
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Runic wrote:
For me it went the other way around. I got plain bored of Warmachine & Hordes, with scenarios ending with a casterkill 80% of the time, atleast in tournaments, and the games occasionally being cut to few turns in length.
How many of those caster kills were forced by scenario pressure though? I've never seen scenarios not be a factor in a game of warmachine.
And to be fair, some people enjoy being able to get in a quick game.  I'd rather than than four hours of dice rolling which is what 40k and the various flavours of historicals I play can boil down to.
Runic wrote:
I tried getting a few friends to play aswell, but they decided to quit as they realized they would be in for hundreds of those matches, until they basically knew what every model in the game does so they won't get surprised in a match ending way (the infamous "Gotcha!" -factor of WM/H, in my experience the biggest turnoff for new players.)
Horses for courses to be fair. I dunno about this runic. In my experience with getting folks into the game, the steep learning curve of the game is actually an attractive feature. It's often sold that it's a gauntlet we all go through to earn our wings. That learning curve, the fact that experience counts for so much (in for hundreds of games and so on) the fact that there is so much going on, and so many intricate little synergies and things happening is quite a hook. As was told to me, 'You earn your wins' essentially, rather than just being the guy who wins because the codex he likes is a power build. As much as I am happy, willing and able to make forty-k work, I found warmachine to be quite empowering compared to it. I doubt I'm the only one.
Thst said, There is nothing wrong with not wanting to put all that effort in though to get good, and just get on with playing a game. This is a player thing as much as it is anything else though.
Runic wrote:I just somehow don't plain understand how some seem to struggle in playing the game in a way they want to.
GW has, for a long time now, declared they want nothing to do with the competitive scene, and encourage players ( even in the rulebook ) to adjust the game to have fun. It somehow seems some people are just plain unable to do this, and then become bitter eventhough they themselves played a part in making things more difficult than actually they need to be.
It is in essence paradoxical to want everything to be done by the book, yet ignore this very thing, written in the book. I guess it's possible you just can't find anyone, just seems very unlikely that it simply cannot be done ( imo.) Tournaments aside, they have preset rules and you go in knowing what is to come. If a person themselves doesn't want to compromise, and wants this one singular thing and accepts nothing else when there are hundreds of thousands of players around with different tastes then I don't know. Will be a tough road, and a self inflicted one at that.
If the largest events in the world are fine with adjusting the game to make it more sensible, why aren't "you?" It is only as difficult as one makes it. Personally I have always found people who are willing to compromise, or plain agree the way you want to play. Occasionally I play the way they want to play, it's not the end of the world. I have, never, met a person who says "no way, never"" -when leaving the superheavies home or making a rerollable 2++ more sensible has been suggested.
I don't know. Just not an issue whatsoever altogether in my experience. Could be a cultural thing, I'm in the impression it's considered embarrassing to be stubborn about something this trivial where I live. You have to do this with other wargames aswell, just not always to the same extent. TFG's are always bad news, the platform hardly matters. Discuss the lists and details beforehand and if you can't come to a conclusion, just politely decline from playing ( ...or crush them at their own game.  )
You know, I agree wit you here. You can make forty-k work like this. I enjoy home brewed games immensely - we do this with flames of war, infinity and various historicals ourselves. But, and there is a but here - it's often quite hazardous. There are a lot of hoops to jump through to get this to work, and frankly, quite a few consequences too. It takes a lot of organisation and forethought and input (and sometimes, it's nice to not have to do this, and just be able to play the game). You need a group of like minded people, often on the same general wavelength to make this work in the first place, which can often risk fracturing the community into independent 'cells', and the requirement for a 'negotiation phase' to make things work can often severely hamper pick up games and tournaments. For me, while its workable on the local scale, the second you try and push this beyond a small group of friends on a local level, it becomes like herding cats, because everyone wants something different and everyone is playing something different, and essentially, what I bring to the table can potentially arbitrarily be defined as either illegal or probably immoral at best. Having functional and balanced rules straight out of the box facilitates ease of play and a reduction in noise and argument. Ease of play facilitates pick up gaming and organised play. For me, it's the lack of a universal common ground that is potentially the biggest consequence. It makes things harder for the community at large, although individual groups might be happy out with their tske on things (and more power to them).
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/01/16 12:23:42
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/16 12:20:29
Subject: How does one even play this game anymore?
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
Let me say this: I am a treadhead. I love me some tanks.
If someone can name a game that lets me field tank companies in 28mm, with a big-mother centerpiece super tank like a Baneblade or Ordinatua, then I will give that game a shot.
Till then, I will stick to Ogre, Flames of War, and 40k and honestly, despite what people say about "other games being better and you don't know till you try something besides 40k", 40k is the best of the trio imo.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/16 14:18:46
Subject: How does one even play this game anymore?
|
 |
Battlewagon Driver with Charged Engine
|
Deadnight wrote:How many of those caster kills were forced by scenario pressure though? I've never seen scenarios not be a factor in a game of warmachine.
Doesn't really matter to me, I find the scenario being irrelevant in the end quite dull all the same.
Deadnight wrote:Thst said, There is nothing wrong with not wanting to put all that effort in though to get good, and just get on with playing a game. This is a player thing as much as it is anything else though.
I personally understand them completely. Having played since MK1 I have no issues with knowing what does what, but imagine it feels like a waste of time to set up for a game only to be blown apart by a single reactive ability/assassination with no way to prevent it aside from knowing the rules of another players army from memory.
Deadnight wrote:Having functional and balanced rules straight out of the box facilitates ease of play and a reduction in noise and argument. Ease of play facilitates pick up gaming and organised play. For me, it's the lack of a universal common ground that is potentially the biggest consequence. It makes things harder for the community at large, although individual groups might be happy out with their tske on things (and more power to them).
Yep, they do indeed. 40K requires communication before the game, probably more than many other games. However, Bolt Action and Infinity also have grounds for some really unbalanced games if the opposite ends of the player spectrum meet. The only game I have personally played, and of which I therefore speak that hasn't got large issues in the matter is WM/H. In it too however you can easily crush a casual player by bringing a hyper competitive list. That said, on average pickup games are more even than in 40K thanks to the relatively balanced rules.
Don't think I have much to add, the three choices available to someone who wishes to play 40K in their own way have been listed before. Communicate & compromise, don't compromise and continue banging ones head against the wall, or stop completely. Don't know why anyone would choose the second one but I'm pretty sure I'm seeing people around who have chosen that very road.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/01/16 14:24:13
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/16 15:52:11
Subject: How does one even play this game anymore?
|
 |
Inspiring Icon Bearer
|
As an avid board game player and the OP of the thread, the answer I've come to in light of my latest really fun game was kind of simple. Reduce the game. Galaxy Truckers was a favorite game of mine before they added the 3rd and 4th expansions. King of Tokyo was good fun for my young daughters, but evolutions confused them. Pokemon cards was something they really enjoyed with their old cards, but they liked less and less and EX Pokes and Mega-Evolutions started creeping in. The solution for all of these was to reduce the game. We stuck to expansions 1 and 2 for Galaxy Truckers. We played box-only King of Tokyo. We stopped using the more tech savy pokemon cards, and we enjoyed these games again. To answer my original question, "How does one even play this game anymore?" , the answer is similar but less digestable. Reduce the game. "Sorry, I really don't like playing with Superheavies, Gargantuan Creatures, or super formations. I'm looking for a smaller, simpler game.' Is this perfect? No. I might not find anyone to meet those guidelines and be assed out that day, with no game. This is certainly disappointing and might hurt my desire to keep trying to play 40k. It's also not really fair to the guy who bought an army of Knights, because he -is- fielding a legal and legitimate army. It reminds me of how I felt when I bought Grey Knights in 5th because of how cool the Grey Knights from Warhammer: Dawn of War were. They were still Demonhunters when I bought them, but when they gained power, I remember being kind of mad when people were like, "I don't want to play your army.", even though I had no Paladins or Stormravens. Still, you can't enjoy a game thinking only about your opponents like and dislikes. You have to consider yourself too. And haggling is a thing. And I don't mind allies or flyers or any of the rules therein. Back on topic though, what I've done is eliminate three pressures. 1. The monetary pressure of feeling like I have to keep buying new stuff until I can field 2500 points. 2. The time pressure of feeling like I can never paint the whole army. If I can play 1250 and have a fun, full 2 hour game, that's enough for me. I can add a little to it as time goes on if I want, but the initial "wall of grey" effect is reduced. 3. The resentment pressure of feeling like my army cannot compete in an environment of superheavies and decurion formations or all the other new crazy in the game. Playing with cultist chaos in unregulated 40ks current meta is like playing chess without a queen or bishops. It's nice to feel like I have a fair shot. I have fun joking about the death of droves of cultists anyways, so I don't mind losing every game as long as I can see where I might have won had something been different. There's so many 40k players, odds are good I should find one person willing to de-escalate the game. If not, that's why I have board games and other hobbies for game-store night.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/01/16 15:57:08
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/16 15:55:22
Subject: How does one even play this game anymore?
|
 |
Hacking Proxy Mk.1
|
Unit1126PLL wrote:Let me say this: I am a treadhead. I love me some tanks.
If someone can name a game that lets me field tank companies in 28mm, with a big-mother centerpiece super tank like a Baneblade or Ordinatua, then I will give that game a shot.
Till then, I will stick to Ogre, Flames of War, and 40k and honestly, despite what people say about "other games being better and you don't know till you try something besides 40k", 40k is the best of the trio imo.
I don't know if it's played much but bolt action had an all tank supplement and tigers get pretty friken huge. Plus you don't need to use the cheap, simple, bolt action tanks, you can get the amazingly detailed Tamyia ones with metal barrels and brass etch.
*Edit*
Oh and it's not 28mm, but it's also not 15mm so I'm not sure what the scale is but Team Yankee made an appearance in my FLGS with lots of tanks, I believe it is the same rules as FoW but upscaled and played as a 1980s era cold war spilling over into alt history WWIII.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/01/16 16:03:09
Fafnir wrote:Oh, I certainly vote with my dollar, but the problem is that that is not enough. The problem with the 'vote with your dollar' response is that it doesn't take into account why we're not buying the product. I want to enjoy 40k enough to buy back in. It was my introduction to traditional games, and there was a time when I enjoyed it very much. I want to buy 40k, but Gamesworkshop is doing their very best to push me away, and simply not buying their product won't tell them that. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/16 17:08:09
Subject: How does one even play this game anymore?
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
I don't know how you can claim scenario doesn't matter. scenario play was so overpowered that they had to nerf the two strongest scenario casters in the game (Denny 2 and H2).
Even now, elemental evolution and the new tier list for trolls are considered quite good due to AD giving them scenario pressure. Scenario is huge in competitive war machine. Caster kill is more common, but it usually results from scenario pressure or attrition advantage.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/16 17:24:20
Subject: Re:How does one even play this game anymore?
|
 |
Abel
|
Whenever I belly up to the table, I gird my loins beforehand for the whatever bile and vomit list my opponent might bring to the table. Sometimes I'm pleasantly surprised and enjoy the game. Other times, I walk over to the beer fridge and start drinking heavily during the match.
Anymore it just feels like too extreme of a game. I either have a good game, or I want to go drink heavily and punch babies/kick a kitty.
|
Kara Sloan shoots through Time and Design Space for a Negative Play Experience |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/16 17:32:22
Subject: How does one even play this game anymore?
|
 |
Shas'o Commanding the Hunter Kadre
Olympia, WA
|
War Machine is fun. It's just not the same type of game. Its more like playing 3D Magic.
c-c-c-c-combo breaker!
I like War Machine but I play it for entirely different reasons than Warhammer, and it has zilch to do with it being "better". It isn't. It's too different to compare them.
Flames of War is more comparable. I happen to enjoy the incredible job of balance the Flames of War game provides. It's incredibly hard to find, among all the games I do play, a better tournament game.
Warhammer, though is a far more interesting game than most I play. the magnitude of the variety in lists I have seen is mind boggling and i love that.
It's grown in actual rules but the game is still essentially one of learning what things do and getting better all the time like it always has been. Even before the deluge of rules lately, it is quite common for people not to be some kind of expert on every single codex. Most people focus on a couple armies they know exceedingly well and theres always table discussion about rules just because there are so many. It is only unhealthy if your opponent is a defensive D-bag about it.
=)
|
Hold out bait to entice the enemy. Feign disorder, and then crush him.
-Sun Tzu, the Art of War
http://www.40kunorthodoxy.blogspot.com
7th Ambassadorial Grand Tournament Registration: http://40kambassadors.com/register.php |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/16 22:17:09
Subject: How does one even play this game anymore?
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Runic wrote:
Yep, they do indeed. 40K requires communication before the game, probably more than many other games. However, Bolt Action and Infinity also have grounds for some really unbalanced games if the opposite ends of the player spectrum meet. The only game I have personally played, and of which I therefore speak that hasn't got large issues in the matter is WM/H. In it too however you can easily crush a casual player by bringing a hyper competitive list. That said, on average pickup games are more even than in 40K thanks to the relatively balanced rules.
Don't think I have much to add, the three choices available to someone who wishes to play 40K in their own way have been listed before. Communicate & compromise, don't compromise and continue banging ones head against the wall, or stop completely. Don't know why anyone would choose the second one but I'm pretty sure I'm seeing people around who have chosen that very road.
I have to disagree on your point about Infinity. There's a thread on the Infinity forums where very experienced players take a randomly generated list against a less experienced player who takes a list tailored for that particular scenario. I think it's currently 2:1 to the experienced player with random list. I took a QK list based upon the list of the winner of Interplanetario against a friend of mine who was much less experienced, and using the USAriadna starter. Some stupid decisions on my part and it was a romp for my friend. I played another game against a really experienced Infinity player recently [I'm pretty new to the game] and, due to some [surprisingly] intelligent play on my part, gained maximum points. It doesn't matter what list you take, it's how you use it. That's how a game should work - player skill [or lack of] is the most important factor.
In terms of arranging a game for Infinity, the only questions are "what points level?" and "which scenario?" That's it. Actually, the first question only becomes relevant if one side chooses to play below 300 points as 300 is such a recognised standard points level. Before I quit 40k it would take days of negotiation and compromise to arrange a game [and that was with a group of friends].
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/17 00:15:17
Subject: How does one even play this game anymore?
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
tyrannosaurus wrote: Runic wrote:
Yep, they do indeed. 40K requires communication before the game, probably more than many other games. However, Bolt Action and Infinity also have grounds for some really unbalanced games if the opposite ends of the player spectrum meet. The only game I have personally played, and of which I therefore speak that hasn't got large issues in the matter is WM/H. In it too however you can easily crush a casual player by bringing a hyper competitive list. That said, on average pickup games are more even than in 40K thanks to the relatively balanced rules.
Don't think I have much to add, the three choices available to someone who wishes to play 40K in their own way have been listed before. Communicate & compromise, don't compromise and continue banging ones head against the wall, or stop completely. Don't know why anyone would choose the second one but I'm pretty sure I'm seeing people around who have chosen that very road.
I have to disagree on your point about Infinity. There's a thread on the Infinity forums where very experienced players take a randomly generated list against a less experienced player who takes a list tailored for that particular scenario. I think it's currently 2:1 to the experienced player with random list. I took a QK list based upon the list of the winner of Interplanetario against a friend of mine who was much less experienced, and using the USAriadna starter. Some stupid decisions on my part and it was a romp for my friend. I played another game against a really experienced Infinity player recently [I'm pretty new to the game] and, due to some [surprisingly] intelligent play on my part, gained maximum points. It doesn't matter what list you take, it's how you use it. That's how a game should work - player skill [or lack of] is the most important factor.
In terms of arranging a game for Infinity, the only questions are "what points level?" and "which scenario?" That's it. Actually, the first question only becomes relevant if one side chooses to play below 300 points as 300 is such a recognised standard points level. Before I quit 40k it would take days of negotiation and compromise to arrange a game [and that was with a group of friends].
So if this is the case, then there must be no strategy in army building; everything is so balanced that it is samey, it sounds like - randomly generated lists being able to beat intelligently built and tailored lists just tells me that there is no list building strategy at all.
Also, TFGs utterly killed Infinity in the local scene, doing things like deploying speculative fire weapons like grenades and Katyushas in solid buildings with no windows or doors and speculatively firing out of them.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/17 00:43:10
Subject: How does one even play this game anymore?
|
 |
Heroic Senior Officer
|
Balanced =/= samey
I weep for anyone who could honestly think that, you need to play more games man.
I've played a couple infinity demos and the armies definitely play differently, it just means you have options. As a game should be.
Variety is pointless if only a couple of units in your army are worth a damn, which is why 40k has gotten so samey. Yes, there are hundreds of options in your codex, but will you really take very many, given how blatantly varied the power of those upgrades are?
|
'I've played Guard for years, and the best piece of advice is to always utilize the Guard's best special rule: "we roll more dice than you" ' - stormleader
"Sector Imperialis: 25mm and 40mm Round Bases (40+20) 26€ (Including 32 skulls for basing) " GW design philosophy in a nutshell |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/17 11:29:13
Subject: How does one even play this game anymore?
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Unit1126PLL wrote:
So if this is the case, then there must be no strategy in army building; everything is so balanced that it is samey, it sounds like - randomly generated lists being able to beat intelligently built and tailored lists just tells me that there is no list building strategy at all.
Also, TFGs utterly killed Infinity in the local scene, doing things like deploying speculative fire weapons like grenades and Katyushas in solid buildings with no windows or doors and speculatively firing out of them.
It's more the case that, while an intelligent and tailored list can give you the edge, it's not as important as player skill. In addition, nearly any list can be successful [with a few caveats, for example the need to include specialists] as long as it is played well. This means that every unit is valid. Can the same be said about 40K?
One of the things I love about Infinity is that I have only scratched the surface. I've found some decent lists and strategies with my Qapu Kalkhi, but have hardly used my vanilla Haqq or Hassassin Bahram. And the best thing? They can all be successful lists once I learn how to use them well.
In reply to your negative experience of Infinity, that's a real shame. My experience is that it almost forces you to play in a friendly way as, for example, you will be asking your opponent whether they have LoS quite a lot. If they for some reason refused to tell you, then they would be gimping themselves as you, in return, wouldn't tell them. Unlikely crits also make for hilarity. such as when my opponent needed 1s to hit in a F2F with my sniper who needed 15s, and rolled two 1s to crit twice. I find Infinity to be conducive to a very genial gaming experience. Finally, if they pull the bs with the grenades again, don't forget that ani-materiel can be used to destroy walls...
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/17 11:50:32
Subject: How does one even play this game anymore?
|
 |
Battlewagon Driver with Charged Engine
|
Akiasura wrote:Even now, elemental evolution and the new tier list for trolls are considered quite good due to AD giving them scenario pressure. Scenario is huge in competitive war machine. Caster kill is more common, but it usually results from scenario pressure or attrition advantage.
And in the end the scenario in itself becomes factually irrelevant as nothing pertaining to it matters after your caster is dead, which again, I find boring, and that's that.
tyrannosaurus wrote:I have to disagree on your point about Infinity. There's a thread on the Infinity forums where very experienced players take a randomly generated list against a less experienced player who takes a list tailored for that particular scenario. I think it's currently 2:1 to the experienced player with random list. I took a QK list based upon the list of the winner of Interplanetario against a friend of mine who was much less experienced, and using the USAriadna starter. Some stupid decisions on my part and it was a romp for my friend. I played another game against a really experienced Infinity player recently [I'm pretty new to the game] and, due to some [surprisingly] intelligent play on my part, gained maximum points. It doesn't matter what list you take, it's how you use it. That's how a game should work - player skill [or lack of] is the most important factor.
In terms of arranging a game for Infinity, the only questions are "what points level?" and "which scenario?" That's it. Actually, the first question only becomes relevant if one side chooses to play below 300 points as 300 is such a recognised standard points level. Before I quit 40k it would take days of negotiation and compromise to arrange a game [and that was with a group of friends].
Having a random list hardly disproves a good player decimating a casual/beginner with a list of their choosing, which was my point. If a competitive players brings a competitive list of their choosing in Infinity against a "lesser" player, they are able to crush him with ease.
Ofcourse taking a random list makes it more even... that's obvious.
I also think saying setting up a game took -days- of negotiation is exaggeration, or then you had some really punctual friends. I never had to negotiate more than 5 minutes at most.
I also can't see why having your armylist being a big factor next to player skill is a problem. That's just one view, and no more correct than another. This varies per game, and it being a bad or good thing is only a matter of taste, nothing more. There's just no way argumenting around that, altough I'm sure someone will try. But ah, whatever. This discussion is already pointless. There's people who are able to play WH40K in an enjoyable way and there's people who cannot.
|
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2016/01/17 12:02:34
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/17 12:47:14
Subject: How does one even play this game anymore?
|
 |
Hacking Proxy Mk.1
|
Runic wrote:Having a random list hardly disproves a good player decimating a casual/beginner with a list of their choosing, which was my point. If a competitive players brings a competitive list of their choosing in Infinity against a "lesser" player, they are able to crush him with ease.
You know some people like, dare I even say strongly prefer, a game were player skill is important and the results aren't down to random dice rolls. An experienced chess player is going to mop the floor with a noob, but that has not hurt the long term popularity of the game.
|
Fafnir wrote:Oh, I certainly vote with my dollar, but the problem is that that is not enough. The problem with the 'vote with your dollar' response is that it doesn't take into account why we're not buying the product. I want to enjoy 40k enough to buy back in. It was my introduction to traditional games, and there was a time when I enjoyed it very much. I want to buy 40k, but Gamesworkshop is doing their very best to push me away, and simply not buying their product won't tell them that. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/17 13:18:35
Subject: How does one even play this game anymore?
|
 |
Battlewagon Driver with Charged Engine
|
jonolikespie wrote: Runic wrote:Having a random list hardly disproves a good player decimating a casual/beginner with a list of their choosing, which was my point. If a competitive players brings a competitive list of their choosing in Infinity against a "lesser" player, they are able to crush him with ease.
You know some people like, dare I even say strongly prefer, a game were player skill is important and the results aren't down to random dice rolls. An experienced chess player is going to mop the floor with a noob, but that has not hurt the long term popularity of the game.
It's as if you were implying that skill doesn't matter in Warhammer 40,000. Couldn't be further from the truth. It matters, a lot. The games are down to player skill way more than they are to random dice rolls when good players are involved and the lists even. Last week I took a game against a Space Marine player who has half my games under his belt, the toughest thing in my army was a single Riptide. He had only Gravbikes, Tigurius and Centurions in Drop Pods, and Smashbane. I still won. He made some choices that caused him to lose the game in the end, which had nothing to do with dice. We played a hybrid mission with Maelstrom of War + Eternal War, ITC style.. My list didn't beat him, and my dice didn't beat him, it came down to player skill and know-how, and ability to plan ahead (which is a part of skill afaic.)
That, or you missed the point completely. It was about veterans having more equalized matches against beginners in Infinity using a randomly generated list having nothing to do with the fact that a veteran can still crush such a beginner with a competitive list of his own devising. By using that argument you could claim Warhammer 40,000 is balanced because veterans using randomly generated lists have more even matches against beginners (it's the exact same thing, afterall.)
I just see players often who had a realistic chance at winning a game but they botch it by playing poorly. It's easy to blame your army/opponents army/dice in WH40K as the balance is unstable, but often those factors are given too much credit when one should just look at his play and realize it's him who is losing the games by just not having a clue.
|
This message was edited 8 times. Last update was at 2016/01/17 13:55:00
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/17 13:39:09
Subject: Re:How does one even play this game anymore?
|
 |
Fixture of Dakka
West Michigan, deep in Whitebread, USA
|
Ah 7th edition 40K, a game involving everything that's great about Epic 40K, at a price point 1,000 times higher with rules that much more cumbersome.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/01/17 13:41:55
"By this point I'm convinced 100% that every single race in the 40k universe have somehow tapped into the ork ability to just have their tech work because they think it should." |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/17 14:23:59
Subject: How does one even play this game anymore?
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Runic wrote:Akiasura wrote:Even now, elemental evolution and the new tier list for trolls are considered quite good due to AD giving them scenario pressure. Scenario is huge in competitive war machine. Caster kill is more common, but it usually results from scenario pressure or attrition advantage.
And in the end the scenario in itself becomes factually irrelevant as nothing pertaining to it matters after your caster is dead, which again, I find boring, and that's that.
If you find it boring, that's fine, but let's not make things up that are certainly not true.
Body and soul, a list that was sweeping the competitive scene for over a year, won entirely on scenario. H2, considered the most competitive caster in the game for 3+ years, usually won on scenario. Many casters in the game win on attrition at the competitive level, since caster kills are usually unable to be performed until a good chunk of the army is dead. If you read battle reports for competitive games, scenario pressure is huge and what drives their decisions from the start.
It's certainly not "factually irrelevant" because your caster is important. You could make the same argument against 40k ( VPs don't matter if you get tabled) but it doesn't mean that VPs won't influence your decisions or list design.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/17 14:30:15
Subject: How does one even play this game anymore?
|
 |
Dark Angels Librarian with Book of Secrets
|
Thunderfrog wrote:So here I am, considering re-entering the game again and I don't even know where to start. I don't want to by an army by formation, but that seems the only way to play anymore... maximizing the best formation bonuses for as much free/power spam as you can get.
Play beer and pretzel games until you get back into the swing of things.
GW has changed the way armies are built from the traditional CaD to formations. This is done on their part to help balance things. If one army is particularly weak, just released a new formation with detachments in a supplement that buffs a specific unit.
At least that seems to be the theory. In practice GW still does not playtest everything as deeply as they should and the balance is still out of wack. Seriously, when will GW just hire 50 of the top NOVA players to playtest their stuff?
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/17 16:11:57
Subject: How does one even play this game anymore?
|
 |
Fixture of Dakka
|
jonolikespie wrote: Runic wrote:Having a random list hardly disproves a good player decimating a casual/beginner with a list of their choosing, which was my point. If a competitive players brings a competitive list of their choosing in Infinity against a "lesser" player, they are able to crush him with ease.
You know some people like, dare I even say strongly prefer, a game were player skill is important and the results aren't down to random dice rolls. An experienced chess player is going to mop the floor with a noob, but that has not hurt the long term popularity of the game.
What about poker? That game is almost purely random and on luck. Also you need skill as well. It seems random hasn't hurt that game either and has been around for more than a century as well.
So you can have random in the game and also have skill to play it as well. Automatically Appended Next Post: labmouse42 wrote:
At least that seems to be the theory. In practice GW still does not playtest everything as deeply as they should and the balance is still out of wack. Seriously, when will GW just hire 50 of the top NOVA players to playtest their stuff?
How will 50 people who must win with plastic toy soldiers balance a game? All these people do is take the best options. If these people were really that good, they should be using sub par units, and sub par options because then they will really know what balance is. No, they just take the easiest and best options in most cases and wouldn't balance 40K anymore than GW can.
What people are forgetting is a balanced game or a balanced codex is when you have great options and crappy options. Problem is, people who must win with plastic toy soldiers are using allies now, so they don't have to use the crappy options in both codices now. So how is that balanced? Take the good with the bad. Right now, everyone is just taking the good.
Also why NOVA? What makes them so good than say anyone else?
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/01/17 16:19:28
Agies Grimm:The "Learn to play, bro" mentality is mostly just a way for someone to try to shame you by implying that their metaphorical nerd-wiener is bigger than yours. Which, ironically, I think nerds do even more vehemently than jocks.
Everything is made up and the points don't matter. 40K or Who's Line is it Anyway?
Auticus wrote: Or in summation: its ok to exploit shoddy points because those are rules and gamers exist to find rules loopholes (they are still "legal"), but if the same force can be composed without structure, it emotionally feels "wrong". |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/17 16:59:44
Subject: How does one even play this game anymore?
|
 |
Hacking Proxy Mk.1
|
Davor wrote: jonolikespie wrote: Runic wrote:Having a random list hardly disproves a good player decimating a casual/beginner with a list of their choosing, which was my point. If a competitive players brings a competitive list of their choosing in Infinity against a "lesser" player, they are able to crush him with ease.
You know some people like, dare I even say strongly prefer, a game were player skill is important and the results aren't down to random dice rolls. An experienced chess player is going to mop the floor with a noob, but that has not hurt the long term popularity of the game.
What about poker? That game is almost purely random and on luck. Also you need skill as well. It seems random hasn't hurt that game either and has been around for more than a century as well.
So you can have random in the game and also have skill to play it as well.
I think professional poker players who spend a lot of time learning to bluff and tell when someone is bluffing would disagree with your assessment of the role luck plays in that game
|
Fafnir wrote:Oh, I certainly vote with my dollar, but the problem is that that is not enough. The problem with the 'vote with your dollar' response is that it doesn't take into account why we're not buying the product. I want to enjoy 40k enough to buy back in. It was my introduction to traditional games, and there was a time when I enjoyed it very much. I want to buy 40k, but Gamesworkshop is doing their very best to push me away, and simply not buying their product won't tell them that. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/17 18:14:55
Subject: How does one even play this game anymore?
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Runic wrote:
It's as if you were implying that skill doesn't matter in Warhammer 40,000. Couldn't be further from the truth. It matters, a lot. The games are down to player skill way more than they are to random dice rolls when good players are involved and the lists even.
.
'Where the lists are even' being the fundamental problem here. Getting to that point in 40k is problematic. The codices in 40k are terribly balanced You can have all the talents of sun tzu and often if will not help you. Now yes, you can 'do the negotiation' phase and compromise yourself into a game that might be 'acceptable', but to a lot of people, Being able to just get on with the bloody game without needing your opponent to acquiesce and enable you to do this is preferable. And they're not wrong for wanting that.
Davor wrote:
How will 50 people who must win with plastic toy soldiers balance a game? All these people do is take the best options. If these people were really that good, they should be using sub par units, and sub par options because then they will really know what balance is. No, they just take the easiest and best options in most cases and wouldn't balance 40K anymore than GW can.
Here's the thing - they know what's works and what doesn't, where there are problems and where there is room for improvement. Saying they'll just take the best options is really just missing the point. These are the people that will put a system through its paces, play rough with it, push it to its limits and find the weak points, grey areas and other areas where there are issues. This is called 'play testing'. Then take the feedback. The designers can then add, change and improve as required to make a robust game. Simples
Davor wrote:
What people are forgetting is a balanced game or a balanced codex is when you have great options and crappy options. Problem is, people who must win with plastic toy soldiers are using allies now, so they don't have to use the crappy options in both codices now. So how is that balanced? Take the good with the bad. Right now, everyone is just taking the good.
No. You have it completely backwards here. It's quite the opposite in fact. A balanced game is not one with great options and crappy options - that, by definition is a poorly balanced game. A balanced game is one where all the game pieces have value, and 'have game' essentially. When everything is playable and viable, you generate real variety and choice. Let's also not make the mistake of saying balanced equals homogenous. Because that is simply not true either When the game has good options and crappy ones, People simply gravitate to the good ones, the bad ones might as well not exist, and you end up with the illusion of choice and a very skewed and poorly realised gaming landscape, along with a frustrated player base.
Right now, everyone just taking the good is symptomatic of a poorly balanced game.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/19 11:37:27
Subject: How does one even play this game anymore?
|
 |
Veteran Inquisitorial Tyranid Xenokiller
|
Deadnight wrote:Runic wrote:
It's as if you were implying that skill doesn't matter in Warhammer 40,000. Couldn't be further from the truth. It matters, a lot. The games are down to player skill way more than they are to random dice rolls when good players are involved and the lists even.
.
'Where the lists are even' being the fundamental problem here. Getting to that point in 40k is problematic. The codices in 40k are terribly balanced You can have all the talents of sun tzu and often if will not help you. Now yes, you can 'do the negotiation' phase and compromise yourself into a game that might be 'acceptable', but to a lot of people, Being able to just get on with the bloody game without needing your opponent to acquiesce and enable you to do this is preferable. And they're not wrong for wanting that.
Davor wrote:
How will 50 people who must win with plastic toy soldiers balance a game? All these people do is take the best options. If these people were really that good, they should be using sub par units, and sub par options because then they will really know what balance is. No, they just take the easiest and best options in most cases and wouldn't balance 40K anymore than GW can.
Here's the thing - they know what's works and what doesn't, where there are problems and where there is room for improvement. Saying they'll just take the best options is really just missing the point. These are the people that will put a system through its paces, play rough with it, push it to its limits and find the weak points, grey areas and other areas where there are issues. This is called 'play testing'. Then take the feedback. The designers can then add, change and improve as required to make a robust game. Simples
Davor wrote:
What people are forgetting is a balanced game or a balanced codex is when you have great options and crappy options. Problem is, people who must win with plastic toy soldiers are using allies now, so they don't have to use the crappy options in both codices now. So how is that balanced? Take the good with the bad. Right now, everyone is just taking the good.
No. You have it completely backwards here. It's quite the opposite in fact. A balanced game is not one with great options and crappy options - that, by definition is a poorly balanced game. A balanced game is one where all the game pieces have value, and 'have game' essentially. When everything is playable and viable, you generate real variety and choice. Let's also not make the mistake of saying balanced equals homogenous. Because that is simply not true either When the game has good options and crappy ones, People simply gravitate to the good ones, the bad ones might as well not exist, and you end up with the illusion of choice and a very skewed and poorly realised gaming landscape, along with a frustrated player base.
Right now, everyone just taking the good is symptomatic of a poorly balanced game.
Don't forget the bit about a balanced ruleset also being easier to customise, for those who want to do that sort of thing.
Before people conjure the point of "being forced to talk to your opponent helps customisation".
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/01/19 11:40:14
Brb learning to play.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/19 12:27:31
Subject: How does one even play this game anymore?
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
So what is the threshold for balance, then?
You can never balance an all-Zerker army against an all Baneblade army for example. Even if the Zerker were 1 pt and the baneblade 3500 they still would never be able to stop it or even hurt it.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/19 12:33:36
Subject: How does one even play this game anymore?
|
 |
Dark Angels Librarian with Book of Secrets
|
Davor wrote:How will 50 people who must win with plastic toy soldiers balance a game? All these people do is take the best options. If these people were really that good, they should be using sub par units, and sub par options because then they will really know what balance is. No, they just take the easiest and best options in most cases and wouldn't balance 40K anymore than GW can.
That's a remarkably negative view of the competitive 40k scene.
I'll admit I've met a few of the WAAC players, but they are the minority at big events.
The reason these top players would be good is because they can spot the cheese really quickly and exploit it. Then that cheese could be reduced before the release. Sub-par units could be identified as performing badly.
That's why they would be paid. To find the weaknesses in the rules and help balance them. 50 employees at 50k a year is only 2,500,000 salary before benefits and work space. To a company the size of GW to handle quality control, that's a pittance.
Davor wrote:Also why NOVA? What makes them so good than say anyone else?
The draw. It pulls a huge player base from the east coast -- where the majority of Americans live. Adepticon could do the same. I am not familiar enough with the European circuit to make a good enough call.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/01/19 14:42:20
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/19 13:10:43
Subject: How does one even play this game anymore?
|
 |
Hacking Proxy Mk.1
|
Unit1126PLL wrote:So what is the threshold for balance, then?
You can never balance an all-Zerker army against an all Baneblade army for example. Even if the Zerker were 1 pt and the baneblade 3500 they still would never be able to stop it or even hurt it.
Nor should they, they're an anti infantry unit after all. But those kinds of extremes shouldn't really be a consideration. A 2000 point all comers list for a Khorn army should be able to deal with a 2000 all comers Guard list. If someone fails to take any anti vehicle weapons in their list that is a tactical error on their part, not an inbalance in the game.
|
Fafnir wrote:Oh, I certainly vote with my dollar, but the problem is that that is not enough. The problem with the 'vote with your dollar' response is that it doesn't take into account why we're not buying the product. I want to enjoy 40k enough to buy back in. It was my introduction to traditional games, and there was a time when I enjoyed it very much. I want to buy 40k, but Gamesworkshop is doing their very best to push me away, and simply not buying their product won't tell them that. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/19 13:17:10
Subject: How does one even play this game anymore?
|
 |
Potent Possessed Daemonvessel
|
Or you know GW could run open beta tests like some other companies those see to catch the worst offenders....
As for all Zerker vs all Baneblade. IMO that shouldn't even be an option. But then I'm against super extreme armies and would prefer to see the game reward balanced list building through scenario structure.
|
|
 |
 |
|
|