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.

 Bobthehero wrote:
Don't have to shoot at the nearest target (is that still a thing? Tell me its not a thing!) and could fire at extreme ranges (1.5x range). Only applicable to basic weapons.

From what MWG did, it is still a thing.

5: Marksman
A model with the Marksman skill can ignore the
normal restriction which obliges fighters to shoot at
the nearest target. Instead, he can shoot at any target
he can see.

It meant you could feed them juves to hit while your guys picked off their good ones. Worked with heavy weapons.

The key was to get as much good BS long range marksman in your gang and watch the other guy melt away.

Fantastic news it's gone

Edit: Of course nearest target will still be a thing, it's a foundation of Necromunda

 NivlacSupreme wrote:

 Bobthehero wrote:
Don't have to shoot at the nearest target (is that still a thing? Tell me its not a thing!) and could fire at extreme ranges (1.5x range). Only applicable to basic weapons.

From what MWG did, it is still a thing.

That is good. A big part of the strategy in Necro was positioning your gangers so the opponent would be forced to target the weaker ones first. although that could be mitigated somewhat by the fact that you only had to shoot the closest fighter in LOS, not the closest period. Marksman was broken because it allowed you to pick off the leader, heavy weapons etc first and ignore the weak fighters running towards you screaming. I recently had Marksman on a Heavy with Heavy Plasma and it basically broke the campaign all by itself.

Blergh, that's hell of a stupid rule. Can we ignore it wiht a LD at least?

 Fafnir wrote:
So I got really excited and ended up writing up a first draft for an Inquisitional kill team.

Now, I've yet to even play a game yet, so everything could be wildly off base, since it's mostly based on speculation from looking at the entries for other factions. Things are also a bit long-winded, since it's meant to be a more advanced response to the somewhat limited selection a lot of the official factions have to deal with.

I've tried to add some more diverse specialists, starting with Death Cult Assassins. If people like them, I might try throwing something for diversified specialists for other factions.

Special Operatives are not included yet (Daemonhosts?), and the Ordo Xenos don't get a huge amount of representation since they have fewer easily implementable source books for me to draw from.

So, feel free to take a look at it and let me know what you think. Maybe even test it out if it looks like it might be fun. C&C is appreciated, please be as vicious as you possibly can.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1X571b0souqfurLwtVky943TovnbhLgBHCMZkGexqPbY/edit?usp=sharing

Maybe start a new thread in specialist games section, might get more focus there.
Some comments: Warband size seems small, maybe stick to standard 3-10, leaders can't be replaced anyway so first part of restriction is unnecessary. You've labeled the Throne Agent Specialist as Trooper.
The specialist should only be 10 pts more then trooper.
The death cultist, should be priced more, the Harlequin Virtuoso is 175pts, w/ +2 BS -1 S and +1 Ld and +1 M, maybe 145pts?
All weapons that use user str seem to have a static mod: user+1 rather then user x2, Rad grenades seem too strong for the price, maybe only test once and remove rarity.

It's still a thing as far as I can tell.

 Dravis wrote:

Some comments: Warband size seems small, maybe stick to standard 3-10, leaders can't be replaced anyway so first part of restriction is unnecessary. You've labeled the Throne Agent Specialist as Trooper.

H.B.M.C. wrote:]I genuinely thought your original post was dry sarcasm.

I'm surprised that I was wrong.

There is certainly an element of it. It wasn't a totally off base interpretation.

I guess I just have come to accept GW's business model for what it is, even if it goes against the fact that injection moulded plastics are most efficient when they are for as high volume of production as possible.

Obviously what I think GW should do is make a low model count game that scales up well that doesn't have a huge barrier to entry in terms of price. This isn't quite it, but it had the potential to be that.

Given that it's not though, I think GW should use it to cash in on nostalgia money. Since it is just a game attached to a terrain product launch accompanied by the Kirby-era practice of model bundles with no savings, I think they should go whole hog on the approach. If they're not going to take the time to get ex customers back in a way that keeps them, they may as well try to get what money they can in a single shot.

So yeah, it was dry sarcasm, but also an acceptance of GW's current practices not being as different from the Kirby era as some people like to claim. And I actually see the utility in selling less product at a higher price for some releases.

@Manchu, I also completely agree with you except for the conclusion. I see price as a supply management tool in response to high demand *for this type of product*. They underestimated the effectiveness of their own promotion and the general demand for this type of game whereas if they didn't, I think a more appropriate response for this single product would be to jack up the price and make as much money as they can in a one and done fashion. By the time their promotion of this was going, it was probably too late to change their supply even if they did suddenly get that their marketing and customer communication about this release was actually working.

Obviously the better approach would have been for this game to be a truly supported new product line and not an afterthought to sell some terrain kits and no discount model bundles on their web store. But with new40k on the horizon, I don't think that's necessarily strategically sound.

Imagine if there was suddenly a continually available version of 40k from GW that required a handful of the models of a current edition army and with tight and tested rules for most of the models (not the larger models that are out of scope for such a game). It would be in direct opposition to their move towards selling people on huge games with hordes of smaller models scattered around big monsters and vehicles on 120mm bases.

So now that they know there actually is demand for something like this they need to figure out the best way to sell it that doesn't negatively effect new40k. It really can't be a viable version of 40k that continues as an alternative to new40k. While player's may love that, GW is probably still deathly afraid of cannibalizing their own lines. Even if they're wrong about that, I don't think they'll take the risk.

 Mymearan wrote:

 NivlacSupreme wrote:

 Bobthehero wrote:
Don't have to shoot at the nearest target (is that still a thing? Tell me its not a thing!) and could fire at extreme ranges (1.5x range). Only applicable to basic weapons.

From what MWG did, it is still a thing.

That is good. A big part of the strategy in Necro was positioning your gangers so the opponent would be forced to target the weaker ones first. although that could be mitigated somewhat by the fact that you only had to shoot the closest fighter in LOS, not the closest period. Marksman was broken because it allowed you to pick off the leader, heavy weapons etc first and ignore the weak fighters running towards you screaming. I recently had Marksman on a Heavy with Heavy Plasma and it basically broke the campaign all by itself.

I find it funny that an entire campaign breaks because one dude figured out one of the most basic military tactics.

It takes all skill of positioning out of the game. Necromunda without nearest target would be a totally different game - and I can well imagine a marksman Heavy Plasma completely draining the fun out of a campaign.

They look to have done a good job toning shooting down

Shoot the closest target was already problematic in the original Necromunda because it only applied to models inside your 90* fire arc and so in many cases you could rotate the shooting model to remove the juve meat-shield from your arc. It was one of the rules we play house ruled (1. Choose closest within 90* 2. Rotate firing model to aim directly. 3. If another model in the arc is now closer, that must be targeted instead.)

You still get cover and minus a for BS for using that cover. It may male sense for gangers yo freak out and shoot at the nearest target, but for trained soldiers? (And it only goes up from there and the scale of training)

 Bottle wrote:
Shoot the closest target was already problematic in the original Necromunda because it only applied to models inside your 90* fire arc and so in many cases you could rotate the shooting model to remove the juve meat-shield from your arc. It was one of the rules we play house ruled (1. Choose closest within 90* 2. Rotate firing model to aim directly. 3. If another model in the arc is now closer, that must be targeted instead.)

Arc had nothing to do with closest target (unless you're talking about overwatch).

Closest target, turn to face. Simple.

Guard skills:


I think that almost covers everything.

Never minded the shooting restrictions, sort of counter balances the overuse of overwatch.

If people actually read the overwatch rules they aren't too bad. People frequently get targeting and overwatch wrong though.

The major thing missing is the missions. Hopefully they fixed them up too

Vorian wrote:

 Bottle wrote:
Shoot the closest target was already problematic in the original Necromunda because it only applied to models inside your 90* fire arc and so in many cases you could rotate the shooting model to remove the juve meat-shield from your arc. It was one of the rules we play house ruled (1. Choose closest within 90* 2. Rotate firing model to aim directly. 3. If another model in the arc is now closer, that must be targeted instead.)

Arc had nothing to do with closest target (unless you're talking about overwatch).

Closest target, turn to face. Simple.

I'd have to go through my ORB but that's not how I remember it at all. What were arcs for if you didn't target models in them?

Nope, I'm misremembering the official rules because we ignore it and do 360 sight unless on overwatch. It's going to be hard to unlearn decades of houseruling!

You do the swivelly thing you outlined officially - turn to face nearest in arc, then if anyone else is now nearest turn to face them, and so on.

Hopefully whoever I play agrees to ignore arcs too, they are fiddly things that serve no useful purpose and just introduce judgement calls that can be argued. Those and no pre measuring are the two things I do away with whenever I can

Yeah, they added a bit of strategy because you committed your models to looking a certain direction and if you managed to take out all the threats in that direction early you could be left with no models to shoot with latter gangers. I think the swivel thing might have been added in the LRB, whereas I have always played ORB. Happy to know our house-rule turns out to be the same as a later official ruling!

I think removing the rule can be worthwhile in just speeding up the game, and agree with your houserule that being kept for overwatch is a good call.

The "strategy" is just gamey spinning your model round so you get the best 90 degrees to target who you want though. It's like the even more stupid version of moving behind half a pillar to obscure one target from line if sight!

Luckily it rarely makes any difference

True, but there was also strategy in, 'there are 2 models on my left flank, I could pivot 2 models to face them and hope it's enough or pivot 3 and run the risk of one not having a target'.

I had a look through the rulebook today in my lunch break and it is a beautifully done book! The campaign has a definite win condition too which is cool, earn 15 promethium crates (the max) and then win one more game with 15 in your stash (so no Special Operatives) to win!

Did you notice any difference in the scenarios?

For anyone that played that Kill Team box that released with the Deathguard and the Tau in it, how far removed is this? Is it very similar, or just way way different?

I don't know if you guys noticed, but Shadow War: Armageddon went from Sold Out to Temporarily out of stock, but there is no "email me" button.

There's also no gift list button.

So quick question (and sorry, if it has been mentioned already): in the web shop it's marked as "Currently not available" instead of "No longer available"... So second print run incoming?

Aah... Ninja'ed by nou

nou wrote:
I don't know if you guys noticed, but Shadow War: Armageddon went from Sold Out to Temporarily out of stock, but there is no "email me" button.

I noticed that - it doesn't seem to be on the main entry, but shows 'temporarily out of stock' when you search for it. Wonder if we'll see something more definite later today?

The "Sold Out" overlays have been removed from all the pictures as well.

That has just changed in the last hour or so.
I looked earlier for closer pics at the scenery sprues
(it bugs me that they write SOLD OUT across every image meaning you can't get that clear a view).

I managed to preorder one on Saturday but I wouldn't mind getting another for the scenery savings (plus more orks is never a bad thing).

Sold Out stuff is gone from the OZ website as well.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Sold Out stuff is gone from the OZ website as well.

Second round perhaps? Those people paying upwards of £200 in ebay will be kicking themselves...