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.

I recommend everyone to download the "Necromunda compilations I & II" which is a collection of articles from Citadel Journal, WD, supplements etc with new gangs, rules and most importantly dozens of new scenarios to play. Super fun to try them out and I highly recommend it.

endlesswaltz123 wrote:
If you have the option of playing with a good game master, that person can be a balancing element. The gang that is getting too far ahead and is lethal to all opponents?

Next time two gangs are teaming up and will form one team against them to ambush the gangs HQ.

Maybe they are getting so powerful the Hives upper government is worried they could be a potential threat to overthrow or challenge the chain of command... Well in that case, the GM sends a team of bounty hunters, mercy, local PDF or Arbites kill team into the under hive to route out this seed of heresy before it can truly flourish.

Maybe the noble houses of the upper hive have heard rumours of this dangerous gang, and it is making them salivate at the thought of hunting them, so they sydr suit up and head on down.

All great scenarios. Only problem is NONE of them address the core problem of broken skills, item combinations or simple power leveling of characters turning them into mini SLY MARBOOOOO clones.

Shadow War worked because each faction had a niche or different play style through gear or stats. Name me any player who in a competitive campaign of Necromunda who didn't use the Van Saar's to get the ultra spammy 'inventor' skill on EVERY ganger.

I love Necromunda. But even I had to lay down some SERIOUS house rules while I DM'd a campaign. Out of the 5 people who took part, I had to ask 1 to leave and give a severe gypsy warning to another. First guy was blatantly power gaming and trying to bend the rules for his own purpose. Quickly banned when it was obvious he didn't give a monkeys. Second guy was going against the spirit of the game, by always fighting the weakest gang at the time. After the 3rd game, told him I knew exactly what he was doing and to cut the crap. He started playing within the spirit of it, and became much better because if it.

That's why I'm hoping it's an 8th edition vibe crossed with Shadow Wars rule set. Easier to learn, less scope for douche WAR abuse and very quick FAQ on issues.

Sorry, I wasn't saying my way is the best. It just means when combos are discovered and you get some WAAC guys, or even people who stumble upon them by accident getting too powerful, you can bring them down a peg. And heck, who doesn't love an uber villain who everyone can rally together to tackle.

Powerful combos will always be around in any game, at least in an RPG element, the objective over seer can minimise it slightly, or turn the narrative to get people to work together. And you can't get rid of powerful combo's either otherwise you'd have to get rid of too many options and make the game bland. Some need to be nerved, but not everything.

 Freddy Kruger wrote:
Name me any player who in a competitive campaign of Necromunda who didn't use the Van Saar's to get the ultra spammy 'inventor' skill on EVERY ganger.

What on earth is a "competitive" Necromunda campaign? That's like playing an RPG to win. No one played Van Saar because the models were ugly and the hardest to convert due to their unique style of weaponry.

Anyway, if a new edition ever comes out, you'll just have to rely on Forge World's staff creating a balanced game.

nou wrote:
If you are able to just line up and shoot then you are using not enough terrain. Drastically not enough.

Not really the point I was getting at mate.

I thought Shadow War: Armageddon was pretty underwhelming. However, if a Necromunda re-release fixes that - OR provides new plastic model options (bonus points applied for Arbites)...and possibly brings new plastic terrain to expand the SWA line ---- then I could be okay with it.

Not exaggerating, I think if they did a re-release...80% of the people buying it would be playing old Yaktribe Necromunda in place of a newer rule-set.

I do agree that GW's "nothing without a model" policy would absolutely WRECK a new Necromunda project before it goes anywhere.

PS: To avoid having to make 5-6 gangs, I could easily see this game being "Necromunda: Uprising" featuring a single type of gang vs. Arbites etc. That way you appease all kinds of crowds without having to dedicate yourself- there is no way they'll do more than a couple of plastic releases for Necromunda unless it takes off huge. But a boxed game with a non-descript gang vs. Arbites? Easily an option. You then toss in a dataslate for armed gangers or Arbites to be included in your Imperium 40K games as well. Boop.

AndrewGPaul wrote:

 Freddy Kruger wrote:
Name me any player who in a competitive campaign of Necromunda who didn't use the Van Saar's to get the ultra spammy 'inventor' skill on EVERY ganger.

What on earth is a "competitive" Necromunda campaign? That's like playing an RPG to win. No one played Van Saar because the models were ugly and the hardest to convert due to their unique style of weaponry.

Anyway, if a new edition ever comes out, you'll just have to rely on Forge World's staff creating a balanced game.

I second that question - why on earth every game has to be competetive? Necromunda clearly isn't one.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

nou wrote:
If you are able to just line up and shoot then you are using not enough terrain. Drastically not enough.

Not really the point I was getting at mate.

I simply pointed out, that your experience with unballanced scenarios might, just might be due to innapropriate handling of this game? I never had problems with brokenly one sided scenarios. Even basic Gang Fight is a brain-stretcher on a densely packed terrain. I can get gangs to CC, "all overwatch" isn't a viable strategy on my tables and since you can win games with fresh juves with hand flamers I don't realy see where this "necromunda needs heavy rebalance of scenarios because only Scavengers require anything other than shooting each other" is coming from...

I can do this, I can do that are meaningless. I could play my 6 year old and basically do what I like.

There isn't a need for a competitive game - there is a need for a game which is fun without having to introduce self regulation.

I don't mind a new Necromunda game, but I do mind the million dollar price tag.

GW has the old too hot/ too cold syndrome down to a science.


It will be De ja Vue all over again, when they think people want to drop 500+ for a skirmish game. My local shop still has a gak load of the Shadow War stuff still on the shelves.

WHY? Because of the over-reach-around price. ( I mean, damn, GW- at least take me out to dinner first.)

To the Necromunda WAAC point- If you are playing it that way, you are missing the point. If you can't take a couple of scrub gangers, and use what they have, and struggle- YOU are going to have a bad time of it. You might as well just get a couple of space marines, and go at it with a squad on mission approach, if that pulls that hair.

Of course, you can always do what We used to do, and use your imagination.

Drop in a couple of chaos monsters, drop in a river troll, drop in a plaguebearer/ bloodletter/ pink horror, drop in an IG squad, make missions based on movie scenarios.

Isolate the gangers, put stipulations on- ( One ganger, 5 juves. and loadout.)

Add in subplots, etc.etc.etc... Point being that the scenarios were weak, but the game was so versatile that you can do lots with it with minimal effort to have a good time with it.

The idea was to be able to play with a couple of gangs and have a good time. 1st edition, the game group I played with almost turned it into an obsession. The Second edition missed the mark, and if GW thinks people are in the same position that they were back in 92-96 timeframe, they are sorely missing their market yet again.

The prices have broken peoples backs at this point. They get that under control, they might even keep the few players they have left.

Our favourite was to take the Lord of the Spire Arbitrator scenario (a bit like Total Wipeout, It's a Knockout or Gladiators, but with automatic weaponry), put the Big Red Button on top of a five or six-storey tower, and rule that the ground level was water, so models landing in it weren't injured, and have at it. Sometimes we put an Ork or a Genestealer at the top for a laugh.

We also played using the WYSIWYG rules. That tended to ensure that gangs were made up of models we liked, rather than "optimising" the weapons and equipment. YMMV.

Look, I get that the old SGs weren't perfect, but if you want some radical new gameplay experience please, please just go and play a radical new game and leave one sodding thing for people with fond memories of the older systems.

If you want "AoSheim", play AoS Skirmish or Path to Glory and leave Mordheim alone. If you want "Newcromunda" then wait for the inevitable 40K-ified version of those products that you'll doubtless get once the initial glut of codex releases has passed. You don't need to try appropriating the one solitary aspect of post-Kirby GW's output that is supposed to be catering to vets.

I don't think the general tone of the conversation has been asking for a different game experience at all, to be honest.

 AndrewGPaul wrote:
No one played Van Saar because the models were ugly

A friend of mine once called them a gang of math teachers. Still can't get that out of my head when I look at the models.

They all looked like circus strongmen (or Charles Bronson or Freddy Mercury) to me. Except the Juves, they looked like Bill Clinton.

As far as a new game goes, I want it to be in a new hive on Necromunda, with six new Houses to give us more background material. However, I'd like that new material as well as the old, and I'd be happy for the new gangs to be simple "reskins" of the old ones. The only difference was which of the skill charts all members of a gang had access to, so it would be easy enough to have a different House which aslo has access to Agility skills like House Escher, for instance.

That would provide something new for me, and also allow the people who want to continue in the old setting, but who may be interested in a new set of rules to do so.

One of my all time favorite games, I think only coming a narrow second to BFG.

I choose to Trust and Believe in the new GW, that has, so far, been doing great things. Plastics for Necromunda gangs would be amazing, just think of the conversion potential in them as well. I would love to dust off the Obsidian Sisterhood and give them a repaint.

 Dryaktylus wrote:

 AndrewGPaul wrote:
No one played Van Saar because the models were ugly

A friend of mine once called them a gang of math teachers. Still can't get that out of my head when I look at the models.

My name is a killing word...

 insaniak wrote:
New plastic gangers would certainly be nice, though.

You mean you didn't use those chaos cultists from the 40k starter boxes? They make awesome gangers.

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:
One of my all time favorite games, I think only coming a narrow second to BFG.

I choose to Trust and Believe in the new GW, that has, so far, been doing great things. Plastics for Necromunda gangs would be amazing, just think of the conversion potential in them as well. I would love to dust off the Obsidian Sisterhood and give them a repaint.

Spoiler:

Yeah, that's always been a top artwork. I want a buff Escher heavy like that.

Vorian wrote:
I can do this, I can do that are meaningless. I could play my 6 year old and basically do what I like.

There isn't a need for a competitive game - there is a need for a game which is fun without having to introduce self regulation.

Is having appropriate terrain density a self regulation? I never had a problem with Marksman skill, because it isn't broken on a table with just two or three narrow shooting lanes reaching further than 12" away from a shooter and perfectly represents sniper "movement lanes denial" role.

This is one of those silly things peddled around all the time. Unless you're playing on a table that has literal line of sight blocking (such as a zone mortalis table) then there's always plenty of shots to be had.

Playing on one of those tables is then a totally game which have their own downsides.

There is no reason why a table with plenty of cover providing terrain, which is basically what everybody is actually going to be playing on, can't give you a good game of Necromunda.

Stupid skills like marksman just need to not exist, BS 6 gangers with Infrared sights need not exist, charge ranges from one side of the board to another need not exist. The ambush scenario need not be decided on a few dice rolls at the start.

There are silly little fixable problems that can just be solved easily.

Vorian wrote:
This is one of those silly things peddled around all the time. Unless you're playing on a table that has literal line of sight blocking (such as a zone mortalis table) then there's always plenty of shots to be had.

Playing on one of those tables is then a totally game which have their own downsides.

There is no reason why a table with plenty of cover providing terrain, which is basically what everybody is actually going to be playing on, can't give you a good game of Necromunda.

Stupid skills like marksman just need to not exist, BS 6 gangers with Infrared sights need not exist, charge ranges from one side of the board to another need not exist. The ambush scenario need not be decided on a few dice rolls at the start.

There are silly little fixable problems that can just be solved easily.

You really can't imagine a non-zone mortalis style "continuous wall" tables that provide plentiful of LoS blocking and cover all over the table? Multi-level terrain with a lot of platforms and walkways, small terrain features, random debris, features hanging down from upper levels etc when dense enough provide so much los cut-off points, that it is usually just a partial angle or a narrow line of clear sight from any point on the table. You simply cannot play Necromunda on 40K style table, this game hasn't been designed for that. But it works like charm with proper table as is. Marksman just forces you to utilise Hide rule carefully, infrared sight don't work in overwatch and through solid walls and if it's so long into campaign, that there are BS6 gangers with infrareds, then there are most certainly other gangers with movement, infiltration and CC boosting skills to counter them.

And an ambush scenario is one of those campaign balancing mechanisms mentioned above and voluntary bottle out at second casaulty is a very valid way out of it. Nothing from this list of your needs "fixing". I have an impression, that you expect Necromunda to be ballanced with "standalone missions on minimal terrain setup" 40K-like approach in mind and not with "perpetual RPG-like campaign with a lot of against-all-odds missions in drastically differing conditions" it actually has been designed with.

As many terrain companies as there are, I think people might've gotten a bit lazy. If you only recently started wargaming you might not know but there was a time when most terrain was actually made by players. Foam board from the dollar store, cardboard from boxes, random things from around the house, bits from the bits box, craft paint and if you're lucky some actual flock and maybe .. some water effects of some sort.

Now everything is styrene, mdf, resin, HIPS, HDF, whatever.. I get it.. I have a TON of that stuff.. but one of the things about the old specialist ranges was they taught you to not rely on pre-made.. ready to go type stuff.. since there really wasn't any. You wanted a fight in a crowded city block.. you would make your own. TBH, some of those old terrain pieces were better than a lot of these MDF kits and more durable that most of the plastic and resin stuff.

I hope to see a resurgence of hobby-related focus. One thing GW has gotten "right" over these years, it's building dependence on ready made kits.

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:

Did Patrick Stewart ever have hair?

I'm all for Newcromunda. i'm gonna be scared into preordering so I don't miss it like shadow war armageddon

 Necros wrote:

Spoiler:

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:

Did Patrick Stewart ever have hair?

I'm all for Newcromunda. i'm gonna be scared into preordering so I don't miss it like shadow war armageddon

That's like asking if George Peppard's hair ever had color.

Surely if we get a new Necromunda, it'll be a specialist game and just as available as Blood Bowl still is, no? I mean, it's not Shadow War that builds on the existing 40k range. There won't be more than two gangs in a possible starter set. How could they even support a new Necromunda with a fire and forget release?

nou wrote:

Vorian wrote:
This is one of those silly things peddled around all the time. Unless you're playing on a table that has literal line of sight blocking (such as a zone mortalis table) then there's always plenty of shots to be had.

Playing on one of those tables is then a totally game which have their own downsides.

There is no reason why a table with plenty of cover providing terrain, which is basically what everybody is actually going to be playing on, can't give you a good game of Necromunda.

Stupid skills like marksman just need to not exist, BS 6 gangers with Infrared sights need not exist, charge ranges from one side of the board to another need not exist. The ambush scenario need not be decided on a few dice rolls at the start.

There are silly little fixable problems that can just be solved easily.

You really can't imagine a non-zone mortalis style "continuous wall" tables that provide plentiful of LoS blocking and cover all over the table? Multi-level terrain with a lot of platforms and walkways, small terrain features, random debris, features hanging down from upper levels etc when dense enough provide so much los cut-off points, that it is usually just a partial angle or a narrow line of clear sight from any point on the table. You simply cannot play Necromunda on 40K style table, this game hasn't been designed for that. But it works like charm with proper table as is. Marksman just forces you to utilise Hide rule carefully, infrared sight don't work in overwatch and through solid walls and if it's so long into campaign, that there are BS6 gangers with infrareds, then there are most certainly other gangers with movement, infiltration and CC boosting skills to counter them.

And an ambush scenario is one of those campaign balancing mechanisms mentioned above and voluntary bottle out at second casaulty is a very valid way out of it. Nothing from this list of your needs "fixing". I have an impression, that you expect Necromunda to be ballanced with "standalone missions on minimal terrain setup" 40K-like approach in mind and not with "perpetual RPG-like campaign with a lot of against-all-odds missions in drastically differing conditions" it actually has been designed with.

Sure - and the battlefield you're describing has loads of fields of fire.

I've played plenty of long running Necromunda campaigns - and I know that the first few games before the nonsense sets in are the best games of any campaign.

Bottle out of ambush voluntarily? Sure, but at that point you have suffered at least 25% casualties - probably more. I've had a game where I've driven 45 minutes to get there, set up, rolled for scenario etc, been shot off the table turn 1, bottled out because it was hopeless and then driven back home without taking a turn (and I had the far superior gang - it would have been even more brutal if the random rolls at the start of the scenario had gone my way).

It's a terrible scenario. End of story.

Vorian wrote:

nou wrote:

Vorian wrote:
This is one of those silly things peddled around all the time. Unless you're playing on a table that has literal line of sight blocking (such as a zone mortalis table) then there's always plenty of shots to be had.

Playing on one of those tables is then a totally game which have their own downsides.

There is no reason why a table with plenty of cover providing terrain, which is basically what everybody is actually going to be playing on, can't give you a good game of Necromunda.

Stupid skills like marksman just need to not exist, BS 6 gangers with Infrared sights need not exist, charge ranges from one side of the board to another need not exist. The ambush scenario need not be decided on a few dice rolls at the start.

There are silly little fixable problems that can just be solved easily.

You really can't imagine a non-zone mortalis style "continuous wall" tables that provide plentiful of LoS blocking and cover all over the table? Multi-level terrain with a lot of platforms and walkways, small terrain features, random debris, features hanging down from upper levels etc when dense enough provide so much los cut-off points, that it is usually just a partial angle or a narrow line of clear sight from any point on the table. You simply cannot play Necromunda on 40K style table, this game hasn't been designed for that. But it works like charm with proper table as is. Marksman just forces you to utilise Hide rule carefully, infrared sight don't work in overwatch and through solid walls and if it's so long into campaign, that there are BS6 gangers with infrareds, then there are most certainly other gangers with movement, infiltration and CC boosting skills to counter them.

And an ambush scenario is one of those campaign balancing mechanisms mentioned above and voluntary bottle out at second casaulty is a very valid way out of it. Nothing from this list of your needs "fixing". I have an impression, that you expect Necromunda to be ballanced with "standalone missions on minimal terrain setup" 40K-like approach in mind and not with "perpetual RPG-like campaign with a lot of against-all-odds missions in drastically differing conditions" it actually has been designed with.

Sure - and the battlefield you're describing has loads of fields of fire.

I've played plenty of long running Necromunda campaigns - and I know that the first few games before the nonsense sets in are the best games of any campaign.

Bottle out of ambush voluntarily? Sure, but at that point you have suffered at least 25% casualties - probably more. I've had a game where I've driven 45 minutes to get there, set up, rolled for scenario etc, been shot off the table turn 1, bottled out because it was hopeless and then driven back home without taking a turn (and I had the far superior gang - it would have been even more brutal if the random rolls at the start of the scenario had gone my way).

It's a terrible scenario. End of story.

Fields of fire that can be sneaked between, run between, walked around hidden etc...

Voluntary bottle out can happen after second casaulty, not after 25%, and is probably second most common cause of end of game for me. But I see where our experiences and expectations differ - I play locally or even at home and I play a lot. Like 3-5 games a week when I'm playing a campaign and I don't mind quick bottle out ends and proceeding to next post battle/pre battle sequence.

A player may voluntarily fail a Bottle roll if he wishes
to do so. In which case there is no need to actually
take the test, it is assumed to automatically fail as the
gangers melt into the shadows and retreat. Note that
all the conditions for taking a Bottle roll (25%
causalities) still need to be met.

From NCE, so will be the same as the latest official rules

Huh. Looks like the minimum two casualties for voluntary bottling didn't make it past the 1st edition of the game. Well, I never.

If you lost the Ambush scenario so quickly, why didn't you just play another game?

My bad, I didn't check in all three rulebooks (I have 1st ed physical and the rest only in digital form. I personally play by 1st ed). But it is still rarely on more than third model lost, unless you play "all juves I can buy" numerous but weak gang or have unusual luck to not permalost your gangers...

 Necros wrote:

I'm all for Newcromunda. i'm gonna be scared into preordering so I don't miss it like shadow war armageddon

Same here. I'm even more excited for this release, so I hope it doesn't sell out before I can get the cash together.

I wouldn't be holding my breath for Necromunda plastics considering how slow Blood Bowl plastics are coming out.