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.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Scott-S6 wrote:
None of those weapons are in the death watch kit so this goes with the current policies in that regard just fine. I'm pretty confident that isn't an oversight.

I know it's not an oversight, but when the Deathwatch Codex came out they stopped with the mind-numbing restrictions and made it more free for players to arm their characters as they want.

For a game like this the same amount of freedom should be replicated. The asinine no model = no rule restrictions, especially on such kit-bashable minis like Space Marines, is the worst thing they could do for a game like this.

 ChargerIIC wrote:
Imagine if you released a game and then met someone on the street the next day who said 'Dude, I played your game last night and think I got the rules right and let me tell you what you need to fix...'

It's a similar scenario, except in this case the developer has never even met you and can't be certain you actually played the game in the first place.

If the guy had never played a wargame before, but most of us have been at this a while and can see mistakes and problems a mile off.

Did you catch a glimpse of the point as it flew over your head?
That's okay, I'm actually a dev for necromunda abd I'm taking all your feedback 100% seriously. Also I am a goat. Trust me.

My first impression has been somewhat negative, but I'm looking to play more and see if things change.

Pros:
-Characterful lists. Things do the things they should based on fluff, and the emphasis is on units that are sadly often neglected in normal 40k lore.

-The small scale and tons of customizabiliity really emphasizes the strengths of 40k miniatures - making your force your own.

-Very cheap to get into. You can make a viable kill team with one box for many armies.


Cons:
-The Movement phase is really poorly done as far as I can tell, with the player with initiative hugely disadvantaged (he has to move all his guys before the opponent moves anything).

-The scenarios are very matchup dependent. One requires you to kill opponents in melee, which means some armies just lose (good luck beating Lictors with Tau...). The one we played gave points for each guy you killed, which naturally advantaged my Marines over my opponent's Eldar, since I had fewer tougher models and killing a Reiver wasn't worth more than killing a Guardian.

-Too many negative to-hit modifiers. This is already a problem in tabletop 40k and has many of the same issues here. Many weapons are not very useful because of this except at short range, and naturally short ranged weapons get hit really hard.

-The flesh wound table wants you to roll low, which is generally silly. You should always want to roll high for your own models.

-Some armies lack obvious options (no IG veteran squads? no Sternguard? no Chosen? really?), and some units lack wargear options from normal 40k (no storm bolters for Tactical Sergeants, for instance)

I feel like the movement phase is odd. I've only played 2 games so far. I ran into this and it felt odd. Tyranids had initiative. There were 2 genestealers in melee with a Reiver. You cannot declare a charge when you're already in melee, right? So the Marines fell back and the rest of the gunline mowed the genestealers down in the open. Was I missing something there? It seemed very strong for a gunline to use a screen in this way.

 Colonel Cross wrote:
I feel like the movement phase is odd. I've only played 2 games so far. I ran into this and it felt odd. Tyranids had initiative. There were 2 genestealers in melee with a Reiver. You cannot declare a charge when you're already in melee, right? So the Marines fell back and the rest of the gunline mowed the genestealers down in the open. Was I missing something there? It seemed very strong for a gunline to use a screen in this way.

If the Reiver left melee, nothing is stopping the Genestealers from charging, assuming they didn't give up their move before that.

Yeah that was the problem, the tyranids had initiative, so had to move first. And as they were locked up, what can you do?

Yeah it's a bit of an odd problem; the reverse turn order is really bad for the shooter because there's nothing stopping the melee model from just charging in again.

If the melee team goes first one thing you can do is charge another model into the model that will want to fall back; you can't fall back if you've been charged, so this prevents the shooting model from falling back at all.

 Kingsley wrote:
My first impression has been somewhat negative, but I'm looking to play more and see if things change.

Pros:
-Characterful lists. Things do the things they should based on fluff, and the emphasis is on units that are sadly often neglected in normal 40k lore.
Absolutely. I feel that this is the most loyal to the 40k lore than any other iteration of 40k.

-The small scale and tons of customizabiliity really emphasizes the strengths of 40k miniatures - making your force your own.

-Very cheap to get into. You can make a viable kill team with one box for many armies.


Cons:
-The Movement phase is really poorly done as far as I can tell, with the player with initiative hugely disadvantaged (he has to move all his guys before the opponent moves anything).
This is part of the strategy, and I've seen people say that the player with initiative has a huge advantage in the movement phase. Play more games.

-The scenarios are very matchup dependent. One requires you to kill opponents in melee, which means some armies just lose (good luck beating Lictors with Tau...). The one we played gave points for each guy you killed, which naturally advantaged my Marines over my opponent's Eldar, since I had fewer tougher models and killing a Reiver wasn't worth more than killing a Guardian.
That's just the nature of the strategy. If you don't like the missions, there are more coming out very shortly in different killzones, starter boxes, and people making all sorts of house missions. Better yet, just learn the strategy and figure out other ways to win. If you're Tau vs. a 4 Lictor list, then position yourself well, shoot them off the table, and you'll win by breaking the army instead of taking prisoners. I've had a Tyranid Warrior lose in close combat against a Pathfinder. That's something that can happen due to only rolling 1-2 dice in a phase per model. Big, heroic swings can happen when you get rid of the whole 'let's throw 40 dice at the enemy and hope for the best'.

-Too many negative to-hit modifiers. This is already a problem in tabletop 40k and has many of the same issues here. Many weapons are not very useful because of this except at short range, and naturally short ranged weapons get hit really hard.
The negatives to hit are what balance the game and keep models from dying too quickly. It 'slows' the game down in a way, which makes each turn matter. Plus, unlike in 40k, 6's always hit.

-The flesh wound table wants you to roll low, which is generally silly. You should always want to roll high for your own models.
This is a really minor complaint. If you don't like it, houserule it the other way around, it's not difficult.

-Some armies lack obvious options (no IG veteran squads? no Sternguard? no Chosen? really?), and some units lack wargear options from normal 40k (no storm bolters for Tactical Sergeants, for instance)

Want to play with some of those units? That's what the full 40k game is for. Many of these options were left out because they were not very flavorful, not supplied in the kits for those models, or were not good for the balance of the game. Plus, do we really want some of those armies with even MORE options over other forces like Thousand Sons, Death Guard, or Harlequins that only have 1-2 viable Kill Team options?

My comments added in green.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Arachnofiend wrote:
Yeah it's a bit of an odd problem; the reverse turn order is really bad for the shooter because there's nothing stopping the melee model from just charging in again.

If the melee team goes first one thing you can do is charge another model into the model that will want to fall back; you can't fall back if you've been charged, so this prevents the shooting model from falling back at all.

Pre-measuring is a thing and everyone has the Core Rulebook. You should be able to see the movement and abilities of every faction. Move your doods accordingly knowing that the melee force wants to close distance. You can use Retreat to make it harder for those charges to get off, or better yet, if the enemy is trying to charge a clump of your units, retreat all but the chaff you don't mind losing. Now the enemy is stuck in close combat with one guy but can't reach any of the others. Or, even better, overwatch the pants off of them and hope for the best.

Just like in 40k, positioning, deployment, screening, and all of these things are very important.

 Kingsley wrote:

-The flesh wound table wants you to roll low, which is generally silly. You should always want to roll high for your own models.

You are supposed to roll for your opponents models, not your own, so you definitely want to roll high. Important distinction as they're are things like strategems that affect the roll that you have to decide before rolling it.

 Redemption wrote:

 Kingsley wrote:

-The flesh wound table wants you to roll low, which is generally silly. You should always want to roll high for your own models.

You are supposed to roll for your opponents models, not your own, so you definitely want to roll high. Important distinction as they're are things like strategems that affect the roll that you have to decide before rolling it.

I believe the controlling player makes the injury roll - that's certainly what it says on the GW site and IIRC in the rulebook as well, though I don't actually have it in front of me.

Killl Team Core Rules pg31 wrote:Inflict Damage: The damage inflicted is equal to the Damage characteristic of the weapon used in the attack. A model loses one wound for each point of damage it suffers. If a model’s wounds are reduced to 0, any further attacks directed against this model by the attacking weapon are not resolved, and then the player controlling the attacking model makes an Injury roll for the target model (see overleaf).

Emphasis mine.

I'm also concerned about the initiative and movement phases but I wanna play more games to explore that.

Yea that is my biggest complaint as well: If you already have a fight going, the next movement phase is either:

-Melee-favoured unit has the initiative. He has to stay locked in combat and there is nothing he can do to prevent the other model from falling back.
-Ranged-favoured unit has the initiative. He can fall back but will get charged again immediatly.

It’s silly that depending on the initiative roll a model can either stay permanently locked in combat or never get into another combat again.

Doctoralex wrote:
Yea that is my biggest complaint as well: If you already have a fight going, the next movement phase is either:

-Melee-favoured unit has the initiative. He has to stay locked in combat and there is nothing he can do to prevent the other model from falling back.
-Ranged-favoured unit has the initiative. He can fall back but will get charged again immediatly.

It’s silly that depending on the initiative roll a model can either stay permanently locked in combat or never get into another combat again.

So basically if you "win" initiative" you loose it?

Most games with alternating units that I have played allow the person who wins initiative to choose whether to go first or second.

If you win initiative youre stuck with priority no choice.

Also until FAQ'd fall back states "at the start of the movement phase" and overrides all other movements. If an enemy falls back and you want to charge again tough tiddies :/ even if the enemy fell back you started the movement phase next to an enemy and can only fall back or remain stationary. This is why staggering units and effectively using cheap tarpit models is really essential.

Well there are still some things you can do:

Doctoralex wrote:
-Melee-favoured unit has the initiative. He has to stay locked in combat and there is nothing he can do to prevent the other model from falling back.

Have a buddy charge the same target and he cannot fall back anymore, as you are not allowed to fall back if you were charged in the same turn.

Doctoralex wrote:
-Ranged-favoured unit has the initiative. He can fall back but will get charged again immediatly.

Fall back and have another model charge the model you escaped. And of course charge ranges are a dice roll so it's not a guaranteed thing.

Of course these are both very situational, but at least it's something.

 Redemption wrote:
Well there are still some things you can do:

Doctoralex wrote:
-Melee-favoured unit has the initiative. He has to stay locked in combat and there is nothing he can do to prevent the other model from falling back.

Have a buddy charge the same target and he cannot fall back anymore, as you are not allowed to fall back if you were charged in the same turn.

Doctoralex wrote:
-Ranged-favoured unit has the initiative. He can fall back but will get charged again immediatly.

Fall back and have another model charge the model you escaped. And of course charge ranges are a dice roll so it's not a guaranteed thing.

Of course these are both very situational, but at least it's something.

If its alternative models you can only move one at a time and so won't have the opportunity to use a second model to charge the model escaped from?

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Redemption wrote:
Well there are still some things you can do:

Doctoralex wrote:
-Melee-favoured unit has the initiative. He has to stay locked in combat and there is nothing he can do to prevent the other model from falling back.

Have a buddy charge the same target and he cannot fall back anymore, as you are not allowed to fall back if you were charged in the same turn.

Doctoralex wrote:
-Ranged-favoured unit has the initiative. He can fall back but will get charged again immediatly.

Fall back and have another model charge the model you escaped. And of course charge ranges are a dice roll so it's not a guaranteed thing.

Of course these are both very situational, but at least it's something.

If its alternative models you can only move one at a time and so won't have the opportunity to use a second model to charge the model escaped from?

Movement is U-GO-I-GO, not alternating.
You have to play with your other models and the terrain to block models in combat or chain charge to prevent falling back - combat is absolutely devastating in Kill Team so it's worth planning around enabling your Combat / Zealot specialists.
I love using Poxwalkers for this - although the Death Guard are slow, Flail marines backed by ensnaring Poxwalkers are absolutely savage.

 Dedwoods42 wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Redemption wrote:
Well there are still some things you can do:

Doctoralex wrote:
-Melee-favoured unit has the initiative. He has to stay locked in combat and there is nothing he can do to prevent the other model from falling back.

Have a buddy charge the same target and he cannot fall back anymore, as you are not allowed to fall back if you were charged in the same turn.

Doctoralex wrote:
-Ranged-favoured unit has the initiative. He can fall back but will get charged again immediatly.

Fall back and have another model charge the model you escaped. And of course charge ranges are a dice roll so it's not a guaranteed thing.

Of course these are both very situational, but at least it's something.

If its alternative models you can only move one at a time and so won't have the opportunity to use a second model to charge the model escaped from?

Movement is U-GO-I-GO, not alternating.
You have to play with your other models and the terrain to block models in combat or chain charge to prevent falling back - combat is absolutely devastating in Kill Team so it's worth planning around enabling your Combat / Zealot specialists.
I love using Poxwalkers for this - although the Death Guard are slow, Flail marines backed by ensnaring Poxwalkers are absolutely savage.

Oh I didn't realise that - that's another disappointment then.

Has anyone played it doing alternating moves in the movement phase. I know the numbers of models on each side might not be the same, but other games manage it with rules like, lowest number of models always gets to move their final model last or variants along those lines.

I got my rulebook at the weekend and had to kind of take a wtf moment when I realised the movement was IGO-UGO and the other phases were alternating. I wonder what the game design behind this bizarre mixed choice was?

I was also annoyed that my purchase of the Kill Team cards didn't get me the ones for each faction in the rulebook. Apparently those cards and a few bonuses are in the faction starters... where you have to rebuy models and terrain you might already have loads of. So £37.50 a starter to get 12 cards.

I think GW are doing a good job in releasing all these new games, but the manner in which they're coming out is lousy.

 Redemption wrote:

 Kingsley wrote:

-The flesh wound table wants you to roll low, which is generally silly. You should always want to roll high for your own models.

You are supposed to roll for your opponents models, not your own, so you definitely want to roll high. Important distinction as they're are things like strategems that affect the roll that you have to decide before rolling it.

EDIT: Sorry, checked page 31 - I guess for any kind of attack the attacker makes an injury roll. And for...some other reason a unit would make an injury roll, i'ts the controlling player?

the_scotsman wrote:

 Redemption wrote:

 Kingsley wrote:

-The flesh wound table wants you to roll low, which is generally silly. You should always want to roll high for your own models.

You are supposed to roll for your opponents models, not your own, so you definitely want to roll high. Important distinction as they're are things like strategems that affect the roll that you have to decide before rolling it.

EDIT: Sorry, checked page 31 - I guess for any kind of attack the attacker makes an injury roll. And for...some other reason a unit would make an injury roll, i'ts the controlling player?

Perils or any similar cases of self-inflicting Mortal Wounds - falling too?

 Gimgamgoo wrote:
Has anyone played it doing alternating moves in the movement phase. I know the numbers of models on each side might not be the same, but other games manage it with rules like, lowest number of models always gets to move their final model last or variants along those lines.

I got my rulebook at the weekend and had to kind of take a wtf moment when I realised the movement was IGO-UGO and the other phases were alternating. I wonder what the game design behind this bizarre mixed choice was?

We had a demo game in the FLGS when we picked up our preorder stuff, and the guy running it hadn't read the rules in detail and incorrectly told us that's how it worked. You certainly could do it like that, but it has the old issue of performing all your 'safe' moves first, favouring horde teams, and making moving a bit less ambitious I think? The main issue when we played the demo, though, is it makes things take longer. The game feels really quick and tight with the movement as it is in the rules. I'd be keen to play a bit more to get to grips with it, mind!

So far I've had aot of fun with Killteam, but it seems like making your coolest character Leader, is a waste of Specialist traits.

I used to always pick a disposable :"Hidden" Character as HQ in 7th Edition, and it seems liek this is the best choice for Killteam leaders too (which seems like such a shame). I suppose for odd interactions like this, we best Forge the Narrative, and just say the lesser Leader is hiding some secret battle plans or a relic or something.

Anywhoo, Grot Leaders hiding behind walls! Wooo!

The only other issue has been multi-player. It still has the problem of breaking up your forces target selection. My Orks had 2 good games so far, but i fear it was only because of dividing the attention between the second and third player.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Scott-S6 wrote:
None of those weapons are in the death watch kit so this goes with the current policies in that regard just fine. I'm pretty confident that isn't an oversight.

I know it's not an oversight, but when the Deathwatch Codex came out they stopped with the mind-numbing restrictions and made it more free for players to arm their characters as they want.

For a game like this the same amount of freedom should be replicated. The asinine no model = no rule restrictions, especially on such kit-bashable minis like Space Marines, is the worst thing they could do for a game like this.

 ChargerIIC wrote:
Imagine if you released a game and then met someone on the street the next day who said 'Dude, I played your game last night and think I got the rules right and let me tell you what you need to fix...'

It's a similar scenario, except in this case the developer has never even met you and can't be certain you actually played the game in the first place.

If the guy had never played a wargame before, but most of us have been at this a while and can see mistakes and problems a mile off.

Given that kill team is clearly intended as a gateway game into 40K restricting wargear to parts that are easily obtainable send extremely reasonable up me. Especially since regular marine parts don't match the death watch parts they're replacing even if they do fit.

As for the rules comment, given the many battle reports with rules errors it would seem that you're overly optimistic about most people's ability to absorb the rules correctly.

 Nightlord1987 wrote:
So far I've had aot of fun with Killteam, but it seems like making your coolest character Leader, is a waste of Specialist traits.

I used to always pick a disposable :"Hidden" Character as HQ in 7th Edition, and it seems liek this is the best choice for Killteam leaders too (which seems like such a shame). I suppose for odd interactions like this, we best Forge the Narrative, and just say the lesser Leader is hiding some secret battle plans or a relic or something.

Anywhoo, Grot Leaders hiding behind walls! Wooo!

The only other issue has been multi-player. It still has the problem of breaking up your forces target selection. My Orks had 2 good games so far, but i fear it was only because of dividing the attention between the second and third player.

except that it's usually only the leader of a unit that can take the Leader specialty.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Scott-S6 wrote:
None of those weapons are in the death watch kit so this goes with the current policies in that regard just fine. I'm pretty confident that isn't an oversight.

I know it's not an oversight, but when the Deathwatch Codex came out they stopped with the mind-numbing restrictions and made it more free for players to arm their characters as they want.

What? I have no idea where you got this idea but it's completely and utterly wrong. DW is as limited as ever.

Let's see, DW dreadnought? Still all of 2 weapons. DW bikers? Zero ranged options. DW termies? Can swap melee weapons but for some reason thunder hammer isn't one of them so if you want one, no gun for you (and in general you can only ever put bits from either ranged or melee TDA boxes on one mini, mixing is verboten). DW Vanguard? Kelly book era stupidity continues and you can't take relic frakking blade despite it being right in the middle of box picture, and in the assembly instructions, and on sprue. Freedom!

DW primaris? Didn't get bone every other primaris unit got in being able to take their chapter's signature sword (despite it not being on primaris sprues), I guess Cawl forgot to include plugs for Xenophase blades or something. Worse than that, Aggressors and Inceptors forgot to pick up SIA when it was being handed out during briefing, and to make it even better, most of primaris bolter weapons have completely inane point prices making them far more monobuild than their Codex counterparts as usually one loadout is much better than the others.

To be fair, DW codex writers sorta managed to sneak one thing past bits censors, namely Veterans can now take BA and vanilla tactical squad options, but if you ever opened DW book at all, you'll see that is the only thing they had relaxed. So, they can take heavy flamer, because it's in BA bits, and heavy bolter/missile launcher, because it's in vanilla box, but every single other heavy weapon either of these squads can take? Nope.avi, out of luck, only what it's on the sprue. No grav/lascannon/multimelta/plasma/volkite/rest of the junk for you, because gluing DW pads on devastator box minis is apparently too difficult or something

I could easily make this post three times as long with stupid DW bits inconsistencies, but I hope that's enough to get my point across. DW restrictions are just as bad in their 8th ed book one as in KT, if anything, KT has less dumb sprue decisions than DW book. Too bad people weren't paying attention to DW loadouts in 7th and (especially) 8th, maybe we woudln't be having the limits discussion today. Alas, there was no backlash for the good of the game after Kelly's hack job, nor after it was repeated in both Index and Codex, so GW got the idea it will fly in other projects and we now reap the crop of that trial. It's kinda funny to see people finally wake up and see how grating the stuff DW players dealt with for 2 years now is once it was applied to their own factions

the_scotsman wrote:

 Nightlord1987 wrote:
So far I've had aot of fun with Killteam, but it seems like making your coolest character Leader, is a waste of Specialist traits.

I used to always pick a disposable :"Hidden" Character as HQ in 7th Edition, and it seems liek this is the best choice for Killteam leaders too (which seems like such a shame). I suppose for odd interactions like this, we best Forge the Narrative, and just say the lesser Leader is hiding some secret battle plans or a relic or something.

Anywhoo, Grot Leaders hiding behind walls! Wooo!

The only other issue has been multi-player. It still has the problem of breaking up your forces target selection. My Orks had 2 good games so far, but i fear it was only because of dividing the attention between the second and third player.

except that it's usually only the leader of a unit that can take the Leader specialty.

Yep. And for Orkz, we can take a Grot as leader (but not an Ork boy). I would normally choose a Nob as leader (seems fluffy) but a Nob is better off with Combat than Leader when you expect him to do heavy lifting.

But you can take a nob equivalent from each Ork unit and only one need be a leader. The other can be a combat specialist.
I look forward to model specific releases for this game. There are many Easter eggs that suggest so much more is coming.

Kendo wrote:
But you can take a nob equivalent from each Ork unit and only one need be a leader. The other can be a combat specialist.
I look forward to model specific releases for this game. There are many Easter eggs that suggest so much more is coming.

My favorite is the Harlequins getting a Tactic specifically for fighting against Slaanesh units, but the only Slaanesh unit in the game would be a Chaos Marine with a Mark of Slaanesh, and the only reason to take that would be to take the Icon of Excess, which gives you a bonus against Imperium units. In other words, there's no reason to take a Slaanesh Chaos Marine against Harlequins, so why do they have that specific tactic in the core book?

drbored wrote:
so why do they have that specific tactic in the core book?

To start making the game more fluffy. I believe Grey Knights have the same rule, only agaisnt deamons. I am liking that we are getting fluffy rules now. Only reason I can see having fluffy rules is no good is if everyone has 6 rules and that is it. I believe this is the case and while it's good to have for fluff reasons, there should also be another rule to take it's place for game reasons as well.