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 noticed that a large chunk of the gaming industry is functionally moving toward the Fantasy Flight Games, Living Card Game (LCG) format. Without a doubt both X-Wing and Shadespire are LCGs with miniatures, right down to the card distribution method. CCGs have mostly become LCGs already and we are seeing many board games with subscription formatted expansions that even alter the base game over time.

Recently I have seen various comments that 40K 8th edition is a CCG. Since I have been mostly unplugged from this edition can someone explain in as much detail as possible why 40K is a CCG? In addition, are people using CCG out of familiarity or specificity? In other words, is 40K a CCG or LCG merely a semantic difference?

It's mostly an insult used by the "Hates 8th" crowd so far as I know.

They see cards being used to play

so they assume its a card game?

There is practically no difference between a LCG and a miniature wargame.

Maybe it's the "just take as many of the best things as you're allowed to" approach to listbuilding that 8E has going on? Seems reminiscent of deckbuilding in other games, as boring and lazy as it is there as well.

- Salvage

It's a pretty terrible card game with all those miniatures you have to paint.

It is a slur being thrown around, and honestly just a gross simplification.

I mean, I can say that Warhammer has become a MMORPG because there are forums online and even tabletop emulators, massive amounts of people world-wide play the game, I am assuming the role of a battle-field commander lording over my army of peons, and it is indeed a game.

Though not sure how many people would agree with the last statement of it being a game.

Seems more like a chore for a lot of people anymore.

At least if you hear them talk about it...

Honestly, though, I am being harsh. There's just a direction that a portion of the community doesn't like with 8th edition, and they use CCG/LCG as slander to express their discontent.

 Boss Salvage wrote:
Maybe it's the "just take as many of the best things as you're allowed to" approach to listbuilding that 8E has going on? Seems reminiscent of deckbuilding in other games, as boring and lazy as it is there as well.

- Salvage

Kinda maybe.

most ccg has limits on what you can take and ban lists and different formats

though it doesnt stop people still taking those super powerful cards (often costing a significant amount of money. though this doesnt really apply to 40k since the model prices dont actually change.)

 Xenomancers wrote:
There is practically no difference between a LCG and a miniature wargame.

I need you to explain this good sir.
There are very significant differences that I can tell.

1st, CCGs are random purchases. If I want card X, I need to blindly buy a pack, or 20, just to get it.
Miniatures games, you just buy what you want

CCGs also draw cards randomly, so you don't always get the card you need for a combo
Miniature you just "activate" the model/unit you need and roll dice.

The only thing similar (to me) is the element or random, CCGs with drawing and Miniature with rolling dice. However even that is pretty different
The card you need being at the bottom of the deck is pretty different to rolling a few 1s.

-

 Xenomancers wrote:
There is practically no difference between a LCG and a miniature wargame.

.../s?

I mean, the materials, the rules, the expectation, the interactions, the different kinds of effort put in... I can think of a lot of differences.

Unless you want to get ultra-reductionist, at which point no game played on a flat surface with one or more people is unique. Hey everyone, Age of Sigmar is the exact same as Cards Against Humanity!

 Galef wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

1st, CCGs are random purchases

Erm... He's talking about LCGs (Living Card Games), not CCGs. They're currently the in vogue method for most card games, since they're not randomly distributed.

 Boss Salvage wrote:
Maybe it's the "just take as many of the best things as you're allowed to" approach to listbuilding that 8E has going on? Seems reminiscent of deckbuilding in other games, as boring and lazy as it is there as well.

- Salvage

This is the sort of thoughtful response I am looking for. EXALTED!

As I stated above, both X-Wing and Shadespire are literally LCGs because of distribution method and combos created across expansions. To all of the Captain Obvious's out there, we all know Dakka is rife with posters who throw around terminology just to be dicks. So what if people call 40K a CCG out of spite or even call it a Legacy game and smash their models with a hammer. We do not need to rehash that here. I am looking for some intelligent discussion on the morphing format of 40K and what it really is becoming.

EDIT: There has been some good stuff posted since I typed this, not trying to insult anyone here, just looking for people digging to the root rather than the low hanging fruit!

 Desubot wrote:
most ccg has limits on what you can take and ban lists and different formats

though it doesnt stop people still taking those super powerful cards (often costing a significant amount of money. though this doesnt really apply to 40k since the model prices dont actually change.)

I mean, I feel like all of that applies to 40k, including limits both in the game's architecture (org slots, special character limit, new Tau Commander style limits) and those imposed by events (WHFB 8E was heavily comped at the tournament level, no reason 40k won't occasionally be, and things like Highlanders have totally been event formats in the past). Annnnnd as for super powerful rare things that cost $$$, pretty sure that's where Forge World comes in

- Salvage

 infinite_array wrote:
Erm... He's talking about LCGs (Living Card Games), not CCGs. They're currently the in vogue method for most card games, since they're not randomly distributed.

That's good to know. I pretty much stopped playing CCGs because of how frustrating it was to want X card for your deck and not be able to get it (either because you couldn't find it or it was ludicrously expensive)

Still, random drawing the deck you built is still pretty different than rolling D6s for an army you built that "should" mitigate for better rolls.

-

 Boss Salvage wrote:
I mean, I feel like all of that applies to 40k, including limits both in the game's architecture (org slots, special character limit, new Tau Commander style limits) and those imposed by events (WHFB 8E was heavily comped at the tournament level, no reason 40k won't occasionally be, and things like Highlanders have totally been event formats in the past). Annnnnd as for super powerful rare things that cost $$$, pretty sure that's where Forge World comes in

- Salvage

FW isn't actually good or OP though so that pretty well falls apart.

I think it's because it's about listbuilding (deckbuilding) and comboing things together to make the super OP alpha strike "I summon Exodia the forbidden One!" combo that destroys your opponent

 Boss Salvage wrote:
Maybe it's the "just take as many of the best things as you're allowed to" approach to listbuilding that 8E has going on? Seems reminiscent of deckbuilding in other games, as boring and lazy as it is there as well.

- Salvage

This is spot on IMO, You don't need to like the army or enjoy their storyline. The way codices are approached since 6th ed. is buy the new hotness and win. What's so fun about playing the same meta every time you get to the table? if its just to smash your opponent its not to enjoy the game any longer.


When IMO they can balance the codices better and everyone wins. Not at the game obviously, but by having a competitive fun units in every codex where all it takes is savy and maybe a little luck.

 Boss Salvage wrote:

 Desubot wrote:
most ccg has limits on what you can take and ban lists and different formats

though it doesnt stop people still taking those super powerful cards (often costing a significant amount of money. though this doesnt really apply to 40k since the model prices dont actually change.)

I mean, I feel like all of that applies to 40k, including limits both in the game's architecture (org slots, special character limit, new Tau Commander style limits) and those imposed by events (WHFB 8E was heavily comped at the tournament level, no reason 40k won't occasionally be, and things like Highlanders have totally been event formats in the past). Annnnnd as for super powerful rare things that cost $$$, pretty sure that's where Forge World comes in

- Salvage

Ha well thats true.

though i guess you could consider girlyman the jace the mindsculpter of 40k. the boogieman if you will.

or perhaps dark reapers are the cawblade of current tournament 40k.

but at least you dont have to open booster boxes to find all the bits.

re: the 'take as much of the best things you're allowed to' thing. Wasn't this the prevalent attitude through 7th? And 6th? And 5th?

And in fact any edition of 40k, at least in the views of certain areas of this hobby/game. I find the only common aspect between LCG's, CCG's and wargaming in general is that you're collecting items. But as for a gameplay comparison I'd argue that 40k doesn't have that much in common with something like Magic or Netrunner outside of having to havea pre-built list/deck/army for gaming purposes. But that same comparison applies to all wargames not just those by GW

 Rune Stonegrinder wrote:
This is spot on IMO, You don't need to like the army or enjoy their storyline. The way codices are approached since 6th ed. is buy the new hotness and win. What's so fun about playing the same meta every time you get to the table? if its just to smash your opponent its not to enjoy the game any longer.


When IMO they can balance the codices better and everyone wins. Not at the game obviously, but by having a competitive fun units in every codex where all it takes is savy and maybe a little luck.

Why is your meta so stale? That doesn't sound as much like an issue with the game as it does a slow revolution of armies and play styles in the local area. Also I'd very much so contend that just because something is new doesn't make it good.

 Galef wrote:

 infinite_array wrote:
Erm... He's talking about LCGs (Living Card Games), not CCGs. They're currently the in vogue method for most card games, since they're not randomly distributed.

That's good to know. I pretty much stopped playing CCGs because of how frustrating it was to want X card for your deck and not be able to get it (either because you couldn't find it or it was ludicrously expensive)

Still, random drawing the deck you built is still pretty different than rolling D6s for an army you built that "should" mitigate for better rolls.

Yeah, the money sink now comes from a monthly release schedule and the knowledge that, even if you only play a faction or two, you have to buy an entire pack to get the specific cards you want.

Honestly, it why I dropped Xwing as a game, and why I'm cautious about investing too much in Test of Honour. I don't like being forced to purchase cards to customize units when they could easily be printed as a single line in a rulebook.

It's not, for all of MTG's current 'issues' it still has what well may be the most solid and comprehensive rule set I suspect I'll ever see, and 40k errrm doesn't

What is the OP asking? Warhammer being a CCG?

Cards are boring.

I can't play with my cards and do "pew pew" noises in the bath like I do with my miniatures.

Check mate, atheists.

 Farseer_V2 wrote:
FW isn't actually good or OP though so that pretty well falls apart.

I guess I'm mostly referencing 6-7E, though our last local tournament had a lot of Fire Raptors. I mean like as many as there were players (and there were 20-30 players)

- Salvage

 Boss Salvage wrote:

 Farseer_V2 wrote:
FW isn't actually good or OP though so that pretty well falls apart.

I guess I'm mostly referencing 6-7E, though our last local tournament had a lot of Fire Raptors. I mean like as many as there were players (and there were 20-30 players)

- Salvage

Fire Raptors are one of the few exceptions but even then they aren't meta warping.

 Farseer_V2 wrote:

 Boss Salvage wrote:
I mean, I feel like all of that applies to 40k, including limits both in the game's architecture (org slots, special character limit, new Tau Commander style limits) and those imposed by events (WHFB 8E was heavily comped at the tournament level, no reason 40k won't occasionally be, and things like Highlanders have totally been event formats in the past). Annnnnd as for super powerful rare things that cost $$$, pretty sure that's where Forge World comes in

- Salvage

FW isn't actually good or OP though so that pretty well falls apart.

.....what.....lol like what? Forge world is not good? Uhhhh there was a reason GW had to nerf the ever loving crap outta fw units in chapter approved. Even still the fire raptor is one of the best things to take as a space marine or chaos space marine. On top of that their super heavy takes are amazing. A falcion is a quick way to blast any LoW unit off the table in a single shooting round


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ok. You just posted I was gonna say what are you talking about lol....that said I just got an idea....I wonder if T sons can take a fire raptor

The game design philosophies in a CCG / LCG game have been inserted into AOS and 40k as well.

The difference is instead of cards, you are using miniatures instead.

Classic tabletop wargaming tropes such as maneuver have been almost removed in favor of busting out combos like you would with a CCG game.

Terrain is largely meaningless and serves more as a decoration, whereas in a real battle terrain and managing a battlefield are key areas, and classic wargaming tropes include these to some degree.

Both games revolve around the concept of deckbuilding and combo chaining and synergy as opposed to fielding an army of troops and using battlefield tactics and strategies to win the day, instead relying on spreadsheeting math formulas to find the best probabilities using discrete math combinations.

Things like that.

The games no longer represent what a battle would feel like, and instead feel more like a board game or a CCG style game only using miniatures. It is very abstract. It doesn't represent what you read about in war novels nor what you see in film, and trades that feeling with a more gamey game feeling wherein you could sub out your models for cards and it would work largely the same with some minor modifications.

Thats where you get the comparison from. As a comparison, it is part emotional and part pattern matching to each individual and can not be proven correct or incorrect.

Compare AOS or 40k with something like Bolt Action or Saga or Hail Caesar and you can feel the difference in the two styles of gameplay.

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 Farseer_V2 wrote:

 Boss Salvage wrote:
I mean, I feel like all of that applies to 40k, including limits both in the game's architecture (org slots, special character limit, new Tau Commander style limits) and those imposed by events (WHFB 8E was heavily comped at the tournament level, no reason 40k won't occasionally be, and things like Highlanders have totally been event formats in the past). Annnnnd as for super powerful rare things that cost $$$, pretty sure that's where Forge World comes in

- Salvage

FW isn't actually good or OP though so that pretty well falls apart.

.....what.....lol like what? Forge world is not good? Uhhhh there was a reason GW had to nerf the ever loving crap outta fw units in chapter approved. Even still the fire raptor is one of the best things to take as a space marine or chaos space marine. On top of that their super heavy takes are amazing. A falcion is a quick way to blast any LoW unit off the table in a single shooting round

Yeah because so much of it shows up in winning lists or defines formats. There was an exception in Malefic Lords but they did indeed get demolished. The rest of FW that got demolished was I guess just a happenstance of being Forge World models. Forgeworld units certainly don't fit the pay to compete model that the poster is trying to set them up in. Also I'd suggest shifting out of the hyperbole of 'lol like what dude?!?!' and instead I'd post examples of say top table lists at events that have used many FW units as a much better basis for an argument.

 Farseer_V2 wrote:

 Boss Salvage wrote:

 Farseer_V2 wrote:
FW isn't actually good or OP though so that pretty well falls apart.

I guess I'm mostly referencing 6-7E, though our last local tournament had a lot of Fire Raptors. I mean like as many as there were players (and there were 20-30 players)

- Salvage

Fire Raptors are one of the few exceptions but even then they aren't meta warping.

Elysians were for a bit

iirc tarantulas were taken as super cheap slot fillers

i dont think they are currently though but at the beginning of 8th when the fw indexs popped up i recall them being pretty popular.