Switch Theme:

Are the Available Kill Team Units Meant to Convey Personality/Playstyle?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
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.




Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





So looking over the available units in Kill Team, there are some strange inclusions and exclusions. Eldar don't have access to scorpions, presumably due to the lack of customizable kit, but they do have access to rangers (which are even less customizable). Dark eldar can take wyches and kabalites but not wracks. The IG can field 7(?) plasma guns in a kill team, but they don't have access to a ratling sniper or an Ogryn. Tau can take an elite and powerful stealth suit, but they don't have access to kroot who, thematically, would be very appropriate for KT.

So are the units available the result, at least in part, of a conscious design decision intended to give a personality/playstyle to each of the factions? Are guard meant to have tons of special weapons compared to marines to convey a dependence on heavy firepower over powerful statlines? Are wracks not available to DE because it would make them feel less quick and fragile? If it isn't GW's intention to convey a playstyle, then why have certain non-customizable kits been included as options? If the goal was to convey a playstyle to each faction, then what exactly is that playstyle? I'm not sure I see a strong theme to, for instance, craftworlders compared to guard or marines.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/08/21 04:27:54



ATTENTION
. Psychic tests are unfluffy. Your longing for AV is understandable but misguided. Your chapter doesn't need a separate codex. Doctrines should go away. Being a "troop" means nothing. This has been a cranky service announcement. You may now resume your regularly scheduled arguing.
 
   
Made in us
Archmagos Veneratus Extremis




On the Internet

Most KT options are based around troop choices. And the available wargear is based on what those said troop choices have access to in their codex (give or take some exceptions).

So I'm going to say it's more for trying to make sure what all the available options there are ones people are likely to have since troops are so common to the game.
   
Made in us
Powerful Ushbati





United States

Wyldhunt wrote:
So looking over the available units in Kill Team, there are some strange inclusions and exclusions. Eldar don't have access to scorpions, presumably due to the lack of customizable kit, but they do have access to rangers (which are even less customizable). Dark eldar can take wyches and kabalites but not wracks. The IG can field 7(?) plasma guns in a kill team, but they don't have access to a ratling sniper or an Ogryn. Tau can take an elite and powerful stealth suit, but they don't have access to kroot who, thematically, would be very appropriate for KT.

So are the units available the result, at least in part, of a conscious design decision intended to give a personality/playstyle to each of the factions? Are guard meant to have tons of special weapons compared to marines to convey a dependence on heavy firepower over powerful statlines? Are wracks not available to DE because it would make them feel less quick and fragile? If it isn't GW's intention to convey a playstyle, then why have certain non-customizable kits been included as options? If the goal was to convey a playstyle to each faction, then what exactly is that playstyle? I'm not sure I see a strong theme to, for instance, craftworlders compared to guard or marines.


I think over time the base lists will grow to include a lot of these units. Keeping the game relatively well balanced in the beginning while building up a tournament scene will really go a long way to building a stable community. So long as the rules are appropriate though, I really think they could add most any non-character infantry type unit to the game. Imagine being able to bring ravaners as tyranids, or being able to bring some howling banshees or even a squad of crusaders!

One thing I've been curious about is if it will be possible to have a game mode where one player plays a big thing, for example one player plays an Armiger, or a Carnifex. And it's more like a hunt type game mode, where the big nasty is extremely hard to kill, and players have to work together to take it down. A scenario such as this would be great for a 2 v 1 game!
   
Made in gb
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain





Cardiff

They’re meant to convey basic troops boxes from their shops into your carrier bags via a transaction. ;-)

 Stormonu wrote:
For me, the joy is in putting some good-looking models on the board and playing out a fantasy battle - not arguing over the poorly-made rules of some 3rd party who neither has any power over my play nor will be visiting me (and my opponent) to ensure we are "playing by the rules"
 
   
Made in de
Longtime Dakkanaut





 JohnnyHell wrote:
They’re meant to convey basic troops boxes from their shops into your carrier bags via a transaction. ;-)


Give this guy a medal.
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: