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.

There's nothing TO guess. All it is basically is target prioritization until you kill 20% of the opponent's army.

I come here now to lurk to see what news pops up. Lot less time to hobby with the little one these days so I live vicariously through the online community.

That and it seems like 40k still suffers from many of the post 5th ed ailments that helped push me out.

I am thinking of getting into one of the 'specialist' games they offer now, something that doesn't have 100 models on the table.

So I get my news here.

I don't play 40K, except that I do.

My group and I veered off in the middle of 5th Ed. to play our own modified rule set. I come on here to see if GW has added anything of interest over the editions, and to see how people react to certain changes in these rules. If a change seems worthwhile we may incorporate it or modify it and alter our rules accordingly. Over time I've grown to respect certain posters even if I disagree with some of their preferences. Others can be entertaining, while of course some are quite annoying. Despite our differences we all have a penchant for this hobby, so as much as you may want to dismiss somebody, you must realize we all still have this game in common.

Kudos to Games Workshop for that.

 amanita wrote:
I don't play 40K, except that I do.

My group and I veered off in the middle of 5th Ed. to play our own modified rule set. I come on here to see if GW has added anything of interest over the editions, and to see how people react to certain changes in these rules. If a change seems worthwhile we may incorporate it or modify it and alter our rules accordingly. Over time I've grown to respect certain posters even if I disagree with some of their preferences. Others can be entertaining, while of course some are quite annoying. Despite our differences we all have a penchant for this hobby, so as much as you may want to dismiss somebody, you must realize we all still have this game in common.

Kudos to Games Workshop for that.

I'd be quite interested in seeing your modified rule set.

Pointed Stick wrote:

 amanita wrote:
I don't play 40K, except that I do.

My group and I veered off in the middle of 5th Ed. to play our own modified rule set. I come on here to see if GW has added anything of interest over the editions, and to see how people react to certain changes in these rules. If a change seems worthwhile we may incorporate it or modify it and alter our rules accordingly. Over time I've grown to respect certain posters even if I disagree with some of their preferences. Others can be entertaining, while of course some are quite annoying. Despite our differences we all have a penchant for this hobby, so as much as you may want to dismiss somebody, you must realize we all still have this game in common.

Kudos to Games Workshop for that.

I'd be quite interested in seeing your modified rule set.

Yes! Just Yes please share if you can.

I'd be happy to send our rules to anybody who PM's me a valid email.

We also had to alter the codices to fit our rules of course, and not every current faction or model is represented. It isn't that hard to add models or units to the game once you're happy with the overall balance and structure. We may add a mercenary codex in the future just for a chance to use all manner of off market models, for example.

We also made a Random Combat Table for helping us generate battles when we don't have anything specific in mind.

It is strange for me.
I build-up and get fully painted an army and then stop for a bit where me and my group play other games for a time.
Then I update to the new rules my "established" army and slow down a bit while I make a new army, wash, rinse, repeat.

3rd edition was CSM (All four Gods represented! more of a Black Legion mix to get all the differing painted stuff together).
4th was Inquisition (A bit of a hodge-podge of completion)
5th was Black Templar (Completely painted)
6th-7th I tried to play, it sucked... was making a huge Imperial Guard / Astra Militarum army that is at least primed and 1/4 painted.

I am at that stage where I have pretty much a Primaris Company's worth of Ultramarines.
I have JUST finished painting some 30 joe-trooper-marines and now have to get into the fancier units (Everything assembled and primed... airbrush is helping this along).
Soon I will have to jump into my local hobby shop gaming rather than friends, they just have too much going on to get together regularly.

So I stay on here to keep on top of the usual trials and tribulations of updates and how to keep track of it all.
I REALLY do not want to misremember and mix old rules with new... having every edition since Rogue Trader rattling around in my head sure makes keeping rules straight a pain.

 amanita wrote:
I'd be happy to send our rules to anybody who PM's me a valid email.

We also had to alter the codices to fit our rules of course, and not every current faction or model is represented. It isn't that hard to add models or units to the game once you're happy with the overall balance and structure. We may add a mercenary codex in the future just for a chance to use all manner of off market models, for example.

We also made a Random Combat Table for helping us generate battles when we don't have anything specific in mind.

I'd be curious what form your custom rules take.
Are they mostly just notes?
Are they core rules, or modifications to an existing rulesset?
Are they concrete or conceptual?
How "balanced" do things need to be before your group is happy with overall balance/structure?
-And, following that, do you typically aim at a specific balance level ("Competes with basic Marines"), or more holistically?
-Also, for additions or interesting rules, do you typically aim for "meta-changing", "perfectly-inline", or "not problematic"?
If it's a formally retained set of documents, have you considered something like git?

These are just odd other-hobbyist questions I have, there really is no right/wrong answer to any of these.

Slowly getting into Kill Team and am interested in figuring out the favorite buzzwords/topics of the truly salty so I can more easily pick out who to avoid/marginalize when I'm playing.

Bharring wrote:

 amanita wrote:
I'd be happy to send our rules to anybody who PM's me a valid email.

We also had to alter the codices to fit our rules of course, and not every current faction or model is represented. It isn't that hard to add models or units to the game once you're happy with the overall balance and structure. We may add a mercenary codex in the future just for a chance to use all manner of off market models, for example.

We also made a Random Combat Table for helping us generate battles when we don't have anything specific in mind.

I'd be curious what form your custom rules take.
Are they mostly just notes?
Are they core rules, or modifications to an existing rulesset?
Are they concrete or conceptual?
How "balanced" do things need to be before your group is happy with overall balance/structure?

-And, following that, do you typically aim at a specific balance level ("Competes with basic Marines"), or more holistically?
-Also, for additions or interesting rules, do you typically aim for "meta-changing", "perfectly-inline", or "not problematic"?
If it's a formally retained set of documents, have you considered something like git?

These are just odd other-hobbyist questions I have, there really is no right/wrong answer to any of these.

Ah yes, context is everything!

I'd say our rules resemble mostly a blend of 4th & 5th Ed. with several other concepts mixed in. Some standard things have been either been given a face lift or an complete overhaul. We grew weary of GW tarnishing some great ideas by over-correcting problems that eventually arose. Too often layers of corrections are added to fix something that was of dubious merit in the first place, compounding the issue and distracting from the original intent. Our changes will never be perfect, but I think our version is engaging and tactical. When you win or lose you feel like it was due to player skill foremost. These rules aren't for everyone, but if we don't like something after a bit we change it! Most people can't afford that luxury, which is a shame.

When we decide to play, usually we generate or decide on parameters a week in advance. This way you will know what army you are facing and know what are the victory conditions, and approximate terrain so you can bring the appropriate units. Each codex is capable of defeating every other codex. The biggest determining factor in our games is the player, though some scenarios may favor a certain force in a specific set up.

I'm not familiar with git. We just wrote up our rules in Word and our codices in Excel, but the basis is still recognizable 40K from earlier editions. If our players want to tweak a certain codex for their own personal army, we work around that by maintaining the standard codex but letting people develop their own supplement that they tend to stick by. For example, I have a space marine army that allows dreadnaughts to be heavy or elite but I'm not allowed non-transport tanks for close support (no Predators or Vindicators). 4th Ed had chapter traits that were interesting without being too powerful, but we feel GW currently has bitten off more than anyone wants to chew. To each his own!

I come here for the Foxnews of 40k. Big fan of news and other peoples input.

Then you have the regular shows which are bat crazy and has hosts that should have retired years ago.

That is DakkaDakka.


Btw 40k is in great shape these days and as social hobby it is at it's best since for a long time.

Just came from SoCal and that gak is fun!

Because people are wrong on the internet, and must be corrected!

The One True View must be espoused and defended!

/s

Haven't had a game of 40k in ages but would still say I play 40k... just happen to play AoS more at the minute. Fully intend to focus more on 40k in the new year. Voted for reading dakka for the news. I prefer to read my news rather than podcasts and whatnot - dakkadakka, TGA, and the Warhammer Community sort me out.