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.

 jojo_monkey_boy wrote:

Keel wrote:
Yes, the great inconvenience of ongoing support. Such a hassle.

If people prefer no support and 7th edition, they can keep playing just like they always did.

Yet the very thread you're posting in contains rumours indicating upcoming support for the game, to say nothing of the ongoing support for the game in black books and FAQs.

Indeed, rumours which indicate changes to the game. I'm not sure why these changes don't inconvenience people though?

While the black books are nice, they aren't really coming out as fast as they should. Two years plus between books which contain some rules for two legions is not a lot of support, but I agree that it doesn't really inconvenience anyone, if that's the goal. IIRC, there was talk about 20 books or so before we go to Terra? We're going to be waiting a long time for that… which is to say I think the Black Books are dead.

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 Gert wrote:

Just as a personal side point:
Nobody, either those who are pro-8th style rules or pro-current style rules, should be invoking Alan Bligh as reasoning for their argument. It's grim.

Except apparently he wanted to go the route of 8th, which is a good thing. Crablez is just acting like a boomer resisting change.

I'm 36. And not the topic last I checked

And fortunately I'm also a powerful psyker and I alone am privy to Alan Bligh's deathbed wishes and he wanted the game to remain unchanged. So there.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Keel wrote:

 jojo_monkey_boy wrote:

Keel wrote:
It makes as much sense for both sides of the argument. I "play" HH because I like the lore, models, and overall army design, not because I love 7th edition. But I primarily use my HH models for 40k, because that's what my friends play. I liked it better when I were able to use the Legion army list to play them.

So GW should inconvenience all the people who enjoy the actual heresy game so that you can use your heresy army in 40k games?
Huh?

Yes, the great inconvenience of ongoing support. Such a hassle.

If people prefer no support and 7th edition, they can keep playing just like they always did.

This seems to be pretty much the main group wanting to mess up HH, the "I wanna play 40k with my 30k models because no one plays 30k". The there's the 40k players who think 30k is basically just apoc and only play like 5000pts+ a side, which is also a bit baffling but whatever.

HH is actually a pretty great game from about 2250-3500pts, it really doesn't need the 8/9th ed treatment, it just needs a bit of love and some model releases that don't suck.

Leaks assumed to be from loyalist legions supplement. Was originally two images but I cut and merged into one

 Marshal Loss wrote:
Leaks assumed to be from loyalist legions supplement. Was originally two images but I cut and merged into one

Spoiler:

Neat, glad to see some cool art. So a Loyalist Legions supplement... I suppose that means there'd be a Traitor Legion supplement as well, much like how they handled the Legios for Titanicus.

Love it.

Oh man that Imperial fist helmet on the bottom right sure does look cool, I really wanna buy that armor type....oh wait.


I seriously don't understand this. Why advertise or show art for models you don't even produce?? Stop showing MKII unless you actually plan to support it. Stop showing Lucius pattern warlord heads in your Titanicus art if you don't make any.

 Midnightdeathblade wrote:
Oh man that Imperial fist helmet on the bottom right sure does look cool, I really wanna buy that armor type....oh wait.


I seriously don't understand this. Why advertise or show art for models you don't even produce?? Stop showing MKII unless you actually plan to support it. Stop showing Lucius pattern warlord heads in your Titanicus art if you don't make any.

Looks like the bottom 2 in this pack?
https://www.forgeworld.co.uk/en-GB/Imperial-Fists-MK-III-Upgrade-Set-Veteran-Heads

What's up with those beakie helmets where the three vents are at the top of the beak? I need some of those in my life! A new variant AFAIK

Not thrilled about the retcon to the veteran helmet having the roman leaves thingy.. In RT era, those were only worn by highest ranking Broters amirite? I have been saving up mine to be used only on the captains, this is going to mess with my OCD LOL

Was also going to post that I read from Bolter&Chainsword that the new BL HH model boxes already have the same graphic flourish as the upcoming HH book.. so Dominion Zephon and Fafnir can be considered the first official models of the HH reboot

The leaked pictures of the new beakies are too blurry for me to make something like that out, but they're beakies and new models. So perhaps you're in luck and some of them have those top vents.

Well HH could have based on 5th ed I guess, it was more balanced between ranged and combat. 6th/7th ed seemed to be weighted to shooty armies IIRC. Although I did read somewhere that 6th ed HH was reasonably balanced due to the wide options.

Anyway, looking forward to the announcement even if I haven't played any 30k for a while!

 Nicky J wrote:

 Midnightdeathblade wrote:
Oh man that Imperial fist helmet on the bottom right sure does look cool, I really wanna buy that armor type....oh wait.


I seriously don't understand this. Why advertise or show art for models you don't even produce?? Stop showing MKII unless you actually plan to support it. Stop showing Lucius pattern warlord heads in your Titanicus art if you don't make any.

Looks like the bottom 2 in this pack?
https://www.forgeworld.co.uk/en-GB/Imperial-Fists-MK-III-Upgrade-Set-Veteran-Heads

Spoiler:

I hope you're not actually trying to imply they still support MKII armor lol.

 Midnightdeathblade wrote:

 Nicky J wrote:

 Midnightdeathblade wrote:
Oh man that Imperial fist helmet on the bottom right sure does look cool, I really wanna buy that armor type....oh wait.


I seriously don't understand this. Why advertise or show art for models you don't even produce?? Stop showing MKII unless you actually plan to support it. Stop showing Lucius pattern warlord heads in your Titanicus art if you don't make any.

Looks like the bottom 2 in this pack?
https://www.forgeworld.co.uk/en-GB/Imperial-Fists-MK-III-Upgrade-Set-Veteran-Heads

Spoiler:

I hope you're not actually trying to imply they still support MKII armor lol.

No, I was half asleep and missed the bit of text above the go pic that explicitly says it’s MKII, and was just pointing out that if you want helmets that just *look* like that, then the set I posted were still available. Ignore me, sorry!

 Midnightdeathblade wrote:

I hope you're not actually trying to imply they still support MKII armor lol.

There are rumours that the revamped HH line is going to cover more armour marks, and I do remember mk2 being mentioned not long after the box set pictures leaked. Not sure why GW would bother though, mk6 is clearly the best

I’ve not played HH, was priced out by resin and direct ordering from UK. Excitedif they do all plastics, not a huge fan of Mk VI. I’m excited for this release, got my printer working again to embellish kits that I can. Just need to settle on which legion.

An Horus Heresy fans are weird.
Why would you not want the game to continually change and grow and evolve into modern gaming.
Games staying the same is how they die

Because GW's idea of "modern gaming" is gak

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
An Horus Heresy fans are weird.
Why would you not want the game to continually change and grow and evolve into modern gaming.
Games staying the same is how they die

That's not what most people are saying though. I think most people are looking for smaller changes and clarifications to the current ruleset rather than a huge change.
Change "just because" isn't a good thing and the only reason change should be implemented is if there are serious concerns with the system, which to my knowledge there aren't many. There doesn't need to be a shift in the paradigm because the current core rules are very good.
People just look at it and see 7th Ed without understanding that many of the problems that plagued 7th just don't exist in HH.
The biggest issue with HH currently is the lack of centralised rules, something that is an easy fix to implement. The current Red Book system works fine and all I would say is split the Loyalist and Traitor Legions into two separate compendiums only because there's a lot of stuff to cram in.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
An Horus Heresy fans are weird.
Why would you not want the game to continually change and grow and evolve into modern gaming.
Games staying the same is how they die

Battletech has mostly been the same for how many years now? And what its biggest shake ups were adding in the Clans, and then moving to a click game before moving back to how it was.

Ah... the fairy tail of "games without updates/patches are dead"....

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
An Horus Heresy fans are weird.
Why would you not want the game to continually change and grow and evolve into modern gaming.
Games staying the same is how they die

Battletech has mostly been the same for how many years now? And what its biggest shake ups were adding in the Clans, and then moving to a click game before moving back to how it was.

Battletech was better written to begin with though. Does that really count?

EviscerationPlague wrote:

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
An Horus Heresy fans are weird.
Why would you not want the game to continually change and grow and evolve into modern gaming.
Games staying the same is how they die

Battletech has mostly been the same for how many years now? And what its biggest shake ups were adding in the Clans, and then moving to a click game before moving back to how it was.

Battletech was better written to begin with though. Does that really count?

Major difference is one was written to only sell miniatures while the other wasn't.

That'd be why Battletech is dead then, regardless of the copium being huffed in this thread.

Lotr is still basically the same since 2001, and I'd say ruleswize it's in the best position it has ever been because the developers are people that know the game very well.
Meanwhile 40K gets restarted or some halfassed load of campaign books when you think "now would be a good time to refine".

That being said, I think HH made the best you can do out of 7th Edition... But it's still 7th Edition, one of the worst base rules I can think of. Adopting some of the aspects of 8th is a good step.

IMHO, if the core rules of a game are solid, all it needs is a more or less steady influx of new content and slight "elovutionary rather than revolutionary" tweaks/changes to the core rules in order to keep things going. New content doesn't have to mean new rules which always try to reinvent the wheel, more like new missions/scenarios/campaigns etc

Battletech is since 2019 more alive then ever before.

It’s not that Horus Heresy players are against change. I’m sure pretty much everyone would change the physic phase given the chance. But subtle changes that improve the current system are not the same as a totally new game being pushed out and the one we play and love being abandoned, ala the launch of 8th edition for 40k.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
An Horus Heresy fans are weird.
Why would you not want the game to continually change and grow and evolve into modern gaming.
Games staying the same is how they die

Games getting worse is also how they die.

 Irbis wrote:

Also movement stats I can't stand, the unit type system is better and easier on everyone

Yup, because it totally makes sense destroyers with two pistols move just as fast as devastator marine with huge, unwieldy autocannon and in 100 meter sprint, both would come in dead heat

This argument was stupid in 40K and is even dumber in HH, where vast majority of bodies are MEQ and you need more, not less granularity to differentiate them. Ditto with vehicles, when most are Rhino variants it doesn't make sense empty box moves the same speed as the box with added armour and turret. Abstract unit types make sense when you have too much basic diversity, not almost zero like in HH.

I don't really play HH anymore. But not long ago I went back and reread the unit type section of the rulebook. Made me want to punch myself in the face. Talk about ridiculously overwritten rules. Adopting some of the better aspects of 8th might actually pique my interest in HH again.

 Tamereth wrote:
It’s not that Horus Heresy players are against change. I’m sure pretty much everyone would change the physic phase given the chance. But subtle changes that improve the current system are not the same as a totally new game being pushed out and the one we play and love being abandoned, ala the launch of 8th edition for 40k.

Ya, psychic phase isn't great. A new compendium or soft back book could work as a big faq, but I think the core of respecting 30k is trying to diminish as little as possible owning all those big books. GW staff would have a hard time justifying all the paper they waste to the environmentally conscious out there. There is something to be said for a game that feels like a respected institution when compared to it's brothers. 40k looks like a casino/buffet in a vegas strip mall in comparison. And like any casino it only seems to care that you have no idea what time of day it is. AT is the smart quiet kid getting babysat by strippers.

30k needs the tiniest of love, some model support, a starter and the communication from gw/fw that there is a plan going forward. All this rumour sounds like is someone in marketing managed to get enough money allocated because someone showed them dreadnoughts are their highest seller or something. It's been stated to death but because it's true it shall be stated again, mc's and flying mc's are the only real problem units, it would have made more sense to deal with those. And as imperfect as walkers are, plenty of them can get invul saves and decent armour on the front. A leviathan dread in a drop pod is obnoxious enough, it doesn't need to be made better. Only other thing I'd do is reing in the stupid knight faction that is more annoying than mechanicum or daemons of the ruinstorm. 30k for the last while in terms of releases has basically been "oh look, an expensive hq character.. neat". The game could see next to no changes, a starter and a sprinkle of plastic releases to follow and I feel like that'd sate most people, and the 8-9th players can still use the models.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 gorgon wrote:

 Irbis wrote:

Also movement stats I can't stand, the unit type system is better and easier on everyone

Yup, because it totally makes sense destroyers with two pistols move just as fast as devastator marine with huge, unwieldy autocannon and in 100 meter sprint, both would come in dead heat

This argument was stupid in 40K and is even dumber in HH, where vast majority of bodies are MEQ and you need more, not less granularity to differentiate them. Ditto with vehicles, when most are Rhino variants it doesn't make sense empty box moves the same speed as the box with added armour and turret. Abstract unit types make sense when you have too much basic diversity, not almost zero like in HH.

I don't really play HH anymore. But not long ago I went back and reread the unit type section of the rulebook. Made me want to punch myself in the face. Talk about ridiculously overwritten rules. Adopting some of the better aspects of 8th might actually pique my interest in HH again.

There may be more unit types than is needed, but understand having these core things not change for literally years means once you commit the rules to memory the core game functions very well. Same with usr's, I can agree there too you could likely trim as there are a lot, but again, it also makes reading new units great once committed to memory because you can save a lot of space and instantly understand how things work. The opposite, the 8-9th way is just a stat-fest, it's like pretending skyrim had some deep intricate system. It makes the game feel much more like a collectible card game than a wargame. It also lets off all the terrible rules writing with the marketing bs of "bespoke" until everyone ears start to bleed.

I get wanting most of the relevant info on the page/unit card but I also want a game with a strong core set of rules that are in many ways the price of entry.

 Crablezworth wrote:
There may be more unit types than is needed, but understand having these core things not change for literally years means once you commit the rules to memory the core game functions very well. Same with usr's, I can agree there too you could likely trim as there are a lot, but again, it also makes reading new units great once committed to memory because you can save a lot of space and instantly understand how things work. The opposite, the 8-9th way is just a stat-fest, it's like pretending skyrim had some deep intricate system. It makes the game feel much more like a collectible card game than a wargame. It also lets off all the terrible rules writing with the marketing bs of "bespoke" until everyone ears start to bleed.

I get wanting most of the relevant info on the page/unit card but I also want a game with a strong core set of rules that are in many ways the price of entry.

I see no good reason why anyone should have to be expected to memorize bikes vs. cavalry vs. beasts. It's a wargame, not an RPG. Give units a simple move stat like countless other wargames and be done with it.

To me, it isn't the stats or core rules that really make 8th/9th feel like a CCG. That's about the codexes and their layered buffs and combos and gotcha stratagems and such. A lot of the extra complexity of 7th doesn't express itself in better gameplay. Both 7th and AT have armor facings, but one of those games gets much more hot and heavy into unit maneuvering and counter-maneuvers to jockey for/protect against side and rear shots, and it isn't 7th.

 gorgon wrote:
I see no good reason why anyone should have to be expected to memorize bikes vs. cavalry vs. beasts.

A - You don't have to memorise it, just read the rules.
B - Depending on the army you play, some of those unit types never come up.

Move characteristics are a fine addition but let's not pretend remembering unit types is a big issue for HH players.