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.

 Agamemnon2 wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:
[Because a lengthy game-design essay would be somewhat off-topic. You haven't explained what advantages clunky alternating activations are supposed to have either.

Either way, if other systems were truly objectively better, it shouldn't be hard to get your locals to switch games by merit of presenting a genuinely superior system.

Are you a visitor from Vulcan, by any chance? Because I find this argument to be bizarre and incompatible with what's universally known about human nature. Especially since wargames represent an extreme commitment of time and effort, so any choice to play a particular system automatically involves a substantial investment in that game (an investment which generally is incompatible with other games).

Perhaps. But I don't think I am the only wargamer out there who has dabbled to some extend in many of them. I have a pile of X-Wing & Infinity stuff, some WarmaHordes, the odd Kickstarter-thing, Bolt Action and Saga, as well as some GW stuff like HH Boxed Games, Underworlds, etc.. It's not unreasonable that over some time experimenting (and especially as time and/or funds grow more limited again for various life-reasons), people ultimately gravitate to the system they like best and reject (or at least phase out) the games that provide a less tactical, less nuanced, less immersive, etc.. game experience.

Or, if people play multiple games (I do also play Blood Bowl regularly on the side), the game they think is the best usually sees the most play.


That said, I might just be biased living in a region where I can play (and have played in the past) a variety of games. I could join an X-Wing or 9th Age or Infinity group tomorrow, if they'd fix these various games (ideally by emulating some of what makes 40K great).

I feel like given that you've provided absolutely zero examples of anything 40k does better than any of those games that makes it better/more tactical/whatever, you're just trolling at this point.

Because the problems obviously depend on the games' mechanics. The issues in X-Wings are initiative-ranked activation are different than the structural flaws in Infinity's unit-based activation-numbers, etc..

How is playing 40K because you actually like 40K trolling? Sure, there may be elements of some games not being played in remote regions, but popular games can and do decline rapidly if they lose their appeal (e.g. WarmaHordes or even GW's own LoTR) and 40K wouldn't be such a widely played game to begin with (including in competition with other GW games that benefit from the same retail infrastructure, etc.), if the game didn't appeal to many people. And at least in many cities, people certainly have a plethora of options on the market.

Sunny Side Up wrote:

 Agamemnon2 wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:
[Because a lengthy game-design essay would be somewhat off-topic. You haven't explained what advantages clunky alternating activations are supposed to have either.

Either way, if other systems were truly objectively better, it shouldn't be hard to get your locals to switch games by merit of presenting a genuinely superior system.

Are you a visitor from Vulcan, by any chance? Because I find this argument to be bizarre and incompatible with what's universally known about human nature. Especially since wargames represent an extreme commitment of time and effort, so any choice to play a particular system automatically involves a substantial investment in that game (an investment which generally is incompatible with other games).

Perhaps. But I don't think I am the only wargamer out there who has dabbled to some extend in many of them. I have a pile of X-Wing & Infinity stuff, some WarmaHordes, the odd Kickstarter-thing, Bolt Action and Saga, as well as some GW stuff like HH Boxed Games, Underworlds, etc.. It's not unreasonable that over some time experimenting (and especially as time and/or funds grow more limited again for various life-reasons), people ultimately gravitate to the system they like best and reject (or at least phase out) the games that provide a less tactical, less nuanced, less immersive, etc.. game experience.

Or, if people play multiple games (I do also play Blood Bowl regularly on the side), the game they think is the best usually sees the most play.


That said, I might just be biased living in a region where I can play (and have played in the past) a variety of games. I could join an X-Wing or 9th Age or Infinity group tomorrow, if they'd fix these various games (ideally by emulating some of what makes 40K great).

While it is true that people tend to abandon games they don't like, there is a very real phenomenon that I have seen in games (mainly while being in gaming clubs and among RPG players) where a player who likes a certain type of game but dislikes one game of that type ends up playing it anyway. For instance a RPG player who likes pen and paper RPGs but hates DnD ends up playing it anyway because that is the only game they can find locally. Players like that often refuse to start a new group because they are risk adverse and doing that may fail or are simply lazy. They end up playing the game they don't like and end up being rather toxic to everyone else who does like it.

With all due respect, I believe we were talking about Psychic Awakening...

PiñaColada wrote:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/03/17/orks-da-new-rulezgw-homepage-post-3/

New ork stuff, da flying 'eadbutt is great haha!

Huh, yea that one is pretty useful, but neither the other strategem nor the specialist mob one will make my burna boyz any better. If burnas were Assault D6 maybee, but with D3? Don't bother. It's a shame, I love the models...

 Blood Hawk wrote:

While it is true that people tend to abandon games they don't like, there is a very real phenomenon that I have seen in games (mainly while being in gaming clubs and among RPG players) where a player who likes a certain type of game but dislikes one game of that type ends up playing it anyway. For instance a RPG player who likes pen and paper RPGs but hates DnD ends up playing it anyway because that is the only game they can find locally. Players like that often refuse to start a new group because they are risk adverse and doing that may fail or are simply lazy. They end up playing the game they don't like and end up being rather toxic to everyone else who does like it.

Sure. But this isn't the 80s. It certainly is the golden age of miniature wargames by all "historical" accounts. Big conventions and tournaments like the LVO or Adepticon don't just offer 40K, but pretty much any game available under the sun. The Internet makes it incredibly easy to find groups of like-minded people. Again, it might well be an issue in some remote areas. If you're stuck out in nowwhereland and really, really, really only want to play ... dunno ... Arena Rex, you might be out of luck. I get that.

But that doesn't seem like a plausible reason that could explain 40K's success, including in major population centres and all over the world, if there wasn't some intrinsic appeal in the game itself. At the very least, the "stuck-with-the-majority"-phenomenon would show up regionally with different games, where everyone in Australia ends up stuck with X-Wing (not least because GW is even more expensive), even those that want to play 40K, while people in Spain might be squeezed into the dominant Infinity scene while UK folks cannot get out of Games Workshop's shadow.

Yeah, we actually have some rules to talk about now. How are these specialist mobs going to work? Like specialist detachments? Do they cost cp?

Gadzilla666 wrote:
Yeah, we actually have some rules to talk about now. How are these specialist mobs going to work? Like specialist detachments? Do they cost cp?

It sounds like they replace your Kultur.

 Abadabadoobaddon wrote:

Gadzilla666 wrote:
Yeah, we actually have some rules to talk about now. How are these specialist mobs going to work? Like specialist detachments? Do they cost cp?

It sounds like they replace your Kultur.

Ah. So basically build a chapter for orks.

mosrtly meh rules for the orks then, power is nice but who takes blood axes.. .

 Latro_ wrote:
mosrtly meh rules for the orks then, power is nice but who takes blood axes.. .

Maybe they're trying to give a reason for taking them?

 Carnikang wrote:

Sunny Side Up wrote:

Either way, if other systems were truly objectively better, it shouldn't be hard to get your locals to switch games by merit of presenting a genuinely superior system.

That's a load of gak. I've been pushing Conquest in my area as a real balanced and competitive game compared to AoS, and everyone is extremely hesitant because it's new and they're not interested unless more people are playing it.

People play what their friends and community play, regardless of how good or bad the game is.

this, it doesn't matter anymore for GW if they release a propperly tuned game or not, they are the company.
Simply put, anything non gw non historical is nigh allways failed to be niche through sheere force of numbers and investment required often.

That preview is fire even with just a fraction of the reveals. 2 CP to get 2d3 discard lowest on 14 Lootas.

Extra movement buff on a Morkanaut could make KFF a thing on vehicles.

I am fascinated by the specialist detachments. The burna one is whatever but it highlights how there has to be at least one that is the sauce.

I wouldn't say I take Blood Axes (haven't played since last spring) but I'm loving some of that stuff like the Flyin' 'Eadbutt. This has me looking up prices for certain Ork models...

 Oguhmek wrote:

PiñaColada wrote:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/03/17/orks-da-new-rulezgw-homepage-post-3/

New ork stuff, da flying 'eadbutt is great haha!

Huh, yea that one is pretty useful, but neither the other strategem nor the specialist mob one will make my burna boyz any better. If burnas were Assault D6 maybee, but with D3? Don't bother. It's a shame, I love the models...

Rerolling the number of shots from burnas (and equivalent weapons) isn't useful?

SamusDrake wrote:
With all due respect, I believe we were talking about Psychic Awakening...

Indeed.

We know in long threads there's always going to be a bit of a diversion, especially during info lulls, but please do not continue the off topic tangent.

Fresh from the Book of Faces...


For those who can't or don't want to see it:
It's a Stratagem called "Da Biggest Boss". It's 1 CP, used before the battle. You select a Warboss model in your army and add 1 to that model's Wounds and Attacks characteristics and it gains a 4+ invulnerable save. You can only use this once per battle, and only if your army does not include Ghazghkull Thraka.

Thats pretty cool

Whoops got beat to it.

Nice, Orks can finally field a warboss with the standard 4++ that you need to compete. Might just be the nail in Ghaz's casket though, as a biker boss with the Klaw and this is quite tasty.

Seems pretty good!

 TedNugent wrote:
That preview is fire even with just a fraction of the reveals. 2 CP to get 2d3 discard lowest on 14 Lootas.

Extra movement buff on a Morkanaut could make KFF a thing on vehicles.

I am fascinated by the specialist detachments. The burna one is whatever but it highlights how there has to be at least one that is the sauce.

Yea I am so hype. This could bust open tons of builds for Orks.

That’s pretty good. Add on to that Fists of Gork and the Goff trait alongside the Killa Klaw and that’s quite a hefty melee monster

Interetsing stuff. There's more psychic powers and "traits" for sure. Glad the orks got something..

So all the Warbosses swapped their Mega Armour for Iron Haloes.

 Dysartes wrote:

 Oguhmek wrote:

PiñaColada wrote:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/03/17/orks-da-new-rulezgw-homepage-post-3/

New ork stuff, da flying 'eadbutt is great haha!

Huh, yea that one is pretty useful, but neither the other strategem nor the specialist mob one will make my burna boyz any better. If burnas were Assault D6 maybee, but with D3? Don't bother. It's a shame, I love the models...

Rerolling the number of shots from burnas (and equivalent weapons) isn't useful?

I think it could be interesting on certain units, but probably not burna boyz, since even if you roll a 3 those guys are just kinda not great. however, that kultur on a flyer wing detachment of burna bommers could be awesome.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Fresh from the Book of Faces...

Spoiler:

For those who can't or don't want to see it:
It's a Stratagem called "Da Biggest Boss". It's 1 CP, used before the battle. You select a Warboss model in your army and add 1 to that model's Wounds and Attacks characteristics and it gains a 4+ invulnerable save. You can only use this once per battle, and only if your army does not include Ghazghkull Thraka.

Haha - slayer gets the totally not sloppy and lazy Ghazghkull rules he wanted!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Though, my 2,000 point list that only includes units with ranged weapons that hit automatically would be pretty goddamn hilarious with the burna subkultur

Sadly, that included a ton of models that are Legends now, and the signature models of the list relied on the Bad Moonz relic and the Snakebitez relic.

Basically I had a big mek on bike with 2x kombi-scorchas, one of which was the gobshot blunderbuss, so he put out 4d6 S5 AP-1 D1 autohits at 8" range, and I had a deffkilla wartrike with the brogs buzzbomb (3d6 S5 AP-1 D1 shots to a unit within 6" and 2d6 more to another unit within 6" of the first unit. The list also had skorcha buggies which are now legends as well. and quad-scorcha deff dreads.

 Trimarius wrote:
Nice, Orks can finally field a warboss with the standard 4++ that you need to compete. Might just be the nail in Ghaz's casket though, as a biker boss with the Klaw and this is quite tasty.

Perhaps you can convert roller skates on Ghaz and use him as a biker biggest boss!

 Crimson wrote:

 Trimarius wrote:
Nice, Orks can finally field a warboss with the standard 4++ that you need to compete. Might just be the nail in Ghaz's casket though, as a biker boss with the Klaw and this is quite tasty.

Perhaps you can convert roller skates on Ghaz and use him as a biker biggest boss!

Have him be pulled along by a team of squigs, maybe?

 Kanluwen wrote:
Fresh from the Book of Faces...

Spoiler:

For those who can't or don't want to see it:
It's a Stratagem called "Da Biggest Boss". It's 1 CP, used before the battle. You select a Warboss model in your army and add 1 to that model's Wounds and Attacks characteristics and it gains a 4+ invulnerable save. You can only use this once per battle, and only if your army does not include Ghazghkull Thraka.

That's the final nail in the coffin for Ghaz being of any use. Great job, GW.