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.

 bullyboy wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Spoiler:

 bullyboy wrote:

gungo wrote:

 Chamberlain wrote:
There is a huge advantage to a 30" width that you add multiples of. Standard folding table widths.

Kill team and warcry boards fit on standard folding tables that tons of game stores use so you can have two games going on one table, just like 2 games of Magic the Gathering fit on one of these tables.

Combat Patrol and Incursion at 30" tables means that you can have one game per table for events and still have room on each side for books, dice, reserves and so on.

Exactly people keep missing this fact...
This is really the size table most people in the world play 40k on...
Most players don’t have neoprene mats....
most players don’t have a giant 6x4 plywood board...
Most players are already playing on a folding table at thier house or in thier garage... or at the local Game store (Using the same tables for card games) or they are playing on a kitchen table that is A similar size...
This change makes 40k more accessible!
Longest time me and my friends played on a kitchen table
Then we upgraded to green felt on the table
Eventually we bought plywood and kept in a garage
and eventually we got a neoprene mat but that was years later. As poor teenagers what cash we had went into models not expensive tables

That doesn't really make much sense when you get to 2000pt games though, which is what most people play (at least what I've seen through 8th, maybe a few 1750). You still need a similar size table as current to play a 44x60 game.

For me, it's not even about the rules....it's more about the fact I have 6x4 mats, my local has tables for 6x4 games with similar mats, etc. I don't want to spend extra time taping off areas of the map...looks dumb.
And yes, you don't have to tell me it's just a minimum, I get that. However, people are sheep and if this becomes the new standard, it will spread through the gaming community until it becomes pretty much standard.
With knights, fliers, etc on the table...it already feels way too small (epic would be much better), so why the heck are they shrinking it further? I just don't see a rational reason outside of maybe hoping to dominate new ales af terrain/mats at this specific size.

Minimum size means you don't need to make the play space smaller if you don't want to. You're literally inventing a reason to be upset out of nothing. Minimum table size just means "your play space must be this large for a balanced game".

Seriously, read what I actually wrote, don't skim.
I fully understand what minimum means, I'm simply pointing out that it will become standard....check back with me in 3 months and see where i stand,
Oh, when was the last time you played a 40K game without the rule of 3? You know you don't have to, right?

ITC has said they will be cutting boards down for the events they host, but they aren't making it a rule for ITC events being hosted by others to do so. That alone with keep the incentive around for people to keep playing on 6x4s.

Not to mention most stores and clubs have pre-existing tables set up specifically to be 6x4. They aren't going to run out and change that just because you can play on a smaller table.

Rule of 3 was largely adopted because it affected balance across the game and prevented spam lists from ruining every game, casual or otherwise, people played.

This table size? All it means is that your table needs to be that size or bigger to have a balanced game, and if your table is bigger, why not use it as is?

 bullyboy wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Spoiler:

 bullyboy wrote:

gungo wrote:

 Chamberlain wrote:
There is a huge advantage to a 30" width that you add multiples of. Standard folding table widths.

Kill team and warcry boards fit on standard folding tables that tons of game stores use so you can have two games going on one table, just like 2 games of Magic the Gathering fit on one of these tables.

Combat Patrol and Incursion at 30" tables means that you can have one game per table for events and still have room on each side for books, dice, reserves and so on.

Exactly people keep missing this fact...
This is really the size table most people in the world play 40k on...
Most players don’t have neoprene mats....
most players don’t have a giant 6x4 plywood board...
Most players are already playing on a folding table at thier house or in thier garage... or at the local Game store (Using the same tables for card games) or they are playing on a kitchen table that is A similar size...
This change makes 40k more accessible!
Longest time me and my friends played on a kitchen table
Then we upgraded to green felt on the table
Eventually we bought plywood and kept in a garage
and eventually we got a neoprene mat but that was years later. As poor teenagers what cash we had went into models not expensive tables

That doesn't really make much sense when you get to 2000pt games though, which is what most people play (at least what I've seen through 8th, maybe a few 1750). You still need a similar size table as current to play a 44x60 game.

For me, it's not even about the rules....it's more about the fact I have 6x4 mats, my local has tables for 6x4 games with similar mats, etc. I don't want to spend extra time taping off areas of the map...looks dumb.
And yes, you don't have to tell me it's just a minimum, I get that. However, people are sheep and if this becomes the new standard, it will spread through the gaming community until it becomes pretty much standard.
With knights, fliers, etc on the table...it already feels way too small (epic would be much better), so why the heck are they shrinking it further? I just don't see a rational reason outside of maybe hoping to dominate new ales af terrain/mats at this specific size.

Minimum size means you don't need to make the play space smaller if you don't want to. You're literally inventing a reason to be upset out of nothing. Minimum table size just means "your play space must be this large for a balanced game".

Seriously, read what I actually wrote, don't skim.
I fully understand what minimum means, I'm simply pointing out that it will become standard....check back with me in 3 months and see where i stand,
Oh, when was the last time you played a 40K game without the rule of 3? You know you don't have to, right?

The big problem is that none of the lengthwise deployments work on a 30" board. Every single weapon and most melee units and most psychic powers will be in range turn 1 every game. Even if they go down to a 9" deployment zone or w/e everything in 40k is either so fast, so long range, or both that there's really not any room to out deploy on the smaller widths. Even cramming your army into a corner will see your opponent in full effective range immediately.

Hopefully people just continue to do 6x4 as always for tournaments and use the (imo much gakkier) smaller table options for beer and pretzels games in someone's dorm room.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Spoiler:

 bullyboy wrote:

gungo wrote:

 Chamberlain wrote:
There is a huge advantage to a 30" width that you add multiples of. Standard folding table widths.

Kill team and warcry boards fit on standard folding tables that tons of game stores use so you can have two games going on one table, just like 2 games of Magic the Gathering fit on one of these tables.

Combat Patrol and Incursion at 30" tables means that you can have one game per table for events and still have room on each side for books, dice, reserves and so on.

Exactly people keep missing this fact...
This is really the size table most people in the world play 40k on...
Most players don’t have neoprene mats....
most players don’t have a giant 6x4 plywood board...
Most players are already playing on a folding table at thier house or in thier garage... or at the local Game store (Using the same tables for card games) or they are playing on a kitchen table that is A similar size...
This change makes 40k more accessible!
Longest time me and my friends played on a kitchen table
Then we upgraded to green felt on the table
Eventually we bought plywood and kept in a garage
and eventually we got a neoprene mat but that was years later. As poor teenagers what cash we had went into models not expensive tables

That doesn't really make much sense when you get to 2000pt games though, which is what most people play (at least what I've seen through 8th, maybe a few 1750). You still need a similar size table as current to play a 44x60 game.

For me, it's not even about the rules....it's more about the fact I have 6x4 mats, my local has tables for 6x4 games with similar mats, etc. I don't want to spend extra time taping off areas of the map...looks dumb.
And yes, you don't have to tell me it's just a minimum, I get that. However, people are sheep and if this becomes the new standard, it will spread through the gaming community until it becomes pretty much standard.
With knights, fliers, etc on the table...it already feels way too small (epic would be much better), so why the heck are they shrinking it further? I just don't see a rational reason outside of maybe hoping to dominate new ales af terrain/mats at this specific size.

Minimum size means you don't need to make the play space smaller if you don't want to. You're literally inventing a reason to be upset out of nothing. Minimum table size just means "your play space must be this large for a balanced game".

Seriously, read what I actually wrote, don't skim.
I fully understand what minimum means, I'm simply pointing out that it will become standard....check back with me in 3 months and see where i stand,
Oh, when was the last time you played a 40K game without the rule of 3? You know you don't have to, right?

ITC has said they will be cutting boards down for the events they host, but they aren't making it a rule for ITC events being hosted by others to do so. That alone with keep the incentive around for people to keep playing on 6x4s.

Not to mention most stores and clubs have pre-existing tables set up specifically to be 6x4. They aren't going to run out and change that just because you can play on a smaller table.

Rule of 3 was largely adopted because it affected balance across the game and prevented spam lists from ruining every game, casual or otherwise, people played.

This table size? All it means is that your table needs to be that size or bigger to have a balanced game, and if your table is bigger, why not use it as is?

Because if I'm practicing for LVO, or other ITC events, I need to use the same rules they do. The game is completely different on a 30" wide table than it is on a 48" wide table. Every game I play on a 6x4 would be a total waste of time because it isn't representative of the games I'm trying to practice for.

ERJAK wrote:

Because if I'm practicing for LVO, or other ITC events, I need to use the same rules they do. The game is completely different on a 30" wide table than it is on a 48" wide table. Every game I play on a 6x4 would be a total waste of time because it isn't representative of the games I'm trying to practice for.

And yet, some ITC tournaments will still be on 6x4 tables because Reese is only making it a thing at FLG run ITC events and leaving it up to TOs for all others. Which means you need to practice on both sizes depending on which events you participate in.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

ERJAK wrote:

Because if I'm practicing for LVO, or other ITC events, I need to use the same rules they do. The game is completely different on a 30" wide table than it is on a 48" wide table. Every game I play on a 6x4 would be a total waste of time because it isn't representative of the games I'm trying to practice for.

And yet, some ITC tournaments will still be on 6x4 tables because Reese is only making it a thing at FLG run ITC events and leaving it up to TOs for all others. Which means you need to practice on both sizes depending on which events you participate in.

And like I said, check back in 3 months and see what has become the standard. I do hope I'm wrong, truly. I just know how most gamers are.

 bullyboy wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

ERJAK wrote:

Because if I'm practicing for LVO, or other ITC events, I need to use the same rules they do. The game is completely different on a 30" wide table than it is on a 48" wide table. Every game I play on a 6x4 would be a total waste of time because it isn't representative of the games I'm trying to practice for.

And yet, some ITC tournaments will still be on 6x4 tables because Reese is only making it a thing at FLG run ITC events and leaving it up to TOs for all others. Which means you need to practice on both sizes depending on which events you participate in.

And like I said, check back in 3 months and see what has become the standard. I do hope I'm wrong, truly. I just know how most gamers are.

Resistant to change?

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

ERJAK wrote:

Because if I'm practicing for LVO, or other ITC events, I need to use the same rules they do. The game is completely different on a 30" wide table than it is on a 48" wide table. Every game I play on a 6x4 would be a total waste of time because it isn't representative of the games I'm trying to practice for.

And yet, some ITC tournaments will still be on 6x4 tables because Reese is only making it a thing at FLG run ITC events and leaving it up to TOs for all others. Which means you need to practice on both sizes depending on which events you participate in.

And like I said, check back in 3 months and see what has become the standard. I do hope I'm wrong, truly. I just know how most gamers are.

Resistant to change?

Obviously, otherwise so many people wouldn't be so adverse to getting rid of IGOUGO for a more tactical game experience

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

ERJAK wrote:

Because if I'm practicing for LVO, or other ITC events, I need to use the same rules they do. The game is completely different on a 30" wide table than it is on a 48" wide table. Every game I play on a 6x4 would be a total waste of time because it isn't representative of the games I'm trying to practice for.

And yet, some ITC tournaments will still be on 6x4 tables because Reese is only making it a thing at FLG run ITC events and leaving it up to TOs for all others. Which means you need to practice on both sizes depending on which events you participate in.

And like I said, check back in 3 months and see what has become the standard. I do hope I'm wrong, truly. I just know how most gamers are.

Resistant to change?

Obviously, otherwise so many people wouldn't be so adverse to getting rid of IGOUGO for a more tactical game experience

I was thinking about how the community has been freaking out everytime GW says they're changing something and how it'll ruin the game forever (or so I've been told).

Personally I just don't think AA is the magic patch everyone says it is, but each to their own on that hill. I don't feel like dying on it today.

I definitely feel like the movement speed and weapon ranges all need to be adjusted for these new table sizes.

 Red_Five wrote:
I definitely feel like the movement speed and weapon ranges all need to be adjusted for these new table sizes.

Maybe a return of night fighting?

ERJAK wrote:

Because if I'm practicing for LVO, or other ITC events, I need to use the same rules they do. The game is completely different on a 30" wide table than it is on a 48" wide table. Every game I play on a 6x4 would be a total waste of time because it isn't representative of the games I'm trying to practice for.

(hope I have the right person attributed here)

The LVO, ITC, and so on? While big names in the competitive scene, they're just a small fraction of the overall 40K experience and GW's aiming at bringing in a lot of new players for this edition, so giving minimums that focus on the average dinner table or folding tables in a garage is *extremely* smart.

My local store uses 8' X 4' boards for bigger games (such as 2K), scaling down to 6' x 4' for 1500. It's not what everyone uses, but you get used to it.

If your focus is more on "I want to travel the tourney circuit!" then you need to practice on tables matching what they use.

If your focus is more on local games, then you can use smaller tables *if you want*, but it isn't required.

This just makes the minimum size a bit more firm.

It's seriously not a big deal. The sky's not falling. Just vreathe, play locally, and wait for the major tournies to release what size they'll be using, then shift gears to practicing for that. There's no point getting worked up on this one.

Kick back, relax, crack open a beverage, and focus on enjoying the game for a month or two. Training mode's down the road, you know?

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Red_Five wrote:
I definitely feel like the movement speed and weapon ranges all need to be adjusted for these new table sizes.

Maybe a return of night fighting?

The Eighth Legion would approve of that.

I'm totally cool with lowering the table size in the abstract, it's the doing it without reworking threat ranges thing that makes me worried. This and a lot of other stuff I'm seeing makes me think we're going to have a really rough first year or so of 9th until they get codexes out that fix the game for the new ruleset. I don't buy for a minute the idea that the PA books were set up to create a seamless transition.

The game will "work" using 8th edition numbers and books, but I doubt it'll work very well.

yukishiro1 wrote:
I'm totally cool with lowering the table size in the abstract, it's the doing it without reworking threat ranges thing that makes me worried. This and a lot of other stuff I'm seeing makes me think we're going to have a really rough first year or so of 9th until they get codexes out that fix the game for the new ruleset. I don't buy for a minute the idea that the PA books were set up to create a seamless transition.

The game will "work" using 8th edition numbers and books, but I doubt it'll work very well.

There is a day one errata, so hopefully it addresses some of that stuff, if the core rules don't.

I hope so, though I doubt that any day 1 errata is gonna go so far as to update movement statistics, stratagems, psychic powers, and the like.

I suspect what we're going to see is a big FAQ 3 months down the road that nerfs a lot of stuff.

But we'll see, maybe it really will work as well as they're saying. It'd be a first, but there's a first time for everything!

yukishiro1 wrote:
I hope so, though I doubt that any day 1 errata is gonna go so far as to update movement statistics, stratagems, psychic powers, and the like.

I suspect what we're going to see is a big FAQ 3 months down the road that nerfs a lot of stuff.

But we'll see, maybe it really will work as well as they're saying. It'd be a first, but there's a first time for everything!

We've seen a bigger playtesting team for 9th than 8th had, with far more tournament player support. I sincerely hope all that extra manpower wasn't wasted in getting that stuff pointed out and corrected.

gungo wrote:

Exactly people keep missing this fact...
This is really the size table most people in the world play 40k on...
Most players don’t have neoprene mats....
most players don’t have a giant 6x4 plywood board...
Most players are already playing on a folding table at thier house or in thier garage... or at the local Game store (Using the same tables for card games) or they are playing on a kitchen table that is A similar size...
This change makes 40k more accessible!
Longest time me and my friends played on a kitchen table
Then we upgraded to green felt on the table
Eventually we bought plywood and kept in a garage
and eventually we got a neoprene mat but that was years later. As poor teenagers what cash we had went into models not expensive tables

I started on a dining room table too. My parents' dining room table just happened to be 6x4 feet though. LOL. All you needed was a green tablecloth and we were good to go.

Another benefit of smaller tables is that my gut won't be knocking over as much stuff now when I'm measuring distances in my opponent's deployment zone.

 Red_Five wrote:


Why would you shave the tables? Now everyone will have a foot of space to place reserve and/or dead models, as well as books, bags, drinks, nachos, etc.

Or they can continue use same size as before and if model counts drop enjoy game where movement matters more than before

Reese: "Just how you move around the table is different"

I wonder if he's talking about the way terrain affects it or something else.

 bullyboy wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Spoiler:

 bullyboy wrote:

gungo wrote:

 Chamberlain wrote:
There is a huge advantage to a 30" width that you add multiples of. Standard folding table widths.

Kill team and warcry boards fit on standard folding tables that tons of game stores use so you can have two games going on one table, just like 2 games of Magic the Gathering fit on one of these tables.

Combat Patrol and Incursion at 30" tables means that you can have one game per table for events and still have room on each side for books, dice, reserves and so on.

Exactly people keep missing this fact...
This is really the size table most people in the world play 40k on...
Most players don’t have neoprene mats....
most players don’t have a giant 6x4 plywood board...
Most players are already playing on a folding table at thier house or in thier garage... or at the local Game store (Using the same tables for card games) or they are playing on a kitchen table that is A similar size...
This change makes 40k more accessible!
Longest time me and my friends played on a kitchen table
Then we upgraded to green felt on the table
Eventually we bought plywood and kept in a garage
and eventually we got a neoprene mat but that was years later. As poor teenagers what cash we had went into models not expensive tables

That doesn't really make much sense when you get to 2000pt games though, which is what most people play (at least what I've seen through 8th, maybe a few 1750). You still need a similar size table as current to play a 44x60 game.

For me, it's not even about the rules....it's more about the fact I have 6x4 mats, my local has tables for 6x4 games with similar mats, etc. I don't want to spend extra time taping off areas of the map...looks dumb.
And yes, you don't have to tell me it's just a minimum, I get that. However, people are sheep and if this becomes the new standard, it will spread through the gaming community until it becomes pretty much standard.
With knights, fliers, etc on the table...it already feels way too small (epic would be much better), so why the heck are they shrinking it further? I just don't see a rational reason outside of maybe hoping to dominate new ales af terrain/mats at this specific size.

Minimum size means you don't need to make the play space smaller if you don't want to. You're literally inventing a reason to be upset out of nothing. Minimum table size just means "your play space must be this large for a balanced game".

Seriously, read what I actually wrote, don't skim.
I fully understand what minimum means, I'm simply pointing out that it will become standard....check back with me in 3 months and see where i stand,
Oh, when was the last time you played a 40K game without the rule of 3? You know you don't have to, right?

It might be new standard for new boards built and bought. Nobody will cut existing ones since deployment maps don't require. You can play combat patrol on 10x9' and it works


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Oaka wrote:
Another benefit of smaller tables is that my gut won't be knocking over as much stuff now when I'm measuring distances in my opponent's deployment zone.

Tables where you play aren't set for easy access to other side? With deployment zones like hammer and anvil that is fairly essential. Heie we can so quick walk around solves it.

Speaking of deployment zones noticed gw abandoned one tool they had that had weakened alpha strike. Defender picking deployment map and where they deploy.

Or how Deep they deploy, but it will fix melee i heared, completely ignoring the fact that it will just be the extreme range outliers that will Profit even more from that.

Much Fun to be had getting a t1 dp with wings in your Face , much interaction aswell....

Oh wait

Not Online!!! wrote:
Or how Deep they deploy, but it will fix melee i heared, completely ignoring the fact that it will just be the extreme range outliers that will Profit even more from that.

Much Fun to be had getting a t1 dp with wings in your Face , much interaction aswell....

Oh wait

Watched Reese talk about everything that had released by Wens (it's in my post above) and he flat out said to forget what we know about 8th, just get it out of our mind. Basically the game has some big shifts I guess.

It's not balance related, so he might know what he's talking about in regards to the game changing.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Or how Deep they deploy, but it will fix melee i heared, completely ignoring the fact that it will just be the extreme range outliers that will Profit even more from that.

Much Fun to be had getting a t1 dp with wings in your Face , much interaction aswell....

Oh wait

Watched Reese talk about everything that had released by Wens (it's in my post above) and he flat out said to forget what we know about 8th, just get it out of our mind. Basically the game has some big shifts I guess.

It's not balance related, so he might know what he's talking about in regards to the game changing.

The hilarious part is that first the company promotional theme was ”9th is more like 8.5, it will be a smooth transition, everything old will work” and now it’s going to minitables, moving through models, no overwatch, tanks shooting in melee, every competitive first turn assault hitting home, GK smites all being in range turn 1 except from the couple units you can put in the corner, deep strikers really becoming unscreenable properly since you have no depth to create a layered defense, etc. And finally the transition will be so smooth you’ll go cutting your game mats.

And it wasn’t even GW who flat out said people should cut their game mats and forget everything with range higher than 36 because it’s never needed, it was Reece, who needs to sell something and fit more customers at his events. Nobody asked for this, but I’m sure there will be plenty of bullgak how dumbing down your game is actually good for you (read: him).

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Or how Deep they deploy, but it will fix melee i heared, completely ignoring the fact that it will just be the extreme range outliers that will Profit even more from that.

Much Fun to be had getting a t1 dp with wings in your Face , much interaction aswell....

Oh wait

Watched Reese talk about everything that had released by Wens (it's in my post above) and he flat out said to forget what we know about 8th, just get it out of our mind. Basically the game has some big shifts I guess.

It's not balance related, so he might know what he's talking about in regards to the game changing.

No, i call bs, we know what rules carry over and unless gw significantly lowers availability of movement shenanigans and the movement statistics that isn't going to happen.
Massed non fly melee will still suck and anything that has fly and other shenanigans will still be "smashing" fun.

I feel like there will be a lot of core stuff that is likely the same, but a lot of details are changing, but who the heck knows anymore. It's clear we don't have enough detail to know what hasn't changed since the only thing GW really has shown us is what has changed.

John D Law wrote:
Anyone notice the crazy Xenos portrait previewed? Some of that stuff is bizarre!

Lower right has to be a new tyranid model. Has to be.

I mean, the change or removal of 1-2 rules could completely change how we play the game, I already see lots of things that push for different list building which allow will make huge changes.

GW pushing a new board size based solely on what size tile they can cram in a box is the first truly disappointing thing about 9th.
And they certainly consider it the cherry on the cake that it will screw over all those evil third party game mat producers.

That the biggest tourneys are already bending over and sticking their bums up is even more disappointing.

I'm fairly sure that they explained multiple times that the driving force behind the KT board size decision was being able to fit it onto a regular table anywhere.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
GW pushing a new board size based solely on what size tile they can cram in a box is the first truly disappointing thing about 9th.
And they certainly consider it the cherry on the cake that it will screw over all those evil third party game mat producers.

That the biggest tourneys are already bending over and sticking their bums up is even more disappointing.

Screw them over? It's a boon for them, now they can sell a new mat to a lot of players who already have one and feel that they must play on the "correct" size.
Let's say you bought a 6'x4' mat from FLG and you're happy with the quality. If you're a tournament player, would you rather cut it to size (or mark the extra inches off) or buy a new one, that fits more easily on tables and takes up less room?
Same goes for tournament organizers: it's more convenient to buy new mats in order to fit more people in the room/conference hall/... than to continue using the old ones and have less participants. It's a large investment upfront but it allows for more money coming in down the line.