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.

I know it may be weird to talk about apocalypse with 9th codices rolling out but I was always interested in apocalypse gameplay during 8th, unfortunately I never got around to playing it before lockdown and other commitments. Now I'm wondering if there's been any indication that GW is going to revisit their apocalypse rules to take into account all the new units.

While we're here I may as well ask, for those that played, what would you like to see updated or done differently aside from new units?

 Mixzremixzd wrote:
I know it may be weird to talk about apocalypse with 9th codices rolling out but I was always interested in apocalypse gameplay during 8th, unfortunately I never got around to playing it before lockdown and other commitments. Now I'm wondering if there's been any indication that GW is going to revisit their apocalypse rules to take into account all the new units.

While we're here I may as well ask, for those that played, what would you like to see updated or done differently aside from new units?

Apocalypse is a great core system that is unfortunately limited by a couple issues that honestly seem like simple math errors.

in general the only big structural issue I can see is at the very end of the unit size scale with things like random 1pl character models (that just should not exist in apoc tbh, you do not need to have apoc rules for a fething sslyth bodyguard for your drukhari army) that would be clearly and obviously abused by a person interested in powergaming, and certain hyper-fragile units like gretchins and kroot that in large units are vastly more durable than they should be because of the small blast/large blast system.

A trait for dedicated infantry-clearing weapons called "Suppressive" that would allow the weapon to cause multiple small blasts on a target instead of the usual sequence of small then large then another small would probably fix the issue.

Having played apocalypse, I find it quite the enjoyable system, though neither myself were my opponents were powergamers interested in breaking it.

It makes more sense for 40k games than 40k does though, in terms of scale and abstraction imo. Alternating activation of detachments is awesome, as is damage resolution at the end of the round.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Having played apocalypse, I find it quite the enjoyable system, though neither myself were my opponents were powergamers interested in breaking it.

It makes more sense for 40k games than 40k does though, in terms of scale and abstraction imo. Alternating activation of detachments is awesome, as is damage resolution at the end of the round.

^yep.

In my experience the thing people don't like about it is giving up all their units' various and sundry special abilities from 40k.

But man alive I wish I could convince folks to go to an alt activation system.

probably not apoc's one, for 40k I'd probably go for something like Necromunda: players select a CHARACTER unit and they and everything within 6" of them activates. After all characters have been activated, players take turns activating units not within 6" of characters.

Add a 1CP universal stratagem to priority activate 1 unit (which does not activate others, if it is a CHARACTER)

In 9th ed players don't bring enough distinct detachments to make detachment activation feasible.

Given the average rate of update of specialist games maybe in six or eight years?

Apoc did receive 1 update so far. I think another update IS coming, but it might not be for another 6 months or so. All these new units they are making need to come out in 40k so that they can get their datasheets in apoc in one big lump. Or at least thats how GW is seeing it for some reason. They COULD be releasing the datasheets as the units are released but they aren't.

That being said Apoc is by far the better game. It just is. You could even just take the missions from 40k whole sale and just play them in apoc and it would work great.

I guess the worst case scenario, aside from being left behind in 8th, is for GW to wait until all their codices or at least the ones with new units first have been updated first and then doing apoc in one go on the side. Which should be a little over a year from now given a generous pace of 2 books a month?

If I recall correctly, the first/last update to the Apocalypse datasheets was around the time the Space Marines 8th 2.0 Codex was released, and the update included the new models from the Shadowspear box. So roughly mid/Summer 2019.

With the pace GW is working on 9th, AOS, and the new Blood Bowl, I would not expect any update to Apocalypse datasheets until after a few more 9th codexes are released that coincide with new model releases. So maybe late 2021 is my guess.

That being said, have there really been that many new models released since mid-2019? You have the new indomitus box set and necron models, new ATV and bunker; anything else really significant? Apocalypse datasheets are very simple with excellent commonly-used USRs, so why wait for GW? In my opinion it would not be difficult at all to create new, "house-ruled" Apocalypse datasheets with balanced stats and power levels for any new models released.

Side note: For any readers of this thread that have not yet tried Apocalypse: Yes, it is much better than the modern 40k rulesets, including 9th edition 40k, and works very well at 100-150 power level games (roughly 1500-2500 points in 8th-9th edition points). If you don't mind giving up the layers of rules minutiea of modern 40k for a more enjoyable and easier-to-learn game experience you would do yourself a favor to pick up the box set (currently averaging $50 buy-it-now on ebay), download the free datasheets for all armies, and try out a few games.

Apocalypse is, sadly, a dead game.

 Mixzremixzd wrote:
I guess the worst case scenario, aside from being left behind in 8th, is for GW to wait until all their codices or at least the ones with new units first have been updated first and then doing apoc in one go on the side. Which should be a little over a year from now given a generous pace of 2 books a month?

Assuming they don't decide to do another wave of Primaris releases and redo all the supplements, or add sub-faction supplements to other armies, or something like that.

my guess is sometime during 9th edition we'll get a "2.0" apocylpse that includes datasheets for all the new stuff and smooths over any rules oddities.

There are like... 7 or 8 new primaris units/kits/options plus all of the new necron stuff at the very least. I would say there are easily 20 new datasheets missing from Apoc. Also Shadowsun is still representative of her old model

I totally would have played Apocalypse, but I'm not a fan of AA- I like breaks; I like being able to coordinate between multiple units rather than having every plan interrupted and wrecked because I only get to move one unit at a time.

Still, I would have played it and I'm sure I would have liked it, although I might have found it a little too simple.

Then Crusade happened, and I'm never going back. Also, with the changes to Game size rules, and have actual missions designed for 3k armies, there isn't as big a niche.

maybe once all the codexes drop they will update it with any new units etc.. If i was going to update it thats how id do it.

 Argive wrote:
maybe once all the codexes drop they will update it with any new units etc.. If i was going to update it thats how id do it.

It's unfortunate considering I think both KT and Apocalypse have better basic mechanics than 40k.

PenitentJake wrote:
I totally would have played Apocalypse, but I'm not a fan of AA- I like breaks; I like being able to coordinate between multiple units rather than having every plan interrupted and wrecked because I only get to move one unit at a time.

Still, I would have played it and I'm sure I would have liked it, although I might have found it a little too simple.

Then Crusade happened, and I'm never going back. Also, with the changes to Game size rules, and have actual missions designed for 3k armies, there isn't as big a niche.

And here is proof you've never even tried Apocalypse. AA is on a detachment basis, not a unit basis.

It's hardly a "Gotcha!" moment when the guy already said he hadn't played Apoc, BCB... sheesh.

Apoc is a great system, lots of cool rules and simple to play mechanics.

It falls down on a few easily fixable points, as mentioned above the single inconsequential character units are annoying and large squads of weak infantry doesn't really have weapons that are good against them making them more durable than they should be.
Some unit datasheet are just out of whack, in a points of stat way that need correcting.

The other main issue for me is the stratagem cards (is that what they are called?) there are too many of them available to a player and their power varies greatly especially in some odd cases where they can be applied to massive forgeworld models that they were not designed to effect - our group had some issues with the tyranid biotitan being more or less unkillable.

Unfortunately I don't think GW is interested in giving the rules a little spit and polish, it wouldn't take much but its wasn't a huge selling product as far as I can tell and that means they won't support it.

I think the best case would be for the community to start to patch the game, kinda like they did with Blood Bowl back in the day.

I think we will see an update in time, maybe after all or the majority of the codexes are updated. They seem to have current 40k set up for 500-3000pts, anything below 500 play kill team, and over 3000 play apoc. I think that is even stated in the core rulebook.

The thing is apoc is a better game at 2k then 40k is.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

PenitentJake wrote:
I totally would have played Apocalypse, but I'm not a fan of AA- I like breaks; I like being able to coordinate between multiple units rather than having every plan interrupted and wrecked because I only get to move one unit at a time.

Still, I would have played it and I'm sure I would have liked it, although I might have found it a little too simple.

Then Crusade happened, and I'm never going back. Also, with the changes to Game size rules, and have actual missions designed for 3k armies, there isn't as big a niche.

And here is proof you've never even tried Apocalypse. AA is on a detachment basis, not a unit basis.

Never claimed to have played. Said "I would have played." As in "I was planning on picking up Apocalypse, but then 9th dropped, so I didn't bother."

However, AA a detachment at a time is cool; it would allow enough units to act at a time to do some coordination. Now that I've been reminded of this, I may still give it a try if any of my Crusades make it above 3k. That's a bit of a long shot, but it is possible.

Lance845 wrote:The thing is apoc is a better game at 2k then 40k is.

I know, right? Or even if you stick to 150PL per side as suggested (which is equivalent to around 3k points), it's still a faster and smoother game.

PenitentJake wrote:Never claimed to have played. Said "I would have played." As in "I was planning on picking up Apocalypse, but then 9th dropped, so I didn't bother."

However, AA a detachment at a time is cool; it would allow enough units to act at a time to do some coordination. Now that I've been reminded of this, I may still give it a try if any of my Crusades make it above 3k. That's a bit of a long shot, but it is possible.

Yeah, my bad on that, sorry. Glad I "convinced" you to give it a try at least! My recommendation is to stick to 150PL but as Lance845 says it works fine at 100PL.