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.

Totally agree with everything you wrote. I had the same feeling after playing it.

I think OPR is probably not a good competitive ruleset, (not that 40k is either), but for friendly gaming, it is an amazing 40k substitute. It feels like 40k, just a lot better

edwardmyst wrote:
My friend and I played our first game of OPR, Grim Dark Future.
(...)
Overall, I felt like I was back playing a tabletop, miniatures battle game. (...)

Refreshing to hear, I index on everything you have said and have high hopes to play more OPR casually. I'm not saying I won't be playing some 40k with other groups, but for my house games and some more casual/narrative play the lower barrier of entry and flexibility of OPR is a big win for me. For one, I feel like making up units and powers in 40k is a challenge because of the complexity of the game, but with OPR you slap together a few stats and boom, a much more playable custom model/stat line that has much lower potential to imbalance the game as in 40k.

Arhurt. Those are very good points. 40k continues to be a far more complex game, which can create greater tactical play (although never forget how really simple Chess is and yet remains the staple for this). That then creates balance issues. It is it's own game.
OPR is tabletop light on the build side in comparison, but I found my play on the table far more involved.

I'm actually going to be using Warstuff from the One-Off games section of OPR to get my 7yo son into wargaming, and I'm REALLY looking forward to getting anyone I know to play a few games of Warfleets: FTL with me. Dad never liked the mechanics of the card interplay of Star Wars Armada, but FTL might be a new and more accessible way to use all my Armada ships, and there's even some additional rules to add in some of the elements of Armada to the core game.

edwardmyst wrote:
40k continues to be a far more complex game

The word you're looking for is convoluted.

 lord_blackfang wrote:

edwardmyst wrote:
40k continues to be a far more complex game

The word you're looking for is convoluted.

This. 40k just has so many needless steps that ultimately add little to the tactical depth of the game. All it does it create more illusion of a complex game, when in reality it is just a convoluted mess of a system.

Pretty much. Every edition of 40k has always been a combination of a solid core game, with an ever-increasing pile of add-ons that eventually contradict each other.

 stonehorse wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:

edwardmyst wrote:
40k continues to be a far more complex game

The word you're looking for is convoluted.

This. 40k just has so many needless steps that ultimately add little to the tactical depth of the game. All it does it create more illusion of a complex game, when in reality it is just a convoluted mess of a system.

You are all correct. I was being polite to avoid the GW apologists...

Ah. Hopefully we are far enough down the forum index to not be noticed

This is a long post. Here is a set of mission objectives my group came up with. Any comments on balance etc would be welcome. We play on a 6x4 table, 12" deployment on long edge. I do not have access to the OPR missions at the moment, so...

Stalemate:
Primary mission:
Both sides are probing the enemy for openings for the next offensive. At the same time, both forces are trying to deny the enemy such information. Therefore, the high ground is crucial. Five locations with vantage points overseeing the battlefield and possible avenues of attack have been marked. At the end of the game, each is worth 1 VP if you hold it.

Open goals: Choose one of these options and tell your opponent what you have chosen.
1. Rescue Mission. One of your heroes has been captured and needs to be rescued. Pick a hero model. Your opponent must pick one of their units that has captured the hero. Your opponent must place these units (captured and capturer) together, in a terrain piece that is more than 6” from either deployment zone. The unit that has captured the hero cannot move until the second battle-round (they may shoot, and defend themselves). Your hero does nothing until you rescue it by destroying the unit that has captured it when it joins the rescuing unit. The hero cannot be harmed in any way until he has been rescued. If this hero then survives the battle, you gain 1 VP.
2. It’s personal. You have a personal beef with the enemy warlord. Kill them! Your opponent must name a hero their warlord. You gain 1 VP if this model is slain.
3. Forward positions. You need a foothold in the enemy’s territory. If at the end of the game, you have more units in their deployment zone than they do, you gain 1vp.
4. Hold the line! You are not prepared to attack yet, and must stall your opponent by refusing them any advantage. If at the end of the game, you have more units than your opponent within your deployment zone, you gain 1 VP.

Secret Agenda: Choose two of these options and write it down in secret.
1. Intelligence cache. A secret stash of vital intelligence, much needed supplies, or a spy has been hidden on the battlefield and your goal is to retrieve it. Choose a terrain piece more than 9” from your deployment zone. You need to search this terrain piece with a unit. You must inform your opponent when you begin searching. If that unit survives through six, unit activations by your opponent, you gain 1 VP.
2. That’s mine! A member of an enemy unit holds an item you want. You must destroy that unit completely, and then search the bodies. Inform your opponent when you destroy the unit and place a marker on the table where it was eliminated. You successfully search the body if one of your units survives through three, unit activations by your opponent. Gain 1 VP.
3. Extended Recon. Your forces have secretly infiltrated a unit behind enemy lines, and now it is ready to return with its information. Choose one of your units at the beginning of the game. It is now returning from behind lines. Place it in reserve. On turn two, it must enter the board from the table edge backing the opponent’s deployment zone making a normal move. If that unit then survives the game, you gain 1VP.
4. Open the Flank. You hope to open one flank for your offensive. Secretly choose one short table edge. You must eliminate the enemy from this flank so that your following forces can roll through. If, at the end of the game, your opponent has no units within 20” of that table edge, and you have at least one unit within 20”, you gain 1 VP.
5. Prisoner Snatch: The high command has demanded a few prisoners. This is not an easy task. To capture without killing. In any melee combat, you may try to capture an enemy model rather than kill them. Your unit receives -1 to its hit rolls to represent this. If you remove 5 models in this way during the game, you receive 1 VP.
6. Smash and demoralize. You have decided the key to your opponent’s ability to defend lies in only a few units. Choose 3 of your opponent’s units (at least one of these must be a unit of 5 or more models or a unit with Toughness. None of these units can be a Hero). Earn 1 VP at the end of the game if you have destroyed all three of these units.

So I had my first two games (one 750points, one 2000) of Grimdark future, Orks vs. Tau. My Orks got tabled in both games, first game was pretty close, though. Here are my first thoughts:

positive:
+ more tactical depth than 40K due to alternating activations
+ smooth and fast gameplay, our 2000P game took about two and a half hours
+ in 40K you waste time rereading rules, in GF you waste time thinking how to react to your opponent
+ the army lists give you more options to equip your units on two pages than GW is capable to pull of on a hundred pages

neutral:
- the basic mission is okay for test games, but just like the eternal war/ matched play missions in 40K after having played it two times you need something more interesting

negative:
- balance seemed off, reminded me of the problems of 6th/ 7th edition where CC armies were having a hard time against shooters (note: my Orks were basically in cover all the time, didn't help them much)
- I didn't expect the game to be that lethal, but since Tau had Ap1 on everything I only had 6+ all the time, I would have liked some cover save
- similar to the old editions of 40K, units that aren't specialized have a hard time, I'd like an action that allows you to shoot and charge 6'' or something

Even if the opposition has AP weapons (which can admittedly be nasty against forces with a bad defense), remember they still have to take a -1 To Hit penalty if you are in cover, unless they are using a weapon with [Blast].

 AegisGrimm wrote:
Even if the opposition has AP weapons (which can admittedly be nasty against forces with a bad defense), remember they still have to take a -1 To Hit penalty if you are in cover, unless they are using a weapon with [Blast].

Yeah, the Tau had -1 to hit most of the time, -2 when firing at Kommandos, but when 28 shots come your way it doesn't help much . The advanced rules have some additional actions like stealth move I guess these might help Orks a little. Also strats to make you faster look nice, we'll try these out next time.

Just played two 1500 pts games of Age of Fantasy in maaaybe 3.5 hours, including swapping opponents in between.

Goblins remain undefeated, vanquishing Ogres and High Elves. Phalanx remains the meta definer for us.

Watching the 2.5 beta with interest. Goblins made it out like bandits with all the unit customization, the other two armies not so much.

What factions would be good to start with in Grimdark Future?

Edit: I have Chaos Marines for 40k, so lemme look at those guys.

Just thought I'd +1 what everyone is saying so far, and introduce myself...

I used to play RPGs years ago, and I've always been peripherally aware of 40k. When I wanted to get my 7yo son some dice so he could do his own randomization for a school activity, I took him to the GW affiliated game store in the neighborhood. He was ENTHRALLED by the tables, the terrain, the minis, the art - the whole 40k aesthetic fascinated him, especially the idea of playing with "little soldiers and monsters". To be honest, I'd never really outgrown my fascination with all of it either.

I explained the basics of how tabletop games work - it's like playing with toys, except there are very specific rules and you use dice to determine what happens. He wanted to play right away, I said I'd have to look into it and see if it's something we could do together.

*Insert a montage of several weeks of watching youtube and reading forums, reddit, etc*

When I realized what committing to GW meant in terms of time, money and then more time and money every few months when they update the rules, as well as their litigious attitude towards fan generated content, and especially the glacial pace of the actual gameplay - I realized that I am not a good candidate to join the ranks of 40k players. And my son is an even less likely match.

I did find a reference to OPR and GF in my research, and I was immediately hooked. For all the reasons everyone has mentioned in this thread, I'm sold on it. My son and I played our first game last night using the 1page ruleset and the quickstart with paper minis. His orcs wiped the table with my BB, he got to practice his reading and arithmetic and strategic thinking and everyone had a blast.

My wife has agreed we need a 3d printer - looking forward to putting a proper army together!

Nice first post, welcome.

I've dove as deep into the rules as I currently can without getting a game in. I've tried to convince my partners to get into it, no dice yet. But hey at least there's some good battle reports out there.

One question though: is the army forge more recently updated than the books, or the other way around? Because the army books on the google drive are... often quite different.

The latest army books are here, version 2.50 beta (rulebooks stay the same)
https://webapp.onepagerules.com/game-systems/

 lord_blackfang wrote:
The latest army books are here, version 2.50 beta (rulebooks stay the same)
https://webapp.onepagerules.com/game-systems/

Ah, that explains a lot. The google drive ones linked on the website are way outdated then. Destroyers being 3 to a unit is... odd, considering what they're representing/represented by.

A local guy new to wargaming just did a demo of Grimdark Future for me, a 20+ year gaming veteran. I had an absolute blast, and wish I would of tried it 5 years ago. Really a fun time.

 cole1114 wrote:

Ah, that explains a lot. The google drive ones linked on the website are way outdated then. Destroyers being 3 to a unit is... odd, considering what they're representing/represented by.

They still come in units of 3 in the online army builder and 2.50 lists.

Forget what they are in 40k, this is a different game. A bit bloodier, a lot simpler. I think of it as the 3rd edition rulebook lists, but updated for all current armies.

Destroyers in GDF are resilient and capable units, even in threes, and Ambush makes them very dangerous mid to late game A heavy weapon hit with Deadly[3] is still nasty though.

Unit cost is calculated differently from That Other Game too: missile launchers, for example, can get very expensive in the hands of good-Quality units. In my limited plays of GDF, Destroyers do feel like a squad of you-know-what.

It is a great, fun game - I really recommend playing.

So, I had my 3rd and 4th game of GDF yesterday, this time Space Wolves vs. Orks. We played with the full rulebook this time, so stratagems and additional actions were in use. The experience for me as the Ork player was better than in our first games (against Tau), because the strat mechanic and additional actions allow for more player interaction (that is already higher than in 40K due to activations). I also had my first victory though the scenario seemed to favor me as the attacker - an orbital rocket bombardment is quite effective against marines as it turns out .

I'm really tempted to get more games in, but some criticism remains: the game is possibly even more lethal than 9th and multipurpose units have little place since your CC units will never shoot and your shooty units will die when they get attacked, so CC weapons on them seem wasted.