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 love how tneva82 constantly posts that their predictions are so accurate (or would be, if double turn didn't exist for aos) but has never once rose to the challenge of ever trying to prove it. Like literally once a person posts two lists they fade out of the topic as if they had never posted at alllll.

Part of it is the lack of player decisionmaking as well.

You can make wargames enjoyable with casters - and sometimes the casters can be the players. Tabletop CP does Chain of Command battle reports that are unedited and manage to get a following - and they aren't nearly as young or charismatic as the the TTT folks.

But the game itself.does some of the heavy lifting. Player choice is a lot more castable.when the options aren't so obvious. Rolled a 4,1,3 2,1 for your Command dice? Ooh let"s see how the player runs his army with this roll. Rolled a 6,6,2,1,5? Well, let's see if the player plans to take advantage of the double phase - but his enemy has a COC die and he probably hasn't guessed he has a flamethrower in support...

Etc.

The WH+ batreps edit the game fairly heavily to focus attention on the action; they're also hidden behind a pay wall, which is problematic...

Back in 2008, a buddy and I set up a table for three days, and we played one or two turns per night. We took somewhere in the neighbourhood of 900 photos with the plan of generating a stop-motion depiction of the action of the game. I did manage to string all the photos together, but I never got around to adding voices and music because the Hard drive died and I lost everything.

I've been meaning to get back into this sort of thing for quite a while- it's why I build such outlandish campaign scenarios. Crusade's progression system provides an interesting framework for linking games and demonstrating the growth of armies both on and off the battlefield- the time has never really been better to do the sort of things I've always wanted to do with the game.

In my ideal world, batreps would have layers that could be toggled on or off; if you wanted the graphic overlay with CP and VP totals and the dice cam, you could toggle that; if you wanted the tactical Crusade meta analysis, toggle; if you want character voices for the models, toggle.

I've been really disappointed with representations of Crusade play on Youtube, and even WH+. There is so much potential being wasted by the focus on competitive optimization and math hammer. I've wanted to do it myself since nobody else is doing it, but by the time I have enough models and terrain painted, the edition will most likely be almost over- a shame, because I don't think people would watch a video of a OOP system.

But man, I've got some wicked ideas. It's why I want a persistent edition as badly as I do. A level 1 - level 20 story arc in D&D took my group four years of almost weekly playing. I expect a GOOD Crusade campaign to be about the same, though the games could be bi-weekly or even monthly for all the painting and terrain construction.

The story I'm working on could take even longer. The planet we started with has eight settlements and a capital city; the former have 25 territories each and the capital has 45. Each territory is represented by a single Onslaught Sized board, complete with detailed building descriptions. Most games are 25PL games, so each batle uses only a slice of the onslaught map.

Crazy thing though?

This is one planet in the system.

The campaign will also involve games set in other systems to establish the origin stories of some of the factions who will travel to our system. It's massive. This is why I've said that 9th probably has to be my forever edition: thinking a game at a time is really boring for me. If the game isn't part of that 5-10 year campaign, it just doesn't have enough to justify the effort it takes to paint the minis and build the table.

In the city I'm from, there was a story in the local paper of a professor at the university who's been running a D&D game since the mid 80's. Not the same setting... The same GAME. People come from all over the world to play live in his campaign- he's had more than 300 players over 35 years, and only one or two of the original players still plays regularly. The first wave of characters have grown into powerful NPCs who play pivotal roles in the world, and the GM still consults with the original players at times to determine how those NPCs should react.

THIS is the kind of thing I want out of a game.

THIS is why I think edition churn is the biggest problem with any game system.

My experience with such grand campaigns isn't that the new edition screws things up. It's that the players change, and it devolves into one-offs anyways because the same people don't keep coming back.

Hard to set up a Slaaneshi seduction of an IG officer if the IG player stops showing up...

Rather like sports, I feel it matters more if you care about the result.

I.E. watching some battle reports is like pulling teeth. You can't hear the players (if they say anything at all) or often much of the table. Its just a lot of standing around, then some dice rolling (which, depending on focus you may not be able to see) and then some models get removed.

But I've watched some big tournament finals online - and yeah it can work. There is a bit of fun to it. You hopefully have some commentators who vaguely know how to talk about the game (or just be somewhat amusing). You have a chat to bounce off. You can really get into thinking about whether player X goes all in this turn, do they hold off, if they do go all in how do the dice fall etc. This is especially true if you want someone to win (either for personal reasons, faction reasons, whatever).

The issue however with tournaments is that you can't have all the improved camera work, graphics etc which are becoming more common on youtube battle report channels. Which must be growing in popularity or there wouldn't be so many.

Really "live 40k" needs some decent casters and some sort of flyable micro-drone that can get good camera work of the table during a game. The former is probably easier to sort out than the second.

PenitentJake wrote:
Sure.

But if you bothered to buy one, its Crusade content is still valid.

If you didn't buy one, then I would assume it doesn't matter to you whether or not the content is invalidated, because it was obviously content you didn't care about in the first place.

Or I'm not fool enough to pay GW for a filler book who's content can be read for free online, or by reading a friends copy* (& a scanner may have been involved....).

Don't fret for poor GW though. The $ I didn't waste on more paper was definitely spent a few times over on additional plastic.

*Technichally not free - he did grab a beer out of the fridge....

Battle reports and lore videos and all things digital 40k are usually background noise for hobbying. If I try to watch them just for the sake of watching... I get bored pretty quickly and find something else to do. Movement phases in particular become a bit of a snooze fest to watch. As a medium to have some noise going while painting or assembling or what-have-you, though... not bad

 Rihgu wrote:
I love how tneva82 constantly posts that their predictions are so accurate (or would be, if double turn didn't exist for aos) but has never once rose to the challenge of ever trying to prove it. Like literally once a person posts two lists they fade out of the topic as if they had never posted at alllll.

Funny. Doubie turn isn't that big issue. Tournament lists handle that out. Noobs complain about double turn. Tournamemt players just deal with it. And gw games aren't deep or tactical enough.

Season of war had br this week. Wasn't too hard to figure bone splitters win. Did opponent get double turn? Yes. Did it matter? Guess delayed defeat. It was still easy win.


If you can't predict it just shows how laughably bad you are

If lists aren't tournament level(those are the 4/5 failures i have　had) then it gets harder as it's not as point and click so bad dice roll can have bigger impact.

tneva82 wrote:

 Rihgu wrote:
I love how tneva82 constantly posts that their predictions are so accurate (or would be, if double turn didn't exist for aos) but has never once rose to the challenge of ever trying to prove it. Like literally once a person posts two lists they fade out of the topic as if they had never posted at alllll.

Funny. Doubie turn isn't that big issue. Tournament lists handle that out. Noobs complain about double turn. Tournamemt players just deal with it. And gw games aren't deep or tactical enough.

Season of war had br this week. Wasn't too hard to figure bone splitters win. Did opponent get double turn? Yes. Did it matter? Guess delayed defeat. It was still easy win.


If you can't predict it just shows how laughably bad you are

If lists aren't tournament level(those are the 4/5 failures i have　had) then it gets harder as it's not as point and click so bad dice roll can have bigger impact.

I'm literally just quoting you on the double turn thing...

tneva82 wrote:

 Rihgu wrote:
I love how tneva82 constantly posts that their predictions are so accurate (or would be, if double turn didn't exist for aos) but has never once rose to the challenge of ever trying to prove it. Like literally once a person posts two lists they fade out of the topic as if they had never posted at alllll.

Funny. Doubie turn isn't that big issue. Tournament lists handle that out. Noobs complain about double turn. Tournamemt players just deal with it. And gw games aren't deep or tactical enough.

Season of war had br this week. Wasn't too hard to figure bone splitters win. Did opponent get double turn? Yes. Did it matter? Guess delayed defeat. It was still easy win.


If you can't predict it just shows how laughably bad you are

If lists aren't tournament level(those are the 4/5 failures i have　had) then it gets harder as it's not as point and click so bad dice roll can have bigger impact.

So you fail 4/5 times concerning non-tourney games? You'd be more accurate if you simply flipped a coin! But yet you're telling others how laughably bad they are? LOL.

I think that’s saying that out of the five total failures they’ve had, four have been from looking at tournament games.

 Blackie wrote:


Seriously, do you enjoy watching people playing videogames? Is there even a market for that?

It's a multi-billion dollar industry. Go to Twitch right now and look at how many people are watching other people play video games. It's in the tens of millions. You might as well be asking if there's a market for online shopping.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

PenitentJake wrote:

A level 1 - level 20 story arc in D&D took my group four years of almost weekly playing. I expect a GOOD Crusade campaign to be about the same

What kind of magical world do you live in that can keep a campaign going that long? I've never lived anywhere that could even keep a 12 week campaign for any system going without people dropping. A few store managers I've spoken with said they try to keep campaigns to 8-9 weeks because there's usually a big dropoff after that. That's why crusade wasn't meant for that, because their experience and market research shows that only a fraction of a percent of the overall customer base will stay engaged with a campaign longer than 12 weeks.

The 4 years may come from the fact that you play, lets say once a month. then 12 games turn in to a year. On the other hand if you play 3 games each day of a weekend, and maybe 1-3 games durning the week, if things are slower, you burn through content much faster.

At my old store, when we run a new players campaign, at the start of 8th, some people would play 10+ games durning the week and then another 10 durning weekends. Which with a 3W-1L-0D point set up, made some older players ask for a limit of games per weekend, because some of us could generate more points then them, even while losing 20 games per week.

good point Karol.

My club plays twice weekly and all 3 Crusade campaigns ground to a halt after a few weeks or so, because after about 10 games people started finishing up their Crusade content and getting legendary characters.

 Rihgu wrote:
I love how tneva82 constantly posts that their predictions are so accurate (or would be, if double turn didn't exist for aos) but has never once rose to the challenge of ever trying to prove it. Like literally once a person posts two lists they fade out of the topic as if they had never posted at alllll.

Yup, he's that local braggart everyone knows is full of it.

As to the market for video games, I avidly support speed running. I love watching wholesome people like Arcus and PJ have awesome runs, just to shave a tenth of a second off their WR in Ninja Gaiden, or Bionic Commando. Games that used to decimate me as a kid. On the other hand, who doesn't love watching Zallard and Sinister do a Blindfolded speed run of Mike Tyson's Punchout! with each using one hand on the same controller? Epic stuff!

 Blackie wrote:
I don't know. I consider pretty much every game and sports in the world, barring a very few exceptions (all sports), as boring as hell to watch. Even if they are a lot of fun to play in person.

Seriously, do you enjoy watching people playing boardgames, cardgames or videogames? Is there even a market for that?

This is the boomerest post I have ever seen on Dakkadakka

stratigo wrote:

This is the boomerest post I have ever seen on Dakkadakka

I'm a millennial and I understand that there's a market for it, but I still don't get the appeal.

Hecaton wrote:

stratigo wrote:

This is the boomerest post I have ever seen on Dakkadakka

I'm a millennial and I understand that there's a market for it, but I still don't get the appeal.

There's a difference between "I don't need to drive a car because everything is a 5min walk from the house" vs "Who would ever need automobiles? Is there even a market for that?"

Hecaton wrote:

stratigo wrote:

This is the boomerest post I have ever seen on Dakkadakka

I'm a millennial and I understand that there's a market for it, but I still don't get the appeal.

Same, tbh.

But then, I think the same about the more general streams on youtube that everyone and their dog seems to be doing at the moment.

I'm sure it makes things easier on the creator (no need for editing or other such), but I fail to see why listing to 4 hours of waffle is apparently preferable to 20 minutes of concise discussion.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Part of it is the lack of player decisionmaking as well.

You can make wargames enjoyable with casters - and sometimes the casters can be the players. Tabletop CP does Chain of Command battle reports that are unedited and manage to get a following - and they aren't nearly as young or charismatic as the the TTT folks.

But the game itself.does some of the heavy lifting. Player choice is a lot more castable.when the options aren't so obvious. Rolled a 4,1,3 2,1 for your Command dice? Ooh let"s see how the player runs his army with this roll. Rolled a 6,6,2,1,5? Well, let's see if the player plans to take advantage of the double phase - but his enemy has a COC die and he probably hasn't guessed he has a flamethrower in support...

Etc.

Lack of easily explainable decision making. A high level game of 40k has far more going on in decision making than you give the game credit for and far more than most mid-level 40k games have as well. It's all just relatively difficult to articulate quickly.

Other wargames also have that much (or more) difficult to explain nuance, the difference is they also have easy stuff for the caster to talk about. Legion is a good example with Order chips and cards. Alternate Activation just inherently makes it easy because you can focus down onto a handful of specific interactions rather than "okay, now let me explain why running 7" rather than 9" is important using the current positioning and ranges of EVERY UNIT AND OBJECTIVE ON THE BOARD.'


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Toofast wrote:

Hecaton wrote:

stratigo wrote:

This is the boomerest post I have ever seen on Dakkadakka

I'm a millennial and I understand that there's a market for it, but I still don't get the appeal.

There's a difference between "I don't need to drive a car because everything is a 5min walk from the house" vs "Who would ever need automobiles? Is there even a market for that?"

Especially egregious if you read any of the lore, which is also a close equivalent to 'just watching the game'.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 vipoid wrote:

Hecaton wrote:

stratigo wrote:

This is the boomerest post I have ever seen on Dakkadakka

I'm a millennial and I understand that there's a market for it, but I still don't get the appeal.

Same, tbh.

But then, I think the same about the more general streams on youtube that everyone and their dog seems to be doing at the moment.

I'm sure it makes things easier on the creator (no need for editing or other such), but I fail to see why listing to 4 hours of waffle is apparently preferable to 20 minutes of concise discussion.

For streaming in particular there's 2 general modes of consumption that give it a strong competitive advantage over more traditional video medium:

1. Interactivity. Anyone with an account on the streaming service can talk to the creators real time, as well as other fans. This creates a sense of comraderie or community that's only achieved in external forums or subreddit with traditional media. It's basically dakkadakka in real time. Since you're ON dakkadakka, I'm assuming you can understand the appeal.

2. Non-interactivity. The 'moment by moment' nature of a stream means that your attention can drop in and drop out and you'll likely miss very little, and what you do miss will be relatively easy to catch up on. This makes livestream perfect for 'secondary entertainment modes' when doing something else. Essentially background noise that you can drop in and drop out of without hampering the experience. A traditional tv show/movie/youtube video generally has a beginning/middle/end that makes it much harder to dip in and out of unless you've already seen it before.

Note that even streamed games of 40k, which also have beginning/middle/end, can be enjoyed in that same non-interactive way because you honestly don't really need to follow the arc of the game to enjoy the moment to moment discussion between the players (provided the players are interesting to listen to. Which, if they have a successful stream, means that they're at least mildly entertaining sometimes).

ERJAK wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Part of it is the lack of player decisionmaking as well.

You can make wargames enjoyable with casters - and sometimes the casters can be the players. Tabletop CP does Chain of Command battle reports that are unedited and manage to get a following - and they aren't nearly as young or charismatic as the the TTT folks.

But the game itself.does some of the heavy lifting. Player choice is a lot more castable.when the options aren't so obvious. Rolled a 4,1,3 2,1 for your Command dice? Ooh let"s see how the player runs his army with this roll. Rolled a 6,6,2,1,5? Well, let's see if the player plans to take advantage of the double phase - but his enemy has a COC die and he probably hasn't guessed he has a flamethrower in support...

Etc.

Lack of easily explainable decision making. A high level game of 40k has far more going on in decision making than you give the game credit for and far more than most mid-level 40k games have as well. It's all just relatively difficult to articulate quickly.

It can be explained easily enough, the problem is 40k's gameplay is so dense those explanations would be boring as all hell.

Toofast wrote:

Hecaton wrote:

stratigo wrote:

This is the boomerest post I have ever seen on Dakkadakka

I'm a millennial and I understand that there's a market for it, but I still don't get the appeal.

There's a difference between "I don't need to drive a car because everything is a 5min walk from the house" vs "Who would ever need automobiles? Is there even a market for that?"

Lol, I'm simply not interested in videogames, don't know any friends who are deep into videogames and don't read anything about videogames. I only care about Mass Effect, Fallout and Hitman new releases. Other than that I'm completely ignorant on videogames and anything about its market.

I don't even get the appeal of online playing or multiplayer. But I do understand that lots of people love it. I simply had no idea that there were people, let alone millions of them, who enjoy watching other people play.

Mine could be the boomerest post on dakka but yours is definitely among the most obtuse ones .


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Tyel wrote:
Rather like sports, I feel it matters more if you care about the result.

I.E. watching some battle reports is like pulling teeth. You can't hear the players (if they say anything at all) or often much of the table. Its just a lot of standing around, then some dice rolling (which, depending on focus you may not be able to see) and then some models get removed.

But I've watched some big tournament finals online - and yeah it can work. There is a bit of fun to it. You hopefully have some commentators who vaguely know how to talk about the game (or just be somewhat amusing). You have a chat to bounce off. You can really get into thinking about whether player X goes all in this turn, do they hold off, if they do go all in how do the dice fall etc. This is especially true if you want someone to win (either for personal reasons, faction reasons, whatever).

The issue however with tournaments is that you can't have all the improved camera work, graphics etc which are becoming more common on youtube battle report channels. Which must be growing in popularity or there wouldn't be so many.

Really "live 40k" needs some decent casters and some sort of flyable micro-drone that can get good camera work of the table during a game. The former is probably easier to sort out than the second.

Yeah, all of that. And playing on the typical dull terrain, that tournaments always have, with barely acceptable battle ready armies doesn't help either.

Toofast wrote:

Hecaton wrote:

stratigo wrote:

This is the boomerest post I have ever seen on Dakkadakka

I'm a millennial and I understand that there's a market for it, but I still don't get the appeal.

There's a difference between "I don't need to drive a car because everything is a 5min walk from the house" vs "Who would ever need automobiles? Is there even a market for that?"

big true

 NinthMusketeer wrote:

ERJAK wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Part of it is the lack of player decisionmaking as well.

You can make wargames enjoyable with casters - and sometimes the casters can be the players. Tabletop CP does Chain of Command battle reports that are unedited and manage to get a following - and they aren't nearly as young or charismatic as the the TTT folks.

But the game itself.does some of the heavy lifting. Player choice is a lot more castable.when the options aren't so obvious. Rolled a 4,1,3 2,1 for your Command dice? Ooh let"s see how the player runs his army with this roll. Rolled a 6,6,2,1,5? Well, let's see if the player plans to take advantage of the double phase - but his enemy has a COC die and he probably hasn't guessed he has a flamethrower in support...

Etc.

Lack of easily explainable decision making. A high level game of 40k has far more going on in decision making than you give the game credit for and far more than most mid-level 40k games have as well. It's all just relatively difficult to articulate quickly.

It can be explained easily enough, the problem is 40k's gameplay is so dense those explanations would be boring as all hell.

Po-tay-to, Pa-tat-toe

Yes, I was agreeing with you.

Sad to say that post dataslate tournament data has come out, Guard are 26% winrate despite the changes. They need more help than ever.

Toofast wrote:


What kind of magical world do you live in that can keep a campaign going that long? I've never lived anywhere that could even keep a 12 week campaign for any system going without people dropping. A few store managers I've spoken with said they try to keep campaigns to 8-9 weeks because there's usually a big dropoff after that.

For starters, since 1989, I've played one game in a store, and I've been to I think two events? My best games were always with friends at people's houses where we could do other things in the same space, like drink, or listen to metal loud enough to make models move on their own. In order to get to a place where this was possible, I had to make friends that knew how to play, and I had to teach my non-gamer friends how to play, and I have enough minis that I supply newbs with armies regularly.

Here's a tip: when your friends tell you that they aren't interested in playing 40k, what they might actually mean is "I'm not interested in buying or painting the models necessary to play 40k." In 30+ years, I've never met a person who wouldn't play when I supplied the models, terrain, play space and books. Not all of them became players, but many did. And with the built-in support for 25PL games in the current edition, the cross compatibility with KT 2021 or BSF, as well as the preponderance of vs boxes (4/ year every year!) and combat patrol boxes, playing this way has never been easier.

In fact, another tip? I honestly don't think it's possible to create your own circle of 40k gamers if you insist on playing 2K games. You play 2k with a newb, and even if they're wicked smart enough to pick up the rules (usually only happens if you're dealing with a certified gamer who has played enough other games that they've learned how to learn rules) and even if they LOVE the game, they still probably won't become players, because they can understand how much money and time it would take for them to get that far- so the only way you get buy in from a newb is to demonstrate to them that 2k ISN'T the default.

In 1998, I ran a teen center where I taught somewhere in the neighbourhood of 15-20 teenagers how to play and supplied all the models that they need for our games at the center. You'd be amazed at how many of those teens I've met as adults, and some of them have armies of their own now. And some of those that don't are still up for games if I bring the models.

Creating your own gaming circle is a skill, and it also requires a lot of luck and a particular set of circumstances, so even among those who have the skill, it isn't always possible to employ it. I recognize this fact, and I am grateful every day for the circumstances that allow me to do this. Did I mention that I met my wife at a games convention? One that I managed as member of the university gaming society? Or that I GMed 5/7 slots that weekend because that's just what WGS Executives did?

(I was also the Vampire Prince of my city for a year and half... And Nosferatu at that! But that's another story....)

Toofast wrote:

That's why crusade wasn't meant for that, because their experience and market research shows that only a fraction of a percent of the overall customer base will stay engaged with a campaign longer than 12 weeks.

Crusade was meant for people to use it in as many different ways as they can think of, as are all forms of 40k. GW doesn't want A demographic: GW wants them ALL. Other games may target A demographic, but GW hasn't been interested in that narrow minded kind of approach since the Kirby "We're a model company" days.

Crusade was designed to be flexible enough for a weekend campaign, a 12 week campaign or a campaign that lasts the entire duration of the edition. Obviously, a 9th edition Crusade campaign is not meant to last more than the length of the edition, because for sure, GW totally wants you to buy the next edition. But don't be surprised to see rules about how to update a 9th edition Crusade to continue moving forward as a 10th edition Crusade, because again, that would capture more demographics. In fact, this is actually a requirement for me, and if they don't do it, there's not a snowball's chance in hell I'm buying into 10th. Odds are slim even if they do include this in 10th, because edition churn is the exact opposite of what I'm looking for in a game; they almost lost me when 9th dropped, but I decided to stick around long enough to try Crusade, and once I did I discovered that 9th was better for me than the edition I was leaving behind.

Equally obviously, GW expects that six months is a satisfying duration for what MOST Crusade players want, because that's how long a 40k season is. But each season includes 48-54 missions, and GW does expect that there will be at least some people who want to play them all- and you'd be hard pressed to do that in the six months they give you before the next season breaks.

Jarms48 wrote:
Sad to say that post dataslate tournament data has come out, Guard are 26% winrate despite the changes. They need more help than ever.

Maybe. They may also need more experienced players to take them up. A few people did ok. There's also lists potentially hiding in Imperium.

The average score for the past weekend was 52.3. From Jan to April 21 it was 51.7. June to Dec was 54.2.

Maybe auto-wound on a 5+? 4+? Auto-wound just for eveything?