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.

 Blndmage wrote:
Have you ever tried moving "a couple sheets of plywood" on the bus, into old ass elevators and then into an apartment that has no space to actually lay the board down?

This magically works fine when the sheets are a few inches shorter? But doesn't allow you to cut a 6x4 table into multiple smaller sheets for transport purposes?

(And let's not forget that GW didn't care about people like you when they made the changes. This was purely about making everything fit within their standard cardboard box size so they could save a bit of money on shipping and packaging costs.)

You can play 40k at sub 25PL, that's literally what the rules for game size mean. It's still a real game.

I have already explained why it is not a real game.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dudeface wrote:
When did I move the goalpost? We're being told repeatedly buy a sheet of wood for a full size 2k game or bigger, else you're a pleb that should get out.

As a good example, "trimming a few inches off" let's me play on my kitchen table without need of a sheet of wood. 48x48 would facilitate me keeping a 4ft square of wood somewhere In the house, which gets in the way and inevitably warps of left leaning/upright.

You moved the goalpost when you started off by complaining about a cheap plywood table looking "scruffy", but then changed your argument to the virtues of smaller game sizes when I pointed out that a minimum size 9th edition table made out of cheap plywood isn't going to look any less "scruffy" just because it's a few inches shorter.

£100 is, what $200cnd now?
Ya, more than enough to get one person playing.

 Blndmage wrote:
£100 is, what $200cnd now?
Ya, more than enough to get one person playing.

I agree. It's a great start to a Kill Team army and Kill Team is an excellent game for people who are new to the hobby.

Aecus Decimus wrote:

 Blndmage wrote:
Have you ever tried moving "a couple sheets of plywood" on the bus, into old ass elevators and then into an apartment that has no space to actually lay the board down?

This magically works fine when the sheets are a few inches shorter? But doesn't allow you to cut a 6x4 table into multiple smaller sheets for transport purposes?

(And let's not forget that GW didn't care about people like you when they made the changes. This was purely about making everything fit within their standard cardboard box size so they could save a bit of money on shipping and packaging costs.)

You can play 40k at sub 25PL, that's literally what the rules for game size mean. It's still a real game.

I have already explained why it is not a real game.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dudeface wrote:
When did I move the goalpost? We're being told repeatedly buy a sheet of wood for a full size 2k game or bigger, else you're a pleb that should get out.

As a good example, "trimming a few inches off" let's me play on my kitchen table without need of a sheet of wood. 48x48 would facilitate me keeping a 4ft square of wood somewhere In the house, which gets in the way and inevitably warps of left leaning/upright.

You moved the goalpost when you started off by complaining about a cheap plywood table looking "scruffy", but then changed your argument to the virtues of smaller game sizes when I pointed out that a minimum size 9th edition table made out of cheap plywood isn't going to look any less "scruffy" just because it's a few inches shorter.

Wow, way to gatekeep the hobby.
If it's not played your way, it's not a real game?
Combat Patrol games (*up to* 25PL) are a perfectly valid way to play the game, there are missions and everything!

Aecus Decimus wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
When did I move the goalpost? We're being told repeatedly buy a sheet of wood for a full size 2k game or bigger, else you're a pleb that should get out.

As a good example, "trimming a few inches off" let's me play on my kitchen table without need of a sheet of wood. 48x48 would facilitate me keeping a 4ft square of wood somewhere In the house, which gets in the way and inevitably warps of left leaning/upright.

You moved the goalpost when you started off by complaining about a cheap plywood table looking "scruffy", but then changed your argument to the virtues of smaller game sizes when I pointed out that a minimum size 9th edition table made out of cheap plywood isn't going to look any less "scruffy" just because it's a few inches shorter.

Keep up with your own narrative here:
I said people don't want a 8 or 6x4 sheet lying around, which was the initial suggestion, because it takes a lot of space and looks scruffy resting on a wall. You responded with:

Aecus Decimus wrote:

Making a slightly smaller table with a 5.8x4.8 sheet of plywood is any different? .

No, it isn't, but it also isn't the only size you can play 40k at. That's the point.

 Blndmage wrote:
Wow, way to gatekeep the hobby.
If it's not played your way, it's not a real game?

There are lots of valid ways to play the game that I don't enjoy. For example, tournament 40k is clearly a real game even though I have zero interest in it myself. But a game with 1-2 units per player isn't, for the reasons I've already explained. There just aren't enough pieces on the board for the decision trees to be non-trivial or for player agency to matter.

But fortunately there's a solution as long as you aren't caught up in Cult of Officialness nonsense about needing to play Official GW-Approved 40k: Kill Team is an excellent game that works well with the equivalent of a single 40k unit. By breaking up one unit into 5-15 units you get enough pieces on the board for it to be a real game with real decisions.

Combat Patrol games (*up to* 25PL) are a perfectly valid way to play the game, there are missions and everything!

Combat patrol is 500 points.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dudeface wrote:
I said people don't want a 8 or 6x4 sheet lying around, which was the initial suggestion, because it takes a lot of space and looks scruffy resting on a wall.

And the point is that a slightly smaller than 6x4 sheet of plywood looks just as scruffy. The fact that you can play 500-1000 point games instead of 2000 point games is completely irrelevant when the subject is how 9th edition trimmed a few inches off the table sizes to fit GW's official boards into GW's standard cardboard box for packaging and shipping efficiency. If an 8th edition board for a given game size is "scruffy" then the 9th edition board will have the exact same problem.

Aecus Decimus wrote:

 Blndmage wrote:

You can play 40k at sub 25PL, that's literally what the rules for game size mean. It's still a real game.

I have already explained why it is not a real game.

You did.

You were wrong.

Move on.

Aecus Decimus wrote:

 Blndmage wrote:
Wow, way to gatekeep the hobby.
If it's not played your way, it's not a real game?

There are lots of valid ways to play the game that I don't enjoy. For example, tournament 40k is clearly a real game even though I have zero interest in it myself. But a game with 1-2 units per player isn't, for the reasons I've already explained. There just aren't enough pieces on the board for the decision trees to be non-trivial or for player agency to matter.

But fortunately there's a solution as long as you aren't caught up in Cult of Officialness nonsense about needing to play Official GW-Approved 40k: Kill Team is an excellent game that works well with the equivalent of a single 40k unit. By breaking up one unit into 5-15 units you get enough pieces on the board for it to be a real game with real decisions.

Combat Patrol games (*up to* 25PL) are a perfectly valid way to play the game, there are missions and everything!

Combat patrol is 500 points.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dudeface wrote:
I said people don't want a 8 or 6x4 sheet lying around, which was the initial suggestion, because it takes a lot of space and looks scruffy resting on a wall.

And the point is that a slightly smaller than 6x4 sheet of plywood looks just as scruffy. The fact that you can play 500-1000 point games instead of 2000 point games is completely irrelevant when the subject is how 9th edition trimmed a few inches off the table sizes to fit GW's official boards into GW's standard cardboard box for packaging and shipping efficiency. If an 8th edition board for a given game size is "scruffy" then the 9th edition board will have the exact same problem.

Stop being a stubborn dick.

Combat Patrol games are either 0-25PL, or 0-500 points, played on a 30"*44" board (minimum, but recommended).
Read the book!
It's presented as just a valid way to play the game as Strike Force game.

There's also a *really* strong undercurrent here of able-bodied people running down how hard it can be for other folks to do that transportation and setup that they take for granted, as well as the impact that can have even if its attainable.

Like, try having a little empathy?

Catulle wrote:
There's also a *really* strong undercurrent here of able-bodied people running down how hard it can be for other folks to do that transportation and setup that they take for granted, as well as the impact that can have even if its attainable.

Like, try having a little empathy?

Thank you!
I barely have the energy to setup and play a few rounds of Micro 40k once a week. A "proper" Combat Patrol game, is literally the only thing I can manage that day, and can take a day to recover from!

Oh jesus. Put it back in the deck. I'm a two time cancer survivor with 80% disability from two wars. I don't come onto forums and complain about the game being too difficult to play. I make the game less difficult to play. Stop acting like we all have to cater to your victim mentality simply because we are willing to put in the effort and time to achieve success in something.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Oh jesus. Put it back in the deck. I'm a two time cancer survivor with 80% disability from two wars. I don't come onto forums and complain about the game being too difficult to play. I make the game less difficult to play. Stop acting like we all have to cater to your victim mentality simply because we are willing to put in the effort and time to achieve success in something.

I have blood cancer, a type that you don't survive, because your bone marrow is burned out. I'm already at 20/24yrs predicted, an was originally given 20. So feth me if I'm asking that playing the game, as presented in the book be recognized as a valid way to play.

All I'm saying, is that, as I started within the conversation, I really like the smaller 30"*44" board for Combat Patrol games. I don't see why I need to keep justifying why I prefer that board or game size. Discussing the merits and flaws is one thing, that not what has been happening here.

I am truly sorry to know you have that type of cancer. But if you choose to spend your time on forums arguing with strangers about how to play with plastic dolls, instead of making the most of your life, consider me impressed. When I got the second diagnosis I went back to school. I made things, planted trees. Wrote letters. If this brings you happiness then whatever the F you want to play on is fine. Just play. Stop arguing about what is and is not ok, and just do it.

As others have said, it's hard to fit more than 1000 points of models on a 2x2 board, without it all becomming a scrum on turn 2. 500 per player that is.

Aecus Decimus wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
Hecaton, do you think that people in poverty don’t deserve to enjoy a fun hobby?

Please don't make straw man arguments. If someone is so poor that they can't afford enough space to store a couple sheets of plywood then they can't afford 40k at all. Whether or not they deserve to have fun is irrelevant.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Blndmage wrote:
Re the command box being ~$170 and out of your $100 limit:

It's not just the models (for 2 armies), but terrain, dice and a board. But as it's for 2 players, that's only $85 each. Solidly within your $100 cap.

That's kind of dishonest and you know it. You're only within the $100 limit if you find someone else to split the box with you and share all of the dice/rulebooks/etc, it's not an option that is generally available to anyone who wants to buy it. And it's still well short of being able to play a real game.

You can’t play 40k with the official models, with official terrain, on a small budget.

You can still play it-the rules aren’t free legally, but they’re affordable to lots more people than the rules and the models.
You might not consider playing 40k with Coke cans and green army men as models and books and boxes as terrain worth playing. But other people can and do.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Oh jesus. Put it back in the deck. I'm a two time cancer survivor with 80% disability from two wars. I don't come onto forums and complain about the game being too difficult to play. I make the game less difficult to play. Stop acting like we all have to cater to your victim mentality simply because we are willing to put in the effort and time to achieve success in something.

The point was, there is a legitimately craptacular assertion in this thread that the more accessible versions of the game are, in some way "not real" despite all printed (and played) evidence to the contrary. That's not playing a card to point out how poor that form of behaviour/argument is.

It's okay to have preferences. It's douchey in the extreme to address an argument that isn't being made (c.f. "complain(ing) about the game being too difficult to play" or the possession of a "victim mentality," neither of which were actually asserted) when the reactionary position being advanced upthread is that its somehow illegitimate to play PL, or, Lord help us, find the smaller *minimum* board sizes more convenient. Like it makes the faintest of differences to anybody not involved. It's frankly pathetic, divisive for the sake of it, and achieves less than nothing for the hobby at large.

Live and let live.

 Blndmage wrote:
Combat Patrol games are either 0-25PL, or 0-500 points, played on a 30"*44" board (minimum, but recommended).
Read the book!
It's presented as just a valid way to play the game as Strike Force game.

And 500 points is the minimum to have an actual game. No matter how many times you try to insist that a 100 point pseudo-game with one unit on each side is technically by strictest RAW Official GW Approved 40k it's not a real game because there aren't enough units on the table to have meaningful decision trees or player agency. "Micro 40k" or whatever you're calling it these days is not a thing for anyone but you.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Catulle wrote:
There's also a *really* strong undercurrent here of able-bodied people running down how hard it can be for other folks to do that transportation and setup that they take for granted, as well as the impact that can have even if its attainable.

Like, try having a little empathy?

Sorry, could you clarify what exactly about having a disability requires you to play a 100 point pseudo-game instead of a real game of Kill Team? It's unfortunate if some people can't play 40k for various reasons but that doesn't change what 40k is.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Blndmage wrote:
I don't see why I need to keep justifying why I prefer that board or game size.

You don't. You can leave this argument and stop posting at any time, nobody is forcing you to continue defending your opinions or even continue reading this thread. What you can't have is unquestioning validation of your opinions and agreement that your games are Official Warhammer 40k Games.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I am truly sorry to know you have that type of cancer. But if you choose to spend your time on forums arguing with strangers about how to play with plastic dolls, instead of making the most of your life, consider me impressed. When I got the second diagnosis I went back to school. I made things, planted trees. Wrote letters. If this brings you happiness then whatever the F you want to play on is fine. Just play. Stop arguing about what is and is not ok, and just do it.

As others have said, it's hard to fit more than 1000 points of models on a 2x2 board, without it all becomming a scrum on turn 2. 500 per player that is.

I'd love to be able to do those things too but I'm in constant pain and can't get the the bathroom without passing out. Forums generally require small bits of writing, as opposed to my RPG I've been working on for a decade, which requires focus and energy.

I agree that Incursion games can be crowded on the board, but it depends on the armies. Custodes incursion games would feel far less cramped than a Necron Silver Tide list, or (I can't image a mirror) horde nids.

I think Incursion games are a different meta than Combat Patrol, with the board size vs army size being a key factor in how each meta functions.

Catulle wrote:
The point was, there is a legitimately craptacular assertion in this thread that the more accessible versions of the game are, in some way "not real" despite all printed (and played) evidence to the contrary.

It has nothing to do with accessibility. It's about the number of units on the table, and the reality is that for a game to be a game and not just an exercise in rolling dice to see who rolls more 6s you need to have meaningful decision trees where player agency matters. 40k can't do that with only 1-2 units on the table because the correct choice for each player is obvious at all times, there is never any reason to deviate from the script, and all you can do is roll dice to see which player has better dice luck and wins. There's no meaningful difference between a pseudo-game with 1-2 units per side and a game of "each player rolls 50 dice and the player who gets the most 6s wins".

And I'll once again remind you that small boards have nothing to do with accessibility. The sole reason GW changed the table size was that a 30x22 board is what fits in the standard cardboard box they use, and by changing the table size they were able to eliminate the need for a separate box size as used by the old 24x24 tiles and save some money on shipping and packaging. If you want genuine accessibility then you should play and encourage Kill Team, which is a real game with a modest price and small table sizes.

Aecus Decimus wrote:
Sorry, could you clarify what exactly about having a disability requires you to play a 100 point pseudo-game instead of a real game of Kill Team?

No. Your argument is based in a kind of ignorance that would be entirely too boring to engage with further. You've already abandoned the rulebook, so there really is no point.

Catulle wrote:
No. Your argument is based in a kind of ignorance that would be entirely too boring to engage with further. You've already abandoned the rulebook, so there really is no point.

"I'm so smart and infallible I don't have to defend myself lol".

I guess if that's what you need to feel like you won?

Aecus Decimus wrote:

Catulle wrote:
No. Your argument is based in a kind of ignorance that would be entirely too boring to engage with further. You've already abandoned the rulebook, so there really is no point.

"I'm so smart and infallible I don't have to defend myself lol".

I guess if that's what you need to feel like you won?

What are you actually hoping to achieve here?

If you personally don't think that a particular way of playing the game is worthwhile, that's fine... don't play that way. But don't gak in other peoples' pools by insisting it's not a valid way to play the game. That's not up to you anywhere other than at your own table.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Hecaton, do you think that people in poverty don’t deserve to enjoy a fun hobby?

I never said that. So try again, kid.

Hecaton wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
Hecaton, do you think that people in poverty don’t deserve to enjoy a fun hobby?

I never said that. So try again, kid.

So why imply it?

Seriously-I get that the game is better with cool models and proper terrain, but what’s actually wrong with playing cheaply? You’re being a gatekeeper. Why?

 Blndmage wrote:

Are you freaking kidding me?
Have you ever tried moving "a couple sheets of plywood" on the bus, into old ass elevators and then into an apartment that has no space to actually lay the board down?

You can play 40k at sub 25PL, that's literally what the rules for game size mean. It's still a real game.

You use the board as a table topper.

It's not the weirdest thing on the bus. Or get one of your friends with a car to help you out, the same way you would anything else big.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Deadnight wrote:
We used to bring all our warmachine stuff and a 5x4 plywood board down to the local pub on foot, set up on a table outside in the beer garden and play our games with a few beers, then pack up and go home.

That's someone genuinely enjoying minis games as a hobby, as opposed to sitting on the internet complaining. Might not go over well with some people.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dudeface wrote:
I said people don't want a 8 or 6x4 sheet lying around, which was the initial suggestion, because it takes a lot of space and looks scruffy resting on a wall. You responded with:

Ah, see, the problem is you don't know what you're talking about. Quarter sheets of plywood are 2 foot by 4 foot, so you can stack three of them on top of each other and lean them against a wall.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Catulle wrote:

Aecus Decimus wrote:
Sorry, could you clarify what exactly about having a disability requires you to play a 100 point pseudo-game instead of a real game of Kill Team?

No. Your argument is based in a kind of ignorance that would be entirely too boring to engage with further. You've already abandoned the rulebook, so there really is no point.

Nope, he's sticking to it. Certain opinions shouldn't be validated.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JNAProductions wrote:

So why imply it?

Seriously-I get that the game is better with cool models and proper terrain, but what’s actually wrong with playing cheaply? You’re being a gatekeeper. Why?

I didn't imply gak, you just thought I did because your values were trash.

I've been suggesting playing on bare plywood in this thread. That's not visually appealing.

I'm gatekeeping because some people deserve to be gatekept.

“I enjoy playing the game in a way most people don’t,” needs to be invalidated… why?

Why does Blndmage need to leave the hobby?
What about her is so offensive to you?

 JNAProductions wrote:
“I enjoy playing the game in a way most people don’t,” needs to be invalidated… why?

Why does Blndmage need to leave the hobby?
What about her is so offensive to you?

Blndmage isn't part of "the hobby", as near as I can tell.

Hecaton wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
“I enjoy playing the game in a way most people don’t,” needs to be invalidated… why?

Why does Blndmage need to leave the hobby?
What about her is so offensive to you?

Blndmage isn't part of "the hobby", as near as I can tell.

She plays the game.
She builds models.
I’m not sure if she paints them, but I barely paint either.

So what about her is so threatening that you want her excluded from 40k?

 JNAProductions wrote:
She plays the game.
She builds models.
I’m not sure if she paints them, but I barely paint either.

So what about her is so threatening that you want her excluded from 40k?

To be a hobby there has to be some kind of creative activity, not just consumer behavior. For miniature wargaming in general, the more people just cleave to consumer behavior, the more the scene suffers.

 insaniak wrote:
What are you actually hoping to achieve here?

The point is that "40k game" is a concept that has meaning. If you play a game with Infinity miniatures, Battletech rules, and Star Wars fluff you aren't playing a game of 40k. And no amount of "I enjoy it" or "it's my table" will change that fact. Similarly for a pseudo-game with the 40k rules and one unit per player, whether or not you enjoy doing it you don't have the gameplay elements of 40k. And you don't really have a game at all given the complete lack of meaningful decision trees or player agency. Things just don't function at that scale.

And the context here is that someone claimed that you can play 40k for $100, making a $20-50 table a major expense relative to everything else. But the reality is that a $100 budget isn't a realistic or useful standard, it isn't buying you enough to play anything that most people would recognize as a game of 40k. The real cost to play the game is significantly higher, and that $20 table becomes a much smaller expense relative to the total cost of playing.

If you personally don't think that a particular way of playing the game is worthwhile, that's fine... don't play that way. But don't gak in other peoples' pools by insisting it's not a valid way to play the game. That's not up to you anywhere other than at your own table.

Why is something only worthwhile if it is validated as Official Warhammer 40k? I really don't understand this obsession some people have with officialness. If you enjoy playing not-40k then play not-40k, the fact that I don't consider not-40k to be a game of 40k shouldn't impact your enjoyment of not-40k one bit.

Hecaton wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
“I enjoy playing the game in a way most people don’t,” needs to be invalidated… why?

Why does Blndmage need to leave the hobby?
What about her is so offensive to you?

Blndmage isn't part of "the hobby", as near as I can tell.

I'm curious as to how you can tell.
Afterall, they've told you how they play. What styles & scale of games they play (and why). Who they play with. And in other threads what forces they have.
So what's your criteria for being part of the hobby?