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.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
One might say that including absurdly powerful things is a mistake.

Imagine a WWII game where one side could run the OSS and the other side could play Pacific Islanders, and the scenario is a tank battle...

[Grognard]back in my day,[/grognard] they kept the Custodes out of the wargame, precisely because of these issues

Honestly Custodes really wouldn't have been a problem had they been handled correctly. And besides, any S7+ weapon would have been wounding T5 on 2+s. Main problem with the old system was how MCs were handled, and the lack of a Damage variable once MCs started their inflation around 5th ed.

Hecaton wrote:
I'm kind of excited Nids are getting attention in 10th.

It's actually more likely to bring women into the game than any focus on representation of female characters in Imperium factions.

Yeah, what's up with that?

I'm noticing a lot of women 'Nid players in my neck of the woods too...

Not complaining! MORE THE MERRIER!

 whembly wrote:

Hecaton wrote:
I'm kind of excited Nids are getting attention in 10th.

It's actually more likely to bring women into the game than any focus on representation of female characters in Imperium factions.

Yeah, what's up with that?

I'm noticing a lot of women 'Nid players in my neck of the woods too...

Not complaining! MORE THE MERRIER!

I wonder if it's the freedom in choosing how they look? Some of the paint jobs that are facsimiles of real world creatures are pretty awesome. It tickles the creative process a bit more.

But so are orks or eldar, or more or less any non specific name space marine chapter. It has to be something else. God knows what though.

Karol wrote:
But so are orks or eldar, or more or less any non specific name space marine chapter. It has to be something else. God knows what though.

We should probably ask them, lol, but maybe is the asexual-ish nature of nids? Less 'masculine machines of war' and more 'force of nature'. All I know is my wife loves goofy dwarves and goblins.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

We should probably ask them, lol, but maybe is the asexual-ish nature of nids?

Genderless would be a better term.

After all Orks are asexual and yet blatantly masculine in design.

There's totally a joke in here about the "devouring mother" psychological archetype.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Karol wrote:
But so are orks or eldar, or more or less any non specific name space marine chapter. It has to be something else. God knows what though.

We should probably ask them, lol, but maybe is the asexual-ish nature of nids? Less 'masculine machines of war' and more 'force of nature'. All I know is my wife loves goofy dwarves and goblins.

I always thought that people either picked up the hobby, because either they wanted or liked to play the game or because they want to paint the models. No idea what sexuality would have to do with picking armies. I must say that it is very confusing to hear.

People also pick the hobby because they liked the themes of a faction, and gender tends to be a theme in many factions.

 Tyran wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

We should probably ask them, lol, but maybe is the asexual-ish nature of nids?

Genderless would be a better term.

After all Orks are asexual and yet blatantly masculine in design.

Whoops. Yea much better term. Thank you.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

I wonder if it's the freedom in choosing how they look? Some of the paint jobs that are facsimiles of real world creatures are pretty awesome. It tickles the creative process a bit more.

Over the years I’ve had 3 girlfriends who’ve found the nids very cute. LThese are also the kind of women who find bugs in general (especially chibi depictions, such as Lucas the Spider) absolutely adorable.

Basically degrees of Tomboy.

Well that is just facts, Nids indeed are very cute.

 whembly wrote:

Hecaton wrote:
I'm kind of excited Nids are getting attention in 10th.

It's actually more likely to bring women into the game than any focus on representation of female characters in Imperium factions.

Yeah, what's up with that?

I'm noticing a lot of women 'Nid players in my neck of the woods too...

Not complaining! MORE THE MERRIER!

My suspicion is because they don't look like a military, like the human factions basically all do. The miniature games that I've seen a lot of women playing are MCP and Malifaux, neither of which have the assumption of a military milieu like 40k, Warmahordes, Infinity, etc.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Karol wrote:
And people don't want real w40k. 20 allarus terminators should be able to drop 300 veteran csm. a demi company of marines should be a problem to handle for an IG regiment. Orks and Tyranids should not exist in forced under a few hundred models, unless it is something like Dread Mobs or Carnifex swarms. Demons , once they get a hold of a space should have infinite respawn, and vice versa GK should make the smaller ones start to lose connection to the real world just by being in eye sight of a demon.

Nah, Custodes can get ganked by Harlequins, you're inflating how durable they are.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Right, well, another nail in the coffin for realism being suitable for good gameplay.

Pffft. Happy to disagree with this one!

Sorry - I shouldn't make that sound like no game would be suitable for such rules. It has it's place, but not in a game where people are concerned about balance as well as having the diversity of armies.

Happy to agree to disagree with that as well!

The problem is the premise. Not all "control" is for clearing a path to evacuate women and children. Control that hill top so you can laze the bombs onto the target. Control that train station to prevent the enemy from embarking. That just requires having more "combat power" as defined by ObSec/Control/whatever than the other person - the representation there is that 3 Intercessors keep 4 grots too busy for one to sneak onto the train.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Happy to agree to disagree with that as well!

Certainly. I just don't know how you design a system that allows stuff like one-shot kills of tanks to be balanced.

Bolt Action is balanced if the people playing communicate beforehand. There's tons of units - especially bigger tanks - that you won't see competitively. Instead it will be flamethrowers and body armor.

Epic armageddon only has one shot kills, and is pretty balanced. Everything that does not kill instantly is a temporary suppression, wich makes the unit more vulnerable.

Sure i could see 40k needing some wound and damage tracking, but that is a funny statement as I think most big battle systems have mostly one-shot kills.

Anyways, can 40k ever be balanced anymore? Isn't it just too bloated now?

the problem is, 40k is not a big battle system, although it has the size of one, it is written an marketed as skirmish game and therefore need to have skirmish style damage

40k is way over skirmish scale.

 Gitdakka wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Happy to agree to disagree with that as well!

Certainly. I just don't know how you design a system that allows stuff like one-shot kills of tanks to be balanced.

Bolt Action is balanced if the people playing communicate beforehand. There's tons of units - especially bigger tanks - that you won't see competitively. Instead it will be flamethrowers and body armor.

Epic armageddon only has one shot kills, and is pretty balanced. Everything that does not kill instantly is a temporary suppression, wich makes the unit more vulnerable.

Sure i could see 40k needing some wound and damage tracking, but that is a funny statement as I think most big battle systems have mostly one-shot kills.

Anyways, can 40k ever be balanced anymore? Isn't it just too bloated now?

Epic Armageddon had one shot kills for non War Machine vehicles, but those vehicles were parts of larger units, essentially acting as squads. I don't think that's a very good analogy.

That said I don't really have an issue with one-shot kills, because A: We've seen it before in 40K and it worked fine when the balance was good, and B: It's both realistic and cinematic, so at least some effort should be taken to model it.

Some of the issue is probably just variance (feels unlucky), but also maybe because it might be a hard thing to defend your tanks against because boards are more crowded than they used to be.

tneva82 wrote:
40k is way over skirmish scale.

In terms of the number of models fielded in an army these days? I'd agree.

In terms of how zoomed in we are when we look at each model/units equipment and wargear? No, I'd say we're still at the skirmish level.

 Dysartes wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
40k is way over skirmish scale.

In terms of the number of models fielded in an army these days? I'd agree.

In terms of how zoomed in we are when we look at each model/units equipment and wargear? No, I'd say we're still at the skirmish level.

A relatively clean cut-off point is that we're still talking about individually-based infantry models, which imho puts the game into skirmish scale, as well as the wargear issues you already mentioned. The fundamental unit of the game is still the single soldier, while usually company-level wargames use fireteams or squads as their lowest-level unit.

it is not only about basing

but we move models, check LOS with models, shoot with models, roll saves for models
just with a lot of them

a big battle game moves, checks LOS, shoots, saves etc with units not models

but people don't want their individual models be more than just markers
but also want to put all of them on the table

hence we have skirmish levels rules and big battle number of models
which is the main reason why 40k games are that slow and we have bloat, as everything goes down to models and not units

 kodos wrote:
it is not only about basing

but we move models, check LOS with models, shoot with models, roll saves for models
just with a lot of them

a big battle game moves, checks LOS, shoots, saves etc with units not models

but people don't want their individual models be more than just markers
but also want to put all of them on the table

hence we have skirmish levels rules and big battle number of models
which is the main reason why 40k games are that slow and we have bloat, as everything goes down to models and not units

I fully agree - that's what i meant with 'The fundamental unit is the single infantry model'. Most game actions work on a logic that works on a per-model basis.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Karol wrote:
But so are orks or eldar, or more or less any non specific name space marine chapter. It has to be something else. God knows what though.

We should probably ask them, lol, but maybe is the asexual-ish nature of nids? Less 'masculine machines of war' and more 'force of nature'. All I know is my wife loves goofy dwarves and goblins.

The problem with many factions in 40k is that they are made for masculine power fantasies. Hell, even Sisters of Battle are still kind of made for men even though they've tried to steer away from that with the recent release.

Nids are free from that. They are just bugs and bugs are fun. No power fantasies(unless you have a fantasy of devouring the world I guess). Plus a lot of freedom of painting and decorating the carapaces.

Also the reason why I like Craftworlds. They tend to be neutral and come in "Taste the rainbow" selection.

I've seen women tend to like Tzeentch a lot as well, partly because of the colors and also possibly again because of the relative lack of hyper-masculinity. Even the Thousand Sons aren't much of a male power fantasy as I don't know anyone who fantasizes about being an automaton made of dust.

Inducted only one girl into the game, and it was with Space Wolves so... your mileage may vary.

Nids are cute though

On another note, characters and vehicles now have to roll for leadership. Well that's interesting.

18/04/2023

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/04/18/the-new-edition-of-warhammer-40000-makes-all-the-phases-count/

The New Edition of Warhammer 40,000 Makes All the Phases Count

The Psychic phase and the Morale Phase are now no more

psychic powers are used throughout the other phases

Smite is used in the the Shooting phase

Morale gets sorted in your Command Phase, when you take Battle-shock tests for any units that have taken enough losses.

Roll a 2D6 for every unit that’s Below Half-strength – that means they’re a squad with less than half of their starting models, or a single model with less than half of their starting Wounds. You’ll need to roll above your new Leadership characteristic – if you fail, that unit suffers some nasty penalties until your next turn:

-OC falls to 0
-Stratagems cannot be used on that unit
-if it Falls Back, it must take a test-roll for every model in the unit

If the old blast rule has been kept, we now have interesting choices to make. A unit with 5 models takes rolls after 3 casualties, while a unit with 6 needs 4 casualties. Even numbers are to be preferred. At the same time we all know what happens at 6 models.

2 model units are immune to morale.

Another interesting point. Even if your sniper doesn't get its job done, you can still get that character to panic.

Spoletta wrote:
If the old blast rule has been kept, we now have interesting choices to make. A unit with 5 models takes rolls after 3 casualties, while a unit with 6 needs 4 casualties. Even numbers are to be preferred. At the same time we all know what happens at 6 models.

2 model units are immune to morale.

Another interesting point. Even if your sniper doesn't get its job done, you can still get that character to panic.

Hmm...I wonder if they'll allow 2 model units ( e.g. Spawn ).

The point about the sniper causing panic...really cool.