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.

40K 10ed main book started out pretty well with that, having all the actual rules in one clearly marked section.
We'll have to see how that carries on to the codices though.

Sarouan wrote:
It's not just a game. It's a hobby. Plenty of people spend that amount (often way more !) for their hobbies. Even though they don't necessarily play with what they do with it in the end (I guess riding your tuned motorbike on a weekend can be counted as "playing with it" ?)

Yeah, I'm in this category. Love the creating, building, painting.

Don't get me wrong, playing is fun too, but not my #1 reason for being here.

I haven't played a game in over three years but have built and painted multiple armies for 40k, AoS, Aeronautica, Kill Team, etc

 Rolsheen wrote:
I haven't played a game in over three years but have built and painted multiple armies for 40k, AoS, Aeronautica, Kill Team, etc

Three years? THREEEEE YEAAARRRRSSSS???

Report to your local gaming club immediately!

 schoon wrote:

Sarouan wrote:
It's not just a game. It's a hobby. Plenty of people spend that amount (often way more !) for their hobbies. Even though they don't necessarily play with what they do with it in the end (I guess riding your tuned motorbike on a weekend can be counted as "playing with it" ?)

Yeah, I'm in this category. Love the creating, building, painting.

Don't get me wrong, playing is fun too, but not my #1 reason for being here.

I have a couple armies that I've only played 1 or 2 games with, despite working on them over the course of months or years. It's definitely more a collecting/building hobby for me, with painting next and playing last. Though, playing does tend to give me motivation to continue the other parts of the hobby, so it all works out.

Everyone gets what they want out of the hobby. The goal is to not feel bad about the thing you're spending time and effort into. Unfortunately, this site is really good at making people feel bad about their choices.

Are there any places you can get Terrain for this already? Might need to get a city sorted out

There’ll be some official stuff released on launch day (which is not next week it seems). Until then Vanguard Miniatures has a load of stuff.

The adeptus titanicus terrain line is already a large chunk of the official terrain range, with more to come on launch.

Grimdsrkterrain also has an incredible 3d printable range, believe they also have some licensed printers if you don't have the hardware for it

VAYASEN wrote:
Are there any places you can get Terrain for this already? Might need to get a city sorted out

There is also Dropzone Commander paper buildings. They are free and you can print some out to try out, play some games befor deciding on what works for you and what you want/need.
They are larger but it's easy to scale.

https://ttcombat.com/pages/dropzone-commander-resources

Look for a Buildings link, there are also roads.

MarkNorfolk wrote:
There’ll be some official stuff released on launch day (which is not next week it seems). Until then Vanguard Miniatures has a load of stuff.

Thanks.

I am sure its been noted many times...but what scale is the game considered to be?

VAYASEN wrote:

MarkNorfolk wrote:
There’ll be some official stuff released on launch day (which is not next week it seems). Until then Vanguard Miniatures has a load of stuff.

Thanks.

I am sure its been noted many times...but what scale is the game considered to be?

1/4th of 40k

The scale has officially been referred to as 8mm scale (yes, it has explicitly been referred to as "8mm scale") and 1/4 40k scale by GW. There are no 3rd party terrain sets (other than 3d printables) that are a precise match. Technically speaking dropzone commanders 10mm terrain is 25% larger but its close enough to work, especially given the absurd scale of 40k architecture.

VAYASEN wrote:
Are there any places you can get Terrain for this already? Might need to get a city sorted out

If you have a look at this thread, there is a section on terrain which is mostly up to date about 3/4 down the first post:.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/751316.page

VAYASEN wrote:


I am sure its been noted many times...but what scale is the game considered to be?

Talking about terrain, 8/10mm scale equivalent should work fine. Even 15mm, actually...mankind's future in the 30/40k universe loves oversized buildings and doors, so it will fit with the background. And of course, "statues" of 28/32mm scale miniatures will also find their place pretty smoothly.

This thread will also show you all sorts of terrain option.

 Crablezworth wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:


At Epic scale I'm not noticing what small arms the infantry dudes are equipped with and quite frankly it really shouldn't matter.

But you actually have to be, because some have lasrifles, some have flamers, some have axes, that not actually like, up to you. Those are distinct bases of models, you need some way to tell them apart.

Flags! 1st edition flags!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

chaos0xomega wrote:
Having you take a unit where every base in a given unit/detachment has a potentially different weapon profile based on whether you put the little guy with the tiny pistol or tiny whatever it is on it is purely asinine, no game in this scale does that.

I mean, 1st edition did You could also have your sarge dive under tanks with a grenade.

the earlier 1st edition sets (but not the later ones) had bases in different coloured plastic as well to make telling the tactical marines (five guys in Mk VI with bolters) apart from the support marines (five guys in Mk VI with bolters) easy.

it also made it easier to tell both from the assault marines (five guys in Mk VI with bolters) or indeed the devastator marines (five guys.. you guessed correctly)

the flag was then the 'commander', who, and you'd never have guessed, was five guys in Mk VI with bolters..

at least there was the Mk VII boxed set not that long after that had actual distinct assault and heavy weapons bods

 SgtEeveell wrote:
40K 10ed main book started out pretty well with that, having all the actual rules in one clearly marked section.
We'll have to see how that carries on to the codices though.

There's already an 18 page pdf explaining what their gakky vague rules actually mean

Just a fluff article today but what's interesting is this:

You’ll be able to command a tercio or five of your own shortly, when Legions Imperialis comes to pre-order. Exactly when we can’t say, but can you hear that pitter-patter of tiny feet in the distance?

Could mean nothing but with the other article last week that also said it is "on course for a release soon" a release in the first half of October seems even likelier to me

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 SgtEeveell wrote:
40K 10ed main book started out pretty well with that, having all the actual rules in one clearly marked section.
We'll have to see how that carries on to the codices though.

There's already an 18 page pdf explaining what their gakky vague rules actually mean

I didn't say they were *good* rules.

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 SgtEeveell wrote:
40K 10ed main book started out pretty well with that, having all the actual rules in one clearly marked section.
We'll have to see how that carries on to the codices though.

There's already an 18 page pdf explaining what their gakky vague rules actually mean

Wonder how you classify chess and mtg rules then seeing they have longer than 18 pages :>

tneva82 wrote:
Wonder how you classify chess and mtg rules then seeing they have longer than 18 pages :>

Lolwut? Chess does not have 18 pages of rules, not unless you write the rules in some comically large font with giant pictures on every page.

FIDE rulebook is 25 pages long.

The US Federation rulebook is 380+ pages long.

MtG CompRules rivals the Bible.

The amount of commentary a rules set receives has no bearing on its relative qualities.

 His Master's Voice wrote:
FIDE rulebook is 25 pages long.

https://www.fide.com/FIDE/handbook/LawsOfChess.pdf

16 pages, the appendices for non-standard stuff like speed chess variants don't really count. And that 16 pages includes outside of game stuff like a code of conduct, along with formatting that isn't particularly concise. A rulebook for the game of chess itself, not including tournament-specific rules for this one organization, with concise formatting would be far less than 18 pages.

And I disagree that page count is irrelevant. The fact that 40k needs such a huge page count for its core rules plus an additional 18 pages of commentary explaining how the rules work is a sign of incredibly poor game design given how shallow those rules are. Elegance is a virtue in game design and GW fails utterly at it.

You think it's increadibly poor games design, that doesn't make it so.

I would suggest GW measure the success and failure of the ruleset very differently (and arrive at a different conclusion).

We’re also discussing a rule set none of us have had a chance to actually get to grips with.

I mean, I can remember back when I was wee, before my exile from Scotland wee, when I couldn’t tell you which was which out of Rhino, Predator and Land Raider, let alone what every rule in Adeptus Titanicus was, or what they did,

It takes time and in-game experience to remember them all, and when each might be useful.

You wanna play chess? Frankly, go and play chess then.

Vorian wrote:
You think it's increadibly poor games design, that doesn't make it so.

Bloat and having a high page count to strategy depth ratio are objectively bad design.

I would suggest GW measure the success and failure of the ruleset very differently (and arrive at a different conclusion).

I would suggest that GW is very bad at game design but very good at marketing and considers a terrible game a success as long as it sells a bunch of copies based on FOMO and whales. And while "shareholder value added" is a good metric if your goal is making money it doesn't have much to do with the question of whether a game is good or not.

In the context of LI GW may very well consider the game a success if some people buy it purely for the models, a bunch of people buy it because of FOMO, and the game is dead within a couple years. GW may even consider it a success if lots of people buy it but throw the rulebook straight into the trash and play with the old Epic rules.

 ThePaintingOwl wrote:

Vorian wrote:
You think it's increadibly poor games design, that doesn't make it so.

Bloat and having a high page count to strategy depth ratio are objectively bad design.

I would suggest GW measure the success and failure of the ruleset very differently (and arrive at a different conclusion).

I would suggest that GW is very bad at game design but very good at marketing and considers a terrible game a success as long as it sells a bunch of copies based on FOMO and whales. And while "shareholder value added" is a good metric if your goal is making money it doesn't have much to do with the question of whether a game is good or not.

In the context of LI GW may very well consider the game a success if some people buy it purely for the models, a bunch of people buy it because of FOMO, and the game is dead within a couple years. GW may even consider it a success if lots of people buy it but throw the rulebook straight into the trash and play with the old Epic rules.

So why are you spamming up this N&R thread with your hot takes? This is for rumours and news of the game not hot takes.

 ingtaer wrote:
So why are you spamming up this N&R thread with your hot takes? This is for rumours and news of the game not hot takes.

Why are you singling out my post out of an ongoing discussion involving other people? I'm far from the only person here posting "hot takes" on a game we haven't seen much of yet. The majority of the past couple pages has been general discussion of game design opinions unrelated to any specific news or rumors.

 ThePaintingOwl wrote:

 ingtaer wrote:
So why are you spamming up this N&R thread with your hot takes? This is for rumours and news of the game not hot takes.

Why are you singling out my post out of an ongoing discussion involving other people? I'm far from the only person here posting "hot takes" on a game we haven't seen much of yet. The majority of the past couple pages has been general discussion of game design opinions unrelated to any specific news or rumors.

To take an educated guess the conversation was discussing the merits of wysiwyg and small arms profiles on the infantry bases, but then derailed when you made comments about people won't buy into the game to rarely play.

Kinda agree though that it's better to just clean up the thread and message privately or issue a general warning?