Switch Theme:

Warhammer 40k news and rumours - Christmas Battleforces revealed pg 244  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Fixture of Dakka






I may go for the Krieg one. 2 more artillery pieces, a second full unit of troops, and engineers to bring my squad up to 10 would basically finish off what I want as a kreig detachment.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




St. George, UT

That Chaos box is fire as long as your not playing one of the god factions. Hell of a starter box.

However, any of us would probably pledge ourselves once again to the ruinous powers for that rhino.

I haven't seen one of those available for purchase in person for years.


See pics of my Orks, Tau, Emperor's Children, Necrons, Space Wolves, and Dark Eldar here:


 
   
Made in gb
Gore-Drenched Khorne Chaos Lord




Overread wrote:
They aren't the same and that's kind of the point - if you want smaller games there's specific game formats for smaller matches.
This means the core game can get away being bigger armies because anyone new or with less funds/time/whatever can play in the smaller game formats which are decently supported in most places.


This is still skirting round the problem that they've shrunken the table, pushed 2k almost exclusively as the default and drop points on everything like it's the best thing since sliced bread. Armies could stand to be a little smaller, I don't care that there are smaller sub-games, its a mutually exclusive statement.

LunarSol wrote:And I will repeat, if you want smaller but still core 40k, play the Incursion game mode.


Agree it's a nice game size, suits the smaller tables better as well. However it's still the ginger haired step child of the game. It needs to see more events and coverage to be more widely accepted. Most people would pass it over or simply stop visiting incursion once they get to 2k.

Overread wrote:And at under 500 points total you could easily get two and field every model.


Which exactly highlights the problem.
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




U.k

Dudeface wrote:
Overread wrote:
They aren't the same and that's kind of the point - if you want smaller games there's specific game formats for smaller matches.
This means the core game can get away being bigger armies because anyone new or with less funds/time/whatever can play in the smaller game formats which are decently supported in most places.


This is still skirting round the problem that they've shrunken the table, pushed 2k almost exclusively as the default and drop points on everything like it's the best thing since sliced bread. Armies could stand to be a little smaller, I don't care that there are smaller sub-games, its a mutually exclusive statement.

LunarSol wrote:And I will repeat, if you want smaller but still core 40k, play the Incursion game mode.


Agree it's a nice game size, suits the smaller tables better as well. However it's still the ginger haired step child of the game. It needs to see more events and coverage to be more widely accepted. Most people would pass it over or simply stop visiting incursion once they get to 2k.

Overread wrote:And at under 500 points total you could easily get two and field every model.


Which exactly highlights the problem.


The latest mission cards have special missions and maps specifically for incursion, they are pushing it and making it a unique offering, and it’s bloody good fun too.
   
Made in gb
Gore-Drenched Khorne Chaos Lord




Andykp wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
Overread wrote:
They aren't the same and that's kind of the point - if you want smaller games there's specific game formats for smaller matches.
This means the core game can get away being bigger armies because anyone new or with less funds/time/whatever can play in the smaller game formats which are decently supported in most places.


This is still skirting round the problem that they've shrunken the table, pushed 2k almost exclusively as the default and drop points on everything like it's the best thing since sliced bread. Armies could stand to be a little smaller, I don't care that there are smaller sub-games, its a mutually exclusive statement.

LunarSol wrote:And I will repeat, if you want smaller but still core 40k, play the Incursion game mode.


Agree it's a nice game size, suits the smaller tables better as well. However it's still the ginger haired step child of the game. It needs to see more events and coverage to be more widely accepted. Most people would pass it over or simply stop visiting incursion once they get to 2k.

Overread wrote:And at under 500 points total you could easily get two and field every model.


Which exactly highlights the problem.


The latest mission cards have special missions and maps specifically for incursion, they are pushing it and making it a unique offering, and it’s bloody good fun too.


I agree and play them myself, but I know its uncommon and a lot of people out there don't want to. They want the massive armies rammed into a tiny space whilst complaining how few points are in big boxes.

I'll drop it anyway, it's not a rumour and it's certainly not news.
   
Made in fi
Posts with Authority






That Krieg box would have been perfect for me.. if I hadnt already bought most of it via individual kits. Would have saved me quite a bit of money to buy this instead. Oh well..

If I was just starting out with DKoK, I'd buy two of these and a HH Malcador (to use as a counts-as-bottomless tank of M41)

"The larger point though, is that as players, we have more control over what the game looks and feels like than most of us are willing to use in order to solve our own problems" 
   
Made in gb
Decrepit Dakkanaut




UK

I do agree its a problem that GW "shrunk the board size" since it was basically done purely to fit the half sized boards they fit into their larger boxed sets. That said if you feel the board is too small just play bigger. 40K (heck all GW games) are not balanced anywhere near a level of granular balance that changing table size would break them (unless you go to extremes). The board size is (and always has been) purely a suggestion by GW. Granted more competitive groups will flock to the official numbers, but many people just get one of those big roll mat table covers with a landscape on them and use that as their default size.

Dudeface wrote:


Overread wrote:And at under 500 points total you could easily get two and field every model.


Which exactly highlights the problem.


It's not a problem its a point of view. You want to have fewer models that cost more to deploy for a "standard 2K game". Meanwhile I (and others) are more than happy to be able to have the choice of an army that can field large infantry blocks; multiple artillery and tank units on the table at once for a standard 2K game.

There's honestly no "right" answer here - that's why having different formats of game size helps. You want a smaller game play Incursion/Spearhead etc... You want a larger game heck I'm surprised GW hasn't re-released an updated Apoc book.


A Blog in Miniature

3D Printing, hobbying and model fun! 
   
Made in gb
Terrifying Wraith




Tbh I think mainline 40k being a more detailed but smaller model count game, and "multiple tanks and artillery" style games being more an Apocalypse thing, was a much better state of affairs for a number of reasons. There's no EMPIRICAL right or wrong but there's certainly effects (overly long games and very high time and cash barriers to new armies being the key ones)
   
Made in gb
Gore-Drenched Khorne Chaos Lord




Billicus wrote:
Tbh I think mainline 40k being a more detailed but smaller model count game, and "multiple tanks and artillery" style games being more an Apocalypse thing, was a much better state of affairs for a number of reasons. There's no EMPIRICAL right or wrong but there's certainly effects (overly long games and very high time and cash barriers to new armies being the key ones)


This. It's not a right or wrong but as noted:

- entry level mode of combat patrol is pants to be honest
- incursion isn't widely humoured by the wider community
- if there isn't a consensus on table size or points it defaults back to match play standard
- most outward media encourages comp play 2k only
- armies are forever getting more expensive for new comers
- the game is taking longer in my experience
- it promotes the lethality arms race
- points reduction as a primary balance tool simply results in "buy and field more"

I would define those as problems, the degree to which anyone is personally impacted will vary, but problems they are all the same.
   
Made in gb
Decrepit Dakkanaut




UK

At the same time warhammer has never been bigger than it has right now.

I'd also argue most armies are too diverse in models to cope with being downsized. You downsize them and that one-game-a-week (at best for most) or maybe one a month for many - means a LOT of a collection might sit on the shelf and not see game time.

This was a problem the old FOC system had for some armies. They had options but the slot limits stopped you fielding more of them.

It's not just a case of point cost, but army size and diversity. People want to put their toys on the table to play with and for many on limited games its better to have the option of a bigger match with more diversity than it is to have much smaller games.



Lethality arms-race isn't really a size of game problem its an inherent problem with how GW chooses to build and balance their games.



Also lets face it at some point this stops being an inherent problem with the game and becomes a local club and social problem that GW can't fix. GW can't make your local group play how you want; only the people there can do that .



Like I said before in the past game size was a problem; Old World 100% had it as one of the contributing problematic factors for newbies burning out. However there are multiple game formats now, esp for 40K that allow games at smaller sizes. Yes costs are up, they've always gone up every year; and every year we predict its the end of GW and -- honestly - GW has just kept growing.

A Blog in Miniature

3D Printing, hobbying and model fun! 
   
Made in gb
Gore-Drenched Khorne Chaos Lord




 Overread wrote:
At the same time warhammer has never been bigger than it has right now.

I'd also argue most armies are too diverse in models to cope with being downsized. You downsize them and that one-game-a-week (at best for most) or maybe one a month for many - means a LOT of a collection might sit on the shelf and not see game time.

This was a problem the old FOC system had for some armies. They had options but the slot limits stopped you fielding more of them.

It's not just a case of point cost, but army size and diversity. People want to put their toys on the table to play with and for many on limited games its better to have the option of a bigger match with more diversity than it is to have much smaller games.



Lethality arms-race isn't really a size of game problem its an inherent problem with how GW chooses to build and balance their games.



Also lets face it at some point this stops being an inherent problem with the game and becomes a local club and social problem that GW can't fix. GW can't make your local group play how you want; only the people there can do that .



Like I said before in the past game size was a problem; Old World 100% had it as one of the contributing problematic factors for newbies burning out. However there are multiple game formats now, esp for 40K that allow games at smaller sizes. Yes costs are up, they've always gone up every year; and every year we predict its the end of GW and -- honestly - GW has just kept growing.


I mean to put boots on the other feet - if you want to use all of a large collection maybe that should be an above-average game size, which again they have officially supported in multiple ways at multiple times, but doesn't catch on. The options exist all the same as a smaller one, the only difference is one side of that discussion currently has a bit more of what they want than the other as the default.

I don't honestly think having a large collection with some of it sitting on a shelf is bad. I can only think of one person I know personally who used to only collect a "game sized" force and keep it exactly relevant to what they played. Having a depth of units and roster is good, it allows you to keep swapping things and trying stuff, the limitations create decision points and scarcity that is largely ignored if everyone just wants "more" all the time.

The bigger army sizes also exacerbate when some armies have smaller rosters than the others, as they are forced into spam just to fill points to a large degree.

I do agree on the arms race, but like I say, community largely and GW either seem to think it needs to kill more (added lethality) or be killed more (point drops to facilitate more lethality), it's a very two dimensional process and results into a race to the bottom for points. It's happened repeatedly already since 7th.

Regards local player groups, you are right but like I say when the community as a wider whole are happily presenting the "right way" to play as following the default, anything else will always be an uphill battle.

Edit: to that end I don't think I've ever seen sigmar players complain they want more stuff on the table, that their armies costing more is good, or that getting greater game value from the boxes is bad. None of those can be said in comparison with 40k.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2025/10/07 14:51:57


 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





Nobody plays incursion because nobody plays incursion is a self-fulfilling prophecy. Be the incursion you want to see on the table!
   
Made in gb
Decrepit Dakkanaut




UK

Dudeface wrote:

Edit: to that end I don't think I've ever seen sigmar players complain they want more stuff on the table, that their armies costing more is good, or that getting greater game value from the boxes is bad. None of those can be said in comparison with 40k.


I mean I can start doing it now if you want?

Sigmar is in a different odd spot because it "should" have armies of comparable size to 40K; but the way Sigmar grew caused it to stall its growth for a number of years which is why between 2.0 and today GW has cut down army size to make it more accessible to totally new people. Meanwhile 40K has a much larger mature market who push for larger armies.

It's a balance - get it too far wrong and you shut down one group - either those with big collections feel left out or those getting started. Ths problem is a LOT less than it was in the Kirby days and before; because back then side-games in smaller formats weren't properly supported like they are now. Today you've got other game modes to help ease people in.


I've also got a feeling that some of the downsizing of AoS is GW trying to draw a line between the AoS and Old World experience of play; but I think this is a minor point compared to the simple fact that AoS just needs more growth time

A Blog in Miniature

3D Printing, hobbying and model fun! 
   
Made in gb
Gore-Drenched Khorne Chaos Lord




 Overread wrote:
Dudeface wrote:

Edit: to that end I don't think I've ever seen sigmar players complain they want more stuff on the table, that their armies costing more is good, or that getting greater game value from the boxes is bad. None of those can be said in comparison with 40k.


I mean I can start doing it now if you want?

Sigmar is in a different odd spot because it "should" have armies of comparable size to 40K; but the way Sigmar grew caused it to stall its growth for a number of years which is why between 2.0 and today GW has cut down army size to make it more accessible to totally new people. Meanwhile 40K has a much larger mature market who push for larger armies.

It's a balance - get it too far wrong and you shut down one group - either those with big collections feel left out or those getting started. Ths problem is a LOT less than it was in the Kirby days and before; because back then side-games in smaller formats weren't properly supported like they are now. Today you've got other game modes to help ease people in.


I've also got a feeling that some of the downsizing of AoS is GW trying to draw a line between the AoS and Old World experience of play; but I think this is a minor point compared to the simple fact that AoS just needs more growth time


So being super reductive, the only division point from your perspective is the relative inflexibility to milk AoS players due to a lack of critical mass/sunken cost fallacy, whereas 40k players will happily just take it due to inertia of the gaming community?
   
Made in in
[MOD]
Otiose in a Niche






Hyderabad, India

 Fayric wrote:
Would be great if they did a remake of "Dance Steps for GWs Space Hulk" with actual dedicated models.


You can't just throw that out without including the picture!


 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





Eh, I feel like Age of Sigmar armies haven't been fleshed out enough to put a real demand on making them bigger. In a lot of ways I feel like they're already too big, with most army lists I see repeating the same unit 3-5 times as the bulk of the points.
   
Made in us
Arch Magos w/ 4 Meg of RAM






The Land of Humidity

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
 Fayric wrote:
Would be great if they did a remake of "Dance Steps for GWs Space Hulk" with actual dedicated models.


You can't just throw that out without including the picture!



The best use of Ultramarines... evar.

 BorderCountess wrote:
Just because you're doing something right doesn't necessarily mean you know what you're doing...

 
   
Made in gb
Decrepit Dakkanaut




UK

 LunarSol wrote:
Eh, I feel like Age of Sigmar armies haven't been fleshed out enough to put a real demand on making them bigger. In a lot of ways I feel like they're already too big, with most army lists I see repeating the same unit 3-5 times as the bulk of the points.


It varies a lot - Skaven, Lizardmen, Stormcast - big armies with lots of options

Fyreslayers - utterly tiny and have to spam the same units over and over. Heck even Daughters of Khaine are a bit like that.


In some ways its a transitional element; armies which are smaller will be expected to gain more models and diversity and thus put more pressure on people wanting to take more.

A Blog in Miniature

3D Printing, hobbying and model fun! 
   
Made in us
[DCM]
Tzeentch's Fan Girl






Southern New Hampshire

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
 Fayric wrote:
Would be great if they did a remake of "Dance Steps for GWs Space Hulk" with actual dedicated models.


You can't just throw that out without including the picture!



Umm... is this the REAL reason there are no female space marines?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Overread wrote:
It varies a lot - Skaven, Lizardmen, Stormcast - big armies with lots of options


Two of those are holdovers from WHFB, and the other is the over-bloated poster-boy faction.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2025/10/07 18:17:56


She/Her

"There are no problems that cannot be solved with cannons." - Chief Engineer Boris Krauss of Nuln

Kid_Kyoto wrote:"Don't be a dick" and "This is a family wargame" are good rules of thumb.


DR:80S++G++M--B+IPwhfb01#+D+++A+++/fWD258R++T(D)DM+++
 
   
Made in gb
Decrepit Dakkanaut




UK

 BorderCountess wrote:

 Overread wrote:
It varies a lot - Skaven, Lizardmen, Stormcast - big armies with lots of options


Two of those are holdovers from WHFB, and the other is the over-bloated poster-boy faction.


And yet I fully expect to see other armies gain similar diversity. You don't hear of Ossiarch players saying that they've got all they ever need. They still cry out for archers; for more monster-beast-constructs; for the centaur cavalry etc...

So yes those that I picked were hold-overs from the past and retained a lot of strengths for that in model diversity. That said considering 40K, 30K, and Old World ALL leaned into wider army diversity as a means of expansion then I fully expect AoS to follow the same pattern. Sure not every army will get addons all the time; but barring unique ones like Gargants, I fully expect to see rosters continue to expand considerably toward large diverse forces. It just takes time.

A Blog in Miniature

3D Printing, hobbying and model fun! 
   
Made in us
Virulent Space Marine dedicated to Nurgle




I'm pretty sure they vaulted more Stormcast warscrolls than exist in the battletome. I feel like AOS will not be hitting 40k levels of unit bloat (for most factions).
   
Made in us
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain






A Protoss colony world

PoorGravitasHandling wrote:
I'm pretty sure they vaulted more Stormcast warscrolls than exist in the battletome. I feel like AOS will not be hitting 40k levels of unit bloat (for most factions).

Not quite, but yes a lot of units got sunsetted, and I expect more to go away next edition. Kind of a shame but I do support reduced bloat in the game.

My armies (re-counted and updated on 11/7/24, including modeled wargear options):
Dark Angels: ~16000 Astra Militarum: ~1200 | Imperial Knights: ~2300 | Leagues of Votann: ~1300 | Tyranids: ~3400 | Stormcast Eternals: ~5000 | Kruleboyz: ~3500 | Lumineth Realm-Lords: ~700
Check out my P&M Blogs: ZergSmasher's P&M Blog | Imperial Knights blog | Board Games blog | Total models painted in 2024: 40 | Total models painted in 2025: 40 | Current main painting project: Tomb Kings
 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
You need your bumps felt. With a patented, Grotsnik Corp Bump Feelerer 9,000.
The Grotsnik Corp Bump Feelerer 9,000. It only looks like several bricks crudely gaffer taped to a cricket bat.
Grotsnik Corp. Sorry, No Refunds.
 
   
Made in gb
Leader of the Sept







I am intrigued by that approach. Can the models be used for other new units, or is that it? One of the main drivers of what you are calling bloat is that people rather like to be able to use the stuff they have bought, and there is 30 years or so of model releases to cover.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2025/10/08 06:53:50


Please excuse any spelling errors. I use a tablet frequently and software keyboards are a pain!

Terranwing - w3;d1;l1
51st Dunedinw2;d0;l0
Cadre Coronal Afterglow w1;d0;l0 
   
Made in gb
Gore-Drenched Khorne Chaos Lord




 Flinty wrote:
I am intrigued by that approach. Can the models be used for other new units, or is that it? One of the main drivers of what you are calling bloat is that people rather like to be able to use the stuff they have bought, and there is 30 years or so of model releases to cover.


Yes and no in the case of stormcast. There are some very easy and obvious proxies for a lot of them but in essence they are simply gone. Their roster is still massive compared to most however.

It shocked an upset a lot of people, but likewise you avoid, as you say, the bloat of every model to have ever existed all being game worthy and people wanting to use all the stuff at once.

Plus frankly they ran out of design space imo and it was getting a bit repetitive for the faction.
   
Made in au
Longtime Dakkanaut





If tow is anything to go by they definitely keep their moulds assuming they're still usable.

I remember their starter intro 40k stuff from 5 years? Ago or so which included 2nd ed plastic ork buggies.

The storm cast are spirits so they can look like anything. It would be easy for them to re release them in a Sigmar redoubled event or something, even if temporarily.

I am interested to see if they ever do a mto for old 40k plastics or re release some stuff under some kind of event or promotion. Like the maelstrom releases old tactical marines as junk pirate marines or something.

   
Made in gb
Using Object Source Lighting







My Sacrosant army got full support and even a new edition box set only to be discontinued very few years later. The reason was army bloat... but the second after they were discontinued, Stormcast got a new edition box set with loads of new models.

In short Fantasy side of things is volatile and in no way the new army you just got, is guaranteed to be supported in 6 or so years. Actually not even any fantasy game.

Many factions got muddled between WFB, AoS and now the old world... Frankly its a mess and I dont want none of it.

   
Made in gb
Dakka Veteran




Dudeface wrote:

Regards local player groups, you are right but like I say when the community as a wider whole are happily presenting the "right way" to play as following the default, anything else will always be an uphill battle.

I'm not saying you're wrong, and there's no way to actually know, but I think it's equally likely that even if Incursion was the "default" game mode according to what was in the rules, people would still end up going for 2000 points anyway.

There's a chance that the reason it's the most popular is because it's what most people want to play.
   
Made in gb
Gore-Drenched Khorne Chaos Lord




deano2099 wrote:
Dudeface wrote:

Regards local player groups, you are right but like I say when the community as a wider whole are happily presenting the "right way" to play as following the default, anything else will always be an uphill battle.

I'm not saying you're wrong, and there's no way to actually know, but I think it's equally likely that even if Incursion was the "default" game mode according to what was in the rules, people would still end up going for 2000 points anyway.

There's a chance that the reason it's the most popular is because it's what most people want to play.


Not really there's a loooooot of studies on the bandwagon effect and the impact of people following the popular opinion, which at this point is entrenched at 2k. If people wanted to bring all the stuff or huge games you'd see 3k a lot more than you do, they instead default to the... default, as that's the sort of herd mentality.

Without ripping the game apart and going again, people are locked in as a group consciousness to this 2k game size, despite the fact it's in reality an arbitrary limit. As long as they can continue to be provided with a means to keep it "same-ish" and work towards that confirmation bias and comfort zone, it won't change.

If GW upped all points by ~30%, essentially making a 1500 point list the normal for 2k, people would simply play 2k still and either enjoy it or bemoan it, but there wouldn't be a giant mass community move to 2500.
   
Made in us
Moustache-twirling Princeps




United Kingdom

Your downloadable Warhammer 40,000 faction rules are changing – find out how

Interesting change - seems to be mainly cosmetic, but should make finding things easier.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2025/10/08 09:50:20


 
   
Made in de
Oozing Plague Marine Terminator





Dudeface wrote:
deano2099 wrote:
Dudeface wrote:

Regards local player groups, you are right but like I say when the community as a wider whole are happily presenting the "right way" to play as following the default, anything else will always be an uphill battle.

I'm not saying you're wrong, and there's no way to actually know, but I think it's equally likely that even if Incursion was the "default" game mode according to what was in the rules, people would still end up going for 2000 points anyway.

There's a chance that the reason it's the most popular is because it's what most people want to play.


Not really there's a loooooot of studies on the bandwagon effect and the impact of people following the popular opinion, which at this point is entrenched at 2k. If people wanted to bring all the stuff or huge games you'd see 3k a lot more than you do, they instead default to the... default, as that's the sort of herd mentality.

Without ripping the game apart and going again, people are locked in as a group consciousness to this 2k game size, despite the fact it's in reality an arbitrary limit. As long as they can continue to be provided with a means to keep it "same-ish" and work towards that confirmation bias and comfort zone, it won't change.

If GW upped all points by ~30%, essentially making a 1500 point list the normal for 2k, people would simply play 2k still and either enjoy it or bemoan it, but there wouldn't be a giant mass community move to 2500.


Not sure I even buy your premise because I'd say overall 10th edition armies aren't actually larger than they've been in 5th Edition.
With the drive towards making marines more elite than before, Orks being more expensive per model and all hordes having smaller squads, vehicles overall being more expensive than in 6th edition and not being able to buy cheap squads without special weapons, I wouldn't say the game actually is getting bigger and bigger. Yes, there are points cuts in the FaQs, but usually they hit only a couple of units, it's not as prevalent as it was in 9th or 8th edition.
In 5th to 7th you also had game sizes of 1750 or 1850, but I'm not even sure these actually had a lower model count than a 2000points game today.
   
 
Forum Index » News & Rumors
Go to: