Latest posts for the thread "Feelings on Mechanisation of 40k?"

Feelings on Mechanisation of 40k?

nullBolt — GMT

Does anyone else feel that the emphasis on mechanised forces takes away from a lot of the fun of 40k?

It's probably been that way for awhile (I've been away for a long, long time) but I just don't like how it's been taken away from Space Marines (and their enemies) doing bad arse things and has became "Land Raider moves forward, disgorges a bunch of marines and then kills everything". It takes away a lot of the fun of the game when the things doing the best work are mechanical and not my empathetic units.

Nevermind the fact that they just don't feel at all suited to the scale of the game. 28mm does not lend itself to a lot of big pieces on the board.

It's also part of the contributor to points creep. More points to fit in more big things which takes away from the feeling of "being on the ground".

Space Marines = Very good.
Dreadnoughts = Good.
Rhinos = One per army, at the most.
Landraiders = For feth's sake, just play Apocalypse.

Oh, well, I guess Infinity exists. I'll start playing that and see if I can't convert a few people. Either that or Kill Team.

Re:Feelings on Mechanisation of 40k?

HoundsofDemos — GMT

I disagree. For one this edition vehicles arn't that strong this edition, and as far as marines go are probably one of the weaker choices. Drop pods, centstar or bike lists are all arguably stronger builds. Additionally your chart applied to other armies strips a lot of flavor away, for instance guard will loss tanks, chaos got even worse (sad thought), sisters become unplayable. Limiting things to just walking infantry guts a lot of armies mobility, so armies that have bikes or jet bikes just became even more powerful.

I do agree someone what with the idea that there is to much big stompy stuff in 40k, but my line is more being annoyed by SH and GC in codexes as stock options.

Feelings on Mechanisation of 40k?

koooaei — GMT

Landraiders are small for current standards. Most armies have superheavies and garganaughts running around.

Re:Feelings on Mechanisation of 40k?

nullBolt — GMT

HoundsofDemos wrote:
I disagree. For one this edition vehicles arn't that strong this edition, and as far as marines go are probably one of the weaker choices. Drop pods, centstar or bike lists are all arguably stronger builds. Additionally your chart applied to other armies strips a lot of flavor away, for instance guard will loss tanks, chaos got even worse (sad thought), sisters become unplayable. Limiting things to just walking infantry guts a lot of armies mobility, so armies that have bikes or jet bikes just became even more powerful.

I do agree someone what with the idea that there is to much big stompy stuff in 40k, but my line is more being annoyed by SH and GC in codexes as stock options.

The landraider stuff was an example more than anything else. Apply it instead to Wraithknights for Eldar, if you prefer. :p Specific faction stuff (IG tanks, small sister walkers) would be fine. It'd be great, in fact, since it'd give such a massive distinction to the faction itself.

Bikes and jet bikes would be able to be more distinct and be nerfed due to the fact that they are one of the sole sources of huge mobility.

koooaei wrote:
Landraiders are small for current standards. Most armies have superheavies and garganaughts running around.

Which is even worse. :p

Feelings on Mechanisation of 40k?

MeanAss_Demasoni — GMT

The power creep is kind of sad some times. I’m not sure if there is a good answer for that though. These units already exist and people have bought them.

Although, I don't include tanks in that category. I think a healthy interplay between infantry, vehicles and air units where each has its strengths and weaknesses is the ideal situation. It’s the crazy super units that dwarf the others that reduce the fun by a lot.

There is something cool about the small to medium sized units that is more interesting and fun. I feel the same way about all games, once you get to the upper tier units you lose something and I just don’t feel the draw.

Feelings on Mechanisation of 40k?

War Kitten — GMT

As someone who runs (mostly) mech-based armies I don't think Vehicles ruin 40k at all or take away the fun. Vehicles are pitifully easy to kill nowadays (even the Guard's AV14 vehicles). What's taking the fun out of 40k is the power creep, and the additjon of GC's and Super Heavies to the main game. Before their additional to the regular game I could take most lists against my opponents and feel that I still had a shot at winning, but now that things like Wraithknights being GC's and Imperial Knights being so easy to take exists, THAT is what's hurting 40k. Not vehicles.

Feelings on Mechanisation of 40k?

Melissia — GMT

You're not taking my vehicles away from my Sisters until you pry them away from my cold, dead hands, bones long since rotted away to dust.

Feelings on Mechanisation of 40k?

nullBolt — GMT

MeanAss_Demasoni wrote:
The power creep is kind of sad some times. I’m not sure if there is a good answer for that though. These units already exist and people have bought them.

Although, I don't include tanks in that category. I think a healthy interplay between infantry, vehicles and air units where each has its strengths and weaknesses is the ideal situation. It’s the crazy super units that dwarf the others that reduce the fun by a lot.

There is something cool about the small to medium sized units that is more interesting and fun. I feel the same way about all games, once you get to the upper tier units you lose something and I just don’t feel the draw.

Well Games Workshop is a model company and not a games company, so it clearly doesn't matter if they remove the models from the rules. :p

I just don't feel that 28mm is a suitable scale for infantry, vehicles and air. Most fliers in 40k should be over the board in about half a turn doing strafing runs, not hovering there waiting for someone to shoot them. Essentially GW wants us to be playing a large scale wargame in a scale suited for skirmishes. 1/72 scale might work (it used to be used for modern wargames), but 28mm just doesn't.

I completely agree with you on that, at least.

War Kitten wrote:
As someone who runs (mostly) mech-based armies I don't think Vehicles ruin 40k at all or take away the fun. Vehicles are pitifully easy to kill nowadays (even the Guard's AV14 vehicles). What's taking the fun out of 40k is the power creep, and the additjon of GC's and Super Heavies to the main game. Before their additional to the regular game I could take most lists against my opponents and feel that I still had a shot at winning, but now that things like Wraithknights being GC's and Imperial Knights being so easy to take exists, THAT is what's hurting 40k. Not vehicles.

I don't think all vehicles ruin all the fun, just the current preponderance of them.

Melissia wrote:
You're not taking my vehicles away from my Sisters until you pry them away from my cold, dead hands, bones long since rotted away to dust.

Don't worry, GW will take the Sisters away before long. :p

Feelings on Mechanisation of 40k?

Melissia — GMT

GW ain't the boss of me

Feelings on Mechanisation of 40k?

vipoid — GMT

War Kitten wrote:
What's taking the fun out of 40k is the power creep, and the additjon of GC's and Super Heavies to the main game. Before their additional to the regular game I could take most lists against my opponents and feel that I still had a shot at winning, but now that things like Wraithknights being GC's and Imperial Knights being so easy to take exists, THAT is what's hurting 40k. Not vehicles.

This.

What's worse is that GCs and Super Heavies are just so dull. There isn't anything even remotely fun about fighting one. It's just an endless list of rules they ignore, except for any which might make the slightest bit of sense ("No, you can't shoot my Imperial Knight because you might hit the guardsmen that don't even reach its knees.").

That said, I would like to see more infantry-heavy armies. I'd also like to see bikes and jump packs be more even, but that's a topic for another thread.

Feelings on Mechanisation of 40k?

WaughGoff — GMT

I remember when 40k was infantry and IFVs and light to medium tanks. Platoon to company sized engagements. If we wanted anything more, we had Epic40k. Airstrikes was something that was called down by a commander using purchased wargear and resolved using blast templates, if they were used at all.

But then some clever modeler said "Hey, I can make this cool scale model of a jet. Or a supertank. Or a megawalker. I wanna use it in game." And we cobbled together some rules to let people use their cool toys. It was supposed to an occasional "how would infantry handle something like this?" Gargantuan, superheavy, and flyers were nevèr a regular part of the game.

Then GW saw that they could make money by making "official" models to replace all of our scratch built beauties. Now everyone has to have them, and they have to pay GW for them.

Feelings on Mechanisation of 40k?

MechaEmperor7000 — GMT

In general I have no problem with things being mechanized. It's more of them consistently nerfing close combat (or at least making it random as hell) while also introducing things into 40k that never should have been (GCs, Superheavy tanks, D Weapons and Flyers).

The fact that they need additional rules to accomodate them (for example, D weapons are made because it exceeds S10) into the game system is probably a sign that they never should have been in the first place.

EDIT: @ WaughGoff: Exactly. 40k started as a skirmish-level games. Superheavies, flyers and GCs should have remained in Epic 40k.

Feelings on Mechanisation of 40k?

Melissia — GMT

Yeah, I definitely wish there wasn't as easy access to SD weapons, gargantuan creatures, or titan-class walkers and vehicles.

Feelings on Mechanisation of 40k?

Psienesis — GMT

The fact that GW has recognized the fact that their rules for Walkers are terrible, and so make all of their new Walkers be Gargantuan Creatures instead, rather than, you know, release a FAQ/Errata that changes how Walkers work is telling.

The inclusion of such things, though, is simply symptomatic of the power creep. They wanted armies to be bigger, so they boosted shooting, so people buy more models that shoot. Then they wanted to sell big kits, so they introduced a dozen varieties of Titans, from big ones to really big ones.

Re:Feelings on Mechanisation of 40k?

Terminal — GMT

[This is just in response to the original post...]

Actually, I've seen fewer and fewer players use Land Raiders as time goes on. Land Raiders just aren't as tough as they were in 5th edition, and people would rather use a Storm Raven or spring for more Razorbacks/Rhinos.

But personally, the presence of Vehicles is one the primary reasons I've stuck with Warhammer 40k. Few other tabletop games have vehicles at this scale, and few allow me to field more than one or two.

Re:Feelings on Mechanisation of 40k?

HoundsofDemos — GMT

I agree with much of what was said above. 28mm scale is fine for say a few squads in rhinos backed by a few tanks or a flyer or two is fine. What needs to be done and if GW won't do it, players should do is limit GC/SH in anything below 2000 to 2500. I saw a Wraith knight in a 1000 point game the other day and that is neither fun thematically or game play wise.

Re:Feelings on Mechanisation of 40k?

Blacksails — GMT

The major draw for 40k for me is that its 28mm with vehicles. I think the power/scale/size creep is out of control now, and I feel that the game would do well to revert to a reinforced platoon/understrength company level game for the most part. That would be, at most, like a dozen vehicles for a 100% mechanized force at the larger point values, and probably trend towards 1-4 for most armies and point sizes.

Personally, I'm an all or nothing kind of guy, and have run my Guard as either purely mech, or pure foot. Back in 5th/6th, it wasn't uncommon for me to field an army at 1000pts consisting of 3 chimeras and 3 russes. Alternatively, I'd put 120 infantry on the board.

Re:Feelings on Mechanisation of 40k?

Makarios — GMT

HoundsofDemos wrote:
I agree with much of what was said above. 28mm scale is fine for say a few squads in rhinos backed by a few tanks or a flyer or two is fine. What needs to be done and if GW won't do it, players should do is limit GC/SH in anything below 2000 to 2500. I saw a Wraith knight in a 1000 point game the other day and that is neither fun thematically or game play wise.

I hate to be all "back in the day"

but ... back in the day... when i played 40k back in highschool there were many creatures and models that had such rules, i believe even certain heros, like ghazghul the ork, couldnt be in the army if it was under 2000 pt or something like that

Re:Feelings on Mechanisation of 40k?

StarHunter25 — GMT

You dang astartes and your transports. At least the flesh tearers are kind enough to run a taxi service for we servants of the omnissiah,

Feelings on Mechanisation of 40k?

KhorneontheCobb — GMT

I like playing combat patrol rules for a skirmish feel... I also like the vehicles for larger games that feel more like a battle.... I hate super heavies, strength D, gargantuans, Titans, etc outside of Apocalypse games.

Re:Feelings on Mechanisation of 40k?

Nevelon — GMT

Makarios wrote:
HoundsofDemos wrote:
I agree with much of what was said above. 28mm scale is fine for say a few squads in rhinos backed by a few tanks or a flyer or two is fine. What needs to be done and if GW won't do it, players should do is limit GC/SH in anything below 2000 to 2500. I saw a Wraith knight in a 1000 point game the other day and that is neither fun thematically or game play wise.

I hate to be all "back in the day"

but ... back in the day... when i played 40k back in highschool there were many creatures and models that had such rules, i believe even certain heros, like ghazghul the ork, couldnt be in the army if it was under 2000 pt or something like that

Yup. And some characters required your opponent’s permission to use.

But those limits might hamper sales...

Feelings on Mechanisation of 40k?

Imateria — GMT

Not in the slightest but then my local meta is quite varied with a tendancy more towards infantry heavy lists, fully competative lists are a rarity.

Feelings on Mechanisation of 40k?

Toofast — GMT

How long have you been away? The beginning of 5th started rhino rush, there was also leaf blower around that time. Things have only gotten bigger and more mechanized since then. That was about 15 years ago...

Feelings on Mechanisation of 40k?

Bartali — GMT

nullBolt wrote:
Does anyone else feel that the emphasis on mechanised forces takes away from a lot of the fun of 40k?

It's probably been that way for awhile (I've been away for a long, long time) but I just don't like how it's been taken away from Space Marines (and their enemies) doing bad arse things and has became "Land Raider moves forward, disgorges a bunch of marines and then kills everything". It takes away a lot of the fun of the game when the things doing the best work are mechanical and not my empathetic units.

Nevermind the fact that they just don't feel at all suited to the scale of the game. 28mm does not lend itself to a lot of big pieces on the board.

It's also part of the contributor to points creep. More points to fit in more big things which takes away from the feeling of "being on the ground".

Space Marines = Very good.
Dreadnoughts = Good.
Rhinos = One per army, at the most.
Landraiders = For feth's sake, just play Apocalypse.

Oh, well, I guess Infinity exists. I'll start playing that and see if I can't convert a few people. Either that or Kill Team.

I had to check the date of this post to make sure it wasn't a necro thread from 5th ed.
It's long ago escalated past the points made in this thread - marine players generally don't take vehicles unless they're free. 7th is Apocalypse to all intents and purposes, and it's all about MCs/GMCs, Super Heavies and Invisible death stars

Feelings on Mechanisation of 40k?

Nerak — GMT

Back in the day!
-yay-

Remmember when the Land raider and the monolith where kings of the battlefield with unrivalled armour and guns?

Remmember when every individual model had a point cost? (<--I still havn't gotten over this)

Remmember when you needed "your opponents agreement" for certain characters and rules? (Like the deamonhunters summoning lesser deamons/possesing)

Remmember when you couldn't ally things (except for the inquisition), and khorne wouldn't allow tzeentch models/ Nurgle woudn't allow slaneesh ones?

Remmember when the Slaneesh deamons had 3 pairs of breasts?

Remmember when you could build a kill team of 160p from every type of unit in your codex with a bunch of restrictions?

Remmember when the Space wolves had preffered enemy Dark angels and thousand sons and where not allowed to ally theese under any circumstances?

Remmember when all living beings didn't really fear death, they feared the nightbringer?

Remmember when taking deamonhosts would not allow you to use Grey Knights?

Remmember when Hot-shot lasguns where called "Hellguns" and where ap 5?

Remmember when Special/named characters where only allowed over a certain points limit?

Remmember when summoned deamons had to take instability checks every turn? Including greater deamons?

Remmember when you gave special rules to your army dependent on the chapter/regiment/craftworld/fleet/god and not on the special character taken?

few.... I went totally off topic but damn it felt good the get that out of my sysyem. Sorry guys. Something about mech?
(I do Believe I failed to make my Point that the rules used to be more fluff oriented and smaller in scale with big things being reserved for bigger themed games)

Feelings on Mechanisation of 40k?

Makarios — GMT

Toofast wrote:
How long have you been away? The beginning of 5th started rhino rush, there was also leaf blower around that time. Things have only gotten bigger and more mechanized since then. That was about 15 years ago...

lol, been away a while

started with 2nd ed, i think 3rd was recently released but i didnt get it until later

lol long enough to remember most of what nerak just described i just finished reading it... good times....

and just to add to your list

remember when you could flip through hundreds of pages of catalogs for miniatures ordering

Re:Feelings on Mechanisation of 40k?

HoundsofDemos — GMT

personally I find all infantry armies boring for the most part, especially in larger games. Foot infantry are generally slow, which means assault is even harder now and the game is going to be just lobbing long range shoots. Additionally this makes jet bikes even stronger as they now have unrivaled movement.

Feelings on Mechanisation of 40k?

Jayden63 — GMT

Mechanization is the only reason I got into 40K. If I wanted to play a game with nothing more than boots on the ground there were tons of better games out there.

Every army I have ever fielded had at least 8 or more vehicles in it. I can't help but not take them. Its what makes the game for me.

Now, I don't play 7th edition. I hate how it has become appoc all the time. Super Heavies and Gargantuan models should be special sinerio or mission type of games. Not present on every game and often more than 1 on the field.

Feelings on Mechanisation of 40k?

oldzoggy — GMT

I feel like the game should need more fliers and spacecrafts in order to make it more fluffy. If I was going to invade a planet I sure as hell would use my fighter jets and lance the hell out of enemy artillery.

Its just too bad that there isn't that much of diversity for fliers and that they all are way to expensive.

Feelings on Mechanisation of 40k?

the_scotsman — GMT

If you don't like the way that size of armies has increased...why not just not play lower points values? Or idk, play an infantry based army?

Strongest ork army: green tide. Totally on foot.

Strongest SM armies: bike focused, drop pod focused.

Admech: no transports whatsoever.

Nids: no vehicles whatsoever.

Strongest Necron list: entirely foot infantry and heavy infantry.

This is THE heavy infantry/bike edition. Fast Obsec MSU and fast Death Stars of infantry are king. If you want to play infantry, if you want to play smaller games, nothing is stopping you.

Feelings on Mechanisation of 40k?

vipoid — GMT

the_scotsman wrote:
If you don't like the way that size of armies has increased...why not just not play higher points values?

Yeah, if you think armies are too big, you should use an even bigger army.

It's the GW way.

Feelings on Mechanisation of 40k?

the_scotsman — GMT

Lol. I got mixed up between "why play high point games" and "why not play lower point games" and said the opposite

Automatically Appended Next Post:
But seriously my group has been seeing a ton of newcomers so we've been playing a ton of 1k games and I've been really loving them.

Just recently played vs the new Tau, his biggest thing was one of the new ghost keels and mine was a Russ punisher. Ordered Ignores-Cover Lascannons brought it down in the end after it ripped two sentinels to shreds, and the men of the guard fixed bayonets for a close-quarters city fight with the fire warriors over the mid board objectives.

Feelings on Mechanisation of 40k?

Nerak — GMT

Metal boxes.

Feelings on Mechanisation of 40k?

Furyou Miko — GMT

Nerak wrote:Back in the day!

Remmember when you couldn't ally things (except for the inquisition), and khorne wouldn't allow tzeentch models/ Nurgle woudn't allow slaneesh ones?

No, because Khorne denied Slaanesh and Tzeentch denied Nurgle. :p

Feelings on Mechanisation of 40k?

RazgrizOne — GMT

I don't feel vehicules are that strong. I play IG mech and, chimeras being what they are, they have neither the speed and toughness to really compete in big games and they are costly for small games.

They usually not perform very well, especially with their low ap weapons/low BS. You can take out things if you're lucky but they don't have so much offensive power IMO.

Every time I play, they die, and the game is often toe to toe ith my opponent.

It's not because LR are assault vehicules and have AV14 that any other mech build is OP.