Jump to content

New 40k edition


pretre

Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, Hobbitron said:

I just realized.... what if Pyrovores become good with their rules?

Or if Subterranean Assault actually works?

I'm super excited all of a sudden. Though, as a Nid player I should really keep my expectations reined in.

I just want hormagaunts, carnifexes, and warriors to be good at melee for their points.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Lord Hanaur said:

Yeah Warmachine got way out of hand with their points.  75 point games are absurd.  Lol.  I know WHY people want to play with as many toys as possible but dayam.  When it forces tournaments to use stop clocks for peoples turns...theres just too many models on the table (relative to that game system).  Hehehe.

Gonna have to agree with Fluger here. Mark three, although far from my favorite game, effectively doubled their point system to add more granularity to the game and not to add more models.

I also keep reading your assertion about what the clocks are for in Warmachine and you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what they're for. Clocks have been standard in WM since 2012 for all events (long before the current edition launched) and are there to ensure that both players get an equal allotment of the round time. Most games that use the I-go-you-go system would benefit from such an inclusion on a competitive level to remove slow play as a factor. I'm sure most competitive 40k players understand the absurdity that is losing a game because someone brought an all Warp Spider list/horde list and couldn't operate it fast enough to give both players an equal share of the round.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, VonVilkee said:

I got a buddy who never really gets out of his house and is terrified of the store game, don't know why but whatever. He doesn't spend energy being absolutely efficient with his points I struggle sometimes to dial back. I like to think that with power levels I can just take what I have ready give him a power level to shoot for a little higher than mine kinda like a handicap. Competitive points still wouldn't really work for this... tried it but I could take the low end of the power steps while he takes the higher end and we would still "be the same" while giving him a bit more...

I think it's great as a substitute for points in demo/intro games, but its value will drop quickly as they start asking "why should I take flamer/meltagun/plasma?' And,  'Which should I glue on the model?" The system suggests that doesn't matter, but it will to someone trying to understand the game. Those are the questions that take the longest to answer in list building too, it's not the adding numbers up.

And I think we all struggle to dial it back when teaching, we play these games because we're some level of competitive. It seems like this loose structure reinforces that possibility and only puts more of a burden of self-restraint to an experienced player. Min-maxing squads has no downside whatsoever, so very "low power" lists would be things like spamming 3 man squads of scatterbikes, 5 man sternguard packed to the gills, etc. 

If you want to play with a handicap, take a 1750 list against your casual buddy's 2k (don't tell him if he'll take offense). At least the upgrades have a more honest "true value" in the list you're using. 

Again, I have nothing against it's existence but I just wonder if it'll actually be as practical as it first seems.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it will really come into its own either, as I said, in Narrative Games (OK, we've got a Demi-Company of Blood Angels coming in here. That means we should have XX Power Level Points worth of Orks waiting for them for a more or less even Game), or in Games between people who have Squads all painted up with full insignia and stuff, and on both sides, it's going to be a matter of "I'm gonna take Tac Squads 1, 2, and 5, Assault Squad 8, and Dev Squad 9", each with whatever gear those got when they were built, like my Dark Angels and IG were. It's probably not going to be particularly useful as a means to simplify competitive play.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, fluger said:

You obviously haven't played enough Mk3.  They virtually doubled all the points of everything in order to get more variation in points.  75 pt game is roughly equivalent of a 50 pt Mk2 game in terms of model counts.

One thing IS for sure.  I haven't gotten to play it nearly as much as I'd like.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, necrontyr said:

In the new Warhammer 40,000, you’ll find there are two ways to balance your games.

Yesterday, we saw that Datasheets include something called a Power Level. This is a rough approximation of a unit’s relative effectiveness on the battlefield. These can be used to very quickly throw together two roughly equal forces to fight a battle. Or, in the case of some narrative and open play scenarios, will determine who takes what role in the game. For example, if you’re playing the “Ambush” mission, the side with the highest total Power Level for their army will always play the role of the attacker, where the smaller enemy force will need to escape the trap.

New40kPointsPowerMap.jpg

Power Levels are a great way to very quickly get a roughly balanced game organised and started, but they do not account for the various wargear options and upgrades a unit can have. For this level of granularity, you have points. These will be just as detailed as they are now, right down to points for individual weapon upgrades on every squad member. For example, a Tactical Marine Squad of five models is Power Level 5, but in a matched play game, each of those Tactical Marines would cost 13 points each, with upgrades ranging from a grav-pistol for the Sergeant at 7 pts, all the way up to multi-meltas at 27 pts. The full squad totals up at a similar number of points to what it costs today. With faster play times for most games, we’re expecting matched play games of a couple of hours to sit around the 2,000 points mark.New40kPointsPowerSM.jpg

In matched play, your points will be capped across the whole game. So if you’re planning to summon units to the battlefield, you will need to set points aside to do this. You won’t need to specify what the points will be for though, so this does leave you with your options open and if during the game, you decide that what you really need is a fast combat unit instead of a durable objective holder, you’ll be able to summon the right tool for the job, points permitting. You will no longer be able to indefinitely replicate Daemon units, and instead, summoning will be used more as an alternative mechanism of deployment, much like deep striking or outflanking is today (both of which exist in their own forms in the new Warhammer 40,000 too).

The points for units don’t appear on the datasheet but will be elsewhere in the same book. This is because you don’t need them to play if you don’t want, which frees up room to include more rules for weapons on the datasheet. It also means that, in the future, points for units could change without invalidating existing books – so if one unit or weapon starts to dominate tournaments, or certain units don’t seem to be carrying their weight in competitive games, we can address the balance.New40kPointsPowerFarsight.jpg

All cool stuff. We’ll be back tomorrow with another piece of new background from the new edition.

Quoted to bring to new page.

Edited by InfestedKerrigan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Threejacks said:

  Plus summoning is totally under control AND still usefull..I rem all the flip out about that when the GH came out last year.Now though players are finally finding the usefulness of being able to customize your amy compostion on the fly through summoning.

 

 

I'm torn on this. I don't find it fluffy, but the change isn't about fluff. It's about balance in competitive scene. Causual and Narrative gaming has allowances for an unending hoarde coming through a Demonic breach if I'm wanting that sort if endless tide. Of course assuming there aren't detachments that grant without number.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, InfestedKerrigan said:

 

I'm torn on this. I don't find it fluffy, but the change isn't about fluff. It's about balance in competitive scene. Causual and Narrative gaming has allowances for an unending hoarde coming through a Demonic breach if I'm wanting that sort if endless tide. Of course assuming there aren't detachments that grant without number.

 

Well, depending on the player and the scenario we would be running, I would allow for unlimited summoning. However, I can see writing the base rules in a way that doesn't allow for it. Otherwise, that guy comes around and ruins it for everyone.

I HATE that guy. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, InfestedKerrigan said:

 

I'm torn on this. I don't find it fluffy, but the change isn't about fluff. It's about balance in competitive scene. Causual and Narrative gaming has allowances for an unending hoarde coming through a Demonic breach if I'm wanting that sort if endless tide. Of course assuming there aren't detachments that grant without number.

  It does seem like a nerf to the Demon players,yes..however it's highly likely that those armies will have units with a special rule allowing models within the unit to be brought back,,as it is in AoS.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...