Lord Hanaur

Last OFCC they used NON-narrative terrain which not only took up valuable gaming time, which was frustrating, but also made it feel less friendly. I did what was tactically intelligent to do in my games and my opponents surely did. But we musta had 60% terrain on one of the boards I played on. There was just so much of it and we rolled very high on the amount of terrain per quadrant. Before we ever deployed a fig, I thought There's no way this is going to make things more fun. In normal games, I let my opponent set all of it up. At the OFCC, they had us alternating and i just knew that had the potential for exactly this kind of post. I'm really soured on alternating terrain. It's EXACTLY like deploying units. Both people have a very good reason for where they are putting things. It takes longer and frankly it becomes their excuse later when they lose. So then you get to look forward to that. Not awesome. One idea if they ever DO use Narrative again would be to give the tables a story so the players at least have something to guide their hand. Otherwise, it's tactica like the rest of your deployment. But if you're going to do that why not just do Narrative in the first place? I wonder how 7E handles this? My point is, I hope 7E doesn't keep this potential for someones experience to be affected by terrain of all things? "The terrain beat me" isn't a great story to tell later. Have a third party do the terrain or maybe just one guy does the terrain and the other gets +1 to his roll for sides. that would be a really great way to handle it.

which is the way it should be

ditto

If you're not distributing it theres not much anyone can say anyways.

It would be a huge use of resources with no return for a long time. I just dont think they could.

I got the money already set aside and play 2 times a week plys tournies so ill be going the spendy route. Im pretty excited bout so many of the changes. does anyone remember the rumors about 6E's original design lead falling on the outs and being replaced late in the game? Naturally no one would ever admit to it. NDA's and all that. but now that 7E is out just two years in, and clearly in production within the year of its prexecessor, I kind of wonder more about it.

no need to skip an edition. just borrow the rules.

Rough Riders for the win.

I dont want anyone messing around with my tablet. its just too expensive. I am going hardbound. Easier to flip to what you want and its way handier during a game. I can hilite it which I really like to do as well. Dont know bout you, but the key words and phrases for mny things dont always get bolded.

Looooot of scoring in there. I like that part. Should be no problem with moving it all forward at challenging the heart of the enemy directly. Deep Strikers are going to have to REALLY think about things before they try to overwhelm the blob with shots or flamers, though they will try. Those Plasmas will be waiting for them and thats no joke. Looks dangerous.

Nice sound effects. When games get silly out of hand, there's a couple of us that start making up rules for the losing player. its pretty funny. "Oh man you rolled a 6 for that charge, but remember that your unit has the special thing that gives you the thing, so go ahead and re roll". First they blink at you uncomprehendingly. Then slowly...very slowly, their hands reach for the dice and...re-roll. Or "yeah, 2 on the pen chart, lemme see here.... Shaken. alright so with the new FAQ, you add four; so what is that, a six? okay so that vehicle explodes. Pinning test time..." Hey you gotta do something at the end of the game for the guy. I think some people would take it the wrong way, but we think its hilarious.

no one loses when you choose orks. Everyone wins.

yup, the games will be slow but very informative.

Chexmix, you are as hard core a tourney player as i know. while your lists are fun, they are brutal. Lol. I've played them and seen what they do to people. Your advice is definitely not wrong, its just one more way to skin a cat. I dont like spamming because it makes you matchup susceptible. In tournies you can coast for a bit on this kind of build because it hurts armies SO MUCH that haven't done an equal job of spamming. the lists that prepared for you and get the jump are the ones that will beat this. Alternately, ones that rob you of targets until you ARE the target is the other. I tend to be the latter of the two. But its not untrue. This is definitely an effective way to go.

oh. they wanted them painted?

I focus on Disruption 1st and mobility 2nd (although they often end up being the very same units which is convenient). I want to take the enemy out of ITS game, and make them play mine. Firepower is next on the list and then melee, in that order. In the case of Imperial Gaurd, at 1500, i am primarily interested in Covering the core bases, which I outlined on the blog this month. One unit of each type needs to be in there. With the points remaining, I can spend the rest on nerfage. I think at 1500, Coteaz is an incredible buy for IG. He's disruption. I also think that a unit of Ratling Snipers plays well at smaller points limits to eliminate key weapons within units and the chance of pinning. As flyers are pretty expensive at 1500, and ANTI-flyers cheap and too plentiful at 1500, I might consider alternatives to them at 1500. the Rogue Riders can help you eliminate in a hurry any enemy troops choice in a hurry. A biker Ally really makes that unit incredible at the lower points and drawing enemies into quadrants they dont want to go to is always smart. Its that or get charged so dictating that choice to them is nice. I like 1500 point games. So many less shenanigans and remember: you aren't FACING as many either. =)

Well actually... For Flames of War... The army lists are essentially from actual units that existed, pitted against other forces that also existed. Its not like a codex where you can take anything you want. Each list is actually representing units and leaders that DID fight in a particular theare of war. So you can recreate the battles in those Theatres of war or ones that could easily have happened in nearby theatres. The Warhammer universe now includes happenstance alliances that truly WOULD never be likely to happen in its own universe really, so I think that if anything, Warhammer allows the equivalent of a German General to command a British brigade that is made up of japanese and Italian forces... So... If Verisimilitude is a goal, I will say that Flames of War certainly doesn't entertain such things. And at tourney, the whole scoring system is just PERFECT. In fact some 40K tournies have gone to a kind of 4-3 system, if you've noticed. Get the most secondaries? 3 points. Get the most primarie? 4. Stuff like that is showing up I've noticed. It's not analogous, but its essentially the same concept. if someone FEELS they might be beaten, they can just focus solely on secondaries and come out not very far behind and a lot of winners will "win" with just four points, which allows people to get back into the fight a little easier from a tourney perspective.

With every passing leak I grow more and more excited. I can't wait to dig into this. My head if fairly bursting with new ideas for how to use things... Awesome stuff so far. i was way more weary of 6E, because I loved 5E. People kind of grew to dislike certain things about 6E and 6E is pretty incapable of dealing with all the new stuff that came out so 7E makes sense and as I read I grow more convinced that the Edition will work better with the codex's

Flames of War is really REALLY a great tournament game. Specifically for tournaments, Flames of War provides a great experience and theres so much less acrimoney for exactly the reason you describe. In casual games, ironically, there is about the same amount but at tournies: very excellent.

I had a friend take a loss VERY badly on Saturday. Like Rage quit bad, and he was using my models, in a list he made up the night before, so putting those kinds of expectations on himself was a little unrealistic. Nonetheless, it underscores the issue of frustration that comes up when people FEEL like they were overwhelmed. Sometimes its just skill differences but other times (as in this case) it was that he took a Thousand Sons army for the first time, an army that requires finesse, played by a guy whose used to Mech spam Eldar (no finesse) His reaction was uncalled for, and his lack of gratitude for me letting him borrow the models to attempt it was equally off putting. It was a free narrattive team event, so no prizes were on the line. IN the end I really dont know what I could have done to make it any more fun to him since lists were set and it was an Astra Militarum vs. Chaos forces themed thing. In the end I think he just doesn't like losing. I've never known what to do about that kinda reaction and thankfully its been a rarity. Winning is really fun, but losing isn't really a big deal after it's occurred. Losing is just an excuse for a grudge match in my mind. You raise your hand in Doctor Claw like fashion and say in your coolest Doctor Claw voice "Next time Gadget. Next tiiiiiiime..." If losing hits a little too close to home to take a cavalier attitude about it, then maybe try these ideas: 1 Dart board 40K. it's fun. You roll randomly for what units you will take and then try to out skill your opponent cause tyhe list isn't really uh... sensical most of the time. It requires you to take one of each slot before taking another so it is kinda like Highlander format, 2 In fact Highlander format matches might even be a less random but even more fun way to do it. Have you seen that format? If not I could get you info on it. If you and your opponent agree to play lists that conform to it, i have heard EXCELLENT reviews from nearly everyone whose tried it. Hit Point Hobbies did an event using it and they had a lot of good data from that. 3 Other ideas might include a sideboard type thing where whoever is the underdog gets to use their sideboard. 4 Another cool idea is "best of three". sometimes you just get unlucky. have a mini tourney with your buddy. 5 I LOVE switching armies. You play your army round 1, then flip. Gotta trust the butter fingers you're playing with a little bit, but thats another fun way to play 40K that we've done. These are all just ideas for you to ponder. Or not. But I thought I'd throw it out there.

Well the stock holders are getting a little bolder with word of 6E but the pattern is so stark. Even investors read a forum or two and see the venom in the customer base. there's poison in the pool.

Thus my opposition. I dont agree with your conclusion though. Troops are going to be key in this. Make no mistake. Any General who skimps on that or underestimates that will be punished! But again... The missions are going to have a LOT to say about how true that is. My opinion may change.

Teaching people wasn't really the issue, but sure.

Well... Unbound armies certainly are at a disadvantage here. You can Eldar Jetbke in turn 5 all you want but you're not taking that objective from a Battle Forged force. They have to obliterate the objective defenders, while the Battle Forged company can deny Unbound armies with a Rhino (well it seems so since a Rhino can now BE a troops choice apparently). I'd say that's a big hairy deal. so long as most missions remain objective focused, it's going to be an up hill fight for the Unbound army to claim things. Naturally, that means when faced with a Battle Forged force its no different than playing now. So good. When facing Unbound, you can focus on troops and once their troops are too low to take more objectives than you can, you can ignore them as targets of necessity. That creates some pretty interesting strategy's. I think the idea of an Unbound army is kinda dumb, but I'm definitely seeing why a Battle Forged army might have some serious advantages here. Some people are focusing, i notice, on the destructive power that an Unbound army can field and rightly so. But does it matter if they cant take an objective? maaaaaybe not. I guess the wise Unbound General will not undervalue his number of troops even if he lets their quality slip. Seems like an unbound player could hardly afford to go with less than 6 troops choices. I dunno. This is a lot to absorb and anticipate from. If I was Unbound with lets say Tau. All the Broadsides I can field, Lets say around 250 when its all kitt'd out. That's 8ish units of them right? 24 Broadsides. None of them scoring. None of them contest. Heck now that I think about it... Unbound vs. Unbound would be even worse because then No one on either side could contest! the big IF here is: are missions going to be primarily objective based... or will they get silly and allow KP missions? Will TO's? That's a big question.

OMG. Has anyone seen the dividends that GW has given out since 2010? For the uninitiated, dividends are like profit sharing in a lot of ways. No profit, no dividend for owning the shares. In October 2004, the stock dividends began going through the roof. During the 2008 collapse, for obvious reason, there was no dividend again until 2010, but in late 2010 (September) it sent berzerk from then forward. I mean bananas relatively speaking. June 2012 was when they released 6E. The stock price SOARED. It started at 522.59 and then jetted to 823.50 in September of 2013, a year into the new edition. It has now suffered a glacial meltdown since then to $493 in February!!! Wow. Now the interesting thing about this is that the stock itself is just the eye of the beholder. It means essentially the confidence in the company dropped significantly after people had seen the game for a year, investors wouldn't touch the stock because, probably, they lacked confidence in its future compared to alternatives. The stream of goodies started to come out and innundate us. But it is no shock that a CEO would see this and say "holy crap, my portfolio and that of my board members is suffering...Gotta do something." And so only 2 years in and even AFTER leaking the 7th Edition as some are calling it... Stock roseTO $579 and that gain may be dubiously banking on sales of the new book while cautiously aware that their prices are out of whack and could counterbalance any gains... Now the reason I say all this is because REGARDLESS of how the investors are feeling at the moment, the company simply IS making money! a Dividend of $24 was given March 2013 and $16 in May 2013 just two months later. Those numbers have nothing to do with Stock price. They purely are the amount of money the company gave to shareholders divided by the number of shares themselves. The value of the shares themselves are irrelevant to dividends, though the cost does help PREDICT if dividends are coming. a $16 Dividend or $24 dividend is INSANE. There have been as many as 300,000 shares traded in a given month, so this isn't a scenario under which there aren't many shares being available! I am pretty stunned at the profitability margins this company has and yet investors can see something is wrong as evidenced by the stock prices! Anyways its a very interesting thing to look at.