Speaking of cram holes...

Last time I complain on your behalf, Dave.

_________________
Let us playtest like the Greeks of old... You know the ones I mean

I'll bite. What don't you like?

I think Mk2 is an improvement over Mk1, with the use of what are effectively USRs, the toning down of the most filthy combinations, and the expansion of the Farrow and Gators specifically.

Sigh, I know the feeling.

_________________
"I don't believe in destiny or the guiding hand of fate." N. Peart

core ruleswise: i hate the lack of granularity in the point system. there is no good reason to make the points scale so small, it just screws up finetune balancing. i dont like the new formation rules, i dont like that screening has gone. i certainly dont like the new SR rules.

model ruleswise: i hate that so many interesting tactical options have been removed. i hate that so many of the units i have spent large quantities of time and money (alexia for instance) have become wastes of storage space. i hate the fact that while some balance issues have been fixed, many others have been left. i hate the way that virtually every one of my favourite models across all 4 factions i played have been declawed (and more importantly, defunned) i also hate the retribution.

communitywise: i dont like the fact that apparently everyone is so rabidly 'pro-mk2' everywhere. you cant say "i dont like Mk2" without fifty people jumping down your throats and accusing you of powergaming or quoting some bogus page5 'evolve or die' bullshit. i hate the way they handled their playtests (ie: we know what we want, and dont care what you think about it unless its what we also already think)

i also think that the new faction books are much less cool than the old books (or atleast the merc and legion ones are)

TL;DR version. pretty much everything. i like some parts of the core rules, but overall it isnt the same type of game anymore, its less fun, its less challenging, and its less cool. (ps; i wasnt happy with legends either btw, mk1 had some serious issues, and mk2 would have been a good thing if they addressed those issues properly)

its a game i loved, with models i loved, tricks i loved, and background i loved. now they've taken most of that away, and it just makes me sad.

_________________
~Every Tool Is A Weapon, If You Hold It Right~

SG players still blaming LotR-SBG for their own games non-commercial success.

There, said it.

_________________
Light at the Horizon.

Warp Rift
Project Distant Darkness
Eldar MMS

GothiComp Hall of Fame
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=38&t=19176

You are not an Army Champion of the Imperial Tau Coelescent Brigade or Army Champion of the Space Marine Red Shiny Buttons on My Power Armor 2.5.8.3 list! List Developer, fine. Author, fine. NOT AN ARMY CHAMPION! There are only Champs for each main race and that is it. Come up with a different term if you are that creative.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.

Yes there is: simplicity. What about the Epic granularity? Divide everything by 25, and you end up with what Privateer have (yes, I know there's the occasional exceptional 10, 15, 45 or 65 point model, but that could be worked around). In general, any points system is flawed, as the complexities of interaction of all those numbers, combined with the randomness of dice and the choice of scenario, and add to that the different skill levels and play styles of players, means that any points costing is ultimately an estimate.

The Mk2 system makes it very quick and easy to pick a list so you don't need much book keeping and can just pick up and go.


I like the formation rules. Makes a formation with a good CMD value a lot more flexible, as they can spread out more if the situation warrants it. Screening can be done with larger based models easily enough, and makes sense to work as it does (the guy at the front doesn't provide cover, as he's trying not to be shot too). Can't comment on the Steamroller rules, as I didn't play using them under Mk1.


I hate the look of the Retribution too. Horrible design. However, I entirely disagree with you on the rest of it. I really like that the killswitch units have been declawed. That those units have been declawed makes the game more tactical, and ultimately more fun. It's not about who gets off the killer combination first, it's more about manouver and target selection.


There's no possible way that they could have handled the playtest any other way, unless enough people spoke out the same way about particular rules. If they devolved the process to taking every decision to a committee, they'd never have got anything done. Someone had to have a vision and to use that to direct the playtest.

And they did their playtesting in a far superior way to the way GW do any of theirs, letting the community hammer out the broken bits before release.


Old style books will be resumed next year once the last of the faction books are done. They've already announced the first one, which will be a Warmachine one.


I played Mk1 for a year, and have been playing Mk2 for a year, and I'm much happier with the balance of Mk2.

Each to their own but I prefer mkII to mkI.

I have that same issue. And even if you don't do a workaround, just dividing by 5 would be fine too. Most formations would still be easy to add (Devastator Formation is 50, Commander is 10, Hunter is 15, standard game 500-600pts), Because while you might get some who'll argue about splitting into +/- 10/15pts is necessary, I think anyone who suggested 27, 56 or 111 point upgrades would be taken as a joke.

Again, same issue. I've long argued locally that a points system for a freeform wargame cannot be anything more than an adequate approximation. Especially one that works purely with only the simpler operators (addition and subtraction), and doesn't take into account anything other than the raw statistics and abilities (terrain being one of the bigger factors, but some games have others, like inability to affect).

I'm not saying that army construction should need a Masters degree in Advanced Mathematics. But the 'belief' in a points system being fully accurate still seems to persist.

Morgan Vening

I have a grievance with the heavily relied upon 25 point denomination system as well. Although don't think we need to divide the numbers, just have more 17 point upgrades.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.

thats a bad arguement. the old point system worked. it allowed for there to be a difference between the bonechickens, and all sorts of solos. epic could be simplified without much loss, warmachine not so much.



i'm not talking about depowering things so much as i am talking about the removal of cool tricks and interesting rules. alexia was too good for what she did, thats not my arguement, my problem is that now she's not much good at all, and more importantly, she's boring. she was once a flexibile unit with interesting options, now shes not, and having spent $150+ on her, i feel upset. it's not a balance thing, because eCaine is even more ridiculous than he ever was, both the denny's are atleast as horrific as before, eThagrosh is, eHaley is too.
meanwhile, all the cool details have gone. the old witch no longer jumps around in smoke, rhyas no longer goes invisible, shredders no longer fight in packs, karchev no longer has Iron Curtain, risen no longer mob people vayl hardly works at all (there is essentially no reason to take her vs eThaggy)



except that they didnt give us any of the new units, they left an entire faction out, and splitting it between the two means hordes is mostly balanced against hordes, but much less so against WM, but WM is way off-balance against hordes. given how many problems the initial 'playtest' changed midway through, not letting us test RET was a poor decision. stalkers are too good, because all their playtest was around WM units, so virtually noone cared that their claws would be way better against hordes. and those that did where ignored, because PP knew what they wanted and screw the rest of us.



thats not what i meant. the old books where cool, the stories where neat, most of the units where cool, it was good
the new legion book is all about bethayne. the story isnt as good, and most of the new units are not cool. (atleast the new lylyth and vayl arts are awesome!)
the merc book isnt much better.

Mk2 could have been great. i was really happy with most of the core rules (and the ones i wasnt happy with i could have lived with) all they needed to do was bump the pointscale up. doesnt even need to be as high as before, but doubling it would go a long way towards helping.
then most of my problems where with the units.

_________________
~Every Tool Is A Weapon, If You Hold It Right~

Some git came and stole 2010! I saw it coming, I had all these projects I wanted to do, and now I see it going, and I still have all these projects I want to do!

There's plenty of difference between the chickens. Ripjaw and Defiler are really good, and cost 5 points each. Deathripper and Nightwretch are pretty much just arc nodes, and are 4 points each. And each has their own niche. Cheap melee chicken? Ripper. Melee chicken with better abilities? Ripjaw. Cheap gunchicken? Wretch. Nasty gunchikn? Defiler.

Remember, it's all an abstraction of a really complicated system.


Alexia is awesome.

I've never really had any love for the Alexia/Risen models, mainly cos I've already got too much Cryx to really want another source of undead, so I've never really paid her any attention. I've just looked at the unit in the Mercs book though, and I see 5 points for a nasty solo and 9(!) fast moving cannon fodder. That's *really* good. The Risen aren't going to kill much except other crappy infantry, but their job isn't to kill things, it's to throw into the enemy lines to clog them up. Your gunline either spends a turn cleaning out the Risen heading for them at speed, or gets tied up in combat with the rubbishy dead guys the next turn. Your assault force either charges the rubbishy dead guys, or gets charged by them and has to clean them out in your turn, either way leaving the actual fighters standing behind the rubbishy dead guys to get the first charge... And they've got CMA, so even with crappy claw attacks they *can* mob things that aren't heavily armoured...

Alexia herself gets a 9" Arcane Suppression bubble (which is awesome in itself as it's a passive ability and still allows her to fight or cast), some nice, if situational utility spells, and a 12" POW 12 hand cannon, and she can make more rubbish dead guys (out of your own soldiers as they get killed off, no less), all for effectively half a point...


I've played him, and if you're careful he's managable. I was playing Madhammer, and I sat Madhammer behind an Avalancher for the game, using Indirect Fire to pummel the Cygnar from safety until I could get fire corridors from my Gunners to Caine for the kill. I see eCaine as brutal at assassination, but that's really his only avenue of attack, as he doesn't do much for jacks or units, and he's going to cry like a baby if the opponent can soak the feat turn assault (Barnabas in a Swamp pit, for instance, will literally make him cry).


eThagrosh's feat is now battlegroup only, which tones him down, but fair on the other epics. eHaley and eDenny are regarded in the circles I play in as the only really broken choices when you're playing scenarios.


2 factions. Minions as well.

There were a number of problems with playing Hordes v Warmachine, which were hammered out in testing. Not allowing transfer to frenzied beasts, doing shakeoff before threshold tests would be two of the big ones I can think of. The games I've been playing have been pretty even between the two lots. I've been hurting people with Khador, Farrow and Trolls, and been hurt by Menoth, Trolls and Cryx.

Stalkers do look vicious, but you're only going to let one get to your Warlock once. They also give up the massive utility of the arc node and two damage boxes over their equal-pointed chicken brethren. And they drop a point of armour for a point of DEF compared to the other chickens, which won't help when the Legion guy uses the Harrier animus on something attacking it, or when the Swamp Troll forces to boost the tongue attack and sits there nomming on it, legs sticking out of its mouth (oh, now that's a great idea for a conversion...). Very very glass cannon.

You're also assuming they had the new models planned out and ready for the playtests. They may have not hammered out the rules until further down the release schedule, and they're never going to have the resources to open beta every single new thing they plan.


I think their prose has got better. Used to be the case where as they'd write about the combats where the use of the in-game spells and powers by the characters was incredibly unsubtle. And I think you're letting your personal tastes for the older models taint your assessment of what's actually worthwhile or not. I don't play Legion, and I look at the Blackshard, the Scythean and the Spell Martyrs with absolute dread...

On topic, my grievances from this year are:

The dirty scumbags who humped the company I was working for and who effectively cost me my job. (Though it has given me time to work on painting toy soldiers.)
Car insurers for being ridiculous with renewal quotes.
My body for falling apart more this year. Having all 5 saliva glands swell up for a week was fun. Got some good pictures of me looking like a bull frog out of it...
GW, for persisting with 40k 5th edition, especially given the quality of the DE models.
Other people I have to share the roads and pavements with. Especially taxi drivers.