Haight
Junior Strategist
Posts: 396
|
Post by Haight on Mar 28, 2017 22:50:58 GMT
I completely agree maVoo - I am eagerly awaiting Armageddon: Shadow War to relive my necromunda glory days ; but now with my son. Oddly enough I was planning on teaching him battle box games with his own for his birthday, until recent events. Then i saw the Necromunda reboot, and knew that was the direction i was going to go in. The box sets are a really brilliant idea. Wait, they're rebooting Necromunda? Colour me interested in GW again. Sure are! Necromunda is getting rebooted as "Shadow War: Armageddon" i think is the name BoLS has screenshots of the boxed set, and then some genestealer cult crew rule book . Shit looks awesome .
|
|
|
Post by ratrek on Mar 29, 2017 4:50:53 GMT
Wait, they're rebooting Necromunda? Colour me interested in GW again. Sure are! Necromunda is getting rebooted as "Shadow War: Armageddon" i think is the name BoLS has screenshots of the boxed set, and then some genestealer cult crew rule book . Shit looks awesome . I was in GW yesterday when their pre-release copy of SW: A came in. Both of the staff were huge Necromunda players back in the day so they were super giddy. Seems GW staff had a huge presence at Adepticon as well doing outreach/discussion sessons. As a GW guy from yonks ago, it's nice to see them take the community seriously again.
|
|
|
Post by Blargaliscious on Mar 29, 2017 5:00:57 GMT
I'm a relatively new convert to tabletop gaming, so I don't have the history to fall back on, but the few experiences I had playing 40k were brutal and not particularly fun. At this point, I'm waiting for a ruleset that pulls me in, but that might be all that's missing. Xintas, welcome to tabletop gaming. I think you made the right choice by looking at Warmachine and Hordes - stick with it.
Now, if you want to make the mistake of doing anything with Games Workshop and if you're looking for a really good WH40K rules set you might consider looking into WH40K 2nd edition.
Yeah, you read that right, 2nd edition.
I really liked 2nd edition and had a lot of fun playing it. The "feel" of 2nd edition was very close to friendly non-SR games of Warmachine - it was really pretty good. There were some minor problems with it that could have been *easily* fixed (like restricting the number of heroes ginned up with so many wargear cards that it gave them acne) but our good friends at GW decided to instead throw the baby out with the bath water and released 3rd edition.
Now, after looking over the initial release of the 3rd ed. rules and realizing the complete, and utter, lack of playtesting that was involved in 3rd edition WH40K I came to a conclusion. That conclusion was that 3rd edition was a pile of dead, burning, radioactive babies surrounded by a 10ft deep moat of donkey piss. I imagine that later editions merely submerged Claymore landmines into the moat of donkey piss or sprinkled chemicals onto the pile of dead, burning, radioactive babies to change the color of the flames. I don't know, I stopped paying attention.
(No, I'm not salty about what GW did to their games with edition changes and lack of playtesting, not one bit. Go ahead, ask me my thoughts about the 1st edition of Battle Fleet Gothic. Or better yet, the release of Epic 40K...)
Don't be a fool, don't be a lemming, keep your soul, and stay away from Games Workshop.
But hey, that's just my deeply informed opinion generated after years of experience, I could be wrong.
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Mar 29, 2017 6:48:49 GMT
I'm a relatively new convert to tabletop gaming, so I don't have the history to fall back on, but the few experiences I had playing 40k were brutal and not particularly fun. At this point, I'm waiting for a ruleset that pulls me in, but that might be all that's missing. Xintas, welcome to tabletop gaming. I think you made the right choice by looking at Warmachine and Hordes - stick with it.
Now, if you want to make the mistake of doing anything with Games Workshop and if you're looking for a really good WH40K rules set you might consider looking into WH40K 2nd edition.
Yeah, you read that right, 2nd edition.
I really liked 2nd edition and had a lot of fun playing it. The "feel" of 2nd edition was very close to friendly non-SR games of Warmachine - it was really pretty good. There were some minor problems with it that could have been *easily* fixed (like restricting the number of heroes ginned up with so many wargear cards that it gave them acne) but our good friends at GW decided to instead throw the baby out with the bath water and released 3rd edition.
Now, after looking over the initial release of the 3rd ed. rules and realizing the complete, and utter, lack of playtesting that was involved in 3rd edition WH40K I came to a conclusion. That conclusion was that 3rd edition was a pile of dead, burning, radioactive babies surrounded by a 10ft deep moat of donkey piss. I imagine that later editions merely submerged Claymore landmines into the moat of donkey piss or sprinkled chemicals onto the pile of dead, burning, radioactive babies to change the color of the flames. I don't know, I stopped paying attention.
(No, I'm not salty about what GW did to their games with edition changes and lack of playtesting, not one bit. Go ahead, ask me my thoughts about the 1st edition of Battle Fleet Gothic. Or better yet, the release of Epic 40K...)
Don't be a fool, don't be a lemming, keep your soul, and stay away from Games Workshop.
But hey, that's just my deeply informed opinion generated after years of experience, I could be wrong.
To be honest, I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on battlefleet gothic. I played it a couple of times, and personally I found it to be one of their better offerings (though certain aspects were unbalanced as all get out...)
|
|
spideredd
Junior Strategist
Summer Gamer
Posts: 588
|
Post by spideredd on Mar 29, 2017 7:21:10 GMT
Xintas, welcome to tabletop gaming. I think you made the right choice by looking at Warmachine and Hordes - stick with it.
Now, if you want to make the mistake of doing anything with Games Workshop and if you're looking for a really good WH40K rules set you might consider looking into WH40K 2nd edition.
Yeah, you read that right, 2nd edition.
I really liked 2nd edition and had a lot of fun playing it. The "feel" of 2nd edition was very close to friendly non-SR games of Warmachine - it was really pretty good. There were some minor problems with it that could have been *easily* fixed (like restricting the number of heroes ginned up with so many wargear cards that it gave them acne) but our good friends at GW decided to instead throw the baby out with the bath water and released 3rd edition.
Now, after looking over the initial release of the 3rd ed. rules and realizing the complete, and utter, lack of playtesting that was involved in 3rd edition WH40K I came to a conclusion. That conclusion was that 3rd edition was a pile of dead, burning, radioactive babies surrounded by a 10ft deep moat of donkey piss. I imagine that later editions merely submerged Claymore landmines into the moat of donkey piss or sprinkled chemicals onto the pile of dead, burning, radioactive babies to change the color of the flames. I don't know, I stopped paying attention.
(No, I'm not salty about what GW did to their games with edition changes and lack of playtesting, not one bit. Go ahead, ask me my thoughts about the 1st edition of Battle Fleet Gothic. Or better yet, the release of Epic 40K...)
Don't be a fool, don't be a lemming, keep your soul, and stay away from Games Workshop.
But hey, that's just my deeply informed opinion generated after years of experience, I could be wrong.
To be honest, I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on battlefleet gothic. I played it a couple of times, and personally I found it to be one of their better offerings (though certain aspects were unbalanced as all get out...) Most of their games that didn't start with 'Warhammer' were actually quite balanced. Battlefleet gothic was both visually interesting and reasonable in terms of balance, although the torpedoes were broken good and fighters were broken bad. And to be honest. As much as I hated 3rd, it wasn't too bad for balance if you used the army lists in the back of the rulebook rather than any codex.
|
|
|
Post by Blargaliscious on Mar 29, 2017 7:42:35 GMT
Welcome Xintas...
WH40K 2nd edition was good...
GW sucks...
I mention BFG
To be honest, I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on battlefleet gothic. I played it a couple of times, and personally I found it to be one of their better offerings (though certain aspects were unbalanced as all get out...) My friend and I had played Star Fleet Battles previously (his emotional scars were still deep) and right after Battle Fleet Gothic came out he suggested that the group give it a try. I became the Eldar player of the group.
Now, one of the ~basic~ things you do to playtest a game is to take worst-case scenarios against your core mechanics and see if there is a problem. When a ship is firing a battery of weapons against a target the number of attacks would be modified in a table the game provided based upon prevailing conditions: range, size class of the target, movement vector of the target compared to the firing ship, and if the ship is Eldar (holofields.) More difficult shots went to the right on this table, reducing the effective number of attack dice, and easier shots went to the left on the table, increasing the effective number of attack dice. This table was central to a lot of the combat in the game - a core mechanic.
So, in this one game I was playing, I had an Eldar (holofields) frigate or destroyer (small ship) at long range cutting across the field of fire (more difficult shot) that was being shot by some round-eared ship. We go to figure the number of attack dice based on this table, and we noticed that we hit the edge of the table before getting to the proper column for this shot - we needed to go 2 more columns to the right. WTF?!? My Eldar ships had lost 2 of the defensive factors that should have helped defend them against attack simply because some GW dumb-frak couldn't be bothered to make this core game mechanic table big enough to account for all of the basic situations that they had designed into their game. Nor could they be bothered to compensate by saying "apply a -1 modifier on attack dice for each column you go off the side of the table," which would have statistically achieved the same result.
This oversight by the lack of playtesting pretty much invalidated all of the Eldar smaller ships because in many situations they would not have gotten the defensive benefits that were probably built into their cost.
I was able to over-look a lot of the flaws that the game had up to that point, but after half of my fleet was rendered over-priced I immediately stopped playing the game and sold my BFG stuff on Bartertown. Good riddance.
If you want a great spaceship combat game, play Babylon 5 Wars (out of production) by Agents of Gaming (out of business). Elegant rules engine that could handle a lot of different designs and combat strategies - kinda like Warmachine and Hordes...
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Mar 29, 2017 8:03:33 GMT
Ha, I remember that - played Eldar too.
Lots of great things about that game, honestly - I thought most of the fleets had more character than the actual 40k armies (Tyranids custom building ships, eldar with solar sails and their pulsars/weird shield rules, Orks with their...ramming and torpedo spam.) A good edition upgrade could have solved most of the issues and put out a truly well-tuned game, IMO.
Have to disagree with you on eldar, though - Hemlocks were absurdly cheap for the firepower they packed, and eldar were fast enough to get the first strike most of the time. I don't recall losing many games with that list...
|
|
Xintas
Junior Strategist
Posts: 824
|
Post by Xintas on Mar 29, 2017 13:02:06 GMT
I'm a relatively new convert to tabletop gaming, so I don't have the history to fall back on, but the few experiences I had playing 40k were brutal and not particularly fun. At this point, I'm waiting for a ruleset that pulls me in, but that might be all that's missing. Xintas, welcome to tabletop gaming. I think you made the right choice by looking at Warmachine and Hordes - stick with it.
Now, if you want to make the mistake of doing anything with Games Workshop and if you're looking for a really good WH40K rules set you might consider looking into WH40K 2nd edition.
Yeah, you read that right, 2nd edition.
I really liked 2nd edition and had a lot of fun playing it. The "feel" of 2nd edition was very close to friendly non-SR games of Warmachine - it was really pretty good. There were some minor problems with it that could have been *easily* fixed (like restricting the number of heroes ginned up with so many wargear cards that it gave them acne) but our good friends at GW decided to instead throw the baby out with the bath water and released 3rd edition.
Now, after looking over the initial release of the 3rd ed. rules and realizing the complete, and utter, lack of playtesting that was involved in 3rd edition WH40K I came to a conclusion. That conclusion was that 3rd edition was a pile of dead, burning, radioactive babies surrounded by a 10ft deep moat of donkey piss. I imagine that later editions merely submerged Claymore landmines into the moat of donkey piss or sprinkled chemicals onto the pile of dead, burning, radioactive babies to change the color of the flames. I don't know, I stopped paying attention.
(No, I'm not salty about what GW did to their games with edition changes and lack of playtesting, not one bit. Go ahead, ask me my thoughts about the 1st edition of Battle Fleet Gothic. Or better yet, the release of Epic 40K...)
Don't be a fool, don't be a lemming, keep your soul, and stay away from Games Workshop.
But hey, that's just my deeply informed opinion generated after years of experience, I could be wrong.
I feel like one of those people that casually brings up your abusive ex in conversation by mentioning that they've lost weight and have a new job. I'm sorry for the harm my carelessness has caused you. In all seriousness though, that makes sense to me. The longer a game series (of any type) goes without taking a hard look at the core concepts, the further and further down the rabbit hole things can get.
|
|
|
Post by lawbringer on Mar 29, 2017 14:00:12 GMT
Not to get into too much GW bashing, but the abusive ex analogy is a pretty solid one. Right down to looking back years later after hearing some of his friends say "Oh he's totally changed!" and then flicking through their Facebook going, "m-maybe they have changed? He wasn't THAT bad, right?" Only it turns out the reality isn't quite as sweet and the same person is still below the surface.
*Takes a shot*
|
|
marke
Junior Strategist
Posts: 187
|
Post by marke on Mar 29, 2017 21:41:11 GMT
Stay away from GW? Lmao, such hate. Stop hating and enjoy the hobby. GWs games have good and bad sides, as do PPs. There is nothing wrong with playing GWs games, even alongside of wm/h etc. They have been improving a ton, and their product is top notch. Im not personally playing any GW stuff or have any armies for their games (few odd figures here amd there), but pushing new players to hate on GW isnt doing anybody any favors. Explore all the options and see which one you like. My personal recommendation is Malifaux, as WM/H isnt currently in a very good state imo. Many people like it even now though, so, as I said, its good to see whats out there with an open mind
|
|
|
Post by W0lfBane on Mar 29, 2017 22:47:20 GMT
That's a very laize fair attitude of " just let the new players get hit by a train, it's a good experience it builds character. Maybe they'll even like it"
When i was new to miniatures having friends that knew the hobby that gave me good advice on which games to pursue really helped with my enjoyment of the hobby. So i think having people that have had negative experiences with the GW share their stories is useful to new players.
|
|
|
Post by pangurban on Mar 29, 2017 23:11:04 GMT
The best games to pursue are the ones you'll get to play. I like Bushido but nobody hereabouts plays it: it would be more than a little unfair of me to suggest to a newbie that he or she should invest in it. On the other hand, while I have no interest in GW games myself other than for the miniatures quite a lot of others here enjoy playing them: why should I look down on that, let alone try to steer others away from them?
Give people your honest and objective opinion, but also tell them to listen to others and to make up their own minds: that's the best advice you can give. They can take it from there.
|
|
|
Post by gunndrakcapthide on Mar 30, 2017 0:13:09 GMT
Stay away from GW? Lmao, such hate. Stop hating and enjoy the hobby. GWs games have good and bad sides, as do PPs. There is nothing wrong with playing GWs games, even alongside of wm/h etc. They have been improving a ton, and their product is top notch. Im not personally playing any GW stuff or have any armies for their games (few odd figures here amd there), but pushing new players to hate on GW isnt doing anybody any favors. Explore all the options and see which one you like. My personal recommendation is Malifaux, as WM/H isnt currently in a very good state imo. Many people like it even now though, so, as I said, its good to see whats out there with an open mind Until Kevin Rountree took over, GW seemed to go out of its way to antagonize its user base, plus making bizarre business decisions. While some of the anger towards GW is overblown, the rest is justified and served to warn people interested in GW about what they were possibly getting into. Word of mouth is a powerful thing that help or hurt, and it seems GW wants to recapture some goodwill with their releases.
|
|
|
Post by Blargaliscious on Mar 30, 2017 0:45:21 GMT
Stay away from GW? Lmao, such hate. Stop hating and enjoy the hobby. GWs games have good and bad sides, as do PPs. There is nothing wrong with playing GWs games, even alongside of wm/h etc. They have been improving a ton, and their product is top notch. Im not personally playing any GW stuff or have any armies for their games (few odd figures here amd there), but pushing new players to hate on GW isnt doing anybody any favors. Explore all the options and see which one you like. My personal recommendation is Malifaux, as WM/H isnt currently in a very good state imo. Many people like it even now though, so, as I said, its good to see whats out there with an open mind Wow, going to stomp on that land mine, huh? OK...
Stay away from GW? Lmao, such hate. Stop hating and enjoy the hobby.
Hate? No, not hate. Anger. That is what I feel towards GW - anger. I don't hate GW, their actions anger me. I would love to enjoy "the GW Hobby" but their strategy of forced obsolescence to continue sales angers me. The idea of spending hundreds of dollars and hundreds of hours building and painting an army only to have half of it invalidated with the next edition of the game angers me.
Now, if the new edition of the game was an improvement over the previous edition, then I would be more forgiving. But in my experience, that has not been the case. WH40K 1st edition (Rogue Trader) going to 2nd edition - that was an improvement. I started playing in 2nd edition and enjoyed it - my space marine army was fun to play. But when both of my assault squads (full of power swords and power fists) that I had labored on were invalidated in 3rd. edition, that pissed me off. Then to see that the rules for 3rd ed. were full of *obvious* screw-ups - that angered me. And when I read the 3rd ed. rules and thought that they were more written for 15mm games instead of 25-28mm games (Hey gamer, buy more figures!) I was done with WH40K.
GWs games have good and bad sides, as do PPs.
Would you consider a game that is unplayable as "having a bad side?"
Years ago the "Big 3" games of GW were WHFB, WH40K, and Epic. Epic was a 6mm version of WH40K that was a fantastic game in the beginning, and having come from playing Battletech it was a lot of fun to play. A lot of the space marine and imperial guard tanks that eventually came out in WH40K were in Epic for years previous The releases for the "1st edition" of Epic made for a game that had "good sides and bad sides." The "2nd edition" of Epic - Space Marine and Titan Legions - were baller. Yeah, there were some minor issues here and there, but they were nothing compared to the game in general.
Then the "3rd edition" of Epic came out - Epic 40K.
Epic 40K was the deathblow for Epic as the third of the "Big 3." The miniatures that came out for Epic 40K were an improvement over the older ones. But nevermind the shoddy artwork or the screwy rules layout over 3 different little books, the game had a giant flaw - I couldn't figure out how to play it. I'm an engineer with a masters degree and have played some of the more complicated wargames out there (Star Fleet Battles and Batttletech) but for the life of me I couldn't figure out how to play the game it was so poorly written and laid out. I think that GW had tried to really simplify the game (mind-boggling considering how simplistic Epic was to begin with) and in their efforts had made it so abstract nothing made any sense.
I was apparently not alone - guys were either selling their Epic collections for pennies on the dollar or just out and out throwing their armies away. And when GW finally made a comment about the "disappointing sales" for Epic 40K, they had the gall to blame us players for not being up to the task.
So they make a *really bad* game and it is my fault for not being excited?
That's not a bad side, that is a fatal flaw.
There is nothing wrong with playing GWs games, even alongside of wm/h etc.
You are absolutely correct - if someone wants to make the mistake of getting into GW then I am not going to stop them. I will feel obligated to warn them in no uncertain terms, but if they really want to, it's their money. (I believe P.T. Barnum said something about a certain type of person and his money...)
They have been improving a ton, and their product is top notch.
The improvement part is a matter of perspective. I won't argue that since I don't care - I'm not in the mood to be burned by GW again.
Yes, GW has got their graphics design and miniature production down like a hard-core professional. But I'm not expecting their rules to be any good, so why should I paint an army if the game isn't any good? And if the game is good, they'll just screw it up with the next edition change.
Im not personally playing any GW stuff or have any armies for their games (few odd figures here amd there), but pushing new players to hate on GW isnt doing anybody any favors.
I'm not pushing anyone to hate GW, and I think the popular vernacular of "Don't hate on GW" is an unthinking oversimplification of what GW has done to their customer base over the years. When you find "GW Haters" like me out in the world, we don't hate GW. We're angry with GW. Very angry. Still. I just don't want any other person to invest time, money, or emotion on GW like I have and to be scorned by them.
"Hell hath no nerdfury like a gamer scorned by GW."
I think I will have to make that part of a sig somewhere...
|
|
Lanz
Junior Strategist
Posts: 685
|
Post by Lanz on Mar 30, 2017 0:47:44 GMT
Stay away from GW? Lmao, such hate. Stop hating and enjoy the hobby. GWs games have good and bad sides, as do PPs. There is nothing wrong with playing GWs games, even alongside of wm/h etc. They have been improving a ton, and their product is top notch. Im not personally playing any GW stuff or have any armies for their games (few odd figures here amd there), but pushing new players to hate on GW isnt doing anybody any favors. Explore all the options and see which one you like. My personal recommendation is Malifaux, as WM/H isnt currently in a very good state imo. Many people like it even now though, so, as I said, its good to see whats out there with an open mind Wow, going to stomp on that land mine, huh? OK...
*snip* It seems GW's new leadership direction is looking to fix a lot of these problems, but as someone elsewhere reminded me, it's a bit like looking at an ex who has 'totally changed and is a completely new person now'.
|
|