|
Post by dirtyharrypotter on Mar 4, 2018 22:12:28 GMT
Because warhammer was primarily balanced around movement they could divide armies into sections that covered that, and things like warwachines and monsters were very easy to file under those catagories as well. This is most definitely not true. Warhammer was not balanced around movement, and units were not sectioned according to their movement. Warhammer sectioned units according to the fluff around how common the units were in the army. This is why you would have Knights in the Core of Bretonnia and the Empire, while pretty much everyone else had them relegated to Special or Rare. The same could be said of the Tomb King Chariots as well. Tomb Kings had so many Chariots (in the fluff), that not only could they be taken Core, they could be taken as units. Dwarfs and the Empire could take artillery in the Special slot, while almost everyone else had their artillery in the Rare slot. So, no, movement wasn't a factor in determining if a unit was Core, Special, or Rare, just how common GW thought the unit should be in the army. If you look at some of the more specialized armies that were introduced in 6th Edition, such as the Southlands Lizardmen, the Blood Dragon Vampires, or Clan Moulder Skaven, which rearranged the organization of units (or even eliminated them as an option), you would see that the commonality of the unit was the rule of the day for Fantasy. 40K is a different story. Part of what they used was the commonality of the unit, but that usually only applied to the Troops. The other part was the role that unit had in the army. Cavalry, Beasts, light Vehicles, scouts/infiltrators, or dedicated Mechanized Infantry are Fast Attack. Heavy (or heavier in the case of Dark Eldar) Vehicles and Heavy Weapon Squads are Heavy Support. Veteran or highly trained infantry were usually relegated to Elites, though this sometimes was used for rare infantry like Ogryns. And so on. So, while movement was a factor for the Fast Attack units, it rarely was in the case for any other Role's assignment. Doh I should have seen this confusion comming. Apologies, I didn't express myself very clearly. What I meant was that warhammer(fantasy) is first and formost a movement game, and while warmachine has that too the plethora of rulesinteractions is arguably more defining to the way that game plays than the movement, whereas nothing comes as close to defining the way warhammer plays as moving (big) blocks around. That is not to say units are devided according to their movement, but just that the emphasis the game puts on movement happens to mesh well with the FOC in warhammer. I don't think warmachine's focus on rulesinteractions will fit that approach as well.
|
|
|
Post by HereComesTomorrow on Mar 4, 2018 23:41:15 GMT
It seems really odd to me that there are people that don't give a Firetruck about how PP is doing things that they are desperately trying to Socially Engineer an Alternative for wide spread consumption. When the obvious solution, to me at least, is to just go up to someone at the club/FLGS/Local Facebook group and say "Hey, I want to play a Non Theme game. Any takers?" Why is there a need to make it into a big "this is going to take over conventions!" thing? I said it in another thread but I'll say it here since no one is reading the other. Until PP start forcing it, no one in the main community will play anything but 75pts, themed Steamroller because PP have fostered a competitive atmosphere based around tournaments. There's the mentality within the community to always be practicing for the next tournament. And to a few people those smaller tournaments are practice for bigger tournaments. So unless you want to be curbstomped by the people practicing for big tournaments by playing small tournaments the people who only play small tournaments needs to be on the level of the Big players. Just as an example here is a year of my meta: Post-WTC burnout Selection for WTC for around 3-4 months via steamrollers Selections announced Practice for and attendence of various Masters events Practice for WTC Go to 10 At basically no point in the year is there a time where the larger part of my meta has any "downtime" where they're not practicing for some sort of big competitive event. I gave up attending steamrollers and ultimatly the game in general because I don't have the money to keep up with themes (which I don't like in the first place). Not being able to financially keep up with themes means not being able to practice at the same competitive level as the more aggressive players. Not being able to keep up with hardcore players means being easily trounced at tournaments (tournaments being the main appeal of the game for a lot of people, including myself). Being a walkover isn't any fun, thus tournaments aren't fun and I feel pissed that I wasted €50 and a 4 hour round trip to not have fun. So unless PP actually come out and say "listen dudes, just relax a bit, next LVO we'll be running it without themes just to shake things up" people will continue to play in theme and with the current SR because that is how all the big tournaments are run.
|
|
|
Post by Charistoph on Mar 5, 2018 5:48:30 GMT
Doh I should have seen this confusion comming. Apologies, I didn't express myself very clearly. What I meant was that warhammer(fantasy) is first and formost a movement game, and while warmachine has that too the plethora of rulesinteractions is arguably more defining to the way that game plays than the movement, whereas nothing comes as close to defining the way warhammer plays as moving (big) blocks around. That is not to say units are divided according to their movement, but just that the emphasis the game puts on movement happens to mesh well with the FOC in warhammer. I don't think warmachine's focus on rules interactions will fit that approach as well. While I won't disagree that Movement of blocks of units was a defining factor of Warhammer Fantasy Battles, I will still disagree that Fantasy's organization chart had anything to do with how movement worked at all. Unit size and ranking were what meshed with movement and combat interactions. Where a unit fell in the force organization a unit landed in, though, had zero connection with any of those things. There are just far too many examples of how different unit types which represented different points of speeds and maneuverability ran the gambit across the organizations across all armies to demonstrate how anything related to movement was a consideration in an army force's organization. About the only things you won't find represented in Core, but plenty in Special and Rare, was Monsters and War Machines (I can't remember if the Corpse Cart was a War Machine, off hand, though). You name another type, and there is a representative that can be found in Core, though. Hardly a demonstration of allowing for movement rule interactions determining how force organization worked.
Consider this as well, what if this was a set up for Company of Iron? Much like how Warmachine: Tactics allowed for the individual purchase of models (and not just by the unit). Such a consideration might be in play here. Some food for thought.
|
|