And any system that relies heavily on them is shit. Special rules should be niche things for special situations, if special rules are used all the time they are not special, just the author of the system is a stupid idiot who doesn't know how to organically balance through core stats.
>>98186250Wait, what are we supposed to be mad at, now?
>>98186279On the state of the industry. It's so hard to find a game these days that isn't infected with the special rules bloat cancer because everyone, like sheeps, follows the trend set by Warhammer/DnD/Magic: The Gathering.
> imagine a game where all of your army rules fit on one page> imagine only having 7 special rules across your whole army> imagine 3 of those 7 rules being 'this mount is available to this guy' or 'you know what a bolt thrower is, read the rulebook'> not only does that one page have all your game rules, it also has your army construction rules in the same table
>>98186296I'm 50/50 I really like unique factions that play differently. This kind of makes special needed, to really pull how the army plays. I think grimdark future does a good job of have very few special rules while still having the army keep that unique feel.the other half of me agrees with you, I love games like space weirdos or great helm and the simplicity is just peak some times. Are you saying that al;l armies should just be different stat lines?
>>98186591>Are you saying that al;l armies should just be different stat lines?Yes. Although it is necessary to note that the core rules should allow stats differences to have meaning.
>>98186432But how will retards then pretend that they are playing a complex game without actually playing a complex game? You don't expect retreads to actually think about what they're doing instead of relying on broken shit to carry their smooth brain?
>>98186591NTA, but even in older 40k, around 3rd/4th edition. You had special rules, but the bulk of any army was mainly different from other armies by the stats.Biggest example of this was the Imperial Guard 3.5 codex. You could get a lot of variance within the same basic guardsmen units by simply changing a few stats.Going from a 5+ save to a 4+ changed how the unit played a lot. Since now they are immune to AP5 weapons and can stand in the open and not worry about using cover saves. While just giving them an extra attack in melee meant that now this 10 guardsmen went from having 20 attacks on a charge to 30 and on an edition that melee was basically forcing saves. Those 10 extra attack now are enough to delete a 5 man marine squad or if lucky a 10 man.Add to that special rules like not receiving penalties to leadership you could transform a shooting army into a melee one.
>>98186677Warmaster is a complex game. The complexity is not in the flowchart of keywords and random interaction of modern 40k, but in how you position your army and what priorities you have in your command checks. As well as to when use magic and other special rules.Modern 40k is like Skyrim, its an ocean of possibilities but with the depth of a puddle.
>>98186250I don't think thats true as a generality, however in 40k it's certainly used to compensate for the fact that units often don't work as intended based on their stats and the stats of their equipment. A good example are the new eradicators with heavy bolters. Heavy bolters arent actually good anti-infantry weapons largely because they don't fire enough shots, so the unit wouldn't work, so they get an additional rule to give them blast in order for them to be able to score enough hits for the unit to work.
>>98186711That's my point, all these special rules are smoke and mirrors that hide the simple fact that the systems are completely stupid and you need no tactics or strategy during the game, the biggest "challenge" of these systems is to filter out the garbage information and find the broken crap that work 100% of the time.
>>98186591I played GDF on Monday. I like the simplicity and the quick back and forth between players. I didn't like how quickly everything dies in that game. Now, I did not play with advanced rules (I was showing the system to my son, who is six years old) which introduce a lot of optional rules that address most of the common complaints people have with OPR. I've mostly played the rampant games, where you have about half a dozen of different generic unit profiles that one can spice with special rules. Attack dice in Xenos rampant are capped at 10 for units above half strength, so it is extremely rare that you'll kill more than one or two enemy models during an attack, but you can force the enemy to take morale checks with each shooting attack. There are also some tactics involved because most units can react to being shot at, so you can try to bait the enemy into shooting back at your chaff before you hit them with your more elite units. Unit profiles are a bit samey, but I feel like Xenos Rampant involves a bit more thinking about movement and target priority compared to OPR.
>>98186750>you need no tactics or strategy during the game,You actually do need both in so far as you need those to play any wargame, which is to say that you don't, you can just play badly, and if you play badly against other people who also play badly the outcome will appear random. These things are just entirely related to game mechanics in 40k because of the first part of your post: the system is stupid and unbelievably gamey.
>>98186830The fact that some units only get their abilities if they are on an objective or the target is on an objective is just bizare.
>>98186847> bizarre
Surprised how no one has mentioned how obvious the dota/moba influence is on modern 40k design.
>>98186905Getting boss baby vibes from this one.
>>98186879Its like the old BT rules from 3rd.Just missing the fluff part to explain it.Or are you complaining about the misspelling?
>>98186296You have only repeated the word salad I initially expressed confusion to.Provide examples.Speak English.Be detailed and specific.
>>98186250I don't have any insight to add, but this is the reason why I can't play nu-40k. The rules complexity isn't even interesting, it's all variations of stupid tourneyfag things like scoring points, rerolling results, securing charges and other dumb bullshit. I would unironically prefer AoS 1ed reddit bullshit like "you can only use this ability if you talk like a pirate, matey" than having all this stupid extra text that amounts to "you are better at tourneyfagging"
>>98186830>You actually do need bothIf you consider this to be tactics and strategy then you are one of the retrads I was talking about. If Warhammer is a hard game for you then it just means you have 60 IQ.
>>98186930I'm complaining that the surge distance depends on what pistol the models are equipped with, because otherwise there would be zero incentive to ever use autopistols over hand flamers because of the ridiculous 10E approach to wargear.
>>98187176Ahh. Yep 10th introduced a lot of strange rules like that.The game being literally pointless and its just the power level system wearing the point system skin does not help.
>>98186813thats funny. I love that things die fast. makes the game both feel brutal and makes it play quick. desu, i play a lot of campaign play for GDF/FF and I really enjoy the hard decisions around what engagements to actually make, where to force combat, or if its better to just step back. we dont play with a lot of advanced rules, but for standard gdf, I love that they included a bunch of asymmetric deployments in the book. makes narrative games feel fun. the rules packs are neat, but you really have to pick and choose what your play group likes. great for close knit group, less great for pick up games I keep hearing about xenos rampant but haven't given it a shot. does it do anything unique enough to make it stand out?
>>98187176Mechanically it is an stupid rule. It's just a d6 so the enemy can just stand at 7 away and avoid it entirely. Specially pointless when the average charge roll is 7 and everyone moves 6.Compared it to the old version >>98186930 the 2d6 spread and with a charge of 6. There is a risk reward for both players.The current rule just add another step for nothing.
>>98187210I hadn't played 40k since 8th and my favorite part of 10th (and by extension 11th now) was when one of my old friends asked to play a game of 10th and warned me that the rules were 'kind of shit' and when I asked why he was making me learn 10th instead of just played 8th which we both liked better he said "because it's newer and more recent" since then I've come to realize that some people have GWs cock so far down their throats that even given every opportunity to make or play something they like better they'll still desperately slurp up whatever their favorite company is serving.
>>98187302Because they play for validation and nothing else. The same goes for players who play online competitive games for the sake of getting rank up.
>>98187332Hmm. I suppose we all do something for validation. Hadn't thought of that anon.
>>98187332I've said it before. The current issue with 40k is in part a result of people wanting to play videogames, but sucking so much ass in them that they turn to wargames. Since it is easier to cheat and in modern 40k you can just copy paste an army list and be somewhat functional.You can always claim that you forgot a rule that some how always benefit you. Can't do the same thing in a videogame.Lives so empty that they need to win in a doll game. Older edition didn't have that many weird interactions so it was way easier to call out cheaters.
are the rules too hard for widdle baby?
>>98186250Go play checkers then
>>98187454I mean modern GW and 40k players consider picture related too complex.Something that 10 years old kids in South America could figure out using an English to Spanish dictionary
>>98187483Please anon, don't remind me of those days....or maybe do. I have a friend who would love to play 3rd/4th but I'd have to get a 3d printing setup and don't want gw to get the impression that 11th is selling well hmm...
>>98187125Are you trying to make an aesthetic argument about the presence of strategy and tactics in a game? Because if you are I think it's you who might have an IQ problem.Hex and chit wargames look like total shit, this means they don't have strategy or tactics in them.
>>98187251To each his own. I've played OPR with adults too and it's always been fun. So much depends on with whom you play.As for Xenos rampant, it's a mini-agnostic game for about a platoon-sized force. You can play with bigger detachments too, and I've a hunch that the level of abstraction the game has means that it would work well on smaller scales. Like 15mm and 10mm. The game system has a push-your-luck activation system that some people really hate. Basically you roll to activate your units and if you fail, the initiative passes on to your opponent. In Xenos rampant there are many ways to mitigate this, as most units have some sort of free action, and proximity to your detachment commander gives you bonuses for activation rolls. I like the unit psychology and reactivity in XR, as units can flee, you can bait enemies to charge, some units can counter-charge and most units can shoot back against the first unit that fires at them.
>>98188007It's not about aesthetics, it's about the situation on the table. Miniatures are too closely spaced, objectives in the game are just stupid and don't give room for maneuvers, maneuvers have no sense because it doesn't matter which side you attack from, distance is also not a factor, cover has lost any relevance other than being a line of sight blocker + some stats of individual miniatures simply have no counterplay. It's just a matter of smcking your army against the enemy's without thinking. The game is a shadow of its past self and is simply a live service garbage in which the latest, beloved by GW, OP release wins.
>>98188189whats your example of a good board? just much larger play area? more verticallity? trench for safe running?
>>98188269In a wargame there isn't one board type that fits all.Playing in the interior of a space ship will have a different board than playing on a jungle or mountain pass.The board will depend on the scenario and so will change the composition and limitation of an army.This does not mean you could have pick up rules for when no one wants to prepare a scenario, but those should be the basic bitch rules not the main focus like it is today.
>>98186250yeah, i think a lot of the problem in modern 40k is all the bloat with stuff like special rules and command points and stratagems and rerolls, instead of just making the game's core systems good. modern units, despite having a minimum of ~3 USRs and one super special unique one, are still shallower and less flavorful than when they were just stat lines and an armory back in 3/4e.>>98186905idk about that specifically because i don't play MOBAs, but i have noticed that modern 40k feels like it's trying very hard to be an e-sport rather than a tabletop wargame.
>>98186250>Nouuuuuuu don't give a unit special rules.Fuck you, HH has almost IDENTICAL units salvo their own rules, and its fucking cool
>>98188358right, i didn't ask what is the single board you should always play on, i assume you're not stupid saying "tomb world map 3 is the only design worth playing" im asking what does a good board look like to you. >>98188368tourneyfags in general ruin the core concept. and gw caters to them because they buy every new op release to stay meta. best way to sling plastic. they want to remove any complications from the map. desu i love games with side boards for your army, so you can swap guys in depending on the map. pivot based on whos there. Games like Necromunda or trench have missions with limits to your deployed forces which i adore as well. Tying into the board is great. but for esports we need a solved game and asymetric deployment, uneven board side, maps that just don't favor one type of play just arent allowed.
>>98187502if you're playing older editions, you can grab used minis cheap as hell. especially first born
>>98188440>im asking what does a good board look like to you.In what scenario and what armies are playing. Because it really depends on that. A bunker defense scenario would be totally ass if there is no bunker to defend
>>98186250mesbg 2e fix this>>98186432too bad that game have the worst activation system ever
>>98188464nigga why is it hard to answer with what do you like? are you capable of enjoying? do you just exist to bitch? Here's a necro board I like. It leans into the vertical rule set that pairs great with the system. its aesthetically pleasing while allowing good objective locations that tie into not only the narrative of the board but also into reasonable places for tactical approaches. Its cramped and chaotic which work great for the world.
>>98188569Even in your example of Necromunda you can play scenarios of tunnel rats in 2D and would be perfectly fine.Those same vertically heavy boards and crammed tunnel ones would be ass for a wastland game.Hell that example of yours would not be good for a Bolt Action game, granted facing Imperial Japan vs American in the underhive could be fun the board is not suited for a historical game.Same way a Necromunda game could be played on a board made to represent D-Day, it would be a strange game.That's the reason why I'm asking on what kind of scenario you are asking because it would be extremely dull to play a city fight game on an open dessert board or the city board that is so fucking cramped that you can't even move the models properly.It totally depends on what I'm playing what a good board is.
>>98186721why couldn't they just... get more attacks without having the bandaid [blast] slapped on?
>>98188681whatd you have for breakfast today
>>98188721more attacks makes them more effective vs single target, blast only works on groups
>>98188189It sure sounds like you are making an aesthetic argument and also don't know what the rules of a current 40k game are, because most of the things that you are saying literally aren't true.>Miniatures are too closely spacedToo closely spaced for what? They're spaced so that they're inside the areas of cover provided by the buildings and/or within the area of objective markers. If they were more widely spaced they'd lose the benefit of cover, be more visible, or be less effective at scoring. The players have placed their models in tactically appropriate ways, according to the rules of the game. If you think they are too closely spaced it's because you don't like how that looks, which is an aesthetic argument.>objectives in the game are just stupid and don't give room for maneuvers, maneuvers have no sense because it doesn't matter which side you attack from, distance is also not a factor,None of this is true, maneuvering units to score objectives or prevent scoring is half of the game. >cover has lost any relevance other than being a line of sight blockerCurrent terrain rules are exceptionally dogshit, but this isn't true either. The reason you see units standing inside ruins all the time even when things can obviously see them is because it gives them +1 to their saves, which has totally ruined weapon and armor balance for the last 3 editions.>some stats of individual miniatures simply have no counterplayCorrect.>It's just a matter of smcking your army against the enemy's without thinking. I've seen this posted over and over for the last 20 years about every version of every game by someone who hasn't played it, but has decided they don't like it. It is particularly untrue of 10th edition 40k, which is emphasizes objective scoring above everything else, playing like this just makes you lose (unless you are playing necrons), why do you think all those dark angels are standing in L shaped ruins inside cancer circles.
>>98188964>I've seen this posted over and over for the last 20 years about every version of every game by someone who hasn't played it, but has decided they don't like it.it's an accidental declaration that you can't tell what's happening on the table, people say it about napoelonics all the time
>>98188487>too bad that game have the worst activation system everThe type of skillet who thinks BB Turnover is bad, and cannot understand a concept of not just moving all your units forward
>>98188779>anon is confused that someone can enjoy multiple thingsContext is important. Because even in the same type of boards like lets say jungle. A very cramped one would be totally ass for one type of game while for another it would be great. Just saying I like jungle terrain means nothing to this conversation.The original anon was asking:>whats your example of a good board? just much larger play area? more verticallity? trench for safe running?It really depends on the game.Are large areas good? maybe for a random 40k Apocalypse game a massive board would be good, not so much for Kill Team. Verticality? In what situation? doing it for a tunnel rat game like the old zone mortalis mission it would just add confusion.Same thing with trenches. It really depends what the fuck you want do with the game.In 40k even the same board has different qualities to it if you change the editions that is played on and the scenario rules.City fight is a great example. Regular 3rd edition terrain rules changes a lot with the City fight rules.How the board is set up is really important because it exist to serve a certain kind of game. For 40k 10th edition the core mechanics as so ass that no matter what kind of board you make the game will still be ass.
>>98188786Just have a lot of low damage and low strength attacks? why wouldn't that work?
>>98189134under current 40k rules, any S can wound any T on a good enough roll. because of that, having a lot of low-S decent-AP shots would just push people into not caring about S and pumping their heavy bolters into monsters and vehicles while relying on volume of A to push through, rather than keeping them in the super specific anti-infantry niche GW wants.
>>98189099can you give an example of a breakfast you ate?
>>98186250I don't agree in a general sense but I do think curret 40k and AoS' system where stats are super homogenized and everyone gets a tacked-on special rule (as opposed to old WFB and 40k where stats told the bulk of the story alongside some USRs) is lame and repetitive.
>>98186296Hard to get mad at Malifaux specifically considering it being ultra-crunchy with tons of highly bespoke rules on every model has been its thing forever.
>>98189472Its mostly a book keeping thing tho, it really doesnt matter if you have a sepcial Hazardous rule, or if every plasma weapon just has a rule that says "on a 1 suffer damage"
>>98186905Not really>t. plays both MOBAs and 40kThe worst thing you could say is the focus on unique named characters, which, not really? They're not really consistently OP or centralizing either to balance or design. You could say that for, say, Warmachine, Malifaux if you stretch, but that's it.
>>98187483God that's soulful
>>98188189>It's just a matter of smcking your army against the enemy's without thinkingHave you read the 11e mission rules?
>>98189510People on this board use MOBA as a nothing term for things they dont like, if anything, Fantasy with its Magic items system is moch closer to a MOBA
>>98187483The real reason is not it being too complex, its that Compfags will only use a few meta options, spread it everywhere, and make majority of them absolete
>>98189219this just sound like more proof that the current "anyone can wound anything on 6's" idea was an awful one. at least when it was a neceon necron exclusive rule it was thematic, but being able to theoretically kill superheavies with lasgun spam is really fucking gay.
>>98190112It can be made to work if you inflate wound counts on vehicles/monsters, and damage on weapons meant to deal with them, but its just a very not-neat way of dealing with it
>>98190112People have bitched about this since 8th ed and it's never been an actual problem in and of itself. You need hundreds of lasgun shots to kill a tank because of AP and especially the Damage stat that came with the new wound system. To my recollection, the only time it became a problem was when coupled with layered buffs and copious rerolls, like Hail of Doom Eldar in 9th and some weird Sternguard or Immortal combos in 10th, which were always niche.
>>98188007>Hex and chit wargames look like total shit, this means they don't have strategy or tactics in them.other anon hereretarded take, look at Prussian wargame used to teach tactics, looks even worse then hex and chithttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kriegsspielalso strategy in 40k is when you make army (and it's generous to call it strategy), after that all is tactical
>>98188358>In a wargame there isn't one board type that fits all.open terrain, exists pretty much everywhere, even spaceship can have large empty storage roomsyou just need table or floor to have itadd some clutter from things at hand and you have decent battlefield
This obsession with special paragraphs of rules all over the place like these wargames are now card games is a fucking disease that has killed any enjoyment I could have for current 40kStratagems need to go too
>>98188681>granted facing Imperial Japan vs American in the underhive could be fun the board is not suited for a historical gamefighting for caves at Iwo Jima; you could set it up half of field is at surface, other half underground caves system
>>98191397I mean who hasn't run a game with dual scenarios. I had a game where half of the board was the surface and the other half underground tunnels. It was a game of GSC vs chaos marines.
>>98188681>>98189099Holy autismo. Get checked tomorrow Mr. Roboto.
>>98186296Unironically the only true "wargaming" experience in 2026 is historical wargaming. The rest is all gamey gimmicks. It's sad because I used to love scifi and fantasy gaming, but alas it's getting very hard to find ones that aren't straight ass or that enough hobbying
>>98191395>Stratagems need to go tootruth exterminatushonestly i think they're an even bigger problem than USR bloat
