So, here we are…
Looking for all the world like the mid-point for 6th
Edition. Mind, I have no idea how far we
really are into the current edition’s life span, but it really is feeling very
much like we are at or about “version 6.5”.
The major rule updates coming out in Escalation and Stronghold Assault
really ARE game changers. On one hand,
it has the potential to make the game silly/stupid with a Titan backed up with
minimal “other” to make a legal army. Is
it bad? On some levels, yes… The local game store does not in general sell
those things being Armorcast/Forgeworld or DIY/Home Made stuff… CAN be amazing, beautiful models and has the
potential to pull more people into the game…
Or it can look like crap, drive people away and deny sales to the FLGS…
I have to admit I am
still on the fence about it. On one hand
it does seem like it will have a leveling effect IFF it serves as either an
answer or a deterrent to some of the completely legal but horribly abusive lists. I do not think you will find many people
arguing that the “Screamer Star” or the “Jetseer Council” are NOT abusive
lists. They take things to an extreme,
and while technically legal have the effect of simply killing all enjoyment of
the game. The same effect that the Grey
Knights had on the previous edition I think.
The 4+ giant Monstrous Creature lists including, but by no means limited
to the Tau silliness, Eldar mixed or the Flying Circuses of the
Tyranids/Chaos. Simply NOT fun to play
against with a “normal” army anymore.
So, where does that leave us?
Everyone HAS to bring the same very small subset of “broken” lists or be
relegated to just losing? In the bigger
events, the prize support, etc. makes this a game with money on the table in my
opinion. When there is money on the
table, “friendly play” simply does not exist…
Eventually. Sure, you will
occasionally run across the equivalent of the gun toting Amish vigilante, but
the reality is that the ones playing the most broken and obnoxious (to those of
us who are just there to play a few games) lists are the odds on favorites to
win it all.
I know that a group of the larger TOs out there are working
to create something in a “Tournament 40K” rule set for lack of a better
term. Mike Brandt over at the “Whiskey
& 40K” blog details that here (http://whiskey40k.blogspot.com/2013/12/better-mission-design-more-proactive.html)
… Will it work? I don’t know.
I DO wish them luck and hope that it does. As of right now I have less than zero interest
in going to a major event with any army I would like to play. There are only 2 times I very nearly lost my
temper playing a game, once was when I played uber-competitive 40K back in 3rd
Edition. Would have been very late 2001
or early 2002. I was just out of the
Army a few years, just married, etc., and playing in a RTT up in Joliet. Wound up playing my Fleshtearers against his
IG. His Tallern IG painted up as Al Qaeda
with “Bin Laden” themed and pictured banners…
Kid said he did it just to piss off his opponents… Worked for me, don’t think I ever played a
more brutally effective and vicious game in my life. See, when I get pissed off, I get far more
dangerous. I was methodical, and to be
honest, the BA were horribly broken in that edition, so the kid never really had
a chance as I could easily Assault his
army on turn one, and with the Sweeping Assault rules, just keep going. It was over by the bottom of turn 2, with him
being completely wiped from the table.
Got chipmunked on my “Sportsmanship” score, but whatever. Good thing an old friend of mine was there (Dennis
Smith) and was friends with the TOs or it would have really screwed up my
score. So, “Best General” it was, not
overall winner… And that was the last
big event I went to.
I guess I saw where it would go in time. And let’s be honest, from about the mid-point
of 5th Edition to now it seems that as a competitive game it just
does not work. The ideas about 2
different “Victory Conditions” and giving each player a choice is neat, but…. Well, I’ll wait and see I think. The old Mob quote to the effect of “Every law
they pass just creates more businesses for us” comes to mind. Seems that we are all acknowledging that there
are truly broken things, and to fix them we will introduce more rules and more
potential for breaking things further.
NOT the intention of course, and like I said I really do hope that it
works out and becomes a fun game again on that level. This is probably the most frustrating thing
about it all… Forgeworld as part of GW
actually I think HAS balanced the “Lords of War” stuff in the Heresy rules… A single line of “no more than 25% of your
points may be spent on this slot”. And
that’s it. The things with the most
potential to break 40K are all too expensive to be 25% of any list size we use
in the games we play. Yeah, doesn't help
with what I consider the broken stuff but it combined with say “One Force Org
Chart, allies and Detachments must adhere” and the silliness with the Taudar or
3+ Broadsides, etc. all goes away. Does
it hurt game balance? I don’t know. But why bother with the FOC or frankly ANY
rule if it will not be equally applied for all parties? Night Fighting is one that irks me now that
it is in every mission I think. Some
armies simply ignore it (DE/Tau for the most part), some (Necrons) can cause it
to only affect their enemies and for a longer time in the game… Others still have lost their traditional keen
senses that would allow them to deal with the night fight (Wolves)… With the Wolves, I just feel there is simply
no point bringing them to a 40K game unless I do something completely silly
like a Bran Redmaw army or the like…
Depend on Behind Enemy Lines and Outflank to get my Wolves in close… I have tried it before and it was mostly
effective, but even still, NO defense against a flier, not much long ranged
firepower, dependent on a “Hero Hammer” style of play to be effective. I always liked how effective my basic Grey
Hunters were, now in this edition… Eh,
they are just expensive casualties like the Guard. But lacking all of the IG advantages.
J Guess that is why I started looking at the
Legion stuff to be honest… “This Battle
is lost…. But there is time for another”… The repaint project on my ancient ACTUALLY
pre Heresy Wolves continues… And I am
building “Siege Breachers” out of some other Marines I have around to test that… Needing the full 20 for the real sized Squads
would be too expensive otherwise… Mind,
the FW resin are BRILLIANT minis and I’d love to have them… But things like the broken furnace and other
real life issues keep me from spending that kind of money on the game…
I know MVBrandt will do his best to create a 'balanced' tourney system, but I would still be concerned about another 'INAT 40K'.
ReplyDeleteI know a lot of the INAT council started out with decent intentions...
in the end the rules gerrymandering created it's own game imposed on the game of 40K.
40K will settle back into competing camps of 40K tourney allowances, and each store will have it's 'accepted legal', which will be different from shop to shop. This will produce a splintering of the community again.
Comp has returned once again, in the effort to produce a 'fair' game.
:-) Overall I think there are just a very few things to be tweaked... The breaking of the FOC for Allies/Detachments is one and adapting the Heresy rules for the Lords of War slot... Small things, but I guess it always starts small, doesn't it...
ReplyDeleteI think that is the most frustrating thing about all of this as a mere player of the game... With the Heresy stuff, it is all very clear, balanced and there do seem to be only a few really problematic things (Moritant w/ Plasma Pistols... Yeah, I can't spell in English, much less whatever language they use :-)), but overall? REALLY well written and balanced. Perhaps it is more related to the limited nature of the Heresy itself with everyone being more or less the same Army... Not sure. Seems like the rules are written with an adult in mind as the player and perhaps the 40K side is less so...
ReplyDelete