Finally someone summed up my thoughts on current 40k.......and GW's approach to competitive gamers

[CA$H]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

An excerpt:

"I mean, I thought it sucked in a 'competitive sense,' since the rumors of Random Charge Length were confirmed. The word 'random,' used in relation with any rule applicable in a miniature tabletop game, will make me instantly suspicious of the quality of the system it's being used in."

[Matt Varnish]

Easy answer is not play 40k competitively anymore. We have more than enough FoW tournies. WHy not? I'm gonna get the Eldar codex when it comes out and see what's what then. Worst case, the models arent rotting and retain some value, for me to either wait for another edition or to sell em.

[CA$H]

I agree - I am not against a game with my Chaos, but I wont be buying the new expensive Codex....

But with my entrance into Warmachine, I have my fix there, and the rule set is stunning....

[Joyous_Oblivion]

GW has made it a point to veer away from the tourney scene. I'm not sure why, but it's true. That's what killed it for me. I like the models mostly and the fluff is great but the game sucks IMO.

And as for the 'random movement' quote. I always find it hilarious people use that as their example why 40k or fantasy sucks now, when the entire game is random chance, same as Flames of War and Warmachine. It's all dice based

[Matt Varnish]

Yeha but to a point.. the dice determine hits and misses, but most games' skill was based on using the finite movement rates that you had, and trying to manouver as best as you could. Random charge length is a bit harsh, but they did it with WFB and then with 40k. Im 90% sure next edition itll be gone, but thats in a few years. I guess the only games to not take into effect RNG's is Chess and Go using your criterion. In FoW, the RNG is there to an extent: Defensive fire preventing or whiffing, allowing a charge, or Tank Terror failure of an Anti Tank Inf platoon when in prime assaulting position.. these can be thought of as a different but equal method of introducing randomness to that assault.

[Stormtrooper]

Random charge killed it for me, there where enough things i had no control of in my games but enough was enough

[Matt Varnish]

But its just as 'out of control' as Tank Terror or Defensive fire in FoW. Its a dice roll. Just worded differently.

[Joyous_Oblivion]

But its just as 'out of control' as Tank Terror or Defensive fire in FoW. Its a dice roll. Just worded differently.

Thats really my point. I don't like 40k anymore either but random charge really changed nothing. When you assaulted people before you were within 6" and now its about the same, you rarely try the really crazy charges as they won't work often.

It is no more random than the other games we play, just a different wording on how the randomness occurs.

[CA$H]

But its just as 'out of control' as Tank Terror or Defensive fire in FoW. Its a dice roll. Just worded differently.

Thats really my point. I don't like 40k anymore either but random charge really changed nothing. When you assaulted people before you were within 6" and now its about the same, you rarely try the really crazy charges as they won't work often.

It is no more random than the other games we play, just a different wording on how the randomness occurs.

Wrong. Simply wrong. It IS more random in that your movement is ALSO based on a dice roll - therefore introducing MORE random chance. In FoW, you KNOW you can assault 4"- always 4". Yes the Tank Terror test are dice based, yes defensive fire is dice based, but the movement is a constant.

In 40k, models can move 6" every turn, then in the assault phase all of a sudden they trip and fall over themselves and can only move 2" because you rolled a 2?!?

How can this not be seen as MORE random ?!?!

[Joyous_Oblivion]

It's just another roll. Random is random. If there were two identical games and the only difference was that one had random charge range, then yes, it would be more random, but that's in a vacuum.

I'm not defending 40k, far from it, but saying random charge made it too random to not play is still kind of funny to me, especially when we already had random charges for all charges involving any kind of scenery.

[Diragi]

2d6 or 1d6 +6. Both are random but very differing variability.

[CA$H]

2d6 or 1d6 +6. Both are random but very differing variability.

QFT.

[Matt Varnish]

Yeah true. Diragi wins this one.....

W/E at least my models aren;t "going bad" and if I ever decide to give it a go, I would. I would go for the Golden marine since there is no generalship, but its on Canada Weekend so no dice.

[CA$H]

I thought about Golden Marine also, but I will be in the States of all places for the week of Canada Day - lol

[Joyous_Oblivion]

Yeah true. Diragi wins this one.....

W/E at least my models aren;t "going bad" and if I ever decide to give it a go, I would. I would go for the Golden marine since there is no generalship, but its on Canada Weekend so no dice.

But that isn't what is even here. It's 6+2D6, or 6+6 as use to be the case. Yes there is odds you won't get a 6" charge with the new rules, but I know from personal experience that most of my charges in 3rd-5th were well within 6" anyways. In my opinion the new random charge changes very little but obviously you disagree, which is fine. In the end neither of us play that game, lol.

[PhantomRescue]

I'm cancelling my membership....I thought we only talked about GOOD games.

[Pripyat]

It is random but on average you will charge further than in the previous editions. I played my first 5 games of the new edition of 40K and it felt basically the same with hit/wound allocation being the biggest change followed closely by vehicle damage.

[Diragi]

But that isn't what is even here. It's 6+2D6, or 6+6 as use to be the case.

LOL, I was picking numbers out of the hat. But my point wasn't about charge range but predictability versus randomness.

- some people prefer predictability: eg: in FoW (other than morale) you have to roll a million dice
- some people prefer random 'cinematic' moments: eg in Dystopian Wars roll enough 6s in a row and crazy shit happens

[Mike_A]

Flames of War has some pretty random events in it as well, Reserves, and Company Morale both come to mind which revolve around single dice rolls and can loose you games. Bogging tests to I guess. It's really hard to say 1 game is more random then another without having a very hard look at the probabilities and possible outcomes involved. Also when you are dealing with games you are actually playing you have to be concerned with confirmation bias. It's ok to not like 40k, I don't like it anymore either, but it's not because of random charge distances, I just got bored of it, and couldn't be bothered to learn the new rules. What the rules were don't really matter since I never even read them!

Also the main reason to play 40k beofre was because everyone was playing it so you always had people to game with, thats not really true anymore.

Thanks;
Mike

[Diragi]

Flames of War has some pretty random events in it as well, Reserves, and Company Morale both come to mind which revolve around single dice rolls and can loose you games. Bogging tests to I guess. It's really hard to say 1 game is more random then another without having a very hard look at the probabilities and possible outcomes involved. Also when you are dealing with games you are actually playing you have to be concerned with confirmation bias.

Oh I'm not trying to imply FoW is problem free -- some things are handled better than others. For most instances the outcome is usually single/limited dice per stand, multiple dice per platoon. Reserves are much more predicable in v3 because of the (at least 1 rule).

I'm a bit on the fence about motivation/morale. On hand if we say that the rating is only a guesstimate then the variability is 'good'. ie: SS trooper Hans lost his best friend Fritz earlier in the day and just wants to get home etc. A better gaming mechanic would be to just suppression markers that you have to roll against (where you can ignore a number of them). Even better would be to roll x dice and have to roll y times higher than the number of tokens. The problem is that you've gained a tiny bit in game play but torpedoed gameplay speed with a ton of bookkeeping.

[Matt Varnish]

Force on Force has a suppression system. Once Rob and I get moderns painted we can test it out see if its a superior system for this. Though I bet it works great for skirmish lvl, not so much on a company scale, as there would be a LOT of markers everywhere.

[Mike_A]

Force on Force is definetly not the system for a company level game, you want to have a platoon and maybe a couple of supports for a good game. It does have supressions and stuff like that but they hardly come into it at all in my experience, but you miliage may vary.

I am finding now that Bolt Action gives a much better skirmish game, but Force on Force works really well for the games that are unsemetric. I also think it would be fair to say that Force on Force is by far the most random of any game I have played recently, just because you might get a card that tells you get sniper or air support, or you might get 1 saying your guys are being hit by artillery. Can really turn things around sometimes but that is kind of the point of the cards.

Thanks;
Mike

[Matt Varnish]

Yeah those cards are game changers...coughOMGDOUBLEScough... right Diragi and Phantom?

[Sponsored content]