• The forum software have been upgraded to the latest version.

    If you notice anything that looks off, or does not work, please let us know.

    For more information, click here.

40K - Should I .... or not? Where to start?

Obviously GW got the order wrong for their codex release - it should have been Necrons first to get a Codex then Dark Eldar and then Tau. I wonder if Matt Ward was managing the release schedule?

;)
 
NIGHTBRINGER said:
Unless they revive the old Necron lore it makes little difference. *grumpily shakes clenched fist* :D
Click to expand...

I prefer the new lore myself because it was more Tomb Kingy and I didn’t know much about Necrons before the 5th Ed update anyway, except that they had very few unit selections, but I can see how such a big change in lore would affect existing Necron players when the 5th Ed update arrived. Nevertheless, it has made Necrons more popular in recent years and I think it, along with the new troop types and characters released, was what saved them from going the way of the Squats.
 
Lord Agragax of Lunaxoatl said:
I prefer the new lore myself because it was more Tomb Kingy and I didn’t know much about Necrons before the 5th Ed update anyway, except that they had very few unit selections, but I can see how such a big change in lore would affect existing Necron players when the 5th Ed update arrived. Nevertheless, it has made Necrons more popular in recent years and I think it, along with the new troop types and characters released, was what saved them from going the way of the Squats.
Click to expand...
The new units and steady stream of codexes was definitely a welcome sight. The new models look great, and Necrons were definitely in need of updates. My only issue is with the new lore. The old lore was fantastic.
 
NIGHTBRINGER said:
The new units and steady stream of codexes was definitely a welcome sight. The new models look great, and Necrons were definitely in need of updates. My only issue is with the new lore. The old lore was fantastic.
Click to expand...

But certainly the new lore allowed characters other than C’Tan characters to be possible - in the old lore this wouldn’t have been possible because even the Lords were little more than mindless slaves to the C’Tan and there were no individual Necron personalities.
 
Lord Agragax of Lunaxoatl said:
But certainly the new lore allowed characters other than C’Tan characters to be possible - in the old lore this wouldn’t have been possible because even the Lords were little more than mindless slaves to the C’Tan and there were no individual Necron personalities.
Click to expand...

It would have been a simple fix to just add some characters that were becoming more self-aware and slowly rising up against the C'tan. That way players could choose to play with C'tan led forces or splinter forces. Alternatively, GW could have just added more C'tan of very different personalities, and they would in turn lead forces that reflected their innate nature.

I just think it would have been better to add to the lore rather than to pull a retcon. Matt Ward's contribution just felt sloppy and rushed to me.
 
Soooo.... about this new Kill Team thing:
Judging by older editions y'all might know, how does that work?
Is it comparable to AoS Skirmish?
If yes: How do they balance armies that rely a lot on their big stuff?
 
Aginor said:
Soooo.... about this new Kill Team thing:
Judging by older editions y'all might know, how does that work?
Is it comparable to AoS Skirmish?
If yes: How do they balance armies that rely a lot on their big stuff?
Click to expand...
While Kill Team is not something I am terribly familiar with, I can say that it is, functionally, rather similar to Skirmish, albeit more pared down. The traditional point limit was, if memory serves, 200 points, so massive monstrosities, while not wholly impossible to use, were quite rare. It runs rather more like a specialist game, such as Gorkamorka, Mordheim, or Necromunda, with a small force of hardened specialists.
 
Aginor said:
Soooo.... about this new Kill Team thing:
Judging by older editions y'all might know, how does that work?
Is it comparable to AoS Skirmish?
If yes: How do they balance armies that rely a lot on their big stuff?
Click to expand...

TheSkeptic said:
While Kill Team is not something I am terribly familiar with, I can say that it is, functionally, rather similar to Skirmish, albeit more pared down. The traditional point limit was, if memory serves, 200 points, so massive monstrosities, while not wholly impossible to use, were quite rare. It runs rather more like a specialist game, such as Gorkamorka, Mordheim, or Necromunda, with a small force of hardened specialists.
Click to expand...

I imagine it is very similar to Shadow War Armageddon except it uses the 8th Edition rules. The first edition of Kill Team was released in 7th Edition where I imagine it was used to test the public's reaction before Shadow War Armageddon was released so see what they thought of a Warhammer 40,000 skirmish game. Now that 8th Edition's here GW have decided to bring back Kill Team with the new rules.
 
Thanks to both of you!
So it pretty much sounds like Infantry only, which is fair I guess.
...which brings me back to balance:
Surely there are armies that have weaker infantry than others, or infantry that relies more on synergies with big stuff. I imagine that could screw a bit with balance.
Do any of y'all remember armies that were particularly bad (or good) in kill team and why?
For example Space Marines vs. Tau Fire Warriors. Due to the Tau' s big range, that is probably useless in Skirmish since maps are small and full of terrain, and them being weak in melee I'd expect them to suck vs Space Marines. Do they get a point discount then?
 
Aginor said:
Thanks to both of you!
So it pretty much sounds like Infantry only, which is fair I guess.
...which brings me back to balance:
Surely there are armies that have weaker infantry than others, or infantry that relies more on synergies with big stuff. I imagine that could screw a bit with balance.
Do any of y'all remember armies that were particularly bad (or good) in kill team and why?
For example Space Marines vs. Tau Fire Warriors. Due to the Tau' s big range, that is probably useless in Skirmish since maps are small and full of terrain, and them being weak in melee I'd expect them to suck vs Space Marines. Do they get a point discount then?
Click to expand...
Honestly, I can't offer a great deal of advice in this field, the most "Recent" small scale games I played were Gorkamorka and Necromunda (Haven't gotten around to playing the new release yet, waiting for them to put out Van Saar rules so I can use my good old boys), but I'd imagine the synergy wasn't to significant a problem. The 7th edition of Warhammer 40k was VERY different from 8th edition and Age of Sigmar, in that there weren't really "Bubbles" for buffs, so much as a character joined a unit, and applied it's buff to that unit. But, since in Kill Team, every character is an individual character and there aren't really units, I'd assume that buffs weren't really a thing. At least, that's how it was if memory serves, I can't seems to locate my 7th edition rulebook.
 
Lord-Marcus said:
Idkman. I like the wacky overlord who collects things
Click to expand...

Trazyn the Infinite - he is a pretty good character lore wise.

b4Pk9yv.gif
 
Have you seen the incoming new codexes?

knights, arlequins... and DEATHWATCH!!! :D
 
Killer Angel said:
Have you seen the incoming new codexes?

knights, arlequins... and DEATHWATCH!!! :D
Click to expand...
It should be fun, yeah. Anyone gotten the chance to take a look at the Tau codex yet? Tau are being Tau, as usual.
 
I bought it yesterday!
I haven't read it thoroughly yet and since I don't know the rules yet I don't really understand half of it. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top