40K ITC Poll Results! Signals #494

signals-494

Come on in and check out the results of the latest ITC poll. What has the community decided for 40K?

Bearded Reece talks the ITC 3rd Quarter Poll!

 

holiday-tripple-play-slider

 

  • ZeeLobby

    Round 12 of how to fix but not really fix the game. Go!

    Mad respect for the effort though. They have to have balls of steel to tackle that beast.

    • markdawg

      Go ahead and make Jokes but 7th would have been a disaster without the ITC just like sigmar with no structure. GW owes FLG a lot

      • Nyyppä

        Dude, it’s still a disaster. Slightly less that thanks to ITC but they did not save the game.

      • ZeeLobby

        Lol. It’s still a disaster. All the ITC does is change the skew. It doesn’t actually fix the balance issues, although it does at least answer some of the vagueries. Like I said, mad props to them for trying.

    • Simon Chatterley

      7th is unfixable but at least this makes it vaguely playable (it’s borderline though).

      You are right they deserve credit mind. Trying to make the game a bit fairer is kind of like trying to stop the bull in the China shop from destroying everything. Sure you might save the teapot but man those saucers are getting smashed instead.

      I hated what GW did to 8th Warhammer when they killed it but man alive I’m happy for them to do it to 7th 40k now.

      (PS…I’m aware 8th Warhammer was utterly broken but I naively thought a few tweaks would fix it and the shock nearly killed me….but I’m ready for it this time. BURN IT DOWN)

      • ZeeLobby

        I’m at the same point. A burning is truly in order. It really only needs to be rules, but theyve already started moving the fluff around so I think we’ll see the whole shebang. My only fear is that I’m pretty confident they’ll only go halfway.

  • 301stFeinminsterArmoured

    What’s the deal with Death from the Skies? Why is everyone so disgusted with it?

    • Karru

      Death from the Skies is absolutely unnecessary part of the game that adds more complications to a game that is already overly complicated.

      First they made Fortifications, Super Heavies and Fliers something you could add to your games of 40k, now they are fully included as part of the game in the official rules. Death from the Skies is cumbersome and unnecessary addition to the game as all it does is add one additional phase to already very lengthy game. Now they could just as easily add that to the base game as well, lengthening the game even more.

      40k suffers greatly from rules bloat. Do you think that the solution to that would be to add even more rules?

      • Ross Allan

        I’d suggest the simple solution is a chit chat with your would-be opponent pre-game to agree what is and isn’t fair game.
        Like gentlemen. Grown up gentlemen. And indeed gentleladies too.
        Tournaments have never been shy of restrictions either.

        • Karru

          Because saying that you can’t bring your army of knights that you have spent hundreds of euros and hours to paint and build sounds fair.

          The problem is that because those things are now completely normal in the game people make them. Now that person spends days assembling and painting those broken units and wants a game with them. Would you just go “No, I refuse to play against you because that is broken and my army doesn’t have an answer for it”?

          If they weren’t part of the regular game, there wouldn’t be an issue. Now with Space Marines getting loads of points for free and Eldar getting to field a Gargantuan Creature cheaper than 2 units of Terminators, while armies like Orks and Tyranids suffer from lack of good detachments or formations it becomes increasingly difficult and nigh impossible to play a game that is actually fair without spending up to an hour discussing things over with your opponent.

          You do realise that one of the biggest issues with 40k for many is the time it takes to play a game, right? When you start adding things like pre-game discussion of what is fair and what is not, you are suddenly looking at a game that takes up to 5 hours to get through from meeting up to end game packing.

          How would we avoid things like this? Remove all the “extra” stuff from the game. Super Heavies, Alternative Detachments, Multiple Detachments for example. All these things were part of expansions during 5th/6th edition. Which one do you believe is easier to do, “Hey, wanna play with Escalation Expansion?” or “Can you not bring your 3 Wraithknights to this game so my army might have some hope of winning?”

          Pick-up games are extremely hard to do these days. You only really have hope to get good games if you have a close group of friends to play with. Beyond that it’s a lottery. Odds are that you either get a game you won’t enjoy at all or you don’t get a game at all. Why? Because the game is so broken and bloated.

          I didn’t have issues playing highly competitive players during 5th edition. Those lists could be countered with different armies. Now if I face a highly competitive Eldar player with 3 Wraithknights and loads of Warp Spiders and Jetbikes, I have no hope with any of my armies. This leads to me not getting to play or I will play a game that will see me packing by turn 2.

          How would you start a conversation about what I can bring and what I can’t bring? “Hey, I play Orks so I’d like to see you not bring any of your Super Heavies or Allies you have access to because you are a Space Marine player. Also, don’t bring a Demi-company, kthx.”

          It can become a negotiation. “If I can’t bring this, you can’t bring that” I personally couldn’t care less what my opponent brings as long as it isn’t one of the top tier copy/paste tournament lists because I know my lists have no hope against those armies. Highly Competitive player brings a unit of Warp Spiders, a unit or two of Jetbikes and a Single Wraithknight? Sure thing, I’ll give it a go. x3 all that and suddenly I’ll be taking a 360 and moonwalking to the other direction from the game.

          I have seen that many have had a good amount of fun with Age of Darkness rules. Many have reported increasingly fun games with much greater balance in the game. There has also been some reduction in time and most of all, no need to negotiate what to bring and what not. All the major problem makers are limited or outright removed from it.

          • Ross Allan

            So if you know a game is an involved affair, and takes a while to arrange….where’s the issue?
            Me, I’m planning a big game of Apocalypse for my birthday at Warhammer World. 3,000 points a player. All must be painted. Whilst some 40k models are allowed, lists must be Heresy and follow a standard FoC.
            Because time is going to be tight, I’ve asked that people largely eschew Deep Strike armies. Unit here and there makes little difference, but when you’ve got 7 players kicking their heels whilst the 8th brings on their entire army, having to roll for scatter and deal with any Intercept, it gets a bit dull, and eats into dice rolling time.
            Other than that, anything goes. If Big Si does procure and paint a Warlord Titan, guess what my Loyalist Iron Warriors will have the privilege and bragging rights of taking down?
            And that’s 6 months away (June 23rd to be precise, and I’ve got nowt painted…eep!)
            Your example of beardy armies – players surely know that 4 Knight armies and Eldar with a pair of Wraithknights aren’t much fun for the unprepared. So save them for pre-arranged games where your opponent sees taking it on as a deliberate challenge, and not a hellfest dull game.
            Orks and Nids. Definitely need a bit of spit and polish – as do others. So guess what? Don’t Go Full Beard against them. Play to scenarios. Don’t tailor your list to roflstomp them.
            Then you have the unavoidable, artificial constraint inherent to formally organised gaming – time limits. Some armies do well in shorter games, where their low count, high quality means they can get more done. Ork Footsloggers? Not so much. But, get a game going where none of the parties have anything planned apart from the game, or where it can be left set up until the next session, and that dynamic changes.
            I know it’s hackneyed and I’m going to catch flakk, but sod it – you need to play the game the way it was designed. It’s not a hardcore, no-holds-barred my-peen-is-biggerer-than-your-peen gaming experience. Never has been, never will be. It’s a collaborative wargame. That’s how it’s written. That’s how its creators prefer to play. And whilst there is categorically no right or wrong way to play it, you have to keep in mind there are some things it just doesn’t do that well because of its underlying design ethos.
            And here’s the rub. If your would-be opponent is the type to demand you let him field his allies-from-hell Knight/Grey Knight/Conclave with Freebies list, then pass up. Regardless of what force it is they feel is optimal, they’d never be any fun to play against – for the simple reason that it’s crystal clear their sole aim is to win, and hang the mutual enjoyment aspect.

          • Karru

            The issue is that all those things that make the game so complicated mess should be expansions. Something that aren’t part of the game. This weeds out the A-holes a lot better. Tournament scene and the like usually don’t like to go outside the Main Rulebook. So if Super Heavies, Alternative Detachments and the like were just Expansions, it means that these A-holes that use those broken lists normally would be less inclined to make that type of armies. That is my point.

            I know that the creators of the game had pretty much a completely different view of their game than the players. We could see this during Week 1 of the Warhammer Live games. Problem is that not everyone has the time and interest to go over dozens of scenarios, special rules and limitations before a game. Pick-up games are what drives the game’s popularity. This system only hurts those players while it doesn’t change anything for narrative gamers. Narrative gamers can always play with their Flyers, Super Heavies and Gargantuans, if they wish. Pick-up gamers that come into a store to play a quick game of 40k are having more and more of a hard time to play since the first hour might just be going over what is allowed and what is not.

            I never play with beardy lists, but I have seen way too many that believe “it’s completely legal within the rules so why shouldn’t I bring it?” is a legit reason to bring these types of lists each and every game. Even if I pre-arrange a game with someone, I always make sure to ask them if they are ok with my bringing in stuff I consider problematic without special weaponry. Flyers and Super Heavies. I love to field my Knight because it is currently my most prized model due to looks and the fun I had with it when I was painting. Of course I like to field it, but I believe that even a Single Knight can be devastating to many armies. It’s way too cheap for the amount of fire power and durability it has. I inform my opponent well in advance that I am bringing it and if they ask me to not include it in my army, I will do as they asked and not bring it.

            I understand that not everyone has the money and time to get the new tools that dominate the game or even stuff that is needed in very specific situations. So I make sure my opponent is either prepared for my list or if he doesn’t have the necessary tools then I can adjust my list to make sure that the game is as fun as possible. I have started to limit my usage of flyers ever since one of my games ended in a total wipe out because my opponent was okay with my bringing 3 fliers against his army that had no AA.

            Imperial Guard vs SM. I brought a Storm Raven and 2 Talons. Turn 2 all come in and I kill his entire unit of Veterans and Company Command Squad, destroy a Leman Russ and a Chimera with those things alone. No Cover thanks to the angle of attack and the amount of shots I could pour out. The game ended on turn 4 to total wipe out of his army and he didn’t even manage to glance one of my Flyers.

            My entire point against the original comment “why people don’t like Death from the Skies” is because it adds more bloat to the already bloated game. We don’t have any need for more things to keep track of.

      • 301stFeinminsterArmoured

        A phase that, in addition to only happening every other player turn, and, depending on how much of your army, and your Opponent’s, is Flyer Wings, only gets fully utilized about once or twice a game, less so if your Wings have ways to get out of Reserves early and/or your Flyers have Hover or Vector Dancer, or some other way to stay out of Reserves once they hit the board. Or, more importantly, if your opponent fields no Flyers of their own.

        This just sounds like a bunch of naysaying from people that did not closely read the book when it came out, based on impressions from others that did not understand the rules but had a soapbox to stand on.

        • Karru

          No. This opinion comes from people that would prefer not to lengthen the game more. It doesn’t matter if that phase happens once during the game or after every dice roll. You use it, it adds to the game time. This is my point, it has nothing to do with the rules being bad or something. The game suffers from major rule bloat and the fix for that isn’t to add even more rules.