The Order of the Stick: Utterly Dwarfed
The Order of the Stick: Utterly Dwarfed - Coming in December and available for pre-order now
Page 11 of 50 FirstFirst ... 2345678910111213141516171819202136 ... LastLast
Results 301 to 330 of 1472
  1. - Top - End - #301
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Cheesegear's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2008

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XXXVII: Highlighting the Contrasts

    Quote Originally Posted by Wraith View Post
    Maybe GW will fix that down the line and introduce even more of the boxes for different Chapters/Legions/Craftworlds and the likes. A Thousand Sons one would be nice, for example, purely from the perspective of them not having any kind of discounted box at the moment.
    The thing is, they aren't designed to be discounted boxes.
    You aren't supposed to start your army by buying the box.

    The reason say, the Chaos Space Marine box is the way it is, is 'cause the Detachment is going to read:

    "Chaos Noob Patrol
    <Chaos Lords>, <Chaos Space Marines>, <Chaos Bikers> and <Havocs> gain..."


    You're not starting an army.
    You're getting your existing army, ready for Apocalypse.
    You think the AdMech box is a good idea for starting a new army? Hell no it isn't. It's for jamming a ****-ton of Robots into your existing army that you already have.

    If you're a modern Chaos Marine player, you'll have nothing but Cultists.
    How are you going to get into Apocalypse unless there's a convenient box that has 30 Chaos Marines in it?
    Last edited by Cheesegear; 2019-06-17 at 06:28 PM.
    Steam Name: Cheesegear
    League of Legends Name: Cheesegear
    You can fight like a krogan or run like a leopard but you'll never be better than Commander Shepard.


    Spoiler
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Anuan View Post
    Cheesegear; Lovable Thesaurus ItP.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lycan 01 View Post
    Cheesegear, have I told you yet that you're awesome?
    Quote Originally Posted by MeatShield#236 View Post
    ALL HAIL LORD CHEESEGEAR! Cheese for the cheesegear!
    Quote Originally Posted by Shas'aia Toriia View Post
    Cheesegear is awesome

  2. - Top - End - #302
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Renegade Paladin's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Indiana
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XXXVII: Highlighting the Contrasts

    Quote Originally Posted by Avaris View Post
    And 50 dice (inc 25 d12s for £27. Lolwut.
    LOL. It's like they think we don't know Chessex exists.
    "Courage is the complement of fear. A fearless man cannot be courageous. He is also a fool." -- Robert Heinlein


  3. - Top - End - #303
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Durham, UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XXXVII: Highlighting the Contrasts

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheesegear View Post

    The reason say, the Chaos Space Marine box is the way it is, is 'cause the Detachment is going to read:

    "Chaos Noob Patrol
    <Chaos Lords>, <Chaos Space Marines>, <Chaos Bikers> and <Havocs> gain..."
    I’m not sure we’re going to see Detachment level rules like this though? They haven’t mentioned this sort of thing in the Space Marine preview for example.

    The Detachments exist as a tactical choice in list building, because they all activate together and need to stay together. We might see different Detachment types generating different numbers of Command Assets, and the warlord of the detachment getting abilities, but nothing so complex as rewarding you for having a specific build in the detachment (beyond the inherrent differences in unit abilities).
    You're not starting an army.
    You're getting your existing army, ready for Apocalypse.
    Each box is a self contained Detachment though, in theory. GW’s line is that if you have a 40k force you have an Apocalypse force, so no amount of getting it ready is needed. What these boxes are are iconic formations people might want to have as an additional thing for their army, but they’re not a necessity to get the army ready. GW absolutely wants people to start a new army for Apocalypse: it’s no coincidence that a paint range marketed as ‘paint an army quickly’ came out just before!
    Evil round every corner, careful not to step in any.

  4. - Top - End - #304
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Cheesegear's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2008

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XXXVII: Highlighting the Contrasts

    Quote Originally Posted by Avaris View Post
    I’m not sure we’re going to see Detachment level rules like this though?
    If we don't...Then the Apocalypse boxes are stupid.

    The Detachments exist as a tactical choice in list building, because they all activate together and need to stay together.
    That's fine, but how do you determine what goes in a Detachment?

    but nothing so complex as rewarding you for having a specific build in the detachment
    So the Apocalypse boxes are stupid?

    Each box is a self contained Detachment though, in theory. GW’s line is that if you have a 40k force you have an Apocalypse force, so no amount of getting it ready is needed.
    2000 Points counts as an 'Apocalypse Force'? ...Oh dear.

    GW absolutely wants people to start a new army for Apocalypse
    Then why are the boxes so **** and not conducive to starting an army?
    Steam Name: Cheesegear
    League of Legends Name: Cheesegear
    You can fight like a krogan or run like a leopard but you'll never be better than Commander Shepard.


    Spoiler
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Anuan View Post
    Cheesegear; Lovable Thesaurus ItP.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lycan 01 View Post
    Cheesegear, have I told you yet that you're awesome?
    Quote Originally Posted by MeatShield#236 View Post
    ALL HAIL LORD CHEESEGEAR! Cheese for the cheesegear!
    Quote Originally Posted by Shas'aia Toriia View Post
    Cheesegear is awesome

  5. - Top - End - #305
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Durham, UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XXXVII: Highlighting the Contrasts

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheesegear View Post
    That's fine, but how do you determine what goes in a Detachment?
    Same force organisation charts as 40k. Your Detachment has x HQ/Elites/Troops etc in order to be a detachment, with one character selected as the Detachment’s warlord


    So the Apocalypse boxes are stupid?
    They aren’t the best, no. They’re good if you want a large number of the same sort of thing to bulk out a force, but I’m not convinced many of them will make people stand up and go ‘wow’. Though I’m mighty tempted by ‘buy a Castellan, get two Armigers free’. It all depends on what people want for their armies: I don’t think many will want the CSM one for example.



    2000 Points counts as an 'Apocalypse Force'? ...Oh dear.
    Yes, That’s literally what GW has been saying?

    Apocalypse is, traditionally, a multiplayer version of 40k. So it’s being set up that a group of players can bring their normal armies along and play with exactly that. The lists are already written into Detachments, which will be the same as used in Apocalypse, so you can change system with minimal hassle. Whether a 40k army will work WELL in Apocalypse is another matter though. Equally, people with larger collections could have a one on one Apocalypse game, but expanding forces specifically for Apocalypse shouldn’t be necessary.

    Personally, I suspect Apocalypse will also work very well at the equivalent of a 2000 point one on one game, possibly better than base 40k, but that is not what it is being designed for.


    Then why are the boxes so **** and not conducive to starting an army?
    Because what GW sees as an army and what the Tournament scene see as an army are very different things! The boxes give you an army, or rather a detachment, it’s just not necessarily a good one in normal 40k (whether it is good in Apocalypse is unknown)
    Last edited by Avaris; 2019-06-18 at 02:55 AM.
    Evil round every corner, careful not to step in any.

  6. - Top - End - #306
    Troll in the Playground
     
    bluntpencil's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Ho Chi Minh City
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XXXVII: Highlighting the Contrasts

    My money is on what is good in Apocalypse being totally different from what's good in 40K, because it will sell more.

    Later this year, I'll probably start buying the Guard Spearhead ones, though, since 100 GBP for three Russes, a Chimera, a HWT and a Command Squad is a decent deal.

  7. - Top - End - #307
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Wraith's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    England
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XXXVII: Highlighting the Contrasts

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheesegear View Post
    The thing is, they aren't designed to be discounted boxes.
    You aren't supposed to start your army by buying the box.

    You're not starting an army.
    You're getting your existing army, ready for Apocalypse.
    I'm not saying this to be sarcastic or to try and have a "Gotcha!" moment, but because I think it's a pertinent question: Why not?

    Or rather, more to the actual point, do we think for a moment that GW won't be selling them as starter boxes for new armies, regardless of whether the box has "Apocalypse" stamped on it or not? They're 40k models at 40k scale with 40k rules available for them and they're cheaper than buying all of the units separately; is there a single Blackshirt in the world who wouldn't look me in the eye and tell me "You want to start a Chaos Space Marine Army - You know we have these new boxed sets out with everything you need in them?"

    GW would be idiots to refrain from selling these things as "starter boxes" because they're decent value and generally make up the HQ/Troop combo needed for a functional army at a discounted price - we as players have been asking for this kind of deal from GW for years! Why WOULDN'T they double-down and sell the same box as a 40k army and/or Apocalypse detachment? Surely that's what Apocalypse *is* - turning several armies into one big one?

    If they could be GOOD boxed sets for 40k, then so much the better. That's all I'm saying.

    If you're a modern Chaos Marine player, you'll have nothing but Cultists.
    How are you going to get into Apocalypse unless there's a convenient box that has 30 Chaos Marines in it?
    By using the formation that gives me bonuses for using all those cultists I already have, while sneering at the idea of buying crappy Space Marines that I can't resell or won't reuse elsewhere, usually.
    Seriously though; GW have been pretty brazen in the past, but I doubt even they are going to launch a new 40k-style game and do so in a way that tells horde players - Ork Grots, Chaos Cultists, etc - that their 200 models are now completely redundant. That sort of arrogance doesn't sell more upgrade boxes, it kills new games on launch day.
    Last edited by Wraith; 2019-06-18 at 04:43 AM.
    You don't know what it was like.
    You weren't there.
    You never fought in the Console Wars.

  8. - Top - End - #308
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Turalisj's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    WI, USA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XXXVII: Highlighting the Contrasts

    The big issue is being limited stock. In 2 weeks, there won't be any left.
    Past Avatars:
    Spoiler
    Show

    By Alterform


    Spoiler
    Show
    Lore: 7.

    Factors: 2.

    Wealth: 5

    Magic: 4

    Espionage: 4

    Reputation: 3.

    Military: 2.

    Faith: 6.



  9. - Top - End - #309
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Durham, UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XXXVII: Highlighting the Contrasts

    Quote Originally Posted by Turalisj View Post
    The big issue is being limited stock. In 2 weeks, there won't be any left.
    Except for the CSM ones
    Evil round every corner, careful not to step in any.

  10. - Top - End - #310
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Turalisj's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    WI, USA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XXXVII: Highlighting the Contrasts

    And necron ones, necrons aren't going anywhere for a long time. Unless Apoc changes that, but I have doubts.
    Past Avatars:
    Spoiler
    Show

    By Alterform


    Spoiler
    Show
    Lore: 7.

    Factors: 2.

    Wealth: 5

    Magic: 4

    Espionage: 4

    Reputation: 3.

    Military: 2.

    Faith: 6.



  11. - Top - End - #311
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Durham, UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XXXVII: Highlighting the Contrasts

    More Apocalypse tidbits coming out, with an indication of how damage works. Roll saves equal to number of blast markers on the unit, with saves against small blast markers being on a D12 and large on a D6. So power armour, giving a 6+ save, is very good against small arms, saving about 60% of the time, but only 1 in 6 against heavier weaponry.

    Honestly, as a mechanic, this feels really good. Gives another way of distinguishing between types of weapon and toughness of models without being overly complex.
    Evil round every corner, careful not to step in any.

  12. - Top - End - #312
    Titan in the Playground
     
    LeSwordfish's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Cambridge, UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XXXVII: Highlighting the Contrasts

    Quote Originally Posted by Avaris View Post
    GW absolutely wants people to start a new army for Apocalypse: it’s no coincidence that a paint range marketed as ‘paint an army quickly’ came out just before!
    Frankly I think GW are missing a trick by not running a set of "contrast-ready" battleforce boxes along with the Contrast release - god knows how many people are right now idly looking at the new horde paints and a shiny Tyranid box and contemplating a new list.
    - Avatar by LCP -

  13. - Top - End - #313
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    SamuraiGuy

    Join Date
    Oct 2012

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XXXVII: Highlighting the Contrasts

    Quote Originally Posted by Avaris View Post
    GW absolutely wants people to start a new army for Apocalypse: it’s no coincidence that a paint range marketed as ‘paint an army quickly’ came out just before!
    Do they really? I mean, obviously they want the whales ready to drop $1000+ on an Apoc army in one sitting, but is there such thing as an "Apocalypse player"? It's just people who have huge 40k armies and want an excuse to put them all on the table at once. It's not really something you can realistically expect more than a handful of people to even consider.

  14. - Top - End - #314
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Durham, UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XXXVII: Highlighting the Contrasts

    Quote Originally Posted by Requizen View Post
    Do they really? I mean, obviously they want the whales ready to drop $1000+ on an Apoc army in one sitting, but is there such thing as an "Apocalypse player"? It's just people who have huge 40k armies and want an excuse to put them all on the table at once. It's not really something you can realistically expect more than a handful of people to even consider.
    The niche I think they’re pushing is ‘this is a good excuse to get a new army/detachment/unit to use in a mega game with your friends’. Very few people will have an Apocalypse army on their own (though, as ever, I’m planning to try it on a smaller scale), but being able to have a game with a group of friends over the course of an evening is an ‘excuse’ to paint up the Lord of War or massed infantry you were never going to want/need in ‘standard’ 40k.
    Last edited by Avaris; 2019-06-18 at 01:07 PM.
    Evil round every corner, careful not to step in any.

  15. - Top - End - #315
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Voidhawk's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Oxford, England
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XXXVII: Highlighting the Contrasts

    I was at one point a member of the target market for these boxes.

    I had a reasonable sized Tyranid force, more than a beginner and with some variability in list building, but certainly not enough to be classed as huge by any measure. What I did have though, was friends with large, finished forces. So when one of them bought the first Apocalypse book and organised a game for a months time, I wanted to take part. But I looked at all the interesting formations, and realised my collection wouldn't fit any of them. So what did I do? I thought to myself "Well, I was probably going to get this stuff eventually anyway...", and went out and bought three Tyranid battleforces at once. (Which I'm sure made my blackshirt's day.) At the time the 'Nid battleforce was particularly good value, including a carnefex, warriors, genestealers, and 30 gants/gaunts. It got me enough models to run an Endless Swarm, an Eye of the Hive, a Genestealer Infestation, and a Carnifex Crusher Brood, and I had a great time at the game.

    Was it a good investment long term? Yes; I haven't needed to buy any more of those kinds of models in years, and they've never dropped so low that they're not playable in casual games.
    Did I reduce my spending on GW stuff afterwards to compensate? Not really; I slowed down for the few months afterwards certainly, and while I haven't bought more 'nids in quite a while I just ended up starting on Necrons instead.

    For GW it was a big win in all boxes: I spent more money than I would have otherwise, had a good play experience doing so, and it didn't reduce my future spending by any meaningful quantity.

    This time around I'm skipping out though. There's no Dark Eldar box, the Necron one sucks, and I have enough Carnifexes from the previous go round. However since I have enough models, I might be the one in the playgroup who buys the rules this time. Which once more motivates others to buy boxes. It's a slow spiral upwards for GW, but it trends well long term.
    Last edited by Voidhawk; 2019-06-18 at 02:34 PM.
    Looking back on sanity from the other side, and laughing really loudly

    "In the whole of oWOD, there are only five normal people not somehow tied to the great supernatural conspiracy, and three of them were Elvis."
    Quote Originally Posted by The Tygre View Post
    If Ravenloft has taught me anything, darkness only makes the stars shine brighter.
    Bowl of Petunias avatar by Rincewind

  16. - Top - End - #316
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Cheesegear's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2008

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XXXVII: Highlighting the Contrasts

    Quote Originally Posted by Voidhawk View Post
    This time around I'm skipping out though.
    I'm skipping Apocalypse this time 'round 'cause it doesn't look like 'Slam 10K worth of models on the table and spend the next 10 hours gaming.'

    It looks like 'Get 3 friends, all of you bring 2000 Points, and we've streamlined the rules to speed multi-player games along."
    ...Sure. There's a market for having 2K*4 games go for three hours. But it ain't me.

    I'm pretty sure the response to '10K games are grossly unbalanced towards old people with money' by GW was 'No problem, we've gutted the rules. 12 year-olds can play it with the trash they already have. Hope you like tokens.'
    Again, not saying that there's not a market for that. But...No. That's not Apocalypse. That's streamlining multi-player games.
    Steam Name: Cheesegear
    League of Legends Name: Cheesegear
    You can fight like a krogan or run like a leopard but you'll never be better than Commander Shepard.


    Spoiler
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Anuan View Post
    Cheesegear; Lovable Thesaurus ItP.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lycan 01 View Post
    Cheesegear, have I told you yet that you're awesome?
    Quote Originally Posted by MeatShield#236 View Post
    ALL HAIL LORD CHEESEGEAR! Cheese for the cheesegear!
    Quote Originally Posted by Shas'aia Toriia View Post
    Cheesegear is awesome

  17. - Top - End - #317
    Titan in the Playground
     
    LeSwordfish's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Cambridge, UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XXXVII: Highlighting the Contrasts

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheesegear View Post
    I'm skipping Apocalypse this time 'round 'cause it doesn't look like 'Slam 10K worth of models on the table and spend the next 10 hours gaming.'

    It looks like 'Get 3 friends, all of you bring 2000 Points, and we've streamlined the rules to speed multi-player games along."
    ...Sure. There's a market for having 2K*4 games go for three hours. But it ain't me.

    I'm pretty sure the response to '10K games are grossly unbalanced towards old people with money' by GW was 'No problem, we've gutted the rules. 12 year-olds can play it with the trash they already have. Hope you like tokens.'
    Again, not saying that there's not a market for that. But...No. That's not Apocalypse. That's streamlining multi-player games.
    Oh, you've got a leaked copy? Link?
    - Avatar by LCP -

  18. - Top - End - #318
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Cheesegear's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2008

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XXXVII: Highlighting the Contrasts

    Quote Originally Posted by LeSwordfish View Post
    Oh, you've got a leaked copy? Link?
    I read GW's advertising. Same as everyone else.
    If what we're seeing, is the foot they're choosing to put forwards, that tells me what I need to know.

    Same as every Warhammer Community post ever.
    What they're advertising is what they've got. If they had something better, they'd advertise that, instead.

    Kind of like how I thought Apocalypse Detachments would be like those in Vigilus?
    ...You know what? If that was a thing, they would've shown it. They didn't.

    Apocalypse Detachments are simply really big units consisting of multiple model types.
    Last edited by Cheesegear; 2019-06-18 at 03:47 PM.
    Steam Name: Cheesegear
    League of Legends Name: Cheesegear
    You can fight like a krogan or run like a leopard but you'll never be better than Commander Shepard.


    Spoiler
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Anuan View Post
    Cheesegear; Lovable Thesaurus ItP.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lycan 01 View Post
    Cheesegear, have I told you yet that you're awesome?
    Quote Originally Posted by MeatShield#236 View Post
    ALL HAIL LORD CHEESEGEAR! Cheese for the cheesegear!
    Quote Originally Posted by Shas'aia Toriia View Post
    Cheesegear is awesome

  19. - Top - End - #319
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Durham, UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XXXVII: Highlighting the Contrasts

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheesegear View Post
    I'm skipping Apocalypse this time 'round 'cause it doesn't look like 'Slam 10K worth of models on the table and spend the next 10 hours gaming.'

    It looks like 'Get 3 friends, all of you bring 2000 Points, and we've streamlined the rules to speed multi-player games along."
    ...Sure. There's a market for having 2K*4 games go for three hours. But it ain't me.

    I'm pretty sure the response to '10K games are grossly unbalanced towards old people with money' by GW was 'No problem, we've gutted the rules. 12 year-olds can play it with the trash they already have. Hope you like tokens.'
    Again, not saying that there's not a market for that. But...No. That's not Apocalypse. That's streamlining multi-player games.
    We’re clearly reading different preview articles, as all I’m seeing is a system that looks superior to base 40k, fixing many of the issues around alpha strike and games lasting two or three turns by including alternating activations and important tactical considerations in target prioritisation due to not knowing how dead a thing is until the end of a turn.

    In particular, I’m really not sure how you’re getting ‘gutted the rules’ from a system which has a whole new set of dice never used in a GW game before (allowing greater tweaking of stat blocks) and a more complex set of rules for how weapons affect different targets (having different effects on infantry and tanks is again a greater degree of tweaking than possible in normal 40k)

    I mean, sure, it’s not the weekend long Apocalypse games of old, so that’s reasonable comment, but who ever played games like that more than a handful of times? This can allow similar scale in a sane time commitment. And it really looks to be breaking new ground in terms of what they’re doing with the rules, and also has unit stats freely available online.

    Frankly, assuming the system is as good as it sounds, this is what 40k should be. I wouldn’t be surprised if this originated in their original plans for 8th edition where they were writing a whole new game. And if it is successful, this is surely where the next edition will be heading: between this, Kill Team and Necromunda, GW are clearly experimenting with alternating activations and more elegant combat mechanics. Bring it on I say!
    Evil round every corner, careful not to step in any.

  20. - Top - End - #320
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    SamuraiGuy

    Join Date
    Oct 2012

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XXXVII: Highlighting the Contrasts

    Quote Originally Posted by Avaris View Post
    Frankly, assuming the system is as good as it sounds, this is what 40k should be. I wouldn’t be surprised if this originated in their original plans for 8th edition where they were writing a whole new game. And if it is successful, this is surely where the next edition will be heading: between this, Kill Team and Necromunda, GW are clearly experimenting with alternating activations and more elegant combat mechanics. Bring it on I say!
    It's a bit sad that this will never happen. They would never completely flip the core rules like that in this day and age (partially because no guts, partially because duh), and if they ever implemented "40k scale Apocalypse" as an alternate ruleset, no one would ever use it.

    I really wish they would push their specialist games more to garner more interest in variable game systems. But of course, they know which one makes money. Perhaps I'm just getting more cynical in my old age.

    Maybe I should try to make Necromunda a thing at my store, but I already know everyone would prefer Kill Team because then you don't need to buy new models.

  21. - Top - End - #321
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Cheesegear's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2008

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XXXVII: Highlighting the Contrasts

    Quote Originally Posted by Avaris View Post
    We’re clearly reading different preview articles, as all I’m seeing is a system that looks superior to base 40k, fixing many of the issues around alpha strike and games lasting two or three turns
    Alpha striking was fixed with FAQ 2 and Reserves being hard-limited to Turn 2.
    Games lasting two or three turns...That's a problem for bads and/or a*holes who run games against disproportionate lists.

    I've been tabled once before Turn 5 since CA'18 came out.
    ...I've been tabled way more times in Kill Team.

    In particular, I’m really not sure how you’re getting ‘gutted the rules’ from a system which has a whole new set of dice never used in a GW game before
    Pretty easily.
    You replace the 'hard' parts of 40K, with something easy. If that includes a different set of dice. Cool. But if it's easier, then my rule is still proven.

    (allowing greater simplifying of stat blocks)
    FTFY.

    a more complex set of rules for how weapons affect different targets
    It's less complex because you've removed Strength and Toughness.

    It is exactly what I find wrong with AoS. 'To Wound' is on a fixed number. Except in Apocalypse, you'll have two fixed numbers, instead? ...Come on.

    but who ever played games like that more than a handful of times?
    Anyone who has a meta that has six or more reliable players with large collections.
    ...Or just anyone with a large gaming space and a whole day free.

    This can allow similar scale in a sane time commitment.
    I'll repeat what I said about Contrast Paints:
    Trade Quality (complexity) for Speed. There's a market for that. I know there is. But it isn't me.

    It's like the difference between Necromunda and Kill Team.
    Necromunda is the vastly superior game. Even though both games' fundamental core rules are pretty much identical...Necromunda is the superior game...Unless you can't read good.

    And it really looks to be breaking new ground in terms of what they’re doing with the rules
    For a niche game that only a fraction of the player base will buy, so why even bother spending money printing massive amounts of books that wont even sell?

    Frankly, assuming the system is as good as it sounds, this is what 40k should be.
    ...For people who don't play 40K competitively.
    Last edited by Cheesegear; 2019-06-18 at 04:48 PM.
    Steam Name: Cheesegear
    League of Legends Name: Cheesegear
    You can fight like a krogan or run like a leopard but you'll never be better than Commander Shepard.


    Spoiler
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Anuan View Post
    Cheesegear; Lovable Thesaurus ItP.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lycan 01 View Post
    Cheesegear, have I told you yet that you're awesome?
    Quote Originally Posted by MeatShield#236 View Post
    ALL HAIL LORD CHEESEGEAR! Cheese for the cheesegear!
    Quote Originally Posted by Shas'aia Toriia View Post
    Cheesegear is awesome

  22. - Top - End - #322
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Destro_Yersul's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    sector ZZ9 plural-z alpha
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XXXVII: Highlighting the Contrasts

    40k got gutted a long time ago. I'm not sure when exactly, but the 6 pages worth of rules now are a far cry from what I used to play.
    I do LP's sometimes! I'm currently on hiatus for college purposes.

    My Youtube Channel

    The rest of my Sig:
    Spoiler
    Show
    Avatar by Vael

    My Games:
    The Great Divide Dark Heresy - Finished
    They All Uprose Dark Heresy - Finished
    Dead in the Water Dark Heresy - Finished
    House of Glass Dark Heresy - Deceased

    We All Fall Down Dark Heresy - Ongoing

    Sea of Stars Rogue Trader - Ongoing

  23. - Top - End - #323
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Cheesegear's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2008

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XXXVII: Highlighting the Contrasts

    Quote Originally Posted by Destro_Yersul View Post
    40k got gutted a long time ago. I'm not sure when exactly, but the 6 pages worth of rules now are a far cry from what I used to play.
    Don't you play Missions?
    How do you make Detachments?
    Do you know how Terrain works?

    Then we get to Codecies: Pretty sure each individual unit having its own separate rules is basically the same.
    Steam Name: Cheesegear
    League of Legends Name: Cheesegear
    You can fight like a krogan or run like a leopard but you'll never be better than Commander Shepard.


    Spoiler
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Anuan View Post
    Cheesegear; Lovable Thesaurus ItP.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lycan 01 View Post
    Cheesegear, have I told you yet that you're awesome?
    Quote Originally Posted by MeatShield#236 View Post
    ALL HAIL LORD CHEESEGEAR! Cheese for the cheesegear!
    Quote Originally Posted by Shas'aia Toriia View Post
    Cheesegear is awesome

  24. - Top - End - #324
    Orc in the Playground
     
    Hootman's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XXXVII: Highlighting the Contrasts

    Gosh, it's nice to be back up to speed on the thread. It's been...what, 10 months?

    I've been trying to finally get regular games of 40k and the like back into my life. It hasn't really been that successful so far, but I'm hoping things will come together in the next couple of weeks. Played a great game with my orks as my opener maybe 3 weeks ago against my rival, and played a terrible game last week with my old Marines (with a Steel Legion CP-battery plugged into the gaps, since I only have like 20 Marines and 10 Scouts total) against a guy who didn't know the first thing about the rules. Or what list-building was. Or possibly that units had point values. (Yet he could name all his units by sight, including all of their weapons, and his army was fully painted.) If I had known he was that new to playing when we set up, I'd have suggested a completely different sort of 40k game. As is, it just felt like I was a bully. Oh well, what can you do?

    Moving forward, I've been trying to learn Kill Team, since it's all the rage at my FLGS. I don't really see the appeal yet, since it feels like Everything I Like != What Is Good in every faction I have models for. Except Orks, obviously, since I have some of everything. But apparently Orks aren't particularly competitive unless you cheese it and field 15-20 models and drown them in bodies? I really like the look of Flash Gits + Ammo Runts, but I've been slow to get a grip on the game's tempo. I keep getting thrown by simple stuff, like it being only a 4 Turn game (instead of the normal 5), and CP build-up being basically impossible, since I have to spend it constantly to do things.

    If anyone has any general advice for what a 'typical force has (like model count, availability of high damage or high AP weapons, etc) and what I can do to try to improve my game and the fun extracted from it, I'd appreciate it. They're gearing up for a tourney at my local place, and I'd like to be a worthy challenger.

    Edit: I forgot to mention, games are played using 125pt Teams (4 Specialists) built from a Roster of up to 20 guys (8 total Specialists), so you can try to tailor before a match, as the system seems to want you to do. And your models can gain EXP, but if they level up, you can still field that model as a lower level if you don't want the powers every game, to avoid having to creep up point allowances. I guess. I didn't 100% follow the reasoning, since I don't know the game super well.

    Edit 2: Elites are allowed, Commanders are not.

    Spoiler: Available Forces
    Show
    I have a bunch of different armies, of varying point levels, but I just can't seem to decide what I'll have fun with in Kill Team. I'm open to suggestions.

    Orks - Everything under the sun, including models that don't have rules anymore (and don't appear in KT anyways, so I guess that doesn't matter).

    AdMech - Everything from the Skitarii line, but no Electropriests. They seem super strong, if short ranged, glancing at the rules.

    Guard - Specifically Steel Legion, so they're metal, and have very limited weapon options without getting out my dremel or proxying. And the Regiment power looks like it really sucks in KT.

    Marines - A handful of basic lads, and a bucket of various weapon bits. No Primaris.

    Thousand Sons - Rubrics, but no Tzangors.

    Grey Knights - Just like on the tabletop, it looks like they cost way too much for their (lack of) durability. Got both Marines and Termies.

    Scions - They aren't built, but I have a SC!box around.

    Daemons - So they just aren't in Kill Team, huh? Them and Sisters just...don't appear. It's baffling. And neither does Inquisition. Why? I know Sisters and Inq have the "no dedicated boxes of models for sale" problem, but Inq was always just gussied up guardsmen anyways, so that's a crock. And daemons have loads of models. If I was going to try to kill someone with model count, I wanted it to be Daemonettes and Pink Horrors. Oh well.
    Last edited by Hootman; 2019-06-18 at 05:08 PM.

  25. - Top - End - #325
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Durham, UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XXXVII: Highlighting the Contrasts

    Quote Originally Posted by Requizen View Post
    It's a bit sad that this will never happen. They would never completely flip the core rules like that in this day and age (partially because no guts, partially because duh), and if they ever implemented "40k scale Apocalypse" as an alternate ruleset, no one would ever use it.

    I really wish they would push their specialist games more to garner more interest in variable game systems. But of course, they know which one makes money. Perhaps I'm just getting more cynical in my old age.

    Maybe I should try to make Necromunda a thing at my store, but I already know everyone would prefer Kill Team because then you don't need to buy new models.
    You’re probably right, but as ever I choose to be optimistic! I really think GW is trying out more breadth of stuff, and is able to support it on a global scale due to its distribution methods. As others have pointed out previously, the question of local metas being able to support this many systems is a different matter: they can’t. But Apocalypse essentially uses the same collection and models as 40k, so people are more likely to try it. If, as I believe/hope, it proves better than 40k, it may begin to surpass it. There is no opportunity cost to trying Apocalypse once your meta has the ruleset, you’re not required to buy models specifically for it, so why not try it? And then if the meta finds it better... things may shift.

    @Cheesegear

    Ah, you’re equating complexity of understanding with tactical depth. On that metric, sure, it’s making things simpler, but by doing so, it gives much more scope for tactical depth and complexity.

    Things which Apocalypse does which adds more tactical complexity:
    • Makes Detachments meaningful beyond army building. All Detachments matter for in base 40k is CP calculation and access to specialist stratagems from Vigilus. In Apocalypse, it becomes an inherent part of the entire game: it matters which Detachment you put a unit in, and it fundamentally affects how it plays in the game. It may also give abilities, though we haven’t seen that enough yet to know for sure.
    • Alternating activations. There is significant potential for Tactical decisions in the order you activate your Detachments. When do you activate your elite Detachment? Early so they can move into position and create a distraction to your opponent when they move onto an objective, or later so they can respond to what happens elsewhere?
    • Weapon profiles. Realistically in 40k there is little difference between a S4 and a S5 weapon, or many other combinations. Against most targets the weapons are identical, with 6 possible probabilities you’re trying to reach. In Apocalypse, a weapon with a to wound score of 6+ has a small but meaningful advantage over 7+, and over many shots that will turn into a quantifiable difference in effectiveness. Not to mention that each weapon basically has two to wound roll stats, rather than just strength.
    • Damage prioritisation. Not knowing the outcome of attacks until end of turn creates real opportunities for tension and tactical calculation. How much do you want the target dead: are you willing to trust in the probability that the number of shots fired is enough, or do you adda few more to be sure? Is it better to Focus on a few key targets, or spread damage across a lot of targets in the hope that some will be unlucky in their saves? There is no equivalent to this tactical decision in base 40k


    Things in base 40k like Strength and toughness are false complexity. Having to do maths makes it seem complex, but they rarely actually matter to the extent to which the wider spread of potential rolls in Apocalypse will. Say you have a choice between a S4 weapon and a S5 weapon in 40k: they both wound GEQ on a 3+, have a slight difference against T4 and T5, then once you hit T6 are the same again. By contrast, there is ALWAYS a meaningful difference between a ‘wounds on 6+’ weapon and a ‘wounds on 7+’: you know one will be more effective, so weigh up where it fits in your army list. There can be greater difference between boltguns and lasguns.

    So Apocalypse looks to me like a game that is improving the quality of the game experience while actually taking less time as well. It’s not sacrificing quality for speed at all! I genuinely don’t see anything that is being lost from the normal 40k experience that would improve the tactical quality of the game

    (obvious caveat that we haven’t seen the full Apocalypse rules yet, so I may be wrong. In particular, a lot hinges on how damage is resolved and how Detachments work: we know they are given orders, but not what the orders do for example. Also, there’s a big question mark over how it will be ‘balanced’: if it has a system for this it could be played competitively, but if not it’ll have a harder time (though one could likely jury rig it))
    Last edited by Avaris; 2019-06-18 at 05:22 PM.
    Evil round every corner, careful not to step in any.

  26. - Top - End - #326
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Cheesegear's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2008

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XXXVII: Highlighting the Contrasts

    Quote Originally Posted by Avaris View Post
    Things which Apocalypse does which adds more tactical complexity:
    Makes Detachments meaningful beyond army building. All Detachments matter for in base 40k is CP calculation and access to specialist stratagems from Vigilus. In Apocalypse, it becomes an inherent part of the entire game: it matters which Detachment you put a unit in, and it fundamentally affects how it plays in the game. It may also give abilities, though we haven’t seen that enough yet to know for sure.
    Sure, if you're 'One Codex, One Army' and don't use multiple Sub-Factions in your army.

    The only time your Detachments don't matter, is if you're T'au, Necrons, or Orks.
    And even then, they absolutely do, because you're running different Sub-Factions - definitely as Necrons and Orks, less so for T'au.
    Everyone else is running multiple Codecies.

    There is massive tactical complexity in picking which units go into which Detachments (especially if you play Space Marines).
    The only reason you'd think there isn't, is if you don't play competitively.

    Alternating activations
    I don't care about this at all. This merely creates a new meta. Same as it does for Kill Team.

    When do you activate your elite Detachment?
    Same as Kill Team, as same as the existing 40K Fight phase. Your best units are always activated first because your opponent picks their unit to snipe your unit out of existence. It creates a new meta. Your best unit, must also be survivable...Pretty much just like Eternal War.

    or later so they can respond to what happens elsewhere?
    Play reactively, and lose. Always play aggressively. Why would you let your opponent dictate the game?
    Play to win.

    Weapon profiles. Realistically in 40k there is little difference between a S4 and a S5 weapon
    There's loads of difference between S4 and S5 because of the way Toughness works.
    How common is T3? T4? T5?

    The way Apcalypse works, is that it treats Infantry all the same.
    Is a Guardsmen as tough as a Space Marine? Is a Guardsman as tough as a Centurion or Plague Marine? ...YES!

    Because if you group every unit with the same Keyword as the same thing, Math-Hammer becomes King and 'Tactical Complexity' actually goes right out the window because all's that matters is the Excel Spreadsheet. You don't have to weigh up the difference between T3 and T5, and how likely you are to face each kind within any given meta, because GW just decides that all units are exactly the same.
    ...Hi Age of Sigmar.

    Guardsman = Centurion. Rad.

    Not to mention that each weapon basically has two to wound roll stats, rather than just strength.
    That is, every unit of a type has the same Toughness vs. any given weapon.

    Damage prioritisation. Not knowing the outcome of attacks until end of turn creates real opportunities for tension and tactical calculation.
    No it doesn't. It creates randomness and a massive reliance on risk vs. reward.
    It's not tactical.
    It's gambling.

    Things in base 40k like Strength and toughness are false complexity. Having to do maths makes it seem complex
    The maths will happen anyway. With less variability comes an even greater chance that the Excel spreadsheet will be accurate. Again, you can see Age of Sigmar for how that plays out. It doesn't matter who or what your opponent is, because your variable is always the same. There is no complexity at all. The biggest variable in Sigmar, is movement and random Charge lengths. Hence Chronomantic Cogs being basically mandatory in a competitive list. If everyone is the same...The only thing that matters is movement. This is why slow-moving armies are in the toilet.

    Say you have a choice between a S4 weapon and a S5 weapon in 40k: they both wound GEQ on a 3+, have a slight difference against T4 and T5
    In that case, you should be looking at at least three To Wound rolls; T<4, T6 and T8
    Two, isn't enough.
    But then you make the case for "What about T5, and T7? But T3 isn't the same as T4, a Lasgun doesn't work that way."
    ...And now you're back to the To Wound chart we already have.

    So Apocalypse looks to me like a game that is improving the quality of the game experience
    Emphasis mine. Like I said. There's a market for Apocalypse.

    It’s not sacrificing quality for speed at all!
    Again, if the advertising hasn't lied to me, and what GW is putting forward is the best they have, then I disagree.

    As always, I'm happy to be wrong. Because it gives me another option for playing with toy soldiers. Tamping my expectations is always better because I can't be disappointed if I was right all along. If my negativity is wrong, it's still a win for me anyway because being negative and wrong, means that I buy the product.

    Not buying into a hype train, means that the consumer always wins.
    Last edited by Cheesegear; 2019-06-18 at 06:56 PM.
    Steam Name: Cheesegear
    League of Legends Name: Cheesegear
    You can fight like a krogan or run like a leopard but you'll never be better than Commander Shepard.


    Spoiler
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Anuan View Post
    Cheesegear; Lovable Thesaurus ItP.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lycan 01 View Post
    Cheesegear, have I told you yet that you're awesome?
    Quote Originally Posted by MeatShield#236 View Post
    ALL HAIL LORD CHEESEGEAR! Cheese for the cheesegear!
    Quote Originally Posted by Shas'aia Toriia View Post
    Cheesegear is awesome

  27. - Top - End - #327
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Durham, UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XXXVII: Highlighting the Contrasts

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheesegear View Post
    Emphasis mine. Like I said. There's a market for Apocalypse.

    Again, if the advertising hasn't lied to me, and what GW is putting forward is the best they have, then I disagree.

    As always, I'm happy to be wrong. Because it gives me another option for playing with toy soldiers. Tamping my expectations is always better because I can't be disappointed if I was right all along. If my negativity is wrong, it's still a win for me anyway because being negative and wrong, means that I buy the product.

    Not buying into a hype train, means that the consumer always wins.
    Fair enough: I’m not going to respond to all your points above this, but they are generally well made: we disagree on what types of complexity are good for the game, and that’s ok! I don’t agree with them, but I can see your arguement. I think the crux of our disagreement is that I see added uncertainty as a good thing for the game; I want to have moments where I need to make a judgement as to how much to commit without full information, whereas you see it as gambling. These moments exist in 40k, but are heightened in Apocalypse.

    One I will pick out though, as I think it’s a thing that’s key to my enthusiasm for Apocalypse which you may have misunderstood:

    Same as Kill Team, as same as the existing 40K Fight phase. Your best units are always activated first because your opponent picks their unit to snipe your unit out of existence. It creates a new meta. Your best unit, must also be survivable...Pretty much just like Eternal War.
    You’d be completely right here, were it not for the damage step. It is impossible to snipe a unit out of existence before it has had a chance to do its stuff for the turn. This alone removes a lot of problems that I see in 40k: you always get to use your best unit, even if you go second and your opponent can kill it in one turn. You only get to use it ONCE, but it is much more appealing than being an expensive bullet sponge. And if your opponent misjudges the amount of damage they need to put on it, or you roll above average on your saves, it’ll still be there next turn, creating a new tactical opportunity that you can use and that your opponent has to respond to.

    As you say, it’s not a product for everyone, and you’re happy to be wrong, but I tend towards positive thinking, as being negative about everything GW does wouldn’t lead to my enjoying the hobby. YMMV.

    I am, however, interested in getting your views on what is important in an experiment I plan when Apocalypse comes out. As stated multiple times, I suspect that it will work quite well at ‘standard’ 40k scale. But it’s not designed for that, so I want to experiment and see how well it works. As someone enthusiastic for Apocalypse I am likely to be subject to confirmation bias provided it doesn’t fail entirely, so I was wondering if there are any things you’d be particularly interested in evaluating if using Apocalypse rules for smaller games? What should I be looking out for as things that may indicate this is not as good as 40k at that level of game?
    Evil round every corner, careful not to step in any.

  28. - Top - End - #328
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Cheesegear's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2008

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XXXVII: Highlighting the Contrasts

    Quote Originally Posted by Avaris View Post
    I think the crux of our disagreement is that I see added uncertainty as a good thing for the game
    You like games being less competitive and more random. I don't know why. But sure.
    Steam Name: Cheesegear
    League of Legends Name: Cheesegear
    You can fight like a krogan or run like a leopard but you'll never be better than Commander Shepard.


    Spoiler
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Anuan View Post
    Cheesegear; Lovable Thesaurus ItP.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lycan 01 View Post
    Cheesegear, have I told you yet that you're awesome?
    Quote Originally Posted by MeatShield#236 View Post
    ALL HAIL LORD CHEESEGEAR! Cheese for the cheesegear!
    Quote Originally Posted by Shas'aia Toriia View Post
    Cheesegear is awesome

  29. - Top - End - #329
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Forum Explorer's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XXXVII: Highlighting the Contrasts

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheesegear View Post
    You like games being less competitive and more random. I don't know why. But sure.
    Total agreement with Cheesegear here. More randomization is almost always a bad thing.
    Spoiler: I'm a writer!
    Show
    Spoiler: Check out my fanfiction[URL="https://www.fanfiction.net/u/7493788/Forum-Explorer"
    Show
    here[/URL]
    ]Fate Stay Nano: Fate Stay Night x Magical Girl Lyrical Nanoha

    I Fell in Love with a Storm: MLP

    Procrastination: MLP



    Spoiler: Original Fiction
    Show
    The Lost Dragon: A story about a priest who finds a baby dragon in his church and decides to protect them.



  30. - Top - End - #330
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Durham, UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XXXVII: Highlighting the Contrasts

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheesegear View Post
    You like games being less competitive and more random. I don't know why. But sure.
    I like the dramatic potential made possible by uncertainty. The possibility of heroic last stands against the odds or key parts of a battleplan not functioning as intended makes for, IMO, more enjoyable games and moments to remember.

    I absolutely refute though that added randomness, done well, makes a game less competitive. In fact, I think it makes it more skill testing: a good commander will understand the odds arrayed against them, and be able to make tactical calculations about how to prioritise things. Sometimes the dice will go against them, so they’ve also got to plan around that possibility: the better generals will be able to do so more effectively.

    Consider the situation where you have an enemy unit which you know is a major threat to your army. In normal 40k the tactical choice is a simple prioritisation exercise: continue removing things in order of priority until you run out of guns. You make decisions about which weapons to use first so as to maximise their potential, but once you’ve removed a target unit the choice is done. By contrast, in Apocalypse the prioritisation process becomes much more complex: you don’t just need to decide an order to target things in, you need to weigh up the odds and decide how certain you want to be that it is destroyed. How risky or cautious you play it will have a significant effect on how the game plays out, and neither is necessarily the right answer, as the tactical test is how you use your other forces to respond to the situation that plays out.

    Now, I like games without randomness as well! But 40k, being a dice based game, isn’t one of these. And by introducing D12s Apocalypse seems to be leaning into this and creating much more depth in the uncertainty available, which gives more options to tweak so that the random element can be controlled for better in game design. It seems to be specifically about creating these cinematic moments, where large groups are scythed down by gunfire or a small group survives against the odds.

    Having your elite unit targetted by every gun in the enemy army until you put it back in the carry case isn’t fun. Having the chance that your elite unit survives to the next turn, utterly disrupting your opponent’s plans, is. And the opponent has had the enjoyment of making a tactical decision about how much they target at it: although they may not suceed at destroying a unit, they might gain some satisfaction from the knowledge that they had planned for that risk, or from having been able to destroy something else with the guns that would have otherwise finished the elite unit off. It’s uncertainty, but well handled, and far better than the impact of randomness in base 40k where a poor set of rolls from one of the players simply changes the speed at which units are removed from the board.
    Evil round every corner, careful not to step in any.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •