Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XXXVII: Highlighting the Contrasts

[Requizen]

How does it stack up, useability-wise, for 40k?

Haven't played in a while, but assuming not much has changed:

Wraiths are reliable as they ever are, you basically run 1 unit in every game.
Tomb Blades are ok, they're fast reasonable damage delivery, but once you stack on upgrades (Shield Vanes, Nebuloscopes) and take a few, the price runs up quickly.
If you build the Ark as Ghost, you're doing it wrong. Ghost Arks are... fine? But Doomsday Arks are, iirc, one of the backbone units of the army.
The Cloaktek is a fine way to run it. Chronometron is what a lot of people prefer, but the Cloak lets you run him with Tomb Blades or run around troubleshooting. It's a nice model too.

It's an alright box. But it's also just an alright army atm.

[Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll]

Yeah, as Necron armies go it's pretty good. It's not the best army in the codex (Overlord or two, 30 Tesla Immortals, 3x DDA, 3xDoom Scythe iirc), but it's solid. Two boxes of that should be a pretty decent fast army, not tournament-ready but ok for a semi-competitive environment maybe.

Edit: forgot we knew what Destroyer does, that's 2 blast markers on average, plus the equivalent of a unit of warriors, for the cost of two units of warriors. Actually good.

Edit: Ok, let's see if Necrons are playable in Apocalypse. Luckily, because there's not really any need to know who your enemy is, beyond the ratio of Personnel versus Tanks, I don't need to know what other abilities are! For the rating system, simplified Green/Yellow/Red/Dark Red, but the gap between Green and Yellow is gonna be much larger than in 40k, because of the simplified target range: if it’s not the best at anti-tank, or the best at anti-personnel, why take it?

Spoiler: HQ

Show

Overlord : First off, MWBD is now a true aura. So surround with any high-attack Light models (note this now affects more models than just Infantry). 5+ is also a fantastic save, giving you a 1/3 chance of surviving even a Large marker. But offensively, the Overlord better hide. 8+/8+ is worse than even the Lychguard's Hyperphase Sword. I guess they weakened it to show how there's only one of'em? Hell, even WARRIORS are better than them against infantry! No more slicing through hordes of Marines in close combat with your Warscythe.

Catacomb Barge: Twice the cost gives you over twice the speed, twice the MWBD aura (plus a larger base size to extend it from, BUT MWBD no longer affects itself), a solid gun (5+/7+ or 2 shots of 8+/10+). Most excitingly though, it also has a new Move aura! A 3” buff to movement is awesome when most of your infantry is only 5”. I see myself taking this over an Overlord almost any time, unless I need more detachments.

Lord : Down to a 6+ save, and rr wound rolls of 1. Now that wound rolls are on a d12… that’s not a huge buff. Even for only 4 power, I’d rather have 5 more Immortals. Hard pass.

Destroyer Lord: More expensive than the Lord, twice the move, but rr1 to wound only for Destroyers. RR1 to wound sucks now. Pass.

Cryptek: Has zero offense of defense, but GREAT defensive buffs. Firstly, gone is the dumb 3” auras, back up to 6”. Ignore Damage 6+ for ALL Dynasty units is awesome (Resurrection Protocols and Living Metal are no longer things. Necrons die fast otherwise). RR saves of 1 for all Dynasty Infantry sucks for Warriors (because they can only save small blasts on a d12), but is great for any models with a 6+ save or better, because then when they get hit with Large Blasts, you’re rolling saves on d6s, and thus have a better chance of getting that 1 to reroll. This is especially good with Dispersion Shield Lychguard. A Shieldguard/Cryptek combo will be impossible to move from the table, for 21 Power.

tl;dr for HQ: Crypteks no longer protect large units of weak infantry, they now protect your elite infantry. Expect to see a Lychguard/Cryptek combo sitting on central objectives and never dying. Overlords are ok, CCBs are better than 2 overlords. Lords and Destroyer Lords are garbage.

Spoiler: Named Characters

Show

Imotekh the Stormlord: For his Power level, the point of comparison is the CCB. +1 Command Asset per turn I think alone should make the difference. 6+ SAP makes him an OK shooter, and it looks like Lord of the Storm should do some decent damage (1/3 chance of one blast marker, 1/3 chance of two blast markers, ouch!), but alas it appears Mortal Wounds are no longer a thing.

Orikan the Diviner: Y’all made Characters suck in combat, so a character whose only purpose is to get a CHANCE per turn of becoming SLIGHTLY better in combat? Nope. Keeps the Ignore Damage 6+ buff (Yay!) But lose the rr1 to saves (boo). Won’t be seeing this model often!

Nemesor Zahndrekh: An Overlord with a worse attack, better save, but cancels an enemy Character’s auras with 24”. I’d say only worth taking against someone who rerolls ALL misses. If you’re seeing Guilliman a lot, it’d be hilarious to stick Zahndrekh in with your above Shieldguard/Cryptek combo to screw with him the entire game. Note that there’s no more Obyron/Zahdrekh slingshot, unless that turns into a very rare Command Asset.

Vargard Obyron: So we know Lords suck. Does this lord have any special abilities to make it better? Answer: nope, all he does is take blasts instead of Zahndrekh, whose already very meta-dependant. Plus, for the cost of the two of them, you could have a CCB AND a unit of Immortals!

Illuminor Szeras : HERE’S how you make a Cryptek special character! Take note, Orikan. Sure you lose the rr1s for saves, but your gains are SIGNIFICANT, especially for only 1 Power more! Better save, a decent long-range anti-tank gun, keep the Ignore Damage bubble, and, unlike 8th edition Szeras, the Mechanical Augmentation buff doesn’t have a 1/3 chance of having a wasted effect! (who ever cares about +1S on Warriors of Immortals? Even +1T ain’t all that). No, this time we’re upgrading SAP, SV or BS by 1, all of which are very useful. Having to be within 1” sucks, but you have 1” more move than the units you’re chasing down to buff so that’s ok.

Anrakyr the Traveller: This guy is tricky. Firstly, unlike the other Overlords, HIS MWBD targets INFANTRY not LIGHT, so he ain’t buffing Wraiths or Scarabs. However, running him with a pack of Lychguard and Flayed Ones will ruin face in close combat, as unlike sucky Lords, he straight up adds 1 to Wound rolls for melee weapons. I feel like that’s a decent buff, but the lack of buffing non-Infantry downgrades him to yellow.

Trazyn the Infinite: An Overlord, but decent in close-combat against infantry, and instead of dying it replaces another Character. First of all, you wouldn’t want to replace a Cryptek, because Cryptek>Overlord, so you’re stuck replacing Overlords or Lords and why did you bring a Lord in the first place? Secondly, it’s likely that both Trazyn and whatever character you’re switching him with are both the Warlords of their detachments, so rather than just Trazyn’s detachment being out of command range, now TWO of your detachments are! So, uh, don’t do that.

tl;dr: +1 Command Asset is gonna see us bringing Imotekh to match likely rivals Guilliman and Abaddon (who presumably have the same ability). Otherwise, Szeras has some great buffs on your troops. Mayybe take Zahndrekh if your meta tends to be buff-heavy, or Anrakyr if you want to wreck face in close combat, but that’s it.

Spoiler: Troops

Show

Warriors : Depends on what Rapid Fire does: I so love not knowing the rules of my units! Crappy save (even with Szeras’ buff, can’t survive Large Blasts), but 6 Power for 2 7+ rapid fire shots seems to be about average for troops; Tacticals are 4 for 1 7+ RF, Intercessors 6 for 1 5+ RF(nice!), Guard Infantry are 6 for 4 8+ RF).
Immortals: 6+ Save is good, and makes up for having half the wounds of Warriors, plus means Crypteks buff them nicely against Large Blasts. But it’s time for some simple mathhammer: which do I prefer, Gauss or Tesla? I’m going to do all my comparisons in Blast Markers per minimum size unit, SAP/SAT.
Gauss : 0.38/0.28. Assuming Rapid Fire doubles shots at half range like in 40k, that’s 0.77/0.55.
Tesla : 0.66/0.44.
This is some strange numbers! Gauss is (slightly) better in Rapid-Fire range, but MUCH worse at full range. That’s pretty limiting, so Teslammortals are the way to go still (even if MWBD doesn’t supercharge them like it used to).
How does this compare against Warriors though? 20 warriors is 14 points, a little bit more than 15 Immortals, but 10 warriors is only 2 points more than 5 Immortals because they pointed Warriors weird.
10 Warriors: 0.66/0.44, but then 1.32/0.87 at rapid fire range. One more wound, but two less Sv. Brutal once they get into close range, but only ok outside of that. ALWAYS better than Gauss Immortals, though.
20 Warriors: 1.32/0.87, RF 2.64/1.74, 4 wounds
15 Tesla Immortals: 1.98/1.3 3 wounds. Looks like 15 Tesla beats 10 Warriors still, closing the Wound Gap because of the point weirdness. No Resurrection Protocols means no need to take larger squads either!

tl;dr: Tesla Immortals > Warriors > Gauss Immortals

Spoiler: Elites

Show

Lychguard: So we’re either 0.99/0.99 with a 6+ save, or 0.66/0.66 with a 4+ Save. That’s pretty solid! Especially considering that’s only for a 7 Power unit? Mobility is the biggest issue with them, as it always is. Scytheguard will have difficulty getting into combat (though the 3” CCB aura gives them another option), but will absolutely destroy anything they meet there. Shieldguard are more like it: they’re tough enough that you won’t be able to STOP them from getting to where they need to be (eventually), and damaging enough that they have a good chance at clearing out whatever got their first.

Deathmarks: No mortal wounds mean you’re paying 7 points for half-size deep-striking Sniper Warriors. Take a bad unit and make it worse. Hard pass.

Flayed Ones: Deep Strike and whatever Terror Troops does. They get cheaper the more you buy of them, which is nice. As a melee infantry unit, your point of comparison is Lychguard. No matter what, Flayed Ones will die much faster than Lychguard (1W, 8+Sv vs 2W 6+ or 4+SV).
0.66/0.33 at minimum size, but at max size they’re the same Power cost as max Lychguard, so that’s gonna be our comparison.
2.64/1.32 at max size. So better at anti-infantry at higher points, but worse at anti-tank. Slightly easier to get into combat (deep strike gives one more deployment option than Lychguard) and whatever Terror Troops does, versus dying super fast. For anti-infantry, I think I’d prefer Tesla Immortals, for 2 less Power, better save, and range.


Triarch Praetorians: Auto-pass Morale. We don’t know how that works though. Can’t receive most buffs (only Szeras, Anrakyr, and the Triarch Stalker!) 10” Fly move means they can actually get where they need to be, but are they damaging enough for us to actually care? We have two setups to consider: one anti-personnel ranged-focus, and one balanced melee-focus.
Particle Caster/Voidblade: 0.77/0.44 Ranged, 0.38/0.22 Melee.
Rod of the Covenant: 0.33/0.33 Ranged, 0.66/0.66 Melee.
Tbh, for a 8 Power unit? That’s pretty disappointing, especially compared to Wraiths, which as we’ll soon see are faster, tougher, and deadlier.

Triarch Stalker: Only 2 wounds and a 5+ for an 11 Power unit? Yikes. RR1 to hit doesn’t stack with MWBD, which is no longer limited to one unit, so little point in that. Let’s have a look at the weapons.
Heat Ray: Either 0.38/0.28 with the Inferno trait (whatever that is) at short range, or 0.38/0.5 at ok range. This ain’t it champ.
Particle Shredder: 0.66/0.66. Zero reason to take the Heat Ray, considering 2 7+ shots is better than 1 4+ shot. But still not worth it for 11 points! Just spend 1 extra point and take 15 Tesla Immortals! At least they can get buffs! Melee is the same as this statline.
Twin Heavy Gauss Cannon: 0.33/0.87. But now it’s 12 points! Do the same price and take 15 Tesla Immortals. Duh.

C’tan Shard of the Deceiver: Melee 0.98/0.98, Ranged 1.11/1.11. Always save on d12, Terror, and can switch the Order of its detachment, so your enemy basically doesn’t get warning, and you can react to whatever they do seamlessly. Unsure exactly how useful that’s gonna be: you’re gonna want to focus detachments on either shooting or melee, so it’s always gonna be a choice between Advance and either Aimed Fire or Assault. But combining ok damage output with a useful strategic flexibility ability should be pretty good.

C’tan Shard of the Nightbringer (y: Ranged 1.11/1.11, Melee 1.39/1.11. Save on d12. Slightly better melee damage against infantry. I guess it’s ok, if you can get it into melee. It takes an average of 3.43 hits to take it down, but every second hit against it is wasted because of the way it saves: it doesn’t care about the difference between small and large blast markers! But I’d rather have strategic flexibility, or 15 Tesla Immortals for only 2 more Power. You beginning to see a theme here?

tl;dr: Shieldguard are good because they just won’t die. Deceiver shards have decent damage output against everything, good survivability, and tactical flexibility. That’s pretty much it. So much for Elite options. I guess combining Lychguard, Flayed Ones and the Deceiver with a Cryptek and Anrakyr could be an acceptable detachment, but so far nothing beats a solid Battalion of Immortals with Crypteks and CCBs.

Spoiler: Fast Attack

Show

Canoptek Wraiths: Fast, tough, can now accept MWBD. Combine with a CCB gives them a 15” move through terrain! But how’s their damage? 0.77/0.55 puts this unit above the Praetorian, good for a very quick first attack. Interestingly, their ranged weapons are per model, each weapon costing 1 power. This can quickly get expensive, but can it get deadly? Particle Casters are 0.36/0.22, and are objectively better than the Beamer (why even have the Beamer as an option?). Unsure what the Heavy type of weapons does, so unlikely to be worth it, but that 2 Power gives the squad the firepower of an ENTIRE Triarch Praetorian squad. Their damage output is lower than other close-combat options, but their speed allows them to actually USE it. Depending on how other rules work (fall back, cover, shooting in and out of combat), they may even be situationally better than Tesla Immortals.

Canoptek Scarabs: So, uh, these are the same price as Immortals. 10” move, will die like flies (heh), and only 0.33/0.33 in melee. In 40k, they were worth it for their cheap cost and the Mortal Wounds stratagem, but here? Pass. I’d take Immortals: hell, Immortals are 0.33/0.22 in melee already, so you lose durability, and a ranged attack, all for just speed and slightly better anti-tank in melee? Nope!

Tomb Blades: Underrated in 8th edition (-1 to hit, 14” move, and a mix of 3+ and 5++ made them hard to kill, plus they were pretty deadly), how do they fare in apocalypse! First off, 7+ save is only meh, I want at least a 6+, especially for expensive 1W units. 14” move is still awesome, and presumably the Stealth ability will make them harder to hit, like their previous -1 to hit modifier. How’s their damage output? Well, same as a 10-unit of Immortals (and for the same price).
Particle Beamer: 1.31/0.83
Gauss: 0.76/0.56, but at RF range (assuming it doubles shots): 1.54/1.1
Tesla: 1.32/0.88
0.38/0.28. Assuming Rapid Fire doubles shots at half range like in 40k, that’s 0.77/0.55.
Now normally I’d say this means go all Tesla all the time, but Tomb Blades actually have a choice, because of their speed. They can either keep at 24” at all time with their high speed, or use their high speed to close to RF range and actually use Gauss’s better RF mode.
In a choice between these and Tesla Immortals, I think they both have their place, IF Stealth grants -1 to hit. Otherwise, I don’t think the 14” move makes up for the loss of the Sv point.

Destroyers: Ah yes, the old favourite. Fast, survivable, and always rerolling hit rolls of 1!
0.51/0.39. For the same cost as 10 Tesla Immortals. Pass. But you can pay 1 Power to add a Heavy Gauss Cannon, which increases your damage to 0.7/0.9, assuming no split fire. Still barely better than Tesla Immortals versus armour. Pass, but they have a verrrrry narrow place in a shooting detachment with Tomb Blades: they have roughly equal anti-tank damage, possibly better survivability, for only 1 power more.

Nothing great here. Wraiths and Tomb Blades are situationally OK, but you wouldn’t combine them in a detachment. You could mayyyybe combine Tomb Blades with Destroyers, but that’s it. You always want CCBs for your HQ for this detachment.

Spoiler: Heavy Support

Show

Heavy Destroyers: Never buy just 1, because for just 3 more points you could add 1W and the Gauss Cannon and just run Destroyers with one Heavy Cannon instead. At 3, you’re the same cost as for a unit of 6 Destroyers with one Heavy Gauss Cannon, so that’s our true comparison:
Destroyers have double the wounds, so there’s gonna need to be a sizeable difference for this to have an effect.
3 Heavy Destroyers: 0.58/1.16
6 Destroyers w/ 1 Heavy Gauss Cannon: 1.21/1.29.
So yeah, never run Heavy Destroyers alone. If you really want 3 Heavy Destroyers, just run a max unit of Destroyers. Which for fun, is 2.11/2.33. That’d ruin someone’s day pretty quick.

Canoptek Spyders: Meh. Once per turn can heal 1 Scarab unit, and 50% chance of healing 1 vehicle. Considering Wounds are much lower, this is better than in 8th, but you’re not bringing Scarabs anyways. Healing vehicle wounds though could get nasty, especially with the 3-wound Doomsday Arks. Note that the healing happens at the end of the Action phase, and it heals DAMAGE not blast markers. So you need whatever target to make it through a whole turn of damage, potentially get targetted a second turn, and THEN heal one turn.
As for it’s own abilities, only one wound (sad), 5+ save (good), but awful offensively (0.29/0.25 in Melee, +1 P to take a 0.33/0.21 ranged weapon). Only take it if you’re taking a detachment full of Vehicles. Maybe it’s worth taking to keep your CCB warlords alive though?

Monolith : Ah, the iconic model that sucks so much in vanilla. Did they fix it? 4 wounds and a 5+ save gives it the survivability of a double unit of Destroyers, and let’s spend 2 Power on 2 Heavy Cannons on the Destroyer comparison to even out the point comparison.
6 Destroyers w/ 2 Heavy Gauss Cannon: 1.4/1.8.
Monolith 2.178/1.98
Wow! That’s some solid damage, plus Portal of Exile is now a ⅓ chance of auto-blast marker when YOU move, rather than when YOU’RE charged, plus deep strike, plus eternity gate (which are minor but eh)
Of course, you could ALTERNATIVELY, have 20 Tesla Immortals, for one point less, doing 2.64/1.76, but you also lose a point of armour to do that, and trade Cryptek buffs and MWBD for potentially a Spyder heal...

Annihilation Barge: Compared to 15 Tesla Immortals (only 1 Power more), you lose a wound, AND a sv point, and only gain in speed. How does damage compare?
15 Immortals: 1.98/1.3
Gauss Annihilation Barge: 1.98/1.43
Tesla Annihilation Barge: 2.09/1.43
So, damage is barely different. Tesla>Gauss, and the Barge’s SAT is sliiiightly better. Not worth losing 1 wound and 1 Sv. But if you want cheap vehicles so that your opponent can’t just spam high SAP units and wipe all your Immortals from the field, you could do that, and spamming lots of Tanks could be interesting, as it seems that high-SAT units tend to be low shots, so on average giving less blast markers to Heavy units. So, I’ll keep it green for now. I’d rather mix Monoliths and Anni-Barges for that, cuz just Monoliths would be too slow.

Doomsday Ark : For the cost of 2 units of warriors, the damage output of 1 unit of Warriors, and instead of the second unit of warriors, you lose 1 wound, and trade it for the Doomsday Cannon, which has the Destroyer trait. So that’s 1.54/1.98, meaning that it’s as good anti-tank as a Monolith, for almost a third of the price, even better if you get with 24” or god forbid 12”, where you’ll be doing an average of almost 3 blast markers! But 12” is awfully close for this thing’s terrible melee weapons.

Transcendant C’tan: Melee 0.98/1.11, Ranged 1.11/1.11, plus always save on a d12, and re-roll one hit, wound, or saving throw per turn. Would rather have an Anni-Barge or Doomsday Ark for damage-dealing, or the Deceiver C’tan. On it’s own it’s actually decent, but when compared to the other rivals for a Heavy Support slot…

tl;dr: Actually a few halfway decent options here. Doomsday Arks are our best value for SAT, while Monoliths and Annihilation Barges both do decent all-round damage. Seems like a detachment of Monoliths, Anni-barges, Doomsday Arks and maybe a Spyder could be an ok contender?

Spoiler: Miscellaneous Units

Show

Ghost Arks: Why. All the combat skill of 1 unit of Warriors, for twice the price, and the ability to repair only one damage from only one unit of EMBARKED min-size warriors. Why.

Doom Scythe: Comparison: DDA. Pros: Better against infantry, better armour, Supersonic.
Cons: Doomsday Ark is better within 24”, and has 1 more wound. DDA is also a whole 5 Power cheaper. I’d rather have a Doomsday Ark and a unit of Tesla Immortals!
So, for some reason instead of running 1 Twin Tesla Destructor, this is actually 2 Tesla Destructors? What? Why? Can it split fire them? This caused me to calculate the damage wrong at first.
2.09/2.09

Night Scythe: Like a Doom Scythe, but without the ability to kill tanks, and you can drop units from it. Ok versus infantry, but not as good as a dedicated infantry-killer. Depends on how the Reinforcements rules work, which we haven’t seen. Could be useful for delivering a max unit of Lychguard right into a fight, or a max unit of Gauss Immortals into Rapid Fire range. But unlikely.

Obelisk (: 20 whole power! 5 whole wounds! Deep Strike! ¼ chance to hurt Aircraft near it (which enemies will know and thus never do). How does it compare in the hurt department though?
2.64/1.74. So basically the same as 20 Immortals, but it costs the same as 25. Pass. What kind of Necron player with an Apocalypse-size army doesn’t have 30 Tesla Immortals already anyways?

Tesseract Ark: An Obelisk with 1 more wound, a 5+ save, no deep strike, and a Destroyer weapon, oooh!
4.38/3.48. Now THAT’S more like it! Plus, a lot of players still have one (if not two!) from when they were the best unit in the codex not too long ago!

tl;dr: only Tesseract Arks are any good.

Edit: Myself, I have a wee bit over 200 Power to play with for Apocalypse. Some of which is ok even!

[Cheesegear]

I would've waited until we actually got the rules.

We do know that at least one Mission requires holding more Objectives than your opponent, and it's progressive. Which means that in at least one Mission, movement matters.
We don't entirely know how Objectives are held; Will ObSec be a thing? Will it apply to all Infantry, or just Troops? Will it apply to all non-Characters in general?
If models aren't important - 'cause we know they're not - are Objectives held on a per unit basis? Will more units be better?

How is Deep Strike gonna work? ...It's Apocalypse, so surely Turn 1 might be allowed? Who knows.

We do know a few things...
Like how if the game limits the number of attacks per unit, the solution is to have more units. Cheaper is better.
We know that since every weapon costs the same, anything that isn't the best, is the worst.

But I think that's as far as we can go, for now.

EDIT:
Also, turns out I made a mistake. Tactical Squads only get a Heavy Weapon if they number 10 models, which makes them PR9, with +1 for the Heavy weapon.
PR10 for a single Heavy weapon attack is awful. Back to the drawing board!

[Renegade Paladin]

In other news, apparently this month's White Dwarf low key introduced a new Maelstrom of War mode in a battle report. I'm kind of liking it.

[Blackhawk748]

Mocking a point doesn't make it invalid. A game being easy to math out and "solve" does not make it bad if the usual cultural expectation is that you won't do this. I don't know how to make this point that this game simply isn't intended to be analysed in the way you are doing. "muh narrative" is the point of the game. It's like Power Level: of course you can break the system, it's trivial to. The system is simply designed in the expectation that you will approach it from a different direction. "Solving" apocalypse doesn't make you a genius. It makes you a ****.

Or they could make the game not crazy easy to break and still have it be focused on Narrative. We've been doing that for literal decades, so why re you forgiving them for this laziness now is beyond me.

[Hootman]

In other news, apparently this month's White Dwarf low key introduced a new Maelstrom of War mode in a battle report. I'm kind of liking it.

That's neat. I'm sure I'll be playtesting that once the Kill Team League is over.

Speaking of which, I played my first game in the league last Saturday, and let me tell you, I got ******* stomped.

I ended up having to work that day, so I didn't get to the store until super late, and there was only one person who was into Kill Team that wasn't busy. So Tau-Guy and I put our lists together, rolled Recover Intelligence for the mission, and threw down. Man, I did NOT expect his fish'eads to be so scary. From memory, it looked like this:

Spoiler

Show

Stealth Suit
-Leader, Burst Cannon

Stealth Suit
-Heavy, Burst Cannon

Pathfinder?
-Comms

Pathfinder?
-Sniper Lv2, S8 Rail Rifle Thing

Recon Drone

Something like 8 or 9 Gun Drones

It was brutal. Those Gun Drones move twice as fast as I do, and pump out twice as many shots as Shoota Boyz, apparently for the same price. What? That's gross. And I don't know why, but it never occurred to me that he would have a levelled up character, but WOW, that guy was a beast. Hitting on 2's (rerolling), wounding on 2's, 2 shots, ignore all range and cover penalties, range is the whole board...and all apparently just passively, for no CP. That's DOUBLE-gross.

I lost 4 models on Turn 1, including 2 specialists, without putting so much as a scratch on anything he fielded. Things turned around a little when my Veteran Nob started soaking shots like a boss, but he couldn't carry the team, and all my ranged models died on Turn 1. I forgot to bring my Kommandos in on Turn 1 like a huge dummy, but I was all kinds of salty about my Flash Git getting immediately sniped off the board by the first roll of the game. The only things that ever got into Assault were 2 boyz (neither of which landed a kill) and a grot (on Turn 4, just trying to punk his Leader for fun). Everything else got ripped apart and out-maneuvered. My forces broke on Turn 3, and froze up, like they do. A -5 penalty on Ld 6 will do that to you. At least I learned a good lesson about taking risks (do that), learning stratagems (seriously, do that), and playing aggressively (ALL IN, ALL DAY). I'm going to challenge him again for a practice game next time I'm around, and see if I can't recover some of my greenskin pride.

Unrelated, I just found out there's a 2000pt ITC Tournament nearby this weekend, so I'm going to see if I can go to that for a change of scenery, and to play a game-size I'm more comfortable with.

Spoiler: KASTLE KRASHERZ

Show

They're using the ITC Champion's Mission Pack; I skimmed it, and it seemed easy enough to just pick the objectives that your army was always going to do, and smash everything in CQC. It's come up a bunch of times here recently that people often play ITC by castling up super hard, but I play Orks. I plan to just assault with my whole army on Turn 1, and see if I can't just tear down their castles until no stone sits upon another. I'm going to go re-read the mission pack once I'm done posting, and see if anything in there makes me want to shift my army around, but this is my starting point.

I hope they are ok with models being unpainted, else I can't even try. Also, if they allow Index units, I can bring my Biker Boss and possibly my Biker Mek, for HQ's that can actually keep up.

Ork Battalion - Evil Sunz
HQ
Warboss, 72pts
-Big Choppa (replaced), Kustom Shoota, Attack Squig
-Headwoppa's Killchoppa

Weirdboy, 62pts
-Smite, Da Jump
-1CP, Warphead: Warpath

TROOPS
Choppa Boyz 30, 213pts
-Nob with Power Stabba and Choppa

Grots 10, 30
Grots 10, 30

ELITES
Painboy, 65pts

Ork Outriders - Evil Sunz
HQ
Deffkilla Wartrike, 120pts

FAST ATTACK
Warbikers 6, 151pts
-Nob with PK and Choppa

Warbikers 6, 151pts
-Nob with PK and Choppa

Stormboyz 30, 283pts
-Nob with PK and Choppa

Ork Vanguard - Bad Moons
HQ
Big Mek in Mega Armor, 112pts
-PK, Kustom Shoota, Kustom Force Field

ELITES
Tankbustas 10, 190pts
-Nob with Rokkit, 2 Bomb Squigs

Tankbustas 10, 190pts
-Nob with Rokkit, 2 Bomb Squigs

Kommandos 5, 53pts
-Nob with Power Klaw and Slugga, 1 Tankbusta Bomb

HEAVY SUPPORT
Mek Gun, 60pts
-1 Kustom Mega-Kannon, with Krew

Mek Gun, 60pts
-1 Kustom Mega-Kannon, with Krew

DEDICATED TRANSPORTS
Trukk, 64pts
-Big Shoota

Trukk, 64pts
-Big Shoota


TOTALS: 1970pts, 10 CPs (9 CPs with Warphead)

I intentionally left some points unspent so I have some wiggle-room once the TO gets back to me about Index models, scratch-built models, and so on.

Assuming the tournament is being played by people who are playing as competitively as possible, what do you think I'll have the most trouble with? Is my list even going to leave a mark?

[Renegade Paladin]

ITC, unlike ETC, is fine with Index options. Paint requirements are up to the tournament; you'd do best to ask the TO.

From observation, you wouldn't go far wrong with a second Weirdboy to cast Warpath on the thing you're using Da Jump on.

[Hootman]

ITC, unlike ETC, is fine with Index options. Paint requirements are up to the tournament; you'd do best to ask the TO.

From observation, you wouldn't go far wrong with a second Weirdboy to cast Warpath on the thing you're using Da Jump on.

Oh, that's good to hear. I'll have to see if I can comfortably work in my Biker Boss, since he's always been a Grade-A bruiser. And he rides an ancient metal Chaos Juggernaut with rokkit-boostaz, because he looted it. (Or, his Mek did, whatever.) I was planning on having the Weirdboy become a Warphead right away, and pick up Warpath as his second Ork power. I'll record that in the list for convenience. I'm hoping I'll be able to cast it on the Stormboyz when they go for their Turn 1 charge with like a billion attacks.

...I should bring extra dice to this tournament. That would be smart.


Also, apparently Tau-Guy cheated a wee bit. The Ion Rifle (which is the gun his Sniper had) is neither Rapid Fire 1 nor Heavy 2 when Overcharged. It's Heavy d3. That could have, conceivably, made a difference. I'll have to talk to the league TO about it, and then point out the mistake to Tau-Guy so he doesn't do that to anyone else.

[Destro_Yersul]

Someone linked this to me earlier, and I found it pretty funny, so I thought I'd share: It's a parody news story.

[Forum Explorer]

Unrelated, I just found out there's a 2000pt ITC Tournament nearby this weekend, so I'm going to see if I can go to that for a change of scenery, and to play a game-size I'm more comfortable with.

Spoiler: KASTLE KRASHERZ

Show

They're using the ITC Champion's Mission Pack; I skimmed it, and it seemed easy enough to just pick the objectives that your army was always going to do, and smash everything in CQC. It's come up a bunch of times here recently that people often play ITC by castling up super hard, but I play Orks. I plan to just assault with my whole army on Turn 1, and see if I can't just tear down their castles until no stone sits upon another. I'm going to go re-read the mission pack once I'm done posting, and see if anything in there makes me want to shift my army around, but this is my starting point.

I hope they are ok with models being unpainted, else I can't even try. Also, if they allow Index units, I can bring my Biker Boss and possibly my Biker Mek, for HQ's that can actually keep up.

Ork Battalion - Evil Sunz
HQ
Warboss, 72pts
-Big Choppa (replaced), Kustom Shoota, Attack Squig
-Headwoppa's Killchoppa

Weirdboy, 62pts
-Smite, Da Jump
-1CP, Warphead: Warpath

TROOPS
Choppa Boyz 30, 213pts
-Nob with Power Stabba and Choppa

Grots 10, 30
Grots 10, 30

ELITES
Painboy, 65pts

Ork Outriders - Evil Sunz
HQ
Deffkilla Wartrike, 120pts

FAST ATTACK
Warbikers 6, 151pts
-Nob with PK and Choppa

Warbikers 6, 151pts
-Nob with PK and Choppa

Stormboyz 30, 283pts
-Nob with PK and Choppa

Ork Vanguard - Bad Moons
HQ
Big Mek in Mega Armor, 112pts
-PK, Kustom Shoota, Kustom Force Field

ELITES
Tankbustas 10, 190pts
-Nob with Rokkit, 2 Bomb Squigs

Tankbustas 10, 190pts
-Nob with Rokkit, 2 Bomb Squigs

Kommandos 5, 53pts
-Nob with Power Klaw and Slugga, 1 Tankbusta Bomb

HEAVY SUPPORT
Mek Gun, 60pts
-1 Kustom Mega-Kannon, with Krew

Mek Gun, 60pts
-1 Kustom Mega-Kannon, with Krew

DEDICATED TRANSPORTS
Trukk, 64pts
-Big Shoota

Trukk, 64pts
-Big Shoota


TOTALS: 1970pts, 10 CPs (9 CPs with Warphead)

I intentionally left some points unspent so I have some wiggle-room once the TO gets back to me about Index models, scratch-built models, and so on.

Assuming the tournament is being played by people who are playing as competitively as possible, what do you think I'll have the most trouble with? Is my list even going to leave a mark?

Imperium list will likely give you a fair bit of trouble. You don't really have a way to clear out screening units. You have to go through them which can be brutal. Combine that with stuff like Deathwatch allies, and you could be in trouble. Also Flyers will be a nightmare to kill (but that's typical for Orks) I'd recommend switching to Tracktor Kannons instead or Mega-Kannons. Particularly if that lets you fit a third one in.

[Avaris]

Or they could make the game not crazy easy to break and still have it be focused on Narrative. We've been doing that for literal decades, so why re you forgiving them for this laziness now is beyond me.

So, this is speculation on the inner workings of GW, but I don’t think it’s laziness we’re seeing nowadays. It’s actually the exact opposite: it’s them stopping being lazy after decades of resting on their laurels.

The basic ruleset for Warhammer and 40k was established decades ago. It worked well enough, but is a product of its time: niche, complex, nerdy. It appeals to a certain type of player, but is difficult to gain traction on a wider game market. For a long time this was ok! There was no expectation that gaming of any type could be anything even approaching ‘mainstream’.

So GW got lazy. The task of the studio was simply to iterate on the basics, not to innovate. There was some innovation occuring, which is how we got things like Battlefleet Gothic, but for the ‘core’ games there wasn’t a lot going on: a Space Marine having 3+ to hit, S4 and T4, is pretty baked in. There has been some major change, 3rd edition 40k for example, but it’s still building from the same basis. This laziness became even more pronounced in the noughties, with the decline of things like the Specialist Games studio.

What this means is that the people in the studio are skilled in iteration, not innovation. Starting with the basic ruleset they can produce a somewhat balanced game, helped by the sheer levels of complexity within it: there are a lot of knobs available to turn. And they’ve gotten good at it! Not perfect, hence the regular balance complaints in base 40k, but good enough. The big problem is that the game is so complex, and has so many baked in assumptions, that when something is over or under powered it is actually quite difficult to adjust. You can change points values, or introduce variations on the rules, but can you change the shots or strength on a boltgun? Or the fact it has rapid fire? These difficulties are why pretty much the only response available to balance problems in 40k is the nerf bat.

As a result of this, I’ll wager that very few people in GW have the skill or experience to make a game from scratch. Some do, but for decades it’s not a thing the company has aimed to do. But then in the last decade or so the wider gaming market has shifted: it is becoming much more mainstream, with more and more game designers seeing their job as making something easily accessible but with depth of gameplay. I’m not saying these things didn’t exist before, but with the rise of the internet they have a much wider audience, with good design being recognised and poor design dismissed far more easily. You also have things like university degrees in game design, and people like Mark Rosewater and Donald X. Vaccarino talking at length about the games they design and the reason behind their choices.

Against this background, GW needs to evolve or die. Resting on its laurels will simply lead to a slow decline, as more and more of its market is eaten up by other games that are more accessible experiences: by accessible I don’t mean ‘simple’, I mean easy to understand and difficult to master. It will definitely be a slow decline: GW’s already enfranchised players won’t go anywhere, but the influx of new players will slow, or be harder to hold onto, as they find other things to spend their time and money on than a complex, decades old game with a high buy in cost.

I believe GW recognises this, certainly with the new CEO introduced a few years ago. So there is much more of a drive to innovate: that’s why we’re seeing more things with brand new rulesets like Underworlds and Adeptus Titanicus. The problem is that a lot of people in the studio don’t yet have the skills or experience to do so well and produce a balanced game: they can iterate from their very narrow band of experience, but they don’t fully understand the games, they simply apply the same techniques they used previously. That’s why we see nonsense like abilities to reroll 1s to wound in Apocalypse: it worked in 40k, why not here?

So GW is not lazy. It’s just a lot less skilled at being innovative that iterative. And now that it is recognising the need to be innovative, that the basic rules they’ve used for decades are not set in tablets of stone like holy commandments, we’re starting to see the impact of that much more. They’ll get there, eventually, but it’ll be a bit of a bumpy ride at times!

[Voidhawk]

Someone linked this to me earlier, and I found it pretty funny, so I thought I'd share: It's a parody news story.

That had me giggling like a loon!

[Wraith]

I believe GW recognises this, certainly with the new CEO introduced a few years ago. So there is much more of a drive to innovate: that’s why we’re seeing more things with brand new rulesets like Underworlds and Adeptus Titanicus. The problem is that a lot of people in the studio don’t yet have the skills or experience to do so well and produce a balanced game: they can iterate from their very narrow band of experience, but they don’t fully understand the games, they simply apply the same techniques they used previously. That’s why we see nonsense like abilities to reroll 1s to wound in Apocalypse: it worked in 40k, why not here?

This is very similar to something that I have spoken about amongst my friends - GW's biggest weakness is that they are the biggest miniatures/game company around and have been for a long time.

I'm not referring to the fact that being on top of the pile makes them complacent, although that certainly is a factor. More specifically it's to do with their hiring process; every person new to the industry wants to work for GW because they're the biggest and most famous, so GW is staffed by newbies who cut their teeth on AoS and Sigmar before either leaving the industry or otherwise taking their experience to other companies where they then learn to start innovating. Nearly everyone learns their craft "the GW way" rather than bringing their own experiences into the company.

Nottingham, where GW is based, is a weird little microcosm of gaming incest. Within 10 miles there are also Warlord Games, Mantic Games and Battlefront Games who are all gaming companies founded by (and still often staffed by) ex-GW employees. Slightly further afield we gave companies like DUST Studios in Italy - also GW alumni. All of them do some pretty cool stuff (even Paolo, when he's not preferring to do pseudo-criminal stuff) that they would never have been allowed to do at GW, to GW's cost.

I'm not saying that EVERY teenage dork with an idea for a cool game should be allowed free reign of the design team, of course, but there's a lot of untapped potential out there that's been going on for years, often by former GW employees; meanwhile GW were shutting down Specialist Games and suing people for use of the word "pauldron".

Someone linked this to me earlier, and I found it pretty funny, so I thought I'd share: It's a parody news story.

I remember a joke like this going around a couple of years ago, after an actual fight broke out in a real-life sci-fi convention in England.

Apparently the whole thing was started by a couple of Star Wars cosplayers who evaded police for hours after the fight had finished. They thought they had the right culprits early on, but it turned out these weren't the droids they were looking for.

One particularly belligerent Judge Dredd fan tried to impose order on artist's alley by himself; unfortunately it turned out that it was Detective-Sergeant Hopkins and his enormous wolfhound Saxon who were the law, not him.

The 40k hall is still under quarantine. At first the police thought that someone had used pepper spray or some other chemical against another fan, but it turned out that's just how 40k players tend to smell after 8 hours of gaming.

The day ended in tragedy when guest speaker Imedla Staunton, in full Dolores Umbridge costume, was killed and then consumed by a roving pack of Harry Potter fans. She wasn't even at the sci-fi convention; she was at Potter-Con 2 miles down the road, it's just that those fans are mental.

[Hootman]

Imperium list will likely give you a fair bit of trouble. You don't really have a way to clear out screening units. You have to go through them which can be brutal. Combine that with stuff like Deathwatch allies, and you could be in trouble. Also Flyers will be a nightmare to kill (but that's typical for Orks) I'd recommend switching to Tracktor Kannons instead or Mega-Kannons. Particularly if that lets you fit a third one in.

By Imperium, do you mean Marines, Guard, Other, or Soup? By my math, each biker unit should put a decent dent in any bubble-wrap, and I've got what feels like a good amount of anti-tank/anti-elite fire with my Tankbustas and KMKannons. I'm curious as to what you mean by screening units, and how other armies clear them out, so I can see if Orks can mimic the idea.

Flyers are definitely an issue, but again, Tankbustas might save me with the Dakka Dakka and Showing Off strategems to auto-hit on (exploding) 5s, rerolling to hit because it's a vehicle, and shooting twice. Plus, as you mentioned, Orks don't have good dedicated Flyer defense that is also TAC. Amusingly, I've noticed that killing everything except for the Flyers counts as a tabling, so there's a chance I just have to go for that if someone brings like 5 or 6 planes.

[Forum Explorer]

By Imperium, do you mean Marines, Guard, Other, or Soup? By my math, each biker unit should put a decent dent in any bubble-wrap, and I've got what feels like a good amount of anti-tank/anti-elite fire with my Tankbustas and KMKannons. I'm curious as to what you mean by screening units, and how other armies clear them out, so I can see if Orks can mimic the idea.

Flyers are definitely an issue, but again, Tankbustas might save me with the Dakka Dakka and Showing Off strategems to auto-hit on (exploding) 5s, rerolling to hit because it's a vehicle, and shooting twice. Plus, as you mentioned, Orks don't have good dedicated Flyer defense that is also TAC. Amusingly, I've noticed that killing everything except for the Flyers counts as a tabling, so there's a chance I just have to go for that if someone brings like 5 or 6 planes.

Soup or straight Imperial Guard. Basically units of Imperial guard spread out to protect tanks and elite units. Dealing with them usually involves some good shooting to quickly clear them out.

Most flyers have that -1 to hit, so it'll just be 6's. Tankbustas will help, but I'm not sure they are enough.

[Hootman]

Most flyers have that -1 to hit, so it'll just be 6's. Tankbustas will help, but I'm not sure they are enough.

The Dakka Dakka Strategem allows your auto-hit-exploding-dice to trigger on unmodified 5's. This also overwrites the penalty from Advancing, which is cool.

[JNAProductions]

The Dakka Dakka Strategem allows your auto-hit-exploding-dice to trigger on unmodified 5's. This also overwrites the penalty from Advancing, which is cool.

Technically it doesn't (so if you fire a "Mortal Wounds on 1" or "Slain on a 1" weapon against a -3 to-hit, you die/take wounds on a 1-4) but in this case it might as well.

[Forum Explorer]

The Dakka Dakka Strategem allows your auto-hit-exploding-dice to trigger on unmodified 5's. This also overwrites the penalty from Advancing, which is cool.

That's hilarious, and awesome.

[Blackhawk748]

Avaris Stuff

Ok, I probably should have been more specific. Certain parts of Apocalypse are insanely lazy. Like Pl. PL is stupid, straight up no arguments. It's dumb. Its dumb, because points exist and it takes a tiny bit more math to come up with an army that uses points and will be fairer than one who used solely PL, because PL is insanely easy to break on accident.

Putting everything in a solid unit. That's fine, lots of games do this. What isn't fine is that 1 unit pretty much equals 1 attack. There's a reason that Mantic has the normal amount of attacks be 8 or so (discounting Individuals), its so that you can get a proper number of dice to get a solid average.

Damage being resolved at the end of the phase. This simply sounds like a poor idea to me. You already have alternating activations, so I don't know why it's not resolved immediately.

Individuals in general. I don't like how they're being used as little more than a a giant command bubble. Kings of War does this, but Kings of War isn't heroic space fantasy. It's a game where you have giant bricks of dudes fight other giant bricks of dues. In 40k I expect a Terminator Captain to beat the tar out a squad of Guardsmen, so why can't he?

Really this looks like early AoS to me. A game that really should have been run through the tester a few more times.

Wraith Sutff

Pretty much. GW of years ago near constantly forced out people by not letting them do much of anything, or by just playing blatant favorites. It's why Mantic exists and its why they invented Fisty Glue Man and have an entire book in Kings of War that was pretty much made to let angry WHFB players come over and play with their Infantry Bricks when GW nuked the world.

[Cheesegear]

Its dumb, because points exist and it takes a tiny bit more math to come up with an army that uses points and will be fairer than one who used solely PL, because PL is insanely easy to break on accident.

Here's a revolutionary idea:
Make a program that does calculations for you. Some of kind of...List, that contains every unit in the Codex, with its relevant wargear, with its points cost. Then, you could just plug in your units to the program, and the program would do the maths for you. Easy. In the back of every Codex is a one-use Code that you plug into the App, boom. You get every units' points and wargear costs.

...Basically, just create Battlescribe without the rules. 'Cause you gotta sell those hard copies, amirite?

"Do you guys not have phones!?"

Individuals in general. I don't like how they're being used as little more than a a giant command bubble.

This is my issue. With the game being more random than ever before (e.g; One unit gets one attack, pay PR to fail.), the only way that any individual unit can matter, is with re-rolls.*

Except the joke is that most HQs also only have one attack, too...

In 40k I expect a Terminator Captain to beat the tar out a squad of Guardsmen, so why can't he?

Because rolling more than one dice at a time slows down the game and forces randomness. Trying to remember any number other than '1' is a bit hard for the bads.
If the game is random for both players, you don't need balance, right?

A game that really should have been run through the tester a few more times.

Yeah. But then the Apocalypse release would compete with CA'19 and the Sororitas Codex, and we need our customers spending money every single month. If we release too much stuff at the same time, people will only buy one thing.

*Or, you know...Spam.

[LansXero]

...Basically, just create Battlescribe without the rules. 'Cause you gotta sell those hard copies, amirite?

"Do you guys not have phones!?"

Your old is showing. What GW should actually do is buy the app as is, make it pay-for (like 5$ to unlock your faction; 50$ to unlock all of them), have it keep a searchable database of terms and you can click on a link on a unit entry and it brings up the rule's text (like it already does for the digital apple version of codices). Then whales and oldies can keep on overpaying for their physical relics, and normal people can have the quick, easy and reliable access to rules they deserve.

Yeah. But then the Apocalypse release would compete with CA'19 and the Sororitas Codex, and we need our customers spending money every single month. If we release too much stuff at the same time, people will only buy one thing.

After the insult that is releasing a unique model sister with rules as a GENERIC FKIN SUPERIOR I dont think they're banking too much on the SoB's release. Even if the noise marine, imperial marine or the female commissar had sucky rules, they at least HAD rules.

[Cheesegear]

Your old is showing. What GW should actually do is buy the app as is

Nah. Because then you'd be using your phone to produce rules.
Battlescribe would be awesome...If it didn't work on phones.

All's I want is Battlescribe to be a Calculator. I do not want it used as a Codex.

make it pay-for (like 5$ to unlock your faction; 50$ to unlock all of them)

Not with New GW, you wont.

have it keep a searchable database of terms and you can click on a link on a unit entry and it brings up the rule's text

If my opponent is using a device to show me - or a judge - full rules text, it had better not be on a phone.

What I really don't understand is why everyone has such an aversion to printed rules.

If I acquire a digital Codex - legally or otherwise - and I print out the rules on a physical page. Rather than bringing my entire ~100-page Codex (or three, plus Chapter Approved), or my valuable device that I do not want to lose or break (or have it lose charge in the middle of a game)... I bring the 15 pages or so that are relevant to my army - plus Datacards - ...Full size and everything! Why is that bad?

EDIT: ...Well, yeah. It's the '...or otherwise'.

[LansXero]

Nah. Because then you'd be using your phone to produce rules.
Battlescribe would be awesome...If it didn't work on phones.

All's I want is Battlescribe to be a Calculator. I do not want it used as a Codex.



Not with New GW, you wont.



If my opponent is using a device to show me - or a judge - full rules text, it had better not be on a phone.

What I really don't understand is why everyone has such an aversion to printed rules.

If I acquire a digital Codex - legally or otherwise - and I print out the rules on a physical page. Rather than bringing my entire ~100-page Codex (or three, plus Chapter Approved), or my valuable device that I do not want to lose or break (or have it lose charge in the middle of a game)... I bring the 15 pages or so that are relevant to my army - plus Datacards - ...Full size and everything! Why is that bad?

EDIT: ...Well, yeah. It's the '...or otherwise'.

Why are you under the impression that BattleScribe lists cant be printed out? Or that their formatting is more confusing than 'here is 12 assorted pages for you to fiddle with back and forth, that I copied off my codex'. I get the phone complaint, thats what tablets are for. Or PC (did you know BS works there as well? serious, maybe you didnt) which means I can print out a much more neatly formatted list and its very customizable. Of course, if it was a paid app Id expect I can print it wirelessly from my phone and the formatting to be improved.

[Avaris]

Ok, I probably should have been more specific. Certain parts of Apocalypse are insanely lazy. Like Pl. PL is stupid, straight up no arguments. It's dumb. Its dumb, because points exist and it takes a tiny bit more math to come up with an army that uses points and will be fairer than one who used solely PL, because PL is insanely easy to break on accident.

I’ll argue that

Power level, as implemented, is dumb. However the principle of having a way of quickly adding up an army without having to go to points per model feels sound. The problem is that they’ve gone from too granular for a large game (points) to not granular enough (power level). Because they have entire units costing 1 or 2 power level they have no room in the system for things like differentiating between types of heavy weapon. If power levels were set such that a unit of Space Marines, currently 4 PL, were 10 PL or so, it would have room for this sort of granularity without being as complex as points.

Putting everything in a solid unit. That's fine, lots of games do this. What isn't fine is that 1 unit pretty much equals 1 attack. There's a reason that Mantic has the normal amount of attacks be 8 or so (discounting Individuals), its so that you can get a proper number of dice to get a solid average.

This is Apocalypse’s big misstep, and it’s actually the same problem as Power Level: they’ve gone too far down the path away from granularity.

Damage being resolved at the end of the phase. This simply sounds like a poor idea to me. You already have alternating activations, so I don't know why it's not resolved immediately.

I think this is an interesting innovation to try. It very much changes the dynamic of how you use units: you can’t rely on a single alpha strike to remove a powerful enemy, so you need to work around it more. It wouldn’t suit every game, but I think it will work here. Caveat: it would again be better if more dice were rolled, so you could be more certain of hitting the bell curve of results. I like uncertainty over whether you’ve suceeded, but there is too much when it is reduced to a single die roll.

Individuals in general. I don't like how they're being used as little more than a a giant command bubble. Kings of War does this, but Kings of War isn't heroic space fantasy. It's a game where you have giant bricks of dudes fight other giant bricks of dues. In 40k I expect a Terminator Captain to beat the tar out a squad of Guardsmen, so why can't he?

Inclined to agree here. Again it comes down to granularity: when even Gullimann has 2 wounds and 2 attacks, there isn’t room for smaller heroes to stand out.

Really this looks like early AoS to me. A game that really should have been run through the tester a few more times.

I don’t think it’s quite so bad as that, with its ‘use wounds instead of points’! I feel it has been tested a lot as a base system, but due to the sheer number of datasheets to produce wasn’t so tested on a unit by unit basis. So they ended up with a system that succeeds on its own terms by creating a very streamlined experience, but didn’t stop and think whether the difficulties they presumably had in differentiating units meant it was TOO streamlined.

Personally, I think it still sounds like a good game. A lot of the decisions make sense to me, and I think it will prove at least as enjoyable as 40k. Butit definitely has issues, all of them down to the level of granularity chosen, which has gone too farinto the small numbers camp, so leaves limited space for variation in units.

Edit: thinking about it, I suspect they designed the game and playtested it extensively... with a small number of units. Primaris marines, Imperial Knights, basic guard etc. With a small selection of units it works well, they can be internally balanced against each other while still being differentiated, so they can focus on making it as streamlined as possible. But then once the rules and numbers are finalised they needto fit the other 1000 units in as well. Ah.

I don’t think this is a thing that would have been solved by more playtesting, but rather it needed someone with the skill and experience to raise their head above the detail of the ruleset and think ‘will this work at scale’? I think GW tends towards a very narrow focus in its design: you get a thing as good at being a thing as it can be, without thinking so much about the wider environment you’re creating.

[Cheesegear]

I think this is an interesting innovation to try.

Isn't that what play-testing is for?
Oh wait, GW only does the bare minimum of play-testing.

It very much changes the dynamic of how you use units: you can’t rely on a single alpha strike to remove a powerful enemy, so you need to work around it more.

That's not what it's for. It's so 12 year-old Timmy doesn't get his favourite unit killed before he gets to use it.

At a competitive level, it makes it so the game now plays as Rocket Tag. Whoever has the best Turn 1, pretty much wins*, because neither of you do damage until the end of Turn 1, and when you do do (heh, do do) damage, it happens at the same time. Which means who has what, left standing, at the start of Turn 2, has a massive advantage, because they just snowball every turn after.
It's...Bad.

The whole point of alternate activation is to interrupt your opponent's turn. If you don't do damage and prevent your opponent from Doing the Things, then what's the point of alternating activation?
Again, see Kill Team doing it right.

Here's hoping that Reserves aren't totally gimped in Apoc.

*While this can happen in 40K, at the competitive level, it doesn't, not really. Because you've built your army to not die (that's why T'au armies bring ~40 Shield Drones). But, in Apocalypse? Everything only has one or two wounds. Things dying is really easy. Oh noes. Out of Command Range? Pop. But you can't die on Turn 1, if you're using alternate activations because...Oh wait. Apoc is doing that wrong. Not sure what the point of introducing it was, really.

Caveat: it would again be better if more dice were rolled, so you could be more certain of hitting the bell curve of results.

Just spam low-PR units with Heavy weapons.

I like uncertainty over whether you’ve suceeded

I don't understand why you don't like knowing the effects of your actions.
Or is it more that you don't like your opponent knowing the effects of their actions?

I think GW tends towards a very narrow focus in its design: you get a thing as good at being a thing as it can be, without thinking so much about the wider environment you’re creating.

I think GW does play-testing with studio armies, not real armies.

[Avaris]

That's not what it's for. It's so 12 year-old Timmy doesn't get his favourite unit killed before he gets to use it.

I’m not entirely sure why you think wanting to actually get to use the model you’ve spent considerable time and money on is a thing to be mocked.

At a competitive level, it makes it so the game now plays as Rocket Tag. Whoever has the best Turn 1, pretty much wins*, because neither of you do damage until the end of Turn 1, and when you do do (heh, do do) damage, it happens at the same time. Which means who has what, left standing, at the start of Turn 2, has a massive advantage, because they just snowball every turn after.
It's...Bad.

Potentially, certainly. Though it depends how much damage a side is able to throw out vs how much it can survive. If each army has sufficient firepower that with average luck they can eliminate half the enemy, then sure, it’s rocket tag. If they can only destroy 1/6 even with good luck, it’s not so swingy, and stuff like WHICH units are destroyed matters more. I haven’t done the maths, but I suspect Apocslypse is somewhere between these two extremes.

The whole point of alternate activation is to interrupt your opponent's turn. If you don't do damage and prevent your opponent from Doing the Things, then what's the point of alternating activation?

That’s one interpretation certainly, but I see the point of alternate activation as being more to ensure both players are actively playing the game. Without alternate activation there are parts of the game where I don’t really need to care for quite a while, for example when my opponent is moving a horde of Tyranids towards me. I need to watch, sure, but I’m not engaged: that is not good game play.

I don't understand why you don't like knowing the effects of your actions.
Or is it more that you don't like your opponent knowing the effects of their actions?

Fundamentally, it’s because I like players having to commit to an uncertain choice and not immediately knowing the result. From a simulationist perspective it makes more sense: theoretically everything in the turn is happening at roughly the same time. Your unit of heavy weapons doesn’t get the luxury of waiting and seeing how much damage is dealt by the rest of the army before committing to what they’re going to shoot. This is also why the orders system is a good feature: you have to commit based on limited information.

Now, the important thing is that the unknown becomes known at a set point. You’re not going on no information, it’s just incomplete. It would be bad if, for example, you had to commit to all your targets before rolling anything to hit. I feel knowing the level of damage, with some uncertainty over the final outcome, is the right balance. Although continuing caveat that a bit more certainty would be good, like that which is available from the bell curve of dice results. The order of operations here isn’t a problem, the number of dice rolled and resulting level of uncertainty IS.

I think GW does play-testing with studio armies, not real armies.

No disagreement here!

[Cheesegear]

That’s one interpretation certainly, but I see the point of alternate activation as being more to ensure both players are actively playing the game.

You mean like Kill Team?

Without alternate activation there are parts of the game where I don’t really need to care for quite a while...

I am not against alternating activations. I am against alternating activations without consequences, of which I see few, if any.

Shunting damage armour saves to the end of turn removes almost all tactics on Turn 1. On Turn 2, you'll have to make decisions based on what you have left.
But Turn 1 will almost always be Rocket Tag, and lead to snowballing due to how simple weapon profiles are and how entire units only count as a single 'model'. Whoever makes the most armour saves, wins. Except you don't know what to put more armour saves on because you don't have the information you need to not be gambling, and by the time you do, it's too late.

Fundamentally, it’s because I like players having to commit to an uncertain choice and not immediately knowing the result.

Just out of curiosity, do you buy loot boxes? 'Cause that's what that is.
Did you buy a whole bunch of Space Marine Heroes blind-buys loot boxes?

From a simulationist perspective it makes more sense: theoretically everything in the turn is happening at roughly the same time.

Good narrative. Not good gameplay. We're on the same page.

This is also why the orders system is a good feature: you have to commit based on limited information.

Yep. It's X-Wing. I'm fine with it. Especially given that Detachments have to castle around Characters. So deciding what to do with your Detachment - and knowing with fair certainty what your opponent will do with theirs - is easy. 90% of the time it will be formulaic, but occasionally there will be clutch plays that you didn't expect. Not often. But sometimes.

[Avaris]

I am not against alternating activations. I am against alternating activations without consequences, of which I see few, if any.

Shunting damage armour saves to the end of turn removes almost all tactics on Turn 1. On Turn 2, you'll have to make decisions based on what you have left.
But Turn 1 will almost always be Rocket Tag, and lead to snowballing due to how simple weapon profiles are and how entire units only count as a single 'model'. Whoever makes the most armour saves, wins. Except you don't know what to put more armour saves on because you don't have the information you need to not be gambling, and by the time you do, it's too late.

I think we’re almost in agreement here: it’s just a difference in opinion on the level of information available. Having determined how many blast counters are on a unit, and particularly how many large and small there are, gives you some information. Get two largd blast markers on a marine unit, you can be almost certain of destroying it, given it’s only a 6+ save on a d6. And there are routes to modify their save as well through command assets. That’s enough information for me to go on and make an educated guess. The big problem is it’s a total reliance on one or two dice, so the impact of individual variability is much higher.

Just out of curiosity, do you buy loot boxes? 'Cause that's what that is.
Did you buy a whole bunch of Space Marine Heroes blind-buys loot boxes?

Nope, never bought SM heroes, and not a fan of the concept, as it’s A) completely random and B) once the randomness is resolved, there is no way to respond to it beyond taking the same action again. It only affects my choice in terms of a binary ‘did I get what I want?’ This second part is crucial, and I’d actually argue that the standard turn structure is more like loot boxes in this regard. You take your action, be it shooting or buying a lootbox, and then if you didn’t get what you want you just do the same action again until you run out of resources. Whereas with saves at end of turn, you’ve committed to a decision and thrn make do with what you have.

The other important difference to loot boxes is that you can control the randomness. As said, large blast markers are different to small, and you can modify saves in other ways. So the decision is over whether you are certain enough, not a complete random chance.

Good narrative. Not good gameplay. We're on the same page.

Different gameplay certainly. I’m not convinced it’s worse than what we have in 40k.

[LeSwordfish]

At a competitive level,

then dont play at a competitive level

[Avaris]

then dont play at a competitive level

Remember, every game is competitive if you’re trying to win

Though this brings me to another I feel fundamental problem in GW’s design processes. They haven’t yet learned the lesson (often stressed by Mark Rosewater in his podcasts on Magic) that it’s not enough to design what’s fun, you have to ensure that what is fun is what wins you the game.

I feel GW focuses on making fun ways to play an army/game. They design things which are cool to do, and match what they want the experience for that army to be. But in doing so, they don’t think about how it relates to what is necessary to win the game. So people who want to win, particularly at tournaments, are required to make the ‘unfun’ choice the the designers haven’t considered.