Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XXXVII: Highlighting the Contrasts

[LansXero]

The thing with Arena is twofold; we must all be frustrated architects or something, but we LOVE making complicated terrain and scenarios, so not having verticality sucks for us.

But thats the other half: Its not a competitive game, and it doesnt work as a competitive game. Its cool unbalanced fun with stuff you already own and trying to break each scenario to your favor; once you start making well-thought, dedicated KT lists and restricting oddball objectives / playstyles, you find out there isnt really all that much depth, and for all the added complication you could just play regular 40k instead. Tryhardism kills it really fast, so we always tried to keep it fresh and casual, even though we dont aproach 40k / AoS that way.

[Avaris]

The thing with Arena is twofold; we must all be frustrated architects or something, but we LOVE making complicated terrain and scenarios, so not having verticality sucks for us.

But thats the other half: Its not a competitive game, and it doesnt work as a competitive game. Its cool unbalanced fun with stuff you already own and trying to break each scenario to your favor; once you start making well-thought, dedicated KT lists and restricting oddball objectives / playstyles, you find out there isnt really all that much depth, and for all the added complication you could just play regular 40k instead. Tryhardism kills it really fast, so we always tried to keep it fresh and casual, even though we dont aproach 40k / AoS that way.

It’s a shame Kill Team didn’t reach it’s initial potential as a much tighter highend competitive game. As is, I get the impression it doesn’t really know what it is as a game, and is pulled in different directions by other games that are better in their niche. Want a campaign focussed skirmish game? Play Necromunda. Want a deep, finely balanced competitive game? Play Underworlds. Want a thing to while away a few hours in a friendly pick up game? Play 40k. What is Kill Team’s niche?

I wonder how much of Kill Team’s problem is it’s open roster approach. Underworlds can really pin things down by specifying the exact warbands in play, whereas Kill Team has much more variety. Problem is this variety is also available in 40k, which has abigger range of options, so Kill Team loses out.

I kind of think Kill Team would be better if it specified teams to some sxtent, perhaps offering each faction a few build choices and a bit of weapon flexibility, but otherwise specifying that a guard kill team, say, is always 10 models, including a sergeant, a medic and a specialist. Offer a few different styles of platoons, e.g replacing the specials with grenadiers, but otherwise be quite prescriptive, so you know roughly what is available to players and can balance around that.

[Requizen]

It’s a shame Kill Team didn’t reach it’s initial potential as a much tighter highend competitive game. As is, I get the impression it doesn’t really know what it is as a game, and is pulled in different directions by other games that are better in their niche. Want a campaign focussed skirmish game? Play Necromunda. Want a deep, finely balanced competitive game? Play Underworlds. Want a thing to while away a few hours in a friendly pick up game? Play 40k. What is Kill Team’s niche?

I wonder how much of Kill Team’s problem is it’s open roster approach. Underworlds can really pin things down by specifying the exact warbands in play, whereas Kill Team has much more variety. Problem is this variety is also available in 40k, which has abigger range of options, so Kill Team loses out.

I kind of think Kill Team would be better if it specified teams to some sxtent, perhaps offering each faction a few build choices and a bit of weapon flexibility, but otherwise specifying that a guard kill team, say, is always 10 models, including a sergeant, a medic and a specialist. Offer a few different styles of platoons, e.g replacing the specials with grenadiers, but otherwise be quite prescriptive, so you know roughly what is available to players and can balance around that.

KT's niche seems to be "40k for lazy people". Don't want to bring a lot of models? Don't want to play for 2+ hours? Don't want to set up a 4x6 board? Don't want to paint anything bigger than a pill bottle, or more than a handful of sculpts? Kill Team is the game for you! Less commitment, similar (but not same) ruleset, quick and small.

The thing is... people who want to play 40k are just gonna play 40k. And people who want to play a small skirmish wargame have a glut of other options to play on the market right now - Freeblades, Wild West Exodus, Batman, Arena Rex, Malifaux, Infinity, etc. Now, I can't speak to the balance or viability of those games, and KT has felt more up my alley from the times I've tried various ones, but... there's really keeping people engaged with Kill Team compared to other games, especially when GW treats it like a red-headed step child compared to every other game they produce.

Didn't mean that to sound as rant-y as it did, but yeah, Kill Team is a game I want to love but just doesn't seem to stick, between minimal players in the area and various frustrations with the game itself. Really hoping Warcry gets it right.

[LansXero]

Commanders was a horribly timed release with poorly thought out rules and models and a price point that was a joke. If you switched things around and we'd had sub-factions and Elites at the time, Im sure the game would've gotten the second wind it so sorely needed.

[Wraith]

I think my initial suspicions about Kill Team have been confirmed. Whatever we - the players - ever thought it would be, GW have only ever seen it as an 8th edition update to Shadow War, which itself was a quick and shameless cash-in to sell off a few blister packs which were slow moving in 40k.

There wasn't ever a plan to make it a viably competitive skirmish game, not alongside a nostalgic fan-favourite like Necromunda, whose update schedule has been way more consistent and better planned. There was never a plan to make it into the tactically sound and competitive boardgame like Underworld, which has (as far as I know) proven way more popular than even GW could have hoped for.

It's just their "we had one of these last edition, so we'd better pump out a new rulebook and some overpriced characters to stop people from complaining too much" game that is nominally a gate-way into 'real' 40k, but was quickly priced out of that niche by the necessity of boxes like Arena.
Which is a shame; I like Kill Team and I think that had it been released at the start of 8th edition, preventing it from being eclipsed by Necromunda and allowing it to actually be a gateway into the new ruleset rather than an add-on to an already established one, it would have been a lot more popular. Hell; they should have released it 6 months before 8th edition, and everyone would have scrambled to buy it for their first taste of the "new game", albeit in miniature.

Instead, 'Specialist Games' is quickly getting oversaturated again and Kill Team is the first game to suffer for it. I reckon that Underworlds/Warcry will be next, cannibalising each others' playerbases. God forbid that some bright spark also decide to bring back Mordheim and really put all three of them down... And I *LOVED* Mordheim!

[Cheesegear]

It’s a shame Kill Team didn’t reach it’s initial potential as a much tighter highend competitive game.

I don't know what you think it was ever going to be that. With its twice-watered down Necromunda rules, it was doomed from the start. It's highest potential was always the garbage fire.

I wonder how much of Kill Team’s problem is it’s open roster approach.

As a game, the Open Roster is the only thing that makes it competitive. Automatically lose because your opponent is playing a certain Faction? Nope. Tailor hard, son.
As a product, casuals don't know they have to invest a ****load if they want to make the game even - which they don't - because the game doesn't feel fair (because they haven't invested because GW made them think they didn't have to), they quit, rather than try and make the game better.

Underworlds can really pin things down by specifying the exact warbands in play

...Which is great. Because your 'army list' is actually your deck.
...In which case you have to buy every single warband and you have something like 200 options to make your deck and now casuals are overwhelmed by the amount of money that they have to spend and even if they do, they're overwhelmed by the amount of choices they have.

Your Warband is irrelevant. It's your deck that matters.

[Avaris]

I don't know what you think it was ever going to be that. With its twice-watered down Necromunda rules, it was doomed from the start. It's highest potential was always the garbage fire.

It’s more that it’s a clear niche it could have filled: potential, not execution. If they’d gone down a route of fixing the issues that became apparent early on they could have ended up with a quick to play game that both allowed 40k players to use part of their collection in a tightly balanced game and provided a ramp up for new players into 40k. As is, they just added bloat without fixing on a particular identity for the game.

As a game, the Open Roster is the only thing that makes it competitive. Automatically lose because your opponent is playing a certain Faction? Nope. Tailor hard, son.
As a product, casuals don't know they have to invest a ****load if they want to make the game even - which they don't - because the game doesn't feel fair (because they haven't invested because GW made them think they didn't have to), they quit, rather than try and make the game better.

Closed rosters would help prevent this imbalance in the first place though: if you know how many models a given faction will have, it gives you a balance knob to tweak. Note I’m not suggesting fully closed rosters: give people a points allowance for weaponry, tactics cards and skills for example. But from my understanding the biggest potential imbalance is sheer weight of bodies some factions can take, so controlling THAT would give a basis for bslancing from.

...Which is great. Because your 'army list' is actually your deck.
...In which case you have to buy every single warband and you have something like 200 options to make your deck and now casuals are overwhelmed by the amount of money that they have to spend and even if they do, they're overwhelmed by the amount of choices they have.

Your Warband is irrelevant. It's your deck that matters.

The deck is the customisation mechanic Underworlds has chosen to focus on, and by choosing that it has a basis for balancing on. Kill Team’s problem is it has too many vectors for variance: faction, model choice, weapons choice, tactics cards, specialist skills, freedom of movement around the battlefield. With so many variables it’s very difficult to have a well-balanced game: there will be more unbalanced combinations than the designers can reasonably account for. Underworlds has a chance to be well-balanced as it shut many of these variables down and focussed on one (the deck) that is easier to control.

It’s a similar problem with 40k, and why I believe it will never be a well-balanced game. There is absolutely some balance, but the variability derived from unit choice, weapons load outs, movement considerations, strategems etc etc, not to mention the high buy in cost for new units, is more than can be reasonably designed for, so easily broken by a WAAC approach. For some people this is absolutely fine, and tournaments remain exciting, but in my opinion it creates too much of a gulf in experiences: someone looking to graduate from a local play scene to a larger tournament will have a bad time. As an example, recall the GW studio’s surprise when two tournament level players were conga lining guard to control space and use auras: it’s a fundamentally different game to what they design for! (Which incidentally is why AoS often feels better designed: they have a much closer control on the appropriate rules wording, e.g always using ‘wholly within’ for auras).

Trying to control 40k, eg by restricting unit choice in an army, is impossible and goes against what the game is for many people: the variability is a huge part of the appeal, so the designers need to aim for ‘good enough’ balance alongside all these variables. Kill Team feels like a missed opportunity to design a game controlling some more of the variables and so enabling greater balance, but has ended up as a ‘mini 40k’ with all of the problems that entsils, while gaining few advantages from its smaller size.

Incidentally, this is why Apocalypse is intriguing to me. Despite the size of games, I’m curious to see whether it dnds up better balanced than 40k, given it is a whole new ruleset.

[Cheesegear]

If they’d gone down a route of fixing the issues that became apparent early on they could have ended up with a quick to play game that both allowed 40k players to use part of their collection in a tightly balanced game and provided a ramp up for new players into 40k.

Sweep & Clear
Auto-win if your opponent Breaks, otherwise
3 VPs per Objective.
1 VP per enemy model OoA.

The Objective is to Break/Table my opponent. If not, just stand on my opponent's Objectives.

Take Prisoners
3 VPs to Capture enemy Leader
1 VP every other model Captured.
Capturing = Taking enemy models OoA in Melee.

The Objective is to Table my opponent in Melee.

Recover Intelligence
5 Objectives.
1 VP per round for the Objectives closest to you.
2 VPs per round for the for the Objectives in your opponent's DZ.
3 VPs per round for the centre Objective.

Charge onto the centre Objective and control it. You can't move after Shooting, so what's the point?

Terror Tactics
Auto-win if your opponent Breaks, otherwise
2 VPs per each model that breaks through enemy lines
1 VP for each model OoA.

Table your opponent. If not, Charge your opponent as quickly as possible, then run off the board.

The win conditions of the game strongly favour Melee armies (especially with the small board size). This is why the game strongly favours models like Veteran Specialists and Genestealers, etc. This is why Harlequins were so broken at launch. Because people didn't realise that they could tailor their armies every time. You know your opponent is going to run at you as fast as they can. This is why models like Cultists, Tzaangors and Poxwalkers became so strong early on. They're okay in Melee. But your opponent only has so many 'elite' Melee models, so if they Charge you, you can just drown them in bodies.

Which opens up for ranged Deathwatch and Grey Knights with Storm Bolters. Each model has four shots each. If you cluster your models together - because your DZ only has so much Cover in it and you don't have much room - you open up the possibility to cut down hordes before they do anything.

Which opens up for Genestealers, who can Charge you before you have the oppurtunity to shoot them.

For obvious reasons, Asuryani Howling Banshees dominated at BAO.

The ability to tailor to your opponent's Faction is what makes the game competitive.
You know - roughly - what your opponent is going to do.
Counter it.
Your opponent knows what you can do to counter their list. Can you counter that?

The ability to bluff and double-bluff your opponent is what keeps the game even remotely fair.

Melee armies were also hard-countered by verticality of terrain. Except GW decided to split the already-small player-base by offering a format that didn't have verticality.

Note I’m not suggesting fully closed rosters: give people a points allowance for weaponry, tactics cards and skills for example.

Tournaments do.
You have 200 Points (I think BAO went to 250 with Elites)
Before the game, your opponent tells you their Faction.
Choose 100 Points out of your Roster (I know for a fact BAO was 125).
Both players reveal their lists at the same time.
(I meant to check BAO army lists when they were available...But I forgot. However, I do know that Howling Banshees dominated both days)

The only difference is that the rulebook doesn't put a limit on your roster.
The tournament system gives you options, without being literally everything you can choose.

Read the Missions. You choose your Kill Team after knowing what Faction your opponent has.
You don't just rock up to your gaming table with a pre-made Kill Team and ask for a game.
You rock up to a gaming table with your entire Roster, and ask for a game.

But, again, I have to stress again that putting a points limit on your Roster is something the ITC did, not GW.

But from my understanding the biggest potential imbalance is sheer weight of bodies some factions can take

You know what your opponent's Faction is. Do you have access to Rapid Fire weapons? I don't understand the problem.

With so many variables it’s very difficult to have a well-balanced game:

The single most balancing factor of any game, is the win conditions.

It’s a similar problem with 40k, and why I believe it will never be a well-balanced game. There is absolutely some balance, but the variability derived from unit choice

The win conditions are Objectives.
How do you hold Objectives?
How do you stop your opponent holding Objectives?

Choose models based on those two things.

[Requizen]

In which case you have to buy every single warband and you have something like 200 options to make your deck and now casuals are overwhelmed by the amount of money that they have to spend and even if they do, they're overwhelmed by the amount of choices they have.

I have it on fairly reliable sources that they are aware of this issue and you can expect some changes going into Season 3 of Underworlds from the Cards/Models drama. Nothing more than that, and as always it's possible they try to fix it and drop the ball, but they're apparently working on something, which is good for people who don't want to mass buy like myself.

Your Warband is irrelevant. It's your deck that matters.

Except the mechanics of your warband shape your deck, especially with a lot of the crazy stuff being on the BAR list. But your deck sets your Objectives and the Power cards that get you those objectives, so the deck is the thing that matters, except your warband needs to mesh well with it... it's kinda both?

As a game, the Open Roster is the only thing that makes it competitive. Automatically lose because your opponent is playing a certain Faction? Nope. Tailor hard, son.
As a product, casuals don't know they have to invest a ****load if they want to make the game even - which they don't - because the game doesn't feel fair (because they haven't invested because GW made them think they didn't have to), they quit, rather than try and make the game better.

This I super agree with though. Kill Team has the only version of "sideboarding" that really has seemed to work for miniatures games in my experience. I keep trying to make sideboarding a thing in 40k/AoS but it's always "oh that neuters the viability of TAC lists" and "oh but then my gimmick will always be countered" style of whining, which I seriously don't understand.

I love Open Roster picking. That's the part of KT I love the most, honestly, but everyone just ignores it.

I think my initial suspicions about Kill Team have been confirmed. Whatever we - the players - ever thought it would be, GW have only ever seen it as an 8th edition update to Shadow War, which itself was a quick and shameless cash-in to sell off a few blister packs which were slow moving in 40k.

There wasn't ever a plan to make it a viably competitive skirmish game, not alongside a nostalgic fan-favourite like Necromunda, whose update schedule has been way more consistent and better planned. There was never a plan to make it into the tactically sound and competitive boardgame like Underworld, which has (as far as I know) proven way more popular than even GW could have hoped for.

It's just their "we had one of these last edition, so we'd better pump out a new rulebook and some overpriced characters to stop people from complaining too much" game that is nominally a gate-way into 'real' 40k, but was quickly priced out of that niche by the necessity of boxes like Arena.
Which is a shame; I like Kill Team and I think that had it been released at the start of 8th edition, preventing it from being eclipsed by Necromunda and allowing it to actually be a gateway into the new ruleset rather than an add-on to an already established one, it would have been a lot more popular. Hell; they should have released it 6 months before 8th edition, and everyone would have scrambled to buy it for their first taste of the "new game", albeit in miniature.

Instead, 'Specialist Games' is quickly getting oversaturated again and Kill Team is the first game to suffer for it. I reckon that Underworlds/Warcry will be next, cannibalising each others' playerbases. God forbid that some bright spark also decide to bring back Mordheim and really put all three of them down... And I *LOVED* Mordheim!

GW honestly has everything necessary for a fantastic small-level skirmish game. Great miniatures, great lore from multiple worlds/settings, a huge community, an online presence, app developers (apparently, though they could use more). But they either just don't care about making those types of games, or don't know how to support it. I think it's the latter.

They've never really been great about "support". Up until the late 00s, there really was no such thing as a "tightly supported miniatures game", since everything was still based on waiting for publications that might come out whenever. Now, everyone has realized that you can actively support a rulebase and update rules without waiting for a new model release to go alongside it. And GW is dipping their toes in - General's Handbook and Chapter Approved, better/more regular FAQs, playtesters and tournament feedback - but they have yet to apply that to something like Kill Team. Underworlds, sure, but that game is kind of a different beast, more controlled and curated than a true "your dudes" skirmish game like people want.

They could do it with Necromunda. They could do it with Kill Team. They could have done it with Skirmish (though that balance was straight trash). They still might get it right with Warcry. Either way, they're basically sitting on free money, there's a load of people out there who would dump tons onto a solid, balanced, supported small-level Skirmish game that isn't just an afterthought.

[9mm]

Ironicly I have an easier time getting a kill team game than a full 40k game.

[Cheesegear]

Ironicly I have an easier time getting a kill team game than a full 40k game.

Ironic? Maybe more like...Statistically, somewhere, Kill Team is actually made for somebody.

A lot like '30K being dead'. That can't be true. Not literally. Someone, somewhere, is still very interested in playing 30K and they are in fact, getting games.

[LansXero]

There's a load of people out there who would dump tons onto a solid, balanced, supported small-level Skirmish game that isn't just an afterthought.

Then why isnt Infinity everywhere and anywhere?
- Solid models. The sculpts are some of the best across the industry.
- Low entry cost. You can have a full Infinity army for less than a full KT roster, adjusting for factions of course.
- Amazing entry level products. The 2 player boxes with the Beyond upgrade give you 2 tournament-size armies, completely viable, without fiddling with single model / unit purchases
- A well mantained lore that is constantly evolving.
- Tight control over the ruleset, enacting changes and fix through constant feedback from the community.
- Worldwide campaigns with impact in the lore AND the release of new models based on that.

So its solid, balanced, supported and not an aftertought. Its also still tiny in the US, dead here and likely wont ever massively break outside of Spain.

Ironic? Maybe more like...Statistically, somewhere, Kill Team is actually made for somebody.

A lot like '30K being dead'. That can't be true. Not literally. Someone, somewhere, is still very interested in playing 30K and they are in fact, getting games.

From our admitedly limited local experience, people who buy 30k barely ever get to play 30k. They tend to use their toys as 'count-as' for 40k (which is fine because some of them are amazing), for conversions (some of the 30k bits are stunning) or due to FW giving them rules in both systems. But 30k is basically 7th.25 and people already had their fill of that. Its also VERY EXPENSIVE 7.25th. But the models are beautiful and a delight to paint, so thats a factor on why it sells despite being 'dead'

[Requizen]

Then why isnt Infinity everywhere and anywhere?
- Solid models. The sculpts are some of the best across the industry.
- Low entry cost. You can have a full Infinity army for less than a full KT roster, adjusting for factions of course.
- Amazing entry level products. The 2 player boxes with the Beyond upgrade give you 2 tournament-size armies, completely viable, without fiddling with single model / unit purchases
- A well mantained lore that is constantly evolving.
- Tight control over the ruleset, enacting changes and fix through constant feedback from the community.
- Worldwide campaigns with impact in the lore AND the release of new models based on that.

So its solid, balanced, supported and not an aftertought. Its also still tiny in the US, dead here and likely wont ever massively break outside of Spain.

I would argue there's a handful of things about it that keep it from being popular, though my experience with it is quite limited. Metal models are a real turn off for some people, especially compared to the quality of plastics nowadays. Ruleset is very in depth, which is both a blessing and a curse with complexity and a glut of options/special rules/etc - great for hardcore players, not as fun for casual/middle of the road players, especially to jump into.

But from my (again limited) experience, the playerbase is a real turnoff. At least here in the states, the pockets of players I've seen have had the level of powergamer/neckbeardiness to put most 40k communities to shame. Maybe it's just in my area, however, I've just gone to a couple game nights and nosed around a few events and never got the impression that it's the type of environment I'd enjoy hanging around in. That doesn't say anything about the game, but it's hard to decouple the two, especially if my experience is not an outlier.

I actually really want to like Infinity, since sci-fi Skirmish game with impactful reactions is right up my alley, but I've just found it hard to commit to.

[LansXero]

Rules-bloat is sadly a consequence of reducing the scale, as you need more granularity or it becomes Rocket Tag. However, I do agree that Infinity could use dialing it way back, and it can be played fine without dealing with all the more complex stuff (linked teams, multiple levels of camo vs visor, etc.). Cant do anything about the community though.

I dont particularly like it, because its very, very easy to unintentionally club seals when you teach to new people. The huge ranges and people's obliviousness to LoS mean their every move trigger a ton of AROs and it feels bad to be under fire all the time.

[Wraith]

The Primaris Marine Funk Pops will be available in bare grey plastic, allowing 40k fans to paint theirs in the Chapter colour of their choice.

Someone, somewhere, is going to convert a whole Tac Squad of them, aren't they? I can see it happening right away, and then the doors open to a Chaos Marine version, then Aeldari..... This is just the beginning.

[Manticoran]

The Primaris Marine Funk Pops will be available in bare grey plastic, allowing 40k fans to paint theirs in the Chapter colour of their choice.

Someone, somewhere, is going to convert a whole Tac Squad of them, aren't they? I can see it happening right away, and then the doors open to a Chaos Marine version, then Aeldari..... This is just the beginning.

Timeline on how long until someone bases it and uses it to proxy a Primarch?

[Blackhawk748]

Timeline on how long until someone bases it and uses it to proxy a Primarch?

5 minutes after they assemble it?

[LansXero]

Timeline on how long until someone bases it and uses it to proxy a Primarch?

too big, but it can maybe make a passable 'naut.

Not painting it and selling it as 'do it yourself' gotta be the laziest cashgrab Ive seen. Its not like we could've just sprayed any of the others and done it anyways, right? no we need this very special unpainted one. ugh.

[EhDerangedMonk]

First crack at an Eldar list.

Spoiler: Alaitoc

Show

Battalion 1

HQs
119-Autarch Skyrunner-Banshee Mask, Laser Lance, Fusion Gun
132-Farseer Skyrunner

Troops
60-5 Rangers
60-5 Rangers
60-5 Rangers

Heavy Support
111-3 Support Weapons with Shadow Weavers
111-3 Support Weapons with Shadow Weavers
111-3 Support Weapons with Shadow Weavers

Total Points
764

Battalion 2

HQs
80-Ilic Nightspear
140-Maugan Ra

Troops
60-5 Rangers
60-5 Rangers
60-5 Rangers

Heavy Support
157-Fire Prism with Twin Shuriken Catapult
157-Fire Prism with Twin Shuriken Catapult
157-Fire Prism with Twin Shuriken Catapult

Total Points
871

Spearhead
55-Warlock

Heavy Support
102-3 Dark Reapers
102-3 Dark Reapers
102-3 Dark Reapers

Total Points
361

Overall Total
1,996 Points, 14 CP

I own none of these models yet, so nothing's final.

I didn't see a response to this so I'll give it a crack. As always advice is meta-dependant and highly opinionated.

I have made the assumption that the Autarch is the warlord for the CP regen and that you're probably taking wings on the Warlock so you can use him to jinx the enemy since you don't have any good buff targets for him.

Everyone knows farseers are good. Farseers on bikes are not an exception. Never leave home without doom.

Illic sucks- he can't even ignore invulnerable saves let alone do the laundry list of things a vindicare can do.

Fusion Gun on Autarch can be cut if you need points at some point in the future.

6x5 rangers are fine. I prefer a mix of troops myself since dire avengers have better defensive stats when not in cover, are cheaper, can advance and shoot, and have more wounds. Can't really go wrong with rangers. Both kinds of guardians are also decent but you'll get what you pay for.

MSU Dark reapers are for tempest launcher spam. Where are your tempest launchers? You clearly aren't msu to fill the detachment since you have 6HS slots wasting space. Big blobs of reapers can fire & fade or be buffed to high heavens. Group up or take some tempest launchers.

Support weapons are decent after their points cut. I don't have a lot of experience with them but I did hear of 3x3 Vibrocannons in the top results of a major last week. Make sure to magnetize these.

Maugan Ra? Okay. He's a decent alternative HQ if you have the points and don't need another farseer/warlock.

Not a huge fan of fire prisms myself. They're somewhat lackluster without the stratagem and I find that using the stratagem has a high chance of either wasting one fire prism's shooting or risking a high-priority target's survival.

[Wraith]

Not painting it and selling it as 'do it yourself' gotta be the laziest cashgrab Ive seen. Its not like we could've just sprayed any of the others and done it anyways, right? no we need this very special unpainted one. ugh.

In fairness, normal funko pops are sealed/varnished, which means you needs to sand them down if you want to do a decent paint job of your own on them. The naked ones at least just that step out, which is probably a great time-saver and assurance of quality, compared to accidentally sanding away someone's eye and then falling down the slippery slope of trying to do the other one to match, then going too far, and having to do the OTHER one again....

....I'm being very generous in this suggestion. There is no doubt in my mind that GW had every intention of selling naked pops, if it meant getting people to buy more paint and big brushes for them, too.

[Bobby Baratheon]

I played the third round in my escalation league last week, and saw a G(M?)orkanaut in action for the first time (at 1000 points, no less). Thanks to it being a week ago and me almost never playing against Orks, I'm a little fuzzy on some of the details on his army, so I may get the specifics wrong. We also played on a 4x4 table with 12" deployment zones, so we started fairly close to each other.

Spoiler: My list - 1000 points of Kraken Nids

Show

Hive Tyrant w/ devourers, mrc and -1 to hit relic
Tyranid Prime

Warriors x3 w/ deathspitters and a mix of boneswords and scything talons
Warriors x3 w/ deathspitters and a mix of boneswords and scything talons
Rippers

5 Carnifexes w/ 4x devourers, spore cysts and acid maw

Spoiler: His list - 1000 points of Goth Orks

Show

Weirdboy
The HQ with a random gun (warlord)
Some sort of Nob

20x slugga boyz
20x slugga boyz
10x gretchin

15ish lootas

Gorkanaut (or Morkanaut, idk)

This scenario was a weird one, with a single objective in the middle with a shrinking zone of control (18", shrinking by 3" every round) being the main way to win. First Blood, Slay the Warlord and Linebreaker were also in effect.

Spoiler: The game

Show

Turn 1
I go first, move forward into range and shoot a bunch. All but five of the boys are dead, the gretchin catching heat and dying thanks to a strategem. I chip a few wounds off the Naut. I get First Blood and control the objective. 2-0.

He goes and mostly just advances. He puts his shooting into my carnifexes, and as it turns out -1 to hit is really nasty when your army is BS5+. The exploding shots helped him, but those also being at -1 meant that, if he rolled a six, he had a 1/6 chance of getting another hit. One carnifex dies to weight of fire from the Naut and the Lootas. He goes to charge phase - the rest of the boyz die in overwatch and the Naut pulls off a 11" inch charge, killing two carnifexes and badly wounding another (putting me down to 2 left). I still control the objective, so no points for him. 2-0.

Turn 2
The wounded carnifex in melee falls back to be 1.1" outside of the Naut. I shoot the Naut with everything except the warriors (who kill ~6 lootas), finally bringing it down a bracket. I charge, sending in the wounded carnifex first to draw fire. It does, but miraculously it doesn't die. I then charge in the Hive Tyrant, the remaining fex and the Warriors. I start with the injured fex, which knocks a few wounds off. He interrupts with the stratagem, killing the injured carnifex and badly wounding the last one. I then fail to do anything with the other carnifex, but the Hive Tyrant straight murders it by rolling three 6's to wound (with each being Ap6 and D3). I consolidate, heading towards his remaining HQs and his looters.

His lootas fall victim to -1 to hit and miss with pretty much everything. He charges with his HQs, but fails to scratch the Hive Tyrant. The Hive Tyrant retaliates by murdering both HQs (his warlord is still alive, parked in a corner). I control the central objective still, so 3-0.

Turn 3
I move towards him and shoot down the rest of the lootas. I control the objective, so 4-0.

He shoots with his HQ, failing to kill the last carnifex, and concedes. I win 4-0.

Definitely one of the fastest games of 40k I've ever played. I was expecting him to bring as many boyz as fit into 1000 points (hence the five dakka fexesand devourers on the hive tyrant), so the Naut was a surprise. It did some damage, but its shooting got shafted pretty hard by the -1 to hit and there just wasn't a way it was going to survive melee with multiple carnifexes and a Hive Tyrant. So far in the league, I've virtually tabled each opponent on turn 3 of every game and most of that has been due to the carnifexes and the Walkrant. I get why the Walkrant is so vulnerable at higher points limits, but at low levels with the -1 to hit relic he's straight murderous. 9" movement with Kraken advance (and the 1CP stratagem to double the advance) and the capability of Onslaughting himself makes him very mobile. He's definitely been fun to use, so much so that I actually mostly finished painting him and named him the Lindwurm.

This week is 1250 points and is a weird custom scenario involving me defending a gate from Dark Angels (my main army in 7th when mechanized infantry was a viable strategy ). If he controls the gate, which is on the middle my side of the table and takes up 2" x 14", he gets to use sustained assault, which I obviously don't want to happen. I get a 12" deployment zone, but he gets a 24" one, so he can start 12" away from me. Crucially, he also automatically gets to go first, so I need screens and defense to survive the first turn onslaught. After messing around with lists, this is what I've arrived at:

Spoiler: 1250 Nids

Show

Battalion - Kraken
Hive Tyrant w/ heavy venom cannon, mrc and -1 to hit relic
Neurothrope

Termagants x10
Termagants x10
Termagants x10

Carnifexes x3 w/ 2x scything talons and spore cysts

Battalion - Jormungandr
Tyranid Prime w/ deathspitter and boneswords
Tyranid Prime w/ deathspitter and boneswords

Warriors x3 w/ deathspitters, boneswords and a venom cannon
Warriors x3 w/ deathspitters, boneswords and a venom cannon
Warriors x3 w/ deathspitters, boneswords and a venom cannon

Tyrannofex w/ acid spray

The plan is pretty simple - the gants and the carnifexes are going to be our defensive line. If any of the carnifexes live, they can fall back and charge thanks to Kraken. In between that, everything gets to shoot. He has to get up in my face to win, so the limited range on the tyrannofex shouldn't matter and 4d6 S7 AP1 D1d3 auto-hits should do work against marines. The 8 shots from the stinger salvo on the tyrannofex and the warriors should give me a bunch of heavy bolter shots to chew through troops or chip wounds off anything bigger. My assumption is he's bringing bikes, but who knows. The 13 command points should be pretty important - if I can keep at least one melee heavy hitter alive, I can fight twice with it multiple rounds in combination with the reroll wounds stratagem. I also think I might go with mortal wound spam with the psykers - 2 smites and Psychic Scream should be good to mindbullet some fools. Since it's Dark Angels, I also assume that he's bringing plasma spam, so -1 to hit on the Hive Tyrant and the carnifexes should go a long ways towards keeping them alive. I might also burn 2 CP on the Prepared Position stratagem just to get the fexes and Hive Tyrant to 2+ saves for the first turn. The T.O.'s gave us a few custom stratagems for this round, noe of which gives a unit +1 to its save until it moves. Giving the Hive Tyrant +2 to his 3+ save in addition to being -1 to shoot at and having a 4+ invulnerable might be enough to keep him alive the first turn, with Catalyst hopefully picking up the slack once he does.

[Tyracus]

Then why isnt Infinity everywhere and anywhere?
- Solid models. The sculpts are some of the best across the industry.
- Low entry cost. You can have a full Infinity army for less than a full KT roster, adjusting for factions of course.
- Amazing entry level products. The 2 player boxes with the Beyond upgrade give you 2 tournament-size armies, completely viable, without fiddling with single model / unit purchases
- A well mantained lore that is constantly evolving.
- Tight control over the ruleset, enacting changes and fix through constant feedback from the community.
- Worldwide campaigns with impact in the lore AND the release of new models based on that.

So its solid, balanced, supported and not an aftertought. Its also still tiny in the US, dead here and likely wont ever massively break outside of Spain.

Distribution is a big issue as well. I know my local shop has issues getting it and often gets shorted specials/limited items. Also there are a few translation issues (one of the missions in ITS was completely different in English vs. Spanish) but it is well supported and the company puts a lot of effort and care into the game. Said rules also make a sharp spike in the learning curve early on but after that it's a matter of application and practice (I personally find the constant memorization of new codices and rules for 40K to be more tedious). Also impacting it is the limited gaming market and the niche appeal/limited history of Infinity and it's a bit of a struggle to gain market share (but Corvus has been doing well). Really the market is pretty heavily flooded if you look around and disposable income is generally down.

That aside how are other people seeing knights in their meta. It's kind of turned things into a weird rock/paper/scissors meta locally for us and are generally a massive pain to deal with if your codex came out before they were released. As Tau I get "You have railguns" (hint, they don't work well) or "Your line troops wound them on 5s" (had to resist laughing in his face in trying to pass mass firewarriors as an answer to knights) and with Nids it was "Mass Hive Guard, double shoot and pray" which is not really that useful either (I have 0 of said model) so they're generally "Play against and loose because I can't mass enough ommph" or beat knights and don't have enough to work against hordes. Just curious what else other people are seeing and your opinions on how knights have hit the meta in your experience.

[Requizen]

Distribution is a big issue as well. I know my local shop has issues getting it and often gets shorted specials/limited items. Also there are a few translation issues (one of the missions in ITS was completely different in English vs. Spanish) but it is well supported and the company puts a lot of effort and care into the game. Said rules also make a sharp spike in the learning curve early on but after that it's a matter of application and practice (I personally find the constant memorization of new codices and rules for 40K to be more tedious). Also impacting it is the limited gaming market and the niche appeal/limited history of Infinity and it's a bit of a struggle to gain market share (but Corvus has been doing well). Really the market is pretty heavily flooded if you look around and disposable income is generally down.

That aside how are other people seeing knights in their meta. It's kind of turned things into a weird rock/paper/scissors meta locally for us and are generally a massive pain to deal with if your codex came out before they were released. As Tau I get "You have railguns" (hint, they don't work well) or "Your line troops wound them on 5s" (had to resist laughing in his face in trying to pass mass firewarriors as an answer to knights) and with Nids it was "Mass Hive Guard, double shoot and pray" which is not really that useful either (I have 0 of said model) so they're generally "Play against and loose because I can't mass enough ommph" or beat knights and don't have enough to work against hordes. Just curious what else other people are seeing and your opinions on how knights have hit the meta in your experience.

Knights in regular 40k were a mistake. Are they completely dominating the meta? No, but it also kinda depends on your definition of "dominating". They shape it more than any other army imo, their mere existence, as you said, shapes the way you build your army. Armies that can take on Knights and still be TAC do well. Sometimes those armies just have TAC builds that can deal with Knights already, and that's good for them. Other armies can not play around Knights and build the TAC list... and then just get stomped when they have to play Knights.

Superheavies should have stayed in Apocalypse.

[LordDavenport]

Question for the thread: would a battle tech style simultaneous shooting phase make 40k better or worse? As in, both players pick targets for all of their units, then shoot them all. Dead models are removed at the end of the phase.

Knights in regular 40k were a mistake. Are they completely dominating the meta? No, but it also kinda depends on your definition of "dominating". They shape it more than any other army imo, their mere existence, as you said, shapes the way you build your army. Armies that can take on Knights and still be TAC do well. Sometimes those armies just have TAC builds that can deal with Knights already, and that's good for them. Other armies can not play around Knights and build the TAC list... and then just get stomped when they have to play Knights.

Superheavies should have stayed in Apocalypse.

Yeah... Depends how many knights. A single shooty knight can be ignored, and you just kill everything around it. Gallants though have to be fought directly.

DE have a massed dizzies+blasters, Impirium has knights and death company, chaos has knights, and Nids have ambushing abominants pretending to be death company. Dunno if orks have an answer, maybe mek guns, but necrons and Tau seem to be the main ones left hanging. Though just giving necrons a knight would be cool, people seem opposed.

[Manticoran]

Question for the thread: would a battle tech style simultaneous shooting phase make 40k better or worse? As in, both players pick targets for all of their units, then shoot them all. Dead models are removed at the end of the phase.

My friends and I used to do this for in house matches. We'd do movement priority based on initiative, shooting declarations based on reverse initiative but actually happening all at once, and then obz fighting happens in initiative order.

[Requizen]

Question for the thread: would a battle tech style simultaneous shooting phase make 40k better or worse? As in, both players pick targets for all of their units, then shoot them all. Dead models are removed at the end of the phase.

Dollars to donuts this is how Apocalypse will work. AoS has a "variant mode" for large scale games (basically Apoc) where you do this as well.

In regular 40k? I think it would work fine, but that big of a mechanic shift would really shake up the community. Not sure how well it would be received. I quite like the Kill Team alternating players + Readied Units style, which is also quite different from what we have. IGOUGO is not great from a balance perspective, but it does give 40k that easy pick up and play feel.

Yeah... Depends how many knights. A single shooty knight can be ignored, and you just kill everything around it. Gallants though have to be fought directly.

DE have a massed dizzies+blasters, Impirium has knights and death company, chaos has knights, and Nids have ambushing abominants pretending to be death company. Dunno if orks have an answer, maybe mek guns, but necrons and Tau seem to be the main ones left hanging. Though just giving necrons a knight would be cool, people seem opposed.

Dunno about Tau:

The Obelisk is supposed to be a Superheavy, but is terrible.
The TVault is a good superheavy, but is pretty limited in target selection and gets bogged in melee (despite having fly).
The new big walker thing is supposed to be a Necron Knight, but they overpriced it out of anything resembling usefulness.

Edit: Actually the Walker and Vault are both reasonable, but Necrons don't have the unit types to run one of them and still have a reasonable TAC list behind it, due to what the units do and how much they cost.

[Yaktan]

Tau are actually really good against knights. Firewarrior spam is a key part of how I do it too. One key is to be T'au sept, so you get the sweet, sweet, +1 to wound strat.

My army easily trashes a knight a turn, with ghostkeels and my 20 firewarriors with fireblade with Through unity, devestation doing most of the heavy lifting.

The shooty knights are actually a bit harder for me, since they can hang back. A gallant is a joke. It has a good chance of getting bracketed at least on overwatch if it tries charging my stuff. And then it kills a couple breachers or stealth suits? Oh no, whatever will I do?

[Forum Explorer]

Distribution is a big issue as well. I know my local shop has issues getting it and often gets shorted specials/limited items. Also there are a few translation issues (one of the missions in ITS was completely different in English vs. Spanish) but it is well supported and the company puts a lot of effort and care into the game. Said rules also make a sharp spike in the learning curve early on but after that it's a matter of application and practice (I personally find the constant memorization of new codices and rules for 40K to be more tedious). Also impacting it is the limited gaming market and the niche appeal/limited history of Infinity and it's a bit of a struggle to gain market share (but Corvus has been doing well). Really the market is pretty heavily flooded if you look around and disposable income is generally down.

That aside how are other people seeing knights in their meta. It's kind of turned things into a weird rock/paper/scissors meta locally for us and are generally a massive pain to deal with if your codex came out before they were released. As Tau I get "You have railguns" (hint, they don't work well) or "Your line troops wound them on 5s" (had to resist laughing in his face in trying to pass mass firewarriors as an answer to knights) and with Nids it was "Mass Hive Guard, double shoot and pray" which is not really that useful either (I have 0 of said model) so they're generally "Play against and loose because I can't mass enough ommph" or beat knights and don't have enough to work against hordes. Just curious what else other people are seeing and your opinions on how knights have hit the meta in your experience.

Knights are annoying, but can be handled by nearly every army in the game. Especially since Knights can no longer get a 3++. Eldar have Doom and Jinx, Dark Eldar just have a ton of Dizzy cannons, Haywire, and Blasters, Orks have Meganobs, Mek Guns, and double shooting Tank Bustas, Harliquins have Haywire, Tyranids have Old One Eye, melee Carnies, Hive Guard, and Genestealer Cult allies, Genestealer Cults have Abominates and 8 Rocksaws on Acolytes, Space Marines have Smash Captains and Blood Angels, Imperial Guard have Basilisks, and massed Leman Russ fire, all Imperium Armies have Knights to counter Knights, Chaos has Knights. Tau have the Tau Sept, along with High Yield Missile Pods, and Ion Cannons (you are right, Railguns are awful right now.)

Necrons struggle the most I think. But now that Knights can't have a 3++, three units of Destroyers and 3 Annihilation Barges can get the job done.

On the note of Railguns being awful, I really think they either need to be more reliable (give them two shots), or, and this is the one I prefer, make their damage 2D6. Right now they are a Lascannon that might do some extra mortal wounds on a 6. Which is awful and doesn't come up, because you only have like 4 Railguns max in your army. Unlike Lascannons where you can have what? ~30 if you really wanted that many?

So yeah, Railguns need to do more then a piddly D6 damage.

[JNAProductions]

Did you mean Doomsday Arks, not Annihilation Barges? Because ABarges... Not doing much to a Knight, generally.

[Cheesegear]

As Tau I get "You have railguns" (hint, they don't work well) or "Your line troops wound them on 5s" (had to resist laughing in his face in trying to pass mass firewarriors as an answer to knights) and with Nids it was "Mass Hive Guard, double shoot and pray" which is not really that useful either (I have 0 of said model) so they're generally "Play against and loose because I can't mass enough ommph"

Knights are the epitome of 'Buy New Models'.
Every Faction in the game has the ability to shut down a Knight. As we know, when it comes to units dealing and taking damage, the game is the most balanced it's ever been. The problem is that units dealing and receiving damage is secondary to the true Objective of the game - have more models than your opponent on specific parts of the board.

Some Factions can even safely deal with 2 Knights. They're not that hard. T8 with a 4++. There are ways to deal with that.

Most Factions will have trouble dealing with 3. But thankfully, someone running 3 Knights probably wont be able to hold Objectives and Tabling doesn't work anymore. Thankfully, '3+ Knights' doesn't mesh well with 'Have more models than your opponent.'

The issue is that some people can't afford to deal with Knights. There is nothing wrong with your Faction (except for Grey Knights, Necrons and to a lesser extent, T'au). There is a problem, however, with what you have.

or beat knights and don't have enough to work against hordes

If your Troops are over 7 Points per model, you're right.
If your Troops are 7 Points or less, you should be handling hordes just fine.

The only army in the game that has issues with hordes is Necrons.

Just curious what else other people are seeing and your opinions on how knights have hit the meta in your experience.

Knights hit our meta.
Within 2, 4 and 6 months at the outside...Everyone had bought their Faction's counter.

Buy new models.

It's not that people can't deal with Knights. It's that people can't deal with Knights... With what they have.

Question for the thread: would a battle tech style simultaneous shooting phase make 40k better or worse?

Worse. First turn is the only turn that matters. If you have Reserves, you lose, the end.
Castle up and win.

I suppose you might end up selling Fortifications. Is that a plus?