|
To be fair, you can make radically different starting gangs based on the roster you build and the equipment you take, so its not like they are all the same straight through. It's just that without the campaign you don't get any skill of stat development, which is primarily how the different factions are distinguished from each other - all Gangers are initially the same, but will develop in different ways. Even this isn't true if you use the additional, distinct factions from the expansion like Spyrers and Scavvies. Necromunda definitely lives on its campaign mode, though, its nowhere near as interesting to just play one-offs with starting gangs.
|
#
¿
Jan 17, 2017 18:20
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 23:51 |
|
|
Only works to a certain extent, though. I recall my Heavy getting a pair of WS increases and a Strength boost, and he can't trade off his weapon unless someone else picks up the skill that lets you tote heavy weapons. Although it at least makes it amusing when someone tries to run up and engage him and gets beaten to death with a Stubber.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 17, 2017 21:42
|
|
|
Yea, I'm also not a fan of those slayers. I get what they were aiming for but they really look more floaty than jumpy. I think its because the beard curves back around under them instead of following the line of motion properly. It might be fixable with a little work.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 15:13
|
|
|
berzerkmonkey posted:Yeah, GW never really said what they were using for the system, so I decided to look up "Pilgrym's Progress" the other day and found the "rules" at the bottom of the rabbit hole. It sounds really cool, but you'd need a dedicated GM for something like that. Yea, I think one of the reasons that Inq. stumbled (besides the 54mm thing) was that it really required a GM to run games. It wasn't really the kind of game where you could just turn up at the store with your retinue and fight whoever, and it also didn't work well for the sort of league format that people use for BB and NM. You needed someone to put together a story line and run the games for other players, which is not only kind of a lot of work, it's not something that a lot of people were accustomed to doing for the GW games in rotation. Which is a shame because I thought it was cool and would have liked to see it grow. The 54mm miniatures were great too, I'm bummed I never bought up a bunch of the ones I liked before they went out of production.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2017 18:25
|
|
|
Yea, it looks like they have one body, and then two head options with different helms/beards to give them some difference. If they had worked at it, they could have probably come up with something that would work so that the different head gave you a variation on the pose. Heck, you could just do it so that they aren't both hover-bearding at literally the same height and angle, if nothing else. The other models are decent, I think the slayers are jarring because they are the biggest and flashiest and it makes the obvious similarities more stark than the other dwarfs.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2017 16:12
|
|
|
Indolent Bastard posted:It's the fact that the beards (in part) flow the wrong way. They are jumping forward and yet the bit on the ground is facing the wrong way. Yes you can justify why it would act that way, but simple design says it shouldn't need to be justified. It should just look "right" from the start. Yea, the recurve on the beard if what makes it look like they're floating rather than jumping because it messes up the line of action. But even so, they could have used the head swap to make two different versions of the bad pose, instead of two similar ones.  berzerkmonkey posted:GW's whole "leaping/floating models are cool!" thing is really offputting. I don't think I've seen one yet that I like the look of. There are a handful that are decent; I like the Swooping Hawk models, for example, because they do look like they're skimming the ground or just lifting off, but part of the reason it works is that they are actually flying/floaty guys. They also have a severe problem with overdoing it. If you grab one of the Witch Elf models, they don't look bad. There are a few that even do look kind of cool/dynamic in their poses, and it's a nice amount of movement in a figure. But then they went and put basically every one of them in the same sort of position, so when you rank them up it looks like some sort of cabaret can-can line or a weird Karate Kid kicking class session because they're all the same. If you had one or two of those at it, it would look so much better.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2017 18:12
|
|
|
I would like to paint things in 54mm, but you do get way less stuff to work with. It mostly seems to be for vanity projects like special display figures and stuff. I don't think Inquisitor would have survived even if it was 28mm, but 54mm sure didn't help.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2017 03:09
|
|
|
That rat ogre looks like he either just slipped on a banana peel and is falling over, or was in the middle of a sprint and just noticed the most delicious cupcake on the ground right beside him and just had to try and grab it. It is very badly posed.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2017 15:41
|
|
|
I'm honestly disappointed. I mean, I'm not surprised, but I am disappointed. If you had asked me what I wanted in a NM revisit, it would be to get back to the character and aesthetic of the old game while having the benefit of 20 years of progress on rule development. Instead we're getting the reverse - a bunch of existing miniatures with their modern look dumped into a 20-year old game mechanic. Don't get me wrong, I love Necromunda, but it is still an oldass game. And, of course, we still HAVE NM, it's not like the rules were lost to time. So instead of just republishing it, why not actually revisit it and see how those rules can be updated and rewritten? I didn't want more orks and marines, I wasnted mohawk muscle men fighting punk rock tankgirls and the mole-man's bald trechcoat brigade.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2017 14:21
|
|
|
I literally don't understand how even the dumbest person who actually plays games can say this: quote:Every model should have cool bespoke rules. Not only would that be more fun, but it’ll mean you will only need to learn the rules for your models. Although that would explain a great deal about why GW games are so terribly balanced, if each designer only actually bothers to learn the rules for their own models and never checks anything else  I actually liked different movement rates and armor save modifiers, but there was a reason that they were scrapped in 3rd - if you use those rules in games with more than two or three units it bogs everything down. Oh, this squad is Guardians, so they have a movement of 5, but I attached Eldrad Ulthuan, and because he is old he has a movement of 4. Oh and this Banshee squad has a movement of 6, but I also brought their Phoenix Lord, Jain Zar, who has a movement of 7. Yes, this is a great system to use when I have a hundred loving dudes on the field.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2017 15:50
|
|
|
There is basically no reason not to do that. The main reason that GW didn't was that they really just never planned ahead well and so when they made a new book or a new army they would literally make up entirely new effects for that army to have. So while Warmachine thought ahead and said 'Ok, we will have this special rule called 'Tough' that lets a unit shrug off a fatal attack on a dice roll, and give it to anyone that applies to', GW never did that until they were literally publishing an army (Necrons) and gave them their own rule for it (I'll be back). And then because they had decided to be cute and give it a in-joke name (because Necrons are Terminators, get it?) they would give subsequent armies a different name for a similar rule. They did actually try to consolidate them but then they were unable to commit to not making up stupid new poo poo, so it didn't last long.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2017 18:32
|
|
|
It's not really a bad miniature, but that is a weirdly terrible photograph of it. I don't understand what they're thinking with some of their shots. I think the line of action could be greatly improved, but its fine.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2017 21:58
|
|
|
Yea, the actual model is decent in terms of design/appearance but the motion is wonky. It looks sort of like someone tried to imitate a baseball pitch, only without any references and didn't get the movement lined up properly. Alternatively it looks vaguely like a cricket bowl, but you wouldn't think that is how someone would want to throw a teammate? The whole idea is hazardous enough without introducing an intentional bounce.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2017 16:49
|
|
|
I agree that models that work for a more generic role instead of being particularly interesting in their pose are generally better, especially when whatever they are doing isn't necessarily a component of their role - as in, I am on the fence about throwers modeled holding a ball because they are going to have the ball at certain times, but a troll throwing a goblin when he might never be on a team with one isn't very appealing. I understand why they're doing it, though, and its less like a 'bad model' result than an aesthetic choice I don't agree with. I don't like the pose because I think its a janky pose, not because I disagree with poses. Lovely Joe Stalin posted:It's far more likely that the sculptor would know what a cricket bowl looks like than a baseball pitch. Also, I don't think this needs to be pointed out, but a Troll would probably love to make the Goblin bounce, and the Orks would certainly enjoy it. Macdeo Lurjtux posted:Oh it's a cricket bowl? I thought it was a pitch and he was just covering one eye to help with depth perception. It's also not great bowling form, but at least in cricket you do actually swing the ball way over your head like that as part of the bowling arc while your foot is in the air, although again its pretty messy if that's what it is supposed to look like. Mostly the way the pose is, it doesn't look like the troll is really putting very much of his weight or strength into the throw at all, when I imagine you would want it to be communicating the huge power involved in slinging teammates. It's way better than all the stuff coming out for AOS though.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2017 20:00
|
|
|
I was really disappointed that in this day and age I can't find video of an orangutan slinging footballs, but then I turned up an article that suggests that they can't. Apparently other primates are pretty lovely at fastball, and while some manage a good toss it's usually pretty short/slow compared to (lighter and weaker) humans. So maybe trolls are also just extremely lovely at throwing things, I guess. Mystery solved!
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2017 20:33
|
|
|
I don't disagree, but giving Dire Avengers a bunch of weapon options would be pretty counter to the entire concept, so it would be weird if they did that. I know they are doing them because they have a plastic set, but Rangers or Corsairs would be a much better choice for letting you have a bunch of varying stuff.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2017 13:52
|
|
|
Dire Avengers use shuriken catapults as part of their path, they can't just trade and swap out to other weapons for the hell of it. That leads to chaos and the fall! 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2017 15:21
|
|
|
That melee system is basically NM (and 2ed), although in the summary it looks like they dropped the roll to wound? Not sure if that was an oversight. I actually wish that they had done some work on that, its ok if you are fighting with 2-3 people, but any time you have a bunch of combatants it gets unwieldy really fast. Probably fine for this size game, but not if they use it as as the base for anything that scales up. Edit: Tell me they need sustained fire dice, I have been hoarding those for decades now.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2017 16:54
|
|
|
More or less in the same place (although I won't actually buy a re-release of Necromunda because I have no friends, so I can just glue a sign that says 'Necromunda 2020' on a box and put it my closet to the same effect). I enjoyed Necromunda a hell of a lot, but it's a little jarring to see them simply resurrect 30-year old mechanics without any improvement at all. I mean the things I loved about Necromunda were mostly the setting and the continuity, I wasn't so in love with the mechanics of HTH or ammo checks that I needed those returned to me unblemished by time.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2017 17:28
|
|
|
In the interests of balance, I feel like I should mention I haven't seen anyone playing Warhammer/AOS or 40k in years. A little warmachine here and there, and there was a renaissance for HeroQuest. Right now the most popular game actually seems to be unpacking lots of unfinished miniatures and sorting all the tanks by type. Why yes, I do only play at home with my kids.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 14:52
|
|
|
Cassa posted:How are Tyranids changing their weapons, exactly? They always seemed pretty grown in to me. Most tyranid weapons are symbiotes that can be removed or adapted. There are exceptions (stuff that used to be biomorphic) but in general they can be removed.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2017 12:05
|
|
|
Is it plain 6+, or did then include the special flak rule where its' 5+ against template/blast weapons?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2017 18:58
|
|
|
I am surprised they seem to be actually doing something about it, that's a positive sign. Getting the rules out on their own is really the big deal, as you can basically play it with all the 40k miniatures you already own (and in the case of Orks/Scouts/Guardians, never use).
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2017 19:06
|
|
|
is that the full injury table? I kind of liked the overly long and detailed one from Necromunda where you could end up with horrible scars that cause fear, or a bum leg, or a missing eye. There was one that I think gave you Hatred against the house/gang/individual that took you out, which was pretty fun for campaign stuff, even if it wouldn't come up often.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2017 15:28
|
|
|
Yea, that's fair, and I am ok with SWA not being 'Necromunda, but with 40k Armies'. It's just a bit of a surprise because they seemed to have kept so much of the gameplay stuff entirely intact, which is where I had really expected to see changes. What else do you do beside injuries and advances? I'm assuming they're pared away the whole territory thing, as that doesn't make much sense for the setting. Do you get points for reinforcing your unit or something similar?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2017 15:47
|
|
|
Wow, taking a whole new book to print with all the faction rules and additional rules for Inquisitors and Sisters? That's a really cool move. If this is a portent of things to come, its very encouraging.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2017 18:39
|
|
|
I am hoping that they put the faction lists for Inquisition and Sisters out free, like the others, because it would kind of suck to have to buy a book to use them (especially for people that did buy the full set). It would be great if they just made the base rules free, sure, but this sort of immediate response to the community is pretty great. Now if they would work out their PDF vs. hardcopy pricing.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2017 20:54
|
|
|
First time in years I've regretted selling my sisters force.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2017 21:30
|
|
|
Sounds like its a great list for representing my Necromunda gangers as a bunch of underequipped guys way out of their depth!
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2017 19:50
|
|
|
Not really something you can control well, but the territories that provide special deployment options (tunnels and vents) are very useful for getting guys into combat, as they arrive at different locations.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2017 13:27
|
|
|
ineptmule posted:One of the things you'll probably want to develop is a sense of when to cut your losses and withdraw. Most of the time, you are eligible to 'bottle out' and concede the game once you've lost at least a quarter of your models. Doing this might feel like a cop out (and will likely earn you some derision from others in the campaign) but it honestly it's sometimes pretty necessary to avoid a certain bloodbath that could easily cripple you when the injuries are rolled. Yea, this is a really good point, especially if you haven't played campaign-style games before. In a lot of wargames you basically want to push as hard as you can for as long as you can, just because you may pull off some long-odds win or draw. What's to lose? But in Necromunda the answer to that is 'a lot'. If you find yourself on the back foot and don't see any way to turn it around, don't be afraid to bottle out and avoid further loses. You might even find yourself in a situation where you realize you have royally hosed things up somehow (forgetting about an objective or an opponents models, etc) and you can tell its going to be a nightmare to fight to the end. In that situation, well, maybe its time to cut your loses.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2017 18:58
|
|
|
berzerkmonkey posted:In case anyone is looking for SWA terrain... drat that's tempting. Looks like it could work for a lot of games
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2017 23:38
|
|
|
Short reminder that there is still time to get in on the kickstarter for some rad Necromunda-style terrain for your SWA needs.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2017 14:17
|
|
|
Yea, I think tyranids should be able to swap around weapons like everyone else, they seem pricey enough as it is. And I'm not confident anyone did any cost balancing for them with that in mind. If nothing else, give them the option to 'reprocess' symbiotes for partial refund.
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2017 14:19
|
|
|
When people asked for better representation of the disabled in miniature games, I'm not sure this is what they had in mind.
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2017 15:37
|
|
|
I have no idea what it's going to be like, but I'm glad that they're at least taking a swing at something new. Don't get me wrong, I loving loved Necromunda and it was the source of some of my best gaming memories, but it's an old system - and if you really want to, you can still get a hold of the rules and play it again. I'd much rather GW try to rework it and release a new/improved system; maybe it'll be mediocre, but they'll never bottle lightning if they don't try.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2017 04:38
|
|
|
The Escher look ok, they don't quite measure up on the originals but those were some really good models so that's not a surprise. I am glad that they're putting Escher into the starter set, and that the figures make them look both tough and ready to deal some pain - there aren't any goofy poses or that kind of thing at first glance. Goliath looks pretty good as well, but I wasn't too worried because slab-muscled dudes with ridiculous hair is pretty much GWs' wheelhouse. I am actually ok with a boardgame inclusion, maybe it will let me rope more people into trying it and making the transition from complex boardgames to tabletops. I guess we'll see what the rules are like.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 31, 2017 14:19
|
|
|
I understand why they went with the tunnels layout; if you are planning on roping people in, it's probably better to go with tiles that are roughly like a game board than a bunch on 3D stuff to build/position. From experience, having too little terrain can really hurt the game, so the tunnels probably prevent that pitfall for newcomers. Hopefully they do produce some suitable terrain.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 5, 2017 00:35
|
|
|
I feel like there are a lot more options now than when Necromunda first appeared - at that point it seemed like if you didn't have the GW set, you were going to making your own stuff out of cans, cereal boxes, and egg cartons. With the number of games that use terrain levels and focus on more dense combat (Infinity and Deadzone, not to mention all the Osprey stuff) there is simply more demand and market for it. I backed a kickstarter for some laser-cut MDF industrial terrain, and I think that between that and some other select pieces I am going to be in decent shape for most games.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 5, 2017 00:58
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 23:51 |
|
|
Zaphod42 posted:I backed this kickstarter https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1621774283/battle-systemstm-sci-fi-ii-terrain and its finally about to ship! Hot drat, going to get some of this to shame my MDF terrain and I'll be good for any sort of game I am actually going to play. Bonus, I could use this to display my gangs, which is actually way more likely to be a thing that happens over playing with them.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 5, 2017 03:05
|
|
