Monday, July 2, 2012

Deckchairs R (Still) Us

So I spent yesterday morning reading through the rules - with special attention to the missions and victory conditions - and then I had a text discussion with Charlie last evening (post the mighty Vodafone Warriors crushing North Queensland actually).

Unfortunately I have seen nothing in the rules that alleviates one of my major problems with 5th Edition - the reduction of Troops to "deckchairs". If anything the situation will be more pronounced as people try to shoehorn allies and fortications into their lists. At least with "Allies" there is a "Troop" tax but I can't see these units being anything but minimum size.

Immediately there will be a clamour for TOs to increase points to 2000 points. I hope they resist. List construction should be about choices and I'd like to see some choices being made at 1500 pts.

Having read through the rules can't help thinking that GW have taken "Storm of Magic" concept, mashed it in with 5th Ed and created a game that if they are not careful will play like Apocalypse-Light.

I hope I'm wrong and people are distracted by the shiny bells and whistles and instead concentrate on the core for use as a tournie game. Time will tell.

Post your initial thoughts on the rules.


  1. 1- Pete you are missing one of those bracketed words when it comes to both allies and Fortifications. They are optional. Full Deck Chair armies will still be terrible.

    2- 2000 point tournaments will become a rarity overseas, they will be 1999 (+1) Which is one of the things that I have heard that Mike Brandt who runs the NOVA is thinking about doing.

    And I can see that the actual issue with 5th edition is still there but on a weaker level, Wound allocation shenanigans can still occur in Nob squads, Paladins and squads but on a lesser extent as it only happens on a 4+. The Metal Boxes got worse whilst blast weaponry got better.

    1. Shadow,

      I know its optional but people like their toys. In 12 months both will be stable I'm guessing, first overseas then here.

      1999(+1)/2000 both equal bigger events. That comes with probs as time issues intervene again.

      We'll see.

    2. I don't know why you would do 1999 points lol, just call it 2000 but limited to a single FOC. Tbh as long as you don't do stupid stuff like they have in the US with 2 hours allocated for a 2000pt game time isn't a major issue. I ran the Auckland Open at 2000pts with 2:45 allocated per game, which was plenty of time (most games finished in about 2 hours actually, I think I called 2-3 games for time in the entire tournament).

      In any case why do you think there will be a clamour to increase points to 2000? I would expect anyone with any concept of balance in 40k would realise that doubling the FOC well before any army gets to the point that it is needed is a bad idea. If the doubling happened at 3000 or even 2500 this issue would disappear completely.

      To me the main issues for the moment are going to be the FAQs(i.e GW fixing all the stuff that doesn't work properly now, which needs to be quick, consistent and balanced) and sorting out how the Allies and Fortification are going to be integrated into tournaments.

  2. "Having read through the rules can't help thinking that GW have taken "Storm of Magic" concept, mashed it in with 5th Ed and created a game that if they are not careful will play like Apocalypse-Light."

    I dont really see where you are coming from with this. I see it more as 40k v5.5. The predominate rule set is still 5th, with many of the misgivings cleaned up and a few extra mechanics thrown in for good measure. More a refinement than a new edition.

    I see tournaments remaining at the 1500-1850 points levels. I think several will ban allies and even a few banning structures.
    I would like to see an event run over a weekend where Warlord traints are determined/chosen at the beginning and retained throughout the entire event as a spin on the book. Oh and boooo, random games lengths, boooo!

  3. I like it, generally. I think it neuters assault even further (overwatch eating a couple of models before they strike, removing the I bonus from Furious Charge, removing any bonuses from Multi-Assaults, removes assaulting from reserve, removing a few inches from the overall range for assaulting out of open-topped/assault vehicles) but then forces hoard armies to really be hoard armies to take the hits and still be effective once combat starts.

    Flyers i think will be strong initially until people start really planning for them.

    Curious to see how challenges play out. I don't play Fantasy so i'm new to the idea

    tabling armies that have too much in reserve and ending the game "early" will happen infrequently but is something new to watch for.

    I am rather concerned that Allies will be everywhere. it is optional and i'd like to see events offer a variety of options and pts values.

    Like Jossy i think 6th will lend itself to more "narrative" events, which i think is a good way to provide alternatives.


    1. Challenges will definitely stop characters running around by themselves alot, but I can't see it having a major effect.

      The one thing I think might change is people take a few more Assault Cannons/Heavybolters. more shots = more glances = dead vehicles, especially when you can only Snapfire fliers

      As for allies, we need to play a decent number of games before passing judgement. As long as the points aren't increased so everyone can just take their army plus some allies, and so have to make sacrifices for those Allies I can't see the problem. Also the awesome theme army stuff that allies allow, makes me hope they stay.