Game Does not Match the Fluff

[The_Gonk]

As I think has been touched on, the fluff is wildly inconsistent. The best that can be reasonably hoped for may be that the broad themes - Space Marines are super warriors and therefore > humans all-round; stronger and tougher than Eldar; more disciplined and better trained than Orks etc. just to take the most popular faction.
The point after that is, is the game enjoyable in itself and satisfying.
If you take movie marines as an\example, as was said marine-on-marine combat is a chore. It also involves one person playing a skirmish game whilst a non-marine plays 'mass combat'(ish). Both will get old. One is also not necessarily satisfying from a hobby perspective and won't make GW a lot of money....!

[Mr Mystery]

You would be surprised what I find enjoyable, like the Total War engine I'm working on. Ever seen logistics like territory or supply lines actually matter in 40k? Because they're front-and-center in my game. And this oughta' give some people panic attacks: the only "luck" in the entire system is that you don't know what your opponent's resources are specifically until you actually attack their front lines and find out. It's entirely up to you to bluff the other guy out, and no dice will save you if you get found out and outmaneuvered. I should not be designing tighter and more sensible wargaming mechanics over lunch breaks than GW does for $50 / codex.

I've given up on GW games being balanced. If the metagame is gonna' be reduced to a Wraith-measuring contest for the foreseeable future and thereby render skill utterly moot, the least the game could do to justify the investment I put into it is actually tell some cool stories. Black Library seems to do this pretty well. But no, the designers can't even do that right. To them, it's about making sure their pets win, and they'll bring a hunting rifle to the cockfight to make sure it happens.

Riiiiiiight.

Play tested your game have you? Exposed it to the opinions and experiences of untold thousands of gamers world wide have you?

Because if you haven't, it's a daft claim you've just made. Short of 'I'm great and should be President, because my Mum agrees, and she doesn't like the incumbent'. Seriously. Define 'tighter' and 'more sensible', because I think you'll find it's a matter of taste. 40k allows for a wide variety of play styles and army compositions. The game has to be flexible to accomodate that, and that's before you consider how many different forces are out there, and the millions of possible permutations any given game between armies can throw up (from army composition, dice rolls, terrain affecting things, sheer blind luck etc).

To be honest, a game which involves supply lines as standard would bore the tits off of me. I want the combat, not a hardcore realistic war sim. There's other games out there for that, which I choose not to play.

[Erik Setzer]

As I think has been touched on, the fluff is wildly inconsistent. The best that can be reasonably hoped for may be that the broad themes ... The point after that is, is the game enjoyable in itself and satisfying.

For me... this is where I do have one problem. In the fluff, the Orks are good at tearing people open in close combat. In the game, they're actually pretty miserable. Not very tough in combat, have to pay an arm and a leg to get the fluffy special rule "Eternal Warriors" for a Warboss, and generally are just much better as a shooty army.

I'm okay with them being a shooty army, because they kind of were in 2nd edition, but this is a long time of them pushing the idea of Orks being able to rip open Marines and now they just bounce off of Tactical Squads. Back in 3rd edition, they gave choppas a rule that matched the fluff... but God forbid someone should have the ability to beat the most popular army in assault. (To say nothing of the disconnect of having power weapons on several of the Nob models, but no access to them in the codex. Apparently they want us to believe that Orks can will weapons into working with guns and all, but when it comes to a big axe with wires running everywhere and electrical stuff attached to it, the Orks don't believe in that power field working enough for it to actually work, which prevents them from being as good as they should be at the thing the fluff says they love most.)

Okay, got that little rant out of my system... Meh. I'll be okay overall, got a Blood Axe army and about to start on Deffskullz, so I don't need to bash things up close. Just kind of disappointing they keep telling me I should and then make it damn near impossible.

- - - Updated - - -

To be honest, a game which involves supply lines as standard would bore the tits off of me. I want the combat, not a hardcore realistic war sim. There's other games out there for that, which I choose not to play.

For campaigns, that stuff could be fun, in a limited setting (i.e. with people who are really into that, rather than just wanting very basic campaign rules). But yeah, during an actual game... well, there's a reason that even games like Flames of War and Bolt Action don't include that kind of rule.

[Cactus]

You would be surprised what I find enjoyable, like the Total War engine I'm working on. Ever seen logistics like territory or supply lines actually matter in 40k? Because they're front-and-center in my game. And this oughta' give some people panic attacks: the only "luck" in the entire system is that you don't know what your opponent's resources are specifically until you actually attack their front lines and find out. It's entirely up to you to bluff the other guy out, and no dice will save you if you get found out and outmaneuvered. I should not be designing tighter and more sensible wargaming mechanics over lunch breaks than GW does for $50 / codex.

Let me make sure I understand your point:

You made up a miniature game that has balanced fluff/game play that is about lying about how many supplies you have.

AND that game about supplying (and perhaps resupplying?) is going be better designed and more enjoyable than most popular miniatures game in the world?

I don't think I would have a panic attack, in fact, it has induced the complete opposite involuntary response.

[Theik]

I agree, the game simply does not play like the fluff and we need to change this.
As such, from now on, nobody is allowed to play imperial guard without the mandatory 60 million models that get thrown into the meat grinder before 3 space smurfs arrive after they all die and save the day.

[40kGamer]

On the plus side, if the game does match the fluff a Deathwatch kill team could be your entire force. Sure could save some time and money that way.

[Wolfshade]

BoLS ages ago (back in 5th?) did "movie" marine rules

[url]http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2009/12/40k-playtest-movie-marines-in-5e.html[/url]

[Aegwymourn]

BoLS ages ago (back in 5th?) did "movie" marine rules

[url]http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2009/12/40k-playtest-movie-marines-in-5e.html[/url]

IIRC there originally were rules printed in a WD in the 3rd/4th edition era for "Movie Marines" as well. Very similar to those ones on the BOLS site. Some days I miss all my old WDs

[Tyrendian]

IIRC there originally were rules printed in a WD in the 3rd/4th edition era for "Movie Marines" as well. Very similar to those ones on the BOLS site. Some days I miss all my old WDs

pretty sure I still have those somewhere... if only I could motivate myself to go look for them...

[Rev. Tiberius Jackhammer]

My stance on this is "The heroes always roll sixes". Movie Marines etc focus on making the actions of Space Marines (the heroes) in novels statistically plausible, but I feel like that's the wrong way of looking at it. An action hero does not have a fist fight with one guy then need a day or two to recuperate. He rolls 6s to hit, 6s to wound and the bad guy's armour always rolls 1s.

Remember, in Codices and Black Library novels, the hero is always rolling 6s.