Time to Embrace the Horror II

[Filthy Casual]

I am not sure how old you are and if you actually played 2nd edition but the reason they changed from a skirmish level game, (which it wasn't actually, it was company level, non Space Marine armies, especially Orks and Imperial Guard would typically have 80-100 odd models) to bigger forces was because thats what people wanted and that's how people were playing it.

People weren't complaining that the game was too small and they wanted to use more models, they were using the models anyway and complaining the game took too long to play. They wanted to use their collections, to make massive, impressive armies and use them on the tabletop and they wanted to game to support that aim.

GW didn't betray the roots of 40k, they did exactly what the players wanted.

[grimmas]

Come on Erik, the points are an abstract we just played more points in RT and 2nd there's never been a required points point. RT was a direct lift of WFB which was the mother of all Battle games you might have played small but it wasn't a skirmish game. Also it was pretty easy to go big 3 Rhinos and 30-35 troops for £10 2 Landraiders £12. 2nd was no less a battle game the weapons were too destructive for anything else. The shooting phase makes Apocalypse look tame. A heavy bolter could get 7hits for one successful Hit roll and that's before I get into 2-3" template, heavy flamers and vortex grenades. The close combat was involved but a skirmish game doesn't have character models regularly kill entire squads (or more) each turn. It was also adapted from Space Marine. The psychic powers were also massively destructive. You didn't even get the rules in one set either you had to by Dark Millennium to get all the game rules.

Skirmish roots? No way. I'd concede that RT at the very beginning was scenario based, for about ten minutes before the Army lists came out. I'd also concede that 2nd took awhile to play at decent size. But those rules aren't anything but "battle".


edit. I wouldn't have even bothered with anything less than 3000pts in 2nd.

[nsc]

Most people don't play apocalypse, I wouldn't say that in general people prefer large battles.


Instead I would say that miniature wargaming is a very diverse hobby and it is very easy for people to find what they enjoy within this wonderful hobby. Grimm can fill up a table with plastic soliders while other people play on small tables with only a handful of troops.

I would like a stronger presence for skirmishing in 40k, with kill-teams being more popular or smaller games of 40k being more viable, however I don't want to lose the larger games that other people enjoy. If 40k could be scaled down to a skirmish game in the core rules that would be awesome, but I don't think it will come to that.

[Filthy Casual]

I find 40k generally scales pretty well, from 600 points to 3000 but you have to be sensible, a person could break the game at any of those points values but as long as you have a cool group, Hero a couple of squads and a tank works great

[Charon]

The close combat was involved but a skirmish game doesn't have character models regularly kill entire squads (or more) each turn.

That was no issue in 2nd. This is the situation NOW where you can comfortably ride your Thunderwolf into a unit and kill it off in one round of combat.

As you got +1 WS and +1 A for each goon after the first in combat range (and you could only kill models in combat range) you quickly came to a point where even a gaunt had WS6 and 4A.

[grimmas]

That was no issue in 2nd. This is the situation NOW where you can comfortably ride your Thunderwolf into a unit and kill it off in one round of combat.

As you got +1 WS and +1 A for each goon after the first in combat range (and you could only kill models in combat range) you quickly came to a point where even a gaunt had WS6 and 4A.

True but don't forget an extra attack just allowed you one extra dice to choose from choosing your best and characters with WS in the 7-10 range weren't exactly rare and all had bleeding swords to parry with.

That said I do agree that you can do similar now, that's kind of my point it was a battle game then and it's a battle game now.

I wouldn't dig someone out for wanting to play Skirmishes but you do have to make adjustments to allow for that style of play.

Actually (and this isn't in direct response to you Charon)now I really think about it AoS is actually more true to 40K's scenario driven beginnings than any other game GW has made.

[Erik Setzer]

Are you just under the assumption that "skirmish" means 10-12 models with no vehicles?

If not, then you're wrong. 40K2 was a "skirmish" level game. And the shooting phase wasn't that bad, even for someone like me with Orks (and I had all the different types of weapons). I've also never seen 40K2 (or much of anything else) devolve into the mess Apoc matches can become, especially in the shooting phase.

And I kind of lost my appetite for Apoc after the last match. The one guy bouncing all over the table with units everywhere was bad enough (and some of the shenanigans he was pulling)... but that's just that guy and I've learned to avoid him. No, for me the moment it lost its shine was when an entire Space Marine company, with supporting vehicles, was wiped out, then a card was used to bring it all back onto the table in a different location... and in the very next turn the entire lot of them were wiped out again. A whole Space Marine company, with Thunderhawk, supporting vehicles, etc., just snuffed out in a turn. At that point, I knew that Space Marine (the game) would have been a much better way to play out these large battles with Titans on both sides, because that kind of stuff at 28mm is ridiculously expensive and watching thousands of dollars picked up off the board each turn is just really sad.

[nsc]

I know many gamers who refuse to call 40k a wargame because the units don't rank up.

I've never really been into apocalypse Erik, since in the clubs I've been to all the apoc players are guys who can't get through a 1850 point 6 turn game in 2 and a half hours. The GW 6mm games are pretty snazzy though.

[Katharon]

I know many gamers who refuse to call 40k a wargame because the units don't rank up.

Do these many gamers know how high-velocity ballistic weapons, explosions, shrapnel, and other modern implements and weaponry of modern war work? There is a reason why the American Civil War was one of the last conflicts to involve men marching in ranks towards each other to unload volleys. If you want "ranks" then go play any of the nice Pike & Shot games running around or Warhammer Fantasy (people *do* still play like, myself among them).

[Erik Setzer]

I know many gamers who refuse to call 40k a wargame because the units don't rank up.

I'm sorry to be blunt, but... those people are idiots. In any modern warfare game (WWI and upward, some prior to that), the units don't rank up. That would mean that any game about WWI, WWII, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, the multiple invasions of Iran, Korea, etc. could not be called wargames.

Ask them about that. If they still insist such games can't be wargames, you should call them an idiot and/or slap them with a copy of Warhammer 40,000: Apocalypse.