BoLS Lounge : Wargames, Warhammer & Miniatures Forum
Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 48
  1. #1

    Default Is 30k better than 40k?

    A few days ago, Larry Vela posted an editorial about the potential rules change for Horus Heresy games before the release of book VII, and with that release rules for the last two legions to be given rules for (the Thousand Sons and the Space Wolves). Essentially Larry wants a complete rules set to field all 18 space marine legions within the 40 7th edition rules framework before any rules changes affects the whole of the Horus Hersey set up. The thing I noticed is his claim- a claim also made by others- is that 30k is perfect the way it is.

    I am curious as to why that is the case.

    Obviously there are good reasons to why people believe this. I'm not promoting that 30k is better than 40k or vice versa, or advocating any rules changes. I want to start a discussion on the differences between the two sets. Also I'm writing this article from a position of ignorance, having played little of 30k, and not owning books IV and V, so please bear with me and if I'm wrong about anything post it here. The point I'm trying to bring up is that 30k isn't its own game with its own rules, but an expansion of the 40k rules.

    We all know that 40k has its problems; from broken armies to deathstars, invisibility to D-weapons, formations to superheavies. The thing is that everything wrong with 40k is also included in 30k too (well except formations, unless they got included in the newer books or something, someone will probably tell me I'm wrong). D-weapons in 30k? Yes. Knights in 30k? Yes. Deathstars in 30? Yes. Alternate force org charts in 30k? Yes.

    So why is 30k so cherished while 40k is *****ed on about? Functionally, whatever you could do in 40k you could also do in 30k too. From my subjective point of view there are only two differences between 40k and 30k: the army lists, and the players.

    First off, the army lists, and I say that, I mean space marines, the mechanicum, the solar auxilia, and the cults and militias. These are obviously an important reason people would suggest as to why 30k is good as it is game wise. Reading through the rules, the units and options available feel more balanced and tight than regular 40k lists. There is little that stands out as OP'ed or stupid. But like I said, every abusable option you could do in 40k you could do in 30k too. Except that it is harder to do so. Lords of War are restricted to 2000pt+ games with a percentage limit; allies are limited with fewer factions to choose from; hell even D-weapons have an optional nerf outside apocalypse. Harder, but not impossible. There are combos and rules that can be broken, you can face an army with some from of LOW that you can't deal with, and D-weapons can still wreck stuff if both players forget to use the optional nerf. Has anyone even tried to play 30k with a normal CAD or even unbound?

    This brings me to my second point: the players. Are they different somehow to the rest of the regular 40k players? Do they care more about having a fun game than smashing their opponents' armies in as short a time as possible? Are there even any 30k jerks out there fielding jerk army lists? Do people who play 30k choose not to max out on the worst cheese possible? Honestly I don't know. Like I mentioned before I have little knowledge playing Horus Hersey with others, so my opinions here are purely subjective. From what I have seen people ***** more about how broken X rule is or how overpowered Y army is in 40k than what is said in 30k. Again I could be wrong about this, so say so if I am.

    Before I finish this post I will ask my questions again and leave it to everyone else: why is 30k great right now even though it shares the exact same rules with 40k, which people consider a mess? Is 30k far more balanced with its army list building and difficultly in abusing them? Are the players attitudes different in that it's more play for fun rather than play to win to them?

    And one final question that should be asked: for some reason people don't want 40 and 30k to be mixed. Many claim that 30k doesn't scale down well in smaller games. But with the average points sizes for games being 1850-2000pts, and 40k seemingly encouraging larger games, would scaling be a problem anymore? More importantly, how would the two different armies fare? Would a 30k list be fairer than a 40k list? Would a 30k army struggle against 40k shenanigans?

    [Edit] I want to point out that while fluff/nostalgia are very good reasons why Horus Heresy is popular, I am only interested in comparing 30k to 40 purely from a rules and gameplay standpoint. The point I'm trying to bring up is to discuss whether or not 30k can be just as abusable as 40k is and if players are just as likely to abuse any loopholes or advantages as they are in 40k. Also suggesting that 30k is balanced because it's marines bs marines isn't as true as people think. Just because both sides can field the same options doesn't mean that they do, and when that happens is the game still as balanced, or does it then veer into "bad 40" territory where broken units and cheese rules.
    Last edited by DaveTycho; 08-29-2015 at 06:47 PM.

  2. #2

    Default

    Basically because 30k is Infantry heavy and everyone has access to everything.
    Ultramarines bring a Knight? Don't worry Alpha Legion has one too.

    On the bottom line it is Space Marines vs Space Marines which is also balanced in 40k.

  3. #3

    Default

    30k is a game opposing imperium army vs each other's, hence using the same weaponry and more or less the same profiles. It's easier to balance. Like Charon said : everyone has access to the same options.

    40k is a game based on imperium vs xenos races. The range of profiles is wider as is the type of weapons.
    If you play a game of 40k only including SM (+ codex like Da or SW), IG and chaos SM, your games will be more or less balanced. Moreover, if GW would do so, the updates would be easier : IG players wouldn't have to wait for ages their codex being updated with new formations in line with SM ones for ex.

    If you introduce eldar, necrons and orks in the equation, you have lots more of weapons profiles => more chances to make an error regarding effect/cost. And that's what happened. The Gap between the eldar codex and the orks codex is far wider than the gap between the imperium + chaos codex.

    Maybe players have their impact too, lots of them are fluff fan that like to recreate mythic battles and tired from the weapons race in 40k. And scenario/campaign based battles needs more discussions and pre battle discussions often prevent deception of an unfair game.

  4. #4

    Default

    You have to make a compromise somewhere along the line between having every faction play in a completely different way with their own flavour as far as approaching problems - like anti-AV14, say - while also making sure that it doesn't result in a rock-paper-scissors gameplay style where something like Dark Eldar poison spam trounces Tyranid MC spam, or Guard Conscript spam gives an elite Grey Knights list a headache.

    Many games make their stand somewhere along that line. Infinity is pretty much entirely Infantry as far as I've played, with no vehicles and slight variation in play style. WarmaHordes is very rock-paper-scissors at times and is combo-oriented, though a Warjack from one army plays fairly similarly to a Warjack from another army, and Colossals just feel like big Jacks with a couple of extra special rules.

    Age of Sigmar goes the other way by opening up to a lot of flavour and options, while basically disregarding balance entirely. There are people who hate that, and people who love it. There are people who hate WarmaHordes and people who love it. GW chose one position on that line which leans more towards variety than balance, whereas Forge World with the Horus Heresy series were pretty much solely making Marine forces until very recently.
    Read the above in a Tachikoma voice.

  5. #5
    Chapter-Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Portland, ME
    Posts
    2,816

    Default

    No. 30k doesn't have xenos, it therefore is an inferior product no matter how much better its rules may be.

    A game is more than the sum of its rules.
    I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: "O Lord make my enemies ridiculous." And God granted it. --Voltaire

  6. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CoffeeGrunt View Post
    You have to make a compromise somewhere along the line between having every faction play in a completely different way with their own flavour as far as approaching problems - like anti-AV14, say - while also making sure that it doesn't result in a rock-paper-scissors gameplay style where something like Dark Eldar poison spam trounces Tyranid MC spam, or Guard Conscript spam gives an elite Grey Knights list a headache.

    Many games make their stand somewhere along that line. Infinity is pretty much entirely Infantry as far as I've played, with no vehicles and slight variation in play style. WarmaHordes is very rock-paper-scissors at times and is combo-oriented, though a Warjack from one army plays fairly similarly to a Warjack from another army, and Colossals just feel like big Jacks with a couple of extra special rules.

    Age of Sigmar goes the other way by opening up to a lot of flavour and options, while basically disregarding balance entirely. There are people who hate that, and people who love it. There are people who hate WarmaHordes and people who love it. GW chose one position on that line which leans more towards variety than balance, whereas Forge World with the Horus Heresy series were pretty much solely making Marine forces until very recently.
    Pretty much this.

    AoS is an entirely narrative driven game. And not just the narrative of the battle, but the 'narrative' between the players to agree when the two forces, in combination with the scenario rules and victory conditions feel 'about right'. This will of course appeal to some gamer whilst being anathema to others.

    Bright side? Gamers do what gamers do. There's already a few 'work in progress' threads about assigning points values for those who want to check it out. Agree or disagree, just keep comments constructive if you wish to contribute

    But there's also a decent slice of Defenstratus' point about 30k. Whilst I prefer it to standard 40k, the genuine lack of variety limits the games wider appeal. In a sense, it's closer to Warmachine than 40k. Blue Marines with Blue Marine only spangles against Pale Cream Marines with Pale Cream Marines only spangles, with the occasional bunch of baseline humans wondering just what it is their commander hopes to achieve deploying them against the Legionnes Astartes.

    But, Horus Heresy is very much narrative driven. Every battle is part of wider war, and it's a clearly defined war at that. For me and my gaming buddies, that's a big part of it. Those who love painting like to go for full squad markings, honour badges and that accurate to the particular theatre of war they want their force to be from and so on.

    40k however? The base setting is a sandbox, and requires the players, if they want such a thing, to set their own parameters.
    Fed up for Scalpers? https://www.facebook.com/groups/1710575492567307/?ref=bookmarks

  7. #7
    Chapter-Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    2,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Defenestratus View Post
    No. 30k doesn't have xenos, it therefore is an inferior product no matter how much better its rules may be.

    A game is more than the sum of its rules.
    30k could have xenos they've just skirted around them to focus on the Heresy. From what I've seen it is far better suited to random pickup games and events then 40k has been in a long time... of course after GW proper gets their dirty paws on it this may all go out the window.
    My Truescale Insanity
    http://www.lounge.belloflostsouls.net/showthread.php?48704-Truescale-Space-Wolves

  8. #8

    Default

    IIRC, Forge World's justification is that the HH is set during the era of Mankind's greatest strength as an Empire. There's no Xenos that can threaten them, even the Eldar and Orks are being swept aside during the expansion.
    Read the above in a Tachikoma voice.

  9. #9
    Chaplain
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Brrrrrr
    Posts
    449

    Default

    Played a bunch of 30k and years of 40k. The FOC chart and the rights of war seem to be just right in creating equal opportunity lists that result in decent, fun games, even with roid raging primarchs fighting it out midfield and ranged D weapons everywhere.

    It IS missing that extra little flavor that 40k provides in having Xenos. Yeah its fun to play 30k and go pew pew but the variety of the xenos puts meself more often playing 40k.

  10. #10
    Chapter-Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Norfolk (God's County)
    Posts
    4,511

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Charon View Post
    Basically because 30k is Infantry heavy and everyone has access to everything.
    Ultramarines bring a Knight? Don't worry Alpha Legion has one too.

    On the bottom line it is Space Marines vs Space Marines which is also balanced in 40k.
    Partially - although I went up against a Knight in a necron army last time at Throne of Skulls. Actually, the narrative campaign just gone, my mate saw an Eldar army that took Knights. FFS. Eldar. Took Imp Knight and not a Wraithknight.

    So, in unbound 40K, everyone has access to everything.
    I'M RATHER DEFINATELY SURE FEMALE SPACE MARINES DEFINERTLEY DON'T EXIST.

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •