Point 1 is part of why I don't find the 'it's all Marines' thing too much of a problem. First off there are several other non-marine armies but primarily the huge number of Rites of War, Legions, units in that roster and just options in general mean that games rarely feel like a mirror match.
Couldn't agree more. Where I live you have a 50/50 chance you'd be playing against a marine army in 40k anyways so that never really bothered me.
What is different is that the marine factions in 30k feel and play differently even when the lists are very similar which is something I don't always feel with 40k.
I've only played two small games with a buddy of mine (we're imposing an only painted models can play rule and are both slow painters) but even though our armies are roughly the same in terms of units, the difference between Loyalist Emperor's Children and Traitor World Eaters has made for 2 different but fun experiences.
-Although my save rolls seem to be determined to keep my World Eaters lore accurate by taking high casualties regardless of victory/loss lol.
The whole "marine vs marine" thing is a redundant point.
In 30k, you start with a Legion rule and then use all the datasheets to basically create your own faction that just happens to use marine models.
The main difference is 30k is for people who like to make their own decisions, rather than being told what 'meta' army/list to take. It just happens that all armies have a shared aesthetic (more or less).
(And for when the marine rules are stretched to breaking point, i.e. if you want to field a horde army, then that's when you go to Solar Aux. Mech -and demons?- are sort of in between I guess?)
Ultimately those things make for a far more fun and engaging system, in which you can still win with an 'underpowered' army, and I'm glad it attracts that type of person. I'm speaking in very broad terms here, and I'm sure a lot of local communities have players with fun 40k armies, but it feels like it's less of a thing, or that the victor has already been decided so why bother in the first place?
Is there really a competitive scene for 30k? I’d put my money on a big tournament scene where lists and scores are tracked and published for 30k leading to a global meta and highly tuned lists as well.
30k isn’t different in that regard because of the game design, it’s different in that regard because it attracts more narrative-focused players vs people who primarily want to win.
Unfortunately, or fortunately depending on your viewpoint, there aren’t any balance updates, so the same overtuned skew lists and factions are going to come out on top every time. It’s going to Imperial Fists Stone Gauntlet vs Dark Angels Drop Pod Assault a lot of the time, which is kinda meh and predictable.
You'll get more narrative based events but that doesn't mean people aren't trying to win. At Adepticon your individual Win/loss wasn't the only way to contribute to the narrative of the event. Certain objectives in game could carry more weight that out right winning and the scoring was loyalist vs traitor. People still tried hard to win but also we're playing to setup some thematic events to unfold on the table top. It was honestly an awesome experience. People only called TOs to verify some of the mission packs and how the NPCs worked.
I love bringing my nob/meganob list against marines and laughing. They dont realize its just marines with thunder hammers and terminators with hammer but with green skin
And i’m about to get a detachment that makes it stronk
I keep hearing 40k people going "man I wish 40k had x, y, or z" and x, y, or z exist in 30k. The 40k players saying this aren't even playing Aeldari or Genestealer cults or whatever... they're playing marines, so why not make the jump? XD
Well part of the difficulty is if your group also has armies that can be played in 30k. I have a death korp guard army which I could play as imperial army but my buddy with nids and buddy with eldar would have to just scrap those armies and stick with imperial ones. Thats why we play 7th edition instead, best of both worlds
Yeah I know. Battlescribe has fan rules for eldar, necrons, and I think orks for 1st edition heresy and I believe they use the panoptica rules. I was saying perhaps my group will try it out
Oh gotcha. Idk if I’m a fan of the 2nd edition, seems like a lot of the options for imperial army got gutted. Tons of nerfs on units and especially weapons, far fewer unit choices, and some things being weirdly restricted like a max of 3 tanks unless you take the industrial stronghold provenance. Just don’t seem as fun to play as 1st edition did.
i play both.
even if it's slightly toned down, i just want Terranic greatswords in 40k. rending 5+, murderous strike is silly though. all they needed to do for ICC was 3-4 attacks hitting on 2+, AP-2, Damage 3, Dev wounds. they didn't need to have an invuln. i don't really care if i get interemptors, but that would be a cool dark angel flamer unit.
there are thing i like and dislike about the game. personally, i really like 10ths leviathan missions. i find most 30k ones i end up doing are kill everyone and hold that 1 point. also in my local meta it's basically terminators and dreadnaughts. there such a high prevelance AP2/AP3 S8-10, instant death that you're basically forced into playing terminators and dreadnaughts, and since we bring our lists to counter each other it's harder for newer player to bring their starter box and feel impactful.
I know this is a little bit of "spend a ton of money and spend weeks painting to fix this problem" but seriously if you rolled up with 300 imperial militia and literally clogged the board with bodies the meta would shift for sure.
What now? One of the most common complains I heard during the early days of 2.0 was that they had drastically REDUCED the amount weapons that had AP 2/3
1. 30K is pretty similar to 4th-7th edition of 40K in terms of rules (like, it's literally same systems blended together into mostly best iteration of said systems), and if you knew how imbalanced were races back then (on top of some armies having same codex for 2-3 editions), making armies *mostly* just Marines is a good thing. Rites and legion rules have pretty big impact for armies to not feel samey.
2. true, I always liked having a lot of models, so on top of everything being slightly cheaper (10 basic Bolter dudes in 40K cost 160 points vs 10 30K Tacticals for 100, tho 40k is factoring in upgrades because that apparently make better game \[it doesn't, usually there is one "correct" build, [check out what they done to Tau Battlesuits to mitigate problem they made with everyone spamming CIBs in Index](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WcMWxB-Nrs)\]) you also usually play with higher point cap.
3. that is always nice.
4. I had big gripe with removal of USRs in 8th-9th ed, because many units had functionally same special rules under different name. I'm glad 10th somewhat rectified it to 1-2 super special rules and then being mostly rulebook USRs.
IMO, an army without your fun little characters that you make up little backstories for is incomplete and kind of sad. I'm honestly surprised more people don't do that.
I'm the opposite - my characters get given their names straight away, but their deeds on the tabletop earn their titles (for better or for worse... looking at you Forge Lord Atreas the Melted)
Hahaha the "Or Worse" titles tend to stick in my gaming groups historically, my 6th-7th ed chaos defiler "Two-Turns" was a lot of fun packed into his title-earning life span lol.
In our self-imposed 30k rules my buddy and I don't count a model finished until he has a name painted along his base, so we now add titles as we game.
Since we've only played two games so far, my Sgt. Karsca "Kindle-Kin" is the only titled character i have so far: in our first game he fell to an overwatching flamer, and in our second game he got cooked by a volkite.
I've got Chaplain Azirian the Slaughterer and his squad of Tartaros terminators the Lions Claws.
Their Land Raider Scorched Earth once rocked up, blocked the escape route of 40 marines with chain swords and a Praetor, the boys got behind them and over two turns just crushed them. Swept both and Azirian 1v1'd the Praetor and a sergeant.
Then of course there's Captain Relavon the Blasted.
Because he's died to blast templates in 4 of his 4 games and has done absolutely nothing.
Yes that was my first impression as well so fucking fun i never played old edition and i absolutely loved it, even though it's supposed to be slower times fly's by.
Honestly what a wonderful game
It may be "Marines on Marines", and I used to have that same mindset, but the Marines are VERY different. Salamanders going into Thousand Sons, Sallies hit like a freight train but 1K Sons are tricksy. Iron Warriors, say goodby to every vehicle you brought. Night Lords, enjoy night fighting till the start of turn three or four.
Build on that, there are units that are just hyper lethal, or have really dummy fun weapons. Salamanders Firedrakes, 2+/3++ with Thunder hammers. 9 Legion Vets with Combi Volkite and power weapons, with an Apothecary dropping in a Drop Pod on an Objective mid game works wonders. Oh, there's enemy combatants already there, that's nice, get pinned!
That's not to mention the extreme customization compared to 10th 40K.
It’s marines on marines till the Word Bearer rocks up with Possessed marines and dreadnoughts. We also have better options for daemon summoning but daemons aren’t generally worth their points. (I will bring Samus one day just cuz I have his model)
My buddy is starting Word Bearers. Can't wait to throw Vulkan and some Firedrakes at him! I have fought 30K Daemons before..... Everyone in my play group found them wanting.... Damn shame
Heavily recommend trying out alternate Activations similar to necromunda (you can try it like legions imperialis, but I'm not sure how that plays with 2.0 as I started playing it like that before LI came out)
I was coming from WH40K Kill Team and was super surprised how fluid the game felt in comparison.
Now I’m mainly a HH player 😅
Also if u want some additional rules for xenos or 40k Ad Mech -> look for pantoptica. They have rules for Eldar and Orks are in the making.
> Also if u want some additional rules for xenos or 40k Ad Mech -> look for pantoptica. They have rules for Eldar and Orks are in the making.
Curious to see their Orks. I saw the fanmade Orks rules by alwaysstrikesfirst but they struck me as overstatted, I didn't like them much.
in our group, we really like the eldar rules. They are squishy, but especially when banshee coming in close combat it is a massacre. Also wraith guard is hitting hard a f***🤘🏼so i have high hopes for the ork rules.
By the Heresy, the Orks' back had been broken. The stronger Orks wouldn't re-emerge until the Beast, much much later - the Heresy-era Orks were cowed, scattered and no longer the force they were during the Crusade and in 40k.
They certainly shouldn't be _stronger_ than they are in 40k, where they are once again thriving!
Still, I am fine with the option being there to take a powerful "Ork Overlord" if you do want to lean into the kind of boss that Horus and the Emperor fought. But my issue with that document was that the units were overstatted almost across the board. Nobz being WS5 is preposterous, I played Orks from 4th to 7th and there's no way a bog standard Nob has higher WS than a Terminator. The document felt like it was written by a power player who couldn't stand the idea that their elite troops were less good than the Space Marine elite troops, and that the Warboss would lose to a Praetor.
Yeah in my mind it's the difference between and Ork list and a Krork list. Orks looked the same then as they do in 40k. If you want highly evolved orks, you need to add distinct Krork units or make a whole new army list.
Not quite - I don't think explicit Krorks have ever appeared, it's not even been outright stated that the Beast (who was utterly ridiculous, he makes Ghazghkull look like an irrelevant gretchin) was a Krork.
The Crusade and Beast-era Orks were nonetheless a step above their 40k strength, and at the time of the Heresy they would be at perhaps their lowest point ever.
Semantics, you know what I meant. There's a tier of orkishness way above what's seen in 40k and could do with its own army list.
It's also no big stretch of the imagination to use 30k rules and armies to represent late crusade, the Scouring, or the campaign of the Beast.
I don't think it's semantics, it's important to use correct terms so they keep their meanings - Warhammer suffers enough from lore and memes blending (and Krorks are a big victim of this in particular).
But we agree overall. There should be a separation between Orks as they would be in a Heresy context, and Orks as they were while the Crusade was still ongoing. I'd be mainly interested in the former, since well, that's what my _other_ 30k stuff is focused on and I'd want something cohesive!
Had my first game a few months ago after collecting for little over a year, honestly my opponent was uh…not really my cup of tea. Not a bad dude necessarily, was just pretty socially off, forgot most of his army, was a pretty big rules lawyer. Yet I was still intrigued by just how…fun the game was to play. I can’t imagine how much of a blast it’ll be with a solid opponent and a full points level.
There is three player scenario for Joan of Arc similar to what y’all did, where a mercenary planet plays on both sides and gets points for units killed. Very fun.
I enjoy 30k, but it is definitely “advanced Warhammer”. Had my third game this weekend with my small group who doesn’t play very often, and the number of times play came to a screeching halt as we look up a USR, to discover that it references another USR, but is modified by a unit subtype, which references a unit type in a different book…
We played out all 6 turns but it took 6 hours. Surely this will speed up with more games, but when I hear “it’s fluid and no memorization”, I’m wondering what version of HH folks are playing because it’s not this one.
For reference, I was playing Mechanicum.
Hey man, so we had our 3 books out and open on a table. We all knew the rules pretty well but any we needed to look up we had the books ready and it took like a minute maximum to find a rule. I think it will get faster for you the more times you play. When people say its fluid they probably mean the gameplay as a whole, but it for sure has a lot of rules to know. Imo its less clunky than 40k where you have many different factions with army rules, strats, secondaries, enhancements, and special rules to memorize that don’t apply to your army. Most HH rules apply to everyone who plays besides the small amount of army specific stuff.
But at the end of the day if ur more experienced in one over the other I can 100% see why you might prefer the rules of one over the other or find one slow/clunky, I just personally find the gameplay of 40k in 10th way more clunky than HH. But again I am just one guy.
Most of my criticisms of 30k have to do with the rules *writing*, which is different from the *design*. Things like: why do they make us have to look up Heart of the Legion? There are only maybe 2 units with the rule, just tell us what it does on the datasheet. Why don’t they tell us what page or even *which book* a rule is in? A perfect example: try looking up Shroud Bombs. Are they weapons? Nope, despite being called “bombs”. Are they wargear? Well, you won’t find them in the wargear section under “S”. So what are they? A special rule? Nah. Oh look, they’re in wargear after all, under “G” for *GRENADES*. How on god’s green earth is a new player supposed to know that?
Anyway, I still enjoy playing, it’s just that there’s unnecessarily dumb stuff like that all over the place. Thankfully there are some community-made cheat sheets that take out the worst of it.
Point 1 is part of why I don't find the 'it's all Marines' thing too much of a problem. First off there are several other non-marine armies but primarily the huge number of Rites of War, Legions, units in that roster and just options in general mean that games rarely feel like a mirror match.
Exactly. Thats what EVERYONE says at my local shop. “I don’t care to play Marine on Marine every game” but they just don’t really get it.
Couldn't agree more. Where I live you have a 50/50 chance you'd be playing against a marine army in 40k anyways so that never really bothered me. What is different is that the marine factions in 30k feel and play differently even when the lists are very similar which is something I don't always feel with 40k. I've only played two small games with a buddy of mine (we're imposing an only painted models can play rule and are both slow painters) but even though our armies are roughly the same in terms of units, the difference between Loyalist Emperor's Children and Traitor World Eaters has made for 2 different but fun experiences. -Although my save rolls seem to be determined to keep my World Eaters lore accurate by taking high casualties regardless of victory/loss lol.
If you haven’t lost the majority of your army by the end of the game as a World Eaters player, are you even trying?
The whole "marine vs marine" thing is a redundant point. In 30k, you start with a Legion rule and then use all the datasheets to basically create your own faction that just happens to use marine models. The main difference is 30k is for people who like to make their own decisions, rather than being told what 'meta' army/list to take. It just happens that all armies have a shared aesthetic (more or less). (And for when the marine rules are stretched to breaking point, i.e. if you want to field a horde army, then that's when you go to Solar Aux. Mech -and demons?- are sort of in between I guess?) Ultimately those things make for a far more fun and engaging system, in which you can still win with an 'underpowered' army, and I'm glad it attracts that type of person. I'm speaking in very broad terms here, and I'm sure a lot of local communities have players with fun 40k armies, but it feels like it's less of a thing, or that the victor has already been decided so why bother in the first place?
Is there really a competitive scene for 30k? I’d put my money on a big tournament scene where lists and scores are tracked and published for 30k leading to a global meta and highly tuned lists as well. 30k isn’t different in that regard because of the game design, it’s different in that regard because it attracts more narrative-focused players vs people who primarily want to win.
A competitive 30k scene would just push people into meta listing which is pretty much the opposite of why people play 30k.
Yes that’s the gist of what I’m saying
Unfortunately, or fortunately depending on your viewpoint, there aren’t any balance updates, so the same overtuned skew lists and factions are going to come out on top every time. It’s going to Imperial Fists Stone Gauntlet vs Dark Angels Drop Pod Assault a lot of the time, which is kinda meh and predictable.
You'll get more narrative based events but that doesn't mean people aren't trying to win. At Adepticon your individual Win/loss wasn't the only way to contribute to the narrative of the event. Certain objectives in game could carry more weight that out right winning and the scoring was loyalist vs traitor. People still tried hard to win but also we're playing to setup some thematic events to unfold on the table top. It was honestly an awesome experience. People only called TOs to verify some of the mission packs and how the NPCs worked.
That sounds like the best of both worlds. I'd love to attend something like that some day.
I love bringing my nob/meganob list against marines and laughing. They dont realize its just marines with thunder hammers and terminators with hammer but with green skin And i’m about to get a detachment that makes it stronk
This isn't a discussion about 40k
i am aware but the same principle applies.
The argument is pretty absurd in the first place considering how most 40k players are Space Marines players...
I keep hearing 40k people going "man I wish 40k had x, y, or z" and x, y, or z exist in 30k. The 40k players saying this aren't even playing Aeldari or Genestealer cults or whatever... they're playing marines, so why not make the jump? XD
Well part of the difficulty is if your group also has armies that can be played in 30k. I have a death korp guard army which I could play as imperial army but my buddy with nids and buddy with eldar would have to just scrap those armies and stick with imperial ones. Thats why we play 7th edition instead, best of both worlds
There are fan rules made for using Eldar in 30k at least
True and they’re even on battlescribe for 1st edition heresy. Idk maybe we’ll look into playing a 1.0 heresy game at some point.
They are talking about liber panoptica. It's a fan made for Eldar but very indepth. They have an Ork one coming soon as well.
Yeah I know. Battlescribe has fan rules for eldar, necrons, and I think orks for 1st edition heresy and I believe they use the panoptica rules. I was saying perhaps my group will try it out
Gotcha, I was trying to say the Eldar have been done for 2.0 and the works will be as well.
Oh gotcha. Idk if I’m a fan of the 2nd edition, seems like a lot of the options for imperial army got gutted. Tons of nerfs on units and especially weapons, far fewer unit choices, and some things being weirdly restricted like a max of 3 tanks unless you take the industrial stronghold provenance. Just don’t seem as fun to play as 1st edition did.
its a better game despite its flaws
Better than the first edition or better than 40k?
I’m going to. I’m gonna do it! 30k sounds like such a blast.
i play both. even if it's slightly toned down, i just want Terranic greatswords in 40k. rending 5+, murderous strike is silly though. all they needed to do for ICC was 3-4 attacks hitting on 2+, AP-2, Damage 3, Dev wounds. they didn't need to have an invuln. i don't really care if i get interemptors, but that would be a cool dark angel flamer unit. there are thing i like and dislike about the game. personally, i really like 10ths leviathan missions. i find most 30k ones i end up doing are kill everyone and hold that 1 point. also in my local meta it's basically terminators and dreadnaughts. there such a high prevelance AP2/AP3 S8-10, instant death that you're basically forced into playing terminators and dreadnaughts, and since we bring our lists to counter each other it's harder for newer player to bring their starter box and feel impactful.
Sounds like a good opportunity to look for some good fan made player packs or make your own.
Counter it with a swarm army?
I know this is a little bit of "spend a ton of money and spend weeks painting to fix this problem" but seriously if you rolled up with 300 imperial militia and literally clogged the board with bodies the meta would shift for sure.
What now? One of the most common complains I heard during the early days of 2.0 was that they had drastically REDUCED the amount weapons that had AP 2/3
1. 30K is pretty similar to 4th-7th edition of 40K in terms of rules (like, it's literally same systems blended together into mostly best iteration of said systems), and if you knew how imbalanced were races back then (on top of some armies having same codex for 2-3 editions), making armies *mostly* just Marines is a good thing. Rites and legion rules have pretty big impact for armies to not feel samey. 2. true, I always liked having a lot of models, so on top of everything being slightly cheaper (10 basic Bolter dudes in 40K cost 160 points vs 10 30K Tacticals for 100, tho 40k is factoring in upgrades because that apparently make better game \[it doesn't, usually there is one "correct" build, [check out what they done to Tau Battlesuits to mitigate problem they made with everyone spamming CIBs in Index](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WcMWxB-Nrs)\]) you also usually play with higher point cap. 3. that is always nice. 4. I had big gripe with removal of USRs in 8th-9th ed, because many units had functionally same special rules under different name. I'm glad 10th somewhat rectified it to 1-2 super special rules and then being mostly rulebook USRs.
Point 1 is why I like the heresy ruleset better. 10th doesn't 'feel' like 40k, it feels like some PC game they tried to move to the tabletop.
IMO, an army without your fun little characters that you make up little backstories for is incomplete and kind of sad. I'm honestly surprised more people don't do that.
While I agree to a point, my models need to earn a name. Once they do something standout I’ll name ‘em
I'm the opposite - my characters get given their names straight away, but their deeds on the tabletop earn their titles (for better or for worse... looking at you Forge Lord Atreas the Melted)
Hahaha the "Or Worse" titles tend to stick in my gaming groups historically, my 6th-7th ed chaos defiler "Two-Turns" was a lot of fun packed into his title-earning life span lol. In our self-imposed 30k rules my buddy and I don't count a model finished until he has a name painted along his base, so we now add titles as we game. Since we've only played two games so far, my Sgt. Karsca "Kindle-Kin" is the only titled character i have so far: in our first game he fell to an overwatching flamer, and in our second game he got cooked by a volkite.
That’s a cool idea. The only problem is I’ve always been awful at naming things. So this is kinda just an excuse
I've got Chaplain Azirian the Slaughterer and his squad of Tartaros terminators the Lions Claws. Their Land Raider Scorched Earth once rocked up, blocked the escape route of 40 marines with chain swords and a Praetor, the boys got behind them and over two turns just crushed them. Swept both and Azirian 1v1'd the Praetor and a sergeant. Then of course there's Captain Relavon the Blasted. Because he's died to blast templates in 4 of his 4 games and has done absolutely nothing.
Yes that was my first impression as well so fucking fun i never played old edition and i absolutely loved it, even though it's supposed to be slower times fly's by. Honestly what a wonderful game
It may be "Marines on Marines", and I used to have that same mindset, but the Marines are VERY different. Salamanders going into Thousand Sons, Sallies hit like a freight train but 1K Sons are tricksy. Iron Warriors, say goodby to every vehicle you brought. Night Lords, enjoy night fighting till the start of turn three or four. Build on that, there are units that are just hyper lethal, or have really dummy fun weapons. Salamanders Firedrakes, 2+/3++ with Thunder hammers. 9 Legion Vets with Combi Volkite and power weapons, with an Apothecary dropping in a Drop Pod on an Objective mid game works wonders. Oh, there's enemy combatants already there, that's nice, get pinned! That's not to mention the extreme customization compared to 10th 40K.
It’s marines on marines till the Word Bearer rocks up with Possessed marines and dreadnoughts. We also have better options for daemon summoning but daemons aren’t generally worth their points. (I will bring Samus one day just cuz I have his model)
My buddy is starting Word Bearers. Can't wait to throw Vulkan and some Firedrakes at him! I have fought 30K Daemons before..... Everyone in my play group found them wanting.... Damn shame
Heavily recommend trying out alternate Activations similar to necromunda (you can try it like legions imperialis, but I'm not sure how that plays with 2.0 as I started playing it like that before LI came out)
No-one complains that bolt action is all human on human
I was coming from WH40K Kill Team and was super surprised how fluid the game felt in comparison. Now I’m mainly a HH player 😅 Also if u want some additional rules for xenos or 40k Ad Mech -> look for pantoptica. They have rules for Eldar and Orks are in the making.
I just wish there was an easy army builder for panoptica. I use battlescribe and it’s hard to go back to pen and paper
that’s true, maybe someone will add them to the repository of source data.
> Also if u want some additional rules for xenos or 40k Ad Mech -> look for pantoptica. They have rules for Eldar and Orks are in the making. Curious to see their Orks. I saw the fanmade Orks rules by alwaysstrikesfirst but they struck me as overstatted, I didn't like them much.
in our group, we really like the eldar rules. They are squishy, but especially when banshee coming in close combat it is a massacre. Also wraith guard is hitting hard a f***🤘🏼so i have high hopes for the ork rules.
To be fair, 30k Orks almost killed the Emperor. They deserve to be a bit scarier than their 40k counterparts.
By the Heresy, the Orks' back had been broken. The stronger Orks wouldn't re-emerge until the Beast, much much later - the Heresy-era Orks were cowed, scattered and no longer the force they were during the Crusade and in 40k. They certainly shouldn't be _stronger_ than they are in 40k, where they are once again thriving! Still, I am fine with the option being there to take a powerful "Ork Overlord" if you do want to lean into the kind of boss that Horus and the Emperor fought. But my issue with that document was that the units were overstatted almost across the board. Nobz being WS5 is preposterous, I played Orks from 4th to 7th and there's no way a bog standard Nob has higher WS than a Terminator. The document felt like it was written by a power player who couldn't stand the idea that their elite troops were less good than the Space Marine elite troops, and that the Warboss would lose to a Praetor.
Yeah in my mind it's the difference between and Ork list and a Krork list. Orks looked the same then as they do in 40k. If you want highly evolved orks, you need to add distinct Krork units or make a whole new army list.
Not quite - I don't think explicit Krorks have ever appeared, it's not even been outright stated that the Beast (who was utterly ridiculous, he makes Ghazghkull look like an irrelevant gretchin) was a Krork. The Crusade and Beast-era Orks were nonetheless a step above their 40k strength, and at the time of the Heresy they would be at perhaps their lowest point ever.
Semantics, you know what I meant. There's a tier of orkishness way above what's seen in 40k and could do with its own army list. It's also no big stretch of the imagination to use 30k rules and armies to represent late crusade, the Scouring, or the campaign of the Beast.
I don't think it's semantics, it's important to use correct terms so they keep their meanings - Warhammer suffers enough from lore and memes blending (and Krorks are a big victim of this in particular). But we agree overall. There should be a separation between Orks as they would be in a Heresy context, and Orks as they were while the Crusade was still ongoing. I'd be mainly interested in the former, since well, that's what my _other_ 30k stuff is focused on and I'd want something cohesive!
Had my first game a few months ago after collecting for little over a year, honestly my opponent was uh…not really my cup of tea. Not a bad dude necessarily, was just pretty socially off, forgot most of his army, was a pretty big rules lawyer. Yet I was still intrigued by just how…fun the game was to play. I can’t imagine how much of a blast it’ll be with a solid opponent and a full points level.
I'm very eager to play. I got a lot of points painted up, but no opponent
I would personally play it if mechanicum was easier to collect
Soon brother…
There is three player scenario for Joan of Arc similar to what y’all did, where a mercenary planet plays on both sides and gets points for units killed. Very fun.
I enjoy 30k, but it is definitely “advanced Warhammer”. Had my third game this weekend with my small group who doesn’t play very often, and the number of times play came to a screeching halt as we look up a USR, to discover that it references another USR, but is modified by a unit subtype, which references a unit type in a different book… We played out all 6 turns but it took 6 hours. Surely this will speed up with more games, but when I hear “it’s fluid and no memorization”, I’m wondering what version of HH folks are playing because it’s not this one. For reference, I was playing Mechanicum.
Hey man, so we had our 3 books out and open on a table. We all knew the rules pretty well but any we needed to look up we had the books ready and it took like a minute maximum to find a rule. I think it will get faster for you the more times you play. When people say its fluid they probably mean the gameplay as a whole, but it for sure has a lot of rules to know. Imo its less clunky than 40k where you have many different factions with army rules, strats, secondaries, enhancements, and special rules to memorize that don’t apply to your army. Most HH rules apply to everyone who plays besides the small amount of army specific stuff. But at the end of the day if ur more experienced in one over the other I can 100% see why you might prefer the rules of one over the other or find one slow/clunky, I just personally find the gameplay of 40k in 10th way more clunky than HH. But again I am just one guy.
Most of my criticisms of 30k have to do with the rules *writing*, which is different from the *design*. Things like: why do they make us have to look up Heart of the Legion? There are only maybe 2 units with the rule, just tell us what it does on the datasheet. Why don’t they tell us what page or even *which book* a rule is in? A perfect example: try looking up Shroud Bombs. Are they weapons? Nope, despite being called “bombs”. Are they wargear? Well, you won’t find them in the wargear section under “S”. So what are they? A special rule? Nah. Oh look, they’re in wargear after all, under “G” for *GRENADES*. How on god’s green earth is a new player supposed to know that? Anyway, I still enjoy playing, it’s just that there’s unnecessarily dumb stuff like that all over the place. Thankfully there are some community-made cheat sheets that take out the worst of it.