Search the Community

Hi folks, As we are at dawn of a new season for KT, it is eventually interesting taken a rear-view mirror into the past 2 seasons. Indeed, they have been quite commented due to their differences, at least in some circles where I evolve. General comments, hot and lives, tended to underline a degradation of the delivered content once comparing the Bheta-Decima Season with the Gallow Dark one. Let´s see if it fits. KT as it looked in Gallow Dark First release of the KT-Salvation box has been mildly received; at least where I am wandering around. Format changed to include 2 Kill teams and limited amount of Scenery vs. a galore of scenery before. Very limited amount of scenery in some cases. Main Scenery needed into the last season was available separately, as Bheta-Decima boxed set/kill zone environement. To run the campaign disclosed in the First entry on the Season (and into the latters too), the Kill-zone box was required. Meaning that as an entry box you must pay a Scenery tax or alike. This is indeed a first difference: with the Gallow Dark season you did not need and Kill zone environment – everything was in the box(es). This chilled out many gamers and the argument raised that in fact KT was now a 40k indirect release scheme for units to be set available out of the Codex revision routine developed. Eventually as a largely shared argument. Yet, was it legit? We may eventually start by having a rapid comparison between the top set of releases price wise: Gallow Dark Season Bheta-Decima Season Into the dark – inc Rules 170€ Salvation 80€ Shadow vaults 145€ Nightmare 80€ Soulschackles 145€ Termination 80€ Gallowfall 145€ Kill-Zone Bheta Decima 100€ It is rapidly obvious that the Bheta-Decima season is cheapest than the Gallow Dark one if you play combining more than one campaign episode box (but it is required to buy the rule sourcebook too). Although being cheapest it is depicting a similar pattern in terms of investment required, even if the last season gives a reward to fidelity: more you buy less expensive it is. In terms of contents, beside the difference on walls supplied in standard in the Gallow Dark sets, rest of the main contents remain more or less the same: 2 new KT in each box and campaign book and a small add-on scenery set (for example wall accessories or machineries in Shadow Vaults and Plasma Containers in Termination). As a global overview of KT released, although the Gallow dark season includes 4 boxes instead of 3, it leads to releasing 8 new KT, 10 if the stand-alone Ashes of Faith interlude box is considered. Out of these, 50% are genuine whereas the other half is a repackaging with an accessories sprue, or nothing at all (Cultists). Teams, Teams, Teams On the contrary, all of the 4 out 6 of bands from Bheta Decima season are genuine sets. While two only (Night Lords CSM and brood Brothers) are an accessories sprue. The latest are even completed with classic snap miniatures of old from DeathWatch Overkill game. Looks like a draw as, as such, the release rhythm of new units is similar. With one strong element to be added: all these KT are associated with 40k standard range of army lists whereas the previous Gallow Dark season included at least 2 or 3 that required the artifice of “Imperial Agents” to be included (Inquisitorial henchmen included into the 3). Small stuff but anyway… In terms of narrative, welI imagine we can say it I the same. A slowly growing up story until climax with catastrophically (biblical one says) dimensions. Despite all these similarities and a slight economical advantage for Bheta-Decima, Gallow Dark remains for many tastier. Why? I imagine that it is because of the difference in terms of release strategy. We may be tempted to conclude that in terms of Bliss and Glitter, Gallow Dark was over Bheta-Decima, yet it would miss a key element in the strategy: whereas Bheta-Decima plot and release is a sheer KT product, Gallow Dark was not. Gallow Dark was rather supported as an environment platform for the end of 9th and launch of 10th, through the Boarding action system, the KT integration and all the narrative arc for the Vashtorr buddy. In fact my opinion is that we came back with the Bheta-Decima plot and sets to the KT set-up as it used to be before the amphetamine boost Gallow dark used to be. Back to reality someway. Revised Season´s box Content and KillZones as it used to be So Disappointed? We might be, but it would not be very honest. Yet we are eventually junkies, and as such we always want more, so the perception might be understandable once we got our overdose that Gallow Dark used to be. It is also true that, at the moment, the scenery sets from Bheta-Decima Campaign boxes remain unavailable on a stand alone basis, except at Ebaying them. Gallow Dark remained available as an environment some 2 or 3 quarters after end of the Season. Even if it may touch to an end now… (As Kill Zone Gallow Dark is now marked as "Sold Out Online"...) So looking back in the mirror, and under a cold light examination, as far as I am able to, it looks like there is no reason for rant or grudge. My only very personal egrets are that the pace of release for this Bheta-Decima season has been definitively too concentrated over a limited period of time and that no real dedicated Mechanicum KT has been released so far while the scene was set on a Forge-World... As a KT player I did not had time to enjoy it as it barely gave me the time to play much of the scenario proposed in the campaign. Shame. As a 40k AdMech fan, I felt frustrated not getting any preferential treatment in this season. But it happens. At least GW revised deeply the 40k rules for the cybernetic sociopaths, so I am, more or less, satisfied, or I should be. I do not know how the next season will look like. I am eventually curious to see if the come-back to Chalnath may bring back some Sector Imperialis scenery, either ooP re-released or new stuff. Reprint of Sector Imperialis Sanctum would be great. But I expected MTO for FragDrill and Sisters´s Battle Sanctum to coincide with the GSC and SoB codices and it did not happen. I might get my expectations (a.k.a. wish list) cold showered. Again. KT as it is supposed to look as a standard feature See you next time.

Hi Folks, I lately received a copy of the Bheta-Decima terrain boxed-set. I mainly bought it in order to complete my collection of Sector mechanicus Terrain, adding a fourth Ferromantic Furnace with a big platform and setting more gantries, but this time at intermediate height. Let´s see what comes into the box and how I have ambivalent feelings about the content. 1. What do we have inside? The GW website is exhaustive enough so no need to give too much details. I will focus on what looks like "oddities" to me: - First, the molding quality is uneven between sprues: the straight platforms are clearly aligned (Staright/aligned.. you get it ?) with the older models. No change there. But the round platform looks odd. details may appear being less developped and bottom side is... More about that latter on. - Second, the change of look for the pillars: it is not really rocket design. Clearly it looks like a lazy work here. However one cannot really say that there are less details than on the former pillars. So why this feeling? I guess, at least for me, that it is related to the lack of void areas. These have been filled as pannels and pillars are resulting bulky (I guess on puerpose). But not getting any hollow area leaves a curious outlook to the whole stuff. While the Boarding action terrain had treated these plain areas in a very good looking fashion, here it is not the case. Additionally all accessories have disappeared: so no handrails, not freed cables hanging around or ladders... Instead you have some square add-ons to represent entry points. In the end it is not really a big deal. I found that mounting the handrails has been a painful process both for storage and gaming ergonomy in general. But it looks better on pics for sure. - Third, the Furnace. No change; the same sprue as before. Nothing to add. - Fourth, the specific "objective markers" sprue. You get a substancial amoount of objective markers. They are large, bulky, and may eventually be used as LoS blocking terrain. It is once again less subtle in design than previous Objective markers designed by GW. I will personaly try not to use them as such, rather putting them on other pieces of terrain to give more volume (for example as hatches on STC Ryza bunkers). Shall you look for Objetcive markers, better buy the Hachette "Imperial Objective" spure on ebay or some Gallowdark terrain (Shadowvault is nice for that). They will look better. - Finally, the mat. We saw the head side. Tail side is in the same mood but eventually with less "open sea" area. Here too, more about that latter. 2. Is it the molding quality or the molding philosophy? The uneasy discrepancy between the sprues is not necesary an issue. But as it sorts out obvious because it comes in the same box. Well, you can´t hide the forest behind the tree, right? There is IMHO a clear and deliberate will of slimming the plastic chunks. The round platform is globally OK on the gaming side but bellow, it is made at the economy. To get less plastic. The consequence is something lighter in terms of weight (which may end up being a benefit as mounting a stable paltforms on the Furnace looks like being a Perious Hike in Perious Environement. I will see when the time will come to paint and glue). But looks by yourself, comparing a "old design platform" with this "new design plaform": The drastic sliming is eventually relevant as the round platform looks like not being design for another purpose than fitting on the furnace. Do not look for any kind of modularity here. It is done to go there, on top of the cylinder, and that´s all. Period. Click Bait design. This is a little bit of a deception, especially if you look at the pillars´ design that may hide something in plain sight. 3. The Pillars. OK, they look odd. But this is secondary. After all, the older ones looked better but once set bellow a platform, you do not really take any benefit of the amount of details available. So More is eventually not Better. What is puzzeling with the Pillars is the poptential purpose behind the design features. You have 2 types of pilars. One type molded into a single piece whilethe another type molded in 2 parts: a Piedestal and the main structure to be set on top. They can be stacked in order to reach twice the height and equalize the old Sector Mechanicus pillars. But for that you need one type of each. This is not anyway making the diffrent design necesary, isn´t it? So, what is the purpose there? Shall we foresee another (future) set using these 2 types of pillars in a distinct manner? Something that may jsutify not using the piedestal? Questions, questions... 4. The mat There is no need to talk about the colours... This is a very personal judgment. But liking it or not there is something striking with this mat: at the moment it is useful only for Kill Team. This is a very important evolution in the design philosophy I feel. And it reached its climax with this set. Initial Kill zones released had a 2 side mat with one side uniformized to be used in conjunction to other kill zone mats (more or less). Thank you WarCom: This is over. This is over for a while some may tell me. Sure, but at least the previous zones were not too marked and still usable in 40k too. Here, a plain sea area and only that on the mat may start to be problematic as you cannot match it with anything. With anything, yet (?). I guess this is one key feature of the "Seasonality" of KT: get the future mats along this one to be able getting a combined area worth playing a 2k pts games of 40k maybe.... 5. Conclusions Well, it is a set that serves its purpose: getting an environement for KT under Perious Environement zones´ rules. The associated "fog of war" rules affecting LoS make useless most of other LoS blocking elements. So why bother putting some into the set? The simplified rules for terrain from 10th also looks like they imprinted their influence: get rid of too much details such as handrails as anyway stuff on gantries will benefit of cover. So there is no need of handrails, isn´t it? Price wise, it is not badly priced. 2 sets of gantries, one ferratonic furnace and its large platform and a mat plus objective markers. If you can get it under discount from a FLGS you might get it for the same price as past edition kill zone environements. And the quantity of stuff is higher that in some past killzones. So, no rant there. This set is not cheap but it ain´t overpriced neither (only if compared with other GW internal references of course...). But the overall impression it left me is the one of a product designed to be temporal, fast consumed and fast forgotten. If it does not cut the heredity bound with past Mechanicus Sector, it does not however looks like it is meant to be a installed in perenity. Said that, I see value in 2 cases mainly: 1. for people like me, already owning some terrain and wishing to have some punctual additions that give something not already included (half height gantries mainly) 2. for pure KT players that do not necesarily need more than that to get a gaming arena But as a base for starting a collection of terrain for 40k... I would advise passing. What do you think? PS: Ohh, and BTW, as a side note: my set came labelled "made in UK", if it is of any relevancy.