Get Ready For Chapter Approved

[Panzer]

 

... the point adjustments were by far the most important stuff...

Not for all of us. I am stoked about VDR and missions. In fact me and my gaming group have yet to play a game using points.

Fair enough, not for all. But I dare say for most.

[Calyptra]

I'm pretty unimpressed by the Succubus-only Warlord Trait (hits on 6+ cause extra hits) getting canceled out by the Succubus-only weapon that Succubi are required to take (archite glaive, -1 to hit) for the first 2 turns of the game. (Turn 3 Power from Pain is +1 to hit.)

 

Maybe that was their plan, and maybe it was exhaustively playtested, but it seems awfully inelegant to have a model's unique rules tripping over each other like that.

[Gentlemanloser]

Points adjustment was the most important. Even if there are some players who never used points.

[Calyptra]

Points adjustment was the most important. Even if there are some players who never used points.

They tweaked the points for the Court of the Archon. Forgive me for being underwhelmed.

[Commander Dawnstar]

I'm pretty unimpressed by the Succubus-only Warlord Trait (hits on 6+ cause extra hits) getting canceled out by the Succubus-only weapon that Succubi are required to take (archite glaive, -1 to hit) for the first 2 turns of the game. (Turn 3 Power from Pain is +1 to hit.)

 

Maybe that was their plan, and maybe it was exhaustively playtested, but it seems awfully inelegant to have a model's unique rules tripping over each other like that.

 

I had assumed that at least some of the leaks were fake based purely on how little sense that Warlord Trait made for a model who has to take a -1 To Hit weapon :|

[Slave to Darkness]

Psycannons cost 20.

 

Now the twin psycannon costs 50.

 

Fixed that for ya. ;)

[Charlo]

I feel like Fires of Cyraxus will sort out a lot of the Marine LoW (maybe Titans too) but until then it's very strange to see these increases.

 

Hopefully we get some commentary on it from GW.

[Gentlemanloser]

Fixed that for ya. 

<3

[the jeske]

 

I wonder who of both of us here is in denial. If you guys do not want to listen, fine. All I can do is try to make this more positive, spare you to agony of negativism that I know too well and try to warn you that the thread is getting off tracks, but the choice is ultimately yours.

 

Ok, we have a first totaly new player [as in not vet of editions past, not someone who switched systems,etc] in our group. He and his brother picked Grey Knights as their army. Now tell me how do we make the rule set a positive thing to him, or at least seem to look like a positive thing. Because I don't know how to do it, and I have been playing from 2ed to 7th ed.

[Iron Father Ferrum]

Simple.  You tell them to play what looks cool or seems fun rather than worry about squeezing every possible iota of point-efficiency out of the system.  I know it's an alien concept for you -- I'm not insulting, I've just been here long enough to know your outlook on the game -- but you could try to step away from WAAC ideals.

[Vel'Cona]

I for one am happy for points adjustments being active rather than by-codex, esp. with them happening annually.  Overall, the CA seems like something of a "lessons learned" year-end cap on the current game condition.  I share the concern that charging for something like this seems a bit dirty, but compared to being stuck with a 5+ YO codex I think times have improved greatly.

 

As for customization, that's the job of the local playgroup/FLGS.  GW isn't required to create an experience that appeals to literally every interested party at all times; to even try is to court madness.   Instead, they keep the base product fresh by adding new content (codexes, models, supplements) and it's up to the players to decide which of these elements is valuable.

 

With that being said, we can each decide what CA means to us, or indeed if it has any personal value at all.  The subjective nature is implied, OFC  :)

[Blindhamster]

on saturday whilst the open day, I had a game with a friend who was using knights.

 

a couple of kids and their dad came and watched most of the game, and during it they asked lots of questions which I answered happily.

one of the first things one of the boys asked was "can you beat the knights" to which I responded by explaining that I was playing all primaris, and that most primaris stuff isn't really suited for dealing with high toughness and good saves, so it'd be a tough fight. I also mentioned that I have a large number of regular marine units I could have brought with me that would be far more efficient against the knights. The boy then asked why I didn't bring those instead then, to which I said "I think the primaris stuff looks cooler, and I'll have fun either way."

And I did, and I was happy to suggest that sort of attitude to younger gamers, better that than hyper competitive being the norm (which it is with most groups I go to).

[Gentlemanloser]

Simple. You tell them to play what looks cool or seems fun rather than worry about squeezing every possible iota of point-efficiency out of the system. I know it's an alien concept for you -- I'm not insulting, I've just been here long enough to know your outlook on the game -- but you could try to step away from WAAC ideals.

And watch them lose every game from playing units that don't work and have no synergy with each other. And generally being worse in the table than anything thier opponent uses. While simultaneously trying to learn and understand the game.

 

Slowly becoming dejected with the game and finally moving away.

Edited November 27, 2017 by Gentlemanloser

[CrimsonReign]

points / rules adjustments are great

just seems a bit too soon 

if you play just one army, say space marines, then you've been expected to buy:

main rules

index imperium

codex space marines

chapter approved

 

i thought 8th was supposed to have less book bloat

[Shockmaster]

GW need to do a much better job of balance as it suits most players, hardcore & casual but us players also have to take responsibility for our own behaviour too, maybe don't feel the need as a gaming group in what is meant to be a fun social game to constantly destroy new players who have chosen the so called wrong or weak armies that they like best just because you can.

 

Luckily in my experience the super hardcore incapable of playing anything but the strongest netlist types don't even represent the majority of players who like tournaments let alone represent the entire GW customer base, although at times reading certain online forums it can seem like they do.

[Dosjetka]

To play an army, you need the rules and either the Codex or the Index. You can broaden your options and be 100% up-to-date with extra books but the bottom line is you need two books to play.

[Cryptix]

Hell, only one player is required to bring the rules and chapter approved, and that's if your store isn't like mine and doesn't have copies that you can use while playing. 

[Iron Father Ferrum]

 

Simple. You tell them to play what looks cool or seems fun rather than worry about squeezing every possible iota of point-efficiency out of the system. I know it's an alien concept for you -- I'm not insulting, I've just been here long enough to know your outlook on the game -- but you could try to step away from WAAC ideals.

And watch them lose every game from playing units that don't work and have no synergy with each other. And generally being worse in the table than anything thier opponent uses. While simultaneously trying to learn and understand the game.

 

Slowly becoming dejected with the game and finally moving away.

 

 

That scenario only pans out if everyone playing the game is playing WAAC, you know.  If the play-group in question are all in it for fluff and fun rather than hammer-stomping their opponents as quickly as possible, then the playing field evens itself out.

[Halandaar]

And furthermore, the core rules take up 8 sheets of paper. You may not even need to bring the whole rulebook if you are using missions from Chapter Approved.

[Sete]

Isn't GW making an Army build app? The costs should be updated there I reckon.

 

If you don't want to buy CA, or carry an extra book around, that's a great solution.

Edited November 27, 2017 by Sete

[Ficinus]

And furthermore, the core rules take up 8 sheets of paper. You may not even need to bring the whole rulebook if you are using missions from Chapter Approved.

By this logic, there was never book bloat. The formation rules from supplements were only a couple of pages, you would only need whatever pages your unit and weapon rules were on in your codex, you would only need the specific pages of allied units' rules, etc. The only book you needed in seventh was the pocket sized rule book.

[Halandaar]

By this logic, there was never book bloat. The formation rules from supplements were only a couple of pages, you would only need whatever pages your unit and weapon rules were on in your codex, you would only need the specific pages of allied units' rules, etc. The only book you needed in seventh was the pocket sized rule book.

 

You can actually obtain the 8th edition rules separately from the hardback rulebook; that's how you can only bring that portion of it if you're not using the missions included in said hardback. I'm not saying just rip out the pages you need and take them with you...

[Ficinus]

 

 

By this logic, there was never book bloat. The formation rules from supplements were only a couple of pages, you would only need whatever pages your unit and weapon rules were on in your codex, you would only need the specific pages of allied units' rules, etc. The only book you needed in seventh was the pocket sized rule book.

You can actually obtain the 8th edition rules separately from the hardback rulebook; that's how you can only bring that portion of it if you're not using the missions included in said hardback. I'm not saying just rip out the pages you need and take them with you...

I was assuming you meant that one could photocopy them. And the book bloat issue wasn't and isn't the BRB, both editions have pocket sizes that are quite manageable, it's all the ancillary rules (codex, formations, allies, chapter approved, etc).

[Gentlemanloser]

 

 

 

Simple. You tell them to play what looks cool or seems fun rather than worry about squeezing every possible iota of point-efficiency out of the system. I know it's an alien concept for you -- I'm not insulting, I've just been here long enough to know your outlook on the game -- but you could try to step away from WAAC ideals.

And watch them lose every game from playing units that don't work and have no synergy with each other. And generally being worse in the table than anything thier opponent uses. While simultaneously trying to learn and understand the game.

 

Slowly becoming dejected with the game and finally moving away.

That scenario only pans out if everyone playing the game is playing WAAC, you know. If the play-group in question are all in it for fluff and fun rather than hammer-stomping their opponents as quickly as possible, then the playing field evens itself out.

 

Not at all.

 

A lot of armies can play very fluffy lists, that work well.

 

No matter what units you choose.

 

GK however are not one of those armies.

[Ishagu]

Honestly, as I said before, I am shocked about the GK treatment.

 

CA was a chance to fix and address the army, but this still hasn't happened :-(

 

Hopefully the NEXT edition will do so.