On Scale Creep (in all senses)

[Robbienw]

 

I love many of the new models too, i'd just prefer if the scale creep stopped now. Its not about proportions, you can re-proportion a model without needing to increase its size dramatically, or by decreasing size. Its just i feel the sizes are starting to get too big. I want miniatures.

The new chaos marines are perfect to me. I just finished casting up extended oldmarine legs for my next project to make them the size of the new chaos legionaries. It’s the big centerpiece models like knights and baneblades that should be restricted by points percentage limitations, personally. That will keep the game infantry focused.

 

 

 

Yeah the chaos marines are all right, as are the deathwatch and heroes series marines who are similarly scaled.  That's as far as I'd like it to go with size and bulk of a 40k sized regular power armoured marine model.  The re-sized regular humans are too tall even compared to to them imo.

 

I use different sizes of marine leg in my army, mainly normal unmodified legs, but also Deathwatch ones and some i have cut off from spare Heroes Series marine bodies. And also some from FW legion armour sets.  It gives more leg pose and height variation which i like

[Brother Tyler]

I've gone through and removed some portions of posts (well, a portion of one post and wherever it was quoted in subsequent posts) as well as two posts that were just unnecessary bickering.

 

Really, folks, we don't all have to like each other or agree with each other. We do, however, have to treat each other with a basic level of respect and courtesy, even when we disagree or dislike each other. We can even *gasp* agree with someone we dislike without picking a fight.

[Evil Eye]

Thanks for all the discussion/opinions!

 

I will definitely agree that the introduction of things like Kill Team is a step in the right direction; it allows people who want smaller, more "personal" games to have that option without removing people's ability to play larger games. I will also echo the sentiment that "BIGhammer" would be better suited to 15mm scale, but at the same time that ship has long sailed (though Adeptus Titanicus, along with having separate rules for Apocalypse again, is IMO a very good idea).

[ERJAK]

I guess I don't really see how this is a bad thing. Sure inflated cost isn't great and transportation is a bit more difficult, but the tradeoff of getting amazing centerpiece models we could have never gotten before seems more than worth it to me.

 

I don't want to combat scale creep. I'm perfectly content at 2000pts, I like big centerpiece models, small games are boring, and GW are rapidly approaching the maximum amount of money they'll be able to squeeze out of players before they have to reel it in again, ala 8th edition fantasy. As far as I can tell, there's not actually a problem here.

 

I've actually been hoping for the SoB release (which is ultimately the only 40k army I truly care about) will see size creep in their infantry(easier to paint plus 32mm bases are just better) AND will get a big centerpiece (either some kind of heavy/superheavy tank or that big angel thing from soulstorm). I don't even care if it makes my current metals look goofy in comparison because I'll either shelve them as display pieces or just deal with it.

 

Sidebar based on a single comment I saw, but I'd really love to see less infantry. As much fun as watching someone push around 120 ork boyz is...pass.

[Trevak Dal]

I think that with small scale games, because the nature of 8th and the "need" for command points for strategems, it bottle necks (not sure if that's a right or good term for it) list building. "I want to take chaos raptors...but I need cultists or Red Corsairs for the CP" and I think that's meandered away from original intent of "yo dawg, build the army you want to with the minis you want...but don't be a dick and bring 6 riptides or stormravens" and because the "don't be a dick" part was ignored or overlooked, Khorne Berserkers HAD to be made troops because they used to be in older editions instead of being able to just run Vanguard detachments (and maybe buffing them more to make them more "elite").

 

People are less likely to take "what they want" because time is limited, and they want to win.

 

I want a raptor army. Like seriously, however many points of 5 man raptor, warp talon and jump pack units only. Screw how "good" it is, screw how God awful it would be to paint that many raptors/warp talons, I want that. Double it up as a 30k jump pack army. Rule of Three, which is there to prevent some guy from taking 10 of a given awesome unit poo poos on that.

 

 

Disregarding the need for command points and focusing on smaller point games though, I CAN have a assault marine/raptor army, not spamming MSU but i can put 62 Marines on the table. I just got to accept that I don't get to use part of the game really beyond rerolls (and if you play vanilla loyalists or space wolves, that pretty much what you do anyway)

[Trevak Dal]

Fortunately the writing has been on the wall with regards to "small scale engagements" and "oldhammer" for quite some time, and GW have given us the option to scratch that itch with KillTeam.

 

It takes away vehicles, but the Commander expansion bumped the points value for a game up from the initial 100 points, I suspect Elites will take it further, maybe even to 500, I feel that would be a really good spot for it. There will inevitably be either individual Heavy Support and Fast Attack expansions or a combined one.

 

Kill Teams at 500 points, especially with the Command Roster concept (maybe at 1000 points total) could work really well and if done properly could make a really interesting tournament system too.

 

Also, my bet is on Kill Team 2.0 at some point in 2020.

 

Rik

If I could bring grey knight terminators in kill team (and actually get 5) and get the bolter rules that would be fantastic.

[Closet Skeleton]

Once upon a time, models the size of a Trygon, or even slightly smaller, were massive things reserved as big "boss" monsters for Apocalypse games. Most monsters were of equivalent size to Dreadnoughts, and it was rare that more than a few of those would appear in an army- a Tyranid force with a pair of Carnifexes AND a Hive Tyrant was considered downright scary.

 

2nd ed Tyranid Warriors are so big compared to 2nd ed Carnifexes and Hive Tyrants that despite the rules the scaling made no sense. Especially since they all went on the same 40mm (square!) bases. Re-scaling was very necessary there.

 

Now, though, if you're not taking AT LEAST one Knight sized unit in a standard army list, you'll be told your army isn't "competitive" (even if it's not a tourney list, but that's another matter). The size of armies has ballooned, and so with it has the numbers of big "centrepiece" models (which themselves have become gigantic). This not only makes collecting an army much more expensive and time-consuming, but also makes transport a nightmare and has turned the 41st Millennium into an "arms race" to see who can deploy the most huge models.

 

Sounds like people who don't actually play competitively talking big. Deploying the most huge models isn't a way to win games. Top tier Knight armies don't spam knights, they take 1 knight and a bunch of infantry because with how the 3+ invulnerable save works 1 knight is more durable than 2 knights.

 

The majority of huge models are incredibly noncompetitive. Knights are a massive exception, Wraith Knights were only good last edition.

 

For tournaments, short of indie tourneys introducing army list restrictions (probably a bad idea) or setting up scenarios for people to play with "game modes" other than simple deathmatches (a good idea but probably impractical) there's not much that can be done. Personally I'm of the opinion that tourneys, whilst they have their place, should not be considered the "optimal" or "standard" way to play 40K but again, that's a different topic.

 

Funny, my problem with most tournaments is they've become focused around 'game modes' that are too complicated and arcane. I'm not asking for no missions but ITC feels more doing taxes than playing a hobby and when its not ITC you're usually playing a eternal war and a maelstrom mission simultaneously which is often even worse.

 

If you really had people spending all their time practicing for tournaments then you'd see people playing ITC missions on terrain heavy boards because that's how you actually do well at a big tournament.

 

There are tournaments that place list building restrictions and there is an audience for them and they won't have any effect on little timmy who just wants to play kill points and bring his three wraith knights because tournaments were always a non-sequeteur thing to bring up on things you don't like about casual play at your club.

 

i like painting big minis now that i have an airbrush but gaming wise imo GWs scale is perfect for KT but 40k is going towards a size game wise that would suit a smaller scale such as 20mm or 15mm. ive seen games at my local club where on a 6ft table there is almost no terrain and just a wall of plastic minis and that was the norm.

 

 

There's also the issue of the state of the game itself (with the expectation that every game should be a head-to-head basic deathmatch on a largely barren board) which has contributed to the scale escalation somewhat, but that's a discussion for another time.

 

If that's what the game is like for you then you've got bigger problems. Even in store pick up games I always play actual missions and there's loads of terrain. No tournament play is supposed to be like that (but it unfortunately happens when a club has to set up 30 boards that you end up with a lot of small bits of terrain that don't actually block any line of sight).

 

Given the impact knights like the Castellan have had I'd say yes. They not indestructible, but large monsters/tanks have made their mark I think. Most I have spoken to of late regarding list building seem to ask "can it kill a Castellan?" or "you could do that or a Knight can do it better for the points." 

 

In some respects it can be a good thing to let more use the models they bought though. 

 

Knights aren't especially efficient for their points in 8th edition, its the relics and warlord traits that aren't factored into the points cost that breaks the codex (and its a small list of 20% of those relic/trait options combined with certain households). Point for point a squadron of Leman Russ are tougher than a Knight Castellan.

 

A House Griffith trio of Paladins with a non-character Castellan in the back will tear through non-optimised lists but isn't going to place well in a tournament setting at all.

[chapter master 454]

Not sure I agree entirely with the Knights there, Often find pure knights fairly effective actually as even in objective games like maelstrom (not eternal war "EVERYONE GET IN HERE" objectives) due to their tremendous ability to fight fairly effectively in all theatres of war, be it ranged or Close combat. There is some complaints leveled at the castellan which is unfortunate because it is actually becoming clear that is there only debate in so far as to what is wrong with the game.

 

Not to mention, Knights being good is a great thing because we can see what a good "tank" unit looks like. I.E. a vehicle that can move and fire heavy weapons without penalty (shouldn't be a selling point in the models points cost) along with such units not being able to be tied up in combat so comically.

It is rather sad because by all accounts being a vehicle is a downside rather than an upside due to the fact there is more anti-vehicle keyword abilties than there are anti-monster. Kind of funny how despite the changes, things are still the same!

I digress, sorry.

 

The scale of the game has by all accounts caught up with the intended vision. Yes, we are seeing more of what I would call nit-picking and some rose-tinted glasses going on about the old days. However I will agree that some models do get a bit overboard with details though I would think that is more just a factor of designers wanting to actually go ham on models now they can (don't blame them really. You really think they like having to cut back? The Sternguard marines I would consider 1:1 with likely concept drawings...both a plus and negative).

 

The game is also in one of the most radical times of its life. Unlike prior editions, more tournaments are being played and actively known about than ever with an infinite amount more of variance, some good and some bad but all good to see. The game is now actively getting balanced inbetween editions! That is colossal. If anything, the scale of the game hasn't just increased on the board but also in real life. My only lament is the loss of Games Day. I hope we see that return one day. Would be AWESOME.

 

The best part also however of 40k is the fact that there is more ways to play it than any can imagine. If you prefer smaller games then do so, though I can understand some annoyance if you can't find the game size you prefer, can be extremely infuriating. Just remember, no one format is forced on you, it is your choice how to play 40k.

 

Now excuse me while I try and keep up with my oath...oh boy...there's a scale problem there! Me scaling this mountain I set for myself! :D

[Arkhanist]

I think a big part of what's driven big centrepiece models now is that technology allows them to exist. Between CAD and GW's sprue casting, it really is rather amazing what they can practically produce now. You could make big stuff with the old lead alloy, but thin bits were terribly bendy - spear units usually ended up looking like they were made of rubber. And oh god, the weight, and they'd fall apart if you looked at them funny - the old lead WFB dragons... Abaddon being armless is a meme for a reason and bigger stuff felt like more pin than model if you didn't want to bring super glue for running repairs every game. Resin could (and can) do big impressive models, but the price, eek.

 

Something like Mortarion, or Knights would never have been feasible for mass production 30 years ago. The current stuff is more the longstanding vision becoming possible to actually express - I'm certainly not going to complain comparing Primaris to the old assault on black reach space marines or the venerable RTB01 kit for quality and detail.

 

For modelling, it's a golden age compared to 30 years ago IMO. But then I'm much more a painter than a gamer, so I'll fully concede that that stuff should have probably stayed in apoc games, except of course mainstream 40k is all-apoc-all-the-time and has been for a while due to public demand - people want to play with those big expensive models they bought. At least Kill Team exists and is actually pretty good for that old school small squad vibe that 40K started as.

[ERJAK]

To add on a little bit to the mono knight discussion, Mono knights aren't...great. they really really struggle in a lot of competitive matchups. HOWEVER, mono knights have 2 particular strengths that make them incredible either in a casual setting or against more...experimental lists.

 

1. They are a brake-check army. If you play against a mono-knight list you either have the bodies or the firepower to beat them and you win easily, or you don't and lose horribly. There's not really a whole lot of other outcomes there.

 

2. They're hard to screw up. Knights don't have a whole lot of choices compared to other armies and taking something like a castellan locks up a bunch of points into a good unit. This prevents players from spending points on stupid crap(powerfist sergeants and the like) and artificially makes their lists more efficient.

[Vermintide]

I think the Primaris models are great, their fluff is very... Controversial, but in terms of aesthetic I love them. The problem there, however, was more that the Marine models were too small for their supposed 7-8 ft stature, not that they simply needed to be bigger.

What I do take issue to is the gigantic characters and titan-level mechs that are somehow "normal" models now. Back in my day something like a Castellan would have been some semi-mythical forgeworld model you heard some guy once knew somebody who had one had as a display piece. Maybe you'd see one on display at Warhammer World and take a photo to put on your wall at home. Today, it's in every tournament list.

Then you have characters like Papa Smurf being about as tall as my house. That stuff... Not so keen on.

 

Regarding the general size of armies, I think generally that just gives you more flexibility, so it's not entirely a bad thing. For example, I have noticed a lot of groups and some of the big Youtube channels now use 1750 as their "standard" full scale game. This seems to give you something approximating a 2000 point army from 20 years ago, while leaving room for a little extra if you want to go all in. There's nothing stopping you playing 1000 point matches as standard, and in many ways I often find smaller, quicker games more fun.

 

I think the issue again comes with the tournament scene setting the precedent and defining what "standard" is. Do folks who play pick up games expect you to adhere to ITC rules?

[Ishagu]

Tournaments and competitive gaming is a small part of the community.

 

There are countless collectors and players who have no presence on the Internet groups or forums and who have no interest and only a vague knowledge of thr competitive scene.

 

Arrange and play the game you want with like minded people.

[Rik Lightstar]

ITC rules aren't something I come up against here in England, but pick up games will almost always be Matched Play, Points, Rule of 3, etc.

 

Leagues will be similar too, so you need to be playing and used to playing against 1750-2000 point tournament armies.

 

That defines what you buy and what you paint, creating a bit of a vicious circle.

 

Rik

[Vermintide]

See, I don't do PUGs these days, so I have no idea. But it seems to me that the broader community - podcasts, fan sites, strategy articles, battle reports on the video/streaming sites- is all very rooted in tournament play. 8th edition itself has that flavour about it- It's designed for faster rolling and less ambiguity than previous editions.

 

It's a matter of taste of course, but I feel like that's what gets to the core of this scale creep thing.

[ERJAK]

See, I don't do PUGs these days, so I have no idea. But it seems to me that the broader community - podcasts, fan sites, strategy articles, battle reports on the video/streaming sites- is all very rooted in tournament play. 8th edition itself has that flavour about it- It's designed for faster rolling and less ambiguity than previous editions.

 

It's a matter of taste of course, but I feel like that's what gets to the core of this scale creep thing.

Public discussion is mostly about tournament STYLE play, because that generates lots of content. Even players that don't ever go to tournaments can still talk about their favorite units, gameplay moments, and things they'd like to see changed.

 

Discussion of narrative is mostly 'ah, remember that cool thing? Remember that stupid thing?'

 

Narrative PLAY discussions are pretty one-sided by nature because you have to explain the context of the battle and the characters in order for your audience to be able to associate with it at all, and even then you can't really contribute much other than 'wow, that sounds like a cool campaign, now don't talk for 15 mintutes while I talk about MY cool campaign.'

 

TL: DR, A lot of public discussion is about gameplay because gameplay is the easiest thing to discuss with strangers.

[sarabando]

as i dont play 30k/40k scale creep is only really a modelling issue for me. when i see the guys at my local playing it just seems so boring its a few huge minis lots of dice and barely any terrain. Compared to our local bolt action players who throw :cuss loads of terrain and there is lots of movement and less rolling of buckets of dice. with the push for bigger and bigger kits the scale is getting out of hand for the game, 40k as it currently looks should be a came set at the 15mm scale where as KT and Necromunda are perfect. 

[Xwingt65]

as i dont play 30k/40k scale creep is only really a modelling issue for me. when i see the guys at my local playing it just seems so boring its a few huge minis lots of dice and barely any terrain. Compared to our local bolt action players who throw :cuss loads of terrain and there is lots of movement and less rolling of buckets of dice. with the push for bigger and bigger kits the scale is getting out of hand for the game, 40k as it currently looks should be a came set at the 15mm scale where as KT and Necromunda are perfect.

 

If they don’t play 40k with loads of terrain, that is on them, and not scale creep or the game.

[Brother Eleysium]

I am late to the party as usual, but you can pretty much sum this up with the need and increased interest to make profits and the correlation with availability and number of large models. GW is a business, and like all other businesses, their job is to make money. 

 

From an actual gaming standpoint, I really wish special characters and Lords of War had a point restriction like we saw in Fantasy and 40K of old. From a fluff standpoint, your HQ's don't take place at every battle, and are generally don't participate in direct operations at the front unless there is a larger pitched engagement. Considering the fact that 40K is literally a small skirmish sized engagement, there is no need for a Knight, or a freaking Primarch at every battle.

 

For me though, all of this is dictated by whom you are playing, and how you all play. For myself and most of my group, we play for fun and the fluff/narrative side of the game. Yeah, we generally play a matched point game so the army sizes are even, but you are very rarely going to see a meta list at one of our games. Occasionally one of the guys in our group will want to bring a competitive list to try, but it's discussed beforehand so their opponents know what to expect. Most of us love the actual universe and story of said universe enough to understand Guilliman isn't at every engagement the Ultramarines fight in. 

[sarabando]

 

as i dont play 30k/40k scale creep is only really a modelling issue for me. when i see the guys at my local playing it just seems so boring its a few huge minis lots of dice and barely any terrain. Compared to our local bolt action players who throw loads of terrain and there is lots of movement and less rolling of buckets of dice. with the push for bigger and bigger kits the scale is getting out of hand for the game, 40k as it currently looks should be a came set at the 15mm scale where as KT and Necromunda are perfect.

If they don’t play 40k with loads of terrain, that is on them, and not scale creep or the game.

 

its mostly becausde there just isntroom for terrain with the tanks the size of over weight corgis

[Panzer]

 

 

as i dont play 30k/40k scale creep is only really a modelling issue for me. when i see the guys at my local playing it just seems so boring its a few huge minis lots of dice and barely any terrain. Compared to our local bolt action players who throw loads of terrain and there is lots of movement and less rolling of buckets of dice. with the push for bigger and bigger kits the scale is getting out of hand for the game, 40k as it currently looks should be a came set at the 15mm scale where as KT and Necromunda are perfect.

If they don’t play 40k with loads of terrain, that is on them, and not scale creep or the game.

 

its mostly becausde there just isntroom for terrain with the tanks the size of over weight corgis

 

 

I can't agree on that. There's still plenty of room for terrain even with tanks and big walkers.

The usual cities of death board is the amount of terrain we use in our group in pretty much every game. Something like this random pic from the internet:

[PeteySödes]

Had my first GT game against pure knights on Saturday. Opponent took a (not)Castellan, 2 dual Avenger cannon guys, and a CC Gauntlet/reaper guy. It for sure solidified my thoughts on the subject that I do think it harms the game. For me it comes down to against 4 models with level of toughness its just so dice dependent. It was a high scoring loss for me as I still got a few obj and dropped 2/4 but it was one where I can point to where the whole game I set myself up for success but where I need to dance around and make no mistakes, getting punished if a play fails, he kinda just sits there. Easy words on the internet I know and I'm not claiming to be some crazy top level player. I dont feel like its OP in that regard, just a different game.

 

Still love the models, they can be gorgeous, I just wish they were their own game or mode.

[Gederas]

as i dont play 30k/40k scale creep is only really a modelling issue for me. when i see the guys at my local playing it just seems so boring its a few huge minis lots of dice and barely any terrain. Compared to our local bolt action players who throw loads of terrain and there is lots of movement and less rolling of buckets of dice. with the push for bigger and bigger kits the scale is getting out of hand for the game, 40k as it currently looks should be a came set at the 15mm scale where as KT and Necromunda are perfect.

If they don’t play 40k with loads of terrain, that is on them, and not scale creep or the game.

its mostly becausde there just isntroom for terrain with the tanks the size of over weight corgis

I can't agree on that. There's still plenty of room for terrain even with tanks and big walkers.

The usual cities of death board is the amount of terrain we use in our group in pretty much every game. Something like this random pic from the internet:

I'm in agreement on this. You can fit a MASSIVE amount of terrain while keeping room for larger units. In a tournament, I helped set up the terrain based on the constraints of who had the biggest model footprint (amusingly, it was me with my Brass Scorpion [8" long, 6" wide, roughly 10" tall), so no one could complain they can't move their big units past their deployment zone. Because this was a tournament that saw SEVERAL Lords of War in it.

 

So the TO, the shop and myself owner made it so my Brass Scorpion was the limit for large building closeness, and the boards were STILL utterly covered with terrain. To the point where, on most of the boards, TITANIC units could get full cover.

 

And these are 1750 point games on 4x4s.

[FlamingDeth]

I'll throw in an addendum to that as well...difficulty moving and some paths through the board being cut off to you are part of the costs of using such huge models. If the board you're playing on is a city fight board and you can't move your quarter mile tall murder robot through the smaller alleys, well...you knew that was possible when building your list. Sometimes you have to take the scenic route.

[Slasher956]

Give people a reason to take the infantry heavy weapons squad and a chance to get up close to the big monsters with out receiving a bucket of dice before they've gone half way...

[MegaVolt87]

Give people a reason to take the infantry heavy weapons squad and a chance to get up close to the big monsters with out receiving a bucket of dice before they've gone half way...

 

I got you fam, we can halve the SM dev squad to 5 man 4 heavies, not 5, make them T5, 1W no invuln, move and shoot on 40mm bases. Rule of three to help you get the most out of infantry heavies.