State of the Union (Heresy)

[Doctor Perils]

 

The bloat in 9th is due to a few bloated factions (AdMech for instance), the core rules are way easier to navigate though from what I can tell

 

I do think it's a positive having the two rulesets though - I personally can't be bothered to deal with 7th, but I know a lot of people prefer it so I wouldn't want to take that option away

 

Can i ask what you thought was wrong with the 7th rules? From what I recall before they dropped 8th people were switching over to Heresy in my area to avoid some of the 40k 7th rules problems (formations/Decurions and the free rhino/drop pods/upgrades)

Oh I meant AoD(7), I agree it's much better than vanilla 7th. Still, I can't be bothered with the rules drawers of units with special rules that call out to universal special rules that they themselves call out other universal special rules, which also have a unit type that has more universal special rules, and then you also add on the faction rules...

 

All the while having multiple types of profiles that work nothing alike, an over- complicated WS system, an overabundance of weapon types, an AP system I hate... It all combines in what _for me, personally_ feels like a slog. I can absolutely understand people liking all of that extra stuff because, yeah, it does add a teensy bit more tactical depth.

 

I do really like how Legions, consuls and Rites of War interact, and I do miss the customisation options for characters. But on the whole, I _personally_ prefer 9th because it doesn't give me a headache

[Doctor Perils]

I'm still hoping for that late-autumn slot but who knows..

 

We should be due another Legion Dispatch this week - anyone want to take a bling guess at what it might be?

I think they've moved their Legion Dispatches to Mondays now, and I definitely wouldn't expect one during GenCon

[LameBeard]

The bloat in 9th is due to a few bloated factions (AdMech for instance), the core rules are way easier to navigate though from what I can tell

 

I think “core rules in 8 pages” is an elegant idea but then rendered useless if, to play a decent game, I have to buy my opponent’s codex to read first. I haven’t a lot of experience in 8th/9th but one think I like about (my version of) Heresy is 3 red books is enough - I already know enough about my opponent. I realise that relies on it being mostly marine vs marine action.

[Doctor Perils]

I don't know what your definition of decent game is, I've had very good games not knowing a jot about my opponent (or gaming partner's) codex - just like I'd have no idea how CultMech and Cults&Militia lists work in Heresy. Obviously it depends on how much you trust the person you're playing with

 

On the other hand, to understand how AoD works in the slightest, there's a much steeper learning curve to play even the most simple game, and if you don't get to play regularly then you have to relearn it all over again each time: I just don't find it as fun as 9th...

 

Still, since we're talking about Heresy, I'm happy for you that the rules are going to stay closer to what you like from everything we can so far tell, and I'm happy to have the option to play a crunchier game once in a while :)

[LameBeard]

It’s why I said “if”. I’m interested if people feel it necessary or not in 8th/9th. I am not in either camp about changing not changing Heresy Ruleset, I just think (looking from the outside) that claims of “streamlining” and “faster games” moving to 8th/9th are greatly exaggerated.

[SkimaskMohawk]

It’s why I said “if”. I’m interested if people feel it necessary or not in 8th/9th. I am not in either camp about changing not changing Heresy Ruleset, I just think (looking from the outside) that claims of “streamlining” and “faster games” moving to 8th/9th are greatly exaggerated.

Those claims were a big selling point of 8th during the pre-release phase. It was swiftly proven untrue with alternate deployment and the mass amounts of dice rolled over and over to just say "remove that unit there". 9th is faster than 8th, but I can still play 2500 points of 30k while filming a battle report faster than 2000 of 9th.

 

And ya, there's definitely a spoiler component to going up against a new faction in 9th. The statlines usually tell about 1/3 of the story of what to expect from a unit; faction and subfaction rules, warlord traits relics and stratagems drive results. You can look at a datasheet in 30k and be very confident about what you'll be dealing with.

Edited September 15, 2021 by SkimaskMohawk

[MCC]

 

The bloat in 9th is due to a few bloated factions (AdMech for instance), the core rules are way easier to navigate though from what I can tell

I think “core rules in 8 pages” is an elegant idea but then rendered useless if, to play a decent game, I have to buy my opponent’s codex to read first. I haven’t a lot of experience in 8th/9th but one think I like about (my version of) Heresy is 3 red books is enough - I already know enough about my opponent. I realise that relies on it being mostly marine vs marine action.

 

 

I agree with you on this, it may be 8 pages of rules for the games but the sheer number of codexes and supplements makes the game bloated and its only going to get worse. AT least with Heresy its all Marine vs Marine so you'll know roughly what the other persons army can do before you start. I found playing tournaments and even some friendly games a nightmare in 8th/9th because there's so much stuff to remember.

[Noserenda]

Yeah whilst the core system of 9th blows 7th out of the water i am pretty disappointed by modern codex design tbh, which often just feels like reams of rules for the sake of it :/ That ship has also kinda sailed for AoD though, the Legions and Solar Auxilla are fairly straightforward but Militia are wildly flexible, Nobody ever knows what my sisters do, Mechanicum have buckets of tricks and the Ruinstorm list is... *shudder*

Variety by itself isnt really a problem ofc, if anything, half the Legions could do with a few more toys. I think its the difference between "This is my legion specific tank, its a Sicarian with fancy targetters" and "here is a 3 page cheat sheet to outline my shenanigans" :O  

[Astartes Consul]

Yeah whilst the core system of 9th blows 7th out of the water i am pretty disappointed by modern codex design tbh, which often just feels like reams of rules for the sake of it :/ That ship has also kinda sailed for AoD though, the Legions and Solar Auxilla are fairly straightforward but Militia are wildly flexible, Nobody ever knows what my sisters do, Mechanicum have buckets of tricks and the Ruinstorm list is... *shudder*

 

Variety by itself isnt really a problem ofc, if anything, half the Legions could do with a few more toys. I think its the difference between "This is my legion specific tank, its a Sicarian with fancy targetters" and "here is a 3 page cheat sheet to outline my shenanigans"   

 

This is why I hope that a new AoD edition comes with cleaned up and review Red Book(s). I know there were rumours a while back that such a development was going to be next after Crusade was released, but it was never that substantial and Heresy 2.0 is clearly the next big thing.

 

The way Titanicus recently did the Loyalist Legios update could be a model for this, given the studio and personnel involved. Or just combine the main army list and all the legion rules into one, bigger, red book that can be expanded on by new rules in future supplements/Black Books.

 

Just spitballing of course, thought it seems likely there will have to be an update to all the army lists following a new edition, even if it is only a tweaked version of the current AoD rules. 

[Chaeron]

I think GW is sleeping on the zone mortallis format. It would be a great intro to HH for new people, its just infantry and walkers at a manageable 1k pts. Would teach you most of the basics + templates. Advanced layer of rules, such as corridor breaches, low grav etc. Could also have its own version of narrative play/ crusade, which would be fantastic for weekly play nights. Cheap entry level combat patrol style boxes maybe with a bit higher model count to fit 1k, ZM terrain box with mini HH rulebook + ZM supplement would be a winner. 

I love the concept of this, although it strikes me as being similar to the Centurion rules and similar to what the Calth and Prospero boxed games did too (albeit, with a different rule set!).

 

If that was the starting point - games in the void - and then it built from there with expansions for larger gameplay beyond the core, it’s like a new Great Crusade…

[Cris R]

 

I think GW is sleeping on the zone mortallis format. It would be a great intro to HH for new people, its just infantry and walkers at a manageable 1k pts. Would teach you most of the basics + templates. Advanced layer of rules, such as corridor breaches, low grav etc. Could also have its own version of narrative play/ crusade, which would be fantastic for weekly play nights. Cheap entry level combat patrol style boxes maybe with a bit higher model count to fit 1k, ZM terrain box with mini HH rulebook + ZM supplement would be a winner. 

I love the concept of this, although it strikes me as being similar to the Centurion rules and similar to what the Calth and Prospero boxed games did too (albeit, with a different rule set!).

 

If that was the starting point - games in the void - and then it built from there with expansions for larger gameplay beyond the core, it’s like a new Great Crusade…

 

I agree and think there's a business case for FW/GW/Specialist Games to focus on 1,000 to 1,500 point games and larger ones between 2,500 to 3,000 points. If you make the smaller scale games a viable part of the Heresy experience, players may pick up more Legions and factions to pick up and paint. Once you've got that gateway format, it's easier for folks to want to expand their armies to the larger scale games. Obviously there will be players who will jump right into larger point games. But there's a win-win here for making Heresy more accessible to players and setting up the system for future success.

 

That said, I don't know how successful the Combat Patrol format in 40k has been to assess whether this idea has traction in 30k, differences in gaming communities and focus on narrative games in 30k notwithstanding.

Edited September 15, 2021 by Cris R

[Chaeron]

 

In fact i do recall an article by Jervis Johnson or Rick Priestly that was talking about things being quite the opposite age wise, Teenagers especially get attracted to intricate rules because memorising minutia is a big appeal to geeky boys at that age, once your geeky boys are 40 theyve already got enough of that in their lives and just want something straightforward to play or generally geek out about.

Absolutely this. When I was a teenager I absorbed the rules like a sponge. I was hungry for extra expansions, white dwarf rules, just keep adding the layers and never be referring to rulebooks because if I read it once that was enough for it to stick. Now I am the mirror image. It all seems so unnecessary - difficult to remember, difficult to look up, without adding anything to the strategy of the game, or to the story-telling. Maybe it’s the journey, but I think 8th/9th (and maybe Sigmar) are worse offenders than Age of Darkness.

 

 

I know what you mean to an extent (especially as someone who has gamed through many iterations of 40k!), but I’d also say part of the appeal is the familiarity. It feels nostalgic and works: because there’s a lot of core functionality with units just adding flavour to Legions, rather than being a wholly different faction in their own right. As a result, it makes it far easier to keep up - especially with the release schedule where lots of new things aren’t added regularly. I can’t comment with regard to other games, but I quite like turning up to play a Legion I’ve played more infrequently and being told what it does, the units and synergies around the build, whilst also recognising that there’ll be standard Tactical marines amongst other things and I know what they do… I appreciate that’s a personal choice versus playing an unknown army with a completely varied play style and rules, but it’s also probably why I like this as a separate game and sandbox in which to play.

 

7th edition suffered quite a bit from balance issues, many of which were resolved in HH by it being 99% space marines and the removal of formations. 

 

There are some things I don't like in HH - I think the rules for psykers and flyers are overly complex and nuanced, but I feel like the rest of the game is close to perfect for 2000-3000 points.

 

There's also the personal element that 7th is really just the 5th version of 3rd edition in a lot of ways, so if you played any previous edition then the crux of the rules are very similar. 8th was about learning a whole new game which was fun for a while, but I fell back to comfortable familiarity. 

I think you’ve hit the nail on the head Valkyrion: for me, it’s pretty perfect as is. I know not everyone will have that same experience or opinion, but what the game fulfils for me (and how it works) makes it my prime choice for playing and recreating battles of the era. 

 

The recent responses to this thread have certainly been illuminating both in terms of people’s perceptions as to the current state of the Heresy and their future wishes for the game: it’s great to see a keen, dedicated community of Heresy-hobbyists!

[Brofist]

I thought one of the biggest misses of the first HH rulebook was not including ZM as part of the core rules. I hope they add it in for 2.0!

[Cris R]

I thought one of the biggest misses of the first HH rulebook was not including ZM as part of the core rules. I hope they add it in for 2.0!

And Tactical Strike so folks don’t need the third black book to play that format

[Indefragable]

I'd love to see any updated core ruleset include 

 

1. ZM 

2. Normal 2000-4000pt games

3. a format that better accounts for larger games without going into a whole other ruleset like Apocalypse. Part of what makes Heresy fun is pulling out all the big toys, but having to keep yet another ruleset in mind (let alone finding the books that work with the HH rules) is a whole other matter.

[MegaVolt87]

 

It’s why I said “if”. I’m interested if people feel it necessary or not in 8th/9th. I am not in either camp about changing not changing Heresy Ruleset, I just think (looking from the outside) that claims of “streamlining” and “faster games” moving to 8th/9th are greatly exaggerated.

Those claims were a big selling point of 8th during the pre-release phase. It was swiftly proven untrue with alternate deployment and the mass amounts of dice rolled over and over to just say "remove that unit there". 9th is faster than 8th, but I can still play 2500 points of 30k while filming a battle report faster than 2000 of 9th.

 

And ya, there's definitely a spoiler component to going up against a new faction in 9th. The statlines usually tell about 1/3 of the story of what to expect from a unit; faction and subfaction rules, warlord traits relics and stratagems drive results. You can look at a datasheet in 30k and be very confident about what you'll be dealing with.

 

 

Yeah agree, 8th/9th is also very "gotcha!" with stratagems. Transhuman is a crazy dmg soak buff for example. Also a lot of other things like honour the chapter would have been a unit rule in older editions. The Fury of the Legion bolter attack would definitely move to a stratagem if HH was aligned with 8th/9th ed 40k. Quite a few USR's could just be gotten rid of entirely. Example- weapons have Armourbane, its just an extra D6 of armour pen, why not just add it to the general stat line for instance where applicable. I think HH would benefit from that kind of trimming of rules. Though I am a weirdo I guess because I prefer the old style psychic phase which is in HH, while many seem to hate it and don't miss it in 40k lol. I don't know, drop points for psykter characters, less restrictive with power combo's/ requirements since they don't get used in HH? 

[SkimaskMohawk]

Well the joke is that the 9th Ed psychic phase is closer to the 4th and 5th Ed of taking a leadership test; two dice to beat a given value. They changed it in 6th to be like 8th fantasy and 7th kind of has the worst version since you can easily have a wasted psyker if you only have one, or be completely overpowered if you spam them.

[Dark Legionnare]

 

 

It’s why I said “if”. I’m interested if people feel it necessary or not in 8th/9th. I am not in either camp about changing not changing Heresy Ruleset, I just think (looking from the outside) that claims of “streamlining” and “faster games” moving to 8th/9th are greatly exaggerated.

 

Those claims were a big selling point of 8th during the pre-release phase. It was swiftly proven untrue with alternate deployment and the mass amounts of dice rolled over and over to just say "remove that unit there". 9th is faster than 8th, but I can still play 2500 points of 30k while filming a battle report faster than 2000 of 9th.

And ya, there's definitely a spoiler component to going up against a new faction in 9th. The statlines usually tell about 1/3 of the story of what to expect from a unit; faction and subfaction rules, warlord traits relics and stratagems drive results. You can look at a datasheet in 30k and be very confident about what you'll be dealing with.

Yeah agree, 8th/9th is also very "gotcha!" with stratagems. Transhuman is a crazy dmg soak buff for example. Also a lot of other things like honour the chapter would have been a unit rule in older editions. The Fury of the Legion bolter attack would definitely move to a stratagem if HH was aligned with 8th/9th ed 40k. Quite a few USR's could just be gotten rid of entirely. Example- weapons have Armourbane, its just an extra D6 of armour pen, why not just add it to the general stat line for instance where applicable. I think HH would benefit from that kind of trimming of rules. Though I am a weirdo I guess because I prefer the old style psychic phase which is in HH, while many seem to hate it and don't miss it in 40k lol. I don't know, drop points for psykter characters, less restrictive with power combo's/ requirements since they don't get used in HH?

I like playing 9th, but I do hate the "gotcha" factor. I constantly have to make sure to explain each army's gotchas to opponents before every game as a courtesy. Space wolves 6" heroic intervention, advance and charge for luna wolves (run as white scars), etc... Nobody wants to lose a game because they forgot one key strategem exists.

 

It's no fun to get screwed by one gotcha, compared to 30k where melee can be reliably "decisive" if your right units make it in, but otherwise is more about pools of dice and strategy. (Short of Arcus, Lascannon havocs w/siege master, any other such "whoof" combos.)

Edited September 16, 2021 by Dark Legionnare

[Noserenda]

Yeah they transposed the worst version of Warhammers magic system (6th or 7th i think?) but without even the vague "balance" of scroll caddies. They at least moved to balance out one of the more egregious powers a bit in the AoD book :D 

[derLumpi]

HH is still being played on 48 x 72 tables, right?

[Gorgoff]

HH is still being played on 48 x 72 tables, right?

If you like.

You can play it on whatever table you want, you know. We always played very small games on half a table for example.

Edited September 16, 2021 by Gorgoff

[Brofist]

ZM games are 4' x 4'. 48 x 72 is the standard for 'standard' games

[MCC]

I'd love to see any updated core ruleset include 

 

1. ZM 

2. Normal 2000-4000pt games

3. a format that better accounts for larger games without going into a whole other ruleset like Apocalypse. Part of what makes Heresy fun is pulling out all the big toys, but having to keep yet another ruleset in mind (let alone finding the books that work with the HH rules) is a whole other matter.

 

 I like this idea a lot. Sadly I cant see it happening GW are obsessed with the open, narrative and matched play format so I can see them going with that instead.

 

 

HH is still being played on 48 x 72 tables, right?

 

To be fair GW only recommend the Minimum board sizes for you to play on you don't have to play on that size if you don't want. I'm also fairly sure the sizes they do recommend fit on a standard ikea size dining table which makes it easier for people to play at home.

[derLumpi]

The thing is that the only guys playing in my area are people who chase the meta. This means they do everything GW recommends. ;-)

[Gorgoff]

The thing is that the only guys playing in my area are people who chase the meta. This means they do everything GW recommends. ;-)

Tell them the game is made by Forgeworld and not GW and Forgeworld says that you can play on any tablesize whatever the :cuss you want to play on.

Man, I really don't understand those people.

What happened to common sense?

If I have only 20 models per side it may be to much to play on a 4X6 table. ;)

The first 10 years or so of gaming we played on a table which had the measurements of the station wagon from my dad, 

because that was the vehicle which had to transport that board. 

And guess what?

Our door didn't get kicked in by tabletop police. 

But I guess those kind of players get nervous when they have to decide how to play by themselves. We have a lot of those players in our gaming club.

No imagination of their own whatsoever.

I feel sorry for you that that is the group you have to deal with.

 

 

Yeah they transposed the worst version of Warhammers magic system (6th or 7th i think?) but without even the vague "balance" of scroll caddies. They at least moved to balance out one of the more egregious powers a bit in the AoD book

Can't agree but won't defend the system either.

It works very well if there are only one or two psykers on the field which should be the norm given the fact that they didn't use a lot of psykers in HH.

Even the traitors have not so many on their side.

At least not every legion.

So it fits kind of the purpose although it is a huge pain to play against psyker heavy armies like TS or daemons. 

I am therefore absolute pro change.

And I want levels in buildings and ruins back.

 

 

 

 

 

Example- weapons have Armourbane, its just an extra D6 of armour pen, why not just add it to the general stat line for instance where applicable. I think HH would benefit from that kind of trimming of rules. 

 

Exactly.

Great example.

Those kind of changes I want.

All in all I really like AoD and I don't think that some huge trimmings are needed really.

You won't be able to create a game which fits the needs of 100% 40k "everything has to be streamlined and easy" and 100% 30k "I like painfully in depth rules" alike.

Impossible to achieve that.

But improvement is always possible.