What should 11th look like?

[gaurdian31]

3 minutes ago, Scribe said:

 

Yeah see, if we are going to do down this path, and again I dont know that its going to result in much positivity here, we need to define these things. All of the above are '40K' but also none of them are '40K' aka 10th Edition. Hell, 5th isnt '40K' its a version, a game in the setting of, but if we show up at a shop and I say 'lets play 40K' and I pull out my laptop and fire up Dawn of War, I wouldnt be in the right if people got confused.

You're right and I think I'll just go back to reading the thread as I think I've conveyed my feelings on the matter and I doubt I am adding anything to the conversation at this point. As for what 11th should like. It should look fun and complete when it comes out. I happen to like the base rules of 10th but I get why others might not. I also agree with some others have said and would like to see 11th in maybe 4 or more years. I would like an edition of 40k to last longer than 3 years so they can really get the rules down and make sure when they release the new version it is released complete. I would also like all the codexes to come out in the first few months and then have the game have supplement rules/campaigns come out kind of like Eye of Terror or Armageddon, though that is probably a pipe dream.

[Kallas]

23 minutes ago, phandaal said:

As for holograms, we would have to ask our robot overlords to let us out of our bug pods inside the Matrix before I could tell you that.  But I would probably say yes, if you are there in person doing it with someone then it is wargaming, but in the future.

So split screen/both people in the same room TTS would be wargaming?

 

TTS 40k is doing everything the same as the tabletop, the only difference is a lack of physical models and tools, instead using digital models and tools. There are differing social aspects, because online vs in-person are inevitably different, but when talking about the wargame side of things, TTS 40k is playing 40k.

 

The modeling/painting aspects of the hobby aren't technically intrinsic to the wargame/gaming part of it all. You could play with just bases, with cardboard cutouts (2nd Ed Dreadnoughts anyone?), with paper drawings of models, or whatever - if you're using the wargame's rules, and you're using the same kind of space as the wargame (ie, you're using terrain in some form: are digital buildings any less wargaming than using books as impassable terrain?) then how is it less of a wargame?

 

Total War uses different mechanics to Warhammer Fantasy (real-time with different stats, vs turn based, as well as having a larger strategic layer), as does Dawn of War (eg, base building mechanics as well as being real time), but even then they're still the same setting as their wargame counterpart - TTS isn't a video game in the same manner as either of those, because all of the rules, all of the mechanics and methodology for playing the game are the same; all of the units and statistics are the same. You still roll dice (yes you can automate them more; but then people can also use dice rollers for IRL games too), and you have more accurate tools (eg, measuring and line of sight is much easier because you can get displays that show this without as much human error involved, but that's still the same principle just more accurate), but fundamentally every single part of TTS 40k is using the exact same system of rules and design as tabletop 40k, but without the hobby aspect - but again, the hobby part isn't actually necessary to qualify as a wargame.

 

So really...why is TTS 40k less of a wargame than tabletop 40k? 

 

32 minutes ago, phandaal said:

Rules are not wargaming.

So what is wargaming? It sounds so far like anything that isn't 100% tabletop 40k, including all aspects of the hobby isn't wargaming, but that isn't really the definition of wargaming - wargaming is, well, a game based on war scenarios, fictional or otherwise.

[Scribe]

36 minutes ago, gaurdian31 said:

I would like an edition of 40k to last longer than 3 years so they can really get the rules down and make sure when they release the new version it is released complete. I would also like all the codexes to come out in the first few months and then have the game have supplement rules/campaigns come out kind of like Eye of Terror or Armageddon, though that is probably a pipe dream.

 

I think GW needs to come around to an evergreen edition of the rules, and like D&D/MTG, focus on the content that could be done outside of the core experience.

 

If the core rule set was actually understood (GW has not demonstrated an understanding of their own game) and the codex books refined to work with that edition, then the "DLC" model of just buying campaign books, and model kits, would still absolutely drive GW's bottom line.

 

I know they get the BIG RELEASE BOOST with each edition, but post Covid-Bubble, I dont see how they are going to maintain this 3 year churn.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

51 minutes ago, gaurdian31 said:

Fire Warrior is Warhammer 40k,  Wraith and Glory the RPG is also Warhammer 40k too, your point being?

They’re still playing 40k

[gaurdian31]

2 minutes ago, Scribe said:

 

I think GW needs to come around to an evergreen edition of the rules, and like D&D/MTG, focus on the content that could be done outside of the core experience.

 

If the core rule set was actually understood (GW has not demonstrated an understanding of their own game) and the codex books refined to work with that edition, then the "DLC" model of just buying campaign books, and model kits, would still absolutely drive GW's bottom line.

 

I know they get the BIG RELEASE BOOST with each edition, but post Covid-Bubble, I dont see how they are going to maintain this 3 year churn.

I had to jump back in and just say I wish there was a super agree button because super yes to all of that. An evergreen edition with rules refinement would be perfect. Heck they could release updated core rulebooks every 5 or so years with the FAQS inside if they are still making print books. 

[phandaal]

2 minutes ago, Kallas said:

So split screen/both people in the same room TTS would be wargaming?

 

No, it would be two people playing a video game on split screen.

 

6 minutes ago, Kallas said:

So what is wargaming?

 

All of the stuff that goes into wargaming - modeling, painting, playing games with the models. Are we really confused about this?

 

Now even I am beginning to think we might be quibbling too much. 

[Kallas]

17 minutes ago, phandaal said:

All of the stuff that goes into wargaming - modeling, painting, playing games with the models. Are we really confused about this?

So someone buying models is wargaming? Someone painting models is wargaming? If someone nevers puts them on a table to play a game of 40k, are they still wargaming?

 

Frankly, your definition of wargaming is, simply, wrong.

 

All those others parts are part of the overall hobby, but they aren't wargaming. For miniature wargaming, they are necessary to actually play the game (except for all of the ways that you don't need to build or paint to play; such as the previously mentioned tokens or cardboard cutouts, or what have you).

 

It's not too much quibbling, it's redefining something to fit the way you see it.

[Arikel]

26 minutes ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

They’re still playing 40k

This is not correct. They are playing a game in the 40k universe., not the game of 40k itself .
 

The 40k game uses specific rules, units and measurements, and is ideally played using official models and terrain, though it can be played with proxies of varying complexity, from full 3rd party models from alternate provider down to bits of paper, or, and this will totally blow your mind, using a virtual table top and models simulated by a computer.

 

During the pandemic my d&d group used a TTS program (I think roll20) and Zoom to keep the campaign going, but we were playing d&d, not a computer game, just as people using a TTS to play are playing actual 40k, not a computer game.

 

To sum up, there are many games that share the same 40k universe, both computer and table top, but there is only one game that is Warhammer 40K itself.

[Marshal Reinhard]

I mean really, this is semantics, boiling down to pretty much does the hobby fit within the bigger box of the game or vice versa?

 

I for one, feel that the game fits within the hobby, thus I feel that TTS 40k is a wargame, on the simple account of it being the same game as tabletop 40k. That it completely sidelines the rest of the hobby out of it though, pretty much strips it of any appeal to me, though I do recognize its usefulness as a tool for testing etc.

 

I won't really lose sleep over anyone thinking that the hobby definitionally fits under the greater umbrella of the wargame, thus meaning that this sidelining of the hobby aspect by tts 40k disqualifies it being a wargame, regardless of it in essence being the same game as the tabletop.

 

I'm not sure I'd call it a video game though, as it lacks too many things present in those. And I'm not even talking about animations, and sound effects etc, though I'd pretty much consider those a must for me to want to bother with a video game, but rather the fact that it doesn't operate on any rules itself, but in fact expects you to know and follow the tabletop rules by yourself, leaving you with a "the only game is the one you make for yourself"- situation, though it provides you with all the tools. You're left with what's on the tin. Table top simulator.

 

But again, I won't lose sleep over someone thinking that since its digital, it has to be a video game period, rather than a simulation of a game on a digital platform, its ultimately discussing what we label things.

Edited July 18 by Marshal Reinhard

[phandaal]

31 minutes ago, Kallas said:

It's not too much quibbling, it's redefining something to fit the way you see it

 

No, it really is too much when people start finger pointing over this stuff. Notice that my comments up until now have been in good humor and not using the kind of language that makes this stuff personal. I suggest we all keep it that way.

 

This is what I get for doubting @Scribe when he correctly called out that this would happen. Never again, sir! Back to the wishlisting, sir!

[DuskRaider]

Part of a wargame going all the way back to HG Wells with Little Wars was collecting miniatures, painting them in your scheme of choice, and putting them on a board or surface with terrain to recreate a battle scene. Doing it digitally is not the same nor should it be in the same genre as 40K proper, WFB, Confrontation, War Machines etc. 

[The Praetorian of Inwit]

TTS is not wargaming. It is a computer game. 

 

Playing 40k means playing with physical miniatures. 

 

Playing fire warrior or dawn of war or tys is not wargaming or playing 40k. It is playing a computer game set in the warhammer universe. 

 

This is as true as the world being spherical and orbiting the sun. Saying playing tts is the same as playing actual 40k is the same level of stupidity as flat earthers.

[Lysimachus]

=][= This seems to be getting quite off-topic from the subject.

 

We will look at splitting the discussion of 'what is wargaming to you' into its own thread (though such discussion will need to remain respectful of the fact that others might have different opinions to you).

 

As far as this thread goes, please get back on the original topic of what 11th Ed will be. Thank you. =][=

[HeadlessCross]

45 minutes ago, The Praetorian of Inwit said:

TTS is not wargaming. It is a computer game. 

 

Playing 40k means playing with physical miniatures. 

 

Playing fire warrior or dawn of war or tys is not wargaming or playing 40k. It is playing a computer game set in the warhammer universe. 

 

This is as true as the world being spherical and orbiting the sun. Saying playing tts is the same as playing actual 40k is the same level of stupidity as flat earthers.

What's your definition of playing Chess?

[Lord_Ikka]

=][=This topic is locked while the moderation team decides on whether or not to split it into two topics or leave it as one. =][=