Heresy 3.0 in Spring/Summer

[01RTB01]

29 minutes ago, SkimaskMohawk said:

After the disaster of 2nds roll out and LIs shovel ware status, I don't have any faith in the heresy team to fix anything.

 

These people couldn't even maintain version control across the various languages and production runs of their rules, let alone address it. Couldn't even care to point cost properly after changing stuff from ap2 to 4 lol. 

I'm not sure 2nd Ed roll out was a disaster?...  Feels a little hyperbolic.

[Schrödingers Primarch]

2 hours ago, SkimaskMohawk said:

After the disaster of 2nds roll out and LIs shovel ware status, I don't have any faith in the heresy team to fix anything.

 

These people couldn't even maintain version control across the various languages and production runs of their rules, let alone address it. Couldn't even care to point cost properly after changing stuff from ap2 to 4 lol. 

Both HH 2nd edition and LI were reported to be successful beyond expectations. If anything, they have made HH based games more accessible (plastification), streamlined rules, and reduced the cost. Games Workshop is far from perfect, but it's hard to argue that the Heresy team can't improve the game after their recent history. I'm confident HH 3.0 will continue to improve things, plus who wants point updates regularly? This isn't 40k......

 

[SkimaskMohawk]

2 hours ago, 01RTB01 said:

I'm not sure 2nd Ed roll out was a disaster?...  Feels a little hyperbolic.

 

Rules wise, pretty disastrous.

 

When 1st ended there were rules for Marines, black shields, shattered legions, armies of dark compliance, solar aux, cults and militia, talons, mechanicum, knights and daemons for 10 factions. It took 20 months to be able to play with all of those again, with armies of dark compliance basically evaporating and daemons straight up being relegated to "don't play this in events" status. You compare that to other edition refreshes; 8th 40k got 10 codexes after 7 months, 9th 40k got 10 after 14 months, and 10th got 10 after 12 months. TOW launched with rules for 16 factions. We couldn't even play the full legion roster on launch, because we had to wait like a month for the legacy and exemplary battle units to be released (or many months in the cases of some jump pack options). They admitted to working on some of the factions (militia and daemons) post launch, which means they really did launch the edition without having the factions rules finished. 

 

Then there's version control of the print copy of the rules. Or the lack thereof. It's very well documented at this point that some language versions had completely different statlines for different weapons, and the Epub/standalone main rules has differences to the main rules bundled in the age of darkness box.

 

And this was a system where they had cut substantial faq support 3 years prior. They had all the time in the world to have stuff ready to be rolled out in a timely manner, properly, and without the massive balance holes (which i haven't even touched on this post).

 

Model wise they pumped them out, no doubt. Memes about the marine vehicle focus aside, I don't think I've ever seen that many new plastic kits for a GW game system. But the rules? Not well delivered.

 

@Schrödingers Primarch I'm not talking about financial disaster; I'm pretty sure the GW profit snowball is not going to stop any time soon. The rules are definitely not any more streamlined in 2nd, and some of the changes actually make for a much longer game than 1st. Similar thing with LI to SM2 tbh. 

 

I'll keep on pointing out that asking for necessary FAQs isn't the same as 40k balance updates that upend faction balance every 6 months. TOWs first faq within 4 months solved more issues than all of HH 2nds put together. There can be a middle ground between neglect and churn.

Edited 16 hours ago by SkimaskMohawk

[Marshal Rohr]

Personal theory, Valrak and the 4chan guy are right. Valrak is describing the Launch Box and 4chan is describing the Mark 4 Battle Force next year. 

[01RTB01]

45 minutes ago, SkimaskMohawk said:

 

Rules wise, pretty disastrous.

 

When 1st ended there were rules for Marines, black shields, shattered legions, armies of dark compliance, solar aux, cults and militia, talons, mechanicum, knights and daemons for 10 factions. It took 20 months to be able to play with all of those again, with armies of dark compliance basically evaporating and daemons straight up being relegated to "don't play this in events" status. You compare that to other edition refreshes; 8th 40k got 10 codexes after 7 months, 9th 40k got 10 after 14 months, and 10th got 10 after 12 months. TOW launched with rules for 16 factions. We couldn't even play the full legion roster on launch, because we had to wait like a month for the legacy and exemplary battle units to be released (or many months in the cases of some jump pack options). They admitted to working on some of the factions (militia and daemons) post launch, which means they really did launch the edition without having the factions rules finished. 

 

Then there's version control of the print copy of the rules. Or the lack thereof. It's very well documented at this point that some language versions had completely different statlines for different weapons, and the Epub/standalone main rules has differences to the main rules bundled in the age of darkness box.

 

And this was a system where they had cut substantial faq support 3 years prior. They had all the time in the world to have stuff ready to be rolled out in a timely manner, properly, and without the massive balance holes (which i haven't even touched on this post).

 

Model wise they pumped them out, no doubt. Memes about the marine vehicle focus aside, I don't think I've ever seen that many new plastic kits for a GW game system. But the rules? Not well delivered.

 

@Schrödingers Primarch I'm not talking about financial disaster; I'm pretty sure the GW profit snowball is not going to stop any time soon. The rules are definitely not any more streamlined in 2nd, and some of the changes actually make for a much longer game than 1st. Similar thing with LI to SM2 tbh. 

 

 

40k may have had more books but it's a core game, heresy isn't. Quantity doesn't equate to quality either as 9th Ed 40k was a power leap nightmare of a game.

 

The rules may not be more streamlined but it's a much better game in this humble tester's view.

[Brofist]

I'm dreading the rules refresh. I just don't have a lot of faith in their ability to deliver anymore.... and I generally like and embraced 2.0

[01RTB01]

2 minutes ago, Brofist said:

I'm dreading the rules refresh. I just don't have a lot of faith in their ability to deliver anymore.... and I generally like and embraced 2.0

Then considering the heresy and 40k teams are separate, you like 2.0, why would you be concerned when it's supposed to be an evolution/ tidy up rather than revolution.

[Brofist]

At the end the day its the same toy megacorp with big $$$ pressure and you're on their 3 year treadmill until you decide to quit. I'm not a doomer about it, but its all been heading that direction for a while now. Even events managed by GW can't escape choking out fun community stuff in favor of selling models. The incentives are all :cuss:ed.

[Nagashsnee]

8 hours ago, 01RTB01 said:

I'm not sure 2nd Ed roll out was a disaster?...  Feels a little hyperbolic.

Mechanicum, Custodes, Militia, SA and deamons players could not play the game. Not on day 1, not on day 30, for many not on day 100.

 

If not being able to use the product is not a disaster then i dont know what is. Then day one told a significant part of the player base they are second class customers and they should just BUY a new army to be able to play.  Whats that? What about your existing fully resin fully FW HH specific army? Shelve it till we feel like you should be able to use it again.

 

But sure, not a disaster.

 

 

[Brother Carpenter]

It would be cool to include rules for just after the siege of terra, including the second founding chapters.

So people with non first founding firstborn armies can field their models with a supported system again.

 

And I personally think that is a great and as of yet unexplored piece of lore.

[TheArtilleryman]

@Orange Knight You also have a new and awesome era of gaming to look forward to - the era where you teach your kids to play. My son is my regular opponent these days :)

Edited 10 hours ago by TheArtilleryman

[Nagashsnee]

3 minutes ago, Brother Carpenter said:

It would be cool to include rules for just after the siege of terra, including the second founding chapters.

So people with non first founding firstborn armies can field their models with a supported system again.

 

And I personally think that is a great and as of yet unexplored piece of lore.

GW literally pulled a rug pull on the kratos and leviathan in their need to separate 30/40k models line compatibility, they dont want people buying 40k for 30k or 30k for 40k. It stupid but they have made it very very clear it is the way it is. Firstborn are 40k and will stay in 40k.

[Felix Antipodes]

They will stay in 40K until GW senses a profit drop, then “poof” here’s our upsized MK VII’s, which were introduced near the end of the HH, for you to play out the Siege! 

 

Closer to on topic, it is ironic that the week rumours start flying about new Salamanders they are the subject of GW’s mid-week email flyer…

 

 

[Captain Idaho]

I'm looking forward to a new set of rules that hopefully aren't too far removed from what we already have in the Age of Darkness. The energy it'll bring into the system is particularly exciting. 

 

If GW went whole hog with their main studio homogenising of the rules and make it an extension of 40K/AoS rules, it would be a massive disappointment for me so I do wait with baited breath... even if it is unlikely.

[Gaz Taylor]

5 minutes ago, Captain Idaho said:

I'm looking forward to a new set of rules that hopefully aren't too far removed from what we already have in the Age of Darkness. The energy it'll bring into the system is particularly exciting. 

 

If GW went whole hog with their main studio homogenising of the rules and make it an extension of 40K/AoS rules, it would be a massive disappointment for me so I do wait with baited breath... even if it is unlikely.

Totally agree with this. The energy of a new set of rules are amazing for any release. 

 

As for making the rules more like 10th, I don't think it will happen. I think there will be changes but nothing like that. Years ago I wanted 10th like rules for Heresy but I think now I just want elements of it for my older brain which doesn't have time for stuff. However, I just want something interesting and people to play against. If I have to only do it a couple of times a month, so be it 

 

 

[Petitioner's City]

1 hour ago, Captain Idaho said:

I'm looking forward to a new set of rules that hopefully aren't too far removed from what we already have in the Age of Darkness. The energy it'll bring into the system is particularly exciting. 

 

If GW went whole hog with their main studio homogenising of the rules and make it an extension of 40K/AoS rules, it would be a massive disappointment for me so I do wait with baited breath... even if it is unlikely.

 

The designer who occasionally posts on the Merchant princelings discord is very clear heresy will remain its own thing.

[SkimaskMohawk]

8 hours ago, 01RTB01 said:

40k may have had more books but it's a core game, heresy isn't.

I mean, i mentioned TOW as well. A specialist game that launched with every faction people previously played with in 8th. Even if you discard the legacy factions GW tries to prevent being used at events, that's still 9 factions on launch.

 

8 hours ago, 01RTB01 said:

Quantity doesn't equate to quality either as 9th Ed 40k was a power leap nightmare of a game

 

Ya....heresy doesn't have the stamp of quality either lol. 

 

8 hours ago, 01RTB01 said:

The rules may not be more streamlined but it's a much better game in this humble tester's view.

 

The internal balance of factions in 2nd is a nightmare; it went from a sandbox game where you could try many units and loadouts to achieve the same goal, to one where you're actively handicapped by bringing the wrong unit. Reactions play a big part in this since they're so poorly balanced; I've explained the bonus rounds of shooting in the opponents phase thing to hardcore 8th+ 40k players (the types of guys who are on WTC national teams) and they can't believe it. The 40k players think it's unbalanced lol. 2nd is definitely not better than the 1st at the end of its life, and especially not better than 1st during 6th when the mechanics were at their most harmonious.

[Corswain]

1 hour ago, Gaz Taylor said:

 The energy of a new set of rules are amazing for any release. 

 

 

I would broaden that to new edition, not just ruleset.

 

I have four heresy armies in progress and no real interest in a new ruleset and yet I am thinking about what  am going to do with this boxset. Like it's a done deal.

That energy is so contagious.

 

I am GW's ideal 30k hobbyist/sucker.

[Orange Knight]

4 hours ago, TheArtilleryman said:

@Orange Knight You also have a new and awesome era of gaming to look forward to - the era where you teach your kids to play. My son is my regular opponent these days :)

 

I am looking forward to this, and also can't wait to teach him Guitar... assuming he's interested.

 

I know that kids these days don't like putting the effort in!

[Armchair Warlord]

3.0  - F@~£ Off.

We don't need it.