Horus Heresy New Edition, or Just Horus Hearsay?

[Stitch5000]

40 minutes ago, Mogger351 said:

I exist in a circle of people that arrange game beforehand anyway, they will actively try not to tailor too much, but that's just an "ideal" scenario for what feels like a completely insane change on the mission order.

 

I can't imagine going to Heresy night at the club for a pick up game and spending 30 mins making an army on pen and paper (as GW imagine you do given there is no companion app).

I'm not sure it is "insane", however it is probably at an "aspirational" level that many things about GW games are presented at, that maybe are not reflected by the truth of what actually happens... Take the premise of the gaming surface and terrain for instance... Even the concept of  "two painted armies", not to mention the standard of paintwork etc. 

GW (and in particular Specialist Games) continues the lofty lineage of "unachievably high bar" activities that we all thought were amazing when we were kids (in the 90s and early 90s), and perhaps return to as adults in order to use our high disposable income and increased skills (and power tools) to attempt to emulate. Remember that scaletrix track you wanted as a kid? Never was quite the same when it was on the living room carpet. UK guys might recall the DREAM that was a flat Subbuteo field with the stadium and the battery powered floodlights. The big green cloth never did actually fit in the dining table and who's dad had a car big enough to go and pick up an 8x4 panel of plywood?

I digress, but I think the point is in there.. GW games do rely on a bit of "aspiration" still, like, we'd all love to have that cool gaming room set up where we could just pluck models out of the cases that lined the room and spend ages playing the game... That'd be the thing we did when we won the lottery. In the real world though, we just have to compromise and do the achievable version because we only have 2.5 hours after work before we need to get home to do something.

Even so, what's a message ahead of the game to say "fancy playing Mission 3 on Tuesday night? I've written a list - bring it on!"?

[Mogger351]

28 minutes ago, Stitch5000 said:

I'm not sure it is "insane", however it is probably at an "aspirational" level that many things about GW games are presented at, that maybe are not reflected by the truth of what actually happens... Take the premise of the gaming surface and terrain for instance... Even the concept of  "two painted armies", not to mention the standard of paintwork etc. 

GW (and in particular Specialist Games) continues the lofty lineage of "unachievably high bar" activities that we all thought were amazing when we were kids (in the 90s and early 90s), and perhaps return to as adults in order to use our high disposable income and increased skills (and power tools) to attempt to emulate. Remember that scaletrix track you wanted as a kid? Never was quite the same when it was on the living room carpet. UK guys might recall the DREAM that was a flat Subbuteo field with the stadium and the battery powered floodlights. The big green cloth never did actually fit in the dining table and who's dad had a car big enough to go and pick up an 8x4 panel of plywood?

I digress, but I think the point is in there.. GW games do rely on a bit of "aspiration" still, like, we'd all love to have that cool gaming room set up where we could just pluck models out of the cases that lined the room and spend ages playing the game... That'd be the thing we did when we won the lottery. In the real world though, we just have to compromise and do the achievable version because we only have 2.5 hours after work before we need to get home to do something.

Even so, what's a message ahead of the game to say "fancy playing Mission 3 on Tuesday night? I've written a list - bring it on!"?

No, it is insane if you consider events of blind games. You're encouraged to take your whole collection, find opponent, pick mission, draft list, then play the game. That's a lot of absurdity you have to rationalise around, because as you say, no sane person will follow it without prior communication.

[Aarik]

Looking at the leaked build instructions, I'm very pleasantly surprised that the dread in the box comes with the variant chest pieces and heads.  For some reason I thought they would only be in the full kit.  I'm not a fan of the dread, but the variant pieces are making me come around a bit.  Probably not enough to get the Saturnine box though since even if I get over the Saturnine stuff itself, I still don't really want -- and don't want to dedicate the cabinet space for -- the huge ol' turret that I will for sure never ever use. But the lure of that sweet plastic crack is getting stronger and stronger....

[Ripper.McGuirl]

I dont see the issue with them suggesting you pick mission before armies. Worst case: just don’t do that. Best case: agree with your friend on a cool mission and themed armies, and play on a specially arranged table. Events: either ignore it or say “bring 2 army lists, one for attacker, one for defender, and pick which list you want to run before each game.”, or whatever the variable ends up being that you’d choose around.

4 turn hard limit is another one: just play another turn if you want.

[Deus_Ex_Machina]

2 hours ago, Marshal Rohr said:

Good old twenty Lascannons and 30 Disintegrators, nothing beats that. 

This reminds me of a YT video where a HH player told the story of one guy playing DG at an event and cramming thanks to the RoW an awful lot of lascannons into the list.

[Mogger351]

26 minutes ago, Ripper.McGuirl said:

I dont see the issue with them suggesting you pick mission before armies. Worst case: just don’t do that. Best case: agree with your friend on a cool mission and themed armies, and play on a specially arranged table. Events: either ignore it or say “bring 2 army lists, one for attacker, one for defender, and pick which list you want to run before each game.”, or whatever the variable ends up being that you’d choose around.

4 turn hard limit is another one: just play another turn if you want.

But none of those changes are required, it's throwing up artifical barriers you ignore in the name of actually having a game.

 

Your suggestion to their dodgy rule is "don't do it", well maybe it shouldn't be a rule is the point.

[BitsHammer]

New duel is live: https://youtube.com/shorts/112GBA2TJn0?si=AmQHCDN0zN0cYyZx

Edited 11 hours ago by BitsHammer

[Gorgoff]

5 hours ago, Stitch5000 said:

It is unlikely that this rule will lead to a spike in fully racked out "mobile hobby centre" vans, lined with magnetised shelves and a rapid list building console that allows you to select from a number of fully painted units stored in SKU-coded locations on the racks., which is pretty much what it would take to use the rule fully at an event situation.

 

Damn now I want such a Van.

Imagine it.

With custom paintjob on the side:

Like that :D

 

4 hours ago, Astartes Consul said:

Missions being chosen so early just seems a bit daft, to be honest? Doesn’t really take into account how games are actually run or organised in a lot of cases.

 

 

Sounds like an idea you can use or not. It isn't necessary at least for the core missions as far as I can tell. We saw them already and they are all without an defender and an attacker. But where I live we talk to each other before a game anyway and about our lists and stuff like that so not a big change. 

4 hours ago, Astartes Consul said:

Also sort of makes multi-game events quite tricky to run. Unless you’re basically encouraging people to bring their whole collection and quickly rewrite a list before each game.

 

Pretty wild concept to host an event and not tell people the missions being played. Is that really a thing in your country? We tell the people in the event description what Mission they will face so that they have fitting army lists at hand. 

4 hours ago, Astartes Consul said:

The article also reads like 4 turn games are a hard limit. Again, not a fan, although in practice most games of 2.0 I’ve played have only lasted that long. 

Its been the case for almost two years now so no change for me. 

I really like that.

1. Games are usually over by turn 3-4 anyway and

2. It forces the players to act. Standing in their deployment zone shooting doesn't work. It makes games better in my humble opinion.

 

4 hours ago, Stitch5000 said:

This is true, however most events completely overrule a lot of basic pre-game stuff anyway... People just do it without a second-thought because it is the general nature of it.

 

Exactly.

4 hours ago, Stitch5000 said:

I find that MOST people build and paint a 3000pt list and don't really end up getting many "variations" on that list, because, well, it's a lot of models to buy and paint. 

I know one person who does that because he has an insane level of painting but every other player I know makes a new army list for each game. 

Would bore me to death having to play the exact same list over and over again although some elements tend to re appear of course. 

3 hours ago, Mogger351 said:

I exist in a circle of people that arrange game beforehand anyway, they will actively try not to tailor too much, but that's just an "ideal" scenario for what feels like a completely insane change on the mission order.

 

Yeah this. 

3 hours ago, Mogger351 said:

I can't imagine going to Heresy night at the club for a pick up game and spending 30 mins making an army on pen and paper (as GW imagine you do given there is no companion app).

Hehe yeah wild idea, I totally agree. 

45 minutes ago, Mogger351 said:

But none of those changes are required, it's throwing up artifical barriers you ignore in the name of actually having a game.

 

Your suggestion to their dodgy rule is "don't do it", well maybe it shouldn't be a rule is the point.

For two years now step three of playing a game is building the table. Now without looking it up in Siege of Cthonia do you know how that supposed to went down? 

That there should be a role off and the winner starts to re arrange one piece of terrain and the other one does it sfter him? 

Nobody does that and I never heard anyone doing so. 

They are just suggestions. 

It's your game and you can and should play however you like. :)

 

[jaxom]

27 minutes ago, Gorgoff said:

Pretty wild concept to host an event and not tell people the missions being played. Is that really a thing in your country? We tell the people in the event description what Mission they will face so that they have fitting army lists at hand. 

^Very common. I’ve only seen sideboards or “bring two lists” in other game system events.

[Gorgoff]

28 minutes ago, jaxom said:

^Very common. I’ve only seen sideboards or “bring two lists” in other game system events.

That's crazy. I see it the other way round that we provide the missions being played and players show up and haven read any of that. 

[Wibbling]

2 hours ago, Deus_Ex_Machina said:

This reminds me of a YT video where a HH player told the story of one guy playing DG at an event and cramming thanks to the RoW an awful lot of lascannons into the list.

 

Well, yeah, you see that. Winters SEO has them in his Death Guard but it's not very thematic, is it? 

[Marshal Loss]

Glad that we're finally getting rules articles on the different factions next week. 

  

2 hours ago, BitsHammer said:

New duel is live: https://youtube.com/shorts/112GBA2TJn0?si=AmQHCDN0zN0cYyZx

 

Looks like they've homogenised Lucius' weapons with the Fulgrim Transfigured/Angron Transfigured treatment ('Blades of Lucius'). Not a huge fan of that. 

[jaxom]

20 minutes ago, Gorgoff said:

That's crazy. I see it the other way round that we provide the missions being played and players show up and haven read any of that. 

I wrote it weird. I was trying to agree with you about GW game events while saying other events are more likely to have side boards or bring more than 1 list.

[MARK0SIAN]

I think choosing the mission before list building will only be an issue for multi game events if the missions are radically different. All three missions are probably going to lead to a very similar ‘core’ list of at least 2K points, maybe more. Then the rest would be spent on the mission specific elements. 
 

Thinking about the missions from 2.0, there’s only a few where they play very differently and that’s from a larger pool of missions to begin with. 
 

I’m kind of hoping that the missions in this one aren’t so different that you really need to tailor your army to a significant level, my various forces tend to be built as TAC lists and I don’t really have the models to skew hard into a particular niche with them.

[Son of Rawl]

1 hour ago, Marshal Loss said:

Glad that we're finally getting rules articles on the different factions next week. 

  

 

Looks like they've homogenised Lucius' weapons with the Fulgrim Transfigured/Angron Transfigured treatment ('Blades of Lucius'). Not a huge fan of that. 

I'm expecting this on alot of characters when reveals come next week. Hopes were already low after they showed Sigismund's Black Sword profile.

[Petitioner's City]

5 hours ago, Mogger351 said:

No, it is insane if you consider events of blind games. You're encouraged to take your whole collection, find opponent, pick mission, draft list, then play the game. That's a lot of absurdity you have to rationalise around, because as you say, no sane person will follow it without prior communication.

 

I would suggest borrowing some of necromunda's well established tools for drawing your 'force' from your larger list - I sketched this up tonight after being very inspired by the step 2 possibilities.

 

This hopefully would be very narrative and get away from the often deathmatch-esque games we play at heresy events? 

[BitsHammer]

2 hours ago, Petitioner's City said:

 

I would suggest borrowing some of necromunda's well established tools for drawing your 'force' from your larger list - I sketched this up tonight after being very inspired by the step 2 possibilities.

 

This hopefully would be very narrative and get away from the often deathmatch-esque games we play at heresy events? 

Honestly that'd be an interesting approach. Mix in wounded mechanics and ways to earn resources to spend on new units or wargrear would be good.

[Ripper.McGuirl]

15 minutes ago, BitsHammer said:

Honestly that'd be an interesting approach. Mix in wounded mechanics and ways to earn resources to spend on new units or wargrear would be good.

At that point we’re getting to what I am actually most excited about in this edition: turning it into a skirmish game.

[Urauloth]

2 hours ago, Ripper.McGuirl said:

At that point we’re getting to what I am actually most excited about in this edition: turning it into a skirmish game.

Ok well now I'm interested. Honestly I think it's a tragedy we don't have a Heresy-era skirmish game already.

[BitsHammer]

37 minutes ago, Urauloth said:

Ok well now I'm interested. Honestly I think it's a tragedy we don't have a Heresy-era skirmish game already.

Zone Mortalis is very close but not quite there for being one.

[BitsHammer]

The leaker over on /tg/ posted unit types:

Spoiler