Kill Team minimum buy-in

[callidusx3Participant 197xp 3]

limburger, I agree that some of those compendium forces appear boring (particularly the marines).  But I suspect, based on what we’ve seen so far from reviewers, that boring on paper may not equal boring in-game.  Perhaps one needs to give it a shot and let the system win you over?

Naturally, a faction’s bespoke release for this edition will be spicier and more engaging.  I suppose one might want to wait for that to come about before diving in.  Fortunately for me, Imperial Guard were one of the first two bespoke faction rules released.

I can sympathize with people being cynical with GW.  But there have been games that break their mold, both as to continued, consistent support for non-core games (Blood Bowl and Underworlds) and as to balance (Underworlds and Titanicus).  Admittedly, balance in their two core games is no where near a priority and is likely actively discouraged.

Regarding your preference for Stargrave, I would not naysay you for enjoying what you enjoy.  I simply was stating my comparative opinion on the quality and depth of decision-making provided by these rules.  There may be valid reasons to avoid KT’21 because it is GW behind this game, but I don’t believe poor rules is one of them.

—

Henry R.

[limburger 21705xp 2]

@callidusx3 I like what the author of Stargrave wants to achieve and how he does it.

GW’s games in general don’t appear to have any soul inside them. They feel like they were designed to make money first and be a game second.

It’s weird to see GW list ‘Imperial Guard’ as one of the factions in the compendium … especially given that they have been using those fancy trademarkable names for a few years now.

I prefer games that are complete at launch. Not a ‘here is a bit to get you going until we decide let you buy the proper army lists’.
I wouldn’t mind it if they had released campaign supplements or anything else that isn’t needed to play the core game, but these faction books feel too much like a core part of a game that has been ripped out in order to make ‘moar money’.

And condider this : the compendium has 19 factions
They have announced 3-4 expansions.
Unless there are 4+ factions per expansion they’re not getting everything in the compendium into the game proper.

I kind of wish they had gone the WarCry route and gone for 100% bespoke factions at launch with 4 optional books to cover the 40k factions at a later stage.

[callidusx3Participant 197xp 0]

Limburger, that’s completely fair on Stargrave… different strokes and all that.

As for soulless, I’ve only heard that leveled against euro-boardgames!  Well, we do live in a capitalist world with companies whose goal it is to make money.  But a crap product need not be bought, which is why I parted ways with GW in ’04/’05.  In my estimation, GW currently has some pretty impressive games that have a “soul.”  This doesn’t mean that the manner by which GW rolls out the given product’s line is not problematic.

You and I do share that preference for games that are complete at launch.  This was one of the reasons I left miniature gaming behind 16+ years ago and focused on boardgames.  A complete, deep and replayable gaming experience for a fraction of the cost, and often enjoyed by 3-7 people instead of 2.  But, I do not expect this from my miniatures games.  I would be hard pressed to name a mini’s game that is not designed for expandability.

*Edit – This last sentence is inaccurate.  I know of many miniature rulesets that are not expandable (e.g. historical rulesets like DBA, Osprey’s stuff like Outremer, Reign in Hell).  But with respect to mini’s games with their own miniature line, I think Burrows and Badgers is the only one.

GW’s planned campaign supplements may be a part of the core game experience, but only if it contains the faction(s) you are playing.  Otherwise, there is nothing in Octarius that changes the core rules for non-IG/Ork players; presumably future campaigns will follow suit.  So it’s like buying the core rulebook in 40K and one’s faction codex book.  I do not think this is a tall ask by GW of its customers.

You are right that it will take a long while for GW to release bespoke teams for each faction if the plan is to release 4 campaigns a year, each with just 2 factions.  That may be likely, but let’s see if GW changes it up a bit.

I had a lot of issues with Warcry (and so did a bunch of others until GW publicly stated those optional books for the standard AoS factions were coming out), but 6 bespoke teams at launch would have been awesome for KT’21 to emulate.  Octarius is suppose to involve Tyranids, Marines & the Inquisition.  I’m sure one more could have been snuck in there for 6.  That would have been nice (and avoided the million Marine players out there from whining as much as they’ve been).

[recon63 5075xp 0]

@tuffyears, I’m certain GWHQ & GW Australia will still work out some way to charge us here in Oz for the “privilege” of being able to get hold of the new kill team despite the lock-downs

[Author]

Posts