Hello
people,
Today I am
posting an article , somewhat different from what has been posted until
now. The difference comes from the
credibility and/or objectivity of the following statement:
The new
edition is degrading the competitive side of 40k by introducing progressively
the prevalence of randomness.
Of course ,
this is just a hypothesis , and many people can easily say that a good player
should rely little on the tides of luck. However, after playing a couple of
games , I think that most people will realize that now, there are more random things than what we were
used to.
First of
all, we now have the random psychic powers (henceforth p.p.) from the main rulebook. These new powers are,
for the most part, better that their older Codex counterparts. For example ,
Tyranids have the Catalyst p.p. that bestows the FNP rule upon a unit. The BRB
has the Endurance p.p. which gives FNP+ Relentless+ IWND. The BRB p.p. is
obviously much, much better but you have to risk the chance of getting it or not, or bring many
psykers to the table.
Furthermore,
the introduction of random charge distance had a tremendous impact on most
melee units and armies. It does not only make it harder for a unit to
get stuck into combat ( which gets even worse when you take into account the
enemy Overwatch ) , but it is also
rendering obsolete the most fundamental idea of c.c. armies : “ my force will suffer casualties for the
first 2 or 3 turns but then they will certainly pay off by engaging in combat
In the new
metagame, a close combat unit relies on its mobility, or Fleet in order to take
minimum risk when charging. In case a unit misses its charge it will probably
get shot to death, or the enemy will retreat and run. So , that change is
making the assault phase the one most dependent on chance.
In addition
to this, more random elements have made their appearance into our game.
Mysterious Objectives , Mysterious Terrains , Random Artifacts , Warlord Traits….
they all seem to serve as a simple, fluffy addition to the main rules that can
result in a more pleasant game with little surprises that may come along. On
the contrary, when viewed through the spectrum of competitive gaming , these
impish new features can cause headache and confusion. I think there is no need to analyse that
further because I already see that most
people don’t use any of these rules in their games anyway, and I strongly
believe that in the near future it will become commonplace to ignore these rules completely.
In case you
don’t find this article convincing , I
will explain further why the new “random rules “ should raise a few eyebrows
among the gaming community.
Personally, I play 40k since the era of 4th
edition. Back then , the game used to be much more rigid and objective (
or at least , that is the way I remember it ). There were very little parts of
the game that had to do with luck ( except for the regular dice rolls ).There
was no “ What you see is what you get” because buildings and terrains had the “
level “ system that used to be a definite answer whether you can see a model or
not.
In 5th edition , WYSIWYG made quite a good impression at first
(because people thought that it would make the game more realistic). But after
a while, some smart-ass guys appeared , with models assembled and converted in
a way that would give them a gaming advantage and even later , when people
really got the hang of it, there were other people who would spend 15 minutes
to deploy their Psyfleman dreadnought in a way that would provide the walker with
cover, but not its target.
However, people got used to it, after a while.
Today , in
the early days of 6th edition, there is a wide array of new
additions that come with the idea that “ it will make the game more realistic”.
This time it is not a matter of “ model view” but is an attempt to actually
give a new aspect to the game.
And thus we
reach the quintessence of this whole argument:
Should the
game become more realistic by adding elements that depend on chance?
The idea
that a realistic game should be more fun is something that the gaming community
always wanted. Most players would say that they would like to play a tabletop
game that is a most precise simulation of what a large scale sci-fi battle
would look like. This idea ,combined with the enthusiasm that accompanies films
or videogames , is creating the impression that a tabletop game should be as
detailed and complex as possible.
However ,
the main disadvantage of such ideas is obvious. The game is becoming more and
more complex , time consuming and harder to learn and getting accustomed to it.
For young
players, this means that they it will probably be easier for them to get introduced
to a tabletop game full of fun elements , but actually it will be harder for
them to stay in the hobby.
For more
experienced players who only play for their enjoyment, this means that they
will probably spend their afternoon playing a fun game that resembles real life,
but will also take more time to get done with.
And
finally, for the experienced players , complex rules also result in a game that
takes more time to play, but also in a metagame that requires more effort for a
good player to remain competitive.
My personal belief is that a good player
should have a specific view of the battlefield and a specific way to respond to
any situation that may occur. This profile is the direct result of not only accumulated
experience, but also of a deeper understanding
of the game itself. Much like professional chess players see their game as a
finite result of moves and tactics, a competitive 40k player sees his game as a
finite complex of movement distances , proper deployment and prediction.
However ,
when the game becomes more complex, and there are more things determined from a
dice roll, then it gets progressively harder for a player to calculate all the
possible scenarios. Of course a good player should rarely take luck into
consideration, but he should definitely be fully aware of it.
And to
finally put an end to my seemingly pointless ranting:
All things
considered, anyone can say that despite the new random rules, most of them can
either be ignored completely, or do not affect the game in such a great degree
as this article would suggest. I am fully aware of it. Nonetheless, I can’t
help it but point out that this could be just the tip of the iceberg. I am afraid
that GW is making their rules more and
more based on randomness. And even if you now think that all this article is
about a harmless new feature of the game, what would you say if I told that GW
actually wants to undermine the prevalence of the competitive aspect of our
game, in favor of a more plain and
accessible way of gaming?
Stefanos Kapetanakis, out.
No comments:
Post a Comment