I don’t love free wargear (because there will inevitably better or worse options when everything is a straight swap whereas with points cost you can balance finely), but I can see that it makes life easier.
Fixed unit sizes, however, are supremely shit. All in all totally ripped the variety out of list building, which was one of my favourite things about the game. Lists now will look mostly identical.
I’m gonna level with you. I’ve been playing OnePageRules for years.
So OPR has fixed unit sizes too right? I mean I’m all for simpler versions of the game existing too, I just think we should have the option. Also I know each to their own, of course I can keep playing 9th or house rule it or whatever if I care that much and can find one other person that cares too.
If you care to share how easy have you found it to find games and do you ever feel like you’re missing out on anything playing OPR instead. I admit I can see the appeal of getting off the GW rule carousel.
A lot of units can be double sized. Default battle brother (space marine) squad is 5, but you can pay to make it 10. Heroes can also be added to units.
I mostly was thinking of the wargear & abilities in the original post. Most heroes are very baseline generic, but with a combination of abilities and wargear can be molded to fit different archetypes. For example with battle brothers there is simply a “Master brother” bought wearing normal armor and with no special abilities, but then you can give him a jump pack or whatever, and psychic abilities, or command abilities and mold him into a captain or apothecary or tech marine or whatever.
Units have a decent variety of wargear that they have to pay for, and that wargear can sometimes completely change how the unit works.
One part of list variety is the fact that there are no force templates in OPR. So you don’t need a certain number of HQ or troops or whatever to fill out a force template. You just pay the points and buy the units. There is a competitive validation that says you can’t buy more than 3 identical units but my group just turns off validation in the army building app. It’s very freeing to just buy what you want. I’ve run lists of just terminators and dreadnoughts going up against a hoard of orks and it was way fun and interesting.
Sounds interesting. Worth a try at least!
I’m a big fan of alternating activations in games. I think it makes them more engaging for both players too.
Definitely not a fan of fixed unit sizes.
Free wargear I’m a bit more undecided on. I like just getting to kit to the teeth, and using options that usually are rarely worth the point cost. I also like that it is just simpler/quicker… Buuut, as tyere will be objectively better options that will always get picked and I don’t like not being able to just remove some equipment to fit a point limit and instead have to change whole units. The building blocks become much bigger, meaning list composition ends up more rigid which I don’t quite like.
The thing about free wargear is that it’s not actually that much simpler. You still have to decide which piece you’re taking. The only thing they removed was the cost consideration of what you pick.
It is simpler. Instead of having to decide between an AP5 weapon or an AP2 weapon that’s more expensive but otherwise identical, now you just take the AP2 weapon because it’s objectively better than the AP5 weapon.
In this case simpler is not better.
What?
The cost consideration was a significant part of choosing the weapons though. Often it was the difference between equipping really good weapons or straight up getting a whole other unit for the same price.
As someone getting back into the game after a 20yr hiatus I can see why they’re doing this, but also remember enjoying the process of tweaking my list more finely back in 3rd Ed.
I have to imagine most folks will do points per model outside of tournament play, so that’ll help make things a bit different. With war gear free that also means you’d take 2x squads of 5 over 1x of 10 if that means e.g. you get 2 special weapons for free… I wonder if they’ll find problems with this and backtrack it halfway through the edition or smthg.
I got into things again after not playing since 3rd, I looked at the 9th rules and just thought nah.
Managed to get every single 3rd edition book from various places over the course of a year for not a lot of money. (My best deal was a mint condition 3rd rulebook with slipcase for 8 quid). I also found it really easy to convince people to give it a go and they loved it, they were particularly amazed that the rulebook has the army lists included, so you really only need that to play.
3rd edition is best edition for a fun game!
Interesting! I’ll have to dig through my boxes and see if I can find those 3e books… :)
Yeah it would be super easy to add points for certain obviously unbalanced options (such as those that are take x or nothing). It’s almost like they’ve deliberately designed it so they can make that sort of change. Fingers crossed.
I am baffled by the free wargear\upgrades.
I’m also annoyed by the static group sizes (i.e. Plague Marines sold in 7s, grouped in 5 or 10).
Yeah I find it has almost taken the fun out of making lists especially with my main army being BA. Death company can basically take any combination of ranged/melee weapons but now that they cost the same it’s always powerfist +melta pistol or thunderhammer. Everything else is objectively a worse weapon.
Good luck with that powerfist and melta when you’re drowning in 40+ boys
If that’s the case chainswords +1 attack on 5 guys isn’t going to be the difference that matters.
I think it’ll actually work out fine in the gameplay, but it makes list building much less fun.
There’s also the aspect of kitbashing models because they don’t have an official model. Some of my best models where kitbashed because GW didn’t have a Khorn Lord with chain axe riding a Juggernaut and it was fucking terrifying to have 17 rending attacks on the charge.
I find the game less fun if the lists are less unique. You’re pretty much stuck with generic unit X from detachment Y now, unless you want to be deliberately worse than your opponent. I guess I can just play narratively, but I still prefer trying to win even in a narrative setting.
If a gear option was just objectively better, people would talk about the unit as though they were the cost with the equipment. It allows for lists that aren’t being taxed to death for funtional choices. Also I feel like the wide varieties of strength makes it less “this one is objectively better” and more “this one is objectively better against tanks” but we’ll see as the games get played and the tournaments battle reports get posted
