Apocalypse

[Icarus Athrasuriel]

Well, I know that we're going to be getting some great models out of Apocalypse, but I can't help thinking, will it be good or bad? I know it's just going to be a supplement I won't use, because I prefer tactics to size (big games need no brains) but will it eclipse traditional 40k?

[Templar Mikeel]

Big games need no brains? How do you figure? The way I see it, the more units you have the more tactical options you have. Instead of having a single whirlwind, you could lay down an entire artilery barrage before your troops advance behind an armored column.

[Icarus Athrasuriel]

That's not intelligent thinking. To be successful in a small game you have to have ingenuity, know exactly what every single squad and every man in your army can and cannot do. It's very detailed.

In large battles, all you have to think about is the bigger picture. Any snot nosed 10 year-old knows how conduct a large scale assault. Also, with restricted units, you need to be able to adapt and be inventive. If you have all the options there infront of you, where's the intelligent deliberation, the thinking? Answer : It just simply isn't there. All you need to know to conduct a large battle is the rules and some basic strategies.

Oh? Tell that to commanders of WWII Eastern Front where the battles were MASSIVE.

Big battles require strategy, just not a level or length of traditional 40K. Just because you have big guns, now the opponent does too. Hence your seeming gripe with power ed up lists is gone. If you bring the opponent up to scale, the strategy part is alive!

[masterofweirdness]

another thing... the larger the battle, the less you have to worry about the luck of dice. I mean in a 8000 point battle... you don't need to worry about dice, just percentages.

[Templar Mikeel]

Yes, any snot nosed 10 year old can do that. But any experienced player can skillfully counter it.

Your tone also seemed insulting.

[MSguardsmen]

yeah one problem though! we are suggested to play on the same tabletop that we are using now! you try apocalypse out with 8000 points of orks, nids, guard and see where you end up

[wolfpack]

LOL...on the floor....LMAO..but I wanna know if apocolypse allows for say warhounds in squadron formation?... (it's definatley over 10K guys....)

[Icarus Athrasuriel]

Originally Posted by Templar Mikeel

Your tone also seemed insulting.

How is that? I was stating that you don't need to think things through when using a larger army.

My point, as I thought you guys would see, was that smaller battles require far more original thinking than larger battles. With larger battles, you only need to have a repertoire of tactics and counters, which isn't really using your brain, just making a decision on which of the tactics you know of to use.

[TheKiller333]

Icarus. Say the word. You gotta rant. Hang on.. this already sounds like one. :P

Only thing i can really say is, if your bored of using the same tactics and not REALLY thinking, then make up your own tactics! Simple! =]

[Warmaster Romulas]

Well with Larger battles you need a more sound overall strategy with such huge troop formations. while smaller battles require more on the fly tactical descisions because when you only have 30 troopers instead of 300 out there when you lose a few the hole in you line is bigger
how many time have you had an overall plan with a 1500pt games and as soon as your opponent had their first turn you threw your strategy out the window and used your Tactics to win the day?
i know for samller battles ive had to make more adjustment and could not stick to my overall gameplan but with the bigger battles ive been able to stick with it longer because you have more troops to plug gaps due to losses

[BrainDeleted]

large scale battles require strategy and intelligence to beat an opponent who is also at least slightly intelligent and has a simple grasp of tactics.

[wolfpack]

Who needs tactics when you have TITANS on the table?...LMAO...

Seriously...at least we all agree that with smaller engagements there is less room for error when commiting your forces to a given battleplan...(everyone basically has said the same thing)...whereas with larger battles you have the option and opportunity to move troops about with a bit less regard for the 'moment to moment' strategy...as long as you follow the basic battleplan you can win the game...Either way you still require a working sense of tactics and strategy and either way you need to be ABLE to implement that strategy and those tactics to insure a victory...neither of which is easy when your opponent (you hope) has at least the same skill level as yourself...making the victory worth the fight...and even juicier when your opponents skill is slightly better than your own.

[DeAd_cOmMaNdO]

the way i see it is the prospect of large games wont appeal to everyone just the same way as certain army lists dont appeal to certain games.

which is fine. the rulebook (big as it is) is an expansion - if you dont like it, dont use it! i suggest to buy it to extrapolate whatyou like for use in your own games, and ignore the rest!

i, for one, rarely play games smaller than 3000 - 3500 points so have been looking forward to this expansion for ages