Jump to content



Photo

Week Seven Update


  • Please log in to reply
56 replies to this topic

#1 ffgMark

ffgMark

    Member

  • Members
  • 35 posts

Posted 14 August 2012 - 07:06 AM

Hello all,

The developers have posted their weekly update! Please use this thread if you wish to discuss its contents.

Thank you for your continued support.



#2 Musclewizard

Musclewizard

    Member

  • Members
  • 320 posts

Posted 14 August 2012 - 07:56 AM

I like it. Like Week 6 this was a really well done update and adressed a lot of issues that the community brought up. Good job FFG (and freelancer writers that might work on this).

I have to say that most of my complaints have been adressed by now and there's only a few more things that should be fixed in the released book namely:

  • Backpack Ammo not running out in the first long fight
  • Master Chirurgeon rewrite to better go with the new Extended Care Rules.
  • Adding the Tauros (adding Rough Rider Regiments and Warbeasts / Warhorses would also be great but I don't expect to get that much actually).
  • Rewrite or Jaws of Hell or reduce its costs. It's really not worth being a Tier 3 talent right now. With the current Orders Comrades aren't all that usefull right now without a Comrade and them being immune to Fear or Pinning isn't really worth anything I feel. The same goes for Iron Discipline


#3 KommissarK

KommissarK

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,499 posts

Posted 14 August 2012 - 07:59 AM

Solid changes all around.

While I wasn't pushing for it, thanks for at least making the Storm Trooper's armour not be Good quality. That is always a pain to track, and can often confuse new players. That it is Storm Trooper Carapace is simply icing on the cake.

Good to see the example regiments get cleaned up a bit (especially interesting to see that gas grenades are actually photo-flash). I'm fine with the examples having otherwise impossible to get traits, as it adds flavour.

Cool to see a dice ruling like that.

Excellent to see a ruling on how to handle regiment options on a character by character basis.

Thank you for the 4 points back, but I'm unsure 2 points per leftover regiment point is "worth it." If it was a decision of taking a 3 pt. aptitude doctrine, or a 2 point flavour doctrine, getting +2 standard kit isn't really a "good deal."

Awesome to see a more fleshed out Hail of Fire (wasn't really necessary, as its covered in the rules elsewhere on pinning). Cool that I was right that you actually don't even have to hit the enemy. Man, Hail of Fire + Flamers = scary. If they're pinned, they can't take the full round action to put themselves out.

Gotta say, if you're going to keep the Hunting Lance in the book, can you please provide rules on the use of horses?

Good to see a clear and concise wording on Surprise and evasion. Could we also get as clear and concise a set of wording on how stealth/unaware targets mid combat can/should be treated?



#4 Plushy

Plushy

    Member

  • Members
  • 811 posts

Posted 14 August 2012 - 08:24 AM

 Solid changes.

 

Loving the Storm Trooper getting his armor back. Liking the lasweapons all getting variable traits. The clarification on regimental talents and the revised kit points are all nice. I can't say I'm upset by any of these changes!

However, if you're going to add the Hunting Lance, then Bikes and/or Horses have a place in the rules. Their stat block would be rather unobtrusive, and you could offer them as a starting option for Hunter-Killer regiments (which I think should have A Squad of Sentinels as an option.)

Bolt Weapons may or may not need a boost; I have a thread where we've been discussing this.


My apologies to anyone I offend; FFG staff, playtesters, and forum users alike. 

 

Please check out my Dark Heresy to Only War conversion! You can find it on the main Only War forum. I'm always looking for more people to playtest it!


#5 Emperor Castaigne

Emperor Castaigne

    Member

  • Members
  • 58 posts

Posted 14 August 2012 - 09:08 AM

Still no changes to the options available in Regiment Creation rules. Interesting.

The fact that some of the pre-made Regiments don't quite fit in with the actual creation rules gives me the impression that the Regiment Creation rules isn't quite finished, and yet there has been no word on the matter during the entire Beta.

It seems strange that something so fundamental to the game has only had minor changes like Linguistics and clarifications like characters choosing "or" talents individually.

Are the developers quietly collecting feedback for one big swoop of changes or are they not even taking suggestions for that particular chapter?



#6 JuankiMan

JuankiMan

    Member

  • Members
  • 256 posts

Posted 14 August 2012 - 09:17 AM

KommissarK said:

 

Awesome to see a more fleshed out Hail of Fire (wasn't really necessary, as its covered in the rules elsewhere on pinning). Cool that I was right that you actually don't even have to hit the enemy. Man, Hail of Fire + Flamers = scary. If they're pinned, they can't take the full round action to put themselves out.

 

 

I'd think that being set on fire should overrule pinning. Who cares if you might get shot? You have more immediate concerns at the moment! Denying a burning character the chance to put himself out due to being pinned sounds to me like exploiting game mechanics unfairly.



#7 Cifer

Cifer

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,798 posts

Posted 14 August 2012 - 09:43 AM

Yup, definitely a great update. I'd still like to see Medicae errataed, as (as I've noted before) right now, it may be better to let a critically injured soldier heal on his own or via repeated First Aid rather than risk a failed Extended Care check which has a high chance of killing him.

Regarding formatting, it might be an idea to make "variable settings" a weapon trait rather than writing it into the lasgun and referring to the weapon rather than a trait for all the other lasweapons.

So… what else? Please indicate whether the Favored Weapons one can obtain via the box on errata page 3 are actually weapons put into the standard kit or just more weapons for whom the Favoured Weapons rules count.



#8 Plushy

Plushy

    Member

  • Members
  • 811 posts

Posted 14 August 2012 - 09:51 AM

Cifer said:

Yup, definitely a great update. I'd still like to see Medicae errataed, as (as I've noted before) right now, it may be better to let a critically injured soldier heal on his own or via repeated First Aid rather than risk a failed Extended Care check which has a high chance of killing him.

Regarding formatting, it might be an idea to make "variable settings" a weapon trait rather than writing it into the lasgun and referring to the weapon rather than a trait for all the other lasweapons.

So… what else? Please indicate whether the Favored Weapons one can obtain via the box on errata page 3 are actually weapons put into the standard kit or just more weapons for whom the Favoured Weapons rules count.

 

I believe that it adds them to the standard kit.


My apologies to anyone I offend; FFG staff, playtesters, and forum users alike. 

 

Please check out my Dark Heresy to Only War conversion! You can find it on the main Only War forum. I'm always looking for more people to playtest it!


#9 Jukkaimaru

Jukkaimaru

    Member

  • Members
  • 11 posts

Posted 14 August 2012 - 09:51 AM

Largely excellent changes all around.  Thank you very much for finally getting Storm Troopers their proper armor, and dropping it to Common.  I think I will still have Good Craft Light Carapace as an option in games I run, cutting its weight appropriately.

 

Also, HELL YES on the rest of the standard Imperial lasfamily getting variable settings, vehicles' size increasing, and all the little clarifications here.



#10 Thaddux

Thaddux

    Member

  • Members
  • 85 posts

Posted 14 August 2012 - 12:19 PM

I would like to see ammo capacities for vehicles, so we know roughly how much ammo any given vehicle could be carrying whilst away from the supply lines.



#11 HTMC

HTMC

    Member

  • Members
  • 153 posts

Posted 14 August 2012 - 03:40 PM

Emperor Castaigne said:

The fact that some of the pre-made Regiments don't quite fit in with the actual creation rules gives me the impression that the Regiment Creation rules isn't quite finished, and yet there has been no word on the matter during the entire Beta.

It seems strange that something so fundamental to the game has only had minor changes like Linguistics and clarifications like characters choosing "or" talents individually.

Are the developers quietly collecting feedback for one big swoop of changes or are they not even taking suggestions for that particular chapter?

I doubt that's the case. Correct me if I'm wrong since I don't have access at the moment to the book I'm about to reference, but with DW you couldn't make some of the First Founding Chapters using the rules to create-your-own-Chapter, since they had some unique rules associated with them. You could get something very close, but using the RAW you still couldn't get something exactly the same. I assume something similar is at play here: you could create your own regiment that's almost exactly like the Catachans, but if you want to actually be them, you have to use their pre-generated stats. I'm totally find with this, since it encourages use of the pre-gens for reasons other than not having enough time or being lazy. 



#12 Emperor Castaigne

Emperor Castaigne

    Member

  • Members
  • 58 posts

Posted 14 August 2012 - 04:43 PM

HTMC said:

 

I doubt that's the case. Correct me if I'm wrong since I don't have access at the moment to the book I'm about to reference, but with DW you couldn't make some of the First Founding Chapters using the rules to create-your-own-Chapter, since they had some unique rules associated with them. You could get something very close, but using the RAW you still couldn't get something exactly the same. I assume something similar is at play here: you could create your own regiment that's almost exactly like the Catachans, but if you want to actually be them, you have to use their pre-generated stats. I'm totally find with this, since it encourages use of the pre-gens for reasons other than not having enough time or being lazy. 

"The regiments already described in this chapter have all been built using the rules described in this section, and should serve both as pre-made regiments to begin play quickly or as archetypal Imperial Guard forces, and as examples of what can be done with these rules."

So they're supposed to use the same rules according to the book at least. I can't find it right now, but there was some thread where people asked about differences between the pre-made Regiments and the ones you could create and some developer admitted that some of the pre-made had been created while the rules were still being written.

Personally, I would prefer if they gave more expensive, unique variations of the Home Worlds to some of the most famous regiments, like Cadia being a 4-point variant of the Fortress World with some extra stuff included. Of course, creating such origins and keeping them balanced might not be the best use of the developers time, so it's probably not going to happen that way, at least not in Only War Core.

Regardless of my personal opinion on Homeworlds not having as big of an effect as I would prefer, it still seems like we would have seen something by now if they were going to change things about the regiment creation rules, but there's been virtually nothing. The only changes have been to Fluency/Linguistics, renaming Fieldcraft to Survival to make it less confusing and clarifying that Hardened Fighters can choose to apply the Mono upgrade to their "standard melee weapons" and not just their "standard melee weapon".

Dark Heresy had Puritan vs Radical. Rogue Trader had designing and outfitting your ship. Deathwatch had the different Chapters. Black Crusade had the 4 Chaod Gods and Unaligned.

In Only War, Regiment creation is going to be THE big choice. It will determine the stats and behaviour of the NPCs that surround the PCs, it will determine how you fight battles, it will have an influence on where you fight. It is the source of a thousand sub-plots and character interaction between other regiments, the civilian population and military command.

And now, with the Beta coming to a close, nothing of substance has changed. The Home Worlds, the Commanding Officer, the Regiment Types, Training Doctrines and Equipment Doctrines are just as they were when the Beta began.

Since FFG hasn't changed anything about the 12-budget create-your-own-regiment part, the obvious question is: did the feedback they received on any of those things actually matter?



#13 WittyDroog

WittyDroog

    Member

  • Members
  • 211 posts

Posted 14 August 2012 - 05:35 PM

I don't share any if the concerns that you have. I've had a blast making up interesting Regiments with the rules provided and I'm perfectly fine with the famous ones having something to distinguish them from others, and its usually a single rule so big freaking deal. If you want to remake Cadia but nit have them be Cadians then just call them whatever you like. If you want the special rule associated with a particular regiment that you HAVE TO HAVE then have the GM come up with the appropriate cost. I mean honestly you could do whatever you want since this is just an RPG, not a competitive game, the rules provided act as a guideline but if you got an idea then no one will stop you from using it.

 

Like HTMC said, its nit like Deathwatch's chapters could be recreated with the First Founding rules with perfect accuracy and you know what? The game was just fine regardless, and it'll be fine here too.



#14 boooh

boooh

    Member

  • Members
  • 36 posts

Posted 14 August 2012 - 06:03 PM

Solid changes so far, but i would like to see a reason why to improve the las carabine to the M36 lasgun

actually there is only one more shoot at semi auto and a little more range basicly not worth spending 5 req points.

maybe as a full build main weapon it should not loose it´s reliable trait on overload setting or something.

(there should be a reason why it´s the main weapon as now it would be better to make the carabine version the standard main weapon of the IG )



#15 Shadow Walker

Shadow Walker

    Member

  • Members
  • 61 posts

Posted 14 August 2012 - 08:56 PM

Great update. Now I need only more fluffy Ogryns [T/S unnaturals of at least 4, scrap his BS aptitude, give his cc attacks concussive] and some little changes in Adversarie&NPC chapter [wounds of 25 for Weirdboy, BS of 19 for all Boyz etc.]. That and give Operator 8+wounds.



#16 remmus

remmus

    Member

  • Members
  • 47 posts

Posted 14 August 2012 - 10:56 PM

Shadow Walker said:

Great update. Now I need only more fluffy Ogryns [T/S unnaturals of at least 4, scrap his BS aptitude, give his cc attacks concussive] and some little changes in Adversarie&NPC chapter [wounds of 25 for Weirdboy, BS of 19 for all Boyz etc.]. That and give Operator 8+wounds.

*looks at you*

*looks at the Ogryn wielding his ripper gun*

*looks back at you*

*looks back at the Ogryn wielding his ripper gun*

 

why would ya remove there BS apititude?



#17 Shadow Walker

Shadow Walker

    Member

  • Members
  • 61 posts

Posted 15 August 2012 - 01:12 AM

remmus said:

Shadow Walker said:

 

Great update. Now I need only more fluffy Ogryns [T/S unnaturals of at least 4, scrap his BS aptitude, give his cc attacks concussive] and some little changes in Adversarie&NPC chapter [wounds of 25 for Weirdboy, BS of 19 for all Boyz etc.]. That and give Operator 8+wounds.

 

 

*looks at you*

*looks at the Ogryn wielding his ripper gun*

*looks back at you*

*looks back at the Ogryn wielding his ripper gun*

 

why would ya remove there BS apititude?

Because they are almost as bad as Orks when it comes to shooting. I would therefore scrap his BS together with his comrade and gave him S/T TB of 4 etc. to compensate and make him real Ogryn we know from wh40k fluff.



#18 JuankiMan

JuankiMan

    Member

  • Members
  • 256 posts

Posted 15 August 2012 - 01:56 AM

Shadow Walker said:

remmus said:

 

 

Because they are almost as bad as Orks when it comes to shooting. I would therefore scrap his BS together with his comrade and gave him S/T TB of 4 etc. to compensate and make him real Ogryn we know from wh40k fluff.

Ogryns aren't bad shots. They're not great shots, but at BS3 they're not Ork-level terrible either. 



#19 Shadow Walker

Shadow Walker

    Member

  • Members
  • 61 posts

Posted 15 August 2012 - 02:42 AM

Still they do not need BS aptitude but they need more strenght and toughness. Now they are weaker and less tougher than Ork Nob which is unfluffy.

Vechicles size in Adversaries&NPC chapter should be changed according to IG vechicles size from latest update.



#20 remmus

remmus

    Member

  • Members
  • 47 posts

Posted 15 August 2012 - 02:53 AM

Shadow Walker said:

Still they do not need BS aptitude but they need more strenght and toughness. Now they are weaker and less tougher than Ork Nob which is unfluffy.

Vechicles size in Adversaries&NPC chapter should be changed according to IG vechicles size from latest update.

I for one welcome the BS aptitude, makes Ogryns darn good heavy weapons users (like seriously, stick a heavy stubber in a Ogryn with high BS skill and he can run around with the other players like a rifleman on steroids!)

all in all, in my book the BS aptitude is a good way to ensure players can get out of the streotype swamp by not having there Ogryn being a dumb bruiser….now he can be a dumb gunman X-)






© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS