Feast of Blades to ban/change D-Weapons (Grimoire is out too)

[Cryptognomicon]

I honestly think we only wound up with Escalation because Apocalypse didn't sell very well.

When did Apocalypse come out? 

For some reason I thought it was just this past summer. Am I wrong?  From a sales/marketing standpoint that is not nearly enough time to both get a sales report and to produce/market/print/distribute a new publication. For both books to be ready to distribute by this past week I would say that they had to be done and to the printer early November at the latest. You also have to factor in proofing/printing/shipping/distribution times into that. That really only leaves about 3-4  months to decide that Apocalypse wasn't selling and that is a pretty tight sales period to judge from. 

I really think that this is part of a larger picture strategy to add expansions to the 40k game.  Apocalypse isn't for everyone because there is a lot of Forgeworld stuff in there.  This for the most part allows us to use what is already in production through the GW channel with the exception of a few kits that probably will be released next year(just guessing) using the same (basic) rules with some modifications as standard 40k.   I would not be surprised if six months to a year from now another expansion gets released for the game.

These expansions are really ways for GW to keep giving the customer something new. They are doing a great job of getting new army books out but if  for example you don't collect Tau then the Tau release wasn't going to make you buy stuff.  What this books does is give me a a reason to run out an buy the Baneblade/Shadowsword kit so that I can to add a Stormlord to my IG army.

[Sir_Prometheus]

I honestly think we only wound up with Escalation because Apocalypse didn't sell very well.

GW plans everything 18 months in advance, so no that's not possible.

I don't think that's how they do things anymore, especially with COpy and paste jobs like this.  Like the lack of play testing. 

[Sam]

Escalation doesn't have much to do with Apocalypse at all, really.

The players who are most excited about Escalation don't play Apocalypse. It's daunting to get a zillion points together; a lot of players have to just field everything they own to play a real Apocalypse game, which makes their list kind of shoddy. Which if fine; Apocalypse is about throwing models at each other and watching things explode. But Escalation lets a player get just one super-cool thing and throw it into the army he already has, with a list designed to exploit that advantage. That's a very different animal altogether.

I think Apocalypse was updated as an excuse to bring out new super-heavies and other big stuff, with the intention that they would be used in Escalation. Because GW is a model company.

[shwnlyns]

This talk about escalation not being apocalypse confuses me. The rules for super heavies is the exact same in each. No formations in 40k but they seem very similar to me. And I don't see a change in the meta over this from what it has been for most of 6th edition. Seems to me the current meta is bring the biggest gun and cheapest troops, only difference now is that there are bigger guns available.

 

[Bill]

I read the escalation rules and with the exception of the revenant Titan, think they are neat. The d weapons make people upset because a unit of grots dies just as easy as a 1000 pt deathstar. I like this because it kills 1k point Deathstars, I dislike this because it creates little incentive to take many cool units but tons of crappy units with some melta guns.

All of this being said I would also like to point out that a very limited number of Adepticon gladiator tournaments saw the guy bringing a super heavy as the victor and they allow it all.

In summary:
Are the escalation rules really cool? Yes

Do I think they should be allowed? Sure, in some events.

Do I think they would take the meta in a more diverse and interesting direction? Not a chance

Is this chase's every intention? Seems to be. Every event can be different so there is zero reason to saying xyz can always or never be allowed.

[Sir_Prometheus]

I don't mind there being escalation tournaments same way I don't mind there being apocalypse events.  To each their own, if you enjoy it, Great!

But when chase starts talking "everything should be allowed in doubles tournaments" I get worried.  My main doubles buddy has a baneblade.....still worried. 

[Grimwulfe]

Dont worry be happy man!

[Ian Mulligan]

Chill, dirrrty dawwg. Its a casual game not intended for tournament play. Just have fun and don't worry so much about winning.

[robpro]

Escalation isn't apocalypse because at most you get ONE lord of war, not as many as you like, and you have to follow the force org. There are also additional penalties for having one (opponent seizes easier, extra VP opportunity, and alternate warlord trait chart), and they don't score. You're also very limited in selection compared to what is available through FW and the regular Apoc book.

The rules for these units are the same as Apoc, but the framework around them is different.

How is D killing a unit any different than a broadside and missile drone unit killing a unit? Both are enough firepower to wipe out almost anything without a 2+ rerollable save, and you can always throw a 2nd missileside unit in for less combined points than super heavies with D. D is just a faster way to resolve it.

[Sir_Prometheus]

Chill, dirrrty dawwg. Its a casual game not intended for tournament play. Just have fun and don't worry so much about winning.

And yet, some people want to play it competitively, in tournaments.  This is a really infuriating statement.  You're basically saying the way they want to play it is invalid. 

[Bill]

I love tournaments, do all the BG tournaments and attend about 5 GTs a year but I don't for a second kid myself and think that it is intended for tournaments. The community is forcing a square peg Into a round hole to make it a tournment game. I still enjoy it in that capacity none the less.

[Ian Mulligan]

Bill gets it.

This is not the game you want it to be and it will probably never change.

[Sir_Prometheus]

Yes, it is not intended for competitive play.  For years we have been playing as if it were, but it's getting to the point where that's not possible.  So, those who want it to be competitive have to rewrite it then. 

[robpro]

Yes, it is not intended for competitive play.  For years we have been playing as if it were, but it's getting to the point where that's not possible.  So, those who want it to be competitive have to rewrite it then.

I don't know how you can say it's not possible to be competitive in the current environment, it's just different than what it was in the previous environment. The game and environment have always changed, and we will see what good or bad this brings going forward. There are simply new units to consider during list building with very straightforward counters (void shield generators are also super good against everything else anyways).

Suppose GW comes out and says FW is fine all the time and should be used in every event? Would we need a ban/restrict list for that too?

[Sir_Prometheus]

Yes? Obviously.