Episode 177: Mandatory Catalog

This week Lange and Nathan are joined by Ciaran from the Overlords podcast to review and give our initial impressions of the newly released 7th Edition of Warhammer 40K! Well, it’s more like 6.1 than it is like 7.0 but I suspect most of you already knew this. How will the new Psychic phase affect the game? How will the changes to missions affect tournament play? Listen and Enjoy!!

[WARNING! Jaded Gamercast is meant for an adult audience. We ask that all listeners be at least 18 years of age or have their parents permission before listening.]

Direct Download the podcast here!

Need advice on Army Building? Painting? Crushing your enemies and seeing them driven before you? Dating? ….EMAIL US!?

6 thoughts on “Episode 177: Mandatory Catalog

  1. You missed some changes to the game that i feel are big.

    1 Factions, detachments, allies.

    2 The player who deploys first get to choose who goes first, after deployment.

    • Changes yes, but I would not consider them big changes really. Factions, detachments, and allies are basically the same old concepts but with a different name. As for the first turn priority, this has always been a game won by who gets first turn. (Yes, I am aware that there are always exceptions) So when it comes to how or when a player gets first turn, I am not sure that this change is going to prompt any change in he gaming landscape. Good catch though 😊 I totally missed that last one.

  2. Ah I have been waiting for this episode. Very interested to see what you chaps think to the new edition … honestly I don’t feel a Games Workshop product has been properly released until it receives the Jaded Gamer workover!

  3. Ha! Well since I got called out for supporting a “mousetrap” I feel the need to respond 😛

    I absolutely agree that, point-for-point, unit-for-unit, the Wood Elves are the “Worst Elves” on paper. Everything in the other two books is just a little bit better for what you’re getting. However, of the three people in my club of ~20ish who have switched over to the new WE book every single one of them is undefeated (or very nearly so) over the course of a half-dozen games each thus far. That didn’t happen the same way with the other Elf books.

    The reason is that they play a very different game than the current landscape is used to dealing with. Take the top 10 armies at the last tournament I was at, for instance (Gottacon 2014, in Victoria):

    1) Bretonnia
    2) Demons
    3) Ogres
    4) Demons
    5) Ogres
    6) Warriors
    7) Lizardmen
    8) Warriors
    9) Lizardmen
    10) High Elves

    Of the next 20 placed armies, more than half are Ogres, Warriors, or Demons.

    What almost all of those lists have in common is that they’re hitty, they’re hard, and they’re resilient. They all want to be in combat, and have the means to do it on their terms.

    Wood Elfs don’t play that game. They have no intention of seeing combat with you, and have the tools to keep it that way. They have eagles, some of the best chaff in the game, sitting in your face to double-flee. They’ve got Glade Riders that come in wherever the hell they want and have the movement to get away from you. They have Sisters, who are an incredibly resilient character bunker (4++ is hard, especially with High Magic), and can move 20″ a turn with the movement banner. Or they can but their characters in a big unit with the moonstone and bounce around between forests to stay away with you. You can deploy units in forests to keep them from getting there…but then those units are sitting in forests rather than chasing down elves.

    Now is a few critical mistakes going to be devastating to these sorts of lists? Of course. That’s why you’re not going to see new players doing well with them. But in the hands of a veteran they’re absolutely terrifying, which I know because I’ve been watching them ruthlessly crush people over and over again. And these are good players too being crushed; players who were at the top of that list.

    The TL;DR is that I’d agree that “objectively” Wood Elves have the worst stats and costing of the elf armies at present. However, I can’t call them “worst” because I can really foresee them changing the way that people play Warhammer at the most competitive level. They’re an achilles heel to the sorts of lists that are wrecking face right now. Demon Prince + 3 chimeras + 8 skullcrushers + chariots as core is a terrifying list for the rest of us, but Wood Elves can dismantle them without breaking a sweat. That’s a really big deal, as far as competitiveness is concerned.

  4. Just a note about the force org. stuff: at least 6th and 5th had the ‘this is what a typical…’ bit, and I think that 4th had it as well.The implications that you listed off as having been written in the currect book have been there for a while now. That said, the game;’s more likely to include alternate org. crap than ever, for the reasons you listed outside the BRB, and I’m hopeful that this is the case.

  5. On a completely separate note, I just really, really disagree with GW’s whole “Hey D-bags, this game is here for fun” philosophy. They seem to have this notion that “fun fluffy” armies and “big, mean competitive armies” are ideologically distinct concepts, and that only “big, mean tournament players” would EVER play the latter

    But of course that’s not always the case. Yeah, in some armies the “competitive” build is some horrendous unfluffy mish-mash of all the best choices, but there are other times where the fluff and crunch combine. My friend ran a fluffy Khainite-themed Dark Elf army in 7th edition, but new book comes out and suddenly it’s the power build.

    If someone runs an all-gnoblar or all-night goblin army it’s a “themed” list. If they run an all troll army it’s a “trollspam” list, or all empire knights and it’s a “1+ spam list.” The only difference between the two is that one is limiting yourself with crappy choices while the other is “themed” with competitive ones.

    BUT IT’S STILL THEMED. It’s still fluffy. It can still build a narrative.

    Warhammer is a competitive, adversarial game by definition. At the end of the day, every game has a winner and a loser. By claiming that players shouldn’t be playing to win, GW is just giving themselves a bullshit cop-out from making a tight ruleset that will make this game more fun for all involved.

    Because it only takes ONE asshole to ruin it for everyone…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s