After getting into Warcry, I also looked into Kill Team. As soon as they came to measuring distances in symbols, I had lost all interest. I still watched a few Kill Team Battle Reports by channels whose Warcry content I enjoy and ... I can not pinpoint why, but the pacing of the game just doesn't look fun to me. I also miss the list building, but the more restrictive way Kill Team handles lists may be the reason the balancing is better than in Warcry (and luckily it has no allies to create a boring meta). I will definitely check it out again with the new edition. Maybe the changes are enough for me to get into it now. At least the dumb symbols are gone =D
yea the lack of list building is my biggest frustration with the game. I'm ok with tighter lists, were you might get say 6 picks from 9 operatives, but some forces you litterally just put the whole KT box on the field, no substitutions, no weapon swaps. just feels bad in those instances.
@@Keithslawinski Yeah, pretty much that. I heard in a podcast that (judging by the new upcoming teams) they might go back a bit to having teams of 5 normal soldiers and 5-6 specialists over an entire team of just specialists. But it might as well be a coincidence and would also not affect already existing teams. We gotta wait and see, i guess.
@@ayonmetar2301 That would be a welcome adjustment. In my ideal world, you would cut down on specialist by 2-3 across the board (averaging of 5-8), then encourage customizing basic troops more via equipment, and possibly core rules rare-equipment only available to basic troops in match play (if GW doesn't want to make more KT specific equipment). Further balance this by either making certain equipment restricted to basic troops, or the weapons they tend to hold, or give basic troops a discount when taking tare equipment (Kasrkin has a good example where their foregrip is 1ep to put on a basic trooper, but 2ep if you want to give it to the sharpshooter or gunner). Finally rebalance grenades a bit so they aren't so OP you can only field 1 per team, then limit their selection to the basic troopers. TLDR Storytime; I remember learning about Elucidian Starstriders, and was like "OMG an elite team of rogue traders I get to build who have a space ship as a support WEAPON?! My mind started racing at making my own unique rogue trader cadre. THEN I saw the list was "put this exact box of guys on the table, no substitutions, no additions, no weapon selections". It felt like such wasted potential I immediately walked away from them totally deflated.
I started with Kill Team, and really liked having a team Full of specialists, but I hated how finicky the abilities were. The fact that i could completely skrew myself for a round if I activated my guys in a the wrong order, or lost a key piece to a combo was frustrating & counterintuitive. It also made it very hard to learn. In warcry i still make teams with lots of specialists, i love havjng fighters with multiple abilities & having lots of different abilities in my team. The big difference is how direct the abilities are, & how i can be adaptable with activating any fighter in any order.
agree, for me one of the most fun parts about warcry is the list building, trying new things or ally stuff, also kitbashing to get the miniature that ends giving to the whole pack a lot of personality
I would love Kill Team with Warcry rules. I looked into KT as a way to play "smaller scale quicker games" but unfortunately KT seemed overly complicated and takes too long to play a game.
Same for me. Almost every aspect of Kill Team seems bothersome to me. The cover mechanics, the rerolling, the way ploys and abilites work, the repetitive mission objectives... It is just a matter of personal taste, I guess, but after playing the fast-paced, fluent and fun-centered Warcry rule set, I find it difficult to enjoy anything else in the GW-catalogue =/ Unfortunately, Warcry has a comperatively small player base, so it is either playing a fun game against the same few opponents, or playing "mediocre" games against new people.
@@ayonmetar2301 I agree and KT unfortunately is not fast paced even for experienced players. There is too much going on in KT. I feel like the KT design team could take some ideas from Warcry and simplify their rules and speed up game play considerably.
I'm a huge KT fan and the plethora of unique actions, special abilities, and just excessively wordy rules is my biggest complaint. I'm really glad to see more teams slogging up with a good number of basic warrior operatives. A good number of teams in the last season did the same: yaegers, scouts, blades of khaine to name a few. The comment about space marines being natural specialists made me chuckle. Whenever I run Phobos i'm usually taking 3 Reivers, which are basic warriors. :)
@@OffMetaMusings What I'd really love is if they simply gave existing teams a good reason to choose basic warrior operatives -- make it an interesting decision to take a specialist with a goofy ability versus a basic mook with slightly better shooting/melee or more wounds, for example. This would make the roster more relevant for all teams, reduce cognitive load, and probably even speed up games.
I am trying to get into the game, and it does feel like the simplicity of the core rules are undercut by the expressive complexity of every model being a different special operative, with its own unique skill, and are all fielded every game. It also makes arguments for curating highly restrictive TK builds (and non existent in some cases) as a streamline approach to play feel hollow. Cool I save time not having to think about building a pesky army list, I just put the whole KT box on the table and go. But fielding all special operatives ends up bogging down the game itself, especially for new players (and this will get worse with the compendium gone). I would much rather limit a selection of 5-7 unique operatives from 10 or so choices, then round the force out with basic troops. For more customization offer more equipment directed at these basic troops to buy al la carte, so you can lean them in a way that best supports your chosen special operatives. Players can try their first games with no equipment, then add it back in as their comfort with the team grows. EDIT: a rule I was thinking abut setting for our new group just starting the game is that only 1/2 (rounding down) of your force can be unique operators with a single selection limit (unless this is impossible to make a list with). HOWEVER, you may spend equipment points to purchase "core rulebook rare equipment" for non-unique operatives.
@@Keithslawinski Yeah I think that would be great. Personally I'd prefer even fewer specialists than that! And I really hope this trend continues with new teams. Meanwhile, as much as I'd love to see it happen retroactively, I feel like the current player base wouldn't tolerate adding a limitation that invalidates the teams they purchased, built, and painted from one box during the past three seasons. But I would love those teams to get a buff to basic, non-specialist warriors (which I suspect would encourage those players to go out and buy another box, and just field fewer specialists in general).
I like Kill Team very much but I like orks more. The nice thing about AoS/Warcry/Underworlds is that there is a huge diversity of greenskins to play with: grots are their own thing (and actually competent); orruks come in three flavors and within those subfactions are loads of cool models. In Kill Team, there are my beloved Kommandos and then the generic greenskin teams from the compendium, but that's about. This is because space orks have more variety with vehicles than infantry while AoS is very much an infantry-forward game (that and you can use light cavalry in Warcry; you can't use vehicles or walkers in KT). So anyways, I will make an effort to play more Kill Team if we get some new green teams or if they revamp da Kommandos. Even if that doesn't happen, the simplified rules (fuck do I hate obscuring) and the addition of solo / co-op options are very intriguing.
If there is an emphasis on flying teams this time around, I could totally see a KT of Stormboyz (or better yet, get Boss Zagstruk back in on the action).
I used to play a lot of KT18 (as well as previous release that was essentially a mod for 7th Ed. 40k). I played regular KT, played Arena, made some small thematic events for my gaming group. After the release of KT21 I fully dropped the game, I did not like the new approach to the game at all. Symbols were just an awful decision, rules were written so poor they did not function as intended in some aspects. I still don't like the roster of bespoke teams, since unlike in 2nd Ed. Warcry, where GW decided to make a warband for each of AoS factions, in KT they've decided to spam Imperium (and especially Imperial Guard-esque teams), double or triple on the team number for some factions (or even more in case of Space Marines) while other factions were left with Compendium or WD teams. They seemingly tried to compete with the Infinity, but in the end they did not manage to be as in-depth while being too complex and clunky compared to Warcry for me. As I started playing Warcry here and there since it's launch and really enjoyed it, I expected KT21 to go roughly the same route. It did not. Seeing the new edition changes, I'm not as excited as I could've been, to be honest. One more team for the Imperium that already has Kasrkin as a stormtrooper-like team. Rules are yet to be seen in full, so I'll hold my judgement on that part, though I already see some positive changes (like streamlining of the unit profiles). I'll look into the new rules, maybe the game will hook me again, though I'm not very confident in the current team. And as I already have Warcry, Spearhead and big AoS to play, there isn't as much room for KT in my hobby time. So yeah, unless new rules are really solid and fun for me, I'll remain sceptical. I'll note that it's my personal opinion and feeling, so if people reading this enjoy current KT -- I'm really glad for you and kinda wish I enjoyed it too. But yeah, as a potential returning player, the new edition doesn't spark that flame in me, unfortunately
Good talk. i was interested in kill team, and i still have an open invitation from one of my group for a game, but after i watched some battle reports, i think it is not for me. The symbols drive me crazy, why is the symbol with 4 corners for 3 inches and the symbol with 5 corners for 6 inches and the symbol with 3 corners for 1 inch? why not amount of corners equals inches? this and stuff like the Group Activation makes me feel like its Warcry with extra steps. For some rules, i can see what they wanted to archiev with it and it feels like a shot in the right direction, but still somehow miss in the end.
Since I recorded this more information has come out ofc and for me it will really come down to if there are actually less specialists per team then at the moment
CHARLES WHERE DID YOU GO
HE IS MINE NOW!
After getting into Warcry, I also looked into Kill Team. As soon as they came to measuring distances in symbols, I had lost all interest. I still watched a few Kill Team Battle Reports by channels whose Warcry content I enjoy and ... I can not pinpoint why, but the pacing of the game just doesn't look fun to me.
I also miss the list building, but the more restrictive way Kill Team handles lists may be the reason the balancing is better than in Warcry (and luckily it has no allies to create a boring meta).
I will definitely check it out again with the new edition. Maybe the changes are enough for me to get into it now. At least the dumb symbols are gone =D
yea the lack of list building is my biggest frustration with the game.
I'm ok with tighter lists, were you might get say 6 picks from 9 operatives, but some forces you litterally just put the whole KT box on the field, no substitutions, no weapon swaps.
just feels bad in those instances.
@@Keithslawinski Yeah, pretty much that. I heard in a podcast that (judging by the new upcoming teams) they might go back a bit to having teams of 5 normal soldiers and 5-6 specialists over an entire team of just specialists. But it might as well be a coincidence and would also not affect already existing teams. We gotta wait and see, i guess.
@@ayonmetar2301 That would be a welcome adjustment. In my ideal world, you would cut down on specialist by 2-3 across the board (averaging of 5-8), then encourage customizing basic troops more via equipment, and possibly core rules rare-equipment only available to basic troops in match play (if GW doesn't want to make more KT specific equipment).
Further balance this by either making certain equipment restricted to basic troops, or the weapons they tend to hold, or give basic troops a discount when taking tare equipment (Kasrkin has a good example where their foregrip is 1ep to put on a basic trooper, but 2ep if you want to give it to the sharpshooter or gunner).
Finally rebalance grenades a bit so they aren't so OP you can only field 1 per team, then limit their selection to the basic troopers.
TLDR Storytime;
I remember learning about Elucidian Starstriders, and was like "OMG an elite team of rogue traders I get to build who have a space ship as a support WEAPON?! My mind started racing at making my own unique rogue trader cadre. THEN I saw the list was "put this exact box of guys on the table, no substitutions, no additions, no weapon selections". It felt like such wasted potential I immediately walked away from them totally deflated.
I started with Kill Team, and really liked having a team Full of specialists, but I hated how finicky the abilities were. The fact that i could completely skrew myself for a round if I activated my guys in a the wrong order, or lost a key piece to a combo was frustrating & counterintuitive. It also made it very hard to learn.
In warcry i still make teams with lots of specialists, i love havjng fighters with multiple abilities & having lots of different abilities in my team. The big difference is how direct the abilities are, & how i can be adaptable with activating any fighter in any order.
agree, for me one of the most fun parts about warcry is the list building, trying new things or ally stuff, also kitbashing to get the miniature that ends giving to the whole pack a lot of personality
I would love Kill Team with Warcry rules. I looked into KT as a way to play "smaller scale quicker games" but unfortunately KT seemed overly complicated and takes too long to play a game.
Same for me. Almost every aspect of Kill Team seems bothersome to me. The cover mechanics, the rerolling, the way ploys and abilites work, the repetitive mission objectives...
It is just a matter of personal taste, I guess, but after playing the fast-paced, fluent and fun-centered Warcry rule set, I find it difficult to enjoy anything else in the GW-catalogue =/
Unfortunately, Warcry has a comperatively small player base, so it is either playing a fun game against the same few opponents, or playing "mediocre" games against new people.
@@ayonmetar2301 I agree and KT unfortunately is not fast paced even for experienced players. There is too much going on in KT. I feel like the KT design team could take some ideas from Warcry and simplify their rules and speed up game play considerably.
You should never have left in the first place .
Hah, maybe
I'm a huge KT fan and the plethora of unique actions, special abilities, and just excessively wordy rules is my biggest complaint. I'm really glad to see more teams slogging up with a good number of basic warrior operatives. A good number of teams in the last season did the same: yaegers, scouts, blades of khaine to name a few.
The comment about space marines being natural specialists made me chuckle. Whenever I run Phobos i'm usually taking 3 Reivers, which are basic warriors. :)
Yeah, that's really what will sell it to me or not; I can take 3-4 specialists but entire 10-man teams of individual guys...
@@OffMetaMusings What I'd really love is if they simply gave existing teams a good reason to choose basic warrior operatives -- make it an interesting decision to take a specialist with a goofy ability versus a basic mook with slightly better shooting/melee or more wounds, for example. This would make the roster more relevant for all teams, reduce cognitive load, and probably even speed up games.
I am trying to get into the game, and it does feel like the simplicity of the core rules are undercut by the expressive complexity of every model being a different special operative, with its own unique skill, and are all fielded every game.
It also makes arguments for curating highly restrictive TK builds (and non existent in some cases) as a streamline approach to play feel hollow. Cool I save time not having to think about building a pesky army list, I just put the whole KT box on the table and go. But fielding all special operatives ends up bogging down the game itself, especially for new players (and this will get worse with the compendium gone).
I would much rather limit a selection of 5-7 unique operatives from 10 or so choices, then round the force out with basic troops.
For more customization offer more equipment directed at these basic troops to buy al la carte, so you can lean them in a way that best supports your chosen special operatives. Players can try their first games with no equipment, then add it back in as their comfort with the team grows.
EDIT: a rule I was thinking abut setting for our new group just starting the game is that only 1/2 (rounding down) of your force can be unique operators with a single selection limit (unless this is impossible to make a list with). HOWEVER, you may spend equipment points to purchase "core rulebook rare equipment" for non-unique operatives.
@@Keithslawinski Yeah I think that would be great. Personally I'd prefer even fewer specialists than that! And I really hope this trend continues with new teams.
Meanwhile, as much as I'd love to see it happen retroactively, I feel like the current player base wouldn't tolerate adding a limitation that invalidates the teams they purchased, built, and painted from one box during the past three seasons. But I would love those teams to get a buff to basic, non-specialist warriors (which I suspect would encourage those players to go out and buy another box, and just field fewer specialists in general).
No problem.
No, you shouldn't! I just got into Warcry and enjoy the content of the channel :)
Hah don't worry, I'm not pivoting to Killteam content just yet :)
I like Kill Team very much but I like orks more. The nice thing about AoS/Warcry/Underworlds is that there is a huge diversity of greenskins to play with: grots are their own thing (and actually competent); orruks come in three flavors and within those subfactions are loads of cool models. In Kill Team, there are my beloved Kommandos and then the generic greenskin teams from the compendium, but that's about. This is because space orks have more variety with vehicles than infantry while AoS is very much an infantry-forward game (that and you can use light cavalry in Warcry; you can't use vehicles or walkers in KT).
So anyways, I will make an effort to play more Kill Team if we get some new green teams or if they revamp da Kommandos. Even if that doesn't happen, the simplified rules (fuck do I hate obscuring) and the addition of solo / co-op options are very intriguing.
If there is an emphasis on flying teams this time around, I could totally see a KT of Stormboyz (or better yet, get Boss Zagstruk back in on the action).
I used to play a lot of KT18 (as well as previous release that was essentially a mod for 7th Ed. 40k). I played regular KT, played Arena, made some small thematic events for my gaming group. After the release of KT21 I fully dropped the game, I did not like the new approach to the game at all. Symbols were just an awful decision, rules were written so poor they did not function as intended in some aspects. I still don't like the roster of bespoke teams, since unlike in 2nd Ed. Warcry, where GW decided to make a warband for each of AoS factions, in KT they've decided to spam Imperium (and especially Imperial Guard-esque teams), double or triple on the team number for some factions (or even more in case of Space Marines) while other factions were left with Compendium or WD teams.
They seemingly tried to compete with the Infinity, but in the end they did not manage to be as in-depth while being too complex and clunky compared to Warcry for me. As I started playing Warcry here and there since it's launch and really enjoyed it, I expected KT21 to go roughly the same route. It did not.
Seeing the new edition changes, I'm not as excited as I could've been, to be honest. One more team for the Imperium that already has Kasrkin as a stormtrooper-like team. Rules are yet to be seen in full, so I'll hold my judgement on that part, though I already see some positive changes (like streamlining of the unit profiles). I'll look into the new rules, maybe the game will hook me again, though I'm not very confident in the current team. And as I already have Warcry, Spearhead and big AoS to play, there isn't as much room for KT in my hobby time.
So yeah, unless new rules are really solid and fun for me, I'll remain sceptical. I'll note that it's my personal opinion and feeling, so if people reading this enjoy current KT -- I'm really glad for you and kinda wish I enjoyed it too.
But yeah, as a potential returning player, the new edition doesn't spark that flame in me, unfortunately
Will see on my side; though I love Warcry so not about to drop it just yet :)
Good talk. i was interested in kill team, and i still have an open invitation from one of my group for a game, but after i watched some battle reports, i think it is not for me.
The symbols drive me crazy, why is the symbol with 4 corners for 3 inches and the symbol with 5 corners for 6 inches and the symbol with 3 corners for 1 inch? why not amount of corners equals inches? this and stuff like the Group Activation makes me feel like its Warcry with extra steps.
For some rules, i can see what they wanted to archiev with it and it feels like a shot in the right direction, but still somehow miss in the end.
Since I recorded this more information has come out ofc and for me it will really come down to if there are actually less specialists per team then at the moment
Been a better edition then lat, only thing I'm still missing is list building and a Deathwatch Team, they were the first KT c'mon 😭
It's definitely a better game then 1st Ed, that's for sure :)