Reply To: Lore vs. Game

[limburger 21709xp 1]

I don’t want ‘super’ Orks in order to ‘explain’ why 1 ork can fight 1 elf when the lore says they should be mowing them down.

I want horde armies to feel like an actual potentially unstoppable horde if the bloody elves don’t use their brains.

Just because there are “thousands of ’em” that doesn’t mean that a player has to literally have thousands orks on the table.
A recycling mechanism (like the one that Gerry used for the zulu’s in his version of the battle for Rorke’s Drift) would solve that issue while keeping the game balanced.

Assymetric gameplay should be a feature, not something to be ignored in the name of  ‘balance’
Players need to learn that if they’re going to play faction X then they are not going to kill the opposing army (or even make a dent in them).

Things that happen in the lore should happen (or at least have a decent chance of occurring) in the average game.

A certain robotic enemy calmly re-assembling itself after it is ‘destroyed’ shouldn’t be a 1 in 6 chance. It should be the very essence of the danger that faction has, which means that the controlling player should be able to invoke it on his own without relying on pure luck. The opposing player should be shitting his pants and focus on objectives other than elimination in order to defeat such an opponent.

If a squad of spacemarines hasn’t wiped out at least twice their number in ‘lesser’ creatures they should be considered traitors.

A faction that isn’t allowed to be as in the lore should either be removed from the game (and the lore)  or rewritten from scratch.

Balance isn’t “faction A can win against faction B on average 50% of the time exactly (and vice versa)”
Balance is achieved when playing against the doctrine of your faction is guaranteed to make you lose the game … while playing according to the doctrine will still make you lose if you are fighting a faction that has developed the perfect counter doctrine”.