(Image used without permission from www.games-workshop.com, please see disclaimer below.)
As the title asks, why would anybody play 40k using Spearhead rules? From what I read in my white-dwarf (specially purchased just for the rules... GW con men....) it seems horribly broken. Basically it does away with force-org as long as you have enough to create the spearheads. Does this seem like "Apoc Lite" to you?
Since I cannot wrap my head around this mystery by myself, I wanted to get your opinions on the matter.
So, what say you?
--FP135
I really enjoy the end to end board setup. The missions are interesting too. My last game was played without any spearheads and it was a lot of fun.
ReplyDeleteAs far as being "Apocalypse Lite". I dunno, there is still the Force Org as far as HQ, Elites, etc is concerned. I like the fact that it gives me an opportunity to put my 3 falcons on the board without being a HUGE Apoc game.
We haven't played spearhead locally, but it struck us all as both Apoc lite & a thinly veiled attempt to sell more tanks with minimal effort on GW's part.
ReplyDeleteHard to get excited when it feels like their marketing department is writing the rules...
OK. Accepting Masta Cheefses point about it being a thinly vieled attempt to sell more tanks (which it undoubtably is), what you get is:
ReplyDeleteThe ability to field actual formations. Ones that real armies might have. Taking Hurricane Girl's falcon's as our example, we know from the (admittedly Apoc) fluff that falcons fly around in threes. So with SH we get away to have three on the board rather than pretending that one is in the service bay or something.
Where this idea might be thought to fall down would be that foot formations (eg the Emperor's meat shield) should, by applying the same logic, be allowed.
What might re-balance SH might be to not allow anything that wasn't part of a SH formation. No optional FoC refugees hanging about.
There is enough variety there, IMHO. And Armoured Battle Group lists are nice to collect and field.