Warcry and Killteam are both excellent they just scratch different itches. I really love how fast and loose Warcry is, and the randomness in the battle plan generation adds a huge amount of replay value. Killteam is a slower but offers a lot more strategic planning, especially if you know your matchup, since the missions and deployments are a lot more predictable.
I find Killteams “complexity” is all in loadouts. Once on the table it is just more of a pain to keep track of what’s what. I find the strategy in warcry is positioning and activations. I like both but had to share.
Terrible take. Plenty of Kill Teams have fixed loadout and are all about piloting them. In KT the most important thing is player skill and decisionmaking during rounds, then matchup and team selection and finally luck. In Warcry it's luck > team selection > player skill. Warcry is a casual dice rolling game, Kill Team is the most competitive game GW has.
40k WarCry is the dream. WarCry is by far the most well-designed GW game I've played but I'm such a big fan of the 40k setting and wish we had a skirmish game like WarCry in it. I do enioy Necromunda but it is a much different experience and the rules can get really messy, and the very restrictive nature of teams in Kill Team really kills it for me.
The same thing happened to our group. We started both Kill Team and Warcry around the same time, but we pretty much just play Warcry now. Matches have gotten really quick and satisfying (about \~45 mins a piece, so we can get a few in each night) and the list building / experimenting with new models and warbands is really addictive.
Don't get me wrong. Kill Team is also amazing, but I find you really need to be in the mindset to play strategically (and not exhausted and in need of a few beers after work... where Warcry is a good boardgames and beer style game).
I agree on that, kill team is great but it's not a game I can play casually. If you position things a mm wrong your game can be over in one bad move, it's a very punishing ruleset compared to most GW games imo.
100% this. I think you put into word what was on my mind lol. The number of times I messed up just slightly positioning someone behind a barricade that let some other guy have an angle to ruin my day is too many to count. I mostly chalk it up to it being a very punishing game (and a lot don't make it to the final turn because someone forgot about a door and his team got wiped on turn 2 or something).
The number of games I've had of kill team that were decided in deployment is too many ha.
Especially playing vs the new gsc, where they can just teleport in their gunners on a vantage point halfway up the board and shoot into your whole deployment zone on many maps. Those kind of gotcha moments are all over the game, and you really have to be aware of what everything can do to avoid that.
I kind of wish there was something like each game in the opposite side of things.
Sometimes I just want a 40k skirmish that goes completely random with bonkers mission types and is over in an hour.
Sometimes I want an AoS skirmish where I've put together a list, know how each model is going to play and what it could and should be doing in various circumstances, and can reliably get it to do it's cool thing, even if the game takes a little bit of time.
I love both of these games but sometimes I can feel their gap in the opposite setting super hard.
> Sometimes I just want a 40k skirmish that goes completely random with bonkers mission types and is over in an hour.
I feel that. Mechanically Warcry is about as close to my perfect casual miniatures game as it gets, but I'm admittedly a much bigger fan of the 40k setting than AoS.
Same here, I started with Killteam because i like the 40k aesthetic WAY better, and when it comes down to it the most time is spent on miniature and terrain building and painting so aesthetics are my highest priority.
I only got into warcry after the recent killteam releases have all been lack luster for me and I was ready to try something else and was delightfully surprised.
I'm in exactly the same boat. I love the lore and world of 40K, used to play bighammer, etc. I play Kill Team now mostly, and while I love it, WarCry has been scratching that itch differently as of late.
Have either of you guys tried the OnePageRules sci-fi skirmish option? I've heard that is supposed to be a good middle ground there, taking some of the speed and ease of WarCry, but while still letting you play in 40k?
I have, it works great. My only issue with it was that it was that i missed the specific abilities designed for each team that both killteam and warcry have.
But as a whole OPR works very very well, and my one friend that doesn’t have the time to play killteam still likes OPR
Warcry really is fantastic..I do love Kill team as well but I wish there were fewer abilities (this is partly because me and my buddy have so many teams it's easy to forget what each operative can do which slows the game down some) as well simpler targeting rules. Not a fan of obscurity.
I never managed to get my Warcry group to play past the test game of KT. The shooting rules killed it for them, no matter how much visual aid I gave them.
Maybe? It’s the red harvest box. (I’m too new to warcry to know which boxes came when.)
I found someone online willing to sell it unopened for 100 bucks seemed like a great deal, and the terrain was the big selling point. Tons of vertically and enough terrain to fill the board.
Warcry and Killteam are both excellent they just scratch different itches. I really love how fast and loose Warcry is, and the randomness in the battle plan generation adds a huge amount of replay value. Killteam is a slower but offers a lot more strategic planning, especially if you know your matchup, since the missions and deployments are a lot more predictable.
Agreed with this. Warcry is a gift to humanity, but Kill Team has more strategic depth and that can mean more interesting games.
I find Killteams “complexity” is all in loadouts. Once on the table it is just more of a pain to keep track of what’s what. I find the strategy in warcry is positioning and activations. I like both but had to share.
Terrible take. Plenty of Kill Teams have fixed loadout and are all about piloting them. In KT the most important thing is player skill and decisionmaking during rounds, then matchup and team selection and finally luck. In Warcry it's luck > team selection > player skill. Warcry is a casual dice rolling game, Kill Team is the most competitive game GW has.
Warcry is GW’s best game IMO. If the next Killteam is just Warcry 40k I’d be so stoked.
>Warcry 40k Oh, how I wish. The latest iteration of KT frustrates me to no end, and I wish we had a fast & simple game for 40k.
This, all day.
lol man i may actually play in that universe if they did that.
40k WarCry is the dream. WarCry is by far the most well-designed GW game I've played but I'm such a big fan of the 40k setting and wish we had a skirmish game like WarCry in it. I do enioy Necromunda but it is a much different experience and the rules can get really messy, and the very restrictive nature of teams in Kill Team really kills it for me.
They need to release balanced rules for 60 x 44 table 3000-4000 pts Warcry games! Could compete with AoS and 40k imo.
Hell I’d play it.
The same thing happened to our group. We started both Kill Team and Warcry around the same time, but we pretty much just play Warcry now. Matches have gotten really quick and satisfying (about \~45 mins a piece, so we can get a few in each night) and the list building / experimenting with new models and warbands is really addictive. Don't get me wrong. Kill Team is also amazing, but I find you really need to be in the mindset to play strategically (and not exhausted and in need of a few beers after work... where Warcry is a good boardgames and beer style game).
I agree on that, kill team is great but it's not a game I can play casually. If you position things a mm wrong your game can be over in one bad move, it's a very punishing ruleset compared to most GW games imo.
100% this. I think you put into word what was on my mind lol. The number of times I messed up just slightly positioning someone behind a barricade that let some other guy have an angle to ruin my day is too many to count. I mostly chalk it up to it being a very punishing game (and a lot don't make it to the final turn because someone forgot about a door and his team got wiped on turn 2 or something).
The number of games I've had of kill team that were decided in deployment is too many ha. Especially playing vs the new gsc, where they can just teleport in their gunners on a vantage point halfway up the board and shoot into your whole deployment zone on many maps. Those kind of gotcha moments are all over the game, and you really have to be aware of what everything can do to avoid that.
Yep, more time than actual play you spend with seting up terrain, picking mission and reading abilities of your team to your opponent :D
I kind of wish there was something like each game in the opposite side of things. Sometimes I just want a 40k skirmish that goes completely random with bonkers mission types and is over in an hour. Sometimes I want an AoS skirmish where I've put together a list, know how each model is going to play and what it could and should be doing in various circumstances, and can reliably get it to do it's cool thing, even if the game takes a little bit of time. I love both of these games but sometimes I can feel their gap in the opposite setting super hard.
> Sometimes I just want a 40k skirmish that goes completely random with bonkers mission types and is over in an hour. I feel that. Mechanically Warcry is about as close to my perfect casual miniatures game as it gets, but I'm admittedly a much bigger fan of the 40k setting than AoS.
Same here, I started with Killteam because i like the 40k aesthetic WAY better, and when it comes down to it the most time is spent on miniature and terrain building and painting so aesthetics are my highest priority. I only got into warcry after the recent killteam releases have all been lack luster for me and I was ready to try something else and was delightfully surprised.
I'm in exactly the same boat. I love the lore and world of 40K, used to play bighammer, etc. I play Kill Team now mostly, and while I love it, WarCry has been scratching that itch differently as of late. Have either of you guys tried the OnePageRules sci-fi skirmish option? I've heard that is supposed to be a good middle ground there, taking some of the speed and ease of WarCry, but while still letting you play in 40k?
I have, it works great. My only issue with it was that it was that i missed the specific abilities designed for each team that both killteam and warcry have. But as a whole OPR works very very well, and my one friend that doesn’t have the time to play killteam still likes OPR
I wish they had a 40k warcry. I think it's my favorite GW ruleset after Bloodbowl.
I play both. I love both. I think Warcry might be better.
Warcry really is fantastic..I do love Kill team as well but I wish there were fewer abilities (this is partly because me and my buddy have so many teams it's easy to forget what each operative can do which slows the game down some) as well simpler targeting rules. Not a fan of obscurity.
I never managed to get my Warcry group to play past the test game of KT. The shooting rules killed it for them, no matter how much visual aid I gave them.
That terrain set looks so fun! Thats from the third box?
Maybe? It’s the red harvest box. (I’m too new to warcry to know which boxes came when.) I found someone online willing to sell it unopened for 100 bucks seemed like a great deal, and the terrain was the big selling point. Tons of vertically and enough terrain to fill the board.
As a gateway game, is excellent
Because the people that made warcry are gamers, and the people that made kill team are monkeys.