Just move on man. It’s just toys, grow up. Stop chasing your false dream.

>>97866150
Ignore this guy.
Cannibalize, refit, play, test, and eventually, rewrite and rebrand.

>>97866150
>STOP PLAYING GAMES
Weird take to bring to /tg/.

>>97866133
Has the 3.5 battle bible project died?

These are the ones i know of
Pepsi hammer
>3-6th best of with custom tailored codecies
Pro hammer
>3-6 best of (rulebook only), play with your favorite codecies.
AA Hammer
>Go to alternating activation. Has codecies.
Custom 40k
>a different alternating activation with a touch of the 'tism.
40k reforged
>tourney trash
Long war project
huge unit conversion from modern into HH2.0?

>>97866419
It did, I was the only one posting and when I stopped the threads died. It was a sad case of "who will help me bake this pie".

>>97866419
It finish transcribing the codex of third into an easy to read and print pdf.
The issue is the guys working on it have .txt levels of knowledge regarding editors so it got stuck

>makes a thread about alternative 40k rulesets
>does not include THE alternative 40k ruleset
Bait thread, you should have stayed in /awg/

>>97866610
I know you're playin me, but I still want to know.

>>97866572
It was also just an attitude of complete unwillingness to learn anything new. The amount of posters who would poke in and say "I love what you doing Id love to help oh but I can barely use a keyboard lmao I could never possibly contribute" was disheartening to say the least.

>>97866631
I did some spell checking and try to help, but god damn a bunch of faggots just went there to be assholes.
Like some how if that project actually worked 10th would die or something. It was insane to watch the amount of schizo posting in favor of modern 40k. I do not recall seeing it in grog or anywhere else.

>>97866631
>>97866651
I assume the 4ed core rules were never fully transcribed?

>>97866682
The BRB was finished (as far as I know) but not a single codex got finished. The project stopped with all the codecies transcribed into super barebones word documents that looked like butt. It never crossed the point where someone would choose to use them over just a pdf scan of the original book.
>>97866651
Yeh a few grifters were very negative, but the passivity and apathy was worse imo.

>>97866150
You realize what board you are on, correct?

>>97866709
Do you happen to have the BRB file?

>>97866749
Best I can offer, looks like the mega is still up.
https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/97278656/#97278656

>>97866419
the idiots didn't know about battlescribe or battlescribe files and were weirdly locked in on transcribing codeces when a majority of that work was already done. so much time, energy, and momentum wasted.

>>97867039
We knew about faggotscribe and faggotscribe files, we just aren't faggots who like peen in the bum. Actual wargamers reference documents and construct their lists on A4 paper with pencils.

And eh >>97866419 yes and no. It's not been updated in a while but the work that was done is still done and the discord occasionally shows signs of life.

File: iu[1].jpg (152.8 KB)

152.8 KB JPG

>>97868074
then youd know that all the rules are already transcribed. you couldve vibecoded an xml2pdf formatter with it if that's your goal.

your obsession with homosexuals and genitalia has been noted

>>97868391
>an xml2pdf formatter
so you know nothing about battlescribe format AND pdf authoring? shamefur display. and i'm not even a grog, came here to laugh at grogs who are so out of touch they don't even know what rulesets people actually play.

>>97868391
>>97868737
Alright lets cool the shit flinging, I only get to enjoy one of these 40k homebrew threads like once a quarter.

>xml to pdf
In theory that could have been done, sure, but the barrier to entry was already really high. Peoples ability was limited to what they could do with notepad. I also think we looked and there wasnt a battlescribe 4th ed (only 3rd ed). We had an anon in the thread who was working on a 4th ed one, but somehow it got corrupted and I dont know where he went from there.

>>97866728
board of no games?

>>97868748
The xml to pdf is not complicated but very tedious and may not work very well. I’ve been looking into the battlescribe internals since the developer came back from the dead (only to disappear again) and they are quite complicated and the data is usually encoded in a way that is not very conducive to creating a human readable pdf. So nothing too complicated about the tech itself (xml and pdf) but the data itself may be. Definitely something I don’t expect the average anon to be able to handle.

> t. professional software engineer

>>97869091
Ive thought about what it would take to do something similar. Essentially what we are talking about is parameterizing everything, then using a template to format it. I havn't done it myself (for my own homebrew) because honestly I spend to much hobby time on it and not building minis as it is. I know latex, so the way I think of the problem is "how do I get from a database to latex?" The way I would go about it is write a python layer to generate latex code to typeset. But there are so many exceptions, even down to simple shit like list formatting for available upgrade options.

>>97866133
Which alt ruleset gives marines 2 wounds?

I don't like a lot of modern 40k, but one thing I do like is marines feeling actually durable, and for marine armies to be smaller and elite.

>>97869949
You’re the reason 40k went to shit

>>97869954
Taking bait when it's obvious is a form of kindness I suppose. You should be less kind.

File: 1770020867380781.jpg (288.6 KB)

288.6 KB JPG

>>97866133
10/10 thread

>>97869962
It's not bait. I stand by it.

>>97869954
Tell me how cunt.

>>97869949
"custom 40k" and "alternate 40k Rules" do

>>97866133
Jesus christ just play a different fucking game at this point.

File: 1754985053660431.jpg (3.8 MB)

3.8 MB JPG

>>97870100
>just go play some random literally who garbage instead of the best setting ever created with dozens of cool and distinct factions
No

>>97869949
Marines never needed 2 wounds.

https://github.com/Kothra/Warhammer-40-000-4th-Edition-for-NewRecruit

>>97869949
They don't need 2 wounds when damage isn't bloated to fuck.

>>97869091
>>97869303
Not that i'm too invested in the subject, was just lurking, but an XML parser can't be that hard to do surely?
It's not like it has to be a generic one-size-fits-all, just do all the hacks necessary to deal with the battlescribe format.

That said I would never use Latex, it's horrendous for large formatting imo. I've used it for uni work and wanted to shoot myself once it started going past 15 pages and had to do special formatting and wait for it to render. Typst is a fairly nice alternative.
Though I suspect if it's going to mainly be used by non-techie users then you might want to stick to something like Affinity Publisher or Indesign.

Haha oh boy here we go again, tire fire that the fourk was didn't teach you anything huh

>>97869949
Space marines didnt need 2 wounds because 2 wounds only makes them move durrable to small arms fire, which they didnt need. A unit of guardsman kills like 1 space marine in a round of shooting, that is a fair amount of points. Space marines were too vulnerable to anti tank weapons because 40k has no meaningful way of distinguishing a las cannon from a sniper rifle. AP2 pie plate that ID wouldnt care about an extra wound.

why are none of these based on second edition? I want something that leans into unique mechanics either like second edition cards or like command points ( but better )

>>97870563
I think when it came down to it, making a formatted unit entry requires you to type out exactly how you want the thing to look. So whether or not you are specifying where a bunch of data pulls get placed, or just typing out the words, its kinda a wash in the amount of effort. The one thing I wish I had a data structure for is pretty much just the summary table at the back because I have to type all the weapons again manually. Its a cool idea I just never got around to it. For a homebrew project I also would need a better way of interacting with the database, I was playing around with that too. The real trick would be working out a good way to making lists, like, does the option replace one of your exiting items, can you take only one from the list, are things mutually exclusive. That would be the first step to working it out I think.

>typst vs latex
I have heard of typst but its still in infancy, you just cant do what latex can do. Latex has decades of libraries and problem solving for it for weird niche things. But also I just dont know it, so I use latex. I was well into my now decade long homebrew project by the time typst came out, I have custom classes and templates for latex.
>afpub
I think they had a means of using a json to feed templates, but the anon who was in charge of the BRB wasnt interested in it.

>>97866150
0/10.

>>97870655
2nd edition has a battle bible already, google it you will find it.

>>97870571
You can't kill the idea when it's what the people want. Just because execution on it failed previously means nothing. Everything great went through many failures before the successful breakout.

>>97870571
To be fair the time to present the idea was pretty good as people wanted to move away from GW as much as possible while still enjoying 40k due to the femstodes drama.
The time to advertise the idea was good and it was a reasonable gamble to take.
Obviously the gamble failed.

>>97871024
And it didn't even fail as badly as people claim it did. Most of the "oh my god looool fourk was such a dumpster fire!" posts are revisionist trolling from the same guys who were trying to sabotage it and make it fail from the beginning. All that happened was the main contributors slowly lost steam and stopped showing up and it died from lack of momentum.

>>97866447
Where can I find Pepsihammer?

>>97870601
Plasma cannons would care.

>>97866133
Looked at "The Long War Project" because of you OP, you have my heartfelt thanks.

>>97871252
Here anon
https://mega.nz/folder/2YdghLzL#w0KOILlS1lrM1AeE4jcG-Q

>>97872081
Sure, but I also think a plasma cannon should 1 shot a space marine. Its a plasma cannon. Im sure there are exceptions and quirks, but le'ts not forget it took GW literally 3 finish bandaid patching making space marines 2 wounds. They chased their own tail for like 8 years over that one.

>>97869303
I was going to answer you and then got distracted with something else. The key problem in my opinion with battlescribe is that the format allows for some funky stuff. You can do real time modifications of unit entries as the user edits their roster (hiding or showing options, changing selection limits, etc) which means that in some cases what you see in the data files is too abstract. A good example I’m familiar with are the 30k files. For instance, the entry for a plain old Tactical Squad has all the options available to all the legions in one shared entry. Then the legion specific options are enabled on the fly based on what legion you created your roster with.
Long story short, a bsdata2pdf pipeline could be feasible if the source files do not abuse those shenanigans. The file format itself is not that hard and is somewhat documented thanks to some people in the community (i.e. https://github.com/BSData/schemas but is not up to date with New Recruit’s specific features). The difficulty lays on making sense of that data to fill out the LaTeX (or whatever) template for generating the human readable pdf.

cc
>>97870563
>>97870658

>>97866150
But those false dreams were fun! I want to recapture those fun times, just a few times more before I die.

>>97866447
>40k reforged
No fucking way I'm joining D*scord to have access to rules.

>>97872159
NTA but my God does it look nice and comfy for the eyes. Most of the fanmade rulebooks are such a sore to read.

>TG has a hombrew 40K rules thread again
Neat! Hope this lasts, here is a link to AA 40k https://mega.nz/folder/EqRzATpY#veXSXgaGG23c462K4ppDJg which was mentioned earlier, I really like playing it with my friend, the games are reasonably fast (Even if he spams orbital strikes in all of his lists) and the Tyranid codex has rules for the Malefactor that I just printed so it gets extra points

File: Dark Eldar Cover.png (1.9 MB)

1.9 MB PNG

Hey, convenient. This is the anon behind AA40K, I just finished and uploaded the release version of the Dark Eldar codex. You can find the link in the post directly above this one.
I burnt myself out for a bit hyperlinking the main rulebook. That will probably be what I finish next. I had to step away for a while, but getting this codex done was a nice palette cleanser after jumping back in. After that I'll be working on Grey Knights/Deathwatch and Necrons.

>>97874169
Glad to hear you're having fun with it! Any preferences on what I can work on next that would be helpful for your group? Also, if you have any commentary or issues with the system I'd be interested in hearing about it.

>>97874787
>Any preferences on what I can work on next that would be helpful for your group
A points cost calculator would be nice (If it's not too great of a task). We homebrew units quite often because my friend is a marine piggy who refuses to even consider a normal dreadnought so I had to whip up rules for the fuck huge nu dreads and gravis armor and I got him into the hobby by splitting the leviathan box with him so I had to figure out how to run a unit of 10 flamers without using the flame template 10 times. And I also have an admech army I'm trying to write a codex for so some reference on points costs would be nice

>>97874787
Anon I beg you, edit the art by adding blurred edges or any kind of simple frames. You did such a great job but the visual aspect is a bit lacking and even such a small change would make those books look so much better.
Btw is GW not targeting you for use of their art?

>>97874787
sweet!

I guess AA stands for alternating activations?
Except for that, could you tell me some key differences of your ruleset in comparison to the official rules?

And since we are at it: can someone give a little bit of insight on what Pepsihammer does different?

File: sample.jpg (685.5 KB)

685.5 KB JPG

>>97874843
I'll be completely honest. I'm very much a vibes based points-coster. I'm sure whatever you come up with will be fine, just play games with it and adjust as needed. I tried coming up with one when I was writing the first couple of books, but there are so many weird rules/weapons and factions with varying playstyles that I couldn't come up with anything I was satisfied with.
What I do is use certain units as baseline reference points and then adjust based on the faction. The 18 pt tactical marine and the 6 pt guardsman are two, the ork trukk, leman russ and land raiders are vehicles that I look at, etc. You can also take a look at the Tau Auxiliary unit for an idea of my process, just be aware that they are purposefully overcosted because they exist to paper over gaps a player wants to cover in their army.

>>97874894
I'll look into it and see what I can do. Here's a quick sample you can compare to page 5 of the main rulebook. Is something like that enough or do you have any suggestions?
>Btw is GW not targeting you for use of their art?
If they don't like it they can blame google for hosting it.

>>97874900
>I guess AA stands for alternating activations?
Correct.

>Except for that, could you tell me some key differences of your ruleset in comparison to the official rules?
I really wanted to make decision making an important part of the game during play. I hated seeing those games where the only thing the players did was take their two overcrowded battlelines and smash them together in the middle of the table. I tried to include lots of little things that emphasize this, such as the cover system affecting to hit rolls and improving armor instead of giving a distinct cover save, or reintroducing overwatch as an actual out of turn action instead of shooting when you get charged.
I'd recommend checking out the battle report in the rules file. It should broadly still be accurate to everything on a rules basis, but I should probably make a new one soon. You can also check out the starter rules for quick rundown of how a game would be set up and what tactics can be used.

File: DA.png (1.7 MB)

1.7 MB PNG

>>97875050
Nice, this is already enough to make the art looks like... well... art. I was always a big fan of those themed fancy edges applied to art in 7e codexes.

>>97874085
Pepsi here. Thanks anon I worked really hard on it.

>>97874787
Good to see you’re still around AAAnon.

>>97874900
>quick run down
Pepsi hammer is about playing like you remember, but trying to fix all the rough spots you might have forgotten about. I basically cherry picked the best versions of things from 3rd to 6th, and when nothing suited my fancy I made something up to fill the gap. I have very thourough rules and guidelines for how all sorts of terrain works which was notably (imo) always a weak spot for 40k. (That’s actually how the project started, as an expansion for 6th and 7th).

For example one new mechanic I have added called Overpower, which replaces Instant Death. If your attack is 3 strength greater than the opponents toughness they will take 1 extra wound and be at -1 armour save. I have a blend of classic AP and modern armour rend that I use where appropriate. I’ve also got a new set of rules for psychic powers that I’m super proud of, and a new vehicle damage chart.

I also strive to have really fun codecies, and do my best to balance them. Flavor is the most important part for me so I worked really hard to try and make units feel and behave on the table like I (and my play group’s) expectations. But also some the majority of the rules are pretty similar you can really use any codex from the era with minimal on the fly tweaking.

>>97875281
Cool. I'll mess with that to see what looks best and start updating the files as I go along.

>>97875410
Same! I'll be checking out your updates later today.

File: ezgif.com-webp-to-gif-converter.gif (3.9 MB)

3.9 MB GIF

>>97875410
Where are SoB, Pepsi-san? Where are Daemons?
My gf refuses to play any army other than her SoB. I don't mind playing with something else, but Daemons are my main army since forever and as shameful as it is, they are my only fully painted army as well.

>>97875486
>My gf refuses to play any army other than her SoB
kwab

>>97875486
Cap. Tyranids and Orks exist.

>>97875609
>tyranids
i don't think his gf is female (female) (female)

>>97875609
>Tyranids and Orks exist
Your point? She doesn't like horde armies and even her Sisters are not really infantry-heavy.

>>97875486
Rip. But yeh I started with all the armies my friend group has, and have made a few more. At this point a combination of witch hunters and the Deamon hunters books (cause I don’t know if I can be arsed to make two…) is all that’s left for what I’ve always though of as “real factions”. But I’ve also considered doing admech and squats. And my brother in law just bought a fuck ton of GSC so now I gotta deal with that. And sub-faction units too, I’ll need to make supplements for those. I don’t think I’ve ever even looked inside a Deamons codex, I forgot they split them out from CSM.

>>97876074
>I don’t think I’ve ever even looked inside a Deamons codex, I forgot they split them out from CSM
I would rather see them sharing the Codex with CSM honestly. In your case going with the HH approach may be more reasonable workload-wise. Instead of having separate profiles for Plaguebearers, Bloodletters etc., GW simply split them into more generic groups like lesser Daemons, Brutes etc.

I've reposted the Dark Eldar book with bordered artwork and resized covers. Let me know if there is anything that should be changed.

>>97875486
I've got those armies completed in my AA ruleset if you're just looking for something new to try. I didn't include all of the new Sisters units from their refresh, but all of the vehicles should be able to be fielded.

>>97875410
>Pepsi here. Thanks anon I worked really hard on it.
Just downloaded it and will pitch it to my group, looks kino, appreciate your efforts.

File: EJJK01w.gif (1.4 MB)

1.4 MB GIF

>>97876423
>I've reposted the Dark Eldar book with bordered artwork
Truly, a world of difference. My autism is content, thank you. Now I will try your game.

>>97869949
3.5 base rules as long as you are playing Thousand Sons ;^)

>>97874169
Hey anon, if you're still here, do you have any of the army lists your group has used saved that you could email me? I'd like to look over what units you guys are taking. Also, if you've been playing Tyranids, what are your thoughts on the army? In particular, what do you think of the available level of customization and the synapse rules?

>>97876448
I hope you guys like it! And Im always eager for feedback. - Pepsi

>>97866133
There's also games that "aren't 40k but easily allow for 40k model reuse."
I asked about this on /awg/.

The two standouts (due to being free) are StarBeach and No Limits.
That's all I know. They seem like passion projects by a hobbyist who made making wargames his hobby so expect some really broken rule buried somewhere as tournament play doesn't seem to be considered in the rules writing.

There's also Renegades as a Kill Team alternative.
Also free.

I've never played these games because I can't find anybody to give them a try.
So I cannot comment on the quality. Only say they exist and are free.

>>97878477
Sorry for the late reply, I'll post the list here to bump the thread and to spark discussion, this is one of the less creative Tyranid lists I run, I lost the others I use (For example the 120 Gaunts +30 gargoyles one)
Tyranids 2000 points | Synapse (15)

----HQ----
+ Hive Tyrant [135]
- Twin Linked Devourer [20]
- Pair of Boneswords [15]
- Extended carapace [10]
+ Broodlord [115]
- Acid maw [8]
- Genestealer Brood [70] (Retinue)
- 5 Genestealers [70]
+ Guard Brood [50]
- 2 Hive Guards [100]
- Tyrant Guard [30]
- Crushing Claws [45]

----Elites----
+ Carnifex [150] (Screamer Killer)
- Scything Talons x2
- Tusked [10]
- Bio Plasma [15]
-- Bio Engineering --
- Exceptional Size [24]
+ Venomthrope Brood [45]
- 2 Venomthropes [90]
+ Zoanthrope [65]
- Leach Essence
- Warp Blast [5]
-- Bio Engineering --
- Exceptional Size [13]

----Troops----
+ Genestealer Brood [70]
- 5 Genestealers [70]
+ Tyranid Warrior Brood [90]
- Scything Talons
- Spike Rifles
- Venom Cannon [10]
+ Tyranid Warrior Brood [90]
- Scything Talons x2
- Adrenal Glands [12]
- Leaping [15]

----Heavy Support----
+ Haruspex [190] (Toxicrene)
- Scything Talons
- Toxin Sacs [8]
- Toxic Miasma [10]
+ Haruspex [190] (Psychopage, minus the Psycho part)
- Rending Claws [5]
+ Carnifex [150]
- Scything Talons
- Rending Claws
- Spine Banks [5]

What rules would you change or revert to 2nd edition for HH 3.5 Ruleset ?

>>97879945
>>97878477
As for my marine friend, I'm not sure on the details but it's something along the lines of
Terminator captain w/ orbital strike
Terminator Librarian
2 basic bitch tactical squads of 5
2 ten man terminator squads
Nu dread with lasscannon and missile launcher
Predator
Veteran Squad in a razorback
A devastator squad with those weird new flamers
We run the new dread as a heavy support and I tried balancing it around the contemptor dreadnought from the csm codex and the leviathan dread from the first edition of Horus heresy. As for the Tyranid customization, it's great, I have a few converted models/ ones that don't have rules so I can just build them from something else, the synapse rule doesn't come up in our games that often, I keep my HQ's in the back until the last round most of the time

>>97879969
The push for shorter and shorter games is the thing I hate most. 4 turns? Thats ridiculous. 6 turns minimum and random up to 9 like Rick and Andy intended.

>>97881177
Didn't it got deadlier with v3, so games end up faster ?

>>97881564
More like 3500 became the new standard, which at 4 turns already makes for a 2-3 hour game on average for experienced players. And that’s assuming you focus on playing and don’t spend half the time just hanging out with your mates with the minis on the table and take half an hour to go to the corner store to grab food and beers (which we do a lot).

>>97881564
Deadlier faster is the opposite of what I wanted the from the game. I want long games that actually have enough time to flex and re-strategize to react to your opponents. 4 movement phases is just not enough for me to be interested in even bothering to read the rules.

>>97881885
>>97881177
Agree completely
And its obvious this change is the influence of tournament play because they're trying to pack many short games into one day

>>97879976
Thanks for sharing. Good creativity using the armies to run the Leviathan units. Hopefully the Malefactor works well for you.

>>97881564
No, they made the game shorter because they added a bunch of additional timewasting bullshit like the Challenge system so while it's now only 4 turns the amount of *time* you spend playing is the same as before. And also because with progressive scoring on most if not all missions(I've not bothered to keep up with the trash they've been sharting out in the microbooks) will settle the outcome by the 4th turn no matter what else happens so there's little point going further.

4 turn games are a symptom of the many, many, many other terminal problems with 3.0, not the disease itself.

>>97882582
Random game length is one of the best and most powerful tools for keeping waacs at bay.

What's the best fan rules for the culmination of the Classic Era, I just want the nostalgia of my third through fifth edition days, other stuff is good but fourth end fifth was my introduction to the world

>>97876074
Please promise me that you don't bring modern 40k into this mix and stick to the classic interpretation of the GSC and Squat facti6

>>97878477
Regarding tiranids, you can do a lot of builds but, for the most part. Hormagaunts are to expensive compared to genestealers and termagaunts.
More termagaunts is better than better termagaunts.
Termagaunt+spinefist are great because they are half the price, you use them to asault and block units.
TL devourers are incredible on monsters.
Melee carnifex are absolutely useless.
Barb+venom carnifex are your only reliable AT
Your range attacks are probably better than your melee.
Lictors are super expensive their role is not to kill but to keep busy the long range guns of your enemy. One per army is more than enough.
Imperial armour profiles are ok.
Third and 5th edition special characters are fun and feel compatible and balanced.
You have 3 versions of the trigon, the 5th edition one is the most usable, it's quite balanced (Im cherry picking because heroes and the trigon are quite isolated additions that work ok with the 4th edition codex but don't over do it, other profiles can cause issues and brake the game)

One of the strongest lists is this one, ripers are meant to shield your carnifex of melee troops, the hive t deletes any unit with range attacks.

Clasic nidzilla:
HiveT wing 2xtl dev, shield, tox 186
Broodlord70, carpace 10, hook 3 = 83
11x gene 16 carpace or claws 4, hooks1 = 231

riper 6 60
riper 6 60
riper 6 60
riper 3 30

dakafex 2 tl dev senses 113 (or a single lictor)
dakafex 2 tl dev senses 113
dakafex 2 tl dev senses 113

gunfex ven/barb can senses 148
gunfex ven/barb can senses 148
gunfex ven/barb can senses 148
1493

>>97866133
AA Hammer link please, esteemed colleagues?

>>97885118
Literall just play 4th.

>>97885506
It was already posted in this thread
>>97886145
If you want tips for the current edition you should check out the 40k general thread. Also I checked my scan of the 4th edition witch hunters codex and holy fuck 10 repentia would have cost you 210 points back in the day and they were a 0-1 choice and now you can get 10 for 160 points, point cost deflation is real. Also I know you're not asking for 4th ed but I think Novitates would make for cool Zealots

>>97886260
Which is funny because repentia could melt any unit in the game, if they got to hit.
Which you wouldn't unless you were fighting terminators or a vehicle, or spent miracle.

>>97886260
Aww shit I thought I had gone into the 40k general. My bad!

>>97886132
I thought it was 3rd with 4th codex that was gold standard though.

File: one-page-rules.jpg (29.1 KB)

29.1 KB JPG

>>97866133
Is OPR not liked for some reason? I havent seen anyone mention it and I kinda like their grimdark future rules

>>97886488
It's more of an AWG game, despite the creator treating it like 40k with the serial numbers filled off it really isn't, sorry for the le epic food analogy but 40k is kinda defined by the "fat" on it's meat and OPR is lean

>>97886510
fair enough, I mean the main selling point is literally that you can fit the basic rules on a single piece of A4 paper

File: 20231110_173214.png (798.3 KB)

798.3 KB PNG

>>97886488
For some reason a few schizos in /awg/ claim OPR is a carbon-copy of "Warhammer" whatever that means, but whenever you ask them to name examples of similarities between OPR and any of the multiple edition of 40k, AoS or WFB, they start to spout buzzwords and make weird faecal and fag sex wordplays. It is a weird kind of mental disability that makes you come to alternative wargames thread, look at the alternative wargame played with alternative miniatures and be confident that you see """Warhammer""". Some of them even insist that you may as well play """""Warhammer""""", in an alternative wargames thread.

>>97886820
what the fuck are you trying to say.

>>97885118
3rd - 5th
I mean, I would say pepsi hammer but I’m not at all biased or anything. It’s designed to be what you described, because that’s exactly what I wanted it to be, playing like how you remember but smoothing over the rough spots you forgot about.

>>97886473
Other way around, 4th with 3rd ed codecies.

>>97885213
I’ll be honest, I haven’t ever even opened the codecies for these factions so I know next to nothing about them. Can you tell me some of the highlights and differences? I happen to have saved a randomly found fan-made 7th Ed squats book port that I don’t even know what it’s from but 7th Ed is inherently already compatible so I could just use that lol.

But along similar lines in case you are curious, I do back port units where I feel it is appropriate. Mostly this comes down to “does the unit fit the design space of the era” and whether or not I think the unit is actually a fitting addition to the codex, or just bloat. Not every faction needs to have every answer to every problem. Far too often new units end up filling purposefully unfilled niches, or being too similar to existing units, in which case one always ends up better than the previous.

An example of a back ported unit that I did use was the Necron canoptic reanimator.

>>97886488
One page rules is a cute concept, but the game doesn’t actually stand on its own foundation of solid rules. It can only be played because the audience already knows how to play warhammer; the whole game is just played on assumption. Nothing wrong with that really, I’m sure almost all of us could play a game of 40k and just guess at how it’s supposed to work and get it mostly right. The whole point of wargames is that the rules are Meant to match your assumptions, but OPR just leaves it entirely as an exercise to the reader.

>>97886858
>other way around
Then what the fuck was fourk doing with their SRD being based on 3rd? Clownshoes.

>>97887084
…the F in Fourk literally stood for Four anon…
Fourk was “let’s play 4th edition with a cutoff date of September 2006”.

>>97887129
It was not a bad idea, 4th edition with 3rd codex. That way everyone gets the toys from 3rd, but an updated rulebook.
But it was like 4 guys doing work and the rest just trolling.

>>97886993
I see where you're coming from, but I think thats the whole point of OPR desu. I mean their whole marketing schtick is "warhammer for people that dont want to play warhammer"

I do think its funny though because OPR is supposed to be warhammer but stripped down to the bare essentials, when stripped down warhammer already exists, written by Rick Priestley too, it just happens to be a WW2 historical game called Bolt Action lmao

>>97887129
Okay that one is on me then, straight up I wonder why I thought it was 3rd rulebook. But the MEGA is still up and you can download the last updated version of 0.98 from June 2025 still. What does it even need to hit 1.00? I also see the guy who was doing it left an email to contact him, wonder if he still checks that.

I'd probably play with 4th codex though, I liked that for Nids. The mutations and shit was a little out of control in 3rd and too exploitable and wonky.

>>97886839
That OPR has no place in the discussion of alternative 40k rulesets just like Infinity or StarCraft. The game itself has a quite big following considering next to no market presence but the reason for that is you can use your Warhammer collection without playing Warhammer. All the games mentioned in the OP are remixes of the existing 40k rules and try to mimic them while refining them at the same time.

>>97866133
>all those games in the OP.
I know it is silly but how about some science fiction miniature agnostic games that have armies that are 'coincidentally' eerily similar in naming and stat conventions to make it 'very easy' for 40k armies to be inserted in?

>>97888341
And by that you mean?

>>97888475
I mean games mentioned in this archived post:
https://desuarchive.org/tg/thread/97555597/#97588194
Things like that.
The Star Breach and No Limits wargame.

>>97888542
Maybe? The thing is most people in this thread WANT to play warhammer 40k, they just want a version with features that suits their needs. For example, I want to play 40k with alternating activations, I can play Custom40k or AA-40k, I want a pseudo retro feeling (After playing a few games with terminator armour and Carinfexes that save 3+ on 2D6 I can't really live without it as otherwise those units feel way to squishy and I dislike wound bloat) so I play AA-40k

>>97866133
>Prohammer has multiple, overlapping rules from various editions stacked next to eachother with no care making them unified
>no codex's
well thats garbage. is there any other "classic" edition 40k unified rules? Pepsi hammer is looking good for that still, its Custom 40k good?

File: Rubrics.png (95.1 KB)

95.1 KB PNG

>>97888790
>Custom 40k good?
It looks fine, as for the classic part, judge by yourself by looking at this profile

>>97888790
it is probably what you are looking for. They are actively working on the rules, are open for suggestions and having games in tabletop simulator

>>97887400
When people say "4th ed with 3rd ed codexes" they dont mean literally every 3rd ed codex, you use the 4th ed ones for Marines, Nids, Tau, and Black Templar (and maybe one or two more I missed). All the ones before the design change. It's the period from 3.5 to 4.5 changeover.

>>97886488
OPR is basically what you get if you take the problems of nu-40k (everything "streamlined" to the point of being stripped of all interesting flavor and options) and crank them up to maximum, it's the exact polar opposite of what people want who are trying to go back to older 40k.

>>97888910
That's my exact problem with it as well, I'm sure that as a game system it probably plays much more smoothly than 40k but I just can't get over how sterile and lifeless it all feels. I like having a whole ton of options and little quirks born from someone trying to fit the fluff into the crunch so I just play 4th edition.

>>97888790
Pepsi here. Prohammer deserves more credit than that, I know because I have proof-read his entire 80 page rulebook. It’s very clear to me that the author puts care and a lot of thought into it. And his philosophy of “if people are interested in and willing to play a homebrew project, then we can reasonably expect them to self govern and be capable of balancing cross editions” is correct. I particularly like how he handles deep strike.
>not unifying rules
He does. His vehicle structure points rules are brilliant to the point I wish I could say that I came up with it.

But obviously I like to vouch for pepsi-hammer.

>>97888870
Some people really do mean only 3rd codexes, but that's not what the previous 4e project here was.

>>97889155
>Some people really do mean only 3rd codexes
No, I don't think anyone does. It was always shorthand for saying "the period of time up to circa 2006 when the new designers started shitting the bed and the codex layouts changed", nobody prefers, for example, the 3rd ed Space Marines codex over the 4th ed one.

File: __tyranid_warhammer_40k_drawn_by_mossacannibalis__1696909651ad9213c43218bf8adf7eef.jpg (221.5 KB)

221.5 KB JPG

>>97888870
Ah well sure that works great then. I might as well ask here though, I am writing up some profiles for nidders that released after 4th and marking them down as "as many points as my opponent thinks is fair". Some are patently just existing ones with specific combinations of biomorphs some mutable genus already has, those are whatever. I'm more concerned about the others.
Some sketches in no real order
>Venomthrope, ask for what a fair price would be on letting a Zoanthrope have Toxic Miasma instead of Warp Field
>Tyranid Prime, like a Broodlord version of a Warrior with its own retinue and use Alpha Warrior?
>Parasite of Mortrex, stat it like a Winged Warrior with a couple small biomorph enhancements to stats, and give it a retinue of winged Rippers?
>Tyrannofex, start with a Carnifex and let it have a Melta?
>Neurogants, cheap as dirt Hormagaunt with no Leaping and basic as shit CCW with no Rending nor Scything?
>what fucking combination of biomorphs or current and later psychic powers for shit like Norn Emmisary (basically just a Tyrant in my mind)

Some are easier, others are harder, like Pyrovore, but there's a lot of biomorphs and shit from other armies to look at you can sort work something. Shit like Psychophage and Hive Guard are going to be more tricky for me. Keeping the feel right is a balancing act, since I want it to be fluffy and fun for me and get to use it with just local guys who already know I'm not trying to slip in some busted shit.

Would love suggestions if you (or anyone else) would enjoy chiming in.

>>97889217
To start, many of the things you mentioned already have compatible unit entries in the 5th and 6th and 7th Ed tyranid codecies, is there any reason why you don’t just start there? In case you do isn’t know, the core system for 3rd to 7th changed so little that practically speaking the codecies are all cross compatible.
>neurogaunts
Dumb bloat unit that doesn’t need to be shoehorned in. Their existence dilutes the code and makes it worse. And I won’t lie I feel the same way about practically every tyranid unit released past 5th edition.

>>97889292
Because costing varies wildly? Different design ethos? Different assumptions because the army got re-written to be shittier every time from 5th onwards? The point is "if this was being added in 4th from the start, how would they have done it". Because it's a fun project for me and me alone, but maybe some anon could stimulate my thinking and open my mind on an example that interested them.

Duh.

>>97889170
>No, I don't think anyone does.
I do. There's no reason to intentionally powercreep certain factions.

>>97889330
The 4e Eldar codex is objectively a better designed book than the 3e one and I'm tired of pretending it's not.

>>97889315
Ok my mistake. Here is my quick 5 minute guide to fit the vibe and theme of the 4th ed book / era.
Venomthrope
>delete, malanthrope cooler and unit overlap of that degree is bad.
Malanthrope
>copy paste from IA 2nd edition and replace stealth shrouded with fixed 4+ cover save so it won’t stack with terrain (cause that was aweful to experience)
Psycophage, harauspex, the big phat MC zoanthrope with 4 legs,
>slop, delete
Exocryne
>keep it apoc only, ap2 large blast plasma just is not appropriate for normal games.
Tyranofex
>copy from 5e, double the attacks on the flesh border weapon profile and give the flamer torrent if it doesn’t already have it. Limit to 1500 points or more.
Hive guard
>copy from 5e but swap no LOS to -1 cover save or something like that.
Vonryan leapers
>hard one, I’d go with a t4 hormagaunt with +1 attack and 5+ save, make them beasts. 20 points.
Norn emissary, trygon
>too big, apoc only.
Barbgaunts
>2 wound gaunts with pinning deathspitters? 20 points

>>97889410
Sounds like someone lost to 3 shot star cannons one to many time lmao.

>>97889330
Yes there is, the fact that they were very underpowered by the end of 3rd. Also not all of those codexes are more powerful, some of them are just better designed and more flavorful. It sounds like you weren't even around in 3rd/4th.

>>97889414
Imagine a grimace. All noted I guess.

>>97889414
This guy gets it. One thing you can do if you want to include some of the models that don't fit the theme is change how their rules or wargear work. I was initially going to drop the Maleceptor (fat four-legged Zoanthrope) but I decided there was still a gap it could fill. Since Tyranids eat everything on a planet, I figured that it could be a creature that eats psychic energy and retooled how it works.

>>97889427
You can make all the excuses you want, but using 4th edition rules with 3rd edition only codexes is a perfectly valid position.

>>97889414
>calling a Haruspex slop
You realize that thing existing literally predates Tyranids having a 40k codex, right? It was in epic before it was in 28mm. Existed in lore the entire time before it got a model. Even had armourcast rules in late 2nd and 3rd. And Chapter Approved 3rd ed allows the creation of big beasties like it.

>>97866133
I wonder if Chain of Command is viable to use with 40k
use characters attachable as junior/senior officers
morale level based on LD

>>97889447
If you want to do that sure go ahead, but the original point was that basically fucking nobody ever means that when they say "4th edition with 3rd edition codexes" you are just a unique contrarian edge case I guess. 99% of the time, anons are talking about the period in time halfway through 4th ed before the design style of the codexes changed, after a small handful of them had already been released.

>>97889470
Someone did that already. For Horus Heresy only.

>>97889470
I've thought about it before and even wrote up some test rules, but the thing is that CoC really only properly emulates how command would work for Imperial Guard and nobody else. You would basically have to write extremely detailed and drastically different command rules for every faction to keep to the lore and it's a lot of work. Could be cool if someone wants to put that much effort in, but a very, very demanding project.

>>97889414
>Barbgaunts
>>2 wound gaunts with pinning deathspitters? 20 points
When warriors with a regular deathspitter and scything talons is 26? What are you making worse? You think Synapse is worth 6 points?

>>97889544
To cover my own ass, I did say I wrote that in 5 minutes. Im home with the codex now, let's try a bit better. How about give them slow and purposeful, thats seems kinda fitting with their poor 3 legged parasite body. That makes them 2 wound t3 1 attack vs the warrior 2 wound t4 2 attacks. Their guns would also be one less strength I think. Synapse is pretty good, cause these will need some zoanthrope to babysit them or something. Id also give them heavy indirect fire to better capture their design, and to distance them a bit more. Maybe 25 points?

Warrior, 28 points
>t4 w2 a2
>s5 deathspitter
>+1BS
>scything talons (3 attacks in melee)
>synapse
Barb Gaunt, ?? points
>t3 w2 a1
>s4 deathspitter
>bs3 already
>slow and purposeful
>barrage if they dont move

File: doom.png (1.5 MB)

1.5 MB PNG

>>97889436
My issue with the maleceptor is entirely the model design. The inherent universal truth is that, long before the heat death of the universe, all good things will eventually become ruined by bean counters. Bad things, models, rules, both have negative impacts and damage the experience and artistic atmosphere of the game. The zoanthrope is such a perfectly designed mini, its purpose built huge head and its diminutive body are perfectly designed to capture and convey its battlefield purpose to the audience. Its shriveled body and even hold itself up, its practically is just an appendix. But it doesnt need to, cause it just uses its brain power to hold itself up. Then comes in the maleceptor, and its design just spits all over this. "Haha what id we had a psychic carnifex" was just not a question that needed to be answered, and its presence is harmful to the experience. But a bigger, more preposterous zoanthrope like creature is something I can get behind.

>>97889463
Yes and? That model is the literal definition of caddie slop, like you look it up in a dictionary and thats what you see, uninspiring trash. The new mini just doesnt live up to its namesake. Its an awful looking bastardization resulting from Kerby mandating dual build kits. I wont lie the original model did not age, but at least the concept of a giant slug monster fits the bill of
>for the sole purpose of eating, and are deployed in the latter stages of a Tyranid invasion to consume biomass at a rapid rate.
A monster that does this needs to be made in a way for it, where is it going to put all that biomass? The original giant slug thing that glows and grows as it feeds was a good pairing, but such a unit would also inherently just not be a viable combat creature cause its gotta drag all that biomass around.
The haruspex is a background creature that belongs in art and doesnt Need to be in a codex, its like support / logistics vehicles; they just dont really fit within the design space of a 40k game, but sure put them in a supplement. But not the codex.

>>97889915
This is solid actually, I like it. Genofixed species you say?

Also I know you hated Neurogants, but what if they were dogshit Tyrant Guard, a different retinue option which still does the shieldwall thing but is w1 t3 Sv6+ and extends the Tyrant's Synapse range by 6" or something. Some kind of tradeoff. Maybe you can take more than three since they are more disposable.

I figure there is still a decent amount of stuff you can either backport as a new datasheet or by adding different biomorph options to existing mutable species (eg. let flamespurt be an option for Biovores to get one with a flamer template instead and allow hardened carapace if not taking spore-mine launcher, Pyrovore done), even after culling all the shit that should be banished to Apocalypse games. So thank you for taking this one (Barbgaunt) seriously, this is really nice.

File: banelings lol.jpg (83.1 KB)

83.1 KB JPG

>>97890025
Yeh genofixed for sure, I cant think of a more specialized niche unit except the biovore.
>Retinue
Could you just imagine how strong it would be to have a hive tyrant hiding behind a 32 man ablative wound gaunt unit? Nah if I was forced at gun point to include them, I would make them exploding suicide units. I do not know why, but I cannot look at the neurogaunts without seeing those exploding lava monsters (lambent wretches) from gears of war 1.
>Pyrovore
This is one of those units where I am on the fence. On one hand, that new mini is so good. On the other hand I believe it helps (hurts) to round out the tyranid army too much. It feels like someone at corporate said "what tyranid unit can we make now" and the result was it not being driven by design intent, but as outcome (money). But I think the 5th ed unit card is probably over costed even, Id make them have the +1 wound biomorph for 3 total at 40 points. Its a 6" moving heavy flamer. Give it fleet too, those things look fast.

Hey, guy, the wiki has a typo. Are we just leaving it like that?
https://warhammer40k.fandom.com/wiki/Timeline_of_the_Warhammer_40,000_Universe#Devastation_of_Baal_(ca._999.M41_-_Unknown_Date.M42)
>reclaim taht half of the Imperium

>>97890125
>Could you just imagine how strong it would be to have a hive tyrant hiding behind a 32 man ablative wound gaunt unit?
Oh for sure, you'd want to limit the fuck out of it, I was thinking 3-6 so the same amount of wounds as the tyrant guard but their utility came from the bonus to synapse and less their ablative wounds. 32 would be fucking retarded. Exploding suicide units, with or without access to Without Number? Just exploring your perspective more on that alternative.
>Pyrovore
Speaking of exploding. There's a lot of ways to make it. I think at bare minimum it need to be very short range, but also have a way to survive long enough to get into range against its preferred target big fat groups of shit infantry. The chain explosion bullshit from 5e was also retarded. Minimum expectation, good odds of getting up close and personal with guardsmen-tiers, but not so durable that they can threaten something more sturdy. The new mini is impossible to pass up, gotta come up with something.

>>97889471
Whatever you want to believe, buddy.

>>97890422
At this point I think you're just trolling, here's your last (You).

>>97890447
Yeah, me disengaging and going "whatever bud" is trolling.
Epic troll. u mad?

File: Strategy.png (154.8 KB)

154.8 KB PNG

Let's talk about stratagems, no not the shit kind where you have to get CP to shoot twice, the kino kind where you draw cards at the begining of the game. I think they are cool and games should have them, maybe every army could get their own deck of strategy cards + generic cards like reinforcments, look out sir, etc

>>97886260
yup found the link thanks!

>>97891193
Are you just taking a look at the system or do you plan on playing some games? If you do end up playing, my email address is in the folder and feedback always helps. Copies of army lists too, especially if I can see how your builds change over time.
Have fun!

>>97881580
But do you still have enough units alive at the end of turn 4 ?

>>97881885
I have some ideas to make shooting attacks less lethal.

>>97882582
I'd rather the fix be narrative oriented than for tournaments

>>97883469
What are the other problems ?

>>97883469
>progressive scoring
This is one of the biggest cancers in modern wargaming, I'm trying to fight a battle not play fucking sportsball. You either achieve the objective by the end or you don't. No general ever "scored" his troops on how long they stood on the hill or bridge he wanted captured, all that matters was if you were still standing on it when the battle was over.

>>97893926
nta but one of the other problems with 3.0 was the huge loss of options and customization, and the overall writing of the ruleset seem to have some odd choices, like the challenge system, now not only legions, in general, lost some special rules but they were replaced with challenge stuff same with most special characters (half the special rules from primarch and named character are challenge related)

>>97895116
Challenges are a good mechanic in theory imo, the writers of 3.0 just got completely lost in the fucking sauce and overcomplicated the shit out of it for very little real gain.

>>97895050
Eh, I dont think turn based scoring is the root of the problem. My friends and I have been playing with homebrew missions that include some with turn-based scoring for like years now and its great. The real issue is more that 40k rulebook missions have just always been utter trash. In 4th and 5th I think every mission is just the same "move your units on to the objective at the very last turn and you win lol". 6th edition only had one single good mission, the relic. The rest were trash.
>all that matters is if you were standing on it when the battle is over
If it helps you theme the mission, its easy to explain away as some sort of time critical thing like a data uplink, or AA emplacements, where by the end of the battle its too late. I actually think its the opposite, where holding objectives at the end of the last turn is harder to theme. It needs you to make up some event that brings about the end of the fight, and unless that involves annihilation of the enemy forces as part of the theme its a little hard to rationalize why everyone just stopped fighting.

But, I think even worse is when you combine progressive scoring with fixed turn length. Being able to calculate that you have lost by the half way point is super lame. A combination of random game length and both sorts of missions is best.

>>97895746
I've found a good way to run progressive scoring objectives is to give each objective a set points value which 'drains' as points are granted to a player. So whichever player holds it each turn earns 10% of its VP value and whoever hols it at the end of the game gets what's left. It encourages fights early to take as much from the objectives as you can but also rewards the player holding one the end of the game with big vp boosts to help prevent foregone conclusions.

>>97895839
>hybrid approach, mine more minerals
Thats a really cool sounding mission actually. And I think it just goes to show that there are multiple ways to go about the problem and none of them are inherently bad. Variety is really the way you want to go here because it means you cant lock in a winning strategy (read list building) to bring to the table every time. 10th edition has like 11 missions, but all but 2 of them are just classic capture point with some lame twist.
Ive got a pretty rounded selection of missions that encourage all styles of play. I think this just goes a long way towards keeping the game fun and interesting.

One of the more harmful changes in modern 40k I think is OC. I think having a tie state is very important, and having weakened units be capable of doing so keeps their importance up which is fun for gameplay.

Along a similar lines, an approach I take (which is built to encourage well balanced armies) is that you build the table, build your list, roll for mission, place objectives, and then roll for deployment type. I find this is a great way to end up with balanced scenarios. Knowing what the table looks like before you list build means no one feels like they get too shafted, but not knowing the exact mission parameters keeps you from being able to min-max too hard.
-Pepsi

I just got done making q force in Custom40k and you know what? This is the best god damn ruleset I could have ever wanted out of 40k as a setting and game. Bravo to the man who made this

>>97891106
I hate the notions of strategy being randomly drawn from a deck. There is nothing strategic about that. They should be something built into the mission specifics, or hesitantly, something as part of list building / chosen during deployment.

>>97898663
I think it has a fun factor as something your commander and his troops came up with just before the battle or a result of variables that change quickly, for example comms clearing up enough for the commander to order a bombing run. The idea of them being built into a mission sound cool, a mission where the attacker can play reinforcements and the defender has something like booby traps is a neat idea. Being able to choose them in list building would just reduce them to a few meta picks

>>97898825
>a few meta picks
You’re likely right, but if I had to choose between that and random I’d go with that. I still think mission specifics is the time for strategems. Standard ‘pickup’ i.e. narrativeless games don’t need them.

File: tumblr_9e6aa8bcb9f8862a92068c4e725e644a_ea05c989_2048.jpg (168.3 KB)

168.3 KB JPG

>>97866447
>>97873986
I'm actually rather fond of 40k Reforged. I appreciate their enthusiasm and their attempts to make wargear work, among other changes. They do seem to be in that weird niche of correction-projects where they tunnel into the project itself and go insane a little? It's the same with the Starcraft Broodwar super-mod 'Cosmonarchy'. The names for the units are absolutely atrocious. They even renamed the Protoss Scout into the Panoptus because they said 'Scout' was a bad name and didn't reflect the unit at all. ignoring the flavour of the fact that Protoss are so advanced that what they considered a scout was a air superiority fighter to normal races.

>>97899496
Irving Finkel is one of the rare few likeable brits.

>>97895746
>all that matters is if you were standing on it when the battle is over
It's not about "theming" the mission, it's about what makes an enjoyable mission to play. Last turn capture is superior because it permits *actual tactics* like drawing your opponent off and then using mechanised units or outflanking reserves to swoop in and capture objectives on other parts of the board. It forces you to choose between concentrating defences or spreading yourself thin and potentially losing an objective to a focused thrust. And the tactics required can be varied in the different missions by simply altering the number and placement of the objectives. With progressive scoring you either get your arse on the point asap or you lose, so everyone just leaves a token defence on their "home" objective and everything else turns into a mid-table moshpit.

>>97866932
>Oh sick he even included the affinity publisher files!
>but not for the last version
Bruh.
nuSRDanon fucking wake up and post the latest version of the fucking affinity file so I don't have to redo work to make it look nicer. 0.98's PDF has fucking typos I want to fix.

I've been playing small points games of 7th edition with friends recently,just using the standard detachment. Are there any 5th edition list builders out there? We play 7th bc thats what newrecruit has

>>97900996
Why not just open the codex and write out your lists on a piece of paper with a pen? Genuinely. I get that it is objectively more convenient to not have to write it yourself, but it's marginal. And since it's marginal, if there isn't one you can just click options on, it's not really appreciably more complex to just write it out by hand. Right?

>>97901017
yeah just convenience, and its easier to get people to switch if its more convenient. Gotta track down all the old codexes too, the only ones i have from when i was younger is space marines and guard

>>97901026
>7th edition
Can I convince you to try pepsihammer? I don’t have a list builder, but all the rules are here >>97901026 and I put in a lot of effort into my typesetting to make things easy, pleasant, and familiar to read.

Hey everybody, looking for suggestions.

I need to think of a name for my singular faction of 'free' Necrons. I despise the current state of Necron lore as a whole, but I'll admit that there are plenty of kernels of good ideas for them from their 5th edition revamp onward. Most importantly, I'm switching the current power dynamics in my write up - the C'tan were still broken into shards when they were at their weakest before going to sleep after the WiH by a faction of Necrons that managed to slip the control they established in the bio-transference. However this didn't free the other Necron forces from their control and now the remaining C'tan led Necrons are at war with each other and the rest of the galaxy as each woken shard attempts to gain full control.
So what I'm doing is taking all of the named Necron characters and rolling them under the banner of the Sautekh Dynasty. My problem is, all of those 'Tech' names are stupid as hell, and not in a way that I can enjoy.
So what should the name of this faction be? I had tried a few options that were close to the original name so new players would know what they were right away (Sautak Dynasty, House Sau'tarr) but none of them are clicking for me. Thoughts?