Just that, what little things annoy you?


For me, it's fluff army and population sizes (much too low) and when people say railcannon. There is not such weapon. There is the railgun, rail rifle, heavy rail rifle, and heavy railgun.

1) Too many skulls. We get it, GW, skulls are the aesthetically pleasing representation of death.

2) How Land Raiders and Rhinos go together. Gaps, gaps everywhere.

3) That the modern Tac squad box lacks a bolter that isn't already attached to a hand.

4) The lack of accessories in the Leman Russ box. I would love to deck my tanks out in baggage, crates and barrels.

1) Eldar codex (all of them except 5th)
2) Eldar special rules
3) Eldar
4) Random wound allocation
5) Random warlord traits
6) Random psychic powers
7) Mysterius objectives
8) Eldar

1) Hmmm what am i going to be outfitting my special weapon squad with...will it be rocket launchers, or lascannons, or...

Or one of each kind of special weapon. Thanks, GW.

And then of course the ONLY TIME they don't just put one of each special weapon in the kit...is the only time it might not absolutely explode all hope of having a decently balanced game against the new eldar. GW why can't you even reliably be a money grubbing dick? Why does every unit except the most busted one in the game force you to grub around your bitz box and ebay to outfit a single special weapon focused squad?

2) Super uncustomizable troops you're going to want a whole bunch of. Especially when the kit feths you over with its pricing. Can I at least get modular grot crewmen for my Mek Gun please? maybe a couple different options for how the guns look? No? My full unit of five has to be five sets of absolute clones that cost nearly 200$ for 150 points? Okay GW.

3) Pretty much everything to do with the general playstyle of Eldar and Tau. If your army's drawback is "the troops are squishy" then you shouldn't get to hide everything behind magic super dodgy ultra tanky floating vehicles that absorb more fire than a freaking IK.

4) While we're on the subject, IKs and superheavies in general. There should be A) ABSOLUTELY ONE lord of war allowed in any given army list, and B) it must not compose more than 25% of your total army points. Also get these stupid HQ choices out of the LOW slot gw that's just hamfisted.

5) Anything flying. Handled absolutely awfully in this game. Skyfire should not snapfire at ground targets, flying monstrous creatures should lose a bunch of wounds compared to ground-based equivalents (wings come packaged with hollow bones)

6) Invisibility should not stop blast and template weapons. That's how you'd fight an invisible enemy anyway. "Sir, they've disappeared" "Hand me that flame thrower, I'll find 'em"

7) Jink Save: starts at 4+, Reduced by a value of 1 for each point above 10 in your vehicles' front armor to a minimum of "your vehicle cannot jink". Same thing with Jetbike and FMC units, instead using their Armor Value for every point above 5+.

8) redraw a new maelstrom of war objective card if the objective you drew was impossible due to army composition. THERE, THAT WAS HARD. THAT TOOK A LOT OF EFFORT TO COME UP WITH.

Interceptor
Overwatch
Current Psychic rules
GW not issuing FAQs for all the rules problems that currently exist
Serpent Shield
Super-heavies in non-Apocalypse

For me I think maybe just alot of the current random rolly stuff, like rolling for charge range and such. Rolling for reserves too. Just don't like that aspect very much. I'd like more consistency there.

Other than that just a few aesthetics issues. I kinda wish the various space marine tanks were a little larger and tankier. I feel like the IG tanks really look like tanks, while the ones used by space marines really just look like rolling sponson mounts. They feel more like toys than true tanks I guess.

I'd also like to see some various rules written better and a few streamlined, but well.... yeah. You know. Like wishing on an unlit birthday cake.

Imperial tank treads - I know wargaming models should be sturdy, functional and easy to assemble but come on, there must be a way to make realistic looking tracks that doesn't involve dozens of small fiddly bits.

Here are mine:

- Necron Codex. The lore is surprisingly good, with much focus on civil war between Necron dynasties and war between them and the C'tan. But it's a broken, game-breaking mess.

- Flying Monstrous Creatures.

- When people don't know how to play, misuse rules blatantly or play in a campaign and SUCKS on purpose. Except in beginner games, which I don't play.

- Rhinos. Metal Boxes. I never use these units and whenever I see them,, I just want to crack them open.

- The fact that Land Raiders are not Heavy. Look at the size of them. Look at the armor values.

- Eldar lore. They are like the punching bag of Warhammer 40k. I hope the new Codex will make them look better, as in they gain more victories or admit their ultimate extinction, but not before helping Mankind (and maybe the Tau too) find its true way and win the galaxy.

- Random Warlord Traits and random Psychic Power generating.

- Ungodly amount of Space Marine spam across all facets of Warhammer 40k. And also Orks treated as, in many cases, nothing more than a generic enemy, ready to be slaughtered. I want to see more Tau and Necron as main enemies in video games and other brands of 40k.

- You cannot assault after your non-assault vehicle is killed. These units are stuck out in the open eating bullets like morons.

- Tau lore. feth Games Workshop and colonialism. Tau is exactly the grand and pretty image people in Europe have when they hear about colonialism: those savages don't know what is good for them, so we invade them with our army, kill anyone who oppose and set up a new government that we control. I live in Vietnam and I can't stand colonialism.

- The loss of many great characters from codice, including Vect, Marbo and Thawn.

I think it might be on purporse with tau. They aren't supposed to be nice. In any other setting they would be the bad guys.

The manner in which the rules are written. They seem a bit wordy and not so clear, although the page numbers and index helps.

Dire Avengers have too many parts for my taste. I like that they are available for those who want to do different poses. I'm ok with chunks of metal too.

The frequency of rule changes or modifications vs. miniature releases. I would like to see far more miniature variations than rule variations. I think mission changes over rule changes would be preferable.

Skulls were mentioned, but then I thought, perhaps this is an Emperor thing. I still don't care for skulls but maybe it's a little more clear, as a lot of them seem to be used by Imperial forces.

Prices.

Figures available only in resin and not metal or plastic at present.

Scatterbikes

The vast majority of the 7E BRB.
1. Wound allocation is tedious and makes no sense
2. Cover should modify BS, not this stupid either/or system
3. Random run/charge distance
4. Dreadnought - walking vehicle w a pilot = walker
Dreadknight - walking vehicle w a pilot = monstrous creature
5. Blast/flamer templates hit all floors of a ruin
6. Maelstrom missions played RAW, auto win if 1 player draws impossible cards and the other player draws objectives they're already sitting on
7. Assault armies being inferior to gunlines in virtually every possible way
8. Summon spam, nothing more fun than playing 1850 against 3000 points and having every psychic power you manifest get denied
9. 2++ re rollable on a unit with 24" move, 3 wounds per model and AP2 melee attacks at iniative
10. Riptide with 3++, FNP and JSJ for a stupidly low amount of points

1. Challenges - the mechanic is clumsy unless the 2 charachters are already in base contact after the charge.

2. The Psychic Phase - it feels like I am taking a break from the real game to play Yahtzee. The new rules also make the game feel more like the individual opponent John Doe is casting spells, rather than Ahriman or whoever.

3. Proclivity for mismatches.

4. Blasts pulling wounded models from the front of the unit vs. the blast center.

1) BRB: Written with little logic on the layout. Everything is in different places, not in the order you need it. And it likes to say 'discussed later', but it doesn't say on what page.

2) Psychic Powers: I'd gladly pay more for reliable casting of psychic powers, or even letting me at least choose ONE power, every discipline has at least one completely useless power. After my psykers letting me down in every single game I've played so far I'm just cutting them out.

3) Balance: It seems all the armies that needed a nerf aren't getting one, while the ones who didn't are. Space Wolves have to pay for an extra hand weapon, but necrons always get their Reanimation Protocols now.

4) New FoC: After failing with special codex detachments, Wolves Unleashed Detachment for example (6 HQ's lol wut), these new detachments are infinitely better, but there's this power gap that can only be closed by a codex update.

5) Finnicky Rules: When you ignore them the game runs smoother, but including them has no real benefit.

5) Eldar and Crons Codex's: Who wrote these. You have two hopes when facing these armies. Your first is your opponent went with something fun and not optimized, or second, that he makes a bunch of mistakes and you make none.

6) SM vehicles: If you look at them when compared other armies, they're actually pretty terrible.

7) Heavy Bolters: They're useless. You're always paying to replace them. Always.

8) Dreadnoughts: You're telling me an ancient and brave warrior in a giant machine does nothing to inspire or improve the marines around him.

9) Flyers: They have less of a place in 40k than artillery does. Hovering craft sure, but actual flying ones would spend all of their time turning. Oh but they fly slowly! Then why are they impossible to hit.

10) Snap Firing: Having BS 10 should give you SOME kind of benefit right?

11) Scout Marines: In every single army in history, scouting has been a specialist job. Always elite. Why do marines start there, it makes no sense.

12) Assault Marines: They always always die gruesome deaths. The only why for them to survive is for them to not do anything.

The fact that a Drop Pod is the same points as it is MSRP.

1) The stupid IoM ally shenanigans!

2) Everything about the Grey Knights.

3) Space Marines ignoring too many rules.

4) ATSKNF

5) Drop pods

1) Assault being a vehicle rule as opposed to a Unit Rule. Seeing your Assault Unit of Awesome gunned down as they stand there with their pants down after disembarking is painful. For a Point Cost i'd like to give various Units the ability to assault from transports.

2) Rolling Charge Distances. At least provide a minimum - If I can get within 6 inches of a unit then a charge should be a no brainer.

3) Cover Saves. No no no. Have cover alter the firers BS.

4) Blasts taking casualties from the front and not the models hit... it just gimps charging further.

5) Necrons glacing Land Raiders on 6s. Seriously, the first move advantage is painful.

6) HQs taking up a Transport vehicle slot. It makes it awkward when building standard troops with a HQ attached.

1) Fear

2) USR that almost nothing uses. Seriously, what uses Strikedown?

3) GW's poor rules writing skills.

4) Metal SoB. (friends army, not mine) Lets throw in all the fine cast stuff as well.

5) The CSM Boon Table

1- Lack of incentive to respect a strict CADS
2- Lack of a strict Ally chart
3- Failure to balance a game in a slots to slots way
4- Some squads that don't have plastic kits (Kommando)
5- Some kits that don't have all the bits you need to do every combo with that squads.
6- Overpriced models like Mek Kannon or Broadside.
7- Super heavy mixed in normal game.

I play DE. No good Unique HQs, few options against vehicles, feeling like my codex is a supplement for the Craftworld Eldar.

1) the rules...
2) the cost
3 the balance of the game
4) special rule on top of special rule
5) horrible for pick up games
6) horrible for tournament play
7) did I mention the cost?
8) cutting content out of codex just to charge you another $50
9) GW the company enough said
10) random random random everything

1. Random tables for everything.
2. Cover save's either or system
3. Unplayable for pick up games
4. Chaos Codex doesn't fit the fluff and performs poorly.
5. Chaos Havocs not having enough autocannons.
6. Obviously weak/near useless models. Mutilators, Penitent Engines, Banshees, half the nid dex, etc.
7. Obviously overpowered/cheap for their performance units, wave serpents, (now scatter laser eldar bikes too) riptides, Knights, etc
8. All or nothing psychic phase
9. Mealstrom
10. Unbound.
11. Super Heavies in normal games.
12. Inclusion of fliers. (wrong scale) And then their unfun rules makes it worse.

Also the fact that DA gets shafted in terms of cool toys, but we have overpriced stuff to totally compensate for it...

Tyranid meat guns and meat ships. Gundam Wing. The retcons upon retcons. Terrible balance and still no attempt to fix it after over a decade. The new crap backstory in everything ('cept the new ork dex), stupid names and the terrible sketch artwork (or worse) in every book. Stacking saves and various survivability tricks making for a frustrating game. Monstrous creatures being better at everything than walkers, while they should be worse.

The models are really nice though.

EDIT : And the new luckstorm missions. I don't think I want to play them again unless to humour somebody who wants to try a new dex objectives.

Lack of proper Lost and damn.
CSM codex and how bad it is, and especially lack of trasnport options. Even with forge world drop pods.
Chaos Daemons, rules, goofy models, just whole thing is ugh.
Tau and Eldars being top guys.

well, i'd start with removing a lot of phychic stuff. Then make it so you can only have 1 lord of war in a certain percentage or amount of pts. Then i would un-cheese eldar. Then i would make there no s weapons. Then i would slightly buff DA. Then take 20% off model cost. Then i would put an age limit on the game. I don't mind kids, honestly, but i'm tired of little kids not finishing games and being dragged boredly by their parents back to the table. And it makes sense anyway, it's expensive and kids don't care for that stuff and will probably quit right after their parents spend a fortune. Also, make guardsmen worse and less pts and make vets better and more pts. probably more but i cant be bothered.

and omg get rid of maelstrom missions!

The biggest one is players who think that Tau are still higher tier.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
I think it might be on purporse with tau. They aren't supposed to be nice. In any other setting they would be the bad guys.

yeah pretty much this re Tau and Colonialism. none of the faction in 40k are supposed to be nice guys. Honestly the comparison of Tau to the worst of European Colonialism makes for an intreasting argument when people say they're too nice

BrianDavion wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
I think it might be on purporse with tau. They aren't supposed to be nice. In any other setting they would be the bad guys.

yeah pretty much this re Tau and Colonialism. none of the faction in 40k are supposed to be nice guys. Honestly the comparison of Tau to the worst of European Colonialism makes for an intreasting argument when people say they're too nice

I'm pretty sure that the Tau are based on modern day USA.

SGTPozy wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
I think it might be on purporse with tau. They aren't supposed to be nice. In any other setting they would be the bad guys.

yeah pretty much this re Tau and Colonialism. none of the faction in 40k are supposed to be nice guys. Honestly the comparison of Tau to the worst of European Colonialism makes for an intreasting argument when people say they're too nice

I'm pretty sure that the Tau are based on modern day USA.

... And I'm pretty sure you're wrong. they don't really have much in common with the USA

I'm not sure how I could put it without it coming off as racist :L

Tau based on the modern USA...an interesting comparison. Have to think about that.

Another thing that annoys me is having purchased so many army books for the same army in my lifetime.

I don't like kill points. I much prefer old victory points. You're telling me killing a rhino is worth the same as killing a land raider? No, it should be based on unit cost like it used to.

Raven Cowl wrote:
I play DE. No good Unique HQs, few options against vehicles, feeling like my codex is a supplement for the Craftworld Eldar.

This.

Also:

1) I dislike that a 10pt Lhamaean is the best HQ in my book, and that 90% of wargear spent on other HQs is just throwing good points after bad.

2) Fliers do not belong in a game of this scale. Nor did their rules need to be written by a hamster.

3) Dreadknights, Imperial Knights, Riptides, Wraithknights, Gargantuan creatures and Super-Heavies do not belong in a game of this scale either. Not only that, but Super-Heavies/IKs are practically the definition of boring units, and the others are walkers which are somehow classified as MCs.

4) Daemonkin stole my army's Power from Pain rule. I'd like it back, please.

5) Random tables, more random tables, yet more random table, random victory points. In the unlikely event that a match isn't decided at the list-building stage, you might as well just flip a coin over who wins.

6) Many matches decided during the list-building stage.

7) The wound allocation rules need to drink some paint and die.

8) I used to like Phil Kelly and think he was one of the better authors (not that the bar was set very high to begin with), but it's like he's gradually being possessed by the Spirit of Crap Game Balance.

9) Looking at a new codex and thinking "wow, I wish they'd put that kind of effort into mine".

10) You can't shoot blasts or templates at invisible units, because God forbid anything in this game makes the slightest bit of sense.

11) I can't shoot that Wraithknight because it's in combat, and I might hit the guardsmen that come up to its shins.

12) I can't shoot that wraithknight because it's in combat with those termagants that reach its feet. And, the Hive Mind loves each and every termagant so much that it can't stomach the idea of risking harming even a single one.

13) Combat is such a rules black hole that it might as well be taking place in a pocket dimension, FF style.

14) The fact that I actually have to choose between 'units that I want to use' and 'units that will actually achieve something'.

15) The fact that GW charges excessive prices for rules that basically need to be completely rewritten in order to be functional.

Armoured Ceramite. Maybe it's just the language used but it just grinds my gears that this even exists. Ceramite is used for armour for all sorts of applications across the imperium, going by the entomology I would guess it's extremely resistant to heat. But wait! FW needed a rule to get people buying the latest kit. So here's some ceramite armour to better armour your ceramite. Yo dawg, etc.

 Chute82 wrote:
1) the rules...
2) the cost
3 the balance of the game
4) special rule on top of special rule
5) horrible for pick up games
6) horrible for tournament play
7) did I mention the cost?
8) cutting content out of codex just to charge you another $50
9) GW the company enough said
10) random random random everything

I don't like My Little Pony. You don't see me going on to a my little pony forum and telling everyone there I don't like everything about it. Because they wouldn't care, and it isn't constructive, and if I don't like a theme or genre then I just ignore it and move on with my life.

 Rippy wrote:

 Chute82 wrote:
1) the rules...
2) the cost
3 the balance of the game
4) special rule on top of special rule
5) horrible for pick up games
6) horrible for tournament play
7) did I mention the cost?
8) cutting content out of codex just to charge you another $50
9) GW the company enough said
10) random random random everything

I don't like My Little Pony. You don't see me going on to a my little pony forum and telling everyone there I don't like everything about it. Because they wouldn't care, and it isn't constructive, and if I don't like a theme or genre then I just ignore it and move on with my life.

Apologists for GW.

People who complain about a codex based on leaked images and rumours.

 Happyjew wrote:
People who complain about a codex based on leaked images and rumours.

people that defend an obviously broken codecx after its already neen leaked.

The 'no escape' rule.

Not only because it was such an unnecessary nerf, but because it's called 'no escape'.

What do you mean 'no escape'? My vehicles don't even have tops.

 vipoid wrote:
The 'no escape' rule.

Not only because it was such an unnecessary nerf, but because it's called 'no escape'.

What do you mean 'no escape'? My vehicles don't even have tops.

I think that's the point. If I roast your entire vehicle with flames, where are you gonna go? I could say maybe letting them do an emergency disembark to avoid it, but seriously. If I fill your vehicle with fire, you're screwed.

But then why are closed-top vehicles somehow immune?

Their passengers would be boiled alive.

 vipoid wrote:
But then why are closed-top vehkicles somehow immune?

Their passengers would be boiled alive.

it would take a heck of a lot to heat up a heat resistant tank enough to kill the crew.

 MWHistorian wrote:

 vipoid wrote:
But then why are closed-top vehkicles somehow immune?

Their passengers would be boiled alive.

it would take a heck of a lot to heat up a heat resistant tank enough to kill the crew.

Yeah. I'm not burning your vehicle, I'm literally just filling the transport space with fire, ala what the flamethrowers did to bunkers in WW2. They didn't hurt the bunkers, just torched the guys inside.

Little things that annoy me in 40k?
Squats

My CSM's chance of victory.

If there is one little thing that bugs me, It's really Dark Vengeance. It's an awful starter set, why did they have to use it for two editions, why couldn't they make Stormclaw the starter set? It was great, and I'm kicking myself for not getting it, Orks and Space Wolves make for a cool fight.

 FakeBritishPerson wrote:
If there is one little thing that bugs me, It's really Dark Vengeance. It's an awful starter set, why did they have to use it for two editions, why couldn't they make Stormclaw the starter set? It was great, and I'm kicking myself for not getting it, Orks and Space Wolves make for a cool fight.

This is very subjective. If you don't the factions, you won't like the starter set.

 Rippy wrote:

 FakeBritishPerson wrote:
If there is one little thing that bugs me, It's really Dark Vengeance. It's an awful starter set, why did they have to use it for two editions, why couldn't they make Stormclaw the starter set? It was great, and I'm kicking myself for not getting it, Orks and Space Wolves make for a cool fight.

This is very subjective. If you don't the factions, you won't like the starter set.

Well, look at what's in the set. Chaos chosen really aren't a great unit, they feel overcosted to me, and the stock hellbrute is just okay, the chaos Lord is cool, and the cultists are useful. Then you get Deathwing and Ravenwing, both I find to be annoying and overcost for what they give you, the librarian is a cool model and useful, the captain is okay, I like the model enough, and the Tac squad is meh IMO. Plasma pistols on sergeants don't feel worth it, the plasma gun is good, but the plasma cannon is just not good. Is that a bit of a better explanation on why I don't think it's a good starter set?

Grey Knight Janitor wrote:11) Scout Marines: In every single army in history, scouting has been a specialist job. Always elite. Why do marines start there, it makes no sense.

For the Space Marines, it makes sense. A Space Marine Scout has already been training for a decade by the time he is a Scout. But Space Marines aren't a conventional force. Scouts are picking out targets for an even more elite direct action force to hit.

When your whole army is elite, being elite isn't a distinguishing identifier in and of itself. Space Marines don't (and wouldn't) sneak around much, despite the sillier Raven Guard fluff out there. They're 7-7.5 feet tall and encased in powered armor. They weigh several hundred pounds and use miniature rocket rifles as their basic armament. And they're biologically engineered for all of those purposes. And because of that, it makes sense to give the least dangerous job (scouting) to your least experienced troops who aren't yet finished with that bio-engineering process (and thus can't do the heavy lifting work). It gives them valuable combat experience, provides reconnaissance and saves your limited strike assets for the actual sstriking.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

BrianDavion wrote:

SGTPozy wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
I think it might be on purporse with tau. They aren't supposed to be nice. In any other setting they would be the bad guys.

yeah pretty much this re Tau and Colonialism. none of the faction in 40k are supposed to be nice guys. Honestly the comparison of Tau to the worst of European Colonialism makes for an intreasting argument when people say they're too nice

I'm pretty sure that the Tau are based on modern day USA.

... And I'm pretty sure you're wrong. they don't really have much in common with the USA

They don't. That's his snide Eurocentrism forgetting that colonialism at the end of a gun/sword/spear has pretty much colored their entire history. But, but, Iraq. Or something. Except the Tau fluff predates 9/11. Maybe it's because Vietnam. Wait, no, that was a French colony first.

The Tau, like most things in 40K, are a blend of historical and science fiction references. Their society is based on British author Aldous Huxley's novel (which was in turn based on the Indian castes), and their aggressive empire-building could be... well, just about any empire in the entirety of history which enjoyed a technological superiority. So, most of them. In fact, there's basically nothing about the Tau that is singularly "American" unless your knowledge of history is fairly minimal.

BrianDavion wrote:

SGTPozy wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
I think it might be on purporse with tau. They aren't supposed to be nice. In any other setting they would be the bad guys.

yeah pretty much this re Tau and Colonialism. none of the faction in 40k are supposed to be nice guys. Honestly the comparison of Tau to the worst of European Colonialism makes for an intreasting argument when people say they're too nice

I'm pretty sure that the Tau are based on modern day USA.

... And I'm pretty sure you're wrong. they don't really have much in common with the USA

I am pretty sure if Barrack Obama wants someone to kill himself and his family for no reason, he would refuse. No Tau can do so when an Ethereal has given the order. The Ethereals are more like Communists in China. But Tau society, admittedly, bears a lot of resemblance to modern day USA.

1. The Psychic Phase
2. The 1 in 6 chance to fail something critical.
3. Random tables.

There's plenty more, but those are fresh on my mind after last night's butt-whoopin'

Random assault range. Stupidest rule in the game.

niv-mizzet wrote:
Random assault range. Stupidest rule in the game.

You don't think it's hilarious when your assault units trip over a stick and flub a 6" charge? You're obviously not Forging the Narrative hard enough, son.

 vipoid wrote:
9) Looking at a new codex and thinking "wow, I wish they'd put that kind of effort into mine".

You know, that really hit close to home. I didn't realize until now but I think that's the worst part about the recent Decuricrons and Scatbikes debacles. It's feeling like I'm considered a second class citizen by GW because I like Dark Eldar and Khorne Daemons better than their apparent poster boy armies. It's the false hope of "maybe my army is finally getting the same attention as everyone else's" then seeing everyone else just get buffed to crap with no hope of seeing any similar improvements for years to come.

Indeed.

Although, it's not just about buffs (though some would be nice...), it's about general effort and imagination.

e.g. Power from Pain got turned from an interesting and involving casualty-counting mechanic to a dull table with no involvement or interaction whatsoever. But wait - some units get to add 1 to the table. I think I'm about to have a heart-attack from all this excitement.

Well, whatever, I thought. I guess casualty-counting mechanics are just too complicated for GW's new streamlined codex design.

Oh, codex Daemonkin got a casualty-counting mechanic. And it's really fun and involving and all those other things Power from Pain should have been.

No, don't worry GW - I didn't want any interesting mechanics in *my* codex. Just put them in everyone else's and I'll make do with Captain Bland's Monotonous Edition.

ok, its quite new, but this one little thing annoys me everytime I read t.

In the description of how to use the Decurion style formation detachments,you are told that organising your models into detachments is "a fun process in its own right"

BS. messing about with formations is completely not fun. Arbitrarily not being able to take certain units because they aren't included, and being forced to take units you don't want to take because they are included - is not fun! Its a cheap ploy to make you buy more units.

Whiney players that dont even play the game who spam any forum dedicated to the game they can scour the internet for in order to complain in an effort to ruin the game for others so they can feel better about themselves. None on THIS site o course. lol

GW apologists. I love 40k, it's a freakin' blast, but there are a lot of things I would change, starting with the price of the models

 EVIL INC wrote:
Whiney players that dont even play the game who spam any forum dedicated to the game they can scour the internet for in order to complain in an effort to ruin the game for others so they can feel better about themselves. None on THIS site o course. lol

FYI - Adding "LOL" to things doesn't make the less rude.

People who complain on forums about people complaining on forums.

 vipoid wrote:
People who complain on forums about people complaining on forums.

The irony made me laugh

Have an exalt

The fact that GW pretty much denies the very existence of forgeworld.

That Gw seems to think that randumb is the solution to all things.

Also the chaos spawn table....err..i mean..boon table. I play at 1000 points and haven't finished a single game where my lord wasn't either turned into a spawn or a prince...both of which are bad.

it was not rude in any way shape or form lol or not. No more rude than saying many soccer fans get rowdy or many people who drink too much have impaired driving. Clearly stating that I am not talking about anyone HERE would ensure that it was not rude even if it had been rude elsewhere.

To stay on topic. Enjoying playing a game I grew up with and the ictional world that the game is set in does not make me an apologist at all. as a matter of fact, I am more critical of GW and it' policies that almost everyone on this forum.
To me, in the end, it is a game. There are many of it I disagree with but I stick with it anyway because it is a part of y life in how I grew up and ow I formed lifelong bonds with my closest friends. still play For fun To me, iIS annoying part of the game to be constantly bombarded by people who hate the game and are constantly ing me I HAVE to hate it or e or calling me an st because I dont constantly join in n the hate pew" despite the fact i agree with them on many aspects. To me, life is short. I dont feel the need to constantly be negative and take part in arguments and hate. To me, part of the game is getting along with one another, enjoying a characterful mental excersize that is visually stimulating and having fun despite any rules adversities.
Again, it needs to be noted that I am not discussing anyone on this forum.

 vipoid wrote:
People who complain on forums about people complaining on forums.

It's these people that complain about people complaining, about people complaining on forums that really annoys me. God they're so elitist.

But on topic, people telling others they aren't allowed an opinion as they don't play the game any more, while hand waving away the multitude of reasons why they don't play and ignoring for the most part that (from what I've read) a lot of them want to get back into 40k.

 Mozzyfuzzy wrote:

 vipoid wrote:
People who complain on forums about people complaining on forums.

It's these people that complain about people complaining, about people complaining on forums that really annoys me. God they're so elitist.

But on topic, people telling others they aren't allowed an opinion as they don't play the game any more, while hand waving away the multitude of reasons why they don't play and ignoring for the most part that (from what I've read) a lot of them want to get back into 40k.

Exactly this. I hate seeing genuine issues with the game being hand waved away as 'whining', and I hate people's opinions (mine included) being dismissed because we don't play the game. I used to play the game, and I still follow the game, I'm still allowed an opinion of the game. If things improved I might pick the game up again, that's why I'm still here. I still enjoy the lore and I enjoy discussing the game. People discuss things like sports all the time when they don't play it.

Contrary to popular belief we don't go around dumping on the game in every thread for no reason. We also don't dismiss people's opinions because they don't agree with ours. If you enjoy the game, good for you! But I'm allowed to voice my dissatisfaction of a product on a forum talking about said product. It's as much my forum as yours.

 Mozzyfuzzy wrote:

 vipoid wrote:
People who complain on forums about people complaining on forums.

It's these people that complain about people complaining, about people complaining on forums that really annoys me. God they're so elitist.

But on topic, people telling others they aren't allowed an opinion as they don't play the game any more, while hand waving away the multitude of reasons why they don't play and ignoring for the most part that (from what I've read) a lot of them want to get back into 40k.

Absolutely true. I see this a lot as well. I'm all for different opinions and people getting into/back into the game. i have never even once had a single issue with anyone who politely and respectfully stated their opinions in the spirit of doing so in an effort to improve the game. i have had issues with people who were disrespectfull, ignored my right to my opinion or such behavior of course but never once with anyone who are doing as you suggest. Back and forth banter and discussion often leads to cool house rules to overcome rules shortcomings and adding flavor to the game that you might not otherwise have had. The key part in that discussion is treating one another with dignity and respect. Something that you sadly rarely see online.

Captyn_Bob wrote:
ok, its quite new, but this one little thing annoys me everytime I read t.

In the description of how to use the Decurion style formation detachments,you are told that organising your models into detachments is "a fun process in its own right"

BS. messing about with formations is completely not fun. Arbitrarily not being able to take certain units because they aren't included, and being forced to take units you don't want to take because they are included - is not fun! Its a cheap ploy to make you buy more units.

Not to sound antagonistic, but why take the detachment if you're that against certain units? I agree that it's not that fun to build detachments but no one's forcing you to take the detachment in the first place.

I think his objection is to being *told* that the decurion is fun to build.

I have every right to voice my opinion. Stop trying to silence opposition. I played 40k for over twenty years. I think I've earned a right to say my opinion. My opinion is that GW is a horrible company making an overpriced game with terrible rules.

 MWHistorian wrote:
I have every right to voice my opinion. Stop trying to silence opposition. I played 40k for over twenty years. I think I've earned a right to say my opinion. My opinion is that GW is a horrible company making an overpriced game with terrible rules.

What did I say?

Here's what annoys me most about 40k:

- Crappy Sisters models!
- Crappy Aspect Warrior models!
- Crappy Inquisition and Assassin models!
- Crappy Finecast named models!

Do you see a pattern? All my annoyances would be fixed by replacing crappy old models.

Oh yes, and getting 1 of each special weapon in a squad box, because of course, that's how we equip our squads.

Ordnance weapons on tanks
Random Warlord traits
How durable alien tanks are compared to human ones and turbo boost being more than "one use only"

Only little things, not hard to please!

 Rippy wrote:

 Chute82 wrote:
1) the rules...
2) the cost
3 the balance of the game
4) special rule on top of special rule
5) horrible for pick up games
6) horrible for tournament play
7) did I mention the cost?
8) cutting content out of codex just to charge you another $50
9) GW the company enough said
10) random random random everything

I don't like My Little Pony. You don't see me going on to a my little pony forum and telling everyone there I don't like everything about it. Because they wouldn't care, and it isn't constructive, and if I don't like a theme or genre then I just ignore it and move on with my life.

I would post this on GW forum but they don't have one.

 Talys wrote:
Here's what annoys me most about 40k:

- Crappy Sisters models!
- Crappy Aspect Warrior models!
- Crappy Inquisition and Assassin models!
- Crappy Finecast named models!

Do you see a pattern? All my annoyances would be fixed by replacing crappy old models.

Oh yes, and getting 1 of each special weapon in a squad box, because of course, that's how we equip our squads.

How great would it be if they made a multi-part multi-option box for Inquisitors and Assassins like the Space Marine commander box?

 vipoid wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:
I have every right to voice my opinion. Stop trying to silence opposition. I played 40k for over twenty years. I think I've earned a right to say my opinion. My opinion is that GW is a horrible company making an overpriced game with terrible rules.

What did I say?

I believe MWHistorian's reply was to Evil, Inc., not yours.

 Zewrath wrote:
1) Eldar codex (all of them except 5th)
2) Eldar special rules
3) Eldar
4) Random wound allocation
5) Random warlord traits
6) Random psychic powers
7) Mysterius objectives
8) Eldar

Someone got army envy?

What bugs me most recently is GW not giving consideration to revamping other books like they did to eldar. I can deal with their buffs but why can't other books get the same treatment? Instead mediocre units are copy pasted into other books. For example, and Bloodthirster is similar points wise but would get wholly smoked by a wraith knight. Khorne Daemonkin's lord of war is 3x costly and sucks ass compared to the Wraithknight. Why? (rhetorical) I am sure other books are similar or will be similar.


I don't like how in the 6th edition rule book a step by step list was there to help get the game started and walk through the phases. Now I can't make sense of it without studying it for a few minutes.

I don't like how I don't have enough money to buy all the awesome models I want all at once.

niv-mizzet wrote:
Random assault range. Stupidest rule in the game.

I just thought that it was odd that they added this rule in, but changed the rules to allow pre-measuring.

Random movement distances and no-premeasuring are typically included in wargames in order to introduce the same level of uncertainty that real world troops have. The idea, rules-wise, being that the troops can only guess how far away the enemy is and how far they can get before being shot down, so you the player would/should have to do that.

Allowing pre-measuring, but then adding in a random movement mechanic seems like it presents a conflicting game vision.

 amanita wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:
I have every right to voice my opinion. Stop trying to silence opposition. I played 40k for over twenty years. I think I've earned a right to say my opinion. My opinion is that GW is a horrible company making an overpriced game with terrible rules.

What did I say?

I believe MWHistorian's reply was to Evil, Inc., not yours.

LOL, he isnt talking to me. Thats for certain. I'm all for people having the right to voice their opinions. The only time I ever have any issues is when they tell me I dont have the right to voice mine and if they are totally rude and disrespectful.

1. AP should be 1-5 and should reduce armour by that number (ap 2 would make a marine a 5+ but would cut through an orks T-shirt save). Then make good AP less common.

Flamers and templates should hit invisible units! The wording of the spell should be "attacks must be made at BS1"

Poison weapons only having 1 Str. I get what they're going for with but if you're getting shot with anything it'll still fething hurt.

Oh how to narrow it down:

1) Make it harder (points increase? some drawback) not easier to mix armies.
2) Moar! choices not choice by random.
3) Can we end the high capability / low cost super units? Just a tiny bit of balance please?
4) Put to bed the concept that 40k is "competitive"? Only with a ton of "house rules" which is another name for tournament rules can it have a glimmer of hope.
5) Unit activation would be nice not the "I go first and win" or hide everything I can (deep-strike).

I think the above 5 are the most crippling little things that do not prevent play but certainly prevent the game from being better.

The inconsistancy of GW bugs me.

Skitarii comes out, and while there aren't a lot of things there, they are interesting and clearly well thought out to fit the current balance of power. On its heels comes Eldar Craftworlds...

Some people are expecting a power creep to match Eldar (and the Necron that we thought looked ridiculous until we saw Eldar) but if that's the case, why release this Skitarii codex now?

1. No Chaos Legions, only Chaos Renegades.
2. That Forgeworld makes better and more balanced rules than normal GW.
3. Having to buy four boxes of Havocs in order to field 4 autocannons.
4. Editions that change every two year.
5. The liberal application of the D. I don't want the D smeared all over my gaming surface! It's unhygienic.
6. Turn 1. I hate turn 1, can't we just start on turn 2 or something.

 welshhoppo wrote:
1. No Chaos Legions, only Chaos Renegades.
2. That Forgeworld makes better and more balanced rules than normal GW.
3. Having to buy four boxes of Havocs in order to field 4 autocannons.
4. Editions that change every two year.
5. The liberal application of the D. I don't want the D smeared all over my gaming surface! It's unhygienic.
6. Turn 1. I hate turn 1, can't we just start on turn 2 or something.

I know you jest on your sixth point, but riddle me this; what if we had a first round of only movement before we start the game?
This allows people a tactical movement after seeing where everyone is placed and who goes first. Maybe say it can't move further out of the deployment zone than 3 inches to allow you to reach things that were just beyond, but still not give assault armies a huge bonus.

 Purifier wrote:

 welshhoppo wrote:
1. No Chaos Legions, only Chaos Renegades.
2. That Forgeworld makes better and more balanced rules than normal GW.
3. Having to buy four boxes of Havocs in order to field 4 autocannons.
4. Editions that change every two year.
5. The liberal application of the D. I don't want the D smeared all over my gaming surface! It's unhygienic.
6. Turn 1. I hate turn 1, can't we just start on turn 2 or something.

I know you jest on your sixth point, but riddle me this; what if we had a first round of only movement before we start the game?
This allows people a tactical movement after seeing where everyone is placed and who goes first. Maybe say it can't move further out of the deployment zone than 3 inches to allow you to reach things that were just beyond, but still not give assault armies a huge bonus.

My biggest annoyance with turn one is that one side often takes a hammering in the first turn and it throws the game off balance. I normally lose games in the first turn. Or win them, as the case might be. Maybe movement only would be a cool idea, but then it flings it to the spectrum of assault units, who could be in your face before a single shot is fired.

 EVIL INC wrote:

 amanita wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:
I have every right to voice my opinion. Stop trying to silence opposition. I played 40k for over twenty years. I think I've earned a right to say my opinion. My opinion is that GW is a horrible company making an overpriced game with terrible rules.

What did I say?

I believe MWHistorian's reply was to Evil, Inc., not yours.

LOL, he isnt talking to me. Thats for certain. I'm all for people having the right to voice their opinions. The only time I ever have any issues is when they tell me I dont have the right to voice mine and if they are totally rude and disrespectful.

I was absolutely tslking to you, Evil. As stated by you in a thread you started sbout tactics, you defined disrespectful as disagreement.

 MWHistorian wrote:
I have every right to voice my opinion. Stop trying to silence opposition. I played 40k for over twenty years. I think I've earned a right to say my opinion. My opinion is that GW is a horrible company making an overpriced game with terrible rules.

After seeing a lot of your posts, I'm honestly curious why you would spend time on the 40K forums? Not being sarcastic or anything, but if you dislike the game and no longer play, why spend free time on message boards dedicated to it?

In regards to the OP, the lack of options for kits can be a pain. Want to have a 4 man team of autocannon havocs? Better hit up ebay or buy more kits.

 clamclaw wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:
I have every right to voice my opinion. Stop trying to silence opposition. I played 40k for over twenty years. I think I've earned a right to say my opinion. My opinion is that GW is a horrible company making an overpriced game with terrible rules.

After seeing a lot of your posts, I'm honestly curious why you would spend time on the 40K forums? Not being sarcastic or anything, but if you dislike the game and no longer play, why spend free time on message boards dedicated to it?

In regards to the OP, the lack of options for kits can be a pain. Want to have a 4 man team of autocannon havocs? Better hit up ebay or buy more kits.

because I feel like it and shouldn't have to explain myself to you. Its been answered several times before and im tired of giving the same answer over and over again.

 clamclaw wrote:
Not being sarcastic or anything, but if you dislike the game and no longer play, why spend free time on message boards dedicated to it?

This is an interesting observation I have seen written many times and I think I have a common answer to this:
The game did not always suck for this person.
They remember a time they loved the game and hope by giving what feedback they can, it can become something they like again.
You could get picky about how misguided that may be but the willingness to be involved until that time can be respected.

Just because we disagree with something does not preclude involvement.
Or else why get involved in a debate? Especially in a forum...

1. The fact that i spend hundreds of euros on my army and they release a crappy codex (orks) Why not make every codex just as good as the other and let skill and luck of the dice decide the game instead of. Oh look at my Wave Serpent/Riptide/Helldrake.... It can do everything!

2. The fact that the amount of extra bits that come in a box are near non existent these days

3. Release "the same" color under a new name, yet when you have painted the model and put them next to eachother the color differs slightly

4. That GW chooses to "fix" armies that need it less than others first

5. The fact they put the point costs of a unit only on the unit page and not like old dexes in an army selection chapter like they used to.

6. The amount of pictures from painted models in a codex. Please.. Less... More artwork and army fluff plx

7. The fact they are deleting named characters from codexes... I am now stuck with models that cannot be played anymore...

8. The utter lack of new and variation of terrain scenery they release... 99% is imperium
9. I never hear people stopping with their complaints about the GW glue being crappy... I dont even use GW glue anymore since it doesnt glue stuff together

10. Resin.... Omfg.... Why they ever decided to release this ever bending ever breaking filled with airholes crap idk...

 welshhoppo wrote:
1. No Chaos Legions, only Chaos Renegades.
2. That Forgeworld makes better and more balanced rules than normal GW.
3. Having to buy four boxes of Havocs in order to field 4 autocannons.
4. Editions that change every two year.
5. The liberal application of the D. I don't want the D smeared all over my gaming surface! It's unhygienic.
6. Turn 1. I hate turn 1, can't we just start on turn 2 or something.

Actually I think the codex is even worse for astartes renegades. Renegades chapters have access to all the shiny stuff the loyalists gets , just before they go full renegade. And the Codex they get to represent that?.....yyyyyyeeeeeeaaaaaa....
And then along come crimson slaughter to act all tough in front of abaddon and somehow get better possessed than word bearers...mmmh...riiiiight. Go GW !

 Talizvar wrote:

 clamclaw wrote:
Not being sarcastic or anything, but if you dislike the game and no longer play, why spend free time on message boards dedicated to it?

This is an interesting observation I have seen written many times and I think I have a common answer to this:
The game did not always suck for this person.
They remember a time they loved the game and hope by giving what feedback they can, it can become something they like again.
You could get picky about how misguided that may be but the willingness to be involved until that time can be respected.

Just because we disagree with something does not preclude involvement.
Or else why get involved in a debate? Especially in a forum...

True, and I totally feel you on players wanting it to be like they remember/brining it back to what they liked. I mean I started collecting around 3rd Ed. or so, and seeing it 'evolve' has been... interesting. Obviously there's productive ways to address the games problems, and a forum is just the place for that discussion.

However Dakka is a vocal minority, and sometimes the tone comes off cocksure regarding the direction they want the game to go. Everybody wants a little something different out of the game so it's hard to make a fix to please 100% of the players/collectors. Then again, we're given plenty of low hanging fruit in the form of scatter laser jetbikes etc.

What bugs me is the nonsense bundles that GW offers orks.
My example: the Kult of Speed web bundle

9 warbikers: good deal

1 bomber: weak but fluffy, I'll take it

2 battlewagons: Starting to stray into heavy weapons type army but okay

1 mek: not really speedy but good for the wagons?

5 lootas: wait, what

5 flash gitz: GW, stahp

If you release a thematic army bundle, can you at least try to stick to a theme?

Roknar wrote:

 welshhoppo wrote:
1. No Chaos Legions, only Chaos Renegades.
2. That Forgeworld makes better and more balanced rules than normal GW.
3. Having to buy four boxes of Havocs in order to field 4 autocannons.
4. Editions that change every two year.
5. The liberal application of the D. I don't want the D smeared all over my gaming surface! It's unhygienic.
6. Turn 1. I hate turn 1, can't we just start on turn 2 or something.

Actually I think the codex is even worse for astartes renegades. Renegades chapters have access to all the shiny stuff the loyalists gets , just before they go full renegade. And the Codex they get to represent that?.....yyyyyyeeeeeeaaaaaa....
And then along come crimson slaughter to act all tough in front of abaddon and somehow get better possessed than word bearers...mmmh...riiiiight. Go GW !

I always get the feeling that most of the CSM book is Chaos Renegades circa M32. Before they get all the cool shiny gear.

I don't mind dinobots, but can't I at least have artificer armour and storm shields. Partly so I could run a T6 Nurgle biker Lord with a 2+/3++. Just because I hate everything.

@Waaghboss Grobnub -

1 & 4 - GW has always been lousy at balance. For 30 years, this has been so.
2. What do you mean? The new sprues have TONS of extra bits. Lookie the Admech or the Blood Angels Tacticals?
3. That was a pretty long time ago, and yeah, keeping some of the old colors would have been nice. But the new paint range is WAY better than the old one.
5. Battlescribe!
6. Actually, I like the photos. But the artwork is nice too... I would like both!
7. I'm with you on this. I don't really get why some of the codices (like Dark Eldar) get HQs deleted while others (like Blood Angels) don't. It's not like that Tycho model is real new.
8. Well, at least there IS terrain. Almost every other wargame has no terrain to speak of.
9. Can't say, haven't used GW glue in forever.
10. I dunno why GW (Finecast) has more bubbles than FW or many other companies' resin. You'd think they'd have figured it out. But I <3 plastic.

You DO get artificer armour....except that GW does in a really backwards slap to the face kinda way. Just like they always do chaos.
We have fleshmetal, which is exactly what the fluff describes and is what we used to have and it's awesome. Until you realize you can't actually choose it and it only comes stock on some models.

As for dinobots...uuuuughh...add that to the list of gripes lol. The models themselves aren't that bad, except for the static pose of the heldrake. But I think they don't suit the chaos marine look n feel. Especially the helturkey. Looks nothing at all like a corrupted hell blade or any other flyer.
The mauler fiend is ok though, if you use the ectoplasma head...I hate the actual maulerfiend head. Maybe it's just because I prefer more blocky stuff like the defiler or the forgeworld decimator.

But the dinobots fit right in with their other comical relief models, like their possessed, or the storm raven/talon. They look like kids toys straight from a cartoon.

1.) Assault Range mishaps (I dunno if I can run that far, so I'll just stand here and wait and catch my breath).

I'd like to see if maybe if you didn't make range, you can roll a die to see if you can move closer? Or travel the distance you rolled to close the gap? Just maybe put a caveat in that you can't assault something more than 12' away?

2.) Old arse models at still ridiculous prices.

Ork warbuggy and deffkopta, you come to mind. I don't think I've seen the 'webstore exclusive' deffkopta once. And the warbuggy is so damn old but still at new price.

Maybe if everyone is using AOBR deffkoptas, why not just release those?

 Talys wrote:
@Waaghboss Grobnub -


2. What do you mean? The new sprues have TONS of extra bits. Lookie the Admech or the Blood Angels Tacticals?
.

I just built a squad of skiitari rangers yesterday.

You get:

1, exactly, of each special weapon and piece of equipment.

Even if you just take them as 1 squad instead of 2 minimum-sized squads, you should be able to take THREE of any special weapon. (Three. You know. Like an Eldar Jetbike.) in fact, taking 3 SWs is kind of the POINT of a 10 man squad.

I just went ahead and used the other unit type 's guns as my special weapon of choice. Then I sold the actual SWs on ebay and made 20 bucks back off my 35$ box of models.

Oh, also, all the legs/torsos are monopose. When I made my rust stalkers, everything but the arms was monopose. They come with all the weapons you need because the only SWs they can bring are full squad-swaps, or they're 1-per-squad upgrades on the sarge. That box does get points for having an optional sarge if you want 2 boxes to make a 10-man unit.

But no, the SW layout on the basic infantry is just as bad as the stereotypical "1 MM 1 Las 1 Plas 1 HB 1 Sarge" Devastators squad.

If they released AOBR deffkoptas, I would drop my freshly emptied wallet and go on a buying spree. Those models are well made and look amazing. The models in the webstore look flimsier than the dwarf gyrocopter, and we're comparing a space faring race's machine to a fantasy race's.

I only knew the AOBR version since my friend bought like 6 or so lol. Just looked at the normal deffkopta....wow.

That.....wow...just.....wow

 the Signless wrote:
If they released AOBR deffkoptas, I would drop my freshly emptied wallet and go on a buying spree. Those models are well made and look amazing. The models in the webstore look flimsier than the dwarf gyrocopter, and we're comparing a space faring race's machine to a fantasy race's.

Roknar wrote:
I only knew the AOBR version since my friend bought like 6 or so lol. Just looked at the normal deffkopta....wow.

That.....wow...just.....wow

Fun fact- that model was Gorkamorka special character Dregmek Blitzkart and is more than likely older than much of GW's customer base.

Makes me feel just a little bit better about csm and sisters lol

I dislike that the catachans and the cadians are seperated at the waist differently. One is cut above the belt and one below. This makes kitbashing the two a little problematic depending on which halves your trying to put together. This sort of thing i feel should be "universal".

 MWHistorian wrote:

 EVIL INC wrote:

 amanita wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:
I have every right to voice my opinion. Stop trying to silence opposition. I played 40k for over twenty years. I think I've earned a right to say my opinion. My opinion is that GW is a horrible company making an overpriced game with terrible rules.

What did I say?

I believe MWHistorian's reply was to Evil, Inc., not yours.

LOL, he isnt talking to me. Thats for certain. I'm all for people having the right to voice their opinions. The only time I ever have any issues is when they tell me I dont have the right to voice mine and if they are totally rude and disrespectful.

I was absolutely tslking to you, Evil. As stated by you in a thread you started sbout tactics, you defined disrespectful as disagreement.

Then no disrespect intended but I believe you are simply wrong, but i respect your right to feel that they are the same thing. My stance is and always has been that Disagreement does NOT equal disrespect.Disrespect is when you do not acknowledge that others have a right to disagree. it is also a total disregard for the fact that different people have different opinions, backgrounds and views on the game. It is also calling them names and belittling them. I am all for disagreement and differences of opinion Without that, we would all be automatons sharing a single hive mind and honestly, that would be rather boring to me. If you are able to simply disagree with someone politely and treat them with dignity and respect, I will never ever have trouble with you. I have always treated others with the utmost dignity and respect and have never had any issues with anyone else who does the same.
however, if you wish to continue this conversation, feel free to use the PM function. I feel that pm is a more suitable place for such conversations. Less drama that way.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 clamclaw wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:
I have every right to voice my opinion. Stop trying to silence opposition. I played 40k for over twenty years. I think I've earned a right to say my opinion. My opinion is that GW is a horrible company making an overpriced game with terrible rules.

After seeing a lot of your posts, I'm honestly curious why you would spend time on the 40K forums? Not being sarcastic or anything, but if you dislike the game and no longer play, why spend free time on message boards dedicated to it?

In regards to the OP, the lack of options for kits can be a pain. Want to have a 4 man team of autocannon havocs? Better hit up ebay or buy more kits.

For many o us who grew up playing the game, it has become a part of our lives. More so for people ike myself who was here at the very beginning with Rogue trader but also for others who came in later. This means that even though we people might not actually PLAY the game, they still love the fluff and enjoy discussing aspects of it. Not to mention that they may want to keep tabs on the game for the time when the rules are ccled around to suit their personal preferences again.
I rather enjoy discussing the game with others whether they play or not so I dont mind people coming here to talk about the game when they no longer play.
This is why I specified only one type of person in my earlier post. There is a difference between someone who discusses the game and parts that they like or dont like and someone who spews negativity and drama putting down anyone who isnt storming the wals with hatred. The former, i enjoy talking with while the other can be annoying.
But at the end of the day, if someone wants to spend time here even though they dont play, it is their right and they dont have to explain themselves. You can only hope that they fall into the former catagory. If not, there is an ignore function.

 EVIL INC wrote:

For many o us who grew up playing the game, it has become a part of our lives. More so for people ike myself who was here at the very beginning with Rogue trader but also for others who came in later. This means that even though we people might not actually PLAY the game, they still love the fluff and enjoy discussing aspects of it. Not to mention that they may want to keep tabs on the game for the time when the rules are ccled around to suit their personal preferences again.
I rather enjoy discussing the game with others whether they play or not so I dont mind people coming here to talk about the game when they no longer play.
This is why I specified only one type of person in my earlier post. There is a difference between someone who discusses the game and parts that they like or dont like and someone who spews negativity and drama putting down anyone who isnt storming the wals with hatred. The former, i enjoy talking with while the other can be annoying.
But at the end of the day, if someone wants to spend time here even though they dont play, it is their right and they dont have to explain themselves. You can only hope that they fall into the former catagory. If not, there is an ignore function.

I'm by no means upset or really bothered, was just an honest question. The way you described it makes a lot of sense, and I can see now where he would be coming from. And there are definitely two ways to go about fruitful discussion, though to each their own.

1) Jink, its way too powerful especially when 3+ and in that it doesn't affect passengers of transports

2) Prevalence of high S / low AP guns. They should be more rare (i.e. pts expensive)

3) Ridiculously durable MCs. High T,W,Sv models should be introduced with more care if at all, especially when they also have strong shooting and/or high mobility. In fact, this could be broadened to any model that is durable, powerful, and manueverable. Having all three of those qualities in spades just seems like poor design, regardless of pt cost.

4) That I don't have time to play more than a couple times a month anymore!

You get to play that often?!?!?!
Lucky you. :p

JubbJubbz wrote:
1) Jink, its way too powerful especially when 3+ and in that it doesn't affect passengers of transports

Agreed.

I much preferred Jink in 6th - when it was automatic as long as the vehicle moved, but only 5+. But then, I also don't think Jink should stack with cover modifiers (with the possible exception of Skilled Rider). So, you can't just pile Stealth, Shrouded and such onto a Jink save.

One other interesting idea I've seen is that a vehicle's jink save should worsen by 1 for each point of front armour it has over 10.

A rupture cannon is more likely to damage a baneblade than it is to hurt a Terminator.

Wat.

A Trygon is damn near impotent against a Dreadnought and may as well be using pillows against a Contemptor, despite it being able to see eye to eye with a knight.

Wat.

Also from the Chaos Space Marine's book: "Reality cutting claws" on Warp Talons and "Blades that simply phase through armor" on Lychguards, neither can penetrate the slapped together armor plating of a Meganob.

Kek.

I have one:

The fact that after 28 years and 7 versions of the game GW still doesn't have a ruleset that is clear, concise and consistent. After 7 bloody editions this game should be darn near perfect, but they have no ability to improve their game. They only know how to change it so it never gets better it just gets different.

Skriker

Today that chaos aren't properly represented by their gods...

idk I don't even like chaos that much...

Threads like this

ninety0ne wrote:
Threads like this

What's wrong with it?

ninety0ne wrote:
Threads like this

Ooooooohhh, BURN!

ninetyOne will put all you Negative Nancys in your place. I bet no one will post ITT after that epic putdown

-fear being absolutely useless at all times
-Daemon LoW needing to be only 25% of army when eldar can bring new GC wraithknights and Imperial Knights everywhere
-FW charging $60 for 10 death korp troops (still buying them though)
-the guy who refuses to play against FW superheavies even though he runs an imperial knight
-Wraithknights being GC when they should be a fething walker (as well a riptides, dreadknights, etc.)
-Dakkadakka general discussion being a cesspool of negativity

Lack of legion rules
Formations
Unbound
Allies
The widening gap between the stronger and weaker dexes. I could use it to explain the wealth gap in the US if I had to.

1) Bikes sassault no faster then everage infantry.

2) Flyers can't put their base nearer then 1" to enemy unit and can not stand on impassable terrain and should crash instead.

3) Unclear rules about cover for flyers.

4) Chance of FMCs to drop is too small.

5) MCs are so much better then Walkers.

The things that annoy me are:
1) Old and outdated Chaos space marine models. those plastics are really starting to show their age

2) Rolling up the Black Templars codex into the marines codex. Look, I understand why they did it and it makes sense but that doesn't mean I have to like it.

3) Leman Russ punisher. I really wish that was at least 36 inch range. But the 24 inch range makes it pretty dangerous to use.

off topic but this thread brings a smile to my face

for me it's

Space marines EVERYWHERE for the most elite unit in the galaxy there sure is a heck of alot of em running around

Hot Shot Lasguns, For 1 i like Hellgun For 2 should be like 20 range

rarely... Honestly? the players... there is alot of things that can make a game go bad and some people can be heated when it comes to rule debate which i don't think anyone really enjoys.

And how the GW hobby is shrinking. In my area we used to have 5-6 stores within thrity minutes back in 4th edition when i was a kid now it's like there's 1-2 near me and one doesn't even have 40k regulars anymore.

SGTPozy wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
I think it might be on purporse with tau. They aren't supposed to be nice. In any other setting they would be the bad guys.

yeah pretty much this re Tau and Colonialism. none of the faction in 40k are supposed to be nice guys. Honestly the comparison of Tau to the worst of European Colonialism makes for an intreasting argument when people say they're too nice

I'm pretty sure that the Tau are based on modern day USA.

Yeah man i got gills blue skin and a freakin' laser in my back yard ;D Seriously though My belief is that they seem to be ripped off from the Covenant from Halo. So Badly is not even funny.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

clamclaw wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:
I have every right to voice my opinion. Stop trying to silence opposition. I played 40k for over twenty years. I think I've earned a right to say my opinion. My opinion is that GW is a horrible company making an overpriced game with terrible rules.

After seeing a lot of your posts, I'm honestly curious why you would spend time on the 40K forums? Not being sarcastic or anything, but if you dislike the game and no longer play, why spend free time on message boards dedicated to it?

In regards to the OP, the lack of options for kits can be a pain. Want to have a 4 man team of autocannon havocs? Better hit up ebay or buy more kits.

MWHistorian wrote:

 clamclaw wrote:

 MWHistorian wrote:
I have every right to voice my opinion. Stop trying to silence opposition. I played 40k for over twenty years. I think I've earned a right to say my opinion. My opinion is that GW is a horrible company making an overpriced game with terrible rules.

After seeing a lot of your posts, I'm honestly curious why you would spend time on the 40K forums? Not being sarcastic or anything, but if you dislike the game and no longer play, why spend free time on message boards dedicated to it?

In regards to the OP, the lack of options for kits can be a pain. Want to have a 4 man team of autocannon havocs? Better hit up ebay or buy more kits.

because I feel like it and shouldn't have to explain myself to you. Its been answered several times before and im tired of giving the same answer over and over again.

if people weren't allowed to vent frustration on a public forum BAD things could happen. And considering that the OP was about what one disliked about 40k his feelings are inline with what we are talking abouthowever i disagree with how he went about replying i do feel that something should be mentioned ...

If 40k was perfect and we ALL enjoyed the game to the greatest possible extent then the forums of the interwebs would be free of any Negativity alas, nothing is perfect And MOST would agree that the 40k is by far the truest example of it.

Also maybe alot of this negativity has to do with 40k originally being more akin to a RPG then a mini-wargaming strategy game.

LessThen1intiative wrote:
off topic but this thread brings a smile to my face

for me it's

Space marines EVERYWHERE for the most elite unit in the galaxy there sure is a heck of alot of em running around

Hot Shot Lasguns, For 1 i like Hellgun For 2 should be like 20 range

rarely... Honestly? the players... there is alot of things that can make a game go bad and some people can be heated when it comes to rule debate which i don't think anyone really enjoys.

And how the GW hobby is shrinking. In my area we used to have 5-6 stores within thrity minutes back in 4th edition when i was a kid now it's like there's 1-2 near me and one doesn't even have 40k regulars anymore.

SGTPozy wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
I think it might be on purporse with tau. They aren't supposed to be nice. In any other setting they would be the bad guys.

yeah pretty much this re Tau and Colonialism. none of the faction in 40k are supposed to be nice guys. Honestly the comparison of Tau to the worst of European Colonialism makes for an intreasting argument when people say they're too nice

I'm pretty sure that the Tau are based on modern day USA.

Yeah man i got gills blue skin and a freakin' laser in my back yard ;D Seriously though My belief is that they seem to be ripped off from the Covenant from Halo. So Badly is not even funny.

They were both released in 2001, so that's doubful. Really, I think they are classic high-tech scifi, mixed with Confucianism, and British imperialism, as well as how Christianity was often intertwined with the same.

meh idk they are more like shinto-ism and share alot of similarities to the covenant and i don't see a correalation with "the greater good" and modern religions

EDIT:

Tau have the caste system just like the covenant.
ethereals=prophets, Warrior Caste = Grunts, Kroot = What the Elites Were before the Prophets found them, etc. etc. etc. oh and the greater good sounds awe-fully familiar to the covenant's Ultimate responsibility, Also they both have caste systems and always seem to outclass humans in every conceivable way (Inf V Inf Warfare that is).

LessThen1intiative wrote:
meh idk they are more like shinto-ism and share alot of similarities to the covenant and i don't see a correalation with "the greater good" and modern religions

EDIT:

Tau have the caste system just like the covenant.
ethereals=prophets, Warrior Caste = Grunts, Kroot = What the Elites Were before the Prophets found them, etc. etc. etc. oh and the greater good sounds awe-fully familiar to the covenant's Ultimate responsibility, Also they both have caste systems and always seem to outclass humans in every conceivable way (Inf V Inf Warfare that is).

Well, then I suppose Bungie wrote their background in one month, ripping off Tau before release, as Codex: Tau was released one month before Halo 1 was in 2001.
Or we can maybe look at the more likely option that while likenesses can be drawn they are simply two different worlds inspired by real life politics, invented separately.

Some things that annoy me about playing the game. More so what other players do.

1) players that move their units 7 inches if they're trying to close in. My brother does it all the time! Taking extra inches everywhere...

2) People that play hyper competitive lists to destroy their friends. Personally I feel dirty if my army was way ahead before rolling any dice.

3) People that roll 2 dice for twin linked instead of re-rolling like you're supposed to. I know technically it should be the same, but it's not!

4) People that roll their terminator saves 1 at a time.........not the same as rolling all 8 at once!

5) People that say the dice are cocked when they've missed but not cocked if they roll a 6!

6) People that lie about their wargear. I once played a guy when he failed a 2plus armor save on his hero, I informed him that it would be overkill...he paused and looked concerned then said he took an item that gave toughness 5. I new the guy was cheating.

7) People who jinx your dice rolls. "Oh you're definitely going to kill my guy", or "just don't roll a 1" just before you roll your dice!

8) people who proxy stuff. Mostly if the model is completely different or even from another codex.

9) Floaters. That is people who can't shut up and have a huge grin on their face because they're winning.

10) Playing against Tau, Eldar, or Necrons is obnoxious. Not the players fault really just bad game design.

I know I'm forgetting something but that's all I can think of for now.

bob82ca wrote:

8) people who proxy stuff. Mostly if the model is completely different or even from another codex.

*cough*

Yes, what sort of monster would do a thing like that.

*Looks down at my IG Sentinel standing in for a DE Cronos*

 Purifier wrote:

LessThen1intiative wrote:
meh idk they are more like shinto-ism and share alot of similarities to the covenant and i don't see a correalation with "the greater good" and modern religions

EDIT:

Tau have the caste system just like the covenant.
ethereals=prophets, Warrior Caste = Grunts, Kroot = What the Elites Were before the Prophets found them, etc. etc. etc. oh and the greater good sounds awe-fully familiar to the covenant's Ultimate responsibility, Also they both have caste systems and always seem to outclass humans in every conceivable way (Inf V Inf Warfare that is).

Well, then I suppose Bungie wrote their background in one month, ripping off Tau before release, as Codex: Tau was released one month before Halo 1 was in 2001.
Or we can maybe look at the more likely option that while likenesses can be drawn they are simply two different worlds inspired by real life politics, invented separately.

I'm almost certain that this is what happened with Destiny.

ZING!

LessThen1intiative wrote:
meh idk they are more like shinto-ism and share alot of similarities to the covenant and i don't see a correalation with "the greater good" and modern religions

The greater good is a religion without god. A rigid ideal, with a select few who interprete that ideal (much like priests). Much like Christianity during the time of British imperialism, it is spread to all those they control, often by force.

MarsNZ wrote:
Armoured Ceramite. Maybe it's just the language used but it just grinds my gears that this even exists. Ceramite is used for armour for all sorts of applications across the imperium, going by the entomology I would guess it's extremely resistant to heat. But wait! FW needed a rule to get people buying the latest kit. So here's some ceramite armour to better armour your ceramite. Yo dawg, etc.

As you know, I couldn't agree more. It's the extra rules for things that are theoretically actually part of the basic rules that gets me. Extra ceramite when everything is supposedly ceramite. Targeting bonuses, when targeters should be considered part of the Bs skill anyway, etc.