The State of 40k Forums...

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Ailaros**

Grimtuff wrote:You don't write tight rules then the players will try to jump through those loopholes you've created.

That's like saying that all behavior is acceptable so long as it isn't illegal.

It's the government's fault for not writing tougher laws against murder if I can kill someone and get away with it, is that it?

I guess so long as we don't have to take responsibility for our own actions, or live with the consequences therefrom, then I guess we're all all right, right?

**Azreal13**

I think constructive moderate complaining is ok. I wish 40k had a better moral system. But if instead of complaining I play Flames of war which has a pretty decent moral system.

Don't normally pick people up on their spelling, but this is independently amusing.

So FoW is better at rewarding players who are nice with their models?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ailaros wrote:
Grimtuff wrote:You don't write tight rules then the players will try to jump through those loopholes you've created.

That's like saying that all behavior is acceptable so long as it isn't illegal.

It's the government's fault for not writing tougher laws against murder if I can kill someone and get away with it, is that it?

I guess so long as we don't have to take responsibility for our own actions, or live with the consequences therefrom, then I guess we're all all right, right?

Erm, the law says murder is illegal. If you commit murder and get away with it, then it is either a failure of the law enforcement community or testament to your knowledge and forward planning.

Unless you're arguing that the government failed because they didn't upgrade murder to really illegal and if they had, you'd have stayed in the straight and narrow?

Good strawman ad absurdum though.

**Psienesis**

Yes, you can play a game of 40k, but the amount of hoops you have to jump through (never mind the minefield that getting a random pickup game has become) with your opponent just to agree on what rules are allowed to be used "no escalation" "no formations" "no stronghold assault". Take your pick. Gone are the days when you could just walk into a store or club for a random pickup game and both you and your opponent would know exactly what the fething rules for the game were!

Uh... those are the rules. When you're looking for a game with no this, no that and no of the other thing... now you're house-ruling.

If people want to play the game as published, it's pretty much anything-goes. If you do not want to have that, then that's where people are running into problems.

**Swastakowey**

azreal13 wrote:
I think constructive moderate complaining is ok. I wish 40k had a better moral system. But if instead of complaining I play Flames of war which has a pretty decent moral system.

Don't normally pick people up on their spelling, but this is independently amusing.

So FoW is better at rewarding players who are nice with their models?

Sorry, I try pretty hard to not let my dyslexia show (years of practice) but it still shows

Also im only on dakka at work so I dont get to proof read much. So read that as Morale please haha.

**EmilCrane**

Co'tor Shas wrote:
Kilkrazy wrote:
You should check out Bolter & Chainsword. I understand that they are very pro-GW.

And anti-anythingwithoutpowerarmour.

Considering its a dedicated space marine forum what were you expecting?

OP remember that the internet is a vocal minority, albeit a very large one here on Dakka. People rarely go onto the internet to post about how everything is fine and working properly. The problems with 40k exist but they may not be as noticeable in your particular gaming group. Play the game your guys way and take the opinions of Dakka as indications of wider trends in the 40k "fandom" (urgh I hate using that word but in this case its appropriate)

**Psienesis**

People rarely go onto the internet to post about how everything is fine and working properly.

This is true of just about everything, not just 40K. Any consumer product holds true to this.

**tyrannosaurus**

Ailaros wrote:
There's something else I've noticed as well, from a personal note. It could be nothing but a change in myself, but I have a hunch that my behavior is reactive to my environment.

And that change is Dakka's "ignore" feature. For all the time I'd been on dakka, I'd never used the ignore feature until a year and a half ago when I added one person. I didn't add my second until about 6 months ago. The reason was simple - most people who were on dakka would write good posts and bad posts, but either seemed to be having conversation in good faith, or they would show up and then quickly disappear.

Now, though, every other week I feel like I'm adding someone to the list. Someone who writes dozens and dozens of posts in a row with nothing but useless, angry drivel that seems to have nothing but degrading other people's experience of the game. Nothing but complaining, or vigorously refuting anyone who has the impudence of enjoying themselves.

The mud isn't getting thrown and then sliding off, it's people who are coming on and with an almost professional zeal dedicating themselves towards bad faith posting. The worst, and most curious, are people who complain about 40k or GW who don't even play 40k, or buy GW products anymore. They appear to want nothing more than to be bitter and angry and to make everyone else around them bitter and angry.

And so, at an accelerating pace, I'm finding I'm adding more people who can't ever seem to rise to the level of nice, pleasant, or useful to my ignore list. Which feels sad to me.

This, except the part about ignoring people, because reading posts by ex-40kers ranting on 40k forums about how terrible 40k is has a morbid fascination for me.

**EmilCrane**

Psienesis wrote:
People rarely go onto the internet to post about how everything is fine and working properly.

This is true of just about everything, not just 40K. Any consumer product holds true to this.

Yes I was speaking generally, same thing happens on video game forums for example. The RTS/RTT genre especially.

**Kain**

EmilCrane wrote:
Psienesis wrote:
People rarely go onto the internet to post about how everything is fine and working properly.

This is true of just about everything, not just 40K. Any consumer product holds true to this.

Yes I was speaking generally, same thing happens on video game forums for example. The RTS/RTT genre especially.

You mean starcraft, planetary annihilation and a bunch of MOBAs and RTT games right

**TheCustomLime**

It's not all bad, to be fair. There is some positive attitude among the 30k players and people seem to like the fluff good enough.

On the other hand... it's kind of hard not to feel angry at Games Workshop when they seem to disregard our feelings so callously and commit bad decisions while telling us it's for our own good.

**Ailaros**

azreal wrote:Good strawman ad absurdum though.

Not all analogies a person fails to understand are straw men.

Furthermore, the opposite is a gigantic post-hoc fallacy. Really, GW CAUSED you to behave badly by writing bad rules? A person's behavior is their own choice. They can't then blame their choices on others as if the other was the cause of their actions.

It's the same blatantly broken logic that tells us guns kill people, rich people cause poverty, low wages for teachers causes drug use, and any other desperate attempt to get other people to be the cause of their actions.

The responsibility of what a person does lies squarely and solely on the person doing them. If you do bad things, it's because you're an ass. Demanding that someone else force you to stop being an ass is just as asinine.

**Swastakowey**

Ailaros wrote:
azreal wrote:Good strawman ad absurdum though.

Not all analogies a person fails to understand are straw men.

Furthermore, the opposite is a gigantic ad-hoc fallacy. Really, GW CAUSED you to behave badly by writing bad rules? A person's behavior is their own choice. They can't then blame their choices on others as if the other was the cause of their actions.

It's the same blatantly broken logic that tells us guns kill people, rich people cause poverty, low wages for teachers causes drug use, and any other desperate attempt to get other people to be the cause of their actions.

The responsibility of what a person does lies squarely and solely on the person doing them. If you do bad things, it's because you're an ass. Demanding that someone else force you to stop being an ass is just as asinine.

Well worded.

The blame can only be passed for so long. The rules may let you, but they certainly dont make you.

**Peregrine**

Dakkamite wrote:
However whenever I enjoy a decent game of 40k, it is universlly in spite of the rules rather than because of them. Thats something that differentiates 40k from other wargames out there - that its really kinda crappy.

This.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Swastakowey wrote:
The blame can only be passed for so long. The rules may let you, but they certainly dont make you.

Yeah, the solution is to deliberately cripple your own list so that nobody complains that you're "trying too hard to win". Who cares if you enjoy coming up with new strategies to win, and don't enjoy making deliberate mistakes so your opponent will stop whining. CASUAL AT ALL COSTS.

**Swastakowey**

Peregrine wrote:
Dakkamite wrote:
However whenever I enjoy a decent game of 40k, it is universlly in spite of the rules rather than because of them. Thats something that differentiates 40k from other wargames out there - that its really kinda crappy.

This.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Swastakowey wrote:
The blame can only be passed for so long. The rules may let you, but they certainly dont make you.

Yeah, the solution is to deliberately cripple your own list so that nobody complains that you're "trying too hard to win". Who cares if you enjoy coming up with new strategies to win, and don't enjoy making deliberate mistakes so your opponent will stop whining. CASUAL AT ALL COSTS.

No not at all. Since you dont play 40k you probably dont understand.

The goal is not to cripple your list to make a bland easy lose game, but to make your list in a way that creates a better experience for both you AND your opponent. So its not taking a weak casual at all cost list. Its taking a FUN at all cost list. If your opponent does the same, then you will both have fun AT ALL COSTS. This involves a quick 1 minute talk about goals, units and map. Easy.

Communication is key. If my opponent whined id tell him to get over it because I made my list fair and played hard. But nobody whines because we both know we made fair lists to match the situation. It only takes 1-10 minutes.

Its called not being self obsessed to the point you think you should do anything you want and have fun. Its about setting up a game where both of you get what you want. If its competitive, the same rules apply, if its casual same rules apply. Its simple.

**Azreal13**

Ailaros wrote:
azreal wrote:Good strawman ad absurdum though.

Not all analogies a person fails to understand are straw men.

If someone fails to understand an analogy (and in this case, I believe it to be a big if) them surely the analogy itself is the failure?

Furthermore, the opposite is a gigantic ad-hoc fallacy. Really, GW CAUSED you to behave badly by writing bad rules? A person's behavior is their own choice. They can't then blame their choices on others as if the other was the cause of their actions.

What? No, GW has never caused me to behave badly. Just, to further torture your earlier analogy, nobody has ever caused me to become enraged enough to murder them. Bad behaviour can be incited by external influences though, but this is a massively more complex issue than is appropriate for a discussion about unhappy people talking about things in their hobby that they aren't happy about.

It's the same blatantly broken logic that tells us guns kill people, rich people cause poverty, low wages for teachers causes drug use, and any other desperate attempt to get other people to be the cause of their actions.

The responsibility of what a person does lies squarely and solely on the person doing them. If you do bad things, it's because you're an ass. Demanding that someone else force you to stop being an ass is just as asinine.

Still failing to see how this, in any way, is relevant to the subject at hand? Interesting debating point, totally irrelevant.

**Avinash_Tyagi**

Aleph-Sama wrote:
MWHistorian wrote:
Doesn't like how Dakka is all threads about complaints.
Starts a thread about a complaint.

Nah, just seeing if I can turn this ship a bit. I know it won't turn all the way around. I'm just asking for some decency. If you want to complain about something go ahead! But don't complain if people have been saying it for months now, AKA beating dead horses, preaching to the choir, etc, it jumbles the forum with stuff we've already heard!

You're free not to read posts you don't like

In addition, people have a right to voice their opinions as long as they are not violating any forum rules

If you don't care for these posts I'm sure there are other forums where you can find a tone you prefer

**ClockworkZion**

Peregrine wrote:
Yeah, the solution is to deliberately cripple your own list so that nobody complains that you're "trying too hard to win". Who cares if you enjoy coming up with new strategies to win, and don't enjoy making deliberate mistakes so your opponent will stop whining. CASUAL AT ALL COSTS.

If someone really wants the challenge of coming up with new strategies to win I say play armies that are considered "not good" like Blood Angels. Take it from experience, there is nothing like winning with a sub-par codex against a codex that is not only considered better than yours but is considered one of the best (beating both Blood Angels AND Space Wolves during 5th with Sisters was always fun).

**Azreal13**

ClockworkZion wrote:
Peregrine wrote:
Yeah, the solution is to deliberately cripple your own list so that nobody complains that you're "trying too hard to win". Who cares if you enjoy coming up with new strategies to win, and don't enjoy making deliberate mistakes so your opponent will stop whining. CASUAL AT ALL COSTS.

If someone really wants the challenge of coming up with new strategies to win I say play armies that are considered "not good" like Blood Angels. Take it from experience, there is nothing like winning with a sub-par codex against a codex that is not only considered better than yours but is considered one of the best (beating both Blood Angels AND Space Wolves during 5th with Sisters was always fun).

Or, in a better world, anyone could turn up with anything at least tipping a nod to a balanced list, and would win or lose based not in the models they'd chosen, but on the decisions they made during the game, modified slightly by dice results.

**Ailaros**

Wait, how does refusing to play WAAC absolutely full throttle 100% mean that you're crippling yourself or playing a maximum fluff list?

Sounds like a false dichotomy to me.

**Relapse**

Grimtuff wrote:
Aleph-Sama wrote:
MWHistorian wrote:
Doesn't like how Dakka is all threads about complaints.
Starts a thread about a complaint.

Nah, just seeing if I can turn this ship a bit. I know it won't turn all the way around. I'm just asking for some decency. If you want to complain about something go ahead! But don't complain if people have been saying it for months now, AKA beating dead horses, preaching to the choir, etc, it jumbles the forum with stuff we've already heard!

Alright King Canute, how you been?

Good 'un!

**Kojiro**

Swastakowey wrote:

No not at all. Since you dont play 40k you probably dont understand.

You know what I don't understand? Why building an optimised list and playing to the best of your ability is a problem in 40K specifically.

**Azreal13**

Ailaros wrote:
Wait, how does refusing to play WAAC absolutely full throttle 100% mean that you're crippling yourself or playing a maximum fluff list?

Sounds like a false dichotomy to me.

Because people tend to have different, personal, definitions of what constitutes what, and it is those differing ideas, in a ruleset flabby enough to accommodate it, which is the root cause of all this discussion.

**Swastakowey**

Kojiro wrote:
Swastakowey wrote:

No not at all. Since you dont play 40k you probably dont understand.

You know what I don't understand? Why building an optimised list and playing to the best of your ability is a problem in 40K specifically.

I have to tone down my Flames of War japs so my friends have a chance of winning. That game is regarded as well balanced. It is, but it still depends on factors like models or terrain etc as well.

Also its a problem in 40k because the game is not made to cater for people like that no matter how bad you want it to. Its made for people to discus and quickly plan the kind of game they want and work together to create a fun game. Which goes completely against what most people with optimized lists want.

**Kojiro**

Swastakowey wrote:
I have to tone down my Flames of War japs so my friends have a chance of winning. That game is regarded as well balanced. It is, but it still depends on factors like models or terrain etc as well.

I would argue that if the game is balanced and you *have* to handicap yourself so your friends have a chance then either a) you're exceptionally good or b) your friends are exceptionally bad. Either is possible but I don't see how you can be approximately equal in skill and have to self balance to make it a fair fight.

**Swastakowey**

Kojiro wrote:
Swastakowey wrote:
I have to tone down my Flames of War japs so my friends have a chance of winning. That game is regarded as well balanced. It is, but it still depends on factors like models or terrain etc as well.

I would argue that if the game is balanced and you *have* to handicap yourself so your friends have a chance then either a) you're exceptionally good or b) your friends are exceptionally bad. Either is possible but I don't see how you can be approximately equal in skill and have to self balance to make it a fair fight.

Not overly. What they do on defense is what I also would do. My army just seems superior. Although we have only played like 18 games or so. My list was even beating mid war lists.

**Azreal13**

Swastakowey wrote:
Kojiro wrote:
Swastakowey wrote:

No not at all. Since you dont play 40k you probably dont understand.

You know what I don't understand? Why building an optimised list and playing to the best of your ability is a problem in 40K specifically.

I have to tone down my Flames of War japs so my friends have a chance of winning. That game is regarded as well balanced. It is, but it still depends on factors like models or terrain etc as well.

Also its a problem in 40k because the game is not made to cater for people like that no matter how bad you want it to. Its made for people to discus and quickly plan the kind of game they want and work together to create a fun game. Which goes completely against what most people with optimized lists want.

No, this is a consequence of the flaws in 40K, that you take it as the intent suggests you have sipped a little too much of what GW is offering.

But then, I knew that already.

**Swastakowey**

azreal13 wrote:
Swastakowey wrote:
Kojiro wrote:
Swastakowey wrote:

No not at all. Since you dont play 40k you probably dont understand.

You know what I don't understand? Why building an optimised list and playing to the best of your ability is a problem in 40K specifically.

I have to tone down my Flames of War japs so my friends have a chance of winning. That game is regarded as well balanced. It is, but it still depends on factors like models or terrain etc as well.

Also its a problem in 40k because the game is not made to cater for people like that no matter how bad you want it to. Its made for people to discus and quickly plan the kind of game they want and work together to create a fun game. Which goes completely against what most people with optimized lists want.

No, this is a consequence of the flaws in 40K, that you take it as the intent suggests you have sipped a little too much of what GW is offering.

But then, I knew that already.

? I f I dont feel like one of GW games ill simply play one of the other many games I play. Simple. I dont expect a mega game that caters to my every whim and need.

**Phanixis**

I have participated in several 40k forums over the years, and I really like dakkadakka. The forum is quite active and there are usually one or more threads that catch my interest at any given time and many threads are quite informative.

The forum is also, for the most part, quite civil. You are always going to have your trolls and what not who give the forum, and the internet as a whole, a bad name, but those are the exception rather than the rule. After all, why are you even posting here if you think dakka is such an awful place?

Given the nature of 40k, with its sloppy rules, poor game balance, and the fact that GW seems to live in a bubble, combined with the enormous investment of time and money necessary to get into the game, criticism of different aspects of this game and GW are to be expected. If you find such criticism so repulsive, why are you entering those threads who titles obviously indicate they will be filled with said criticism? Or even worse, creating thread titles that invite some criticism. For instance, there is a thread on the first page of General 40k that includes in it's title the question: "it's not all bad is it?". Guess what, the OP of that topic is going to find out exactly why it is all bad.

**Azreal13**

Swastakowey wrote:
azreal13 wrote:
Swastakowey wrote:
Kojiro wrote:
Swastakowey wrote:

No not at all. Since you dont play 40k you probably dont understand.

You know what I don't understand? Why building an optimised list and playing to the best of your ability is a problem in 40K specifically.

I have to tone down my Flames of War japs so my friends have a chance of winning. That game is regarded as well balanced. It is, but it still depends on factors like models or terrain etc as well.

Also its a problem in 40k because the game is not made to cater for people like that no matter how bad you want it to. Its made for people to discus and quickly plan the kind of game they want and work together to create a fun game. Which goes completely against what most people with optimized lists want.

No, this is a consequence of the flaws in 40K, that you take it as the intent suggests you have sipped a little too much of what GW is offering.

But then, I knew that already.

? I f I dont feel like one of GW games ill simply play one of the other many games I play. Simple. I dont expect a mega game that caters to my every whim and need.

So now a game where both players can turn up with whatever they feel like, go at it and have a fair chance of winning without copious amounts of pre-game negotiation is a mega game?

Yeesh.

**Avinash_Tyagi**

Swastakowey wrote:
motyak wrote:
Swastakowey wrote:
motyak wrote:
How many threads complaining about complaining are on the first page ok 40K discussions now? I mean honestly.

Not enough. Its a nice change

Because the way to fix it is to make sure everyone knows they have no right to complain, since they've already bought the product, right? Right? And to hammer on incessantly about how much everyone else is complaining. Because that's more logical than figuring out why they are complaining.

I know why they are complaining. I see some of the same problems. But I dont think the amount of complaining is right for the problem. Let alone the fact that many just want to enjoy the game, which is kinda stupid really. Wanting something doesnt mean you can complain a great deal. Its simple to move on. You are simply a consumer, nothing more to companies. If you want to be more than a consumer, get a job with them or move on to a company that views you as such.

I think constructive moderate complaining is ok. I wish 40k had a better moral system. But if instead of complaining I play Flames of war which has a pretty decent moral system.

I just think there are better ways of voicing opinion, like moving on or writing a balanced lengthy review and then moving on. You slowed people seem to think that I want everyone to share my opinion and nothing more or less. Which is far from the case. Selective hearing (or reading) may be the cause I dont know. Just be productive. How all you complainers complain is not productive. Wasteful.

So instead of spending 20% of your life wishing to enjoy something thats clearly not for you (exaggeration) move on for a while. Some of you are as bad as those you tube comment lingerers who search out justin bieber videos and state how much better some other rubbish band is, because it makes you feel intelligent. (or something). It does nothing to promote your cause, does nothing to fix anything and just annoys people.

So I see no reason for people to continue. Because just like 10+ years ago, your complaints are the same, they fix nothing and rarely change opinions. Time to move on.

Companies that forget that consumers are their bosses often go out of business

Automatically Appended Next Post:

azreal13 wrote:
Swastakowey wrote:

? I f I dont feel like one of GW games ill simply play one of the other many games I play. Simple. I dont expect a mega game that caters to my every whim and need.

So now a game where both players can turn up with whatever they feel like, go at it and have a fair chance of winning without copious amounts of pre-game negotiation is a mega game?

Yeesh.

wow, never knew I had so many mega games in my house