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.

 Stormonu wrote:


Likewise, prices are way too high, Apple levels of pricing.

Yeah. I'd just been looking at the Necron Battle Force, which is £70/$109, but then I priced each set of units from the set individually and found that it's only £3.75/$5.86 more, so where's the real value? Best you can get with £3.75 is a pot of paint. So I'm thinking it might be better to just buy the separate units with a more tailored view of what I want than the Battle Force.

That said, I have no idea what the better units are these days. Immortals used to be well worth their points back in the day. And I have no idea what a ghost ark or annihilation ark does! lol.

We play HH and/or our own 6.5 version and are quite happy with that - for most of us, 40k now ONLY works with House Rules.

Sad to say but IMO 7th was just bad and the Codexes since it arrived shockingly bad - either underpowered or hugely overpowered, overpriced, lacking in fluff and badly put together..... terrible

Salous wrote:
7th edition is fun. Don't listen to all the naysayers. All you have to do is not go blind into a match and you will have fun. Talk to your opponent, make sure both armies are around the same power level, and have fun. Most of the negative posters are all crying about imbalanced tournament play...This game is not built for it, no point beating your head against the wall trying to make it that way. If you wan't a tournament feel, bring two lists that have equal chance of beating each other.

This however presents several disadvantages:

-You need to own (and bring with you) a large enough model collection so that you can build armies of various power levels.

-You have to accept that a fair amount of the time you will be playing stuff you don't really like in order for the gam to be balanced.

Myc wrote:
Yeah. I'd just been looking at the Necron Battle Force, which is £70/$109, but then I priced each set of units from the set individually and found that it's only £3.75/$5.86 more, so where's the real value? Best you can get with £3.75 is a pot of paint. So I'm thinking it might be better to just buy the separate units with a more tailored view of what I want than the Battle Force.
That said, I have no idea what the better units are these days. Immortals used to be well worth their points back in the day. And I have no idea what a ghost ark or annihilation ark does! lol.

Yeah, the GW site is funny, recently most of these "specials" had NO price difference so it is kinda nice to see it is at least a little less.
The only way to know the "better" units is to get the rule book and the Necron codex and after a little research, buy appropriately.
Look at the Decurion detachment and unit selection may start from there.

Bad Point: I may have to be clear that I prefer a more competitive game so I have learned to relax a bit with 40k but I find it largely garbage as a system unless I design a scenario to be balanced for a close game.
Good Point: The models and variety I am quite pleased with, seeing so much Mechanicus has made me happy and the larger models have been quite pretty. I am taking my time with the Imperial Knights, I find them well detailed and look like an excellent canvas to do some creative painting.
Bad Point: Model cost is definitely problematic, when I can get insanely detailed Gundam models molded in color and with metal parts that are bigger for less, GW has no right to say they are the "best" other than for making models for their setting.
Good Point: Allies I had been drawn to since a LONG time ago the Inquisition could conscript IG or SM's into their force.
Bad Point: The present rules however tend to fly in the face of "fluff" and create some truly unholy alliances. It is due to this huge amount of mixing that can be done that the weaknesses of a force can be compensated for with another.

I also have to say that 6th and 7th is the FIRST time from all the prior editions I just could not buy all the codex's.
It is just too much and way too expensive.
It has made it possible that many times people have no idea what exactly they are facing across the table and depend completely on their opponent knowing their rules and being honest.
I always made a point of knowing my opponent's capabilities as well as they do... just not possible now (or just too costly for what it is worth).
The good thing is I have a variety of armies so I know more than most.

Playing this game with friends works out very well, if you want more competition with strangers I would suggest X-wing.

 Talizvar wrote:

Playing this game with friends works out very well, if you want more competition with strangers I would suggest X-wing.

Agreed with this.

40k is dying, at least from what I've seen. There's been a few people in my area that have quit altogether recently, and I'm not too far behind them. Even my other local store's league, which used to have a variety of people with straight forward lists, has lost a good chunk of people, as the few TFGs that are left just spam whatever's the most powerful, over the course of a few different books.

If you ever don't want to get involved in the current meta *which I think is a mess, personally) you could always look at alternatives, like one page 40k https://onepagerules.wordpress.com/portfolio/one-page-40k/

Or look at some of the modifications that people have done for the various editions.

Thanks
Austin

LordBlades wrote:

Salous wrote:
7th edition is fun. Don't listen to all the naysayers. All you have to do is not go blind into a match and you will have fun. Talk to your opponent, make sure both armies are around the same power level, and have fun. Most of the negative posters are all crying about imbalanced tournament play...This game is not built for it, no point beating your head against the wall trying to make it that way. If you wan't a tournament feel, bring two lists that have equal chance of beating each other.

This however presents several disadvantages:

-You need to own (and bring with you) a large enough model collection so that you can build armies of various power levels.

-You have to accept that a fair amount of the time you will be playing stuff you don't really like in order for the gam to be balanced.

I've always found that making a list before the game is efficient and then you don't have to bring every model you own. It's not that hard to get an email or phone number these days and keep in touch with people you enjoy playing with. Shoot them a message, ask how many points and gauge the power of your lists.

If we're going fluffy you build goofy and fun units, if we're going beat-eachothers-face-in-cheese I'll dust of the Dirty Eldar.

I would also agree with those who posted about the tournament scene. It's pretty much drying up, because GW does not support or really want it. No sense forcing a 40K tournament scene (which everyone says is terrible) when there are alternatives ready to go (x-wing / WMH / Infinity).

I rate current 40k with a solid 7/10.
Sure there are some bizarre rules, FAQs need an update and some armies/units are still borderline bonkers but overall its still playable, fun and if you dont take it overly seriously a great way to get some fun and dice in.

 clamclaw wrote:

LordBlades wrote:

Salous wrote:
7th edition is fun. Don't listen to all the naysayers. All you have to do is not go blind into a match and you will have fun. Talk to your opponent, make sure both armies are around the same power level, and have fun. Most of the negative posters are all crying about imbalanced tournament play...This game is not built for it, no point beating your head against the wall trying to make it that way. If you wan't a tournament feel, bring two lists that have equal chance of beating each other.

This however presents several disadvantages:

-You need to own (and bring with you) a large enough model collection so that you can build armies of various power levels.

-You have to accept that a fair amount of the time you will be playing stuff you don't really like in order for the gam to be balanced.

I've always found that making a list before the game is efficient and then you don't have to bring every model you own. It's not that hard to get an email or phone number these days and keep in touch with people you enjoy playing with. Shoot them a message, ask how many points and gauge the power of your lists.

If we're going fluffy you build goofy and fun units, if we're going beat-eachothers-face-in-cheese I'll dust of the Dirty Eldar.

I would also agree with those who posted about the tournament scene. It's pretty much drying up, because GW does not support or really want it. No sense forcing a 40K tournament scene (which everyone says is terrible) when there are alternatives ready to go (x-wing / WMH / Infinity).

This. As a club game, it's best with a large group of friends/acquaintances. I've rarely had any issue when I've emailed/asked "Hey, 2k points?" and even then the only bad experiences I've had came from A) one guy list tailoring (buddy canceled, so I took a chance on a PUG with a guy I've never seen before/since) and B) a guy who explicitly cheats (although he's like 18 and possibly autistic? he acts oddly even in normal conversation). Can't speak from true tournament experience, but the semi-competitive LGS tourneys I've been in have all been fun and have had reasonable restrictions (no LOWs above 400, no Unbound or Forgeworld).

With regards to price I did some number crunching last year to see just how much GW prices had gone up in my time playing (since circa 2000), while taking the general economy into account.

Basically its 25% above inflation for bog-standard boxsets like Tactical Squads. Find a third party who give you a 25% discount and you're getting effectively the old price range. In fact alot of 5-man boxsets like Assault Marines actually work out cheaper.

Well you aren't because 10 years ago the discount retailer's 25% was off the then GW list price which was 25% lower than now. (Or whatever.)

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Well you aren't because 10 years ago the discount retailer's 25% was off the then GW list price which was 25% lower than now. (Or whatever.)

I clearly meant it compared to direct GW pricing.

Well I think the 'fun' part in 40k depends on your personality and goals; I didn't win a single game since ages and yet I still like to play and have fun. I don't play tournaments, I find most fun in assembling and painting the minis - for me that's the best part. But if you're a competitive person then you may encounter some frustrating things.

As for the prices, most of my minis are second-hand ones or bought from retailers. GW is just crazily priced for me.

Cheers
Kahnawake

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Well you aren't because 10 years ago the discount retailer's 25% was off the then GW list price which was 25% lower than now. (Or whatever.)

It's indisputable that the street price of GW models has gone up relative to inflation through the years. However, the discounts have also gone up -- in 1990, the stores I went to had a 5-10% discount for regulars, in 2000 it was 10-15%, in 2010 it was 20-25%, and now, I've gotten discounts as high as 33%. Not on junk, either; a lot of it is promotional push on new drops -- I'm getting a Skarbrand at 33%.

Back in 1990, getting a discount of 33% was inconceivable.

The way my shop looks at it is, if Skarbrand cost about $70, and they sell it for around $86, that's still a $16 profit per unit with no risk on their part (because you need to commit to it in advance to get the super price). And while you're there, you might buy all sorts of other stuff, or tools and supplies -- which is at a 25% discount. I've see people go in to pick up a $50 model that is superbly priced, and then walk out with $400 of stuff.

Occasionally, to push sales, they'll even put a couple of units on the shelf *below cost* and advertise it for a launch day or sale event. In their last event, they had 2 copies each of Age of Sigmar and Space Hulk for USD $52 to get people into the door (and a bunch of overstocked and old stuff at 50%). There was a lineup to the end of the block that looked more like an iPhone launch than gaming store sale.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Well you aren't because 10 years ago the discount retailer's 25% was off the then GW list price which was 25% lower than now. (Or whatever.)

I remember that you could buy sets twice the size of the Battle Force sets for, like £150/234. Which is much cheaper than now, although I see those sets have disappeared.

What I'd recommend:

Either find a narrative campaign group to join, or a group that practices for tourneys. Those two camps are up and running just fine and have made the (really few) house rules needed to keep things fairly balanced. Let the whiners whine. With basic social skills and a little bit of pre-battle conversation, the game is in a great state of being.

I really love the game at the minute. I don't get to play enough though. more than the game though the world of 40k has grown into an amazing thing. There are a large number of haters out there but try it for yourself and try to ignore the hate squad.

It is however way to expensive.

I'm really enjoying getting back into the game, there are some balance issues, but it's really not as broken as some people like to make out.

 Lobukia wrote:
What I'd recommend:

Either find a narrative campaign group to join, or a group that practices for tourneys. Those two camps are up and running just fine and have made the (really few) house rules needed to keep things fairly balanced. Let the whiners whine. With basic social skills and a little bit of pre-battle conversation, the game is in a great state of being.

100% agree. To bad that it seems most of the posters here forgot to learn basic social skills in school... Guess its the price we pay for allowing them to all grow up on video games and the internet.

I don't play the game, only model/paint/collect. Mini's are the absolute best on the market imo, and the level of detail and quality for GW's new plastic models in unmatched. Sure it's a little pricey, but literally any hobby or activity you do is going to cost you.

grumpy_newenglander wrote:
I don't play the game, only model/paint/collect. Mini's are the absolute best on the market imo, and the level of detail and quality for GW's new plastic models in unmatched. Sure it's a little pricey, but literally any hobby or activity you do is going to cost you.

GW's plastics are very good, but it's hard to say that GW's mini's are in any way superior to say, Dropzone Commander, Infinity, Heavy Gear, Malifaux, etc


GW's just able to do *big* stuff economically in a way that others cannot.

I love 40k straight out of the rulebook - really hate to see people making major rule mods that others have no choice but to accept or not play.

Salous wrote:

 Lobukia wrote:
What I'd recommend:

Either find a narrative campaign group to join, or a group that practices for tourneys. Those two camps are up and running just fine and have made the (really few) house rules needed to keep things fairly balanced. Let the whiners whine. With basic social skills and a little bit of pre-battle conversation, the game is in a great state of being.

100% agree. To bad that it seems most of the posters here forgot to learn basic social skills in school... Guess its the price we pay for allowing them to all grow up on video games and the internet.

Basic social skills? Like insulting posters you disagree with?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Dozer Blades wrote:
I love 40k straight out of the rulebook - really hate to see people making major rule mods that others have no choice but to accept or not play.

7th is my least favorite edition so far.

The main rule mod I suggest is dropping the how to allocate wounds and simply let the player choose which model takes the hit. Every player I've encountered loves the idea. The other is simply a matter of not playing Maelstrom missions. Again another change that never seems to disappoint anyone.

Not playing is always a better choice than playing a game you won't enjoy.

Been playing for 16 years and this is my favorite version of the game. A lot of people claim that the system is broken or some other such comment - hopefully you take that as the extreme exaggeration that it is. It became quite fashionable to pick on GW and pray for its destruction over the last couple years. Some complaints were valid, but the majority have just been...well, an internet fad. Take, for instance, people complaining that GW releases codices that make certain units less viable and others greatly more so. They have been doing that from the start, haha. Does it help sales - heck yeah - but it also makes the game dynamic, interesting, promotes new unit combinations, etc. The death of Warhammer Fantasy in large part occurred because units rarely changed and few were added over the span of years. Apocalyptic minded people claim the sky is falling and 40k is dying, but GW's drop in sales can in large part be attributed to the fact that 40k is dependent on people having disposable income and a lot fewer people have that these days.

Anyways, the game has changed quite a bit over the last few editions with the introduction of flyers, fortifications, and super heavy vehicles/gargantuan creatures in normal games. IMO this has just added to complexity of the game, which, for me, means that it is more interesting than ever. The game is expensive to get into. On the plus side, the game has been around for such a long time that it is quite easy to buy unpainted models 2nd hand at an affordable cost.

I wish there was a company that made super heavy vehicle Titan Models cheap that can be played in WH40k. Forge World makes amazing Big models but you pay greatly for it.

 Dozer Blades wrote:
I love 40k straight out of the rulebook - really hate to see people making major rule mods that others have no choice but to accept or not play.

It unfortunately usually results in very unfun games for many otherwise however, and GW will be the first ones to tell you to house-rule the game.

 Filch wrote:
I wish there was a company that made super heavy vehicle Titan Models cheap that can be played in WH40k. Forge World makes amazing Big models but you pay greatly for it.

China has been known to make Titan models on the cheap

As I see it, 40k is self-conflicted.

On the one hand, it wants to be this light, fluffy game in which we bring fluff-thematic formations of things that look good together. You know, casual play in which we whip out our big shiny stuff to amaze and impress one another with.

On the other hand, everything (units, formations, Maelstrom) is overloaded with a boatload of special rules that cross reference all over the Codex and rulebook, to the point that it requires GW official play aids to use. Nebbish, book-lawyerly stuff that flat out detracts from the fun of pushing toys around and making "pew, pew" noises.

GW tailoring rules to competitive types, is completely counter to the "just bring it!" joy for casuals it encourages at the sales counter.

GW has more huge models than ever before, and that's actually a very good thing, because it's easier to play 1,000 points of Knights than it is to wrangle 1,000 points of Guard, to say nothing of 1,000 points of footy Orky Boyz.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Crimson Devil wrote:
7th is my least favorite edition so far.

The main rule mod I suggest is dropping the how to allocate wounds and simply let the player choose which model takes the hit. Every player I've encountered loves the idea. The other is simply a matter of not playing Maelstrom missions. Again another change that never seems to disappoint anyone.

Not playing is always a better choice than playing a game you won't enjoy.

Thinking about it, I think I have to agree with hating 7E most of all, simply because it added Maelstrom, which is a major fething PITA, while still keeping 6E's Challenges and "Closest First" bullgak. Having played multiple Maelstrom missions, I do not enjoy the random for random's sake. As for wounds, I still allocate wounds a la 4E "owner chooses", and flat out refuse to play 6E/7E closest first.

I would rate mainstream 40k a 3/10. It's below average for a wargame due it's poorly written rules, terrible balance and bloated mechanics. It really need to be streamlined and refined.

Horus Heresy 40k I would rate a 7/10. It does away with a lot of the balance issues mainstream 40k has and it avoids a lot of the stupidity of 7th ed in general because it is more restricted in what you can take and how you can take it.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:


GW has more huge models than ever before, and that's actually a very good thing, because it's easier to play 1,000 points of Knights than it is to wrangle 1,000 points of Guard, to say nothing of 1,000 points of footy Orky Boyz.

At that point however, you're playing an entirely different scale of game than what most of the mini's are really portraying.

You're playing an army that's got fewer models than most skirmish games, and when the disparity gets that big, the purpose of having those smaller units is somewhat defeated, especially having the rules concerned with each individual model instead of the unit as a whole. Having the rules actually bother to discern whether a Sergeant is armed with sword or an axe when it can't hurt anything in the opposing army anyway, makes them far more granular than they need to be, and in fact, you could probably just treat the entire squad a single model at that point instead of bothering with "well, is this individual worthless 5pt guardsmen, who happens to be tied with another for who's closest to the Knight, actually in cover or not?".