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.

I know this poll won't necessarily generalize to the overall gaming populace but I was curious to see at least on dakka what the overall opinion is of 40k as a whole at the moment and if it has actually affected how/what you play. You tend to get very polarized black and white views in news and rumors threads and I've found that the commentary in heated arguments is not usually indicative of the gaming population as a whole. How do you guys and gals feel overall (rules, models, prices, marketing, fiction, Forgeworld, art, etc all rolled into a single overall impression) about the current state of 40k over the last year or two of changes? That doesn't include fantasy, any of the discountinued specialist games, LOTR, or general changes at GW like 1 man stores but rather specifically how you feel about 40k.

Lego, if you feel this better deserves to be in polls then so be it. I was just curious to guage the overall feel on dakka at the moment regarding 40k.

I'd cut back so much I decided to have a go at rewriting the rules to see if I could do better.

I've bought 4 new armies just because of the unbound rules. None of them are game breakers, just fluffy ones that I always wanted to do before but didn't because of the restrictions. I'm happy with the changes, even if I do feel like the game has lost it's soul a little.

I feel like the options for what you want to do have opened. Sure, the codex rules have been getting updated at breakneck speeds, but I am of the type that is ok with that. I only play a few armies and paying $50 for 2 years of usage seems ok for me.

I love it! Never before has there been so much freedom in what you can do with the game, and if I had the opponents locally I'd be playing as often as I could!

I would note that this is the polar opposite of my view of GW themselves, which is very negative. Pointless 'update' after pointless update, climbing prices, total disregard for the customers, all of that is bad for them but worse for the customers that would love to support them.

I've decided that I'm probably going to sit out of tournaments for a while here. The absurdity of the releases of the last 6 months have simply made the game too onerous and unbalanced to bother with. I'll continue to try and get games in with pals on a pre-arranged basis, but methinks I'll be waiting for 8E.

Pickup games have become almost nonexistent for me, nobody is showing up anymore.

Crimson Devil said it best.

 Crimson Devil wrote:
7th edition 40k is a lot like BDSM these days. Only play with people you know and develop a safe word for when things get too intense. And It doesn't hurt to be a sadist or masochist as well.

Unfortunately this means that pickup and tournament games are increasingly no-goes, and that really kills the desire to continue or buy more stuff.

It also doesn't help that many of the "armies" I'm seeing at this point have so little cohesion and relation to the fluff material (being built largely around power and synergy) that it simply kills any immersion, which defeats the largest purpose of this game. Some people call that "freedom", I find it to simply be a relatively thinly veiled excuse to abuse the rules to make power-armies.

 Vaktathi wrote:
I've decided that I'm probably going to sit out of tournaments for a while here. The absurdity of the releases of the last 6 months have simply made the game too onerous and unbalanced to bother with. I'll continue to try and get games in with pals on a pre-arranged basis, but methinks I'll be waiting for 8E.

Pickup games have become almost nonexistent for me, nobody is showing up anymore.

Crimson Devil said it best.

 Crimson Devil wrote:
7th edition 40k is a lot like BDSM these days. Only play with people you know and develop a safe word for when things get too intense. And It doesn't hurt to be a sadist or masochist as well.

Unfortunately this means that pickup and tournament games are increasingly no-goes, and that really kills the desire to continue or buy more stuff.

It also doesn't help that many of the "armies" I'm seeing at this point have so little cohesion and relation to the fluff material (being built largely around power and synergy) that it simply kills any immersion, which defeats the largest purpose of this game. Some people call that "freedom", I find it to simply be a relatively thinly veiled excuse to abuse the rules to make power-armies.

It does open the doors to power gamers, but on the other side it opens the doors to people who aren't interested in the fluff to choose the models they like and not be excluded. Power gamers tried to win at all costs before 7th ed, that hasn't really changed.

Still buying, still playing, still having fun.
Ultimately the last point outweighs all other concerns.

 Ratius wrote:
Still buying, still playing, still having fun.
Ultimately the last point outweighs all other concerns.

I completely agree that the last part should be the most important and that's why I did the poll in the thread. It seems frankly that for a variety of reasons, some folks simply aren't having fun overall and I wanted to see what the relative numbers were at least on dakka.

Loving it! So much freedom, so many armies to fight, the sheer amount of options means I don't have to fight the same list repeatedly. Nothing but win in my eyes

I'm pretty happy with the game itself. I like that the fast release cycle has allowed for books like Harlequins and Skitarii to be released. People complain about the rules a lot, but they've *always* complained about the rules, and they always will. In practice, I find that I'm generally able to have a fun game provided my opponent and I are both playing to have fun (rather than having some curious obsession with smashing face using the most broken lists available).

The current rules set is roughly as good as it has even been since I started back in 5th. The stand-out feature of the core rules for me right now is that warlord traits and psychic powers being random is mildly annoying, but hardly a game ruiner.

Friendly games are generally a lot of fun, and 7th edition gives me more options for how to play those games.

Now that said, I have my own long list of gripes. Some books have been updated twice since older books have been updated. A lot of the changes in some of the newer books (like vypers and vaul supports being part of craftworld war hosts) feels like a pretty obvious cash grab. The balance in 40k isn't and never has been great, but that's largely mitigated if neither player brings a cheese list.

So yeah. 40k is in pretty good shape as far as I'm concerned. GW is still just a bit irksome is all.

 JamesY wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
I've decided that I'm probably going to sit out of tournaments for a while here. The absurdity of the releases of the last 6 months have simply made the game too onerous and unbalanced to bother with. I'll continue to try and get games in with pals on a pre-arranged basis, but methinks I'll be waiting for 8E.

Pickup games have become almost nonexistent for me, nobody is showing up anymore.

Crimson Devil said it best.

 Crimson Devil wrote:
7th edition 40k is a lot like BDSM these days. Only play with people you know and develop a safe word for when things get too intense. And It doesn't hurt to be a sadist or masochist as well.

Unfortunately this means that pickup and tournament games are increasingly no-goes, and that really kills the desire to continue or buy more stuff.

It also doesn't help that many of the "armies" I'm seeing at this point have so little cohesion and relation to the fluff material (being built largely around power and synergy) that it simply kills any immersion, which defeats the largest purpose of this game. Some people call that "freedom", I find it to simply be a relatively thinly veiled excuse to abuse the rules to make power-armies.

It does open the doors to power gamers, but on the other side it opens the doors to people who aren't interested in the fluff to choose the models they like and not be excluded. Power gamers tried to win at all costs before 7th ed, that hasn't really changed.

While true, I'm just not seeing most armies making use of all this "freedom" for fluff purposes. It's almost always for power reasons. Covering a capability gap, synergistic powers, etc.

I've played 7E in a multitude of places, not just a single gaming club or store, and my experience has been largely the same, people are picking and choosing the juicy bits for their capabilities, not to portray anything fluffy or interesting.

I will say that I agree with the BDSM comment above. As long as you have gentlemanly agreements with your playing partners, fun times are generally had. I still have a ton of fun and play games with underpowered and fluffy armies all the time. I try to embrace the fluff and so does my gaming circle.

That being said, I don't do tournaments nor pickup games in my LGS anymore for reasons pointed out above. Tournaments because I'm not a competitive gamer anymore, pickup because I don't have free time to just drop by anymore!

I will add that I personally do not like the accelerated release schedule. Previous editions gave you the chance to learn a codex's basics, then move on to the next release within the constrains of normal life responsibilities. Now, I find that I barely scratch the surface of a faction before a new codex/supplement/formation drops.

Finally I'll say that the few times I've dropped by the LGS and seen people playing, they were generally having fun. So at least that aspect appears to be alive and well in my area

I'd like to hear from all these people saying these new rules are making them buy less and want to quit.

In all honesty, the thing that scares me most is internet forums . I see so much more insane stuff on here than I ever see in real life!

I don't like fliers, unbound, and superheavies.

I'm fine with the dataslates.

 Yarium wrote:
I'd like to hear from all these people saying these new rules are making them buy less and want to quit.

Stuff like having to deal with large numbers of D weapons in an 1850pt game, Necron where basic 13pt basic Warriors are as hard to kill with most weapons as Terminators are and Wraiths that require more S10 shooting to kill than a Warhound Titan. Skitarii coming in out of allied drop pods and tossing out half a dozen Haywire shots or 9 Plasma shots at BS7, playing against formations that give gobs of free upgrades and/or free wargear (largely negating the purpose of a points limit in the first place), and seeing things like SM armies built with multiple detachments, one with IF doctrines for their tacs and Devastators, the other detachment with White Scars for their bikers, and an allied INQ detachment just to bring in Coteaz.

Oh yeah, D-Weapons in normal games also sucks.

Vaktathi wrote:Stuff like having to deal with large numbers of D weapons in an 1850pt game, Necron where basic 13pt basic Warriors are as hard to kill with most weapons as Terminators are and Wraiths that require more S10 shooting to kill than a Warhound Titan. Skitarii coming in out of allied drop pods and tossing out half a dozen Haywire shots or 9 Plasma shots at BS7, playing against formations that give gobs of free upgrades and/or free wargear (largely negating the purpose of a points limit in the first place), and seeing things like SM armies built with multiple detachments, one with IF doctrines for their tacs and Devastators, the other detachment with White Scars for their bikers, and an allied INQ detachment just to bring in Coteaz.

kronk wrote:Oh yeah, D-Weapons in normal games also sucks.

That's quite unfortunate. I'd ask if you've tried talking with your opponents prior to and requested that D-weapons be left off the table (or use the common "-1 to all D results" fix), but I'm sure you have and your opponents weren't willing to negotiate, which is a shame. This game is about having fun - not about beating each other up. Personally, I've had tons of fun lately, but our local meta is pretty much on the "don't bring D-weapons, super-heavies, or power-formations without talking about it with your opponent first" train.

 Yarium wrote:

Vaktathi wrote:Stuff like having to deal with large numbers of D weapons in an 1850pt game, Necron where basic 13pt basic Warriors are as hard to kill with most weapons as Terminators are and Wraiths that require more S10 shooting to kill than a Warhound Titan. Skitarii coming in out of allied drop pods and tossing out half a dozen Haywire shots or 9 Plasma shots at BS7, playing against formations that give gobs of free upgrades and/or free wargear (largely negating the purpose of a points limit in the first place), and seeing things like SM armies built with multiple detachments, one with IF doctrines for their tacs and Devastators, the other detachment with White Scars for their bikers, and an allied INQ detachment just to bring in Coteaz.

kronk wrote:Oh yeah, D-Weapons in normal games also sucks.

That's quite unfortunate. I'd ask if you've tried talking with your opponents prior to and requested that D-weapons be left off the table (or use the common "-1 to all D results" fix), but I'm sure you have and your opponents weren't willing to negotiate, which is a shame. This game is about having fun - not about beating each other up. Personally, I've had tons of fun lately, but our local meta is pretty much on the "don't bring D-weapons, super-heavies, or power-formations without talking about it with your opponent first" train.

That's the big problem, having to negotiate with an opponent on what they can or can't bring, and changing rules and whatnot, can be really awkward, and really just isn't something one should have to do. With close pals, yeah we can work that out, but showing up for a pickup game when both people already have army lists ready to go, or trying to play in a league or tournament, is just increasingly unpleasant.

More critically, with regards to formations, they're just fundamentally borked in that they're giving a grip of free bonuses, and often wargear, for zero additional points investment. That's inherently unbalanced.

7th did make me quit, until I found a local group of more casual players.

If I want a tournament game I have Infinity and KoW, but for fluff and cool models apocalypse is where its at

Since the Eldar book I've stopped spending money and playing. Maybe if the new DA book inspires the spark in me I will give it another go.

Yes, this is a golden age.

It's like Rogue Trader without miles of obstructive, tedious, and obscure rules.

PS - don't try saying the rules are just as bad now. No, no they are not. You would be objectively wrong, so don't even start.

I hate the rules as they are now (no they are not as bad as Rogue Trader). Worst rules set I've played since 2nd edition.

That being said, I still play. I still buy. I sitll have fun. I would just have more fun if they fixed up the rules.

 DarknessEternal wrote:
PS - don't try saying the rules are just as bad now. No, no they are not. You would be objectively wrong, so don't even start.

We currently have units that have special rules that do nothing but grant other special rules to the unit...

So no, I think there's an argument there.



I like a lot of aspects of the current game - snap shots, overwatch, unbound/allies... these are all good ideas. But the current implementation of them, combined with the fact that a year in we still have core rules that don't function and have yet to be errataed just leaves me cold.

 Azreal13 wrote:
I'd cut back so much I decided to have a go at rewriting the rules to see if I could do better.

Have you been engaged in the Zagman's errata stuff? I swear we have enough intelligent people on this forum to write 40k rules that work for everyone, just need to work on it.

I'm just not really interested in a rules set where I have to negotiate pre-game so ensure that both my opponent and I get what we want out of it. I play a very occasional ultra casual game and that's it. I've almost entirely moved on to other games, primarily Malifaux.

 grrrfranky wrote:
I'm just not really interested in a rules set where I have to negotiate pre-game so ensure that both my opponent and I get what we want out of it.

Isn't that how all games of all types occur? You have to agree with your opponent on what type of experience you both want to have? I'm pretty sure it's the foundation of "games".

40k simply has a variable enough paradigm that you can have different experiences within the same game instead of playing either chess or checkers.

 Cytharai wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
I'd cut back so much I decided to have a go at rewriting the rules to see if I could do better.

Have you been engaged in the Zagman's errata stuff? I swear we have enough intelligent people on this forum to write 40k rules that work for everyone, just need to work on it.

Funnily enough, he is one of the select few I've shared and Alpha copy of my rules with, and he's provided some excellent feedback, enough to earn him a spot in the credits if we were talking about a commercial production. I've also tried to reciprocate but his project is a lot more mature than mine, so there was a lot less I could offer. I am certainly recommending people use his Codex work with my core rules changes (there's a fair few big ones - unit by unit activation, removal of cover saves in favour of modifiers and the complete scrapping of AV values and damage tables being the headlines.)

I plan to share my efforts once I've play tested a little more, I've had just the one game so far, and it worked pretty much as intended, but it needs a little more testing. That said, if anyone is genuinely interested, PM me and I'll send you a drop box link to the current version.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DarknessEternal wrote:

 grrrfranky wrote:
I'm just not really interested in a rules set where I have to negotiate pre-game so ensure that both my opponent and I get what we want out of it.

Isn't that how all games of all types occur? You have to agree with your opponent on what type of experience you both want to have? I'm pretty sure it's the foundation of "games".

40k simply has a variable enough paradigm that you can have different experiences within the same game instead of playing either chess or checkers.

Rubbish.

I'm playing X Wing at my next club night, the extent of our negotiation? "Game of X Wing next week?" "Ok."

The most negotiation I've ever encountered outside of 40K is a little clarification as to whether it was a balls out competitive game (eg when one or other player was prepping for a tourney) or something a little more chilled.

I think the game is the best it's been in years, but lately I fear I am very alone in this feeling.

I recently saw a user on this forum who is a regular at the club I run, and I checked the post history. It's almost 100% complaining, discussing things that need to change, making excuses for tough matchups, that sort of thing.

That seems to be more the norm...sadly.

With tyranids in 5th, my main army suddenly became unplayable, so I didn't play them much, and played a lot of blood angels, but I used them from time to time, and painted a few.

Then 6th cruddex came about and made it completely unplayable, other than for pentaflyrants. I love walkrants, and the elf players kept complaining about the list (which has never been played in my group/store), and how OP the nid codex is.

7th made BA harder to play with changes to assault

elves in 6th already made me cut back a lot, with serpent-spam and jetseers. 7th made me cut back completely. Most elf players said git gud, QQ moar. The local group organiser became so obnoxious with the latest elf release, that more than 1/2 of the already dwindling group left, leaving behind 4 elf players, 1 necron and 2 tau. The night 8 of us left was when the ork player showed up to fight against a min-maxed scatterbike army, with a wriathknight. He said something along the lines of "are you serious", and the elf player said something along the lines of "beg me, and I might swap out a few bikes for wraithguard". The group organiser came over and said we should learn to be more strategic, and that elves were the hardest army to play. Most of us packed up and left in disgust that night.

I'm just going to paint and play spacehulk, since I don't like PP's asthetics, and there's no other wargame I'm interested in.

Also, my main group of friends don't mini-wargame, but a lot are shifting to the indie boardgame scene. Seems like the boardgame scene is really picking up. Might spend some money on cthulhu wars.