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.

 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.