So how is 7th edition doing?

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.

**KTG17**

So I guess I was so stunned and turned off when GW announced that they were releasing 7th so soon after 6th was released, it kinda killed my interest in keeping up with GW. But I've checked out some things here and there from time to time, and it looks like 40k is still going strong. Has 7th been a major improvement?

And that being said, any word on an 8th yet? Lol

**insaniak**

Really depends on who you talk to.

Some people seem to be really enjoying it. Others not so much.

There have been a lot of stories of gaming groups moving to other systems, and people being put off by the rapid release schedule... but it's really hard to put them into any sort of context, as it's impossible to say how many others there are out there playing the game to death and loving it.

I'm ignoring the formation rules, and have given up on playing in tournaments and game clubs... but other than that it's ok with a few rules changes here and there.

**Swabby**

7th is the best thing to happen to the game since rogue trader in my opinion. I would say it is going strong locally, but there are quite a few people who disagree, and have just outright tossed the game out the window out here for a number of fairly irrational reasons.

This edition has the most diversity in armies fielded (outside of ITC type tournaments) that I have seen in decades, and I don't know how that can be considered a bad thing.

**Peregrine**

7th edition has been terrible. The core rules took the bad things about 6th edition and made them worse without really improving anything, and GW's idiocy with making the game unbound in all but name is just inexcusable. I honestly can't think of a single good thing about 7th compared to previous editions.

**Ashiraya**

Anecdotal, but 7th (along with rampant price increases) is what wiped out my previously vibrant local 40k community.

**Arkaine**

7th's a blast! My psykers are gimped, my flyers can't land and assault, formations let me play Unbound But Not Really, Lords of War are now an authorized part of this balanced breakfast, CADs suck, allies are broken, Eldar gets two Codex releases before I get one, and it's been 3 years since I've seen a new one!

**evil_kiwi_60**

Eh, the long war will continue regardless.As long as their are fights to be had, 7th edition is good.

**wuestenfux**

Well, the game is still enjoyable.
But it became more lengthy due to magic phase and maelstrom objective counting.#
Moreover, in friendly games here, we see more and more use of the LoW slot.

**jeffersonian000**

7th is super fun whrn you include everything and have a conversation before hand. It starts to get unbalance when you exclude portions of it, which oddly enough seems to be the source of most of the gripping.

SJ

**Vaktathi**

KTG17 wrote:
So I guess I was so stunned and turned off when GW announced that they were releasing 7th so soon after 6th was released, it kinda killed my interest in keeping up with GW. But I've checked out some things here and there from time to time, and it looks like 40k is still going strong. Has 7th been a major improvement?

And that being said, any word on an 8th yet? Lol

In general, 7E is increasingly a "sandbox" game, think of it as "Apocalypse" at any points level.

Stuff that once was purely bad internet hyperbole is now reality (e.g. 1+ FNP rolls, 2++ rerollable Invul saves, armies composed entirely of superheavies, 35pt T6 Fearless infantry with D weapons, etc)

Some people love it, as the game basically lets you do whatever you want (or at least for some factions). However, ultimately, 7E is inccreasingly frustrating for any sort of reasonable "pickup" play, tournaments and events have more houserules and changes than ever (especially relative to say, 5E).

Basically, 7E works if you've got a small group of like-minded players who are willing to play with a large number of self imposed restrictions. Aside from that, it's a gigantic mess.

**Arkaine**

Vaktathi wrote:
Basically, 7E works if you've got a small group of like-minded players who are willing to play with a large number of self imposed restrictions. Aside from that, it's a gigantic mess.

Yep! Couldn't have said it better.

**Peregrine**

Vaktathi wrote:
Basically, 7E works if you've got a small group of like-minded players who are willing to play with a large number of self imposed restrictions. Aside from that, it's a gigantic mess.

I wouldn't even be that charitable. Having a group of like-minded players that don't abuse the balance issues helps, but it still leaves idiotic design problems like wound allocation or the excessive randomness in warlord traits/psychic powers/etc.

**SicSemperTyrannis**

Between GW´s horrible mind numbing decisions and blatant cash grabs (thanks for possessed and tomb blade taxes in the new detachments for example), theres stil a nice game to be found.

My friends and I are having great fun with 7th Ed. I started with Necrons and I´m currently building up my second Army (Khorne Daemonkin). You definitely need to forge some ~~narratives~~ house rules now that GW isn´t doing any FAQS anymore or make agreements with your opponent.
Like no garguantuan/superheavies in games below 1.5k point games or restrict the use of flyers if the enemy hasn´t any (or any suitable defense).

Disclaimer: I started at the end of 6th Ed so excuse me if my bitternes hasn´t fully set in

**Backfire**

Rules-wise, 7th Edition is improvement over 6th edition. It is what 6th edition should have been from the get-go. Wording is better and magic phase speeds up those armies with loads of Psychic powers. My only signifant gripes are vehicle damage table, and wound allocation - it is faster than horribly cumbersome 5th edition wound allocation, but remains abusable.

However, I am not big fan of the Codex design trends. Too many formations, too many 'invisible' special rules hanging on top of the gaming table, too many Monstrous creatures.

**DaPino**

I very much like 40k in its current form, but I could understand why people would think otherwise.

Without some form of agreement on how you and your opponent see the game (comptitive/non-competitve), gak's gonna hit the fan.
Balance is not a factor in the game and if you both do your best to make a good list, chances are pretty big you could tell who would win before you've even started.

That said, I am a gamer aswell and the games I play are rather 'serious' so I like the fact that 40k is more laid back and random compared to the micromanagment I need to put to the table for gaming.

**Backfire**

In my local group, we have no self-imposed restrictions or house rules. We started in 5th and things are same they have ever been: people bring the models they have, game is played, sometimes the armies don't match up well and we're like "heh, well that was unbalanced lol" and sometimes they do. It's no different to what it ever was.

However, in tournaments I have seen a big change. Most 5th edition tournaments were "straight outta box", the game was played 100% according to BRB rules and codex, sometimes only using BRB missions. There were no complex comps like in WHFB or whatever or restrictions. You sure don't see that much anymore, tournament rules are almost as thick as the main rulebook nowadays.

**Makumba**

It did not kill my community like escalation almost did, but it stoped growing for sure. Zero new players, and not just because of the rules or cost problems, because there are people spending a lot of cash on infinity or warmahordes . No idea what it is though. Can't be the players, because all w40k players the other games, can't be the shops, because we play in the same shops. Maybe other systems are just more fun, although what is fun, is rather hard to pin point.

**Kilkrazy**

The success of 7th edition can be read in the 15% fall in GW sales since it came out.

**Lithlandis Stormcrow**

Vaktathi wrote:
Basically, 7E works if you've got a small group of like-minded players who are willing to play with a large number of self imposed restrictions. Aside from that, it's a gigantic mess.

Kinda like AoS, then.

On a more serious note - rampant inbalances not being checked along with ever increasing prices will never help a game, regardless of what GW thinks.

Things here are slowly declining, and Wmh is gaining a lot of players.

**jonolikespie**

Heard from my online store when it released that Dystopian Wars 2.0 outsold it 7 to 1 when it released a week later. I think that kinda said a lot about how Australia felt about a new edition 23 months after the last and all this unbound/summoning shenanigans.

More locally even the hardcore 40k fans seem to be playing Warmachine alongside 40k these days. 40k is still around though, which is more than what can be said for Fantasy/AoS.

**krodarklorr**

Arkaine wrote:
7th's a blast! My psykers are gimped, my flyers can't land and assault, formations let me play Unbound But Not Really, Lords of War are now an authorized part of this balanced breakfast, CADs suck, allies are broken, Eldar gets two Codex releases before I get one, and it's been 3 years since I've seen a new one!

This guy understands it.

**Warboss Gobslag**

I have given up playing totally in 7th. I play mostly pick up games and pregame negotiations started to get tense and way too long. All I want to do is slap my orks down on the table and have a reasonable chance to have a fun game. But more and more I had to beg people to not spam some units or change up horrendously unfun net lists. I have a huge collection of ork models to choose from but I often just want to play a simple list.

The game is already long, I do not feel like negotiating and most likely hurting some ones feeling cause I told them that they couldn't bring that huge new model.

For me 7th is a wash. Back to painting and conversions for me until the next release.

**wuestenfux**

The outcome of another thread here was that 40k is only playable in a group with similar minded players, but no longer at a large scale like chess or WMH.

**Frozocrone**

7th is a mess. I proposed to my friend that we should make our own rules. They're not willing to though, they are frequent users of GravSpam, Thunderdome, Invisiblity, 2++ re-rollable, unit spam, etc, etc.

I'm wanting to play 5th. I've not played it (left in 4th, came back in 6th) but I've heard that was when 40k peaked.

**Korinov**

Peregrine wrote:
Vaktathi wrote:
Basically, 7E works if you've got a small group of like-minded players who are willing to play with a large number of self imposed restrictions. Aside from that, it's a gigantic mess.

I wouldn't even be that charitable. Having a group of like-minded players that don't abuse the balance issues helps, but it still leaves idiotic design problems like wound allocation or the excessive randomness in warlord traits/psychic powers/etc.

Agree with both, to a degree. I have the luxury of playing within a relatively small group of like-minded players, where issues with the game can be usually talked about without problems. That said, the game is such a mess that we still face challenges from time to time. From an absolutely practical point of view, perhaps if GW decided to release a new "Age of Draigo" game and completely scrap 40k, it could be the best thing to happen to the game, as the community would be forced to get its hands on the game. At such stage things could only get better, because no matter how hard people tries, they won't do as bad as GW rules designers.

Backfire wrote:Rules-wise, 7th Edition is improvement over 6th edition. It is what 6th edition should have been from the get-go. Wording is better and magic phase speeds up those armies with loads of Psychic powers.

I don't understand how wording can be any better, since most of the rulebook is a blatant copy/paste from the 6th edition one.

**AllSeeingSkink**

jonolikespie wrote:
Heard from my online store when it released that Dystopian Wars 2.0 outsold it 7 to 1 when it released a week later. I think that kinda said a lot about how Australia felt about a new edition 23 months after the last and all this unbound/summoning shenanigans.

More locally even the hardcore 40k fans seem to be playing Warmachine alongside 40k these days. 40k is still around though, which is more than what can be said for Fantasy/AoS.

Was the The Combat Company? TCC have had issues with GW stuff over recent years and I think made the concious decision to move 40k and WHFB out of the limelight (or maybe it was just not performing so they moved it out of the limelight, I tend to think the former though because they barely even advertise new release 40k any more where they used to in the past and they do advertise other games).

**vipoid**

IMO the game peaked in 5th and has only been declining since then.

Whilst not without its issues, 5th at least had a solid ruleset and allowed for a pretty tactial game.

6th fixed virtually nothing, and instead added a lot of nonsense like flyers, Riptides and WKs that belonged in Apocalypse, starting the War of Escalation that has yet to end. It then proceeded to bog down the game with a load of random nonsense and random tables. Oh, and allies were basically added as an extra pay-to-win feature. I don't think they even bothered trying to conceal it with fluff - it was just 'have you run out of slots to take the most broken units in your army? Well now you can take broken units from other armies, too!

I'm presuming that 6th was poorly received, as GW quickly brought out 7th to replace it. So, what did GW do to fix 6th? Well, they added more 6th, of course!

Instead of adding overly large units to armies, they just made all the Apocalypse units legal. Hope everyone really loves playing against those really massive units. Also, did we hear people saythat they didn't like random tables? Well here's even more random tables! In fact, here's an entire set of missions designed around just randoming stuff! Finally, did someone say that allies were broken? And that people sometimes had to take troops before they could take broken units? Well we'll just add Unbound and Formations - take only the most broken units, and we'll throw in some free bonuses! Also, are you upset that your big units can't score, and you have to actually still make use of infantry to win games? Well not to worry - now everything can score!

I guess if you like all that stuff, 7th is the edition you've been waiting for.

Either way, GW's steadily declining profits (in spite of slashing production costs and firing numerous staff), would seem to indicate that 7th hasn't been a great success. I look forward to 8th, when GW looks at what didn't work and then proceeds to add more of it.

**jreilly89**

Eh, it's very dependent on your LGS. At mine, it's a blast and most Friday nights are packed with players. But we mostly just play with each other, with cheese levels varying, and the occasional LGS tournament. I haven't risked going to a true "tournament".

**Selym**

7th is preventing me moving to 5th again, as nobody seems to want to give up their oh-so-pretty fliers, grav cents, psychic phases, formations and general wacky cheeses.

7E is just a massive pain in the arse, and left all the good armies in the dirt (IG, CSM).

**Xenomancers**

The worst part about 7th edition is that it is not fun. It gives you a lot of options about how to make a list but only 2 kinds of list actually work. Broken formations and abuse of Death-star units. In my eyes the game is all but dead. I refuse to spend any more money on it and I only play with close friends who feel quite the same way I do about it - "we have to play this game don't we? we spent several thousands on it."