wouldnt change a thing, I took a big break from the game during 2nd-7th but kept up w lore & such. Got back into it in 8th and have enjoyed it immensely. Luckily my flgs has a healthy casual element so it was fun coming back and finding people I played against 25 plus years ago to enjoy the game with.
If I could go back and time, I’d not tell younger me not to get into 40k, but to pick up more of the classic stuff while it was still in print.
There is small stuff, like not bothering to pick up a unit I never really use, but nothing big. Most of the stuff I picked up was because I liked it. And generally still do. Or got my use out of it. Not everything, but most things. When you play at a more friendly level, few things don’t work.
I might have started with a different army or made different choices with my collection, but I'm so thankful I've had this hobby in my life. I don't regret any of it.
100% yes. I started in 1989 and have met so many great friends through the years and have had countless hours enjoying modeling, painting, and gaming.
I wish I had not sold as many armies over the years. To continue in the hobby I'd sell armies and put the money back into a new army. Money was tighter years ago, so I don't feel I had a lot of options, but it would have been kinda cool to have more of my older collection.
No, I'd still get into 40k.
The two underlying reasons I got into this game would still be there.
1) I was already a miniature wargamer. I've always liked this stuff - wether it's ancient Romans, 15mm WWII, fantasy stuff, mecha, space ships....Space Marines.... It's building/painting models, playing with toys with your friends, and getting to do it all your life as an adult by calling it a "hobby".
2) My friend Dan would've still been annoying me by running his mouth about how he was going to completely dominate this local tourney & about how unbeatable his army (Eldar)/he was. Challenge Accepted.
Would I do anything different? Yes.
1) I'd jump in sooner than I did.
Divert some funds from whatever I was building WHFB wise at the time. My friend Bill kept trying to get me into this game he'd discovered WH40K: Rogue Trader. I was vaguely familiar it as at the time I was most heavily into WHFB & the fantasy stuff. I resisted, though I'd occasionally borrow some of another friends Squats - until near what was the closing days of RT my friend Dan's boating eventually spurred me to give him that smackdown tourney-wise. I could've been playing this game several years longer than I have been.
2) There's some FW stuff I really should've picked up over the years before it went oop on me. Not impossible to get today, just more expensive/have to deal with re-casters....
And it's not like I didn't have the funds. I was just building other things/procrastinating. Then I took a break from 40k during much of 6th, all of 7th, & when I returned some of the FW stuff was gone. :(
3) I'd pour alot more $ into GW stock.
That'd have been a very nice return these past few years....
Eldarain wrote: Probably not. If I did I'd hope I could stick to one faction.
yeah, that is my current conundrum as well. Wish I had stuck to my guns about one faction.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ccs wrote: No, I'd still get into 40k.
The two underlying reasons I got into this game would still be there.
1) I was already a miniature wargamer. I've always liked this stuff - wether it's ancient Romans, 15mm WWII, fantasy stuff, mecha, space ships....Space Marines.... It's building/painting models, playing with toys with your friends, and getting to do it all your life as an adult by calling it a "hobby".
2) My friend Dan would've still been annoying me by running his mouth about how he was going to completely dominate this local tourney & about how unbeatable his army (Eldar)/he was. Challenge Accepted.
Would I do anything different? Yes.
1) I'd jump in sooner than I did.
Divert some funds from whatever I was building WHFB wise at the time. My friend Bill kept trying to get me into this game he'd discovered WH40K: Rogue Trader. I was vaguely familiar it as at the time I was most heavily into WHFB & the fantasy stuff. I resisted, though I'd occasionally borrow some of another friends Squats - until near what was the closing days of RT my friend Dan's boating eventually spurred me to give him that smackdown tourney-wise. I could've been playing this game several years longer than I have been.
2) There's some FW stuff I really should've picked up over the years before it went oop on me. Not impossible to get today, just more expensive/have to deal with re-casters....
And it's not like I didn't have the funds. I was just building other things/procrastinating. Then I took a break from 40k during much of 6th, all of 7th, & when I returned some of the FW stuff was gone. :(
3) I'd pour alot more $ into GW stock.
That'd have been a very nice return these past few years....
Yeah I started buying GW stock last week and i already made back the broker fee lol
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sarigar wrote: 100% yes. I started in 1989 and have met so many great friends through the years and have had countless hours enjoying modeling, painting, and gaming.
I wish I had not sold as many armies over the years. To continue in the hobby I'd sell armies and put the money back into a new army. Money was tighter years ago, so I don't feel I had a lot of options, but it would have been kinda cool to have more of my older collection.
yeah I have 4 armies that I built myself and 2 that I commissioned. I wish I had realized how long the hobby part takes since I would have just stuck with one army I am painting myself and the 2 commissioned armies. I commissioned detailed armies to paint like ad mech/tsons
Yeah I reckon I'd still get into 40K. I've enjoyed the hobby so at, made some good friends through the game and stores. Sure it's been frustrating here and there, having an army that's weaker in the meta.
I'm happy i got into 40k. I love the miniatures that I have painted, the skills I've gained, the friends I've met and the social confidence necessary to engage with strangers.
The game as of right now is terrible though. Good thing there are plenty of good games out there!
I'd probably coach my younger self how to paint and then tell him to not pick less difficult paint schemes
The one thing I'd change would be not buying any of the 7th edition gak. None of the games were fun and all of the books were a colossal waste of money.
As far as settings go, I have no regrets. 40K gave me a love of all things bombastic and overdramatic, as well as an enjoyment in exploring settings with as much or even more depth to them (including our own history).
The weird way in which there is a consistent “core” of a setting with wildly inconsistent and contradictory details (ex. Captain Titus and Captain Sicarius somehow both commanding the 2nd Ultramaines Company) has also helped me lower my bar for the enjoyment of other media. By consequence, I can still enjoy a story with a convoluted and inconsistent plot.
That being said, I should not have spread out miniature purchases across multiple armies with the intent of playing alone. I love these models a lot, but getting full 2000 point armies across five armies would have lead to an enormous price tag. Thankfully, this was far from fully realized. Hoping to use paper minis to cover the rest.
I would definitely get more into 40k lore and art even earlier, but would have collected 2000s 28mm Inquisition retinues, more Vostroyans, and finally AdMech releases instead of Mantic Forgefathers for Squat conversions. I would in other words have splashed out more on 40k minis. Not much different. Warhammer has given my life a lot. A great lot.
Death Korps of Krieg are so expensive, that I wouldn't have collected them even when given a second chance. Not much changes.
The setting is absolutely glorious. Head and shoulders above any competition, including settings 40k itself copied. Long live Warhammer 40'000!
Sledgehammer wrote: I'm happy i got into 40k. I love the miniatures that I have painted, the skills I've gained, the friends I've met and the social confidence necessary to engage with strangers.
The game as of right now is terrible though. Good thing there are plenty of good games out there!
I m new with 9th but it seems the game is better now being more objective based rather than a shoot them off dice chucker
Despite 8th killing my ability to have fun with the hobby, I still would opt to go through the experiences I had with 6th and 7th. Had quite a few years of fun with the hobby and I still have all those models that I've painted to look at and think back upon better times. Maybe one day things will be improve with a more complex rule set and game mechanics returns to 40k instead of whatever you want to call the current simplified rendition of the table top game.
I started the hobby around the year 2000, during 3rd edition, when orks were getting a new line of models to replace Gorkamorka miniatures. I started playing 10 years later.
So yeah, I'd do 40k again, I picked up that hobby mostly for the models not for gaming.
What I regret is not spending enough time to learn how to properly paint models when I was a kid. Years later stripping a full army of its paint was a real pain . In my defense at that time there was no internet at home, the only sources of learning how to paint were White Dwarf, Codexes and older hobbysts and I was like 12-15yo old.
I started when RT become 2nd ed. I played 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th, and am now back for 9th. I would tell my younger self to dive right in, and that it would be a fantastic hobby, both playing but also painting and tinkering. Most crucially, I would also caution myself to relax, and not be TFG. Things look different when you're twenty years older and wiser. I think I've mostly been an ok opponent, but I remember some games where I definitely felt much too engaged, and games where I took it too much to be a competitive sport instead of a casual immersive tabletop game. I guess, to me at least, it was very intoxicating to discover I had a knack for something. (I won many tournaments, and FWIW I was a big fish in a small pond) My regrets are that I've obliterated both casual veterans and new comers to the hobby, by either just playing to my best or by bringing a gun to a knife fight. Neither party really had any good games out of that.
If I could do it all over, I'd rather be the guy everyone was looking forward to playing at the tournament because I was so fun and easy to hang out with, than be the guy people would fear to meet, because I brought a hard list and a very competitive game. I would also know who the cheaters and bullies were, and just shake their hands and congratulate them on their victories before even starting playing. In the past, I'd meet them head on and give as good as I got. Then, a few unpleasant hours later, both he and I would emerge bruised. But why spend time so poorly? What, really, is at stake? No one cares if play better with your dolls than another nerd? At the most, you can win more toy soldiers at the cost of denigrating yourself. Pfft.
Looking back there are only some unit choices I probably should not have bought, i.e. most of the things that were outsourced to CSM when the DG codex came around.
And maybe I should not have started Daemons, but knowing me if I wouldn't have started them I'd probably always had thrown an eye on them because their connection to DG is just too obvious. The army just has never been as much fun as CSM/DG.
I'd do it all again for sure. All in all, the 40K hobby has been a huge positive for my life. If I were to give advice to my younger self, it'd probably be: learn to magnetize, gain a better analytical understanding of the rules, get those Tallarn and Elysian minis while you can, and don't get distracted by other tabletop games so much. The last point is not strictly 40K, but it is a definite hobby regret - over the years, I spent so much time and money on various other TT games, only for them to die and me learning that I'd been better off with 40K in the first place.
The only thing I regret is not getting further into things like painting much earlier. And reading BL novels which I suspect would have wound up with my doing fantasy a lot lot sooner than I did (and actually getting to play Old World fantasy).
I'd try to be more disciplined in my purchasing & probably spend less time worrying about when something is going to come out/not let future releases dictate what armies I play
If I had it to do all over again, I would skip the side ventures I took like Battletech, Vor, Chronopia, Starship Troopers and Warzone. I would tell myself to just focus on 40k, and I'd have gotten into painting in a more serious manner much sooner, but yeah, I would do 40k again if I had a second run at it.
It's not always the best game, but it's the one where you know you will have opponents, the company isn't likely to go under tomorrow (or to stay in business but drop 40k), and at times when the game is not fun for me (3rd ed, 7th ed, possibly 9th ed - still on the fence on that), it still has the best models, so I can enjoy it from that aspect, and I do enjoy the lore. So there's something to like even if I'm taking a break from the game itself.
AceXT wrote: I'd do it all again for sure. All in all, the 40K hobby has been a huge positive for my life. If I were to give advice to my younger self, it'd probably be: learn to magnetize, gain a better analytical understanding of the rules, get those Tallarn and Elysian minis while you can, and don't get distracted by other tabletop games so much. The last point is not strictly 40K, but it is a definite hobby regret - over the years, I spent so much time and money on various other TT games, only for them to die and me learning that I'd been better off with 40K in the first place.
I have learned the value of magnetizing and thankfully, that had been irrelevant in the armies I had chosen due to the lack of weapons or design/lower price vs work required simply not worth magnetizing. But I have been using that whenever it makes sense to do so
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Tycho wrote: If I had it to do all over again, I would skip the side ventures I took like Battletech, Vor, Chronopia, Starship Troopers and Warzone. I would tell myself to just focus on 40k, and I'd have gotten into painting in a more serious manner much sooner, but yeah, I would do 40k again if I had a second run at it.
It's not always the best game, but it's the one where you know you will have opponents, the company isn't likely to go under tomorrow (or to stay in business but drop 40k), and at times when the game is not fun for me (3rd ed, 7th ed, possibly 9th ed - still on the fence on that), it still has the best models, so I can enjoy it from that aspect, and I do enjoy the lore. So there's something to like even if I'm taking a break from the game itself.
thats true, there are so many things to fall to. I probably have enough minis to last 2 or 3 years worth of painting projects
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Marshal Loss wrote: I'd try to be more disciplined in my purchasing & probably spend less time worrying about when something is going to come out/not let future releases dictate what armies I play
Facts, I wish i had spent more time looking into all of the armies. I got started with some that I liked but then realized there were others that I liked way better and now I havent thought much about the armies that got me started in this hobby
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AceXT wrote: I'd do it all again for sure. All in all, the 40K hobby has been a huge positive for my life. If I were to give advice to my younger self, it'd probably be: learn to magnetize, gain a better analytical understanding of the rules, get those Tallarn and Elysian minis while you can, and don't get distracted by other tabletop games so much. The last point is not strictly 40K, but it is a definite hobby regret - over the years, I spent so much time and money on various other TT games, only for them to die and me learning that I'd been better off with 40K in the first place.
yeah I had initially gotten into a different TT game to then realize I would be the only one playing it in my area
If I could do it all over, I'd rather be the guy everyone was looking forward to playing at the tournament because I was so fun and easy to hang out with, than be the guy people would fear to meet, because I brought a hard list and a very competitive game. I would also know who the cheaters and bullies were, and just shake their hands and congratulate them on their victories before even starting playing. In the past, I'd meet them head on and give as good as I got. Then, a few unpleasant hours later, both he and I would emerge bruised. But why spend time so poorly?
What, really, is at stake? Does anyone care if you play better with your dolls than another nerd? At most, you can win more toy soldiers at the cost of denigrating yourself. Pfft.
SK
famous last words. And true, it is better to enjoy your toy soldiers without being an ass
Marshal Loss wrote: I'd try to be more disciplined in my purchasing & probably spend less time worrying about when something is going to come out/not let future releases dictate what armies I play
Well the good news is that you can still do all (or at least some) of that.
If I were in a position to be giving hobby advice to myself in 1996, the state of 40k in 2020 would not be very high in my list of priorities.
My hobby advice to 1996 me would be "take some live drawing and sculpting classes, move to a country who's consensual crime laws don't [censored] [censored] harder than a colonic irrigation before you put down roots, get into tabletop wargaming but treat whatever you play as a way to meet people until Privateer Press releases Warmachine, and don't get too heavy into that because Hordes will be compatible and better."
I don't regret my time with 40k, but it's the only game in town.
gundam 794986 11017840 wrote:how many units did you end up buying
took my confirmation money, and the store owner had a GK army to sell, he said it would get an update soon. And he didn't lie the GK codex came out in like 3 weeks after I bought it. In the mean time my sister bought a tablet with her money.
I got 20 termintors, 5 strikes, 2 dreadnought, 1 NDK, 1 draigo, 2 rhinos without turrets and a termintor armoured character which I later found out to be brother captin stern. out of all the models only the NDK and rhinos were plastic, and I got a box to transport the army too.
Whilst perhaps not 40k specifically, my 31 years in the Hobby has left an indelible mark (well, marks) upon my life.
From 1996-2003, it was how I met my friendship circle. And being in a relatively small town, everyone I now know all these years later are no more than 3 steps removed. This includes my girlfriend, as I was introduced to her by the first friend I made when I moved to England, and it was GW stuff that lead to that friendship. If anyone has joined in on my video painting sessions, you’ll have met Paul as well.
And in terms of career? It was going for and being rejected for a full time position, and receiving feedback that genuinely changed my life. Whilst my current career isn’t directly related to the hobby (nor something I ever really planned), it was that feedback that saw me belt up and push myself further than before.
Now it’s not to say another Hobby wouldn’t have resulted in all this. But if given my time over again? I’d still take this path - though I’d probably have that wee word with myself a lot earlier on!
I have gotten so much out of this hobby over the years and it has truly helped me through some tough times.
I think all I would do if I had my time over would be to make sure I took better care of my old rulebooks so I would still have them today, especially the old Codex Imperialis background book which I dearly loved but which I can only find really poor quality scans of these days. Would love to still have the cardboard ruins from the 2e boxed set too! And the awesome scenario book.
I would like to say that I would get stuff like BFG when it was still in print, but realistically, I just didn't have the money back then, and that wouldn't be any different second time round. I wouldn't have sold off my beastmen and lizardmen when moving country though!
gundam 794986 11017840 wrote:how many units did you end up buying
took my confirmation money, and the store owner had a GK army to sell, he said it would get an update soon. And he didn't lie the GK codex came out in like 3 weeks after I bought it. In the mean time my sister bought a tablet with her money.
I got 20 termintors, 5 strikes, 2 dreadnought, 1 NDK, 1 draigo, 2 rhinos without turrets and a termintor armoured character which I later found out to be brother captin stern. out of all the models only the NDK and rhinos were plastic, and I got a box to transport the army too.
Have you expanded upon this any since then?
Have you scratch built any turrets to convert your rhinos?
Have you expanded upon this any since then?
Have you scratch built any turrets to convert your rhinos?
Define expended. I bought the PA books, two CA books and the codex. I have not bought any extra models. And I don't have any scratch to build anything out of. Plus 8th didn't make me want to spend much on the army, specialy after the first year or year and a half. I mean I could have gotten a better GK army, but it would still have been bad, and it would require me to build 6+ boxs of strikes, and I bought don't and didn't have such money, and may as well have just bought a new army, that was actualy fun to play.
I did get a box of lumineth lightlords from my aunt as a gift from my aunt. I have them still foiled up somewhere in the attic.
I played quite a bit in my early years, which was a waste of money then due to how expensive the hobby is vs how much I was making at my job. I wouldn't do it over again, unless I was still that stupid.
I bought a lot of Tyranid models at the start of 8th edition. I don't think I've ever had a worse case of buyers remorse.
At this point it's come down to morbid curiosity that keeps me following the game in 9th edition. Just seeing how they can give xenos customers as little as possible while giving the majority of their time and effort to Space Marine and Chaos customers, who they obviously value far, far more.
If I could go back, I would have stayed out of 40K, or at best pick up nothing more than a kill team sized force - probably Tau & Tyranids.
Of course, I also would have stayed away from all the D&D 2E and World of Darkness RPG books too. I literally had three 6-shelf bookshelves full of that gaming material, and have cut it down to less than a single *shelf*.
I would have purchased the Dread Ambull BSF box before it disappeared; I wish EVERY GW product went to last chance to buy before it disappeared- it would make it much easier to make sure you have what you want. Right now I'm in a similar state of anxiety over some of the DE models I want; with an update on the way, we don't know whether the Beastmaster and Beasts or the Court of the Archon models will get disappeared or redone, and if the latter, we don't know if we'll like them.
I would have maintained my painting skills and schedule during the times were I wasn't actively playing.
I would have kept some of the models that I traded or gave away; good will trades DID allow me to get some really good models that I still have and treasure, so this one is harder to do-over than others.
dotcomee wrote: I played quite a bit in my early years, which was a waste of money then due to how expensive the hobby is vs how much I was making at my job. I wouldn't do it over again, unless I was still that stupid.
I bought a lot of Tyranid models at the start of 8th edition. I don't think I've ever had a worse case of buyers remorse.
At this point it's come down to morbid curiosity that keeps me following the game in 9th edition. Just seeing how they can give xenos customers as little as possible while giving the majority of their time and effort to Space Marine and Chaos customers, who they obviously value far, far more.
so would you call yourself a 40k gamer in recovery?
Have you expanded upon this any since then?
Have you scratch built any turrets to convert your rhinos?
Define expended. I bought the PA books, two CA books and the codex. I have not bought any extra models. And I don't have any scratch to build anything out of. Plus 8th didn't make me want to spend much on the army, specialy after the first year or year and a half. I mean I could have gotten a better GK army, but it would still have been bad, and it would require me to build 6+ boxs of strikes, and I bought don't and didn't have such money, and may as well have just bought a new army, that was actualy fun to play.
I did get a box of lumineth lightlords from my aunt as a gift from my aunt. I have them still foiled up somewhere in the attic.
so have you quit or are you in the process of quitting?
If I could start over I would have stuck only to minis I liked instead of minis I needed to keep my army current, never kept up with the rules, and started writing my own evergreen rulebook years earlier than I did.
Eldarain wrote: Probably not. If I did I'd hope I could stick to one faction.
so will you quit 40k? or are you so vested that you are going to ride it out?
I've been out since Marines 2.0. Haven't sold anything off yet. I loved my time in 2nd/3rd, beginning of 4th. Some of the most fun I've had wargaming.
I returned in 6th and its been pretty awful for the most part. Definitely played with some good people and had a few ok games here and there. Playing Word Bearers and Tyranids in a "only the bleeding edge" meta has made enthusiasm for the game challenging.
I actually do like what I've seen of 9th so far to the point I actually picked up one of the super cheap Indomitus rulebooks that have flooded the market.
So I'm waiting to see how they treat my armies this time before making that call. Regardless I'm going to cut down my armies for GW games. The book costs alone are kinda crazy to maintain multiple factions.
Messing with the time-continuum is never a good idea. But if I had to make one time jump to change things I would have played Space Marine (the old Epic) with the group in my FLGS circa 1993/94. I was playing WW2 micro-armour at the time, and while the 40K world intrigued me I was focused on WW2. They had some cool looking games. So I guess I would have started playing sooner, although on my student budget I guess I had one hobby and micro-armour was fun. Darned space-time continuum.
It's been a great hobby, starting in 1996. I left 40K with 7th Ed and came back for 8th. If they pull too many Psychic Awakenings on us going forward I would eye the door, but I am also lucky to play in a great group. As long as Saturday afternoons are fun (and Saturday evenings playing basement-hammer with my adult son) I'll stay on the ride.
If I could do it over again, I would still get into 40k. However,.I would have kept the basic (Non-SW) Marines from my Space Wolf collection. I would have also focused on collecting based on what I wanted rather than what was competitive.
( I'd have also limited my Starfleet Battles purchases to just be a couple of ships I liked rather than a pile of ships overall.)
Considering i started in 3rd yes-the game still appealed to me as a lore focused player and 4th as well as 5th still felt like the same game with a few tweeks/improvements
Like others have said i would only stay with one faction, unfortunately my favorite faction-cult mechanicus wasn't a thing in 3rd outside BFG. the thing is since my group has gone back to playing 5th with some house rule fixes, it is now the best the game has ever been.
I would have started the hobby sooner, but otherwise I wouldn't change too much. I bailed on 6th/7th edition, and looking back, I don't think I missed much.
I've gotten a lot of good out fo the hobby, both in terms of my collection of miniatures, the friends I've made gaming, or even the friends I made here.
I would not have bought so big into Warmachine, OTOH>...
Have you expanded upon this any since then?
Have you scratch built any turrets to convert your rhinos?
Define expended. I bought the PA books, two CA books and the codex. I have not bought any extra models. And I don't have any scratch to build anything out of. Plus 8th didn't make me want to spend much on the army, specialy after the first year or year and a half. I mean I could have gotten a better GK army, but it would still have been bad, and it would require me to build 6+ boxs of strikes, and I bought don't and didn't have such money, and may as well have just bought a new army, that was actualy fun to play.
Model wise. I've gathered you'd added books (or at least the rules). A single box of Strikes will help you a lot. 10 figures - that depending upon how you build them - can make 4 different units/2 squads. And there's modeling tricks we can teach you to make the equipment inter-changable for max flexibility.
You don't lack material for scratch building. Nobody does. At the very least everyone's house is full of it, you get more all the time, and you throw it away without ever thinking about it.
You need glue, a hobby knife (or scissors), and a bit of imagination. Then you need to look at bits & pieces of stuff as shapes/raw material. Puzzle pieces if you will. And some paint + a cheap brush.
Try this: Think of an Assault Cannon. What shapes make up an assault cannon? Not the little details Gw adds, just the shapes. Now, without spending a $, can you find those shapes small enough to make a 40k scale assault Cannon just by looking around your house? Then you start thinking how to add the little details.
Karol wrote: I did get a box of lumineth lightlords from my aunt as a gift from my aunt. I have them still foiled up somewhere in the attic.
You should get those guys assembled & play some Sigmar. That set works well for small games. Or if you can, play some team games.
If anything, I'd tell my younger self to not get distracted by haters into shittier, far inferior games like Infinity, Warmachine and all that crap and just stick with 40K.
IMO the best practice is to never commit to an extent that seems unrecoverable, whether it be 40k or any other hobby. Keep purchases at a minimum, test new stuff carefully and sell off things you are not excited about anymore to fund your budget for future purchases.
I've never regretted anything hobby-related since I have adopted this conservative approach.
If I could do it all over again I would still have gotten into 40k, but I would make significant changes.
Over the years spanning from 4th to 7th edition I bought into the following armies: Necrons, Tau, CSM, GK/IG. However, my taste changed significantly from when I started at 14 and mostly stopped playing in my mid-late twenties).
- Necrons - I chose this as my first army due to the easy of painting and lack of wargear customization since I was young and inexperienced. As a result I quickly grey bored of this army and eventually sold it off. If I could go back I would have never purchased Necrons.
- Tau - I chose this as my second army once I learned more about 40k and developed my taste. I don't really play now, however Tau would be considered my primary army which I have expanded over the years. No regrets with Tau
- CSM - this was the third army I started. My regret is that I wasted the best codex ever made (4th ed CSM) on thousand sons. I was a bit too young to fully appreciate the level of customization available to that army. Eventually I started to rebuild the army in 6th, but never finished. I don't regret starting CSM, but I wish I had gone deathguard or undivided from the start.
- GK/DKoK allies - when 6th edition was released I saw the allies matrix as the perfect opportunity to build a joint GK/DKoK (IG) army. The army looked cool and was easy to transport, but GKs being largely overplayed at the time took the charm out of the army. I'm debating on selling the army now as the DKoK figures have a resale price that only matches what I paid for them.
- Dark Eldar - when the new range was released I planned to create a hellion/jet bike list. However, I never went through with it and ended up selling the kits I bought. Luckily I pretty much sold the kits for what I paid for them.
In summary:
- I would have started with Tau as my primary army and stuck with it until now
- CSM would have been my secondary army: a split between undivided and death guard
- Looking back I think I would like to have owned a small army of SoB (as I've gotten older I see the charm in the old metal models)
- By focusing on less factions I would have had more time to put into conversions/better painting
If I could travel back to 1997 I would walk into DakkaDakka, grab myself by the back of the neck and drag myself outside.
I would explain to myself that even though 40k seems great...
The game will be ruined by the Horus Heresy being so fleshed out that it loses all of its mythic feels.
Eldar still dont have plastic models in 2020.
Space Marines get replaced with new models that dont lend themselves to conversions and customization.
Wolves become werewolves instead of space Vikings.
Orks are forever garbage.
Guardsmen are all Cadian and Cadia is destroyed.
Knights, flyers and Primarchs are usable on tabletop.
I would probably say "Oh, that's dumb" and move on to entirely different hobby.
If I could do it all over again, I would still get into 40k.
I am glad I got into it when I did too. I was shown 40k back in 5th edition and nothing about it really interested me except the Tau a little bit. Furthermore, I'm not sure I would enjoy playing Tau, and I certainly wouldn't have the painting skills to have the models look like I want them to (basically Vior'la before they really were a thing or at least not the poster faction). It certainly wouldn't have been Chaos Space Marines which I still consider my main faction. Which I am also glad I didn't start too early as I didn't have all that much to repurchase with the new sculpts nor have to wait all that long for their arrival. Yet didn't start too late as prices had stopped increasing annually for that bit, and there were $75 Start Collecting boxes and those cheap (I want to say $60 for Rhino and 10 CSM or something) limited edition boxes too. I could still find the Dark Vengeance and its expansions cheap too.
I know I would have sat out 6th/7th 40k playing the other miniatures games that gained in popularity locally during those years. Which I also don't regret even if it is unlikely I will ever get a chance to play them again. Playing other miniatures war games allowed me to have perspective on exactly what I was getting into with Warhammer 40k and set my expectations to largely met during most of my time playing 40k. They also allowed me a chance to find my painting voice on much less expensive models.
It is easy for me to take 40k for what it is and no more. Which is about all I want in miniatures war gaming any more anyways. Nice looking models and game I have a hard time seeing as worth getting overly competitive about. Just better to chuck some dice and socialize. Certainly, an overly complicated system for that, but good enough for me. No regrets.
If anything, I think I would have liked to have got into Age of Sigmar earlier. I am unlikely to have a Stormcast or Khorne army now that those boxed sets are rare, but I certainly could see me enjoying those armies when they are a little cheaper to get into.
DeffDred wrote: If I could travel back to 1997 I would walk into DakkaDakka, grab myself by the back of the neck and drag myself outside.
I would explain to myself that even though 40k seems great...
The game will be ruined by the Horus Heresy being so fleshed out that it loses all of its mythic feels.
Eldar still dont have plastic models in 2020.
Space Marines get replaced with new models that dont lend themselves to conversions and customization.
Wolves become werewolves instead of space Vikings.
Orks are forever garbage.
Guardsmen are all Cadian and Cadia is destroyed.
Knights, flyers and Primarchs are usable on tabletop.
I would probably say "Oh, that's dumb" and move on to entirely different hobby.
BaconCatBug wrote: In short, no. The 40k of today is not the 40k I fell in love with in the 90s.
So is some sort of sunk cost or forlorn hope that keeps you visiting 40k specific forums and news outlets? I know if I hadn't enjoyed something for two decades and regretted even getting into it, I wouldn't visit any kind of social media for it nor keep up on news about it. I certainly don't visit D&D or Pontiac sites anymore, and I don't even regret having those things as hobbies.
BaconCatBug wrote: In short, no. The 40k of today is not the 40k I fell in love with in the 90s.
?? So you would go back in time and talk yourself out of having fun with 40k in the then-&-there because in the distant future you'd no longer enjoy it....
gundam wrote: If you could do it over again, would you not get into 40k? Or what would you have done differently?
I would do it over again, hopefully I would paint better and play better and get some different models, but honestly there wouldn't be any different of what I'm already doing.
BaconCatBug wrote: In short, no. The 40k of today is not the 40k I fell in love with in the 90s.
?? So you would go back in time and talk yourself out of having fun with 40k in the then-&-there because in the distant future you'd no longer enjoy it....
"'Tis better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all" is such a pile of guano it makes the Bracken Caves look small.
I kinda feel sorry for all those who are here on Dakka, thus I assume still engaged on some level with 40K/Warhammer - and yet say that they'd turn themselves away from it at a young age if given the option to try again.
I just think if you're not having fun why are you still doing it - there's so much more out there to engage with in a positive way, why continue to shackle yourself to something that makes you miserable when its a hobby.
Overread wrote: I kinda feel sorry for all those who are here on Dakka, thus I assume still engaged on some level with 40K/Warhammer - and yet say that they'd turn themselves away from it at a young age if given the option to try again.
I just think if you're not having fun why are you still doing it - there's so much more out there to engage with in a positive way, why continue to shackle yourself to something that makes you miserable when its a hobby.
Yeah, same. I'd do it all again, but would probably try to get stuff painted a bit quicker...
I'd definitely do 40k again. I think I'd hold back on a lot of my purchases though. I spent at least a thousand pounds on ebay picking up a nearly all metal inquisition army, including a platoon of the old inquisitorial stormtroopers and many many metal marines. That was three years ago, not long before I started to fall out of love with the hobby. I'm coming back to it, but knowing what I know now I'd hold off. And pick up one or two of the now OOPFW dreadnoughts instead for a lot less than all the money I'd ever saved up as a teenager before going to university.
If anything, I'd tell my younger self to not get distracted by haters into shittier, far inferior games like Infinity, Warmachine and all that crap and just stick with 40K.
I heard about Warmachine on this thread and it seems that it came and fizzled away
Automatically Appended Next Post:
BertBert wrote: IMO the best practice is to never commit to an extent that seems unrecoverable, whether it be 40k or any other hobby. Keep purchases at a minimum, test new stuff carefully and sell off things you are not excited about anymore to fund your budget for future purchases.
I've never regretted anything hobby-related since I have adopted this conservative approach.
Pretty wise words I will start living by in my hobby life. I probably went too hard into some armies that I wish I hadn't.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
gossipmeng wrote: If I could do it all over again I would still have gotten into 40k, but I would make significant changes.
Over the years spanning from 4th to 7th edition I bought into the following armies: Necrons, Tau, CSM, GK/IG. However, my taste changed significantly from when I started at 14 and mostly stopped playing in my mid-late twenties).
- Necrons - I chose this as my first army due to the easy of painting and lack of wargear customization since I was young and inexperienced. As a result I quickly grey bored of this army and eventually sold it off. If I could go back I would have never purchased Necrons.
- Tau - I chose this as my second army once I learned more about 40k and developed my taste. I don't really play now, however Tau would be considered my primary army which I have expanded over the years. No regrets with Tau
- CSM - this was the third army I started. My regret is that I wasted the best codex ever made (4th ed CSM) on thousand sons. I was a bit too young to fully appreciate the level of customization available to that army. Eventually I started to rebuild the army in 6th, but never finished. I don't regret starting CSM, but I wish I had gone deathguard or undivided from the start.
- GK/DKoK allies - when 6th edition was released I saw the allies matrix as the perfect opportunity to build a joint GK/DKoK (IG) army. The army looked cool and was easy to transport, but GKs being largely overplayed at the time took the charm out of the army. I'm debating on selling the army now as the DKoK figures have a resale price that only matches what I paid for them.
- Dark Eldar - when the new range was released I planned to create a hellion/jet bike list. However, I never went through with it and ended up selling the kits I bought. Luckily I pretty much sold the kits for what I paid for them.
In summary:
- I would have started with Tau as my primary army and stuck with it until now
- CSM would have been my secondary army: a split between undivided and death guard
- Looking back I think I would like to have owned a small army of SoB (as I've gotten older I see the charm in the old metal models)
- By focusing on less factions I would have had more time to put into conversions/better painting
so you dont play any more at all? sold off all of your armies?
If anything, I'd tell my younger self to not get distracted by haters into shittier, far inferior games like Infinity, Warmachine and all that crap and just stick with 40K.
I heard about Warmachine on this thread and it seems that it came and fizzled away
They had a poorly-executed launch for the 3rd edition that involved big nerfs to a lot of popular tournament lists and an ill-organized theme force system right around the same time 8e 40k came out. The competitive community that had left 40k for Warmachine decided to give 40k another chance, and never really came back. PP (the makers of Warmachine) has been bleeding design people (there's a whole ex-PP people studio now called Atomic Mass Games) and the game's barely treading water.
Wolves become werewolves instead of space Vikings.
Space Wolves could have been great if they hadnt gone so wolfy. The viking angle would have been so much better
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Matt Swain wrote: Yeah, i'd have avoided it . GW is just too greedy and IMO hostile to gamers.
OTOH i might if i looked into ways to give gw as little money as possible.
GW has to be the least customer-friendly company I have ever seen. But the feedback loops/sunk cost they set up by making plastic expensive, making people assemble it and painting, etc It is a no brainer people will have some emotional transference to plastic toys and end up getting stuck.
Given all that, 40k does have some cool aspects and some cool models but now that I know how the treat players, I stopped buying models and I now buy GW stock
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Overread wrote: I kinda feel sorry for all those who are here on Dakka, thus I assume still engaged on some level with 40K/Warhammer - and yet say that they'd turn themselves away from it at a young age if given the option to try again.
I just think if you're not having fun why are you still doing it - there's so much more out there to engage with in a positive way, why continue to shackle yourself to something that makes you miserable when its a hobby.
but it is also nice to hear good lessons that can be useful for new people coming in
Automatically Appended Next Post:
CREEEEEEEEED wrote: I'd definitely do 40k again. I think I'd hold back on a lot of my purchases though. I spent at least a thousand pounds on ebay picking up a nearly all metal inquisition army, including a platoon of the old inquisitorial stormtroopers and many many metal marines. That was three years ago, not long before I started to fall out of love with the hobby. I'm coming back to it, but knowing what I know now I'd hold off. And pick up one or two of the now OOPFW dreadnoughts instead for a lot less than all the money I'd ever saved up as a teenager before going to university.
If I realized how long painting takes (painting that is clean, has smooth lines, etc) I would have bought MUCH less when I got started
Overread wrote: I kinda feel sorry for all those who are here on Dakka, thus I assume still engaged on some level with 40K/Warhammer - and yet say that they'd turn themselves away from it at a young age if given the option to try again.
I just think if you're not having fun why are you still doing it - there's so much more out there to engage with in a positive way, why continue to shackle yourself to something that makes you miserable when its a hobby.
I actuly really enjoy design and game design, So i do enjoy it here for that but playing the game is less fun than discussing its failings i think.
Too many good games and good minis to be stuck in 40k for me
?? So you would go back in time and talk yourself out of having fun with 40k in the then-&-there because in the distant future you'd no longer enjoy it....
Well can't talk for anyone but myself, but I think not everyones start in to w40k was fun. For example now, I am having a lot more fun with it then over all of 8th ed, and that is like 3 years. Not that w40k is very fun right now, but I have money stuck in to models and rules, quitting would make me just look like a fool. And it is better to be seen as unhappy, then as foolish.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Overread wrote: I kinda feel sorry for all those who are here on Dakka, thus I assume still engaged on some level with 40K/Warhammer - and yet say that they'd turn themselves away from it at a young age if given the option to try again.
I just think if you're not having fun why are you still doing it - there's so much more out there to engage with in a positive way, why continue to shackle yourself to something that makes you miserable when its a hobby.
I can't start something different, because I can't afford buying an different army or a buy in to a new game. And I have problems with getting in to anything on my own. There isn't much thing done here anyway, there is MtG and AoS, and that is more or less it, besides historicals, which I don't like. So w40k sure beats out sitting at home, looking at others have fun with their stuff.
I'm glad I was a 40K player. I had a lot of fun with the game! I regret nothing.
I'm also glad I moved on to better stuff when I stopped enjoying it. But I still look back occasionally. When, or rather if, WH40K achieves the rules quality and elegance of modern board games, I'll be the first to buy a new army/unpack old ones.
EDIT
shittier, far inferior games like Infinity, Warmachine
Idk about Infinity but Warmachine is so much better than pretty primitive and (worst of all) boring and tedious, decision-light/upkeep-heavy WH40K.
?? So you would go back in time and talk yourself out of having fun with 40k in the then-&-there because in the distant future you'd no longer enjoy it....
Well can't talk for anyone but myself, but I think not everyones start in to w40k was fun. For example now, I am having a lot more fun with it then over all of 8th ed, and that is like 3 years. Not that w40k is very fun right now, but I have money stuck in to models and rules, quitting would make me just look like a fool. And it is better to be seen as unhappy, then as foolish.
I understand what you're saying. But no, you are wrong about it being better to be unhappy vs looking foolish concerning a hobby. Because you still look (and worse, are) foolish - for persisting in making yourself unhappy. Why? Why would you want to be unhappy? That's the opposite of what these hobbies are for!
And sometimes you'll try something & .... it'll just be an expensive failure. It happens.
Oh, btw, welcome to the Multiple Armies/Games club. It's not a terribly exclusive club I'm afraid, but your Sigmar elves qualified you.
I am not playing 40K any more at all, but I am still a fan of the setting and the miniatures. So I dunno, I think getting hung up on GW as a company is sort of sideways the the point of being a fan of 40K.
But I understand the people who feel bitter, I went through that as well. It ended for me when I completely stopped caring about what GW are doing with the game and the miniatures and started looking for my own solutions. Not for everyone though, and the people who used to say this in threads back when I was still invested annoyed the crap out of me!
?? So you would go back in time and talk yourself out of having fun with 40k in the then-&-there because in the distant future you'd no longer enjoy it....
Well can't talk for anyone but myself, but I think not everyones start in to w40k was fun. For example now, I am having a lot more fun with it then over all of 8th ed, and that is like 3 years. Not that w40k is very fun right now, but I have money stuck in to models and rules, quitting would make me just look like a fool. And it is better to be seen as unhappy, then as foolish.
I understand what you're saying. But no, you are wrong about it being better to be unhappy vs looking foolish concerning a hobby. Because you still look (and worse, are) foolish - for persisting in making yourself unhappy. Why? Why would you want to be unhappy? That's the opposite of what these hobbies are for!
And sometimes you'll try something & .... it'll just be an expensive failure. It happens.
Oh, btw, welcome to the Multiple Armies/Games club. It's not a terribly exclusive club I'm afraid, but your Sigmar elves qualified you.
Just to pick up on this one as well... Look foolish to who? The people that play in the shop that you don't go to any more because you've stopped playing? Your friends, your family, the people who actually matter to you - they should understand if you've tried something that you thought would like, but discovered it actually wasn't for you. And if they don't? Well, then you've got bigger problems than not liking your toy soldiers.
Honestly, any potential foolish appearance you're worried about - it really won't happen. You learn as you get older that people are generally wrapped up in their own lives and really don't think about you as much as you worry they might. That can be good and bad...
It's a hobby that you do for fun. It's not a prison sentence. If it's not fun, stop. You may lose out slightly if you can't sell your stuff for what it cost you - but if that is a sum of money that you can't afford to lose, then you couldn't really afford to take up Warhammer in the first place.
Finally Karol, please don't think I'm trying to drive you out of the hobby. But I've read your very unhappy posts here for a long time and I'm concerned about you. If you are happier to be doing Warhammer than not, then that's great! But don't keep doing it because you think you'll look foolish if you give it up.
Karol wrote: [ Not that w40k is very fun right now, but I have money stuck in to models and rules, quitting would make me just look like a fool. And it is better to be seen as unhappy, then as foolish.
looks like textbook definition of sunk cost effect. Kind of in a similar situation myself with the amount of minis I have
Honestly, any potential foolish appearance you're worried about - it really won't happen. You learn as you get older that people are generally wrapped up in their own lives and really don't think about you as much as you worry they might.
This times 10,000... a lot of good life lesson in this thread. It takes us too long to realize that most people, except for a very few, do really care at all what you do
If it's not fun, stop. You may lose out slightly if you can't sell your stuff for what it cost you - but if that is a sum of money that you can't afford to lose, then you couldn't really afford to take up Warhammer in the first place.
Also this, I have read enough times that people are continually scrapping leftover money to buy plastic toys..."Maybe save some money instead?".
I have met enough people that make bank and commission $8,000 armies...but I also met plenty of entry-level workers who spend all of their time, money on this. People can spend their money as their wish. But out of all the hobbies I have been in, This one has a healthy number of players who have destroyed their financial future to play with plastic toys.
Karol wrote: [ Not that w40k is very fun right now, but I have money stuck in to models and rules, quitting would make me just look like a fool. And it is better to be seen as unhappy, then as foolish.
looks like textbook definition of sunk cost effect. Kind of in a similar situation myself with the amount of minis I have
Honestly, any potential foolish appearance you're worried about - it really won't happen. You learn as you get older that people are generally wrapped up in their own lives and really don't think about you as much as you worry they might.
This times 10,000... a lot of good life lesson in this thread. It takes us too long to realize that most people, except for a very few, do really care at all what you do
When it comes to hobbies I think its always valid to consider taking a break. Sometimes that's all you need to re-set things and come back later and have more fun rather than pushing through. Just box stuff up and move on for a bit.
Karol sounds slightly different in that they don't seem to have really ever had a major "I'm having fun" moment with the hobby. Which I think takes things beyond a simple sump-cost element
40K is definitely expensive, especially if you try and keep up with the release threadmill and the "meta". It is a lot more expensive now than when I started.
But it is possible to do the hobby of playing with Warhammer miniatures fairly cheaply. Buy second hand, look for boxed sets like Start Collecting that have better value, use a free ruleset like One Page Rules rather than the costly and supplement heavy GW rules, make your own terrain.
It is definitely possible to play on a budget. And life stuff comes first, so if you find yourself spending more than you can afford just set yourself a hard limit.
I'd do it again and more if I had the funds. I am waiting until the Eldar line gets updated in plastic before I purchase any more miniatures or books though as that is a release that would definitely tempt me back in.
The Lumineth lin was tempting but I am waiting to see what they do with Tyrion there.
ccs 794986 11019028 wrote:
I understand what you're saying. But no, you are wrong about it being better to be unhappy vs looking foolish concerning a hobby. Because you still look (and worse, are) foolish - for persisting in making yourself unhappy. Why? Why would you want to be unhappy? That's the opposite of what these hobbies are for!
Being unhappy seems to the natural state to be in. In general people tend to be happy for a short time, and some never. Don't think it is a case of wanting to be unhappy, people just are unhappy and that is all.
Just to pick up on this one as well... Look foolish to who?
to myself mostly, but there is also parents, specialy my stepdad or my sister. Now it is better, because I don't go to school with the guys that convinced me to start w40k, because schools are closed, but in 8th getting laugh on daily was not fun. And did not make me feel smart. Plus it is useful, with the army I can go out, and my mom can think I see people and have friends, and I don't have to visit doctors besides. Although this year it wouldn't matter anyway, because doctors stopped seeing people face to face.
It's a hobby that you do for fun. It's not a prison sentence. If it's not fun, stop. You may lose out slightly if you can't sell your stuff for what it cost you - but if that is a sum of money that you can't afford to lose, then you couldn't really afford to take up Warhammer in the first place.
I have big problems with stopping to do stuff, when I fall in to a patern it just stays. I still have to eat my food the way, I learned to eat it at like 7. It is stupid, but I found out the hard way, that even trying to change the behaviour just ends with me being sick and needing to take more meds. Ain't worth it in the long run.
Crispy78 wrote: ...It's a hobby that you do for fun. It's not a prison sentence. If it's not fun, stop. You may lose out slightly if you can't sell your stuff for what it cost you - but if that is a sum of money that you can't afford to lose, then you couldn't really afford to take up Warhammer in the first place...
You got a way to give people the time back that they feel like they wasted spending it on 40k?
Crispy78 wrote: ...It's a hobby that you do for fun. It's not a prison sentence. If it's not fun, stop. You may lose out slightly if you can't sell your stuff for what it cost you - but if that is a sum of money that you can't afford to lose, then you couldn't really afford to take up Warhammer in the first place...
You got a way to give people the time back that they feel like they wasted spending it on 40k?
if you do, don't post it. It's a trillion-dollar idea lol
I mean its one of those things that if you enjoyed it at that time was it really wasted? but if it was never truly enjoyable then why did you continue doing it? Very likely due to the sunk cost effect
gundam wrote: ...I mean its one of those things that if you enjoyed it at that time was it really wasted? but if it was never truly enjoyable then why did you continue doing it? Very likely due to the sunk cost effect
I think the root point here is that a lot of the people who did like 40k at one point feel that it's been yoinked out from under them. This does vary by community, but plenty of places (here on Dakka, at least one FLGS community near me) have decided that tournament-standard 9th needs to replace all of wargaming and if you don't like it you can just pike off, because 9th is an improvement over 8th (and don't even mention the horror that was 7th), or because they'd love to try homebrew content/oldhammer/other wargames but there's no point because nobody else would ever play, or because all of the screwed-up things GW does to their customer base are obviously the industry standard/best way to run a game, or because 9th is obviously the best way forward for wargaming and there's no way anyone could possibly disagree because (tournament winrate statistics). It's exhausting, frustrating, depressing, and pretty dehumanizing to be constantly told that your hobby has been objectively improved by mutating into something you dislike.
"If you're not having fun just quit!" isn't the panacea you seem to think it is, partially because of sunk-cost thinking, yes, but also because people don't want to quit wargaming, they want to play a different wargame. It's the WoW-effect where there's a huge space out there to explore but all your friends are playing the most popular one so you feel stuck playing that, or you can't find a community that plays anything else (tabletop wargames are geographically restricted in a way video games aren't). It doesn't feel like "oh, things changed, I don't like the new version of the thing so I should stop", it feels like the community has quit you and now you get to be ostracized and told it's your fault for not liking the fantastic new direction that you feel has ruined a game you liked.
You'll notice further up the page when I gave my personal response to the OP's question I didn't say "I'd tell my younger self to find a better hobby", I said "I'd tell my younger self to recognize that GW's rules are never going to improve and start doing his own earlier". I think there's still value and fun to be had out of the hobby, even if I do dislike 9th. I do, however, understand the people who think that they'd have been better off not getting emotionally invested into what's turned into a source of pain/frustration.
Yes, I would get into 40k again if I had it to do over again. Although I've had problems with every edition I've played (been playing since 3rd), I've always had fun. Nothing is perfect, and I'll continue to complain about problems I see with the game, but I don't plan to stop playing because of them.
gundam wrote: ...I mean its one of those things that if you enjoyed it at that time was it really wasted? but if it was never truly enjoyable then why did you continue doing it? Very likely due to the sunk cost effect
I think the root point here is that a lot of the people who did like 40k at one point feel that it's been yoinked out from under them. This does vary by community, but plenty of places (here on Dakka, at least one FLGS community near me) have decided that tournament-standard 9th needs to replace all of wargaming and if you don't like it you can just pike off, because 9th is an improvement over 8th (and don't even mention the horror that was 7th), or because they'd love to try homebrew content/oldhammer/other wargames but there's no point because nobody else would ever play, or because all of the screwed-up things GW does to their customer base are obviously the industry standard/best way to run a game, or because 9th is obviously the best way forward for wargaming and there's no way anyone could possibly disagree because (tournament winrate statistics). It's exhausting, frustrating, depressing, and pretty dehumanizing to be constantly told that your hobby has been objectively improved by mutating into something you dislike.
"If you're not having fun just quit!" isn't the panacea you seem to think it is, partially because of sunk-cost thinking, yes, but also because people don't want to quit wargaming, they want to play a different wargame. It's the WoW-effect where there's a huge space out there to explore but all your friends are playing the most popular one so you feel stuck playing that, or you can't find a community that plays anything else (tabletop wargames are geographically restricted in a way video games aren't). It doesn't feel like "oh, things changed, I don't like the new version of the thing so I should stop", it feels like the community has quit you and now you get to be ostracized and told it's your fault for not liking the fantastic new direction that you feel has ruined a game you liked.
You'll notice further up the page when I gave my personal response to the OP's question I didn't say "I'd tell my younger self to find a better hobby", I said "I'd tell my younger self to recognize that GW's rules are never going to improve and start doing his own earlier". I think there's still value and fun to be had out of the hobby, even if I do dislike 9th. I do, however, understand the people who think that they'd have been better off not getting emotionally invested into what's turned into a source of pain/frustration.
Yeah I can see that being a bad situation, and to a long-term hobbyist it may sound flippant to say 'hey if you don't like it any more then quit'.
My response was really aimed specifically at Karol, who, as I understand it from previous posts:
- has only played since 8th edition
- is young and not wealthy, so buying in was a big investment of a one-off lump sum
- was more or less conned into buying a second hand Grey Knights army which was at the very bottom of the barrel strength-wise
- plays in what sounds like the most toxic WAAC alpha-male environment imaginable
- overall, has been unhappy with 40k basically since starting
Personally I don't play in stores or competitions, just with a small group of friends. And while we've kept pace with releases and are now invested in 9th, I'm sure at any point we could have agreed to stick on a certain edition if we had wanted to.
In all honesty, from reading his, Karols, last post, I don't think any that are going to respond to him here will help him. It seems like his issues go pretty deep and being conned into buying Grey Knights is just one of a number of things. I don't think any of us can or would make him happy with the hobby or the choice or even leaving it behind. It's one of the toughest things to learn in life, but sometimes you can't help someone, even if you'd like to.
I hope things get better for him generally and in 40k more exactly but change comes from within and only really if someone wants to improve their current state. I mean when someone says that life is generally just un happy I don't think some words on the net will bring light into that dark night.
If anything, I'd tell my younger self to not get distracted by haters into shittier, far inferior games like Infinity, Warmachine and all that crap and just stick with 40K.
I heard about Warmachine on this thread and it seems that it came and fizzled away
They had a poorly-executed launch for the 3rd edition that involved big nerfs to a lot of popular tournament lists and an ill-organized theme force system right around the same time 8e 40k came out. The competitive community that had left 40k for Warmachine decided to give 40k another chance, and never really came back. PP (the makers of Warmachine) has been bleeding design people (there's a whole ex-PP people studio now called Atomic Mass Games) and the game's barely treading water.
Which was a shame because Warmachine was the first thing to come along that challenged GW's status as the 400 lb gorilla in the room and I suspect some of the impetus for the stuff I think is an improvement in 8th and 9th came from having real competition.
Whatever else 40k has going for it the designers have never entirely got past the game's rpg roots and you can see it in the focus on narrative play and rules writing that presumes you'll figure out what they meant. Warmachine carved it's market share out by having a diametrically opposed focus, it was aimed squarely at competitive play, hence avoiding codex creep by releasing new units for every army at once and the Caster Kill mechanic that meant you could be down on points and losing on attrition and still win the game if you could engineer an assassination run, and I liked that.
Unfortunately PP bungled Mk 3 and now if you want to reliably show up at your LGS and get a pick-up game going 40k is your only option in a lot of places again, and GW will go back to not giving a [censored] about competitive balance or at least having missions that reward good play and not just good list building.
gundam wrote: ...I mean its one of those things that if you enjoyed it at that time was it really wasted? but if it was never truly enjoyable then why did you continue doing it? Very likely due to the sunk cost effect
I think the root point here is that a lot of the people who did like 40k at one point feel that it's been yoinked out from under them. This does vary by community, but plenty of places (here on Dakka, at least one FLGS community near me) have decided that tournament-standard 9th needs to replace all of wargaming and if you don't like it you can just pike off, because 9th is an improvement over 8th (and don't even mention the horror that was 7th), or because they'd love to try homebrew content/oldhammer/other wargames but there's no point because nobody else would ever play, or because all of the screwed-up things GW does to their customer base are obviously the industry standard/best way to run a game, or because 9th is obviously the best way forward for wargaming and there's no way anyone could possibly disagree because (tournament winrate statistics). It's exhausting, frustrating, depressing, and pretty dehumanizing to be constantly told that your hobby has been objectively improved by mutating into something you dislike.
"If you're not having fun just quit!" isn't the panacea you seem to think it is, partially because of sunk-cost thinking, yes, but also because people don't want to quit wargaming, they want to play a different wargame. It's the WoW-effect where there's a huge space out there to explore but all your friends are playing the most popular one so you feel stuck playing that, or you can't find a community that plays anything else (tabletop wargames are geographically restricted in a way video games aren't). It doesn't feel like "oh, things changed, I don't like the new version of the thing so I should stop", it feels like the community has quit you and now you get to be ostracized and told it's your fault for not liking the fantastic new direction that you feel has ruined a game you liked.
You'll notice further up the page when I gave my personal response to the OP's question I didn't say "I'd tell my younger self to find a better hobby", I said "I'd tell my younger self to recognize that GW's rules are never going to improve and start doing his own earlier". I think there's still value and fun to be had out of the hobby, even if I do dislike 9th. I do, however, understand the people who think that they'd have been better off not getting emotionally invested into what's turned into a source of pain/frustration.
that's not what I was saying at all lol
I said that if he had fun then his time in the hobby wasn't wasted. But if he never had any fun, then life is too short to continue doing something that brings no joy, especially if it's just a hobby. Not sure why the whole tangent came about. 40K will never be perfect and it will always have its issues. Like the guy below said if you just focus on the stuff you like, the negatives will just be irrelevant.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AngryAngel80 wrote: In all honesty, from reading his, Karols, last post, I don't think any that are going to respond to him here will help him. It seems like his issues go pretty deep and being conned into buying Grey Knights is just one of a number of things. I don't think any of us can or would make him happy with the hobby or the choice or even leaving it behind. It's one of the toughest things to learn in life, but sometimes you can't help someone, even if you'd like to.
I hope things get better for him generally and in 40k more exactly but change comes from within and only really if someone wants to improve their current state. I mean when someone says that life is generally just un happy I don't think some words on the net will bring light into that dark night.
true, there seem to be more things going on than 40k. Whatever he has going on, I hope he can sort it out.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gadzilla666 wrote: Yes, I would get into 40k again if I had it to do over again. Although I've had problems with every edition I've played (been playing since 3rd), I've always had fun. Nothing is perfect, and I'll continue to complain about problems I see with the game, but I don't plan to stop playing because of them.
yeah exactly, like I know its perfect but I dont plan on quitting. Granted, if the game knew such a thing as balance, I might be willing to be more vested with more armies, but I am happy sticking with the 5 I got, which might get narrowed down to 3 in a short time.
gundam wrote: so you dont play any more at all? sold off all of your armies?
I still have my Tau, CSM, and some of the GK/DKoK. However, I haven't played in several years as I hate the direction the game is going - lack of customization in both wargear and the figures themselves (all new releases are monopose and childish). I'll probably sell half of my figures this year and just stick with building 1/350 scale warships as they interest me more.
It also doesn't help that the players at the GWs/LGS near me are just cringy, uninteresting people.
I haven't played in several years as I hate the direction the game is going - lack of customization in both wargear and the figures themselves (all new releases are monopose and childish). I'll probably sell half of my figures this year and just stick with building 1/350 scale warships as they interest me more.
It also doesn't help that the players at the GWs/LGS near me are just cringy, uninteresting people.
That is true, for the money, especially the bigger models should have plenty of MORE options for poses
gundam wrote: If you could do it over again, would you not get into 40k?
I would not...not get into 40k. I would get into 40k.
...I hate questions posed as a negative.
Or what would you have done differently?
If I could do it all again, I'd probably split my attentions better between armies. Right now I have obscene amounts for two armies, more than I'll ever use in a single game. I wish I had more varied armies so I could change things up a bit more (or, more accurately, have more partially-completed armies).
gundam wrote: If you could do it over again, would you not get into 40k?
you can go for the meme of double negative or just say "I would get into 40k." like you did lol
Or what would you have done differently?
If I could do it all again, I'd probably split my attentions better between armies. Right now I have obscene amounts for two armies, more than I'll ever use in a single game. I wish I had more varied armies so I could change things up a bit more (or, more accurately, have more partially-completed armies).
thats fair, I do wish I hadnt gone with as many units for 3 armies I have. I should have capped my armies at 3-4k points each
gundam wrote: ...I mean its one of those things that if you enjoyed it at that time was it really wasted? but if it was never truly enjoyable then why did you continue doing it? Very likely due to the sunk cost effect
I think the root point here is that a lot of the people who did like 40k at one point feel that it's been yoinked out from under them. This does vary by community, but plenty of places (here on Dakka, at least one FLGS community near me) have decided that tournament-standard 9th needs to replace all of wargaming and if you don't like it you can just pike off, because 9th is an improvement over 8th (and don't even mention the horror that was 7th), or because they'd love to try homebrew content/oldhammer/other wargames but there's no point because nobody else would ever play, or because all of the screwed-up things GW does to their customer base are obviously the industry standard/best way to run a game, or because 9th is obviously the best way forward for wargaming and there's no way anyone could possibly disagree because (tournament winrate statistics). It's exhausting, frustrating, depressing, and pretty dehumanizing to be constantly told that your hobby has been objectively improved by mutating into something you dislike.
"If you're not having fun just quit!" isn't the panacea you seem to think it is, partially because of sunk-cost thinking, yes, but also because people don't want to quit wargaming, they want to play a different wargame. It's the WoW-effect where there's a huge space out there to explore but all your friends are playing the most popular one so you feel stuck playing that, or you can't find a community that plays anything else (tabletop wargames are geographically restricted in a way video games aren't). It doesn't feel like "oh, things changed, I don't like the new version of the thing so I should stop", it feels like the community has quit you and now you get to be ostracized and told it's your fault for not liking the fantastic new direction that you feel has ruined a game you liked.
This post resonates with me so perfectly.
I loved 40k. I still love everything about 40k except the rules. But there's just no impetuous to change the game at all, and indeed I get shot down quite spectacularly for ever suggesting anything of the sort.
gundam wrote: ...I mean its one of those things that if you enjoyed it at that time was it really wasted? but if it was never truly enjoyable then why did you continue doing it? Very likely due to the sunk cost effect
"If you're not having fun just quit!" isn't the panacea you seem to think it is, partially because of sunk-cost thinking, yes, but also because people don't want to quit wargaming, they want to play a different wargame. It's the WoW-effect where there's a huge space out there to explore but all your friends are playing the most popular one so you feel stuck playing that, or you can't find a community that plays anything else (tabletop wargames are geographically restricted in a way video games aren't). It doesn't feel like "oh, things changed, I don't like the new version of the thing so I should stop", it feels like the community has quit you and now you get to be ostracized and told it's your fault for not liking the fantastic new direction that you feel has ruined a game you liked.
This post resonates with me so perfectly.
I loved 40k. I still love everything about 40k except the rules. But there's just no impetuous to change the game at all, and indeed I get shot down quite spectacularly for ever suggesting anything of the sort.
I feel for you, because I was feeling the same during 6th and 7th, loving all aspects but hating the rules. Because the current ruleset is enjoying quite a lot of success, I think nothing but minor tweaks here and there will occur for the foreseeable future. At least during 6th and 7th I knew that things would not last (GW was really being challenged by xwing and warmachine/hordes, so I knew they would do something drastic). I only expect a change to secondary objectives and point balancing in 2021 (and 2022 probably). We are in for 2 years of a very "stable" (or "stagnant" depending on how much you want change to happen) 40K, IMHO.
gundam wrote: ...I mean its one of those things that if you enjoyed it at that time was it really wasted? but if it was never truly enjoyable then why did you continue doing it? Very likely due to the sunk cost effect
"If you're not having fun just quit!" isn't the panacea you seem to think it is, partially because of sunk-cost thinking, yes, but also because people don't want to quit wargaming, they want to play a different wargame. It's the WoW-effect where there's a huge space out there to explore but all your friends are playing the most popular one so you feel stuck playing that, or you can't find a community that plays anything else (tabletop wargames are geographically restricted in a way video games aren't). It doesn't feel like "oh, things changed, I don't like the new version of the thing so I should stop", it feels like the community has quit you and now you get to be ostracized and told it's your fault for not liking the fantastic new direction that you feel has ruined a game you liked.
This post resonates with me so perfectly.
I loved 40k. I still love everything about 40k except the rules. But there's just no impetuous to change the game at all, and indeed I get shot down quite spectacularly for ever suggesting anything of the sort.
I feel for you, because I was feeling the same during 6th and 7th, loving all aspects but hating the rules. Because the current ruleset is enjoying quite a lot of success, I think nothing but minor tweaks here and there will occur for the foreseeable future. At least during 6th and 7th I knew that things would not last (GW was really being challenged by xwing and warmachine/hordes, so I knew they would do something drastic). I only expect a change to secondary objectives and point balancing in 2021 (and 2022 probably). We are in for 2 years of a very "stable" (or "stagnant" depending on how much you want change to happen) 40K, IMHO.
This, especiallly Kiro's part is something i have myself issues with, in regards to discussions of (war)game vs War(game) systems and the implications for balance it has.
Truth is, the best way to enjoy 40k is if you have a close knit group that is open for experiments and not just pickup/ tournament hammer, especially for the older guard which expects a degree of "realism" for 40k
gundam wrote: If you could do it over again, would you not get into 40k? Or what would you have done differently?
Despite all the frustrations I have with GW, I wouldn't change much about getting into 40k. I've made a lot of good friends over the years thanks to it and it helped me find friends when I was moving around a lot. Despite the drain financially I'd say overall it's had a positive influence on my life. I'd probably do a few little things differently like not buy a certain model at a certain time or sell a certain army (I sold a huge black templars army for $200 back in 8th and regretted it ever since) but overall I'm happy.
Lockdown. Without models to paint, topics to discuss, books to read, I’d probably go out of my tiny mind.
Instead, I’m doing video based painting sessions, which is giving me the social element I’ve been otherwise missing (not just in hobby either. Being stuck in-doors when your home has become your work place is quite the mental health challenge)
I'd ultimately do it again. I do not regret my 3rd-to-early-5th career, save for buying a good number more models than I actually wound up using only to phase over to 3d printing last year. Multiple boxes of sprues and bits sit there in such overall disarray to the point that if I'm looking for a specific small part even for a mostly GW model, it's easier to just print another than find it.
I fully regret getting excited for and actually attempting to organize and play 9th over TTS. For a variety of reasons, some of which were the result of the game being in an unfinished state, and some of which were the personalities involved, it was a complete fiasco.
I would have been substantially happier just making and painting wacky Chaos marines. Those video painting sessions sound like a brilliant idea.
I agree with the sad feeling when the game moves away from what you would like. For me it is mostly stuff to do with rebasing and some issues with no liking the sort of Command Point based system the game seems to run on (just not really my cup of tea for a wargame). And I am also just tired of IGOUGO because it has a lot of problems and isn't a very good way to organise a mass battle game.
But 40K still acted as a gateway to miniature wargaming for me, and there are other options out there. It is daunting to go from a fully fleshed out community to doing things your own way. I will definitely admit that since I dropped out of the GW ecosystem I have had an order of magnitude fewer games. But all the games I have had have been fun and interesting. And I am slowly building up a group of interested and likeminded people to play with (but yeah, this did take literal years).
Having full creative control means I can take all the stuff I love from 40K and still use it. So I have no reason to regret getting into the game. I milldly regret a few of the decisions that GW has made in the last while, but honestly that was always the case. In 2e I wanted to play Squats, only to find out they were discontinued. In 3e I was actually mostly pretty happy I would say, but then in 4e I felt like I was waiting forever for my Orks to be updated. In 5e, I was pretty happy for most of the edition, though I disliked the introduction of Knights and Fliers as I felt they messed up the scale of the game. 6th and 7th seemed to double down on that stuff, so I stayed away.
8th/9th seems to have brought in a lot of changes that I agree with - the return of negative modifiers I think is a good thing, the use of wounds for vehicles rather than the wonky subsystem, with degrading functionality as the wounds decrease is also a good move. Lots of 8th is quite good, but fundamentally I guess I don't like the CP system and I also dislike the smaller battlefield and amplified leathality. I would give it a go, but I expect people would whinge at me for having my dudes on 25mm and I am just not gonna change that. Bit of a trivial reason to sign out of the ecosystem, but once you've already been out for two editions it is a bit harder to put up with stuff like that in my case at least.
I would gladly have spent every red cent on any other thing that is consistently of better quality and more consistently enjoyable.
40k is a trap. Mostly because GW makes it so. Just look at their subscription app. It's the entire GW hobby boiled down and condensed into the trap now available on your phone.
I would do most of it again, but i would skip out on those 3-4 finecast kits i tried. Kept buying into their lies that initial launch problems were solved. Those bastards lied to me....
Would I not get into it? No never, I'd do it all over again. I hadn't played wargames in years before I found out a colleague played and invited me over to watch a few games. I fell in love again despite only playing LoTR and WHFB before I decided to start a 40k army because that's all they play here.
Only regret I have is not starting DG immediately. The game itself and GW especially has many faults but the entire social aspect draws me in. I know people now I'd call friends I would otherwise never know because I started playing again. The hobby has a very social aspect to me that I wouldn't want to give up.
Its a rhetoric question.
I've started at the beginning of the 3rd edition and the game was much more manageable as it is now.
It was rather easy to enter the tournament scene quickly.
Today, the game is too intricate. Newbies can hardly enter.
With my knowledge about the current edition, I wouldn't enter again and possibly would play golf.
Damn them for luring me into a hobby I've that I've enjoyed for 30+ years, met friends through, made a living off of, etc. Hate that sorta trap....
Lance845 wrote: Just look at their subscription app. It's the entire GW hobby boiled down and condensed into the trap now available on your phone.
Ok, I'm looking at it. What of it? All I see is a product that I don't really have any need for. Not using it doesn't interfere with me playing this game. As such I'm content to ignore it.
Lance845 wrote: I would gladly have spent every red cent on any other thing that is consistently of better quality and more consistently enjoyable.
40k is a trap. Mostly because GW makes it so. Just look at their subscription app. It's the entire GW hobby boiled down and condensed into the trap now available on your phone.
So have sold off your armies or are they collecting dust?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gitdakka wrote: I would do most of it again, but i would skip out on those 3-4 finecast kits i tried. Kept buying into their lies that initial launch problems were solved. Those bastards lied to me....
finecast for the price is highway robbery
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Table wrote: Id not get into it. Was mostly happy until the marine spam. Now Im left with a broken and barely useable army (1ksons) and no fix on the horizon.
Did you sell your army or are you waiting for a fix sometime before the end of time? BTW im a big 1ksons fan and its sad how GW trashes army to drive the cycles of different armies. I understand game changes but making armies unusable (ie. Tau, 1ksons etc) its a slap to the face to the people that spend thousands of hours and dollars buying and putting together their armies
Automatically Appended Next Post:
wuestenfux wrote: Its a rhetoric question.
I've started at the beginning of the 3rd edition and the game was much more manageable as it is now.
It was rather easy to enter the tournament scene quickly.
Today, the game is too intricate. Newbies can hardly enter.
With my knowledge about the current edition, I wouldn't enter again and possibly would play golf.
So would you live the hobby or would you stay involved at a minimum level due to all the time and money invested into it?
Damn them for luring me into a hobby I've that I've enjoyed for 30+ years, met friends through, made a living off of, etc. Hate that sorta trap....
Lance845 wrote: Just look at their subscription app. It's the entire GW hobby boiled down and condensed into the trap now available on your phone.
Ok, I'm looking at it. What of it? All I see is a product that I don't really have any need for. Not using it doesn't interfere with me playing this game. As such I'm content to ignore it.
I can also see by yours and other responses the hobby and casual side of gaming being a rewarding experience.
But I can see the competitive side of the hobby being both a money trap and a time sink, just like this store owner said so on FB in a competitive 40k group.
Honestly, if I had it to do over again, the biggest change I would make would be not to branch out into too many other factions. One of my first purchases was the Dark Vengeance starter set; instead of keeping both halves, I would sell the Chaos Space Marine half and use the money to buy more Dark Angels. That way instead of a bunch of small armies I'd have one big one with lots of options and different units.
As it actually went, I kept both sides and even started Tau very early on, and that diluted my hobby time and money a bit too much. The Chaos Marines ended up mainly being used for Khorne Daemonkin in 7th and later as generic CSM in 8th (the army I took to my only major tournament, Adepticon 2018). The Tau grew into a respectable force that served me well in 7th and did okay in 8th. I have since sold both armies, though, so it might have been better if I had just not started them in the first place.
Despite all this I ultimately have few regrets. We all make mistakes, and I did enjoy painting both Chaos and Tau models at the time. My advice to anyone starting up with 40k is to pick an army they like the look of and stick with just that army until they have at least twice as many points as a standard tournament list (in 9th, that would be 4000 points) and then maybe consider branching out if another army is calling to them.
I would have collected fewer factions and bought the 2nd 40K starter box. Back in the day I was too cheap for that and used SM from Space Crusade in my army.
I would have pursued a different career instead of the sheeeeeeety one I am stuck with, but I would not change a thing regarding 40k, and my 20k (30k ? Sadly I think i am such a nerd that I am closer to 30k...) points of painted plastic toys. I feel for those who invested in games that come and went though (and seemed on the verge of taking over GW for a time, at least where I played), like warmachine and such.
They must really have felt the heavy hand of fate smacking them in the face. Or the heavy power fist of GW swinging back at them for having gone over to the competition ("How dare they !")
So much invested, so much time now lost to a distant past...
I definitely have a few things I've invested in expecting them to be a reasonably popular game.
There's nothing worse than the excitement of a new game dying out before you've even painted your new collection.
ZergSmasher wrote: Honestly, if I had it to do over again, the biggest change I would make would be not to branch out into too many other factions.
Yeah thats my debate now, I bought 5 armies and completely built 4 of them. The one still in boxes will probably get sold and I am deciding between keeping 2 or 3 armies total.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Strg Alt wrote: I would have collected fewer factions and bought the 2nd 40K starter box. Back in the day I was too cheap for that and used SM from Space Crusade in my army.
My advice to anyone starting up with 40k is to pick an army they like the look of and stick with just that army until they have at least twice as many points as a standard tournament list (in 9th, that would be 4000 points) and then maybe consider branching out if another army is calling to them.
I shudder at the idea of someone starting their journey by buying 4000pts of Grey Knights, unless the models are bought for them or they don't care about money at all. Plus the doubling on units would have to be huge. I like termintor models and how they look. But getting 8 identical boxs of strikes, would be brutal.
ZergSmasher wrote: Honestly, if I had it to do over again, the biggest change I would make would be not to branch out into too many other factions.
Yeah thats my debate now, I bought 5 armies and completely built 4 of them. The one still in boxes will probably get sold and I am deciding between keeping 2 or 3 armies total.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Strg Alt wrote: I would have collected fewer factions and bought the 2nd 40K starter box. Back in the day I was too cheap for that and used SM from Space Crusade in my army.
How many factions did you end up with and how many in retrospect would have been the ideal number to get the most out of knowing your army well?
That's funny. I've gone back to 3rd Ed. and I still plan on getting one of every army. Not sub armies like Blood Angels or anything like that, just one of each race/army. I sold off most of my stuff when I was fed up with 5th and decided 6th was going to be worse, along with most of my WFB stuff during 8th there, and I'd love to undo that in a heartbeat.
If I could start my GW hobbies again from zero, I'd not get into 40K proper but I'd get into Kill Team and Epic instead.
I'd not buy plastic kits just for the sake of getting a few bits I needed, I still got a pile of boxes I'll never build fully, and nobody wants to buy incomplete units worth of models... I'd concentrate my spending early on into getting enough terrain.
I think 40K is a confusing scale of combat; not really skirmish but not really properly "two armies dishing it out" either. Ultimately, for me personally, Skirmish/Epic scale division is a much better fit.
ZergSmasher wrote: Honestly, if I had it to do over again, the biggest change I would make would be not to branch out into too many other factions.
Yeah thats my debate now, I bought 5 armies and completely built 4 of them. The one still in boxes will probably get sold and I am deciding between keeping 2 or 3 armies total.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Strg Alt wrote: I would have collected fewer factions and bought the 2nd 40K starter box. Back in the day I was too cheap for that and used SM from Space Crusade in my army.
How many factions did you end up with and how many in retrospect would have been the ideal number to get the most out of knowing your army well?
I have 5 armies, two of which are waaaay over 4000 pts (in 9th), and mu opinion is 5 is too many. If I were you I would most def sell the one still on sprues. 4 armies is enough (perhaps even 3). I would sell my dark angels (my 5th army) but I want to see the new codex first, and I want to play a few games with it before I sell the army. But I will sell it, who honestly has time to play with more than 4 armies ? (If someone has, then I want your life !! Give it to me).
ZergSmasher wrote: Honestly, if I had it to do over again, the biggest change I would make would be not to branch out into too many other factions.
Yeah thats my debate now, I bought 5 armies and completely built 4 of them. The one still in boxes will probably get sold and I am deciding between keeping 2 or 3 armies total.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Strg Alt wrote: I would have collected fewer factions and bought the 2nd 40K starter box. Back in the day I was too cheap for that and used SM from Space Crusade in my army.
How many factions did you end up with and how many in retrospect would have been the ideal number to get the most out of knowing your army well?
I have 5 armies, two of which are waaaay over 4000 pts (in 9th), and mu opinion is 5 is too many. If I were you I would most def sell the one still on sprues. 4 armies is enough (perhaps even 3). I would sell my dark angels (my 5th army) but I want to see the new codex first, and I want to play a few games with it before I sell the army. But I will sell it, who honestly has time to play with more than 4 armies ? (If someone has, then I want your life !! Give it to me).
Yeah 2 (maybe 3 armies) seems the most someone can manage while also living a full life out of 40k (ie. working out, full time job, family/friends, other hobbies, etc)
ZergSmasher wrote: Honestly, if I had it to do over again, the biggest change I would make would be not to branch out into too many other factions.
Yeah thats my debate now, I bought 5 armies and completely built 4 of them. The one still in boxes will probably get sold and I am deciding between keeping 2 or 3 armies total.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Strg Alt wrote: I would have collected fewer factions and bought the 2nd 40K starter box. Back in the day I was too cheap for that and used SM from Space Crusade in my army.
How many factions did you end up with and how many in retrospect would have been the ideal number to get the most out of knowing your army well?
I have 5 armies, two of which are waaaay over 4000 pts (in 9th), and mu opinion is 5 is too many. If I were you I would most def sell the one still on sprues. 4 armies is enough (perhaps even 3). I would sell my dark angels (my 5th army) but I want to see the new codex first, and I want to play a few games with it before I sell the army. But I will sell it, who honestly has time to play with more than 4 armies ? (If someone has, then I want your life !! Give it to me).
Yeah 2 (maybe 3 armies) seems the most someone can manage while also living a full life out of 40k (ie. working out, full time job, family/friends, other hobbies, etc)
Nah, you can have all the armies you like/have room for. The trick is that you just don't focus on ALL of them at the same time. Just two or three. Then you rotate what you're using &/or have on the work bench.
Nah, you can have all the armies you like/have room for. The trick is that you just don't focus on ALL of them at the same time. Just two or three. Then you rotate what you're using &/or have on the work bench.
yeah thats true, I dont have to sell the armies so that's what I am leaning for. Right now there are a few good deals on high quality painted armies that are magnetized on ebay so that's how I have bought my last 3 armies. I will just keep them in boxes until the time is right.
Yep and barring the disaster with AoS - GW models last for years. Heck you can still use a lot of MK1 models for many armies. Sure new designs often look better and some do change size - eg old Greater Demons are now too small, but would easily count as marked demon princes.
So you can "Store" an army for ages. It's a bonus for GW because it makes old gamers more likely to return on a whim and once back in most will start to invest in new models.
I agree on the rotation principle, I currently only play orks and nids.
DA, imp guard and GSC will probably take the place of orks or nids when they get their codex, but until then, they are not an option I think.
Though bullgryns getting cheaper makes me want to give imp guard a go in this 9th edition...
Thing is, if you want to play at a decent level, you can't rotate much because it takes time to master an army and learn to use all its tricks (if you have a lot of army points, painted and based, to choose from that is).
Some real good advice here. I've recently been struggling with the amount of armies I have (basically 3 for 40k and 3 for AoS) and reading your comments makes me feel less inclined to sell any of them.
Thing is, if you want to play at a decent level, you can't rotate much because it takes time to master an army and learn to use all its tricks (if you have a lot of army points, painted and based, to choose from that is).
Sure you can. Current 40k doesn't have a very steep learning curve. And the more experience you have in playing games (GW or otherwise), the lower & lower it gets.
Thing is, if you want to play at a decent level, you can't rotate much because it takes time to master an army and learn to use all its tricks (if you have a lot of army points, painted and based, to choose from that is).
Sure you can. Current 40k doesn't have a very steep learning curve. And the more experience you have in playing games (GW or otherwise), the lower & lower it gets.
The key is at a decent level, sure you can get the mechanics and overall feel but the tricks are what make the armies unique. If you live a full life outside of 40k, I dont think it is too realistic to be able to know how to play a lot of armies at a decent level. Even some of the people that stream and do it often can't keep up with stuff and are reminded in chat of the armies tricks.
Thing is, if you want to play at a decent level, you can't rotate much because it takes time to master an army and learn to use all its tricks (if you have a lot of army points, painted and based, to choose from that is).
Sure you can. Current 40k doesn't have a very steep learning curve. And the more experience you have in playing games (GW or otherwise), the lower & lower it gets.
The key is at a decent level, sure you can get the mechanics and overall feel but the tricks are what make the armies unique. If you live a full life outside of 40k, I dont think it is too realistic to be able to know how to play a lot of armies at a decent level. Even some of the people that stream and do it often can't keep up with stuff and are reminded in chat of the armies tricks.
So how long does it take you to learn to play an army well?
How long do you think it takes others?
Exactly what skills do you think go into dong this?
Do you think that when an edition changes those skills learned reset to zero?
I have two armies and usually have phases where I play one or the other, rarely both. When I returned to DG after playing nothing but ork buggies for almost half a year, I definitely dropped below the "decent" skill level. Same when I moved back to orks recently. We've also had a discussion in our group where some of the veterans with 5+ armies were talking about not being able to match the skill level of those players with only one or two armies since it isn't possible to learn that many armies inside out in a game that is constantly changing due to CA, campaign books, codex releases and rebalancing. The same thing can be observed when you see people like the guys from TTS constantly switching armies for every battle report - they just aren't that firm on their armies' rules, their tactics or when to use what.
There is a huge difference between being able to successfully push the models up the field and shoot stuff and actually using an army to full effect.
I imagine there is also a difference between running are fairly straight forward army like space marines or craftworld eldar and one with many interlocking mechanics like admech, guard or tau.
Thing is, if you want to play at a decent level, you can't rotate much because it takes time to master an army and learn to use all its tricks (if you have a lot of army points, painted and based, to choose from that is).
Sure you can. Current 40k doesn't have a very steep learning curve. And the more experience you have in playing games (GW or otherwise), the lower & lower it gets.
The key is at a decent level, sure you can get the mechanics and overall feel but the tricks are what make the armies unique. If you live a full life outside of 40k, I dont think it is too realistic to be able to know how to play a lot of armies at a decent level. Even some of the people that stream and do it often can't keep up with stuff and are reminded in chat of the armies tricks.
So how long does it take you to learn to play an army well?
How long do you think it takes others?
Exactly what skills do you think go into dong this?
Do you think that when an edition changes those skills learned reset to zero?
Are you asking me or gundam ? Or anyone who wants to answer ? I think these are very interesting questions. I can't play more than two armies at the same time because of all the reasons jidmah mentioned. Currently orks and nids. When DA codex drops, i will keep playing either orks or nids, one will have to take a step back.
It takes me 5 games I think, then 5 more to really Git Gud, I'd say. It would take me less if I had the patience to watch battle reps but I don't. I was tourney regular before covid, and have played since 4th ed, so I am talking about "10 games to get playing to a level where I could get within the top spots in a tourney".
what skills exactly to too vast a subject and we would need a dedicated topic for this
Thing is, if you want to play at a decent level, you can't rotate much because it takes time to master an army and learn to use all its tricks (if you have a lot of army points, painted and based, to choose from that is).
Sure you can. Current 40k doesn't have a very steep learning curve. And the more experience you have in playing games (GW or otherwise), the lower & lower it gets.
The key is at a decent level, sure you can get the mechanics and overall feel but the tricks are what make the armies unique. If you live a full life outside of 40k, I dont think it is too realistic to be able to know how to play a lot of armies at a decent level. Even some of the people that stream and do it often can't keep up with stuff and are reminded in chat of the armies tricks.
So how long does it take you to learn to play an army well?
How long do you think it takes others?
Exactly what skills do you think go into dong this?
Do you think that when an edition changes those skills learned reset to zero?
Are you asking me or gundam ? Or anyone who wants to answer ? I think these are very interesting questions. I can't play more than two armies at the same time because of all the reasons jidmah mentioned. Currently orks and nids. When DA codex drops, i will keep playing either orks or nids, one will have to take a step back.
It takes me 5 games I think, then 5 more to really Git Gud, I'd say. It would take me less if I had the patience to watch battle reps but I don't. I was tourney regular before covid, and have played since 4th ed, so I am talking about "10 games to get playing to a level where I could get within the top spots in a tourney".
what skills exactly to too vast a subject and we would need a dedicated topic for this
Thing is, if you want to play at a decent level, you can't rotate much because it takes time to master an army and learn to use all its tricks (if you have a lot of army points, painted and based, to choose from that is).
Sure you can. Current 40k doesn't have a very steep learning curve. And the more experience you have in playing games (GW or otherwise), the lower & lower it gets.
The key is at a decent level, sure you can get the mechanics and overall feel but the tricks are what make the armies unique. If you live a full life outside of 40k, I dont think it is too realistic to be able to know how to play a lot of armies at a decent level. Even some of the people that stream and do it often can't keep up with stuff and are reminded in chat of the armies tricks.
So how long does it take you to learn to play an army well?
How long do you think it takes others?
Exactly what skills do you think go into dong this?
Do you think that when an edition changes those skills learned reset to zero?
Of course your skills dont reset to zero in an edition lol There is no need to fictitious.
Like I mentioned in my comment, it is fairly easy to see that it is not easy to maintain the same skill level when Player A is using 5+ armies as someone like Player B uses only 2 armies, with one of the two being an army in Player's A rotation.
Which is why I mentioned the example of highly placing tournament streamers that dont seem being able to use an army to its full extent due to them rotating many armies.
JidmahMade mentioned the same example.
We've also had a discussion in our group where some of the veterans with 5+ armies were talking about not being able to match the skill level of those players with only one or two armies since it isn't possible to learn that many armies inside out in a game that is constantly changing due to CA, campaign books, codex releases and rebalancing.
The same thing can be observed when you see people like the guys from TTS constantly switching armies for every battle report - they just aren't that firm on their armies' rules, their tactics or when to use what.
There is a huge difference between being able to successfully push the models up the field and shoot stuff and actually using an army to full effect.
I imagine there is also a difference between running are fairly straight forward army like space marines or craftworld eldar and one with many interlocking mechanics like admech, guard or tau.
I mean its fairly obvious to me and other people. Sure it is possible to casually play 5+ armies at once, but you won't be able to use 5+ armies at once to their full capabilities.
addnid wrote: Thing is, if you want to play at a decent level, you can't rotate much because it takes time to master an army and learn to use all its tricks (if you have a lot of army points, painted and based, to choose from that is).
I think this is definitely worth a full discussion.
If it doesn't materialize, I think it largely depends on which factions a player rotates through. I don't suffer too much capability-drain going back and forth from my Primaris and Chaos Space Marine armies. I am well versed with Pre-Indomitus Primaris (and it doesn't hurt that they have simple data sheets), and my CSM army is mostly just spiky marine stuff (Read: things also found in C:SM) with maybe a Helldrake. I tend to stick to a handful of stratagems, if you know either faction; you probably know which ones. Finally, I play both armies pretty much the same way.
Contrasted with my Genestealer Cult army, which I haven't played nearly enough to know the first thing about how to play them. I don't even think I have stumbled upon something GSC does well on accident yet even. The last game I played (still 8th ed) my Abberants were clear and away my MVPs, and they are terrible. They do play like crappy assault terminators though, so I had that to work with. I think if I play GSC all 9th edition, I might get to the point I'm okay with them. Even if they get better rules, I don't think I will be seeing a better than 25-33% win rate. They are just that foreign to my play style (I like them nonetheless). I do think it will take some games to get up to speed again to even get just okay.
ccs wrote: So how long does it take you to learn to play an army well?
How long do you think it takes others?
Exactly what skills do you think go into dong this?
Do you think that when an edition changes those skills learned reset to zero?
Of course your skills don't reset to zero in an edition lol There is no need to fictitious.
Ok, that's one of my questions {the easiest} answered. I await your insights on the other three.
ccs wrote: So how long does it take you to learn to play an army well?
How long do you think it takes others?
Exactly what skills do you think go into dong this?
Do you think that when an edition changes those skills learned reset to zero?
Of course your skills don't reset to zero in an edition lol There is no need to fictitious.
Ok, that's one of my questions {the easiest} answered. I await your insights on the other three.
You will be waiting since those questions are completely irrelevant to the discussion of playing 5+ armies to their full extent at once.
Instead of using personal experience as a way to discuss something (i.e. Sample size of one), Other people and I are using used tournament players and streamers as examples that it is not possible to play 5+ armies well enough at once in this thread (i.e. sample size of more than 1) .
It is something along the lines along the lines of using the scientific method. It helps discussions keep on point without going into irrelevant tangents. You should look it up
If I was starting again though, I probably wouldn't start with Tyranids, as I think starting with something other than organic shapes would have improved my painting faster compared to the years of prime, basecoat, wash and play.
That and picking up way too many armies. These days I'm happy with my Nids, Eldar and Marines, but I only play Eldar.
If I was starting again though, I probably wouldn't start with Tyranids, as I think starting with something other than organic shapes would have improved my painting faster compared to the years of prime, basecoat, wash and play.
That and picking up way too many armies. These days I'm happy with my Nids, Eldar and Marines, but I only play Eldar.
how many armies did you end up with when you had the most? And if you had the chance to sell Nids and Marines and recover all of your costs would you do it and keep only Nids?
addnid wrote: Thing is, if you want to play at a decent level, you can't rotate much because it takes time to master an army and learn to use all its tricks (if you have a lot of army points, painted and based, to choose from that is).
I think this is definitely worth a full discussion.
If it doesn't materialize, I think it largely depends on which factions a player rotates through. I don't suffer too much capability-drain going back and forth from my Primaris and Chaos Space Marine armies. I am well versed with Pre-Indomitus Primaris (and it doesn't hurt that they have simple data sheets), and my CSM army is mostly just spiky marine stuff (Read: things also found in C:SM) with maybe a Helldrake. I tend to stick to a handful of stratagems, if you know either faction; you probably know which ones. Finally, I play both armies pretty much the same way.
Contrasted with my Genestealer Cult army, which I haven't played nearly enough to know the first thing about how to play them. I don't even think I have stumbled upon something GSC does well on accident yet even. The last game I played (still 8th ed) my Abberants were clear and away my MVPs, and they are terrible. They do play like crappy assault terminators though, so I had that to work with. I think if I play GSC all 9th edition, I might get to the point I'm okay with them. Even if they get better rules, I don't think I will be seeing a better than 25-33% win rate. They are just that foreign to my play style (I like them nonetheless). I do think it will take some games to get up to speed again to even get just okay.
I also play GSC. Me and my playgroup always thought they were by far the hardest army to play (even in 7th when they got really strong at some point) of all 40K, because they are such a weird "melee glass canon" army. They are not just very different from SM or CSM. So have no fear, I also would not know how to play them (as a standalone army that is) in the current 9th meta where without a ton of character support they wouldn't even put a dent in a custodes army.
The smaller boards scare me, because thanks to it, so far in my 9th games, I have screened so easily all my opponents out of DSing into good positions, it was not even that enjoyable.
Come to think of it, I probably would not have started GSC if I could do it over again (I thought at the time, 7th edition, that GW would never throw nids a bone ever again, and that having GSC allied with them would be their only hope for winning a game), as the way they are played is really too heavily tied into the DSing mechanics. Though rockgrinders seem pretty good at 95 points now. Now if they could just fix bikes (I have a crapton of them)
ccs wrote: So how long does it take you to learn to play an army well?
How long do you think it takes others?
Exactly what skills do you think go into dong this?
Do you think that when an edition changes those skills learned reset to zero?
Of course your skills don't reset to zero in an edition lol There is no need to fictitious.
Ok, that's one of my questions {the easiest} answered. I await your insights on the other three.
You will be waiting since those questions are completely irrelevant to the discussion of playing 5+ armies to their full extent at once.
Instead of using personal experience as a way to discuss something (i.e. Sample size of one), Other people and I are using used tournament players and streamers as examples that it is not possible to play 5+ armies well enough at once in this thread (i.e. sample size of more than 1) .
It is something along the lines along the lines of using the scientific method. It helps discussions keep on point without going into irrelevant tangents. You should look it up
So you're saying that you don't know how long it takes YOU (personally) to learn to play an army to whatever your standard of decently is?
Or are you saying you won't tell me?
Obviously you've no idea how long it takes me/others.
I'd think that the skills required to play one, maybe two, armies well would be quite relevant in a discussion about being able to do so with multiples. I simply want to know what you think those skills are since you can apparently spot when they're lacking.
addnid wrote: I also play GSC. Me and my playgroup always thought they were by far the hardest army to play (even in 7th when they got really strong at some point) of all 40K, because they are such a weird "melee glass canon" army. They are not just very different from SM or CSM. So have no fear, I also would not know how to play them (as a standalone army that is) in the current 9th meta where without a ton of character support they wouldn't even put a dent in a custodes army.
The smaller boards scare me, because thanks to it, so far in my 9th games, I have screened so easily all my opponents out of DSing into good positions, it was not even that enjoyable.
Come to think of it, I probably would not have started GSC if I could do it over again (I thought at the time, 7th edition, that GW would never throw nids a bone ever again, and that having GSC allied with them would be their only hope for winning a game), as the way they are played is really too heavily tied into the DSing mechanics. Though rockgrinders seem pretty good at 95 points now. Now if they could just fix bikes (I have a crapton of them)
My Genestealer Cult is the army I do have the closest thing to regret to starting. It took a long time in Kill Team before I started playing them, but they quickly became my favorite faction in that game to play. I also very much enjoy painting them, so I had about a 1250 point army at when I decided why not get them to a full 2000 points. I also wanted a T3 and a xeno army, and I don't do Finecast. Nor did I enjoy my Dark Eldar kill team which I have played twice and hated every minute of playing them.
I don't expect I'll ever get very good with my GSC. Which is fine. I play at a casual level often with a bunch of new players. So I don't mind having a particularly weak army that I can still play my best and struggle when playing those games. I know it's GSC thing, but the regret I have is GSC are a faction that fill new player opponents with so much apprehension and straight up dread. Even with little experience, they are so used to their opponent's army setup across from them. So when they see those blips, I can tell their stress levels go through the roof. Not to mention all the Deep Strike and GSC trickery they pull.
In full 40k, GSC do a lot of the same things I didn't like about Dark Eldar. They perform actions that demoralize new/casual players. When my opponent inevitably wins. It seems less like satisfaction and more like relief. I am sure once they get used to GSC that will go away, but I haven't got there yet with those newer players. I try to tell them they did well and not they got lucky, but I get it; playing against GSC can feel like trying to pick up a cat in a dark room. You hope you can do it without getting scratched, bit or stubbing your toe.
I expect that I will mostly be playing GSC and CSM 9th edition. My counter-culture, hipster streak already has me putting my Primaris on the back burner as they sold-out and got popular (I liked them before they were popular ). My CSM are largely complete now that I have re-freshed them with the new models with options I never had with the old models, and the army is my first 40k love. But I expect that my GSC will be popular as I only know of one other GSC in my area, and I don't think they quite have a full army ready to go.
I don't regret starting GSC. But I don't know if I will ever really enjoy playing them compared to my other armies. Despite my army compositions, I actually don't like Deep Strike mechanics. I just happen to really like the models that get them. Not to mention I can't help to see GSC as an apt satire of current U.S. politics that wasn't as dire a week ago. Totally my personal issue I have to work through myself.
Don't regret it, I'd probably have wasted much more time than I already do staring at screens if I didn't have 40k. It's been a good hobby that helps me itch my creative nature.
Today, the game is too intricate. Newbies can hardly enter.
Old editions were no less intricate. People over-state how newbies interact with the game. It's entirely possible for people to play rules wrong and still have fun. Shocking, isn't it?
Today, the game is too intricate. Newbies can hardly enter.
Old editions were no less intricate. People over-state how newbies interact with the game. It's entirely possible for people to play rules wrong and still have fun. Shocking, isn't it?
Yeah, there's quite the influx of new players at my two local shops. None of them seem to be having too many problems.
ccs wrote: So how long does it take you to learn to play an army well?
How long do you think it takes others?
Exactly what skills do you think go into dong this?
Do you think that when an edition changes those skills learned reset to zero?
Of course your skills don't reset to zero in an edition lol There is no need to fictitious.
Ok, that's one of my questions {the easiest} answered. I await your insights on the other three.
You will be waiting since those questions are completely irrelevant to the discussion of playing 5+ armies to their full extent at once.
Instead of using personal experience as a way to discuss something (i.e. Sample size of one), Other people and I are using used tournament players and streamers as examples that it is not possible to play 5+ armies well enough at once in this thread (i.e. sample size of more than 1) .
It is something along the lines along the lines of using the scientific method. It helps discussions keep on point without going into irrelevant tangents. You should look it up
So you're saying that you don't know how long it takes YOU (personally) to learn to play an army to whatever your standard of decently is?
Or are you saying you won't tell me?
Obviously you've no idea how long it takes me/others.
I'd think that the skills required to play one, maybe two, armies well would be quite relevant in a discussion about being able to do so with multiples. I simply want to know what you think those skills are since you can apparently spot when they're lacking.
Obviously this is going over your head. For the third time, as mentioned before, people that play this game on a highly consistent basis at a high competitive level (i.e. tournament players, streamers, etc) struggle to play 5+ armies to their full extent on stream since they don't know all of the tricks and cant keep up with the changes, and are reminded of things, stratagems, during streams.
I am not saying how long it takes me to learn an army because it is not relatable to how long it takes to someone else because we all have different priorities, hobby time etc. Me saying it should take X time for someone to learn an army because it takes me Y time would be extremely foolish. And you thinking it is an applicable way to make a point is very foolish. Apples and Oranges comparisons.
How does me personally knowing( and then guessing for other people) how long it takes to play an army have to do ANYTHING with playing 5+ armies to their full extent when we can see in video it is not really possible already??
Jesus dude... it was both an irrelevant and a bad question... let it go... it's clear you can't have productive discussion without trying to make irrelevant personal points... I suggest you watch a beginner 5min YT video on debating if you dont want to keep coming across as a fool in internet
Way back when my friend first introduced me to 40K, he said it was a perfect format for my interests. I enjoyed wargames, military history, fantasy and art. He was right. I started building and painting armies not knowing if any of my friends had any serious interest. Fortunately quite a few of us have similar tastes so our little group was formed. I don't regret all the crazy hours and money (and pain, lol) poured into the hobby.
If I had to change anything I guess I wished we all realized a bit sooner that GW was more interested in lateral changes for their financial interests than actually creating a really good game. It became obvious enough by mid 5th ed. So we would have veered off earlier, but not dramatically. I do feel bad for any who feel trapped by the business model GW runs. Not everyone has the luxury to extensively homebrew the game to an acceptable level, but I can see if not why some people would regret such a fantastic enterprise.
If I had to change anything I guess I wished we all realized a bit sooner that GW was more interested in lateral changes for their financial interests than actually creating a really good game. It became obvious enough by mid 5th ed. So we would have veered off earlier, but not dramatically.
That became apparent to me 4 months, its a shame because this could be a really good balanced game. By veered off, you mean leave 40k for other war-games? Or home-brew games?
I dont think Homebrew is something im interested in since I would be looking forward to playing with more people rather than the same group.
Homebrew changes to 40K. I really think the progression from 3rd ed. to 4th was a genuine if somewhat unsuccessful attempt to fix certain game elements, but when 5th came out with the new wound allocation system that GW specifically said was FASTER, not just 'better' we knew right then and there GW was lying.
GW merely piled on from there, especially with a couple of bad power codices later on. GW no longer had one designer overseeing the writers, which exacerbated the fluctuating power levels between factions.
gundam wrote: If you could do it over again, would you not get into 40k? Or what would you have done differently?
If I could do it again, I'd not spend my pocket money on Chocolate & Cream Damper every weekend, and put it towards getting as many IG vehicles and Praetorians as I could...
If I was starting again though, I probably wouldn't start with Tyranids, as I think starting with something other than organic shapes would have improved my painting faster compared to the years of prime, basecoat, wash and play.
That and picking up way too many armies. These days I'm happy with my Nids, Eldar and Marines, but I only play Eldar.
how many armies did you end up with when you had the most? And if you had the chance to sell Nids and Marines and recover all of your costs would you do it and keep only Nids?
These weren't fully fledged armies, but I picked up Assault on Black Reach when I only really wanted the rulebook so I ended up with orks and marines, tyranids and eldar so I had 4 "playable" armies and then a smattering of other kits from other factions.
I probably wouldn't only keep Nids now if I were to recoup the cost of the other armies, back in the day I just enjoyed games, but my idea of fun now are competitive games and Tyranids haven't really been good since 4th.
If I was starting again though, I probably wouldn't start with Tyranids, as I think starting with something other than organic shapes would have improved my painting faster compared to the years of prime, basecoat, wash and play.
That and picking up way too many armies. These days I'm happy with my Nids, Eldar and Marines, but I only play Eldar.
how many armies did you end up with when you had the most? And if you had the chance to sell Nids and Marines and recover all of your costs would you do it and keep only Nids?
These weren't fully fledged armies, but I picked up Assault on Black Reach when I only really wanted the rulebook so I ended up with orks and marines, tyranids and eldar so I had 4 "playable" armies and then a smattering of other kits from other factions.
I probably wouldn't only keep Nids now if I were to recoup the cost of the other armies, back in the day I just enjoyed games, but my idea of fun now are competitive games and Tyranids haven't really been good since 4th.
I can assure you, competing with tyranids at the moment is not that hard, especially if you have some of the FW models (dules and dima). I am on a winning streak with nids in my player group, a group that used to prep continously for tournaments before covid. Another player in the group mains nid, and plays even better than me, also on a winning streak.
You won't be able to win against clowns (at the very least the match up is very, very tough), and demons may be hard, but everything else is fair game (whithe scars may be tough, salamders even more so).
Will you leave the hobby and sell the armies or let it slowly fade away and collect dust?
Will you stop posting this message to everyone who wouldn't start 40k again? NGL, being a GW shill isn't a good look. They are a £3b company, they don't need a random guy on the internet to defend their poor business practices.
Will you leave the hobby and sell the armies or let it slowly fade away and collect dust?
Will you stop posting this message to everyone who wouldn't start 40k again? NGL, being a GW shill isn't a good look. They are a £3b company, they don't need a random guy on the internet to defend their poor business practices.
Some people seem borderline offended. "How DARE you stop enjoying something I still enjoy?!?!?!?!"
Will you leave the hobby and sell the armies or let it slowly fade away and collect dust?
Will you stop posting this message to everyone who wouldn't start 40k again? NGL, being a GW shill isn't a good look. They are a £3b company, they don't need a random guy on the internet to defend their poor business practices.
Some people seem borderline offended. "How DARE you stop enjoying something I still enjoy?!?!?!?!"
"opinions on the internet" by ProZD sums up this thread nicely (no link because of a naughty word).
Will you leave the hobby and sell the armies or let it slowly fade away and collect dust?
Will you stop posting this message to everyone who wouldn't start 40k again? NGL, being a GW shill isn't a good look. They are a £3b company, they don't need a random guy on the internet to defend their poor business practices.
Some people seem borderline offended. "How DARE you stop enjoying something I still enjoy?!?!?!?!"
I think others show confusion at why people who dislike something are still interacting with the community of that thing.
Which can be surprising to some since in the physical world if you get tired of 40K or MTG or anything else you tend to stop turning up to the hobby night and store. Ergo you drift away and spend your time elsewhere even if you're still friends with the group. You just socialise with them outside of club nights if at all. Meanwhile online you keep socialising essentially in the "hobby club" which is the hobby forum. This confuses some because they wonder why you're on a GW site in a GW section of that site talking about GW stuff so often when you're "not into it " any more.
Personally I think there's a healthy way to retain a connection to a social group whilst leaving a hobby and there's an unhealthy point and its very easy to drift from the former to the latter without realising. Sadly what can happen is you can end up with a group making the migration and that develops a "toxic community".
Overread wrote: I think others show confusion at why people who dislike something are still interacting with the community of that thing.
Which can be surprising to some since in the physical world if you get tired of 40K or MTG or anything else you tend to stop turning up to the hobby night and store. Ergo you drift away and spend your time elsewhere even if you're still friends with the group. You just socialise with them outside of club nights if at all. Meanwhile online you keep socialising essentially in the "hobby club" which is the hobby forum. This confuses some because they wonder why you're on a GW site in a GW section of that site talking about GW stuff so often when you're "not into it " any more.
Personally I think there's a healthy way to retain a connection to a social group whilst leaving a hobby and there's an unhealthy point and its very easy to drift from the former to the latter without realising. Sadly what can happen is you can end up with a group making the migration and that develops a "toxic community".
Precisely. When and if I become fed up with 40k (even if I happen to like other games including Age of Sigmar), I pretty sure I won't be visiting Dakkdakka anymore let alone posting anything. And certainly not in any of the 40k portions of it. The few MMOs I played and spent time in their forums or subreddits but don't like anymore don't have me making trips to see what bizarre and strange things they have become since I left. And I certainly wouldn't come in there and tell everyone how it was way better when I was playing it. They hold no interest to me usually as they changed in a way I no longer found enjoyable, so I stop participating in the game, forums, everything.
I don't see what it would accomplish beyond wasting time. Things change and often in ways we don't want them to. This includes things we enjoy like hobbies (the Death Guard precedents are a good current example). If these things have changed beyond what we are willing to adapt or can change to what we want, I don't why I would want to stick around if I don't have to. I have had whole games become unable to be played as they went away, changed in ways I didn't want or the player base disappeared. It sucks. I try to not go on and on about it. I try move on to the next thing I think will be me joy.
Da Boss wrote: Way to gatekeep who gets to post in the forum guys.
That is a perspective I suppose. One could argue that it is hard to keep a gate from someone that obviously doesn't want inside but gripe at those that do enjoy the inside. Those that state they have no interest in 40k to the point they regret even starting yet continue post their disdain and affirm they no longer play 40k, and not likely to ever start again, on a 40k subforum is perplexing to you too right?
I didn't like the changes that came with Bolt Action second edition, but I am pretty sure I don't have any posts here in the WWII and Modern subfourm (nor the Warlord forum when it existed) complaining about it. I know I have a few there in the WWII subforum, but they are probably from a few years ago and maybe lament that I don't play WWII games at worst. I couldn't tell you the last time I even bothered checking it.
I would also imagine few game stores/clubs IRL wouldn't tolerate a person that shows up, doesn't buy anything nor plays and makes sure to interject they in fact don't play nor buy anything. From a different perspective, one could say that they are keeping the gate scaring off those interested. I don't take that perspective. Dakkadakka's reputation is already known for what the place is and has been your years if not more than a decade for better or worst. I like it here as I prefer forum based discussion over more modern social media save maybe local Discord servers.
I don't really mind/care who posts on Dakkadakka (please read that as someone with no authority and in the most positive, non-malicious light you can because I know where Dakkanaut like to go with statements like these) as long as they are sticking to the forum rules. I know how to make use of the ignore button and use it. I do have a mild curiosity to why someone would bother wasting their time with a 40k forum/subforum if they are checked out of the game with zero intention to come back as the game that is obviously moving further and further away from what they want while becoming more and more popular. I would certainly hope they are aware of sunk cost or have had some time introspecting why they continue doing something that disinterest 3rd parties to question why they even bother.
I guess I've just never really had a problem with negative posts or people saying stuff I disagreed with on any kind of forum I am on.
It really doesn't bother me or impact my experience at all. I like to read all the different perspectives. The only people I don't like are the ones who are condescending or who only post to big up their ego, not actually engaging in discussion.
Given Dakka has an ignore function, it should be pretty easy to curate your experience I would say.
Most of the people posting here have said they do not regret playing 40K even if they did stop at some point. There are a couple of people who are a bit more bitter about it, but they are the vast minority.
I have been interested in Warhammer since I was a little kid. I am still interested in it, just not in the game at the moment. I collect and paint the minis and read the fiction and play video games. I would actually quite like it if I could get back into the game and play it, so I keep an eye on it to see how things are going.
I would expect a subforum dedicated to 40k to have very few that would respond to a thread such as this stating they regret having any interest in 40k as to prefer to not get into again if they were given the chance. I would expect those with that much regret to have moved on and haven't seen this thread to respond. It wouldn't surprise me at all that a thread such as this wouldn't have anyone that regretted getting into 40k. Those that would have wouldn't be here to post their regret.
Again, it is some mild curiosity on my part to why someone would state they have no interest in 40k, haven't for a long time and don't ever really see themselves going back yet still visit/write-on this subforum or the 40k News and Rumor thread.
As I have mentioned, I think I am capable of understanding the idea of the, 'rug being pulled out from underneath' so to speak where there was a time when they really did like 40k and today's 40k isn't that. Often this comes from those who like 3rd, 4th and/or 5th. That's like a decade ago. More rarely there have been those who liked 6th/7th, but even with them I have seen much negatively pass the first year of 8th. I do think it is safe to say that 40k is very unlikely to go back to playing like it did prior to 8th.
So I am left wondering why someone that doesn't play and has no interest in playing (at least current 40k) would have much interest in staying current with 40k news and discussion. I recognized very early on that GW fans are extremely hopeful that maybe this next edition, codex, unit or whatever will be what they want. Often deludedly so. Many hype things up or take a shred of a rumor from dark corner of the interest and treat is as something GW stated was definitely happening exactly as they pictured it. Then when the thing comes, they are devastated and angry. They start call GW liars. Yet they can't produce the statement they 'know' GW put out. I have seen this thing enough times that it is sort of tragic. And I certainly don't want someone to waste that amount of time getting their hopes and expectations well beyond what could be delivered to be dashed again and again waited for what isn't likely ever happening.
I also don't want myself or anyone else to be especially upset or angry with 40k or any hobby. To me, that is the only sure-fire way one can be doing it wrong. Warhammer 40k is supposed to be fun. Many people can have different ways to find fun in 40k. But I do have my doubts to those whose hobby is complaining about GW and 40k being much fun long term. I have my concerns to the spiritual health of person who perpetually seems to just dislike everything about current 40k yet continues to engage in it. Much like Star Wars or wrestling fans that constantly gripe and complain about literally everything that comes out. I think it might be healthier for them to just walk away. Maybe I am being overly concerned. I don't know.
Which is where my next concern comes in to some perpetually negative posters come in. I do wonder if they can just walk away. I have serious doubts with some, and that makes me kinda sad. Again, the only way I know that someone is doing the hobby wrong is that they aren't having any fun. Some might say they are just being critical of 40k, when I often read it as overly critical at minimum and just mean at worst. I get the impression they really aren't being honest with themselves. Warhammer 40k hasn't really changed from what has been in the decade I have known about it, and I suspect for the next decade it's going to stay about that way. It can certainly be better, and I don't like everything about it. However, there are posters who just seem to have an axe to grind against GW and 40k and are bound and determined to hate it at every turn.
To be sure, a few of them don't post here anymore. I don't know if they left, or they were banned. Neither would surprise me. Even if Dakka is very slow to bring down that hammer (which I do like about here). I think Dakkadakka is more positive than when I actually joined, and a heck of a lot better visited before I finally did join. However, there still are a number of those that I can't explain what they get out of continued involvement with discussing 40k anymore. At least not anything I would consider good for the psyche. They certainly don't sound like they are having any fun and haven't for a long time.
It isn't about gatekeeping or policing opinions. It is about genuine concern that my fellow man is struggling with something that should be fun but no longer is for them, and yet they can't give it up. I don't think it is much of leap to think 40k tends to draw in obsessive types (partly guilty myself) that could have these kinds of issues either.
It isn't about gatekeeping or policing opinions. It is about genuine concern that my fellow man is struggling with something that should be fun but no longer is for them, and yet they can't give it up. I don't think it is much of leap to think 40k tends to draw in obsessive types (partly guilty myself) that could have these kinds of issues either.
This sums it up well for me as well.
It's not even about being part of Dakka either as there are lots of other subsections for other games and interests on the site. Sometimes I see people who put a lot of energy and time into complaining about a GW game or such and I wonder if that person could better put that energy and time into positive threads on the game they are enjoying right now; or the anime or comic or toys or whatever. Ergo into the other things that they engage with which share the same/similar community and can be interacted with through Dakka.
Saturmorn Carvilli wrote: ...So I am left wondering why someone that doesn't play and has no interest in playing (at least current 40k) would have much interest in staying current with 40k news and discussion...
Perhaps people who liked 40k pre-8th/9th don't equate "40k discussion" to "may not complain about GW's rules writing". You'll notice this isn't the "9e is the greatest wargame ever discussion" forum, this is the 40k general discussion forum. The hobby is more things than playing tournament-standard 9th.
My regret is indecisiveness on faction. Every six months there's this urge to start a new army. Which usually entails buying 1-3 kits (or more depending on discounts etc), painting up a couple before thinking "nah, move on". I'd almost certainly have done better bulking out my main armies rather than over the last 5-6 years getting a few hundred points of say Marines, Guard, CSM, Ad Mech, Tyranids, Harlequins, some Tzeentch Daemons I took a fancy too in about 2014 etc etc.
Like right now I'd love to start Death Guard - but would I ever get to 2kish points? More likely I'd paint up my 7 Plague Marines and that would be enough (sorry 30 Poxwalkers or whatever I'd get with them). I do enjoy painting - but in the long run having these penny sized forces feels a bit like a waste, when I could be rounding out forces which are actually at the 2k level and will see play.
(If this sounds like whale behaviour it probably is. I think the Start Collecting sets have been a gold mine for GW and would worry their Combat Patrol kits are getting a bit expensive even if they may offer a comparable saving.)
Saturmorn Carvilli wrote: ...obsessive types (partly guilty myself) that could have these kinds of issues either.
I don't think we even need to get into obsessiveness. 40k demands significant investments of money, time, money, effort, time, money, and money to do anything more than casual play (barring those lucky enough to inherit someone else's army, or are able to get one for pennies on the dollar), and if someone decided that they'd had enough it may end up being quite difficult to recoup any of that investment. That's a recipe for some grade-A Sunk Cost issues.
Will you leave the hobby and sell the armies or let it slowly fade away and collect dust?
Will you stop posting this message to everyone who wouldn't start 40k again? NGL, being a GW shill isn't a good look. They are a £3b company, they don't need a random guy on the internet to defend their poor business practices.
Some people seem borderline offended. "How DARE you stop enjoying something I still enjoy?!?!?!?!"
lmao, exactly... who hurt you and why are you so salty? I genuinely wanted to know if they dont enjoy 40k as much or wish if they hadn't gone into it if they were going to leave all together or why they were still hanging around the community, like someone else posted here
Saturmorn Carvilli wrote: ...So I am left wondering why someone that doesn't play and has no interest in playing (at least current 40k) would have much interest in staying current with 40k news and discussion...
Perhaps people who liked 40k pre-8th/9th don't equate "40k discussion" to "may not complain about GW's rules writing". You'll notice this isn't the "9e is the greatest wargame ever discussion" forum, this is the 40k general discussion forum. The hobby is more things than playing tournament-standard 9th.
well put, GW and the competitive side of the game have a lot of faults, but there are plenty of positives in other parts of the hobby
Saturmorn Carvilli wrote: ...obsessive types (partly guilty myself) that could have these kinds of issues either.
I don't think we even need to get into obsessiveness. 40k demands significant investments of money, time, money, effort, time, money, and money to do anything more than casual play (barring those lucky enough to inherit someone else's army, or are able to get one for pennies on the dollar), and if someone decided that they'd had enough it may end up being quite difficult to recoup any of that investment. That's a recipe for some grade-A Sunk Cost issues.
Given the money, time, money, effort, time, money, formula you posted, I myself put MORE emphasis on the time part, given the hobby side of things.
I do agree that the it is a recipe for some grade-A Sunk Cost issues that I dont see in any other hobbies I have encountered in my life, so thats why I do see how many people who are unhappy with this, just cant seem to let it go.
My regret is indecisiveness on faction. Every six months there's this urge to start a new army. Which usually entails buying 1-3 kits (or more depending on discounts etc), painting up a couple before thinking "nah, move on". I'd almost certainly have done better bulking out my main armies rather than over the last 5-6 years getting a few hundred points of say Marines, Guard, CSM, Ad Mech, Tyranids, Harlequins, some Tzeentch Daemons I took a fancy too in about 2014 etc etc.
Like right now I'd love to start Death Guard - but would I ever get to 2kish points? More likely I'd paint up my 7 Plague Marines and that would be enough (sorry 30 Poxwalkers or whatever I'd get with them). I do enjoy painting - but in the long run having these penny sized forces feels a bit like a waste, when I could be rounding out forces which are actually at the 2k level and will see play.
(If this sounds like whale behaviour it probably is. I think the Start Collecting sets have been a gold mine for GW and would worry their Combat Patrol kits are getting a bit expensive even if they may offer a comparable saving.)
so given the chance to do it over, how many factions do you think would have been the best number for you?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Da Boss wrote: I guess I've just never really had a problem with negative posts or people saying stuff I disagreed with on any kind of forum I am on.
It really doesn't bother me or impact my experience at all. I like to read all the different perspectives. The only people I don't like are the ones who are condescending or who only post to big up their ego, not actually engaging in discussion.
Given Dakka has an ignore function, it should be pretty easy to curate your experience I would say.
Most of the people posting here have said they do not regret playing 40K even if they did stop at some point. There are a couple of people who are a bit more bitter about it, but they are the vast minority.
I have been interested in Warhammer since I was a little kid. I am still interested in it, just not in the game at the moment. I collect and paint the minis and read the fiction and play video games. I would actually quite like it if I could get back into the game and play it, so I keep an eye on it to see how things are going.
I don't think that is weird at all.
Yeah I dont get why some people took a personal offense to it. Most people have been posting they would still get into it but they might have done some things differently. And I found those examples pretty interesting, which would also be interesting for new people coming in.
Will you leave the hobby and sell the armies or let it slowly fade away and collect dust?
Will you stop posting this message to everyone who wouldn't start 40k again? NGL, being a GW shill isn't a good look. They are a £3b company, they don't need a random guy on the internet to defend their poor business practices.
Some people seem borderline offended. "How DARE you stop enjoying something I still enjoy?!?!?!?!"
I think others show confusion at why people who dislike something are still interacting with the community of that thing.
Which can be surprising to some since in the physical world if you get tired of 40K or MTG or anything else you tend to stop turning up to the hobby night and store. Ergo you drift away and spend your time elsewhere even if you're still friends with the group. You just socialise with them outside of club nights if at all. Meanwhile online you keep socialising essentially in the "hobby club" which is the hobby forum. This confuses some because they wonder why you're on a GW site in a GW section of that site talking about GW stuff so often when you're "not into it " any more.
Personally I think there's a healthy way to retain a connection to a social group whilst leaving a hobby and there's an unhealthy point and its very easy to drift from the former to the latter without realising. Sadly what can happen is you can end up with a group making the migration and that develops a "toxic community".
For me personally it's because I play an older edition, am still invested in the lore (what's left of it), and hopefully am treated to new models that will port into 3rd Ed. easily enough. Should I NOT be part of discussions on here because I don't play current? Hell, there were a few discussions where people used false claims about my preferred edition to defend current garbage rules existing. If I wasn't here those false claims would have laid unopposed.
Will you leave the hobby and sell the armies or let it slowly fade away and collect dust?
Will you stop posting this message to everyone who wouldn't start 40k again? NGL, being a GW shill isn't a good look. They are a £3b company, they don't need a random guy on the internet to defend their poor business practices.
Some people seem borderline offended. "How DARE you stop enjoying something I still enjoy?!?!?!?!"
lmao, exactly... who hurt you and why are you so salty? I genuinely wanted to know if they dont enjoy 40k as much or wish if they hadn't gone into it if they were going to leave all together or why they were still hanging around the community, like someone else posted here
…
You DO know I was calling out YOUR behavior in that instance and not BCB's, right? Just because he doesn't latch compulsively onto the GW teat for all current releases doesn't mean he should be disallowed from discussion, either unwillingly or by rather garbage poster pressure such as what you passive aggressively did.
This is a discussion board. I don't have to make music or play it on the regular to have a discussion about it. Participation in the community does not require anyone to be invested in the game. People post on this forum because they have something to say about the topic. It doesn't have to be anything more or anything less then that.
Knowing what I know now, I don't think I'd get into 40k, I'd pick something else. That is with the benefit of hindsight though, so take that as you will.
I've moved on to other games and have a much happier gaming experience for it. Almost all my armies have been sold off, just got my space wolves still, just in case. I keep an eye on 40k, because I played it for a long time, and I like the idea of playing it, but it's not the game for me anymore.
Will you leave the hobby and sell the armies or let it slowly fade away and collect dust?
Will you stop posting this message to everyone who wouldn't start 40k again? NGL, being a GW shill isn't a good look. They are a £3b company, they don't need a random guy on the internet to defend their poor business practices.
Some people seem borderline offended. "How DARE you stop enjoying something I still enjoy?!?!?!?!"
I think others show confusion at why people who dislike something are still interacting with the community of that thing.
Which can be surprising to some since in the physical world if you get tired of 40K or MTG or anything else you tend to stop turning up to the hobby night and store. Ergo you drift away and spend your time elsewhere even if you're still friends with the group. You just socialise with them outside of club nights if at all. Meanwhile online you keep socialising essentially in the "hobby club" which is the hobby forum. This confuses some because they wonder why you're on a GW site in a GW section of that site talking about GW stuff so often when you're "not into it " any more.
Personally I think there's a healthy way to retain a connection to a social group whilst leaving a hobby and there's an unhealthy point and its very easy to drift from the former to the latter without realising. Sadly what can happen is you can end up with a group making the migration and that develops a "toxic community".
For me personally it's because I play an older edition, am still invested in the lore (what's left of it), and hopefully am treated to new models that will port into 3rd Ed. easily enough. Should I NOT be part of discussions on here because I don't play current? Hell, there were a few discussions where people used false claims about my preferred edition to defend current garbage rules existing. If I wasn't here those false claims would have laid unopposed.
Will you leave the hobby and sell the armies or let it slowly fade away and collect dust?
Will you stop posting this message to everyone who wouldn't start 40k again? NGL, being a GW shill isn't a good look. They are a £3b company, they don't need a random guy on the internet to defend their poor business practices.
Some people seem borderline offended. "How DARE you stop enjoying something I still enjoy?!?!?!?!"
lmao, exactly... who hurt you and why are you so salty? I genuinely wanted to know if they dont enjoy 40k as much or wish if they hadn't gone into it if they were going to leave all together or why they were still hanging around the community, like someone else posted here
…
You DO know I was calling out YOUR behavior in that instance and not BCB's, right? Just because he doesn't latch compulsively onto the GW teat for all current releases doesn't mean he should be disallowed from discussion, either unwillingly or by rather garbage poster pressure such as what you passive aggressively did.
ok... but DO you know YOUR point makes no sense right? At what point did I say he should be "disallowed from discussion"? I didnt but YOU did. At what point did I personally addressed him? at no point... but BCB called me a GW shill (I always said the hobby has the positives while it has negatives) and you mentioning "garbage poster pressure".... I am genuinely asking if people are letting the hobby fade away but I found it interesting they still hang out at a 40k hobby... You people should learn that you can still address a topic while remaining on topic. When you start addressing a person (instead of the topic) it is just an indication of lack of maturity , lack of knowledge of the topic, lack of critical thinking skills or a combination of all.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Lance845 wrote: This is a discussion board. I don't have to make music or play it on the regular to have a discussion about it. Participation in the community does not require anyone to be invested in the game. People post on this forum because they have something to say about the topic. It doesn't have to be anything more or anything less then that.
good points
Automatically Appended Next Post:
grrrfranky wrote: Knowing what I know now, I don't think I'd get into 40k, I'd pick something else. That is with the benefit of hindsight though, so take that as you will.
I've moved on to other games and have a much happier gaming experience for it. Almost all my armies have been sold off, just got my space wolves still, just in case. I keep an eye on 40k, because I played it for a long time, and I like the idea of playing it, but it's not the game for me anymore.
So since you kept SW, what changes would make you comeback to be more active? And will you delve into other armies or just stick with SW?
What were some of the things that attracted and what drove you away from the hobby? Was the sunkcost effect of money +hobby time hard when you sold your armies?
It would depend. I only got into 40k because a friend gifted me 500pts of Chaos to get me started for Yuletide as he was getting into 40k, but honestly I was happy just playing Warhammer Fantasy and I play and enjoy that far more. I do like 40k and don't regret getting into it, but with out that push I probably would of gotten into Historicals or star wars/battletech instead.
But yeah, if a friend gave me a similar push I'd get into Warhammer 40k again.
gundam wrote: ok... but DO you know YOUR point makes no sense right? At what point did I say he should be "disallowed from discussion"? I didnt but YOU did. At what point did I personally addressed him? at no point... but BCB called me a GW shill (I always said the hobby has the positives while it has negatives) and you mentioning "garbage poster pressure".... I am genuinely asking if people are letting the hobby fade away but I found it interesting they still hang out at a 40k hobby... You people should learn that you can still address a topic while remaining on topic. When you start addressing a person (instead of the topic) it is just an indication of lack of maturity , lack of knowledge of the topic, lack of critical thinking skills or a combination of all.
Multiple posters have stated they'd have avoided the hobby. Almost every one of them give the reason as GW's greedy practices and moving away from versions of the rules they liked, or implementing editions they find unplayable. You've responded directly to several of them in ways that come off as almost demanding they justify their posts.
That's flat out wrong. You don't get to dictate whether people feel their time here was wasted, or if their choice to not keep current is a bad decision or, as your post that BCB quoted, question people directly about selling their stuff and leaving the hobby.
Now this could all be a massive misunderstanding because tone, inflection, and nuance are usually lost in text. I'd buy that if it wasn't a repeat theme.
Speaking for me only, I don't play modern 40K or AOS. I flat out refuse to as I detest the system underneath it. Full stop. Does that mean I'm not into 40K or WFB? No, not at all. I have large collections for both games, and I play older editions which get battle reported on this very site. Well, linked to the site I actually type it on, but same difference. This involves painting armies, buying models, and gaming. You know what all those are? Parts of the hobby. I'm in this hobby regardless of whether I decide to throw away my money on Roo Rider Aeaeaeaeaeaelves or if I paint up Beastmen to play for 6th Ed. I'm still in this hobby if I post pics of my Crimson Fists models as I finish them. Does it matter that they are played in 3rd instead of 9th? Not to anyone else on this site but you. THAT is how your posts are coming off. THAT is why BCB called you out on it, and THAT is precisely why I hopped on to express my agreement. While 9th isn't for me, I won't actively work towards people not liking/reading/collecting/modeling/painting/playing it. I'd expect the same courtesy.
