Edits: To clarify, I've only EVER been a GK fan, for about 10 years now and JUST began collecting, because money.
What they did to GK with this detachment change was two-fold.
1st, the number of DKs we could take went from 6>4.I typically only use 5. They were not overly broken and a point increase would have been good.
2nd. I lose the ability to take 2 different KEY brotherhood spells, Aegis and Lodestone. I had these two different detachments designed for one to be very tanky and the other one very killy. Now that is completely F--Ked.
I do not see this changing anytime soon and I understand the need for balance, but the difference in power I now possess feels too bad to continue.
Before I post this I just want to note that I haven't yet bought all my models in physical form, so GW will personally be losing hundreds of currency units. F__k them for such a careless change.
as is only being able to take a single Brotherhood.
No, and this is where I drew the line. 4 DK is fine, w/e Ill take a squad of interceptors, but when you remove my ability to also play Terminators effectively, nah, have a nice day.
Honestly, I really couldn't care less. Mixing factions within the same army should have been penalized a while ago, outside of narrative, do what you like battles. It always led to having your cake and eating it too scenarios. Sisters players will need to change, as will Tsons and GKs. So what?
The only thing I sympathize with is those who deliberately painted their army differently because GW said detachments with different orders/kabals etc had to be identifiable on the table. That should never have been a thing with this change on the horizon.
people will drop cash and chase the meta....well, guess what, that changes. If you just buy for your own enjoyment, GW can never take that away.
I don't know about any new rule changes but I have bowed out of 40k for awhile now. Between dropping new editions one after another or GW issuing a ton of extra books for 40k and now Killteam. It's tough to keep up even if you have the money. I'm not going to scrap my 40k stuff. I'll just wait to see how it all changes. In the meantime I'll just keep enjoying Star Wars Legion and hope GW slows down the book dumps.
GW's focus on the list building paradigm, and "meta" may increase sales in the short term, but I see it churning through players in the long term.
I was initially unhappy with 8th, then I saw the writing on the wall after the end of the index phase. If Gw wants to create a balanced game with holisitc design amongst the codexes I'll be interested. Right now it's not worth my time or money.
If you have an army painted in the colors of three different subfactions I feel for you and hope you have a gaming group that's not into tournament play.
If you're only picking what sounds best and have to explain to your opponent what unit belongs to what subfaction this day because they're all looking the same... Well, I guess it will improve the experience for your opponents.
We solved this problem a while ago because our group plays 5th edition and i use my GKs the way they were intended-to aid imperial forces when fighting chaos or demonic forces. not as a stand alone full army. i still use the 3rd ed GK codex as it does the force in the way the lore describes them.
I run a grand master with a 9 terminator retinue (and occasionally one of the assassins, since i own all four). and he joins my space marines or my mechanicus force as needed to spice up the army lists.
We have a guy in our group building a stormtrooper themed inquisitorial force out of the same codex.
To the wider point GW have become as a company that is why i play so many other games (see my sig) or editions of 40K where GW isn't involved to Feth things up anymore.
See, people who spam a single unit like Dreaknights are the most unfun kind of opponent. So if you 'only' take five I would have never bothered to play against you in the first place.
And mixing factions to squeeze out every single special rule you could from those spammed units? I am rather glad that issue is getting slammed.
I do feel bad for a few people after this. Orks lost half of their fun because they were designed to abuse this mechanic. Hopefully the Guard comes through better though - next year when they finally get updated.
And two separate spellings to avoid the profanity filter. Tell us how you really feel.
Seems like an overreaction. This change only applies to matched play games using the 2022 book.
No bearing on narrative play or open play or groups that just wanna stick to 2021 book.
Instead of outright quitting, how about expanding into the other modes of play?
Do people not know that the GK codex only has two heavy weapon platforms or something? Given the choice between the DK or a land raider I know which one I'd choose to take a bunch of.
JohnnyHell wrote: “That unit I spammed… I now can’t take as many in one of three game modes available so I quit.”
What???
I also took a full unit of Terminators, a unit no1 wanted to touch in competitive play, so if you want to talk gak, stop. You're just a clown..
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sim-Life wrote: Do people not know that the GK codex only has two heavy weapon platforms or something? Given the choice between the DK or a land raider I know which one I'd choose to take a bunch of.
They read the OP and think I'm some WAAC, even though I put my Edit at the top for a reason.
This change is solely for Matched Tournament Play. Nothing is stopping you from running mixed subfactions in your normal matched play games, or even in the missions from this book, if you're not actively playing in events or practice games for those events.
Secondly the idea that NDK's weren't overly broken is hilarious. 4 of them is still incredibly powerful, as is only being able to take a single Brotherhood. Unless Interceptors have massively increased in points the army is still in the top tier of power easily.
Calling it careless is also hilarious because this has been on the cards for a long, long time. They should have nipped it in the bud at the start of 9th at least (what will all the other anti-soup going on) and letting it keep going is certainly careless. But like the flyer change this has been an inevitability for quite a while.
I don't care. Oh, you "only" use 5 NDK, what god damn gentleman /sarcasm. You know what I do care, I think your posts in this thread are annoying. The HQ NDK was a mistake in the first place and the 4th should not even be possible. Feth NDK, they are ugly and stupid.
@sim no, people know that just isn't true, there are Dreadnoughts, Flyers and (original do not steal) Devastators. On the other hand, people know that NDK are super competitive at the moment and see someone whining about not being able to bring 5.
as is only being able to take a single Brotherhood.
No, and this is where I drew the line. 4 DK is fine, w/e Ill take a squad of interceptors, but when you remove my ability to also play Terminators effectively, nah, have a nice day.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
vict0988 wrote: I don't care. Oh, you "only" use 5 NDK, what god damn gentleman /sarcasm. You know what I do care, I think your posts in this thread are annoying. The HQ NDK was a mistake in the first place and the 4th should not even be possible. Feth NDK, they are ugly and stupid.
@sim no, people know that just isn't true, there are Dreadnoughts, Flyers and (original do not steal) Devastators. On the other hand, people know that NDK are super competitive at the moment and see someone whining about not being able to bring 5.
I don't get you _SeeD_, GK should still be pretty strong after these changes and if you don't even have the models what bothers you?
I'm sure you'd be able to find out different builds that work at competitive levels. If not just wait for some reviews on the internet, they'll figure it out for you.
Blackie wrote: I don't get you _SeeD_, GK should still be pretty strong after these changes and if you don't even have the models what bothers you?
I'm sure you'd be able to find out different builds that work at competitive levels. If not just wait for some reviews on the internet, they'll figure it out for you.
I have spent many hours on Table Top Simulator, hammering out a unique list that had a bright future lol.
Can't think of a better way to describe it.
Does that make more sense? I'm glad you asked, it's just that OPs need to only be so long.
@sim no, people know that just isn't true, there are Dreadnoughts, Flyers and (original do not steal) Devastators. On the other hand, people know that NDK are super competitive at the moment and see someone whining about not being able to bring 5.
Dreadnaughts and fliers aren't heavy weapon platforms though. They're fairly fragile units that can take heavy weapons. Thats like complaining about Guard players taking Leman Russes when sentinels, heavy weapon squads and valkyries exist.
Lord_Valorion wrote: You spam the best unit of a faction like there is no tomorrow. You are the archetype of Powergamer and i am glad you leave.
I play competitively with the army I've only ever played. That is not powergaming, it's excelling at your particular army.
And I really hope you don't mean that, because I will come back one day and if we ever play, losing to me then would feel even more painful.
Lord_Valorion wrote: You spam the best unit of a faction like there is no tomorrow. You are the archetype of Powergamer and i am glad you leave.
But its fine if he spams gakky units? How about if GW nerfs NDKs hard in CA2022 and he still plays them? Is he still a power games? How about if he does what you say and spams gakky units then they become OP at GWs whims?
I used to play a heavy melee carnifex nid list and now I think through sheer random chance that happens to be the best Nid list going now? Does that make me WAAC now because GWs random throw at a dart board of rules writing made my list good? What if I write a new list themed around hormogaunts and I field all 120 of them that I own and the 9th Ed book ends up making it "unfun" and "WAAC"? Is that my fault or GWs?
Can we get some clarification on what is considered WAAC and what is considered a thematic list that got lucky because GW cannot into rules?
Blackie wrote: I don't get you _SeeD_, GK should still be pretty strong after these changes and if you don't even have the models what bothers you?
I'm sure you'd be able to find out different builds that work at competitive levels. If not just wait for some reviews on the internet, they'll figure it out for you.
I have spent many hours on Table Top Simulator, hammering out a unique list that had a bright future lol.
Can't think of a better way to describe it.
Does that make more sense? I'm glad you asked, it's just that OPs need to only be so long.
if you were planning to play competitive 40K, then leaving now is the best decision, because rules changes like this are a basic fact of life. strong units get nerfs, weaker units get buffs. OP tricks get blocked, and new ones are discovered. If your immediate reaction to finding out your (planned and not yet purchased) list of units and game strategy needs to change is to question your basic desire to play at all, them get out now before you've sunk anymore cash into a hobby that will do this to you repeatedly.
if the painting and modelling side still intrests you, then go do that, or go play crusade games where the army selection rules are totally different. but competitive, matched play 40K does things like this all the time to try and improve balance, or tone down a OP unit combo.
And, as you can see form the reactions of several dakka posters, "Only" 5 dread knights would still be considered OP by most people, and meta chasing even by those that don't object. Those things are really good, and anyone taking lots of them is going to be considered to be playing a WAAC list, regardless of having a sub-optimal unit or two in the list.
Blackie wrote: I don't get you _SeeD_, GK should still be pretty strong after these changes and if you don't even have the models what bothers you?
I'm sure you'd be able to find out different builds that work at competitive levels. If not just wait for some reviews on the internet, they'll figure it out for you.
I have spent many hours on Table Top Simulator, hammering out a unique list that had a bright future lol.
Can't think of a better way to describe it.
Does that make more sense? I'm glad you asked, it's just that OPs need to only be so long.
if you were planning to play competitive 40K, then leaving now is the best decision, because rules changes like this are a basic fact of life. strong units get nerfs, weaker units get buffs. OP tricks get blocked, and new ones are discovered. If your immediate reaction to finding out your (planned and not yet purchased) list of units and game strategy needs to change is to question your basic desire to play at all, them get out now before you've sunk anymore cash into a hobby that will do this to you repeatedly.
if the painting and modelling side still intrests you, then go do that, or go play crusade games where the army selection rules are totally different. but competitive, matched play 40K does things like this all the time to try and improve balance, or tone down a OP unit combo.
And, as you can see form the reactions of several dakka posters, "Only" 5 dread knights would still be considered OP by most people, and meta chasing even by those that don't object. Those things are really good, and anyone taking lots of them is going to be considered to be playing a WAAC list, regardless of having a sub-optimal unit or two in the list.
Blackie wrote: I don't get you _SeeD_, GK should still be pretty strong after these changes and if you don't even have the models what bothers you?
I'm sure you'd be able to find out different builds that work at competitive levels. If not just wait for some reviews on the internet, they'll figure it out for you.
I have spent many hours on Table Top Simulator, hammering out a unique list that had a bright future lol.
Can't think of a better way to describe it.
Does that make more sense? I'm glad you asked, it's just that OPs need to only be so long.
No, I honestly don't think it does. Maybe you're new to 40k, but we can't expect to play the exact same lists for more than some months, especially those that are designed on spamming a few specific units. That's true since almost 5 years now, while in the past things were changed slowlier but still people needed to adapt at some point.
It's a very good thing actually, if things always stay the same everyone would play the very same few lists.
if you were planning to play competitive 40K, then leaving now is the best decision, because rules changes like this are a basic fact of life. strong units get nerfs, weaker units get buffs. OP tricks get blocked, and new ones are discovered. If your immediate reaction to finding out your (planned and not yet purchased) list of units and game strategy needs to change is to question your basic desire to play at all, them get out now before you've sunk anymore cash into a hobby that will do this to you repeatedly.
if the painting and modelling side still intrests you, then go do that, or go play crusade games where the army selection rules are totally different. but competitive, matched play 40K does things like this all the time to try and improve balance, or tone down a OP unit combo.
And, as you can see form the reactions of several dakka posters, "Only" 5 dread knights would still be considered OP by most people, and meta chasing even by those that don't object. Those things are really good, and anyone taking lots of them is going to be considered to be playing a WAAC list, regardless of having a sub-optimal unit or two in the list.
To me the goal of a competitive player should be being good at the game, not being good with one list. That means being able to field multiple build and probably multiple armies at events. Especially if you mostly or only play simulators, with free access to every possible combination of units.
To me the goal of a competitive player should be being good at the game, not being good with one list. That means being able to field multiple build and probably multiple armies at events. Especially if you mostly or only play simulators, with free access to every possible combination of units.
To me, I not only want to win at that level, but do so in a unique way. Not only did I make terminators work, but the list was actually good. Also, this is my first time playing as a GK fan.
Does this make more sense now?
I'm not trying to be just a mindless metadrone, OK?
This is a legitimate grievance. I think people just read "5 DKs" and went mindnumb or something. FFS.
vict0988 wrote: If you're not a mindless meta drone then bring 0 NDK and pick whatever Brotherhood is best for Terminators and spam them.
The current GK meta is not only DKs, but also interceptors, sometimes 30 of them.
My then-list had zero.
You are just antagonizing me at this point. I am not your enemy.
Sim-Life wrote: Can we get some clarification on what is considered WAAC and what is considered a thematic list that got lucky because GW cannot into rules?
The difference lies in intention, attitude and player investment.
Sim-Life wrote: Can we get some clarification on what is considered WAAC and what is considered a thematic list that got lucky because GW cannot into rules?
The difference lies in intention, attitude and player investment.
But as I said, with how GW does rules if my intention was to make a nidzilla list focussing on fexes, then GW decided AFTER I built my army that fexes should be OP, does that make me WAAC? If I bring my nidzilla list that I've been playing for two editions to game night and play a stranger who doesn't know I've been playing that list Before It Was Cool and he calls me WAAC is that fair? And its not like its even the case that I need to have been playing for years, it could have just been literal months (because Seasons are a thing now I guess) before GW decided to change something that makes the list OP thats out of my control.
To me the goal of a competitive player should be being good at the game, not being good with one list. That means being able to field multiple build and probably multiple armies at events. Especially if you mostly or only play simulators, with free access to every possible combination of units.
And to some people having one list, tweaking it over time to exactly your playstyle and knowing all the ins and outs and how that list should react to different situations is what they want. A major reason I stopped playing Warmachine was because I loved having a single list I could make small adjustments to, play incredibly well and I knew how to play on a competitive level. OP is in the same situation as I was when WMH killed how I liked to play the game and I don't think its fair people are jumping down his throat about it.
To me, I not only want to win at that level, but do so in a unique way. Not only did I make terminators work, but the list was actually good. Also, this is my first time playing as a GK fan.
Does this make more sense now?
Still no . You can still win at that level and in a unique way, probably even with the same faction. Just not in that way. You can figure out how to make other units works or even the same units but using different tactics and combos, the GK codex is pretty good.
To me, I not only want to win at that level, but do so in a unique way. Not only did I make terminators work, but the list was actually good. Also, this is my first time playing as a GK fan.
Does this make more sense now?
And to some people having one list, tweaking it over time to exactly your playstyle and knowing all the ins and outs and how that list should react to different situations is what they want. A major reason I stopped playing Warmachine was because I loved having a single list I could make small adjustments to, play incredibly well and I knew how to play on a competitive level. OP is in the same situation as I was when WMH killed how I liked to play the game and I don't think its fair people are jumping down his throat about it.
People who own one list and are not willing to expand any further should stay away from competitive gaming, simple. If people are able to play the very same competitive list forever we'd only have an extremely selected array on lists at some point, everyone would play the same things and every game would be pretty identical and boring.
OP didn't even had this problem as he mostly play with simulators.
I think the issue some people have with your announcement is that it reads like a temper tantrum against GW doing what GW does. Since the start of 8th Edition, GW has been steadily adjusting the balance levers of the game. What was good or even possible at one point of the game has changed to be average, bad, or just not possible. Your list was depended upon a specific balance of units and rules and it just can't be done now. If that is going to elicit a rage quit, you are playing the wrong game when you picked competitive 40K.
Beyond that, I'm sure some of them are needling you. This is the internet after all
alextroy wrote: I think the issue some people have with your announcement is that it reads like a temper tantrum against GW doing what GW does. Since the start of 8th Edition, GW has been steadily adjusting the balance levers of the game. What was good or even possible at one point of the game has changed to be average, bad, or just not possible. Your list was depended upon a specific balance of units and rules and it just can't be done now. If that is going to elicit a rage quit, you are playing the wrong game when you picked competitive 40K.
Beyond that, I'm sure some of them are needling you. This is the internet after all
If I even suspected they would do something this drastic SO early in the new edition, I wouldn't have spent so much time.
I knew 4 DK max was on the table, but also HALF my army? feth jesus.
We are in the early balance phase of this edition, and it's already a flaming mess. No thanks.
Early? The edition has almost been out for almost 2 years already and we've already had multiple balance changes.
Like you haven't even bought any of these models. I get that your potential idea isn't possible but fething hell, Edition changes bring more upheaval than this and we're on our 9th one of those so far. You have spent 0 money, 0 time assembling, 0 time painting so your histrionics in your OP are what people are mocking you for.
And to some people having one list, tweaking it over time to exactly your playstyle and knowing all the ins and outs and how that list should react to different situations is what they want. A major reason I stopped playing Warmachine was because I loved having a single list I could make small adjustments to, play incredibly well and I knew how to play on a competitive level. OP is in the same situation as I was when WMH killed how I liked to play the game and I don't think its fair people are jumping down his throat about it.
People who own one list and are not willing to expand any further should stay away from competitive gaming, simple.
Wait hold on, OP do you have this list you supposedly can't use anymore? Like have you actually bought and used this list in an IRL tournament or is this all just in simulators?
But that's like complaining about your sports team being bad if they don't change their team roster every so often. You can't just expect something to be 100% amazing forever especially if its doing well in a meta.
Bosskelot wrote: Early? The edition has almost been out for almost 2 years already and we've already had multiple balance changes.
You have spent 0 money, 0 time assembling, 0 time painting so your histrionics in your OP are what people are mocking you for.
Wrong, wrong, and wrong.
I don't care about your hatred toward me, and I get that you want me to just "shut up" but my goal here isn't to convince YOU personally, but to be heard, and every time you keep trying to punch me down, you're just helping my cause that much more.
Thank you.
aphyon wrote: We solved this problem a while ago because our group plays 5th edition and i use my GKs the way they were intended-to aid imperial forces when fighting chaos or demonic forces. not as a stand alone full army. i still use the 3rd ed GK codex as it does the force in the way the lore describes them.
Spoiler:
I run a grand master with a 9 terminator retinue (and occasionally one of the assassins, since i own all four). and he joins my space marines or my mechanicus force as needed to spice up the army lists.
We have a guy in our group building a stormtrooper themed inquisitorial force out of the same codex.
To the wider point GW have become as a company that is why i play so many other games (see my sig) or editions of 40K where GW isn't involved to Feth things up anymore.
OP didn't even had this problem as he mostly play with simulators.
It's almost like you don't know what you're talking about and are just antagonizing me because there's NO way I could be right about this.
Not at all. I haven't said a single negative thing about you, in no way I'm antagonizing you. Since you shared your thoughts I was just interested to understand your point of view and replied to other posters in the same discussion.
Right and wrong are entirely subjective concepts, I'd never tell you're doing it wrong. Or what you're expecting from the 40k is wrong. But maybe unusual, uncommon, strange or that needs to be clarified to understand it properly. In 23+ years of 40k I've never met someone that wanted to play competitive 40k with a single one everlasting list so far and was pissed off when GW released a few minor changes.
Gert wrote: Wait hold on, OP do you have this list you supposedly can't use anymore? Like have you actually bought and used this list in an IRL tournament or is this all just in simulators?
The TTS Discord has a seasonal Alpha League and I had a moderate amount of success this season.
I also did the @LFG_Competitive scene for a while before practicing more with friends.
And to some people having one list, tweaking it over time to exactly your playstyle and knowing all the ins and outs and how that list should react to different situations is what they want. A major reason I stopped playing Warmachine was because I loved having a single list I could make small adjustments to, play incredibly well and I knew how to play on a competitive level. OP is in the same situation as I was when WMH killed how I liked to play the game and I don't think its fair people are jumping down his throat about it.
People who own one list and are not willing to expand any further should stay away from competitive gaming, simple.
Nice gatekeeping.
It's the opposite. Playing with a very restricted array of lists is gatekeeping. It prevents players from joining the competitive scene as it's an extremely boring game and someone would never be able to field their beloved armies at all if they're not among those few top tiers. Others could do but only lists that dislike. Is this really what people want?
People who demand everything now (and forever) don't contribute positively to the community. This is an hobby that is supposed to grow over time. To me it's completely reasonable to be able to compete at events after years into the hobby.
OP didn't even had this problem as he mostly play with simulators.
It's almost like you don't know what you're talking about and are just antagonizing me because there's NO way I could be right about this.
Not at all. I haven't said a single negative thing about you, in no way I'm antagonizing you. Since you shared your thoughts I was just interested to understand your point of view and replied to other posters in the same discussion.
Right and wrong are entirely subjective concepts, I'd never tell you're doing it wrong. Or what you're expecting from the 40k is wrong. But maybe unusual, uncommon, strange or that needs to be clarified to understand it properly. In 23+ years of 40k I've never met someone that wanted to play competitive 40k with a single one everlasting list so far and was pissed off when GW released a few minor changes.
Nothing about my list was everlasting. It's been modified many times, but has relied on a BASE system that I thought would not be touched. My disappointment is manifest in this thread.
I'm trying to understand the anger and from my perspective you crafted a list using simulators, intended to buy said list, the list now needs to change which you don't like and now you're quitting 40k. It seems like an overreaction when you can still seemingly run most of the list unchanged and just make some minor adjustments. I'm not saying your experience doesn't matter but the level of anger I'm seeing would generally make sense from someone who had invested into the army, not someone who at most bought a Codex and a Rulebook.
You do you chief but you need to see the perspective that others are seeing instead of just assuming everyone is out to get you.
Gert wrote: It seems like an overreaction when you can still seemingly run most of the list unchanged and just make some minor adjustments. I'm not saying your experience doesn't matter but the level of anger I'm seeing would generally make sense from someone who had invested into the army, not someone who at most bought a Codex and a Rulebook.
You do you chief but you need to see the perspective that others are seeing instead of just assuming everyone is out to get you.
You'd think that, and I say this in the least offensive way possible, but you'd be wrong.
I've been in battlescribe trying so hard to make something work, but I can't without making huge point sacs or losing 3 CP because of the Warlord logistics. The way I hammered this list out, it took advantage and min maxed all the slots available.
You really need to understand that this is more a morale hit than a practical one. I spent so much time and energy making it work and now it's just gone. gg.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Here's the list btw if anyone cares. It's going to become a relic anyway:
Brotherhood Chaplain [8 PL, 140pts]: 5: Warp Shaping, 6. Invocation of Focus, Foretelling of Locus
Grand Master in Nemesis Dreadknight [11 PL, 230pts]: 1: Gate of Infinity, 2: Empyric Amplification, Dreadfist, Dreadknight teleporter, Gatling Psilencer, Gem of Inoktu, Heavy Psycannon, Nemesis Greatsword, Sigil of Exigence
Battle Size [12CP]: 3. Strike Force (101-200 Total PL / 1001-2000 Points)
Brotherhood: Preservers
Detachment Bonuses: Show Bonuses
Detachment Command Cost
+ Stratagems +
Armoury of Titan [-1CP]: 1 Additional Relic
+ HQ +
Grand Master in Nemesis Dreadknight [11 PL, -1CP, 235pts]: 1: Gate of Infinity, 2: Empyric Amplification, 3: Unyielding Anvil, 4: First to the Fray, Dreadfist, Dreadknight teleporter, Exemplar of the Silver Host, Gatling Psilencer, Heavy Psycannon, Nemesis Greatsword, Servant of the Throne, Warlord
That’s the nature of Matched Play if you min/max. Really is a problem you brought on yourself. Collect the models you like as the meta shifts in Matched Play. Or min/max if that’s your bag but don’t get salty when things change… as they do several times a year. I hadn’t even clocked in the OP that you haven’t even bought the models… the only thing you’ve lost is some time on BattleScribe, welllllll that really is a non-problem and why you’re getting heat for an attention thread.
JohnnyHell wrote: That’s the nature of Matched Play if you min/max. Really is a problem you brought on yourself. Collect the models you like as the meta shifts in Matched Play. Or min/max if that’s your bag but don’t get salty when things change… as they do several times a year. I hadn’t even clocked in the OP that you haven’t even bought the models… the only thing you’ve lost is some time on BattleScribe, welllllll that really is a non-problem and why you’re getting heat for an attention thread.
You really have not-enough idea. It would have been better if you said nothing at all.
Being loud is the point here.
Dude, pot kettle. You're getting angry because your hypothetical list that you don't have any models for has been changed but you chose to play competitive and if you were as in depth with a competitive community then you should understand that when you play with fire you might get burned.
There's no need to be abrasive and rude with people who have been trying to understand your situation and are giving their opinion.
Gert wrote: Dude, pot kettle. You're getting angry because your hypothetical list that you don't have any models for has been changed but you chose to play competitive and if you were as in depth with a competitive community then you should understand that when you play with fire you might get burned.
There's no need to be abrasive and rude with people who have been trying to understand your situation and are giving their opinion.
When you alter the CORE RULES midway through an edition, you're going to have unintended bad feelings. I am but ONE example among many. I'm reading the threads. They're making up the rules as they go. No, I choose not to partake, and they need to know about it.
Most of the places I've seen discussing this change have been overall positive. Heck its actually rolled things back to how they were - one player one army. Rather than what they had which was one player multiple different divisions because of course you'd min-max taking the close combat subfaction with your close combat units and the ranged subfaction with your ranged units.
Cutting things back is overall making you have actual choices to make instead of just min-maxing.
I'm with the others that you're having a very large overreaction especially as you've bought and painted zero models. So its not as if you've money on the shelf that you can't use or have to change. You've played games yes, you've practiced and you've learned and won games with those simulated armies. Now the board has changed and you evolve your game to match that change and advance on and chances are all you've learned in the previous games will help you continue to win matches and such.
Heck GW changed how units work in AoS in a FAR more drastic way by cutting down the number of units you can take in forces and shifting things form big infantry to minimum units; it messes with forces I'd physically bought and, whilst I'm not a fan of it, I'm not getting bent out of shape with it. Partly because I know its GW and next edition they might turn things around entirely on their head; and partly because I enjoy the act of building models so its not a waste.
I think if you feel that playing games in a meta and rules system that will change is a waste, then you want to shift to a different type of competitive game system.
Overread wrote: Most of the places I've seen discussing this change have been overall positive. Heck its actually rolled things back to how they were - one player one army. Rather than what they had which was one player multiple different divisions because of course you'd min-max taking the close combat subfaction with your close combat units and the ranged subfaction with your ranged units.
Cutting things back is overall making you have actual choices to make instead of just min-maxing.
I'm with the others that you're having a very large overreaction especially as you've bought and painted zero models. So its not as if you've money on the shelf that you can't use or have to change. You've played games yes, you've practiced and you've learned and won games with those simulated armies. Now the board has changed and you evolve your game to match that change and advance on and chances are all you've learned in the previous games will help you continue to win matches and such.
Heck GW changed how units work in AoS in a FAR more drastic way by cutting down the number of units you can take in forces and shifting things form big infantry to minimum units; it messes with forces I'd physically bought and, whilst I'm not a fan of it, I'm not getting bent out of shape with it. Partly because I know its GW and next edition they might turn things around entirely on their head; and partly because I enjoy the act of building models so its not a waste.
I think if you feel that playing games in a meta and rules system that will change is a waste, then you want to shift to a different type of competitive game system.
When I say I had been holding this nut for 10 years, I hope you understand what I mean.
Before I post this I just want to note that I haven't yet bought all my models in physical form, so GW will personally be losing hundreds of currency units. F__k them for such a careless change.
Hahahahahaha.
Best shitpost of 2022 so far. Thank you very much ! For once, something on Dakkadakka made me laugh out loud.
Before I post this I just want to note that I haven't yet bought all my models in physical form, so GW will personally be losing hundreds of currency units. F__k them for such a careless change.
Hahahahahaha.
Best shitpost of 2022 so far. Thank you very much ! For once, something on Dakkadakka made me laugh out loud.
You're welcome bro. I'm glad someone is having a good time.
Overread wrote: Most of the places I've seen discussing this change have been overall positive. Heck its actually rolled things back to how they were - one player one army. Rather than what they had which was one player multiple different divisions because of course you'd min-max taking the close combat subfaction with your close combat units and the ranged subfaction with your ranged units.
Cutting things back is overall making you have actual choices to make instead of just min-maxing.
I'm with the others that you're having a very large overreaction especially as you've bought and painted zero models. So its not as if you've money on the shelf that you can't use or have to change. You've played games yes, you've practiced and you've learned and won games with those simulated armies. Now the board has changed and you evolve your game to match that change and advance on and chances are all you've learned in the previous games will help you continue to win matches and such.
Heck GW changed how units work in AoS in a FAR more drastic way by cutting down the number of units you can take in forces and shifting things form big infantry to minimum units; it messes with forces I'd physically bought and, whilst I'm not a fan of it, I'm not getting bent out of shape with it. Partly because I know its GW and next edition they might turn things around entirely on their head; and partly because I enjoy the act of building models so its not a waste.
I think if you feel that playing games in a meta and rules system that will change is a waste, then you want to shift to a different type of competitive game system.
When I say I had been holding this nut for 10 years, I hope you understand what I mean.
10 years is a long time never to change your tactics/army design/composition. It's honestly also a really long time to have never bought a model in.
Just seems kinda strange for me that if you're approaching a point where you can afford to start buying models, why would you let a tiny thing stop you;
Overread wrote: Most of the places I've seen discussing this change have been overall positive. Heck its actually rolled things back to how they were - one player one army. Rather than what they had which was one player multiple different divisions because of course you'd min-max taking the close combat subfaction with your close combat units and the ranged subfaction with your ranged units.
Cutting things back is overall making you have actual choices to make instead of just min-maxing.
I'm with the others that you're having a very large overreaction especially as you've bought and painted zero models. So its not as if you've money on the shelf that you can't use or have to change. You've played games yes, you've practiced and you've learned and won games with those simulated armies. Now the board has changed and you evolve your game to match that change and advance on and chances are all you've learned in the previous games will help you continue to win matches and such.
Heck GW changed how units work in AoS in a FAR more drastic way by cutting down the number of units you can take in forces and shifting things form big infantry to minimum units; it messes with forces I'd physically bought and, whilst I'm not a fan of it, I'm not getting bent out of shape with it. Partly because I know its GW and next edition they might turn things around entirely on their head; and partly because I enjoy the act of building models so its not a waste.
I think if you feel that playing games in a meta and rules system that will change is a waste, then you want to shift to a different type of competitive game system.
When I say I had been holding this nut for 10 years, I hope you understand what I mean.
10 years is a long time never to change your tactics/army design/composition. It's honestly also a really long time to have never bought a model in.
Just seems kinda strange for me that if you're approaching a point where you can afford to start buying models, why would you let a tiny thing stop you;
10 years spans multiple editions and codices.
And this was that demoralizing. You probably missed the post where I described my inability to manage the logistics of using 1 Battalion or 2 Patrols without incurring unseen penalties. More unintended consequences from a broad change of the core rules. Mine is a unique case, but that doesn't make it hurt any less.
Overread wrote: Most of the places I've seen discussing this change have been overall positive. Heck its actually rolled things back to how they were - one player one army. Rather than what they had which was one player multiple different divisions because of course you'd min-max taking the close combat subfaction with your close combat units and the ranged subfaction with your ranged units.
Cutting things back is overall making you have actual choices to make instead of just min-maxing.
I'm with the others that you're having a very large overreaction especially as you've bought and painted zero models. So its not as if you've money on the shelf that you can't use or have to change. You've played games yes, you've practiced and you've learned and won games with those simulated armies. Now the board has changed and you evolve your game to match that change and advance on and chances are all you've learned in the previous games will help you continue to win matches and such.
Heck GW changed how units work in AoS in a FAR more drastic way by cutting down the number of units you can take in forces and shifting things form big infantry to minimum units; it messes with forces I'd physically bought and, whilst I'm not a fan of it, I'm not getting bent out of shape with it. Partly because I know its GW and next edition they might turn things around entirely on their head; and partly because I enjoy the act of building models so its not a waste.
I think if you feel that playing games in a meta and rules system that will change is a waste, then you want to shift to a different type of competitive game system.
When I say I had been holding this nut for 10 years, I hope you understand what I mean.
I praise your foresight in knowing, at least 5 years in advance, that Dreadknight HQs would pop into existence in 8th edition.
Fans are made by fluff and models, not rules and lists.
An army list might be competitive for a single edition if you're LUCKY. If this is your reaction to shifts in meta then you'd never last in the competitive scene.
TableTop Simulator does people a disservice, wargaming is more work than just moving models around on a computer screen and polishing your army list.
I suggest you buy yourself a single squad of Grey Knights Terminators (or just some power armor dudes) and build/paint them up and see if you enjoy that side of the hobby before you even think about building an army of Grey Knights, let alone walking into the competitive scene. I've seen way too many people get hooked on the idea of tournament play only to burn out just building the army, let alone painting it.
Honestly if you've waited ten years for this you owe yourself that much.
John Prins wrote: Fans are made by fluff and models, not rules and lists.
An army list might be competitive for a single edition if you're LUCKY. If this is your reaction to shifts in meta then you'd never last in the competitive scene.
TableTop Simulator does people a disservice, wargaming is more work than just moving models around on a computer screen and polishing your army list.
I disagree with this and I kind of hope you'll explain
I suggest you buy yourself a single squad of Grey Knights Terminators (or just some power armor dudes) and build/paint them up and see if you enjoy that side of the hobby before you even think about building an army of Grey Knights, let alone walking into the competitive scene. I've seen way too many people get hooked on the idea of tournament play only to burn out just building the army, let alone painting it.
I already have 2 term boxes and have been doing this
Honestly if you've waited ten years for this you owe yourself that much.
this isn't the end, just the foreseeable future. I strict myself to comp play unless personally requested otherwise. I'll just put my competitive focus somewhere else for now.
Let me translate this to another gaming analogy: I too once spent a long time playing a driving simulator winning many races and when they lowered the speed limit on the A road between two villages near me I got so angry about the obvious incoming change I won't buy that F1 car I don't have.
If you consider this antagonistic it might help highlight to you why other people are having a hard time dealing with your post.
Dudeface wrote: Let me translate this to another gaming analogy: I too once spent a long time playing a driving simulator winning many races and when they lowered the speed limit on the A road between two villages near me I got so angry about the obvious incoming change I won't buy that F1 car I don't have.
If you consider this antagonistic it might help highlight to you why other people are having a hard time dealing with your post.
Nah this isn't a personal attack. It's just a bad analogy.
TTS uses all the same metrics and is actually superior in many regards.
Dudeface wrote: Let me translate this to another gaming analogy: I too once spent a long time playing a driving simulator winning many races and when they lowered the speed limit on the A road between two villages near me I got so angry about the obvious incoming change I won't buy that F1 car I don't have.
If you consider this antagonistic it might help highlight to you why other people are having a hard time dealing with your post.
Nah this isn't a personal attack. It's just a bad analogy.
TTS uses all the same metrics and is actually superior in many regards.
And driving simulator don't use accurate replicas of cars on replica tracks?
Moreover, why not just stick to TTS given the 0 cost investment? There's other quirky armies and lists you can try, honestly the list refining process is the bulk of the work and enjoyment, they've just encouraged you to get excited trying something new.
Dudeface wrote: Let me translate this to another gaming analogy: I too once spent a long time playing a driving simulator winning many races and when they lowered the speed limit on the A road between two villages near me I got so angry about the obvious incoming change I won't buy that F1 car I don't have.
If you consider this antagonistic it might help highlight to you why other people are having a hard time dealing with your post.
Nah this isn't a personal attack. It's just a bad analogy.
TTS uses all the same metrics and is actually superior in many regards.
And driving simulator don't use accurate replicas of cars on replica tracks?
Another gakky analogy. Just stop.
Moreover, why not just stick to TTS given the 0 cost investment? There's other quirky armies and lists you can try, honestly the list refining process is the bulk of the work and enjoyment, they've just encouraged you to get excited trying something new.
Because I want to play IRL. TTS is just training.
Ok, look at it this way. I used to play TTS40k on a regular basis, because I hadn't discovered a good FLGS. I was even in the same Discord you were, until I noticed they were unironically posting Stone Toss. That and BCB's legendary rules takes were the last straw.
TTS is not the same as the holistic IRL40k experience. IRL, only a minority of people play 40k without painting their minis, assembling them, etc. Those things are integral parts of the hobby that you won't get just playing on TTS. Do you see what I mean?
RaptorusRex wrote: Ok, look at it this way. I used to play TTS40k on a regular basis, because I hadn't discovered a good FLGS. I was even in the same Discord you were, until I noticed they were unironically posting Stone Toss. That and BCB's legendary rules takes were the last straw.
TTS is not the same as the holistic IRL40k experience. IRL, only a minority of people play 40k without painting their minis, assembling them, etc. Those things are integral parts of the hobby that you won't get just playing on TTS. Do you see what I mean?
Yea I get it. TTS is not the point of emphasis here though. I want to play IRL and TTS is my only claim to gameplay exp. People would take me even less seriously if I had none.
Hecaton wrote: Why the hell are you conplaining here? Nobody here had anything to do with this. Go bother GW.
It's one of those rare instances where everyone who is usually willing to lock horns over ideals and thoughts about the hobby, lay down their problems and are able to agree for one thread.
Honestly it might be worth the mods just locking this, as it's a bait thread and since the OP is intent on just acting offended and (ironically) antagonistic to being challenged about something with no physical impact to their life.
Heaven forbid they'd planned a renegades and heretics list for 10 years.
Hecaton wrote: Why the hell are you conplaining here? Nobody here had anything to do with this. Go bother GW.
It's one of those rare instances where everyone who is usually willing to lock horns over ideals and thoughts about the hobby, lay down their problems and are able to agree for one thread.
Honestly it might be worth the mods just locking this, as it's a bait thread and since the OP is intent on just acting offended and (ironically) antagonistic to being challenged about something with no physical impact to their life.
Heaven forbid they'd planned a renegades and heretics list for 10 years.
Funny considering most of the comments here are just people calling me a Tryhard, WAAC, Powergamer, or some other ignorant derogatory.
And for what? Because this type of thing is pathetic to you? I'm so sorry for bothering you to the point where you actively try to make me feel bad, when I'm not even attacking anyone here personally. Everyone here who insulted me out of the gate just for complaining needs to recalibrate, because I don't deserve this.
RaptorusRex wrote: Ok, look at it this way. I used to play TTS40k on a regular basis, because I hadn't discovered a good FLGS. I was even in the same Discord you were, until I noticed they were unironically posting Stone Toss. That and BCB's legendary rules takes were the last straw.
Yeah that guy is irredeemable on a rules-nonsense front, and also on a being-a-trash-human-being front.
RaptorusRex wrote: Ok, look at it this way. I used to play TTS40k on a regular basis, because I hadn't discovered a good FLGS. I was even in the same Discord you were, until I noticed they were unironically posting Stone Toss. That and BCB's legendary rules takes were the last straw.
TTS is not the same as the holistic IRL40k experience. IRL, only a minority of people play 40k without painting their minis, assembling them, etc. Those things are integral parts of the hobby that you won't get just playing on TTS. Do you see what I mean?
Yea I get it. TTS is not the point of emphasis here though. I want to play IRL and TTS is my only claim to gameplay exp. People would take me even less seriously if I had none.
Oh, no. Claiming TTS as 'gameplay experience' makes it easier to discard what you're saying.
If you were in the process of building and painting your first army and got taken off guard by the changes, people would actually respect your rage-quite more.
Not much more, since the changes affect the models you can field very little, but some.
Hecaton wrote: Why the hell are you conplaining here? Nobody here had anything to do with this. Go bother GW.
It's one of those rare instances where everyone who is usually willing to lock horns over ideals and thoughts about the hobby, lay down their problems and are able to agree for one thread.
Honestly it might be worth the mods just locking this, as it's a bait thread and since the OP is intent on just acting offended and (ironically) antagonistic to being challenged about something with no physical impact to their life.
Heaven forbid they'd planned a renegades and heretics list for 10 years.
Funny considering most of the comments here are just people calling me a Tryhard, WAAC, Powergamer, or some other ignorant derogatory.
And for what? Because this type of thing is pathetic to you? I'm so sorry for bothering you to the point where you actively try to make me feel bad, when I'm not even attacking anyone here personally. Everyone here who insulted me out of the gate just for complaining needs to recalibrate, because I don't deserve this.
I'm not actively trying to make you feel bad nobody is, what they're trying to do is illuminate you as to why this much energy being wasted isn't worth it.
You've come to a forum, for people playing a tabletop game, to tell them you're not playing the tabletop game and never have, because of a routine rules change that invalidates a competitive list spamming a good unit.
Honestly I don't think it's a reasonable reason to quit, it's even less reasonable to air the subjective grievance and not expect some pushback.
Hecaton wrote: Why the hell are you conplaining here? Nobody here had anything to do with this. Go bother GW.
It's one of those rare instances where everyone who is usually willing to lock horns over ideals and thoughts about the hobby, lay down their problems and are able to agree for one thread.
Honestly it might be worth the mods just locking this, as it's a bait thread and since the OP is intent on just acting offended and (ironically) antagonistic to being challenged about something with no physical impact to their life.
Heaven forbid they'd planned a renegades and heretics list for 10 years.
Funny considering most of the comments here are just people calling me a Tryhard, WAAC, Powergamer, or some other ignorant derogatory.
And for what? Because this type of thing is pathetic to you? I'm so sorry for bothering you to the point where you actively try to make me feel bad, when I'm not even attacking anyone here personally. Everyone here who insulted me out of the gate just for complaining needs to recalibrate, because I don't deserve this.
I'm not actively trying to make you feel bad nobody is, what they're trying to do is illuminate you as to why this much energy being wasted isn't worth it.
You've come to a forum, for people playing a tabletop game, to tell them you're not playing the tabletop game and never have, because of a routine rules change that invalidates a competitive list spamming a good unit.
Honestly I don't think it's a reasonable reason to quit, it's even less reasonable to air the subjective grievance and not expect some pushback.
vict0988 wrote: I don't care. Oh, you "only" use 5 NDK, what god damn gentleman /sarcasm. You know what I do care, I think your posts in this thread are annoying. The HQ NDK was a mistake in the first place and the 4th should not even be possible. Feth NDK, they are ugly and stupid.
@sim no, people know that just isn't true, there are Dreadnoughts, Flyers and (original do not steal) Devastators. On the other hand, people know that NDK are super competitive at the moment and see someone whining about not being able to bring 5.
Oof. I'm sorry Dudeface, I ruined your point haha. He probably has me blocked or something. I don't want you to feel terrible OP, I'm just clowning because your posts were hard to take seriously and a community that doesn't discourage people from making "look at me posts" will get more of them. Imagine if every Dakka poster made a big deal out of it whenever they stopped playing 40k, we'd need a board just for that.
I praise the title of your thread, bad thread titles annoy me to no end. Ideally, you feel amazing doing whatever it is you love doing that isn't posting "I quit" threads.
There is already Soup for the Soul or whatever the thread is called, you could have just made a post there that this change annoyed you and made you cancel your plans to get a GK army. Nobody would have batted an eye.
Given the incredibly emotional response you appear to have relating to this change, I think your decision to quit is a healthy one for you.
I also think the change you described is fine for balance and game health and is one of many small tweaks to the game which help foster a functional system for everyone.
If you cannot find any sufficient joy from this game unless you can run these particular models in the exact quantities you wish to, or cast all the spells you want in every game, then quitting is a reasonable decision for you.
TableTop Simulator does people a disservice, wargaming is more work than just moving models around on a computer screen and polishing your army list.
I disagree with this and I kind of hope you'll explain
Well, there's the work involved in collecting the army. This can be as easy as buying it straight of GW or some other online retailer, but often there are stock issues and you have to do more hunting. Or you buy stuff off eBay, competing for bargains. Trust me when I say in the current pandemic, getting what you want isn't guaranteed when operating over the short term. I'm sure people have had to field sub-optimal lists because of a shortage of this or that as the meta changes.
Then there's building the army, which is a job all of its own - and if you bought second hand, unless you like the paint job there's the stripping and cleaning the army. For a 2000pt list this can be as much as a month or two all on its own, depending on how OCD you want to be about it.
Then there's painting the army, which arguably the bulk of the effort. While it can be done in a few weeks for a 2000pt list if you just want the bare minimum, if you want your dudes looking half decent that's another several months of work.
Finally you have to have some means of transporting and/or storing the army - from a cardboard box to a figure case. Maybe 2 depending on how big your army/models are. And you have to carry your books and other crap as well. I've gone to tournaments carrying hard GW 3 figure cases and a backpack to have all the stuff I needed.
And maybe you want a display board if you want to display your army if the tournament has a 'best painted' competition or awards tournament points for quality of paintjob. Usually that's a minor concern but it could tip the scales on your placing in a tournament and if you go competitive you might as well hit the bare minimum to not lose out. Not every tournament is the same or runs under ITC rules.
Then maybe you decide to go to a tournament that's more than a couple hour drive away and you're arranging hotel stays because tournaments are often two or three day affairs. Suddenly tournament play costs more than buying the army in the first place.
And then you get do deal with playing on an actual table top, where dice get cocked and people are sloppy with measuring and people walk up while you're trying to concentrate and they pick up your minis without permission for a closer look and it's illegal to bash their skull in for doing so. Stuff they can't really do in TTS. And these days you might end up on somebody's web stream if you're doing well. Will that throw off your game? Poker played in person with an audience is a different experience to poker played on line.
Then you realize that the dice you use are trash because they're too small to see and scatter everywhere or are too big and keep knocking crap over or they're just so badly cast/balanced they're rolling 1 a good 30% of the time. Have you even considered the best dice to use? How about measuring? Do you use templates or whappy sticks or hard measuring tapes or soft ones? Or tracking the various crap that TTS does for you (turn/CP/VP counters).
Now you go through all these stages and you find yourself getting attached to your little dudes for all the time/effort you put into them and the experiences you have with them, and less so the list they're in. Trust me when I say you might like painting your first NDK but by the 3rd you might reconsider having 5 in your army because you're already sick of them, but you might love painting Terminators.
The only thing TTS got you attached to was your army list, because that was the only thing that was real/relevant in TTS.
Not having been a player/painter since 4th and having a little read through stuff like this really doesn't make me want to get back playing. If 40k has become a constant meta chase then I don't blame you for not wanting to play it anymore.
I'm coming back to it as I miss the painting and modeling aspect. Maybe one day I'll get a game going but until then I'll be working on my many Guard units that I never finished. I'll buy something shiny and new if it looks cool. There's more to 40k than just the games!
Emperor's Guardsman wrote: Not having been a player/painter since 4th and having a little read through stuff like this really doesn't make me want to get back playing. If 40k has become a constant meta chase then I don't blame you for not wanting to play it anymore.
I'm coming back to it as I miss the painting and modeling aspect. Maybe one day I'll get a game going but until then I'll be working on my many Guard units that I never finished. I'll buy something shiny and new if it looks cool. There's more to 40k than just the games!
_SeeD_ wrote: When you alter the CORE RULES midway through an edition,
When you say this like this is the first time they've done this rather than doing this in every edition regularly over a 25+ year period, it makes it hard to take your "10 year commitment" as a serious time frame.
Emperor's Guardsman wrote: Not having been a player/painter since 4th and having a little read through stuff like this really doesn't make me want to get back playing. If 40k has become a constant meta chase then I don't blame you for not wanting to play it anymore.
I'm coming back to it as I miss the painting and modeling aspect. Maybe one day I'll get a game going but until then I'll be working on my many Guard units that I never finished. I'll buy something shiny and new if it looks cool. There's more to 40k than just the games!
40k as a whole has never been better for casual players in a group, crusade is fantastic for narrative or casual gaming and is readily supported.
The meta chasing is a symptom of the players mentality more than the state of the game. The vocal boards etc are heavily focused on competitive play and pushing the game into an esport type situation. I'd wager 90% of people will happily throw down a game with a fair list against your guard collection regardless of it's content.
Edit: which again shows why this thread is an interesting viewpoint, as it leans so hard into the meta chasing mindset that "fun" or "casual" need not apply.
Carl wrote: This is a amazing bait post. Doesnt even have the models and complains about having to take 1 less model he doesnt even actually own lol.
Mind blowing
and yet so easy to understand!
/s
xD
I'm not even mad anymore. The feces being thrown in my general direction is just amusing.
I’m not even throwing “feces” I was being serious. I can’t help but take that as a joke and I don’t mean it to be offensive. But your complaint is about the ruining of your “10 year passion” and about how you can’t play the army to your satisfaction, which doesn’t even make sense.
Firstly, this rule affects many factions and armies, this isn’t some personal attack on you and your play style. You said you have repeatedly tweaked your list to be what you want. Why would 1 more tweak be that big of a deal? So you can only take 4 instead of 5 of one unit. Do you maybe think that with CA/new codexes on the horizon that some new cool units/compositions could come around that you may enjoy?
That being said. Like 99.9% of the people who play this game it’s a hobby and a fun escape for you. Not your job and not some massive financial investment, if you aren’t having fun or won’t be, I’m sorry to hear that. But there is no reason to stick around and do something you won’t enjoy.
RaptorusRex wrote: Ok, look at it this way. I used to play TTS40k on a regular basis, because I hadn't discovered a good FLGS. I was even in the same Discord you were, until I noticed they were unironically posting Stone Toss. That and BCB's legendary rules takes were the last straw.
TTS is not the same as the holistic IRL40k experience. IRL, only a minority of people play 40k without painting their minis, assembling them, etc. Those things are integral parts of the hobby that you won't get just playing on TTS. Do you see what I mean?
Yea I get it. TTS is not the point of emphasis here though. I want to play IRL and TTS is my only claim to gameplay exp. People would take me even less seriously if I had none.
Not sure about the others, but I take you less seriously by the virtue that all that you did was play TTS online for ten years than if you never played the game.
Dude /facepalm. No.
I JUST started playing any games within the past 6 months, including TTS. I've been an amateur student of the game for about 10 years though, you know, just pretending and gak.
I know that the image you all have of me is an ugly one, but I'm not actually trying to hurt any of you, and no I'm not a rager, jfc.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
TinyLegions wrote: I had a whole post about this, but I suspect that this guy is just a troll. Folks ignore this guy, and report him.
I'm not. And there is this really cool way of ignoring people. Just stop watching.
Every nasty thing I've said here has been a response to equally nasty things.
Emperor's Guardsman wrote: Not having been a player/painter since 4th and having a little read through stuff like this really doesn't make me want to get back playing. If 40k has become a constant meta chase then I don't blame you for not wanting to play it anymore.
I'm coming back to it as I miss the painting and modeling aspect. Maybe one day I'll get a game going but until then I'll be working on my many Guard units that I never finished. I'll buy something shiny and new if it looks cool. There's more to 40k than just the games!
40k as a whole has never been better for casual players in a group, crusade is fantastic for narrative or casual gaming and is readily supported.
The meta chasing is a symptom of the players mentality more than the state of the game. The vocal boards etc are heavily focused on competitive play and pushing the game into an esport type situation. I'd wager 90% of people will happily throw down a game with a fair list against your guard collection regardless of it's content.
Edit: which again shows why this thread is an interesting viewpoint, as it leans so hard into the meta chasing mindset that "fun" or "casual" need not apply.
Cheers, that puts a really interesting perspective on the whole thing. A journey round these forums over the last few days had really soured my idea of what 40k had become so it's quite refreshing to hear that fun play does still exist. Although, the thought of trying to take down multi would Space Marines with lasguns does slightly terrify me. They were always hard nuts to crack with just one! But from the sounds of it they're no longer GW's unbeatable favourites.
OP clearly isn't discussing in good faith. Pretty much all of OP's responses are either 'no it's not' with no further explanations or 'why are you attacking me' when no attacks are made; deflections. OP really hasn't responded to many of the positive, supportive posts here.
Emperor's Guardsman wrote: Not having been a player/painter since 4th and having a little read through stuff like this really doesn't make me want to get back playing. If 40k has become a constant meta chase then I don't blame you for not wanting to play it anymore.
I'm coming back to it as I miss the painting and modeling aspect. Maybe one day I'll get a game going but until then I'll be working on my many Guard units that I never finished. I'll buy something shiny and new if it looks cool. There's more to 40k than just the games!
40k as a whole has never been better for casual players in a group, crusade is fantastic for narrative or casual gaming and is readily supported.
The meta chasing is a symptom of the players mentality more than the state of the game. The vocal boards etc are heavily focused on competitive play and pushing the game into an esport type situation. I'd wager 90% of people will happily throw down a game with a fair list against your guard collection regardless of it's content.
Edit: which again shows why this thread is an interesting viewpoint, as it leans so hard into the meta chasing mindset that "fun" or "casual" need not apply.
Cheers, that puts a really interesting perspective on the whole thing. A journey round these forums over the last few days had really soured my idea of what 40k had become so it's quite refreshing to hear that fun play does still exist. Although, the thought of trying to take down multi would Space Marines with lasguns does slightly terrify me. They were always hard nuts to crack with just one! But from the sounds of it they're no longer GW's unbeatable favourites.
The thing is that forums attract a certain type of people. The guy having fun at their local club just playing the game while having a laugh and drinking a beer who play for the enjoyment of playing have no need to come to internet forums to talk about strategy, lists and how GW's latest changes impact the 'meta', they just play the game.
So online discussion tends to revolve entirely around competitive play and that often has a different mindset.
(and that is not to say competitive players are not fun to play against, you just need one that understands if he is playing a major tournament finals or a fun game with friends.
Cheers, that puts a really interesting perspective on the whole thing. A journey round these forums over the last few days had really soured my idea of what 40k had become so it's quite refreshing to hear that fun play does still exist. Although, the thought of trying to take down multi would Space Marines with lasguns does slightly terrify me. They were always hard nuts to crack with just one! But from the sounds of it they're no longer GW's unbeatable favourites.
Hes absolutely right. Its been years since I have done a tourney, but right now me and my friends are doing a 500 point crusade that will escalate to 2k over the next couple months. Its a absolute blast. While there are definitely representations of some of the "top tier" armies we adjust based on balance as needed and no one feels pressured to take tailored/cheese/WAAC lists.
Like any hobby or leisure activity, find a good group and the game is a absolute pleasure to play. The forums will always gravitate to a more extreme/whiny/competitive outlook. And while there are all sorts of informational posts there is a lot of negativity which really doesnt manifest in person. The "knock the board over when losing" types or the people who cant help but bring some GT winning copy pasted list to friendly play get quickly ostracized. Its why they end up being a very loud minority on boards/reddit/etc. Even if you are just showing up for the first time the average player is usually kind and helpful.
as for guard playability, we really arent in the "best place" but if you are playing for fun you can have a absolute blast and still win a fair amount. When some meta chaser wants to play just politely decline if thats not what you are looking to get out of the game.
TreeSparr wrote: OP clearly isn't discussing in good faith. Pretty much all of OP's responses are either 'no it's not' with no further explanations or 'why are you attacking me' when no attacks are made; deflections. OP really hasn't responded to many of the positive, supportive posts here.
I think we've been served a nothing burger.
Feelsbad not sure what I was thinking. Look on the bright side though - you won't be hearing from me for a while.
Cheers, that puts a really interesting perspective on the whole thing. A journey round these forums over the last few days had really soured my idea of what 40k had become so it's quite refreshing to hear that fun play does still exist. Although, the thought of trying to take down multi would Space Marines with lasguns does slightly terrify me. They were always hard nuts to crack with just one! But from the sounds of it they're no longer GW's unbeatable favourites.
You'll struggle to find discussion of casual or narrative play on this forum or indeed any forum. It's very difficult to discuss because so much of it comes down to "hey cool that's cool". People can't rant and rave for 57 pages about balance, meta, or whatever else because generally its not a massive concern and Dakka does love its rants and raves.
That being said keep an eye out for posts by PenitentJake, they often post about their narrative exploits.
TreeSparr wrote: OP clearly isn't discussing in good faith. Pretty much all of OP's responses are either 'no it's not' with no further explanations or 'why are you attacking me' when no attacks are made; deflections. OP really hasn't responded to many of the positive, supportive posts here.
I think we've been served a nothing burger.
Feelsbad not sure what I was thinking. Look on the bright side though - you won't be hearing from me for a while.
You still havent responded to anyone who replied to you with any helpful suggestions or observations though.
Cheers, that puts a really interesting perspective on the whole thing. A journey round these forums over the last few days had really soured my idea of what 40k had become so it's quite refreshing to hear that fun play does still exist. Although, the thought of trying to take down multi would Space Marines with lasguns does slightly terrify me. They were always hard nuts to crack with just one! But from the sounds of it they're no longer GW's unbeatable favourites.
You'll struggle to find discussion of casual or narrative play on this forum or indeed any forum. It's very difficult to discuss because so much of it comes down to "hey cool that's cool". People can't rant and rave for 57 pages about balance, meta, or whatever else because generally its not a massive concern and Dakka does love its rants and raves.
This. Casual players are discussing stuff with their play groups. Forum users are already a fairly niche group of 40K players(most people I've played with over the past 20 years don't interact with forums of any sort), Dakka even more so, especially with the reputation Dakka has gotten on other boards over the years.
TreeSparr wrote: OP clearly isn't discussing in good faith. Pretty much all of OP's responses are either 'no it's not' with no further explanations or 'why are you attacking me' when no attacks are made; deflections. OP really hasn't responded to many of the positive, supportive posts here.
I think we've been served a nothing burger.
Feelsbad not sure what I was thinking. Look on the bright side though - you won't be hearing from me for a while.
You still havent responded to anyone who replied to you with any helpful suggestions or observations though.
Why would they? This entire thread is the online equivalent of that person who creates problems at a social gathering and keeps loudly proclaiming that they're leaving and never coming back for an hour.
"No, I choose not to partake, and they need to know about it."
Sorry, but no, they don't. If I understand you correctly, you've been "around" for 10 years, and you've spent (at current prices) $108 on 2 packs of GK Terminators (total, all in the last 6 months), and you seem not to have played against real humans across a real table with real miniatures?
You can't quit something you never actually started.
TreeSparr wrote: OP clearly isn't discussing in good faith. Pretty much all of OP's responses are either 'no it's not' with no further explanations or 'why are you attacking me' when no attacks are made; deflections. OP really hasn't responded to many of the positive, supportive posts here.
I think we've been served a nothing burger.
Feelsbad not sure what I was thinking. Look on the bright side though - you won't be hearing from me for a while.
You still havent responded to anyone who replied to you with any helpful suggestions or observations though.
hooooly gak I just want to let go.
I don't respond to people who want to help when I don't have the heart to tell them why they're wrong. I've already thought about most of these things. Some posts confirming that maybe I shouldn't be playing and that I need a break have been met with comfort, from me. You just weren't looking for them.
as a company that is why i play so many other games (see my sig) or editions of 
