That's what made me take a peek back in. I figured the Ad Mecha and Necron books would get people talking and it's still crickets. This far into 9th there was much more activity, even if it was just outrage about something being busted or a faction being terrible.
morganfreeman wrote: It’s almost Christmas mate. Plenty of people have stuff to do around the holidays other than argue on dakka.
There are threads last updated on November 11th still on the front page of General Discussion. That's dead even for what Dakka has become these past years.
The last game I played was Sept. 17, 2019. Covid stopped me from playing, then life got in the way, then massive work overtime, then cancer, then divorce.
I'd love to comment more, but 10th kind-of deflated my hopes. There really isn't much to talk about at the moment.
It seems like there's nothing to say or speculate on. We've all seen that the codexs are the indexes, with a few more options. There's really nothing to get curious or excited about. I think a lot of folks are not playing and waiting to see if the game gives them a reason to play their favourite faction again.
I think it shows how people like to outrage but don't start a thread that says: So the new codex is actually balanced, right?
9th had an extreme codex creep beginning with the 3rd or 4th book I think (Admech?). So people had something to scream about every two weeks. 10th appears slower in its release schedule and GW seems to keep its promise so far that there aren't many changes between Codex and index.
Also legions imperialis seems to have taken a lot of dakka's attention .
So what's left to talk about? We could outrage how every new codex kills some more character models instead of replacing them (see Necrons) but we've seen that crap from GW at the start of 10th (and basically since 8th, really) So it's nothing new. Most players will just continue to use the legends Profile as well.
I think there is more to it than a lack of outrage. I get the impression that a lot of people have finally fallen off the edition release treadmill.
There has been a lot of interest in Oldhammer threads to the point the mods have noted and mooted adding a dedicated subforum. I don't think that is coincidence.
Dakka is mostly 40k driven, so things have quieted down.
10th went into a direction that made it totally uninteresting for me.
Things I dislike:
- Every unit in the game having a special rule.
- Upgrade costs included in unit profiles.
- Characters only being able to join a very specific set of units, based on their loadout.
- Characters having abilities that stop working if they don't have a unit anymore.
- Further introduction of restrictions in how you can customise your hero characters.
- Weapon profiles being highly inconsistent now between different units using the same kind of weapon.
Others may like it, but I don't. It does not feel like the game I grew up with anymore.
I'm still a fan of the setting and I do play almost every Sunday, but not 10th.
In the local club, ~15 people are actively playing our own custom ruleset and we usually have 1-3 tables every weekend. I'm happy to say that by word of mouth the homebrew was spread into two other gaming groups in completely different cities by now, which adds another ~5-6 people meeting and playing independently from us.
Since the aspects of (my) game I want to talk about are completely irrelevant for Dakka, I don't post much and only chime in if I see a discussion going into a more abstract way to talk about theoretical things.
GW legended my beloved Firstborn as soon as the SM codex dropped, making me downgrade to earlier editions of the game. With a new KT21 season kicking off early 2024 and Legion Imperialis now out, I couldn't give a toss about 10th edition. Lets see how much of a rework 11th edition will be in 3 years.
In short it's a place with a reputation for being glass half empty, it's now less than half empty and rather than endlessly complaining about stuff cyclically, people have moved on as a guess?
What was nice was that LI was better received on here and discussed than on B&C which was a bit of a whine pit by comparison.
Secondly, forums tend to be when you wanna get a "wider view" as FB groups tend to be specific i.e. faction or game.
Thirdly, forums are full of eliteist toxicity moreso than social media. So people get fed up of the constant negativity and leave.
Just go through general discussion and see all the posts about "10e is dead" "40k is rubbish" Every other post is something negative with the hobby so people who actually want to enjoy the hobby do the most sensible thing......leave and find others who actually enjoy the hobby.
Canadian 5th wrote: 10th Edition may not have killed 40k but it does seem to have killed Dakka. I've never seen the site this dead.
I just don't think many people on this forum (i.e. 40k General Discussion - the tactics forum is a bit different) are playing the game.
To a degree you could argue it was always ever thus (especially in the second half of 9th).
Its why the threads (to my mind at least) are all on theoretical points rather than "10th as 10th."
I think this was clear from release. In times past the level of Eldar Domination would produced wall to wall salt. There would have been outraged threads, threads about what should be changed, a few people arguing its fine actually just learn to play etc etc. Instead there was basically nothing. Someone I think responded with "yeah Eldar are OP, its obvious, GW will nerf them, there's nothing to say". But that was true for a decade or so and didn't stop people venting on the internet.
I mean I think the Ad Mech book is poor and the latest points speak to GW's indifference towards the faction. But I'm not really sure about starting a thread on the topic - and I'm not sure anyone else really wants to discuss it.
Dudeface wrote: In short it's a place with a reputation for being glass half empty, it's now less than half empty and rather than endlessly complaining about stuff cyclically, people have moved on as a guess?
Yeah I see plenty of 40k discussion. Just not in here.
Canadian 5th wrote: 10th Edition may not have killed 40k but it does seem to have killed Dakka. I've never seen the site this dead.
It's not 10th that's make me post less. It's just a lot of folks being rather unpleasant to talk with about 40k, and I'd rather have discussions with people who actually seem to enjoy themselves, or at least let others enjoy the game without calling their tastes "invalid".
I'm mostly chilling in the "epic show it off " thread in the gw specialist games subforum. Also i peek inte the "news and rumours" to see the upcoming releases.
Here in the 40k general discussions it seems a bit stale. I tried posting replies to thread some times but very rarely get a reply. I think I got put on ignore by most people after a particular rant or two about primaris. Either that or I just write poorly.
The threads are not that varied anymore though so it's not easy to get engaged in 40k for me.
Also i gave 10th a recent spin with a tournament participation, but it did not really raise my hype. For me it's all about epic now baby!
Canadian 5th wrote: 10th Edition may not have killed 40k but it does seem to have killed Dakka. I've never seen the site this dead.
That's been my observation as well, hence why I started the 'has 10th drained the soul of 40K'? thread. That generated quite a lot of good discussion, even from many I tend to often disagree. Never in the past have I gone half a day from looking in on Dakka's General Discussion and not seen any new posts.
Personally, I'm just having trouble finding much worth starting a thread about.
We already have multiple long threads on the first page about 10th's shortcomings. I'm not super motivated to post in Proposed Rules because I haven't gotten enough games in to feel strongly about core rule changes. Most factions don't have their full rules yet, so it feels odd making a post about a specific faction before that faction is really out. I've considered making some threads proposing drukhari rule changes, but then I keep falling down the rabbit hole of wanting to overhaul the entire faction.
There isn't much need for threads discussing OP or UP factions. We all kind of know which eldar units/mechanics are annoying and that sisters struggle to kill tanks.
The Background forum has been somewhat active. I take that to mean that people are still interested in discussing the hobby/setting but just don't have as much to say about the game itself.
Personally, the game is in a weird spot where games play pretty smoothly on the table, but also I'm struggling to get super excited by either list building (lack of options) or by the game itself (plays fine but I don't feel like I'm telling a story; possibly because the number of objectives make me focus on it being a game rather than getting into the story behind why our toy soldiers are on the planet.)
tldr; I'm just having trouble finding a ton to talk about. I recently found a discord server where I can subject people to my short thoughts that don't warrant a thread, and I haven't come up with a lot of thread-worthy thoughts lately.
There is probably a lot of reasons, 40K is kinda bad and I don’t think any other company could coast along like GW does.
But I don’t think the discussion in other places are that rich ether.
Often just more heavy moderation, or very one sided. Just try and talk to women about women in any 40K sub and ohh Boy no!
But I actually don’t think ether of that is one of the issues.
I just think for the most part 40K is boring to talk about, its failures are well documented.
The company can easily brush away its game issues.
And I think even good discussion gets bogged down so easily.
My other thoughts are more general to the hobby. Than Dakka.
I also think that the loss of the grim dark style has really impacted the setting feel, it’s more like a pure power fantasy now for primarch. So the setting discussion is often so dry, and even interesting setting discussions can be pulled into silly power level discussions.
Chaos deserves better !
SeanDavid1991 wrote: I love how people have commented first around how the negativity of views towards the hobby drive people who like the hobby away.
Then moments later people complaigning about the hobby are posting about how its the hobby's fault dakka is empty because the hobby is bad.
So this OP is your answer as to why Dakka is dieing.
I don't know. While I do prefer when we're all being more polite and constructive, there is a certain appeal to passionate disagreements. If anything, I feel like we've all been a bit more well-behaved on the whole of late. The recent silence feels unrelated, but that's just me going off of "vibes."
Being a Harlequin player there isn't much to say beyond what's in the Eldar index, for which the codex probably won't arrive until 2025. We don't have Masques anymore and GW appears to be done with the model range.
The Background forum has been somewhat active. I take that to mean that people are still interested in discussing the hobby/setting but just don't have as much to say about the game itself.
As someone who mainly inhabits the lore subforum over the last few years, I heartily second this. I honestly think the lore subforum is at least as active as it was 2 or 3 years ago, if not more over the last few months. I think this definitely supports the idea that 40k as a setting is still popular on Dakka. It really feels like it is 40k as a game that has died down in activity here.
That's what made me take a peek back in. I figured the Ad Mecha and Necron books would get people talking and it's still crickets. This far into 9th there was much more activity, even if it was just outrage about something being busted or a faction being terrible.
To be fair, those books aren't even out yet. It was a two week preorder (though unless you actually ordered them, that little fact is buried in the preview of the preorder..
Dakka is the opposite of my FLGS reality. My store has never been more popular. I never used to have trouble finding a table but now every night is full of old and new players playing 10th or KT. With the new codices dropping soon, it's the beginning of a bright 2024 here!
It really feels like it is 40k as a game that has died down in activity here.
Yeah, it's weird. I'm playing more frequently than I was in 9th. The games themselves go smoothly and are fine. I'm just kind of missing that spark of excitement.
The free wargear thing might be a factor? And the switch to enhancements. Like, we can't really go back and forth discussing the merits of cheap wargear options vs expensive ones. We can't really speculate/complain about how well different relics/traits work on different characters. We can't really debate whether sticking character X in unorthodox unit Y makes them good in a given role (because you can no longer put character X with unit Y).
I'm not sure if there's a ton of room for discussion of tactics or list building either. Like, you need to kill more vehicles? Try taking more vehicle-killing units. You're having trouble scoring secondaries? Have you tried running one of your approved action monkey units?
10th is fine, just... Quiet. And kind of limited atm. Not sure how much codexes will change that. I like what they've done with the 'nid and marine books, but things are kind of spelled out for us. If you want to run the sneaky things, here is the detachment for that. If you want to run the big things, here is the detachment for that. Here are 6 strats that do about what you'd expect. You can have a fair bit of discussion about the nitty-gritty for how to pilot a certain type of army build, but that's mostly going to be conversation between people playing the same army.
Yeah, it's weird. I'm playing more frequently than I was in 9th. The games themselves go smoothly and are fine. I'm just kind of missing that spark of excitement.
You make 10th sound like a bland-but-reliable lager
Haighus wrote: ...
There has been a lot of interest in Oldhammer threads to the point the mods have noted and mooted adding a dedicated subforum. I don't think that is coincidence. ...
What do you mean that the mods "mooted adding a dedicated subforum" for Oldhammer?
Maybe because 1st through 7th Editions are still mainline 40k and belong in this subforum, which currently isn't too crowded for it!
I guess it's also the case that HH 2.0 sort of rebooted that generation of the game and homebrew editions typically live in the Proposed Rules room.
I also agree that 10th isn't very discussion-worthy despite being decent to play, and we've pretty much said all that can be said about it here.
After taking a break through 9th edition, my Tyranid brother and Ultramarine friend are looking to get back into 40k for some basement games. Our Ork friend sadly moved away and sold his Stompa-lead army, but I've got two other old friends who might join us. They have no interest in models though, just the game, so we'll be making armies of paper minis for them.
Lastly, I just bought the 40k Apocalypse box and I'm sure after a few games I'll be looking into replacing its faction datasheets by adapting proper codices to it. The only problem I foresee is needing to replace its blast markers with tokens that account for both AP and Damage, so when the time comes I'll come here for help with a homebrew.
dewd11 wrote: Dakka is the opposite of my FLGS reality. My store has never been more popular. I never used to have trouble finding a table but now every night is full of old and new players playing 10th or KT. With the new codices dropping soon, it's the beginning of a bright 2024 here!
This.
At the local shop we have 42! People in our just started escalation league.
Everyone from people who started in the days of RT to brand new players who bought thier 1st kits last week. Old armies are being dusted off, new forces are being built....
That's 21 games being played per week & a good # of those players play more than 1 game/week - just for fun.
And there's even more people playing 40k at the shop that aren't part of this league.
That rivals the explosion we saw in 2020 once things re-opened from being shutdown thanks to Covid.
40k is not the only miniatures game actively played either.
The #1 complaint at the shop about the game/GW (other than prices)?
Product availability.
Beyond that? Everyone seems to be having a pretty good time.
Yeah, it's weird. I'm playing more frequently than I was in 9th. The games themselves go smoothly and are fine. I'm just kind of missing that spark of excitement.
You make 10th sound like a bland-but-reliable lager
That's not far off. It doesn't have some of the unique flavor I liked in their older beverages, but it also isn't putting me off like some of their old batches sometimes did. I don't get excited about the thought of sitting down to drink it, but when I do sit down to drink it, it's pretty good.
Haighus wrote: ...
There has been a lot of interest in Oldhammer threads to the point the mods have noted and mooted adding a dedicated subforum. I don't think that is coincidence. ...
What do you mean that the mods "mooted adding a dedicated subforum" for Oldhammer?
Maybe because 1st through 7th Editions are still mainline 40k and belong in this subforum, which currently isn't too crowded for it!
I guess it's also the case that HH 2.0 sort of rebooted that generation of the game and homebrew editions typically live in the Proposed Rules room.
I don't think this is a 40k thing or a 10th edition thing. 40k as a game seems bigger than it ever has been.
It's a forum thing. It's a very ancient form of communication about the hobby. Heck we've been using it for more than 20 years now.
I'm here for the first time in two years, why? I honestly forgot it existed. We have facebook, instagram, discord and they'¨re all a quick way of seeing miniatures or hobbyprojects in general. We now have tons of podcasts to listen to about our hobby as well.
I really like forums, but I'm an old man at 35 and I remember forums being THE best place. But it sort of feels like we're all hanging out at Blockbusters because we like talking and renting movies, whilst the kids are on their netflix, hbo and whatnot.
Maybe we just need to face the fact that we're old?
The mods have considered adding a new subforum dedicated to legacy 40k/oldhammer.
I like that older edition 40k threads appear alongside current editions. I probably would rarely ever click on just new edition stuff, but seeing the two is nice because sometimes I see something that's "current" but interests me.
One big mistakes of Warseer was that they over-segmented the site, which really crippled efforts to revive the site. When people see dead area after dead area, they move on. I note that we still see a trickle of new people, which is a good thing, and if they came here to argue about 10th ed. and then find themselves slipping into a freshly updated Oldhammer one above it, so much the better.
I don't really have much to add a lot of the time because I don't actively play anymore. I still feel quite bitter about how GW gutted 40k to make the bland mess that was 8th and everything since then has been lacking almost all of the gameplay elements that I enjoyed before. GW continues to be rather bad at understanding how to make complex game design so they continue to make basic and bland rulesets. Somehow they seemed to have made an edition that even the people who liked newhammer are mixed on.
So I continue to feel that dull longing to play the game I loved but it's basically impossible to find people who play older editions. Local game store feels less active for pick up games and doesn't even have a dedicated Warhammer game day anymore.
That's what made me take a peek back in. I figured the Ad Mecha and Necron books would get people talking and it's still crickets. This far into 9th there was much more activity, even if it was just outrage about something being busted or a faction being terrible.
I don't think Ad Mech or Necrons are "popular" armies in that I don't think a lot of people play them. Ad Mech is still relatively new, and Necrons have gone through a fairly chaotic roller coaster ride through their history that turned some people off.
That's what made me take a peek back in. I figured the Ad Mecha and Necron books would get people talking and it's still crickets. This far into 9th there was much more activity, even if it was just outrage about something being busted or a faction being terrible.
I don't think Ad Mech or Necrons are "popular" armies in that I don't think a lot of people play them. Ad Mech is still relatively new, and Necrons have gone through a fairly chaotic roller coaster ride through their history that turned some people off.
On the other hand there wasn't that much discussion about the SM Codex as well so I don’t think popularity of a faction is the driving factor. We had big threads about how broken Jeansdealers and Admech were when their codex released in 9th.
I'm also not sure "forums are just old" is that important, there was a lot of traffic here when 10th released, and forums were old in 8th already Btw Facebook at this point is old and mostly empty too, it's basically used for Hobby groups only (and trading I guess). It isn't helped by the fact that you get 20 ads for every post that's actually relevant.
kingpbjames wrote: @Haighus, I meant I didn't understand the use of "moot". I assumed that meant they considered and turned down the idea.
Ah! Poor moot, it has been assassinated as a word for reasons I do not know. I meant it in its older meaning of "discussion" or "meeting" rather than the way it sometimes gets used today as "closed to further discussion". Think the Entmoot from Lord of the Rings.
So mooted means considered or raised for discussion basically.
I think we're mostly older guys who don't play as much or miss older editions. I know I am! I'm mooching around Dakka but don't have much to say about 10e because I'm not gonna play it. I'm doing my own thing.
I'm pretty sure 10e is fine though, just not really my cup of tea for various mostly non-gameplay reasons.
I don't post in background as much because I dislike the new background and am bored of endless conversations about primarchs and the Horus Heresy.
But I'm doing more 40K hobbying and stuff than I have in years, just haven't been photographing and posting stuff online due to lack of time and a crappy camera.
University in the day, working as a bouncer at night. In between I weave in regeneration and training outside of what I have at school. I am also preparing for police school exams.
GK are right now are in a state, where they aren't just weak or bad, I got used to that, but they are an army that doesn't engage the enemy. It is unfun to play with, unfun to play against, because the turns take ages. With the little free time I have, I would rather play a game of AoS with my Lumineth. They aren't mind melting good, but are fun to play with and against.
I know that localy w40k just died. When before OPR was "a thing". Now it is a thing that people play all day , new and returning players come with armies from different games and ask for OPR demon games. Infinity is huge. AoS is small, but people aren't jumping ship (plus some play OPR with their AoS models). There is historicals of multiple model scale being played WWII, ancient, Napoleonic, XVII-XVIIIth century etc.
With w40k the old players aren't just interested in w40k games, and new players don't want to spend a 1000$ to be told a seson later that the army is now bad and unfun to play. There are w40k players that go to euro events, they give coaching lessons and I know that a lot of w40k moved online (no need to buy models or paint them).
Pre codex some people hoped that the index are just a stop gap and that the codex are going to be the real deal. What it turned out to be is that the codex seem to be a side grade. Ton of stuff for marines got legened and nothing drives away new player faster then seeing a WS player with a 2500pts army that has 2-3 legel models in it post codex.
W40k models are still nice, but at least localy, HH gets more hype and often it is HH stuff done by people, not by GW. And this situation seem to be wide spread, not just one or two stores, that I go to. I really worry what is going to happen in 11th, if new people don't come, then the gaming community , at least localy is going to consist of people that arer 30+ with the "new" players being mid 20s represented by me and two other dudes.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Breton 812319 11618302 wrote:
I don't think Ad Mech or Necrons are "popular" armies in that I don't think a lot of people play them. Ad Mech is still relatively new, and Necrons have gone through a fairly chaotic roller coaster ride through their history that turned some people off.
Marines made hardly a splash when their codex came out. And marines are or were popular. People just don't like the idea of GW invalidating entire armies, not fixing stuff everyone knows that should be fixed, focusing nerfs on mid tier armies for some unexaplained reason, and the "fix" to stuff being almost always, "we dropped points, now go spend another 200-300$ and hope the army is better". At some point it just turns the game in to something hard to play and that is even, if someone prints out stuff/buys used/etc.
Marines made hardly a splash when their codex came out. And marines are or were popular. People just don't like the idea of GW invalidating entire armies, not fixing stuff everyone knows that should be fixed, focusing nerfs on mid tier armies for some unexaplained reason, and the "fix" to stuff being almost always, "we dropped points, now go spend another 200-300$ and hope the army is better". At some point it just turns the game in to something hard to play and that is even, if someone prints out stuff/buys used/etc.
On the contrary, the current rules and codex design seems to be preventing the constant "omg what's the new hotness, what must we go buy now!!!!" trends that drove a lot of the conversation and hype, because remarkably, a lack of codex creep is killing off outrage and fewer people are scheming into the night to come up with "the list" due to everything in the codex being different from it's prior state. Stability in the game is creating quiet and stability in the community maybe?
Marines made hardly a splash when their codex came out. And marines are or were popular. People just don't like the idea of GW invalidating entire armies, not fixing stuff everyone knows that should be fixed, focusing nerfs on mid tier armies for some unexaplained reason, and the "fix" to stuff being almost always, "we dropped points, now go spend another 200-300$ and hope the army is better". At some point it just turns the game in to something hard to play and that is even, if someone prints out stuff/buys used/etc.
On the contrary, the current rules and codex design seems to be preventing the constant "omg what's the new hotness, what must we go buy now!!!!" trends that drove a lot of the conversation and hype, because remarkably, a lack of codex creep is killing off outrage and fewer people are scheming into the night to come up with "the list" due to everything in the codex being different from it's prior state. Stability in the game is creating quiet and stability in the community maybe?
These are not mutually exclusive. Some people may have dropped the edition at release because their old armies were moved to legends. Others may have persisted with the edition and find it is internally stable. Both could be reasons for reduced traffic simultaneously.
Dakka has a bad reputation in the community, so very little new members join, which means as older members leave for whatever reason, theres less and less discussion.
With the advent of Discord/Facebook groups, old school forums have a hard time keeping up
The decline of forums was actually a rather like minded thread recently.
As for me, I've come back to posting on dakka while I had to kill the long hours of boredom of my last months in the army, whereas welding is an actual full time job that won't let me post a lot during the day.
It doesn't bother me much that 40k discussions would lessen to be fair, as long as other games and aspects of the hobby still get attention. I've come back to recently to actually tell if these other topics have lost some activity too.
VladimirHerzog wrote: Dakka has a bad reputation in the community, so very little new members join, which means as older members leave for whatever reason, theres less and less discussion.
With the advent of Discord/Facebook groups, old school forums have a hard time keeping up
I stopped regularly posting on dakka years ago but still head here to see what rampant misery the longbeards are complaining about now. Have actively steered people away from this site if they're new and cautioned other folk to be careful what they share.
Dakkas reputation is something to be mocked in my groups which is kinda sad, I do remember coming here to be part of a community, helping new folk out occasionally and whatnot nowadays it seems the long term professional cynics are slowly running out of material (we've certainly had less long form threads to entertain us recently)
mrspadge wrote: ... Have actively steered people away from this site if they're new and cautioned other folk to be careful what they share...
Well that doesn't help the state of things. Forums are a different beast than those heavily moderated social medias. I think only Reddit rivals it in functionality but I've read far better, in-depth discussions here than any thread I've seen there.
So, Mrs. Padge has sabotaged our glorious Imperial Forum! You are past redemption, traitor!
Hand over your minis at your local Inquisition office ask mercy of the God-Emperor.
kingpbjames wrote: Forums are a different beast than those heavily moderated social medias. I think only Reddit rivals it in functionality but I've read far better, in-depth discussions here than any thread I've seen there.
I think I'd prefer a heavier hand on moderation as opposed to some of the behaviour I've seen here.
The Dakka Dive Bar is the only place you'll hear what's really going on in the underhive. Sure you might not find a good amasec but they grill a mean groxburger. Just watch for ratlings being thrown through windows and you'll be alright.
kingpbjames wrote: Forums are a different beast than those heavily moderated social medias. I think only Reddit rivals it in functionality but I've read far better, in-depth discussions here than any thread I've seen there.
I think I'd prefer a heavier hand on moderation as opposed to some of the behaviour I've seen here.
The warhammer subreddits are a horrible place to actually discuss things due to the echo chamber effect that the upvote/downvote system generates. If a thread gets popular then the brainless hive mind swarms in and downvotes anything that goes against the mob mentality. That said the main subreddits are mostly just people posting painted model pictures.
I don't find Reddit to be useful for much information beyond the most current zeitgheist. Want to know something other than the most recent release? Sorry that's hundreds of posts ago,or a carefully constructed search. Even if you do find the relevant topic,you won't get any responses because it's not at the top.
I've always considered Reddit to be the equivalent of full body cancer of forums, as no matter the subject (geopolitics, wargaming, firearms) the echo chamber effect added to the sheer douchebagness of many a poster makes the experience at best useless, at worst painful to me. Without learning much anyways.
I pretty sure I remember a few times where it came up that dakka got a surge of negativity right after warseer closed as some of its angrier posters ended up here. Although I can't assess any of this myself.
Given that 10th Ed didn't really fix any of the problems people had with the overall game or direction GW is going in during 8th/9th then presumably people are just sick of rehashing the same discussions over and over again.
There probably isn't much discussion because all the life and character has been systematically erased from 40k, leaving only a pile of brown sludge.
I'm sure it's functional but I didn't get into a setting like 40k for a game that's every bit as enjoyable and exciting as downing a bucket of wallpaper paste.
kingpbjames wrote: Forums are a different beast than those heavily moderated social medias. I think only Reddit rivals it in functionality but I've read far better, in-depth discussions here than any thread I've seen there.
I think I'd prefer a heavier hand on moderation as opposed to some of the behaviour I've seen here.
Please no. One of the nicest things about Dakka is that the mods take a largely hands-off approach.
So many other forums that are policed to a ridiculous degree by people who were given a little power and immediately started acting like little Hitlers.
It's a combination of bland core rules, bland indexes and a forum with a (well deserved) reputation for negativity and really abhorrent views.
Plus the codexes so far have been exceptionally boring and not all that interesting to talk about. They have been for the most part [Your Index + 4/5 extra detachments]. So if you're already down about your index and feel it has problems then new codexes on the horizon aren't exactly going to be a good vehicle for building hype or reigniting interest. Say what you want about 9th but seeing GW's willingness to mess with statlines and make improvements to units from their 3rd-8th edition values was legitimately exciting. As a Drukhari player how can you be excited for a future codex considering the treatment codexes have been getting so far, the Admech one especially?
"really abhorrent views"? Dakka has always had people with a wide range of views, but I haven't seen anyone advocating violence or anything here. Pretty sure they'd get moderated out.
Reddit is too much of an intentional echo chamber, though all online communities suffer from that eventually (dakka included). But it's designed in on Reddit.
I tried discord for a while for RPG stuff. But a more obnoxious and monetised version of IRC is not really appealing to me, forums have a different purpose.
Da Boss wrote: "really abhorrent views"? Dakka has always had people with a wide range of views, but I haven't seen anyone advocating violence or anything here. Pretty sure they'd get moderated out.
Reddit is too much of an intentional echo chamber, though all online communities suffer from that eventually (dakka included). But it's designed in on Reddit.
I tried discord for a while for RPG stuff. But a more obnoxious and monetised version of IRC is not really appealing to me, forums have a different purpose.
Anything with an Algorithm will turn into an echo chamber by design. Anything with an upvote system will facilitate this internally.
Forums insofar don't suffer from it, but are also not really monetisable due to the fact of engagement being facilitateable through algorithms ergo advert exposure.
I don't feel dakka's particularly home to many wierdos, they might be a few, or some insufferable posters, but by and large i feel discussions remain quite civil ans reasonable, if sometimes heated.
Sim-Life wrote: Given that 10th Ed didn't really fix any of the problems people had with the overall game or direction GW is going in during 8th/9th then presumably people are just sick of rehashing the same discussions over and over again.
There was a pretty active thread about whether 10th had destroyed the spirit of the game.
It seems to me that traffic also moves here depending on where the good discussion topic are. The 40k forums will be hopping if someone has something interesting to say, but it will cool down if there aren't any good discussions.
I do think "edition fatigue" is something of a thing, and the fact that the game has weathered 10 editions kind of dampens enthusiasm. Back in the day, when people thought there might be a "definitive" edition, I sensed a lot more passion.
I'm certain edition fatigue will be a thing, in the sense that in the end, it doesn't seem to me that the core philosophy of GW about the successive editions of 40k actually change, so at heart, what has been broadly said for 8th and 9th remain relatively similar safe for rules specific, which, considering the very simple frame of 10th rules, is probably not as arcane as it used to be. Criticism (bad or constructive) drains the most ink but when you end up repeating the same stuff over and over again there comes a moment when there isn't much left to talk about.
40k drives a wargaming forum anyway I guess. By virtue of being the most well known. Although there are so many other cool games and aspects of our hobby that don't need to be GW tied but those don't get nearly enough attention, alas.
On the contrary, the current rules and codex design seems to be preventing the constant "omg what's the new hotness, what must we go buy now!!!!" trends that drove a lot of the conversation and hype, because remarkably, a lack of codex creep is killing off outrage and fewer people are scheming into the night to come up with "the list" due to everything in the codex being different from it's prior state. Stability in the game is creating quiet and stability in the community maybe?
Index comes out, all the classic marines in it. Scouts really good, RAS really good, people swarm out to buy them for the new edition, which isn't easy with how bad GW supply is. Other people buy in to the new termintors and sterguards with their new good rules. Codex comes out. Classic marine stuff removed, bike armies dead (am not sure how this is around the world, but here Mounted Combat of any kind has a TON of fans, no matter what game), new terminators nerfed, new sternguard nerfed. The "chapter" detachments half are bad, one is good, armies to be played are same looking. No bone thrown to BA/DA/SW, no one wants to invest in to The Way to play SW, out of fear that TWC will suffer the fate of bikers. Although the no one is no one outside of people who really want to play SW at tournaments.
Lack of codex creep is always a thing in early 3-4 books of any edition, or at least that was the case in 8th and 9th. That is why the initial power level and options of early books are so important, because if they are mid for early edition, they will be very bad by the end of it, especialy when the crazy books start to come out. Also you know what is the most stable thing? Death, death is the most stable thing. When enough people decide that an edition is the way it is, and the hype dies, then all the non super fans leave, and if the state continious for long enough even the super fans start to leave too. It happened to other hobbies, it can happen to GW games too.
WFB was like that, and had a huge entry cost for new players too. And w40k seems to oddly mirror that. How much does it cost to start a votan army. GW "fixing" of stuff seems to not to get in to rules, the thing that most often is the real problem, but they rather throw a blanket of "free" 200pts on an army and call it a day. But those 200pts aren't free from the players perspective, at least not as far money goes. Now I am sure GW loves the fact that people need to buy more and that their collections get invalidated. But at some point, especialy when people can't buy the stuff that is non optional to play an army, a lot of people will just quit or start buying recasts etc. But recasts often make people leave GW games and jump on to stuff like OPR, or play games they can play at 1/4th or even 1/5th of the cost of a w40k army. And unlike with a 1000$+ investment, switching it up or even dropping a 150-250$ investment does not sting as much.
Please no. One of the nicest things about Dakka is that the mods take a largely hands-off approach.
So many other forums that are policed to a ridiculous degree by people who were given a little power and immediately started acting like little Hitlers.
Well there are subreddits which are heavy moderated, even extremly moderated. They are fun to read, but not that fun to engage with Sigmarxism is one of the best things one can read for either trying to wake up or to have a good chuckle. Although if one wants to real insanity expiriance any longer existing Star Wars or Marvel/DC reddits is the best. Dakka is the same kind of echo chamber as any other places that has practicaly no new users coming. I mean to a degree, I don't even think we have to post long threads. We could just do a 1/2 or agree/disagree posts, and we more or less know what other people would write/say/think. Dakka is good for enjoyment, looking at models painted by other people and this is probably just for me personaly, to see how english is used properly.
Always think the echo chamber nature of social media is a bit oversstated. Always seems to me the algorithm is more likely to throw people who hate eachother up against eachother than keep them away!
I never really posted much here due to the overwhelming negativity. I mostly stop by to read the Ork tactics thread, and hyperbole like "10e destroyed the spirit of the game" makes me nope right back out again. I'm a veteran of Warseer as well, and while that was bad, I also remember a lot more enthusiasm and creative posts between the whining and raging. In comparison, Dakka often feels like a handful of Grognards circling the drain. In the meantime, the 40K community is growing and I'm certainly enjoying 10e a lot more than 9e, so I just take my hobby joy elsewhere.
As someone who used post regularly, but now does so rarely, I'll say that the reason is that 40k has moved beyond me. The 9th edition CSM codex left me cold, and 10th hasn't fixed any of the issues that caused that. I'm perfectly happy playing 30k. I honestly don't care what happens in 40k anymore, and the lack of posts proves that.
vipoid wrote: I have to say that I'm puzzled by the echo chamber accusation.
I can think of very few threads where there has been any sort of unanimous opinion.
It's a complaining against the generally lightly moderated Dakka. Basically, some people expect a heavily moderated board that reflects their overall positive reflection of current 40k. Their feelings are hurt if they see otherwise. Thus the complaints about "negativity" on Dakka .
vipoid wrote: I have to say that I'm puzzled by the echo chamber accusation.
I can think of very few threads where there has been any sort of unanimous opinion.
It's a complaining against the generally lightly moderated Dakka. Basically, some people expect a heavily moderated board that reflects their overall positive reflection of current 40k. Their feelings are hurt if they see otherwise. Thus the complaints about "negativity" on Dakka .
I think Dakka is fine. Milder than Warseer, but I liked dropping in before it died. (Warseer also had a politics forum, which was something else, let me tell you.)
As to posting, it seems to have a fair pace - some threads churn along with people posting in real time, others are the ones where you post, go away, and come back and see the replies.
In addition to the rise of social media, I think two other factors are in play. The first is that the internet isn't new. Forums were these cool things where you can meet up with fans of obscure games from around the world. Your current teenage/new gamer has never not had internet, or been without social media. So like anything else, it's taken for granted.
But for people of a certain age, forums were an outlet and if you go back 20 years, many of the users joining up were ones whose connection was finally decent enough to enable steady use, or who used computers for work and didn't realize forums were even a thing.
The other aspect is that GW is just doing less. Go back 20 years and you had 40k, WHFB and LotR, the Specialist Games were still fresh and active, 30k was emerging, etc.
Within those lines the movement was considerable. The shift from 2nd to 4th editions of 40k was huge, with major new factions, changes to core mechanics, lots to talk about. Similarly going from 5th to 7th WFHB was signfiicant. The game went from units that rarely broke 16 models into the fabled Death Stars. Card-based magic to dice.
LotR releases were also anticipated because stuff was coming out that wasn't in the movies.
Add in the constant price hikes, staff departures, rumors of financial disaster, and it literally was Interesting Times.
Now? Not so much, which is why I think the artisanal threads and minor games see so much traffic.
Yeah, he nailed a fair few things. But I also would tend to agree on your commentary about negativity being mostly a consequence of freer speech on dakka. This time as opposed to, for example discord servers. While I'm not on a wargaming discord, I'm on a few others were people with diverging views tend to quickly get silenced, mobbed, or banned, so in the end yeah, pretty much everyone left vibes the same way.
One difference I have noticed is in how the P&M board is used. My perception is that the numbers of conversion threads has dropped off a lot. It might be getting picked up by bigger traffic in P&M blogs, but maybe not. A gradual casualty of the "no model no rules" and the dropping of a lot of options in the newer kits perhaps? Or I just have rose tinted specs
vipoid wrote: I have to say that I'm puzzled by the echo chamber accusation.
I can think of very few threads where there has been any sort of unanimous opinion.
It's a complaining against the generally lightly moderated Dakka. Basically, some people expect a heavily moderated board that reflects their overall positive reflection of current 40k. Their feelings are hurt if they see otherwise. Thus the complaints about "negativity" on Dakka .
And the "abhorrent views" too. JFC, that one was a knee slapper...
Oh noes, someone said some bad things about Senpai GW!
Flinty wrote: One difference I have noticed is in how the P&M board is used. My perception is that the numbers of conversion threads has dropped off a lot. It might be getting picked up by bigger traffic in P&M blogs, but maybe not. A gradual casualty of the "no model no rules" and the dropping of a lot of options in the newer kits perhaps? Or I just have rose tinted specs
No, you're right. I'm an avid converter and have seen a major dropoff of quantity of conversions online. When you see Primaris Captain #13 for the nth time online it tends to get a bit repetitive and just highlights the homogenisation of (IMO), one of the best aspects of this hobby.
Modern GW models are intended to discourage kitbashing and conversion most of the time as are there rules (from what I know) but there are still kits aimed at that sort of thing being produced for stuff like Stargrave, Frostgrave and Oathmark.
Some great kitbashing and conversion being done in the non-Peter Jackson inspired LOTR wargaming blogs around.
Da Boss wrote: Modern GW models are intended to discourage kitbashing and conversion most of the time as are there rules (from what I know) but there are still kits aimed at that sort of thing being produced for stuff like Stargrave, Frostgrave and Oathmark.
Some great kitbashing and conversion being done in the non-Peter Jackson inspired LOTR wargaming blogs around.
Actually making me realise I haven't bought any new model from GW for at least the past 2 to 3 years, got everything second hand.
But that's sad to here that the new kits discourage conversions...
Complete tripe. You can still absolutely kitbash, you just can't swap Marine torso and legs anymore which is apparently the only thing that counts as kitbashing.
Commissar von Toussaint wrote: But for people of a certain age, forums were an outlet and if you go back 20 years, many of the users joining up were ones whose connection was finally decent enough to enable steady use, or who used computers for work and didn't realize forums were even a thing.
I think I joined my first forums back in 2001 in middle school when I started to have fairly regular access to the internet. Many of those forums are long gone now and the few that are left have often whittled their active members down to a fraction of what they had at their peak.
Gert wrote: Complete tripe. You can still absolutely kitbash, you just can't swap Marine torso and legs anymore which is apparently the only thing that counts as kitbashing.
Gert wrote: Complete tripe. You can still absolutely kitbash, you just can't swap Marine torso and legs anymore which is apparently the only thing that counts as kitbashing.
Well done for once again not reading what was written as you come in swinging wildly again... No one said you cannot convert nor kitbash. Try again.
Sure, they said GW actively discourages it, which I call bull.
Conversion articles are in WD, converted armies are featured on WarCom and in Battle Report.
Most Infantry kits for 40k armies are still easily able to swap heads, arms, and assorted gubbins (pads, packs, accessories).
Upgrade kits are plastic rather than resin or metal.
Just because there aren't conversion guides in the Codex like 3rd Edition or whatever doesn't mean GW is trying to stop people from doing it.
The only reason I could even partially agree to the idea that GW isn't encouraging kitbashing is NMNR but that is so haphazardly applied to ranges and models that I don't view it as such a drive.
Gert wrote: Complete tripe. You can still absolutely kitbash, you just can't swap Marine torso and legs anymore which is apparently the only thing that counts as kitbashing.
Speaking of complete tripe....
I sat down to build the new Terminators a few weeks ago, got through 2 (of 5) and haven't gone back to them since. They have 5-piece legs, but only go together one way, and only fit with one specific torso.
GW infantry models just aren't fun to build anymore. They're a jigsaw puzzle with too many parts for not enough customisability.
H.B.M.C. wrote: I sat down to build the new Terminators a few weeks ago, got through 2 (of 5) and haven't gone back to them since. They have 5-piece legs, but only go together one way, and only fit with one specific torso.
GW infantry models just aren't fun to build anymore. They're a jigsaw puzzle with too many parts for not enough customisability.
Oh absolutely.
I hate building most modern infantry.
If you think the termies are bad? Avoid building AoS Fyre Slayers. I joke that it should be a crime to cut a Dwarf into that many pieces.
One Dwarf you'll be gluing his toes on. The next you'll have to assemble a left but cheek vaguely connected to the right armpit.... WTF??
And while alot of this stuff only goes together 1 way? That does NOT mean you can't kitbash it (not even the worst examples).
You just have to pretty much fully assemble it 1st, THEN cut it back apart as you please. After that it's just cutting trimming & greenstuff work same as its always been.
Gert wrote: Complete tripe. You can still absolutely kitbash, you just can't swap Marine torso and legs anymore which is apparently the only thing that counts as kitbashing.
Speaking of complete tripe....
I sat down to build the new Terminators a few weeks ago, got through 2 (of 5) and haven't gone back to them since. They have 5-piece legs, but only go together one way, and only fit with one specific torso.
GW infantry models just aren't fun to build anymore. They're a jigsaw puzzle with too many parts for not enough customisability.
Putting together infantry models used to take a few minutes per model for me and it was great to be able to clip out all the bodies, legs, etc, glue them to bases or put the two body halves together while you got on with cleaning up the other bits, then experiment with different options for posing, equipment, etc. Now it just takes so long because you have to treat every single model individually, finding the right parts on the sprues and deciphering the instructions. No two models ever seem to go together the same. That alone has led to build times more than doubling for me. Then there's all the tactical rocks and "dynamic" poses, that mean your models ironically end up looking much more uniform than they previously did. For example, the new JP Intercessors are all jumping off rocks or surging forward in distinctive poses. That's fine(ish) for the first 5. Want more than that? They're all going to look really, really obviously the same. Combine that with the difficulty in making major adjustments to those poses, and I find many newer GW armies look less interesting than older ones where the individual models may have been more restricted in posing, but the overall effect was much, much better.
As a practical example of the annoyance of the modern models, I was "converting" the new Gravis Apothecary to a Deathwatch one, which is just a simple shoulder pad swap. I did it with the 8th edition Intercessors who had moulded pads attached to the arms and it wasn't too bad - a few minutes with a knife to carve the old pad off was all it took. The new Apothecary? Hell no. His arm is attached at the elbow to the main body, then the shoulder pad sits precariously on top of that lower arm assembly, attached by a small strip of plastic, so it can be slotted over the should joint on the main body. So I had to glue the whole thing up, wait for it to dry, then carefully carve away without removing too much of the support post beneath and being careful that the weird elbow joint remained intact while avoiding damaging the cable that goes from the specimen jar he's carrying to his backpack. (Aside: why is that jar attached to his backpack? Isn't that a really bad idea in combat?) It wasn't too bad, but every single part of the procedure just left me wondering what the hell was going on with the build design on these things. I know it's all done by computers now, but at some point some human intervention might be good. The computer that decided Mephiston's cloak needed a tiny sliver of extra material to be separate at the back needs its hard drive reformatted and consigned to a life of monitoring the office coffee machine.
Gert wrote: Complete tripe. You can still absolutely kitbash, you just can't swap Marine torso and legs anymore which is apparently the only thing that counts as kitbashing.
Speaking of complete tripe....
I sat down to build the new Terminators a few weeks ago, got through 2 (of 5) and haven't gone back to them since. They have 5-piece legs, but only go together one way, and only fit with one specific torso.
GW infantry models just aren't fun to build anymore. They're a jigsaw puzzle with too many parts for not enough customisability.
My understanding is the weird pieces and combinations were done to make it harder for recasters and 3d printers to copy the GW product. but in all honesty most good 3d print designers have better designs than GW has now anyway.
Slipspace wrote: The computer that decided Mephiston's cloak needed a tiny sliver of extra material to be separate at the back needs its hard drive reformatted and consigned to a life of monitoring the office coffee machine.
Must be the same computer that did the first lots of Ten Thunders for Wyrd and had Yan-Lo's beard be a separate piece...
Dakkadakka follows exactly the same path as another dedicated forum in my country (it's the french equivalent of Dakkadakka). I've been present on this forum for over 15 years and I hardly ever go there anymore. Why ? Because it's become a nest of boomers (not in age, but in terms of mentality, it has).
Discussions have become sterile because they all revolve around the modern direction taken by GW games. Not that GW games are free of flaws, quite the opposite, and I have plenty of criticisms of my own. But the criticisms I read sound old to such an extent that I don't recognize myself in them. Most of the people I talk to think that scenarios with objectives are abominations, I don't. Many of them miss the days of the 2nd edition, which had a more "role-playing" feel to it, not me (not only am I too young to have experienced it, but I don't see the point of it compared to a real role-playing game). They regret that GW follows its games much more actively (dataslate, metawatch, etc) because it changes "too often", not me. They vilify tournament players (I'm not one, mind you), which for them is a catch-all term encompassing both real competitors and players looking to optimize their list (with comments almost identical to those of the author of the mind-boggling topic "Worried about tournament players at my store").
I've even read on this forum that Youtube (they're fixated on Youtube as a social media which already shows the old man mentality) was absolute evil because it made netlisting very easy (and that Youtube only encouraged optimization which ruined their childhood hobby). Needless to say many of them hate Goonhammer with passion. Come.on.
I'm even more puzzled because a sizeable proportion of its aging population attribute all these ills to the Americans and their influence on the game, and to the toxicity of the American spirit, which is said to be naturally oriented towards competition (whereas, as I still hang around Dakkadakka, I can see that the criticisms levelled at GW games are largely identical and are also voiced by many Americans).
And Dakkadakka follows the same path. Slowly but surely. But why ? Because it's simply a generation gap.
When we disagree on what GW games, miniatures, etc should be, something so fundamental, what meaningful discussion can we have together ? Dakkadakka is negativity incarnated, as is the other forum I'm talking about. But that's to be expected since many, many of its users dislike the modern direction taken by GW games.
But I'm tired of that because I don't share this sentiment. So I decided to look elsewhere, to find other communities that would better meet my expectations.
aphyon wrote: My understanding is the weird pieces and combinations were done to make it harder for recasters and 3d printers to copy the GW product. but in all honesty most good 3d print designers have better designs than GW has now anyway.
Dakka has become a home for old people hating on a game the don't even play anymore.
Most regular posters here are so far detached from the game that they can't even play armchair-general anymore. A good number of them are blatantly lying about their experience with newer editions, unaware that anyone with any real experience can tell easily. They never get tired complaining about both the things that change and the things that don't change, repeating the same pet-peeves over and over like a broken record. Rejecting all change, they instead hate those willing to adapt as traitors.
A small hand full happily plays old editions, Horus Heresy or homebrews, but not the same ones, so there is little to nothing to talk about for them. They are joined by a bunch of bitter ones which also like old editions, but are unable to find games for them, despite being great people to play with (according to themselves).
Many pillars of the community have been driven out by people dog-piling on them for actually liking the thing they do in their free time. Rumor mongers were called frauds and accused of faking until they stopped posting. Thinly veiled personal attacks, gaslighting, arguments in bad faith and rampant racism have driving out pretty much all people generating worthwhile content, as well as many others. Real discussions have disappeared from dakka years ago.
With content being reduced to the same three discussions going in circles, new players have no interest in wasting their time here when lots of interesting and new content is easily available on other platforms.
Speaking of, some of the most toxic people never tire to claim how great and perfect dakka is and how all new platforms are terrible, failing to reflect upon themselves to understand that the self-moderations mechanisms of those platforms are punishing them for good reasons.
The one remaining mod who actually cared for the 40k forums in the last couple of years never stood a chance and instead struggles to punish trivial violations of the ancient forum rules which today sound just as ridiculous as woman's rights from the 50s.
There also is zero drive from the page owners to invest anything into dakka beyond the bare minimum. Web standards like easy image uploads, sharing media and mobile compatibility would greatly enhance the page, but are missing.
For all these reasons, dakka is slowly but steadily dying. And despite me spending years here, I will honestly and truly rejoice on the day dakkadakka.com will offline for good. The only thing missed will be the ork emojis.
Congratulations, denizens of dakka, you killed your own hobby.
Thinly veiled personal attacks, gaslighting, arguments in bad faith and rampant racism have driving out pretty much all people generating worthwhile content, as well as many others. Real discussions have disappeared from dakka years ago.
Pardon?
Unless you're referring to racism against Xenos, I think I'm going to have to ask for some evidence for that one.
I actually think the moderation has improved on dakka, just thin and a small team.
I would probably chat with them more on issues if I didn’t feel bad for how much work it must generate.
On to 40K honestly I think some of the issues is they take so long to catch up to modern standards, that it is still stagnating a fair bit.
They barely touch any of there interesting themes or ideas, and settle for rather boring tropes and fantasy.
40K has a lot of words saying nothing, and when they have some good ideas they often leave them for years. Waiting for a mini team to get a idea to sell.
Apple fox wrote: I actually think the moderation has improved on dakka, just thin and a small team.
I would probably chat with them more on issues if I didn’t feel bad for how much work it must generate.
We are woefully understaffed and yes, coverage right now is spotty to put it generously, but I'd rather people keep on filing reports and sending in what ails them if they feel they need to say something instead of letting things fester.
On topic, 10th edition has killed my interest in 40k for the time being, though this is coming from a Guard player, so yeah. ?
Thinly veiled personal attacks, gaslighting, arguments in bad faith and rampant racism have driving out pretty much all people generating worthwhile content, as well as many others. Real discussions have disappeared from dakka years ago.
Pardon?
Unless you're referring to racism against Xenos, I think I'm going to have to ask for some evidence for that one.
I don't know about "rampant" but there was a thread recently about model diversity that had some uh, phrenologists, explaining that yes, at 28mm scale, there would be pronounced facial differences between different races and just painting models with varying skin tones would be the ACTUAL racism.
Dakkadakka follows exactly the same path as another dedicated forum in my country (it's the french equivalent of Dakkadakka). I've been present on this forum for over 15 years and I hardly ever go there anymore. Why ? Because it's become a nest of boomers (not in age, but in terms of mentality, it has).
Discussions have become sterile because they all revolve around the modern direction taken by GW games. Not that GW games are free of flaws, quite the opposite, and I have plenty of criticisms of my own. But the criticisms I read sound old to such an extent that I don't recognize myself in them. Most of the people I talk to think that scenarios with objectives are abominations, I don't. Many of them miss the days of the 2nd edition, which had a more "role-playing" feel to it, not me (not only am I too young to have experienced it, but I don't see the point of it compared to a real role-playing game). They regret that GW follows its games much more actively (dataslate, metawatch, etc) because it changes "too often", not me. They vilify tournament players (I'm not one, mind you), which for them is a catch-all term encompassing both real competitors and players looking to optimize their list (with comments almost identical to those of the author of the mind-boggling topic "Worried about tournament players at my store").
I've even read on this forum that Youtube (they're fixated on Youtube as a social media which already shows the old man mentality) was absolute evil because it made netlisting very easy (and that Youtube only encouraged optimization which ruined their childhood hobby). Needless to say many of them hate Goonhammer with passion. Come.on.
I'm even more puzzled because a sizeable proportion of its aging population attribute all these ills to the Americans and their influence on the game, and to the toxicity of the American spirit, which is said to be naturally oriented towards competition (whereas, as I still hang around Dakkadakka, I can see that the criticisms levelled at GW games are largely identical and are also voiced by many Americans).
And Dakkadakka follows the same path. Slowly but surely. But why ? Because it's simply a generation gap.
When we disagree on what GW games, miniatures, etc should be, something so fundamental, what meaningful discussion can we have together ? Dakkadakka is negativity incarnated, as is the other forum I'm talking about. But that's to be expected since many, many of its users dislike the modern direction taken by GW games.
But I'm tired of that because I don't share this sentiment. So I decided to look elsewhere, to find other communities that would better meet my expectations.
Oh hey, salut l'ami! Happy to have french references here.
Never was much on french forums, only read it way back for modelling and tacticas but they were already mostly old and offline S
@Jidmah why are you even posting in here in that case? I lmean, if you're THAT bitter about this forum, that sounds at least somewhat masochistic.
I will agree that this website is near impossible to read and write on a phone, so I typically don't.
And also, yes a lot of people play old editions and their own homebrews but there's enough crossplay that they chime in on the main game. After all, if GW does finally have a great idea, I'm sure many would want to add it to their homebrew.
I'm not going to dispute the claims of a vet with almost 20k posts but being doom and gloom about the forum is just as bad as being negative or cynical about the hobby. The difference is that GW is the evil empire and we are the peasants.
Some people like a healthy dose of cynicism, some don't, takes all sorts as they say. If forums are just here for cynical ol grognards harking back to their day then I'm for it.
kingpbjames wrote: I will agree that this website is near impossible to read and write on a phone, so I typically don't.
I don't find that to be the case at all. I do most of my interaction with dakka on my phone. It's clearly not optimized for mobile, but it's still usable, at least for me.
Congratulations, denizens of dakka, you killed your own hobby.
Only if your hobby is bitching about a game you don't play....
MY hobby? Is playing miniatures games. I don't need Dakka for that.
Plus its not like GW is the hobby by itself. Most true wargamers will have some sort of interest in besides 40k. In fact, maybe if the wargaming scene was less GW centered it would probably be way more cheerful, and not in the cringe fashion.
True Wargamer is anyone who wants to be part of the war gaming hobby, if just playing 40K or lots of other games.
I don’t think it makes someone less legitimate within the hobby.
But I do think 40K and GW itself being so dominant in the hobby is a big detriment as a whole.
For anyone having issues with the site on a mobile device I highly recommend not using the dakkalite/mobile friendly theme but one of the others. Ironic I know but it works better for me, no tiny text.
If you do not know how to change theme, its a button on the second header called 'switch theme', should be the extreme right hand one.
aphyon wrote: My understanding is the weird pieces and combinations were done to make it harder for recasters and 3d printers to copy the GW product. ...
While admittedly not having access to the inner workings of the GW design studio, I would be confident in saying that's not the reason. For one, it doesn't do that. For two, the real reason for it is apparent from looking at the models themselves... They stopped sculpting for a specific parts count in plastic, and instead started designing models to be as detailed as possible and then cutting them up into as many pieces as is necessary to cast the end result in plastic. The huge number of parts and weird join lines are a side effect of that. The end result is plastic models that look as good as metal models... but that are fiddly to build and less simple to customise.
Although it's possibly worth pointing out that fiddly plastic models are still easier to kitbash than the metal models that many of us started with.
I wonder if part of the problem there is that many of the current community are new enough to have missed the metal conversion period, and so the skills needed to do those sorts of conversions aren't showcased as much, leading to people just not knowing it's actually a thing. Maybe it's time to start boosting threads in the P&M section featuring green stuff work...
ingtaer wrote: For anyone having issues with the site on a mobile device I highly recommend not using the dakkalite/mobile friendly theme but one of the others. Ironic I know but it works better for me, no tiny text.
If you do not know how to change theme, its a button on the second header called 'switch theme', should be the extreme right hand one.
Hope that helps.
I would second this. I use the regular Dakka 2012 theme on my phone.
IIRC, the mobile theme wasn't a complete mobile site build, it was just the regular theme with a lot of the extra bits and pieces stripped out or tucked behind links to increase screen real estate and boost loading time, as that was the best that Lego had the programming time for, and it's always been a little buggy.
ingtaer wrote: For anyone having issues with the site on a mobile device I highly recommend not using the dakkalite/mobile friendly theme but one of the others. Ironic I know but it works better for me, no tiny text.
If you do not know how to change theme, its a button on the second header called 'switch theme', should be the extreme right hand one.
Hope that helps.
I concur, I used to struggle but some day randomly put on the orange dakka theme and suddenly it got better
Apple fox wrote: True Wargamer is anyone who wants to be part of the war gaming hobby, if just playing 40K or lots of other games.
I don’t think it makes someone less legitimate within the hobby.
But I do think 40K and GW itself being so dominant in the hobby is a big detriment as a whole.
Eh. It is what it is. Sure, 40k draws a lot of the attention. And if you let it it'll seem to be the only thing played.
But that's why it's important to play other, non-GW stuff, at the shops. Even if it starts out small with just you & one friend playing BTech, or some WWII game, or MCP etc every few weeks.
You've got to be seen playing & having fun with non-40k/GW in order to attract more players.
I don't think it's a detriment to the hobby overall, but it certainly is a double-edged sword. I think their size means that very few other games can gain purchase or enough of a market share to force GW to compete, and as a result those smaller games can be crippled by one or two big mistake (look at where Warmachine and X-Wing are now). GW, on the other hand, is big enough (now) to weather the occasional flop, and even when they weren't, things that might have killed them (Gorkamorka) still didn't, and they pulled through. They do force the industry to compete, even if the reverse isn't true. How many not-Contrast paint lines are there now? GW found a market to exploit, and other groups lined up to follow them. That, in turn, gives the rest of us a greater choice.
As for the main thrust of this thread, yes, Internet forums are old hat. I've been posting on them since... what... '96? '97? And before forums it was Guestbooks, because that was the rudimentary systems we had. People are more moving to things like Discord, but Discord is a useful tool to me, not a primary means of communication. I have never liked live chat, even from when I first started using the internet. It's linier. Analogue. It's one continuous stream without any real structure, unlike a forum that has specific topics that you can check up on and leave alone and come back to. I mean, my user name is what it is specifically because of what we had before forums, and before separate threads for topics of even separate sub-forums.
I don't think they'll go away specifically - I mean Redditt is huge and that's basically a forum, even if it is a different style - and forums still exist heavily for information gathering (technical support and whatnot). What it means for places like Dakka? I dunno. I've been here a long time, seen many people come and go, and I've never noticed any particular dead times (certainly dead sub-forums). I maintain that a lull in activity now might because of the new edition, the fact that it was a complete reset, and the fact that because most armies don't have their new Codices that they have been "solved" from a efficiency and competitive standpoint, so there's not much more to discuss. I think this will change.
I certainly don't think this place is any more negative. If anything there are far fewer multi-page arguments. Ah... for the days where we had 3 massive threads in a row on whether Siren worked on Grey Knights. Those were the days!
Da Boss wrote: Don't pull your punches, because you come across as really well rounded and not at all bitter cheering for the death of the website.
For the record, Jid was precisely the type of person I was referring to in this post. In fact, I knew that eventually he'd show up in this thread to give us another morose diatribe gaking all over Dakka. It was, in a lot of ways, inevitable.
Basically the most negative people here seem to always be the ones complaining about how negative everything is. It's like screaming about how much you hate the colour red whilst throwing buckets of red paint at everything around you.
I see a lot of people here talking about how 10th killed their interesting 40k, and I want to know why that is, because I can't believe it was any great love for the top-heavy nightmare that was 9th edition.
Is it is because of the reset, and that if you don't know any of the 4 armies that have received books yet you really don't have much to play with right now? Or is it something else?
10th rejuvenated my interest in 40k, after skipping out most of 8th (pandemic) and finding myself unwilling to deal with the mess of 9th. I'm itching to play the game, even if I'm only really concentrating on 'Nids and Marines. Plus it gives me an excuse to use all the damned terrain I've accumulated/built over the years.
H.B.M.C. wrote: I see a lot of people here talking about how 10th killed their interesting 40k, and I want to know why that is, because I can't believe it was any great love for the top-heavy nightmare that was 9th edition.
Is it is because of the reset, and that if you don't know any of the 4 armies that have received books yet you really don't have much to play with right now? Or is it something else?
10th rejuvenated my interest in 40k, after skipping out most of 8th (pandemic) and finding myself unwilling to deal with the mess of 9th. I'm itching to play the game, even if I'm only really concentrating on 'Nids and Marines. Plus it gives me an excuse to use all the damned terrain I've accumulated/built over the years.
The thread about 10th killing interest ran for pages and pages. Some was posting on it!
H.B.M.C. wrote: I see a lot of people here talking about how 10th killed their interesting 40k, and I want to know why that is, because I can't believe it was any great love for the top-heavy nightmare that was 9th edition.
Is it is because of the reset, and that if you don't know any of the 4 armies that have received books yet you really don't have much to play with right now? Or is it something else?
10th rejuvenated my interest in 40k, after skipping out most of 8th (pandemic) and finding myself unwilling to deal with the mess of 9th. I'm itching to play the game, even if I'm only really concentrating on 'Nids and Marines. Plus it gives me an excuse to use all the damned terrain I've accumulated/built over the years.
I could see Marine fans mad that their non-Primaris options are getting pushed out to pasture. I know that makes me even less likely to play than I already have been.
H.B.M.C. wrote: I see a lot of people here talking about how 10th killed their interesting 40k, and I want to know why that is, because I can't believe it was any great love for the top-heavy nightmare that was 9th edition.
10th is the first edition I haven't bought the BRB and SM book upon release. 9th was a grind and I only played a bit in the beginning phases, but I came into it with some hope after 8th. I actually enjoyed a good bit of 8th, rocky as it was.
10th makes it incredibly clear that the game is going in directions too far from my tastes for me to invest more in it beyond the inertia I have of continuing to paint the models I already have. Between the legending of classic units, the removal of points for upgrades, combined with fatigue regarding GW practices, plus a number of other things, I'm basically sitting this one out. I have one game of 10th loosely scheduled to play, but then I'll be doing older editions, OPR, or experimenting with custom alternatives. All GW purchases have stopped, and locally I no longer advocate for their products and instead advocate for alternatives.
I've only been on here a few years, joining when I got back into 40K with 8th Ed. I had played from 2nd to 6th Ed inclusive. I thought Dakka was a fun alternative and a good place to see news and exchange ideas as I re-entered the game. Since then, though, I have felt that the number of posters who actually play the current edition has been reducing. The content of those who do not play the current edition has risen, which makes it not seem like a great place to exchange about the game. I see little reason for a new player of 10th Ed to join Dakka - do they want to read the same ten posters complaining about 10th Ed when its fairly evident that those posters do not play? The Tactics threads get less doomer content, but there are other ways for players to get tips.
We can go to Auspex Tactics on Youtube to get news very quickly without having to wade through comments, unless of course we want to read Youtube comments. We can get comprehensive Codex reviews and tactics ideas from actual players as early as two weeks before Codex release. I do miss being able to interact with fellow players, though, since Youtube comments are kinda pointless.
So I don't think that 10th Ed has killed 40K. Locally, we have had three sold-out tourneys at our FLGS since the Edition dropped, and another FLGS just had its first tourney that also sold out. Lots of people are playing, and many of them are new or returning players. I'm playing every weekend, less those when I have work/family obligations. Interestingly, our local forum is going strong and I can exchange ideas on 10th Ed with fellow players that I know there.
Perhaps Dakka will have an increasingly Oldhammer focus, which is fine! People can go elsewhere for current Edition content. I'll hang around, for what its worth, because I still enjoy many of the conversations.
TangoTwoBravo wrote: ... The content of those who do not play the current edition has risen, which makes it not seem like a great place to exchange about the game. I see little reason for a new player of 10th Ed to join Dakka - do they want to read the same ten posters complaining about 10th Ed when its fairly evident that those posters do not play? ...
I feel like there were numerous threads discussing 10th besides the ones lamenting it. Maybe newcomers would be surprised to see how much we're divided on it but we're only divided, not united against it.
Also, thanks for the tip on switching my theme off of the mobile/lite version!
It's an unfortunate side effect of the way our brains work that we tend to see what we expect to see.
I remember back when the Dakka Facebook page was regularly posting links to forum threads, seeing fairly common comments over there that 'everything' posted on Dakka was so negative. I went back over several months worth of those Facebook feed links, and it worked out to around 1 in 10 was actually a 'negative' topic. The rest were just general discussion, or gallery pictures, or news posts. But because people had this impression that Dakka is a negative place, they only remembered seeing the negative posts.
The same thing happens here, it's just a little harder to quantify easily because the forum overall is spread over multiple sections... but I very strongly suspect that if one were to go through the boards counting the threads that are nothing but complaints, and those discussing things favourably, they might be surprised by the result.
That's not to say there aren't issues with negativity at times. There's always been a tendency amongst some posters when they dislike something to put a lot of effort into convincing everyone else that the thing is bad, rather than just saying their piece and moving on, which can make it difficult for those wanting to talk about the thing they like to feel like they're getting value out of the discussion.
Perhaps a clearer focus on the topic when a positive discussion is wanted might help there... or perhaps not.
But it is maybe worth taking a moment, if you're convinced that the board is nothing but toxic negativity, to stop and take a look around to see if that's actually true.
H.B.M.C. wrote: I see a lot of people here talking about how 10th killed their interesting 40k, and I want to know why that is, because I can't believe it was any great love for the top-heavy nightmare that was 9th edition.
Of course, you know I'm the exception that proves the rule- I LOVED that top heavy mess, and if I had my way, it would be two campaign cycles heavier by now instead of blown up and empty. Until the at least two of the Sisters, GSC and Drukhari dexes are released and we confirm that their Crusade content is at least as good as 9th's, this is a hollow husk of a game.
That being said, I am willing to give the edition a chance, once the edition actually includes the content I need to play it. If the Crusade content for either of those three dexes is worse than 9th, then for me, no matter how good the rest of the edition is, it will still be worse than 9th.
I CAN port 9th ed Crusade content to 10th easily enough... But there won't be much point. Why bother replacing an editions defective Crusade content with good stuff when it's going into an edition where subfaction is nothing but a paint job and all psykers of the same type must have identical psychic powers.
So far, Nids and Admech Crusade content is no worse than what we had in 9th, and Marines and 'Crons are better than 9th. If the pattern holds, this edition could be okay. If it doesn't hold the edition could be saved by house-ruling, but why bother when 9th was perfect for what I wanted from a game.
Discord is a different animal, it requires near to real time attention and frankly people are boring. Forums you can post and check back later, no need to respond with any immediacy. Although I think a fair bit of tactics discussions happen in the comments now on You Tube videos instead of these forums. Often people will try to distract you from their gakky behaviour by claiming it's being done by others, same thing here with the obhorrent views we hold.
H.B.M.C. wrote: I see a lot of people here talking about how 10th killed their interesting 40k, and I want to know why that is, because I can't believe it was any great love for the top-heavy nightmare that was 9th edition.
Is it is because of the reset, and that if you don't know any of the 4 armies that have received books yet you really don't have much to play with right now? Or is it something else?
10th rejuvenated my interest in 40k, after skipping out most of 8th (pandemic) and finding myself unwilling to deal with the mess of 9th. I'm itching to play the game, even if I'm only really concentrating on 'Nids and Marines. Plus it gives me an excuse to use all the damned terrain I've accumulated/built over the years.
Can’t speak for others, but for me it’s the army creation rules that I find soulless and demoralising.
The actual game itself is pretty fun from the few games I’ve played.
Thinly veiled personal attacks, gaslighting, arguments in bad faith and rampant racism have driving out pretty much all people generating worthwhile content, as well as many others. Real discussions have disappeared from dakka years ago.
Pardon?
Unless you're referring to racism against Xenos, I think I'm going to have to ask for some evidence for that one.
Claiming people just don't understand properly based on the flag next to their name is a common tool used by many people in this very thread regularly to deflect counter-arguments. I myself have been accused of being a war criminal by inheritance, of being anti-semitic and a nazi because I have a German flag next to my name. Those people are still allowed to post on dakka, some even contributed to this very thread. And let's not forget the people expressing unreasonable amount of hatred towards dark skinned models, which have also not been removed from this board.
Eventually, these posts gathered enough reports for some mod from another part of the forum to respond to them, but the slow reaction speed means that those racist posts remained readable for many hours, some even for days, to be read by hundreds of people.
Da Boss wrote: Don't pull your punches, because you come across as really well rounded and not at all bitter cheering for the death of the website.
For the record, Jid was precisely the type of person I was referring to in this post. In fact, I knew that eventually he'd show up in this thread to give us another morose diatribe gaking all over Dakka. It was, in a lot of ways, inevitable.
Basically the most negative people here seem to always be the ones complaining about how negative everything is. It's like screaming about how much you hate the colour red whilst throwing buckets of red paint at everything around you.
I guess someone felt called out, huh?
The thread asked where everyone is, I told them, and there are many people agreeing with me.
It's ironic that a person who wastes hundreds of hours a month telling everyone how terrible GW and 40k is complains about someone writing a single posts a month about how gakky dakka is.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
insaniak wrote: But it is maybe worth taking a moment, if you're convinced that the board is nothing but toxic negativity, to stop and take a look around to see if that's actually true.
To be fair, I don't care about any of dakka's parts but the 40k game related parts (general, tactics, news, YMDC, lists). Other areas might absolutely be less negative, but the parts I visit are all plagued by the same problems.
I did take that step back, asked myself if maybe I was the problem, stopped posting. While lurking, I witness the people who used to pile on me pile on the next person who wasn't joining the "GW bad, 40k bad" chorus until they left. And the next. And the next. I started posting again, and people, especially H.B.M.C. immediately resumed their personal attacks, irrespective of topic and arguments. See his last post for evidence - out of twenty people posting their negative experiences with dakka, he felt the need to call me out specifically again.
Even after taking a step back and exploring every other possible option, I have come to the conclusion that dakka actually is driven into the ground by a small toxic group of highly active and people, killing off the community one by one while contributing nothing or next to nothing themselves. Dropping dakka in favor of other 40k communities has immensely improved my enjoyment of the (40k) hobby.
So no, (40k) dakka is very much as negative as it's reputation implies, giving /tg/ a run for its money.
Congratulations, denizens of dakka, you killed your own hobby.
Only if your hobby is bitching about a game you don't play....
MY hobby? Is playing miniatures games. I don't need Dakka for that.
That kind of was my point. And to be clear, none of that was referring to you.
I pretty much disagree with every other posts you write and roll my eyes when you relentlessly try to convince everyone how your grot army his supposedly highly competitive. You are essentially dakka's grot revolution leader, which makes you PITA for any ork around
BUT. That's what forums used to be for. A place for discussions, for disagreements. You actually write about the hobby, you add content to the page worth reading, you read and respond to what people are writing and tell what you like and don't like. Most people on here used to be like that, but the vast majority has been driven away or been infected by the constant negativity and toxicity. Nowadays having a different opinion is treated as a personal attack an will be retaliated against as such.
To be fair, I don't care about any of dakka's parts but the 40k game related parts (general, tactics, news, YMDC, lists). Other areas might absolutely be less negative, but the parts I visit are all plagued by the same problems.
I did take that step back, asked myself if maybe I was the problem, stopped posting. While lurking, I witness the people who used to pile on me pile on the next person who wasn't joining the "GW bad, 40k bad" chorus until they left. And the next. And the next. I started posting again, and people, especially H.B.M.C. immediately resumed their personal attacks, irrespective of topic and arguments. See his last post for evidence - out of twenty people posting their negative experiences with dakka, he felt the need to call me out specifically again.
Even after taking a step back and exploring every other possible option, I have come to the conclusion that dakka actually is driven into the ground by a small toxic group of highly active and people, killing off the community one by one while contributing nothing or next to nothing themselves. Dropping dakka in favor of other 40k communities has immensely improved my enjoyment of the (40k) hobby.
So no, (40k) dakka is very much as negative as it's reputation implies, giving /tg/ a run for its money..
In the interests of science, since I don't spend as much time in the 40K sections of the site as I used to, I just scanned through the first dozen threads in 40K General. Aside from a single post from HBMC mentioning that he wasn't a fan of 9th edition, the only negativity I came across in any of those threads was from the people in this thread complaining about all the negativity on Dakka, and the others complaining about those complaining about the negativity.
YMDC has always been a bit of a shark pit, although it's considerably better behaved these days than it was when I first joined Dakka back in mumblemumble, and we do try to keep it somewhat reined in and less focused on argument just for the sake of argument. Elsewhere, there are individual threads that get heated, and certain posters who need to learn when to just let it go... but I don't think your perception is actually at all representative of the site overall.
H.B.M.C. wrote: I see a lot of people here talking about how 10th killed their interesting 40k, and I want to know why that is, because I can't believe it was any great love for the top-heavy nightmare that was 9th edition.
Is it is because of the reset, and that if you don't know any of the 4 armies that have received books yet you really don't have much to play with right now? Or is it something else?
I'll start by saying I had a lot of issues with 9th. The core rules were still a nothing-burger and most of the books were stupidly bloated, especially towards the end. There was also the general trend of removing and/or limiting wargear. Plus there was the trend away from properly costing items and instead inching ever closer towards pseudo power-level.
The sad thing, though, was that a lot of these issues could have been fixed very easily: Remove the 'loyalty' bonuses as 9th's army-building rules already punished you for taking allies. Remove stratagems outright and turn the relevant ones back into wargear. Make artefacts (and WLTs) cost points and, if absolutely necessary, just limit the maximum number of each by game size. Replace Auras with Command abilities like in AoS. Cost wargear properly - they even had 8th as a strong starting guide for this.
I'm sure the game would have benefited from other improvements, of course, but these in particular would have drastically removed the level of bloat and made things play more smoothly, whilst still keeping a lot of the good stuff from 9th (such as it was).
Instead, what we got was:
- Character rules that read like they were designed by Hitler from beyond the grave. Gone are separate characters who could move about freely from units (unless they're lucky enough to be a Lone Operative). Gone, too, are Characters that could freely join and leave units during the game. Now what we get instead is Characters who must choose a unit to be locked into for the entire game. They're not allowed to leave the unit. Nor are they allowed to join a new unit even if their old unit is completely wiped out. In fact, so strong was their attachment to their dead comrades that their wargear ceases to work for the rest of the game out of solidarity. Oh and the crowning turd on this river of sewage masquerading as rules is that Characters are only allowed to join very specific units. So if you happened to like some less conventional pairings then you get to sit on GW's middle finger.
- While we're on the subject of Characters, say a hearty farewell to customisation. Remember when one of the great things about 40k was 'Your Dudes'? Well now all that has been thrown in the bin. The wargear selection for my favourite army in particular had been going downhill for a while, but 10th's solution was to remove it entirely. Not only that, but it also removed artefacts and warlord traits - the last remaining bastions of customisation. Instead, we get Enhancements. A unit can only have 1 (so already customisation has been halved even before regular wargear is factored in), there are only 4 to choose from and most of them are locked so that a given Character gets a choice of maybe 2 at most. Though while there used to be some fun WLTs and artefacts, the same absoutely cannot be said for Enhancements, which are about as dismal and flavourless as they come.
Given that character and customisation are big things for me, can you maybe see why I'm not all that into 10th?
Adding to that:
- Psychic powers are just gone now. No more spell selection, you're just stuck with whatever your character comes with (usually not a lot). And your spell selection is determined by your wargear and whether you're a Special Characters. Because of course it is.
- Know what isn't gone, though? Stratagems! Yes, the worst edition 8th edition brought to the game has of course survived the alleged reduction in bloat. Boy it feels great knowing that so much wargear was stripped away so that we could keep these bastards.
- Points have been replaced by Power Level in all but name. I didn't like that 9th was heading in this direction so I like it even less now that the train has reached its final destination.
- Added to that, there's the whole mess of fixed unit sizes, wargear options strictly locked to what's in the box etc. that army-building is just a miserable experience. For all of 9th's faults, I still used to build far more lists than I'd ever have time to play. In contrast, I don't think I've managed to finish a single 10th edition list because it's just so dreary and uninspiring.
- There isn't even the hope that the codex (whenever GW finish pulling it from their backside for release) will actually fix any of these issues. In 8th we at least saw that GW were willing to shake armies up quite a bit relative to their indices. But with 10th it's painfully clear that your codex will just be your index with some extra detachments taped on. So if your units are dismal now then they are absolutely going to remain dismal even when you get your codex.
This is by no means an exhaustive list but hopefully I've explained myself. I'll reiterate, too, that this is not to say that 8th or 9th were amazing editions. I had no end of issues with them as I'm certain you're well aware. The thing is, while the flaws in those editions were extremely frustrating, they were also things I felt I could work around. I could generally build an army I would enjoy playing even if it wasn't great. With 10th, though, I just feel wholly uninspired because the only lists I am permitted to build are ones that I have absolutely no attachment to, nor any desire to actually play.
To be fair, I don't care about any of dakka's parts but the 40k game related parts (general, tactics, news, YMDC, lists). Other areas might absolutely be less negative, but the parts I visit are all plagued by the same problems.
I did take that step back, asked myself if maybe I was the problem, stopped posting. While lurking, I witness the people who used to pile on me pile on the next person who wasn't joining the "GW bad, 40k bad" chorus until they left. And the next. And the next. I started posting again, and people, especially H.B.M.C. immediately resumed their personal attacks, irrespective of topic and arguments. See his last post for evidence - out of twenty people posting their negative experiences with dakka, he felt the need to call me out specifically again.
Even after taking a step back and exploring every other possible option, I have come to the conclusion that dakka actually is driven into the ground by a small toxic group of highly active and people, killing off the community one by one while contributing nothing or next to nothing themselves. Dropping dakka in favor of other 40k communities has immensely improved my enjoyment of the (40k) hobby.
So no, (40k) dakka is very much as negative as it's reputation implies, giving /tg/ a run for its money..
In the interests of science, since I don't spend as much time in the 40K sections of the site as I used to, I just scanned through the first dozen threads in 40K General. Aside from a single post from HBMC mentioning that he wasn't a fan of 9th edition, the only negativity I came across in any of those threads was from the people in this thread complaining about all the negativity on Dakka, and the others complaining about those complaining about the negativity.
YMDC has always been a bit of a shark pit, although it's considerably better behaved these days than it was when I first joined Dakka back in mumblemumble, and we do try to keep it somewhat reined in and less focused on argument just for the sake of argument. Elsewhere, there are individual threads that get heated, and certain posters who need to learn when to just let it go... but I don't think your perception is actually at all representative of the site overall.
There is the problem of what you define negative to mean in this instance, because I feel you're referencing direct complaints/whining/hostility which doesn't feel entirely reflective of the whole scope.
There's certainly people with valid criticisms of the game and there are people with valid criticisms of the company, there are people who complain about either irrespective of the topic and those of course who do not share either. When those criticisms (valid or not) are repeated frequently enough, that is an air of negativity and people with similar opinions are drawn to reinforce and share that, which in turn leads to making it a welcome space for those who are less happy with their hobby to come and vent.
Ironically there are people in here commenting how other places due to moderation or like systems become echo chambers - Dakka is an echo chamber largely as well but it gets more heated due to the lesser moderation (that's not a knock by the way). When this happens those with a negative perception (valid or otherwise) are almost certainly in the majority on here, with anyone who defends their feelings otherwise just get heckled.
There are examples of people in here who do engage with the hobby where possible, they're passionate about their projects and largely want to have fun. But simultaneously I think it's fair to say do not have a positive perception of the company, nor the professional quality of the rules often, which is quite vocally, if respectfully, stated on most topics.
This results in the impression of a person who can be perceived as net negative, which when that reflects most people, is the reflection of the general feel of the board in my opinion. You can definitely track back that there are fewer and fewer rumours and content creators coming here, because of that atmosphere and general negative echo chamber, which can be a bit harsh sometimes due to the way moderation happens.
I don't think the forum is dying due to negativity, it is dying due to the forum structure as a whole becoming antiquated.
I'm not denying the reputation of negativity (though I think it ignores the many good posters here), I'm just not sure it is what is stopping new blood signing up.
After all people sign up for Twitter and that is just basically signing up to receive abusive replies whatever the subject
As others have mentioned, forums have certain advantages over "algorithmic" social media which I think will allow the medium to persist long-term at a maintenance level. The permanence of forum posts and threads being a big part of that. I don't know if forums on the whole have hit that maintenance floor yet, but I think they will hit a floor rather than shriveling entirely (of course that means entire forums will continue to disappear, I mean this effect will appear on-the-whole).
This is aided by "algorithmic" social media becoming... less good as time passes.
insaniak wrote: In the interests of science, since I don't spend as much time in the 40K sections of the site as I used to, I just scanned through the first dozen threads in 40K General.
So you scanned 12 threads? That's by no means scientific. The forum already has become a ghost town, that's why this thread was created, no?
If you want an example of negativity, try to find out why so many regulars with 10k+ posts stopped posting completely over the course of this year. Remember when we created the big tactica threads for the first time, because the tactics forum was moving so fast that many threads of less popular armies would disappear from the first page before anyone could respond? You can see threads all the way back to September now, and half of them have been started by the same person.
The mod practice of deleting dozens of posts whenever gak goes down somewhere also doesn't particularly help to provide data, but maybe there is an archive of deleted posts you have access to.
That, or you can just pretending that everything is well. As pointed out, I don't particularly care anymore. I just wanted to respond to your post, as I thought you would care.
H.B.M.C. wrote: I see a lot of people here talking about how 10th killed their interesting 40k, and I want to know why that is, because I can't believe it was any great love for the top-heavy nightmare that was 9th edition.
Is it is because of the reset, and that if you don't know any of the 4 armies that have received books yet you really don't have much to play with right now? Or is it something else?
10th rejuvenated my interest in 40k, after skipping out most of 8th (pandemic) and finding myself unwilling to deal with the mess of 9th. I'm itching to play the game, even if I'm only really concentrating on 'Nids and Marines. Plus it gives me an excuse to use all the damned terrain I've accumulated/built over the years.
Can’t speak for others, but for me it’s the army creation rules that I find soulless and demoralising.
The actual game itself is pretty fun from the few games I’ve played.
Same - I enjoy tinkering in battlescribe, and 40k removed most of that tinkering - building a list for marines is actually painful now to me, seeing how half my collection is in Legends now, and the restrictions on characters don't help either.
The game on the table is fine, but the other stuff made me quit playing as the list building / model selection completely taints the experience to me.
H.B.M.C. wrote: I see a lot of people here talking about how 10th killed their interesting 40k, and I want to know why that is, because I can't believe it was any great love for the top-heavy nightmare that was 9th edition.
Is it is because of the reset, and that if you don't know any of the 4 armies that have received books yet you really don't have much to play with right now? Or is it something else?
10th rejuvenated my interest in 40k, after skipping out most of 8th (pandemic) and finding myself unwilling to deal with the mess of 9th. I'm itching to play the game, even if I'm only really concentrating on 'Nids and Marines. Plus it gives me an excuse to use all the damned terrain I've accumulated/built over the years.
Can’t speak for others, but for me it’s the army creation rules that I find soulless and demoralising.
The actual game itself is pretty fun from the few games I’ve played.
Same - I enjoy tinkering in battlescribe, and 40k removed most of that tinkering - building a list for marines is actually painful now to me, seeing how half my collection is in Legends now, and the restrictions on characters don't help either.
The game on the table is fine, but the other stuff made me quit playing as the list building / model selection completely taints the experience to me.
This is probably my core issue, granted i switched over to HH and currently are in the final steps of my masters degree so my p&m blog is collecting dust for a bit but it is hardly unfair to criticise story and buisness of 40k and gw with the handling of either. Estrangement is a issue for many 40k players that played over an edition aswell.
And whilest as pointed out, the game currently plays well enough (certainly for gw standards) it is hardly inspiring when whole armies are banished to the shadow realm that is legends.
As for those wishing for heavier moderation, or recommending other communities, sure but it would do you well to understand who said "gaiety is the most outstanding feature of the soviet Union", why toxic positivity is a thing and why you only exchange a percieved echo chamber with a real one, especially if you switch to an algorithmic based plattform.
I don’t follow 40k. I mostly come to Dakka for non-GW miniatures, lore and games (and Geek Media). This means I mostly stick to News and Rumors as that is where the most non-GW action happens.
A year or two ago, all the threads I’d wanted to read were being crowded out by 40k junk. Now I see more threads for non-GW games and minis cropping back up, although not to the highs of the Kirby era. Looks to me like interest in 40k is waning again, but non-40k Dakka is doing alright, but not great.
There is increasing toxicity and negativity everywhere in society these days. Algorithmic social networking sites make it worse. It’s noticeably spilling over to Dakka, but that’s a symptom not a cause of growing negativity.
I don’t follow 40k. I mostly come to Dakka for non-GW miniatures, lore and games (and Geek Media). This means I mostly stick to News and Rumors as that is where the most non-GW action happens.
A year or two ago, all the threads I’d wanted to read were being crowded out by 40k junk. Now I see more threads for non-GW games and minis cropping back up, although not to the highs of the Kirby era. Looks to me like interest in 40k is waning again, but non-40k Dakka is doing alright, but not great.
There is increasing toxicity and negativity everywhere in society these days. Algorithmic social networking sites make it worse. It’s noticeably spilling over to Dakka, but that’s a symptom not a cause of growing negativity.
This is interesting, you're stating the opposite of everyone else I think.
Most of the people mentioning toxicity isn't that it's coming in. People (admittedly mostly people you'd associate with being negative to some degree) are saying don't look to other places as they're full of over moderated toxic positivity, dakka is better because you can complain.
So in this case to compare with your comments, it likely means only negative minded people are left generally, dakka is slowly approaching life support for 40k or that the game is struggling. All.metrics suggest the latter to be false atm, so logically its one of the other two?
The reason a lot of other groups have to be moderated so heavily is that the negativity is so pervasive in the wider culture. If people stick to tiny little niche echo chambers, it’s often because they are aware of how much rampant douchery is happening in the mainstream. If you post in a “safe” FB group, for example, the algorithm will ‘helpfully’ bombard you with outrage-bait from all the other non-safe groups periodically to keep you engaged on its terms. Dakka doesn’t have all the walled gardens, but it also doesn’t deliberately shiv your calm for ad money. People here disagree, but we are all in the same spaces and interact instead of hating on an other we only see through algorithmic trolling. When people say something hateful to you on Dakka, you can report them or reply at your leisure. When someone says something hateful in real life or on FB (where your contact info is available), you have to either risk drama overspill into RL, or swallow any reply and die a little inside, or vacate yet another aspect of your social life.
Dakka has some pretty vile stuff sometimes. But it’s usually cleaned up or called out rather than festering for clicks.
H.B.M.C. wrote: I see a lot of people here talking about how 10th killed their interesting 40k, and I want to know why that is, because I can't believe it was any great love for the top-heavy nightmare that was 9th edition.
10th killed my interest because it was the death-knell for 40k as a wargame.
I hated 9th and was lukewarm about 8th; the over complication of tracking rules through a myriad of books and FAQs was horrific design, and I'll eat my shorts in surprise if it doesn't return in 10th. Also the silliness of vehicles unload their payloads through tires and being shot via atennas, the inability to generate competent terrain rules, so on and so forth.
But I was still more favorable towards those editions because they maintained "your dudes" as a concept. 10th has all the flaws of the previous NU40K editions whilst removing the one thing that kept the game, in my mind, personal. Now every army is the same list with the same over-designed models built around the same center piece (btw there's only one of those in the entire galaxy!11!!) playing the same map with the same L-shaped ruins and the same load outs.
I can get more variety and customization out of a game of League of Legends (or any number of excellent board games) than a game of 40k; none of which will cost hundreds of dollars and dozens of hours before I settle in to the actual playing part.
Which is why 30k is where all my interest currently lay, and why I exclusively use 3d printed models from 3rd party sources.
Apple fox wrote: True Wargamer is anyone who wants to be part of the war gaming hobby, if just playing 40K or lots of other games.
I don’t think it makes someone less legitimate within the hobby.
But I do think 40K and GW itself being so dominant in the hobby is a big detriment as a whole.
Eh. It is what it is. Sure, 40k draws a lot of the attention. And if you let it it'll seem to be the only thing played.
But that's why it's important to play other, non-GW stuff, at the shops. Even if it starts out small with just you & one friend playing BTech, or some WWII game, or MCP etc every few weeks.
You've got to be seen playing & having fun with non-40k/GW in order to attract more players.
Very true. it has taken loads of effort but we have built such a place at our FLGS. to the point people make effort to stay in the area or drive out of their way to come to our store. Sure 40K is still played both new and old editions, but between the regular weekend group we play just about every other game out there. People will be less invested in the hobby if they do not think they will have opportunities to play.
Just off the top of my head- somebody in the regular crowd plays and has armies for-
.flames of war
.team yankee
.victory at sea
.blood red skies
.specter operations
.bolt action
.DUST 1947
.forces of valor battle tactics
.marvel crisis protocol
.star wars X-wing
.star wars legion
.B5 wars
.aeronautica imperialis
.battlefleet gothic
.40K (epic, 10th and house 5th)
.blood bowl
.warmachine
.monster apocalypse
.infinity
.castles in the sky
.AOS .WHFB .classic battle tech
.battle tech alpha strike
That's not counting the odd player that comes in and plays something less regular like song of ice and fire.
Seeing people play and having good looking tables draws attention as does a welcoming community that gives demo games.
I think the people saying Dakka skews negative have a point to be honest. It does! I just don't really see that as a huge problem.
I think when you're really into something you develop strong opinions about it. I love 40K and have loved it since I was a little kid. It means a lot to me, dumb as that might be.
If I'm totally happy with it, then I've not got much to say except "oh wow, this is great!"
Likewise, if I didn't like it at all, I'd just not be interested enough to talk about it or think about it.
But when you're a bit disappointed with something you like, or want to like, then you have a lot more thoughts about it and how it might be improved, ways you could make it fit what you like, and yeah, the things that annoy you about how it's being done at the moment.
And that generates more discussion, people want to feel heard about these things because not many people in their day to day are gonna care about something as incredibly niche as 40K.
So I think that inevitably skews discussion negatively unless there's a strong push for positivity. Dakka has always been relatively lightly moderated, and so there's not much of a push in any direction, so grumbling came to dominate.
Totally get why that's frustrating to people who are happy with the game, but I dunno how you can avoid it really. I'm not playing 40K because I have Opinions about the stuff they're doing with it, and instead I'm working on quite a lot of hobby projects and getting games in with my miniatures in the 40K setting using rules I prefer and with the miniatures I want to use. I've painted 5 large 40K armies in the past 3-4 years, some of them dream armies from my childhood, and I have more on the table for the upcoming period. But no one really cares about another guy doing old editions or OPR and doing "good enough for tabletop" paintjobs and photographing them kinda badly! We're all doing similar stuff. So we come here and chat about whatever the topic is, but sometimes yeah, we do circle the drain a bit with whatever is bugging us.
I have to say, and I posted about this recently, I find the RPG scene a lot more healthy there. The alternatives to the "big games" are all a lot more established and there's more of an idea that you're gonna have to organise things yourself as you like them built into RPGs vs. wargames, where the pick up game is still an influential idea even if you mostly play with people you know.
I think the RPG scene tends to be a bit more positive and focused on the cool stuff people are doing. I'll try to be a bit more like that here and repeat myself less.
As humble and insignificant as they might be, i think our crappy photographed subpar tabletop paintjobs and overly common hobby projects are equally the raison d'etre of such a forum.
They are but more aspects we can share and chat about, just as much as rulesets and tactics or stuff. Wargaming is a hobby, it is unnecessary and pointless by itself, and so are any chat about it. If only for us to have a good time. Sharing stories, battlereps, paintjobs, etc help build a good time.
I mean, we can say that dakkadakka is less active because 10th is a bad edition, theres no proof that isn't real. The only reason i brought up the "Dakka is a negative place" anecdote is because its been its reputation since i joined back in 8th ed.
What the reason for it is, i don't actually care, i was just pointing out that its a reality, with multiple people across multiple LGS near me that all ended up saying the same thing.
And i agree with it, i'm not asking for ultra moderation like on reddit or whatever, but there are some posters that seems to always have a hostile way of writing, which contributes to the reputation of this site.
H.B.M.C. wrote: According to TOW thread, the game is DOA. So was LI. KT is apparently "on life support". People here call HH a dead game.
Not sure where any of this comes from.
Engagement is going to differ vastly between communities, countries and continents. When you haven't played a game before, or haven't seen it being played locally, the only frame of reference becomes the general engagement on the internet.
The problem is that a tight knit community typically doesn't utilize the same communication methods as those that persist on the wider internet. So outside looking in, a lack of engagement on the forums or youtube is perceived as a lack of engagement in playing the game.
With 40k in particular we are in an edition where the codex releases have been far less disruptive to balance than in the past. Less dramatic changes lead to less things to talk about. In addition we have a game that is old for a table top game. Some problems have probably persisted for so long that the old timers have become apathetic (me with aircraft). Overall the relative balance of the game is actually pretty decent so there is fundamentally less to talk about there.
There is also negativity bias and how that generates far more discussion and engagement than just enjoying oneself.
Whether the "lack of engagement" is due to apathy or if a silent majority is enjoying the game, it is impossible to know why internet discussion has declined unless we have GW's sales numbers.
Sledgehammer wrote: Engagement is going to differ vastly between communities, countries and continents.
litterally just this.
to me, Infinity is dead because nobody plays it locally, but i know theres a community playing weekly games in the big city near me. (Although i'll argue that GW is trying its damndest to make sure LI is dead on arrival it seems)
That would seem to be conflating the opinion of a couple of posters with the thread overall. My impression of that thread is that reactions are mostly fairly positive.
insaniak wrote: That would seem to be conflating the opinion of a couple of posters with the thread overall. My impression of that thread is that reactions are mostly fairly positive.
Fair enough. I'm willing to accept that explanation.
I honestly only participate in that thread infrequently, so mostly I just see the odd knee-jerk reaction to things (and people arguing about bases sizes! ).
I am on this forum because it is active, i was on warseer until it crashed and never recovered. and i used to go over to bolter and chainsword, but since my focus is war gaming in general not just GW stuff this forum is much more in that line.
I do not tend to pay much attention to anything about current 40K anymore including all the current edition topics here. but since the question was about the forums-i see the guys at the store playing it and i know it is not for me as it doesn't feel like 40K anymore (or even a wargame) so i play what i like rather it is our house 5th ed 40K or some other GW specialist game or just non GW games in general. there are loads of great ones out there. it is no longer worth my time to pay attention to an edition that i pretty well dislike everything about or a company i will never buy anything from again, when there is so much positive i can get from other games/companies out there. our store has a local discord but it is with people i see for hours every week when we game, so there isn't much game theory to discuss it is usually to set up for games or share gaming resources and memes. aside from the occasional online voice chat for games we all play online.
H.B.M.C. wrote: According to TOW thread, the game is DOA. So was LI. KT is apparently "on life support". People here call HH a dead game.
Not sure where any of this comes from.
This is where I see the negativity on Dakka. Everything that isn't 40k or AoS (or maybe AoS as well I don't really look in on those threads anymore) is a "dead game" or "unsupported" and the reasoning seems to be pretty much exclusively "I want X and GW isn't giving me what I want".
HH is the big one for me because it has been my bread and butter for some time now. I agree that certain releases have been a bit odd with timescales but then I also have the retrospective ability to look at how HH used to be and be much happier that in the past year or so, a huge portion of the Heresy range has massively dropped in price and become far easier to deal with in plastic form. The game has mainline status and I can walk into a GW shop and buy a Spartan or a Leviathan.
But then I see people complaining that new kit X doesn't have part Y and it irritates me that the legacy of HH from those earliest days is being trampled on by whiney children who complain when everything isn't spoon-fed onto their painting table. Oh no, there isn't a Bolt Pistol in the Mk6 Tactical Kit? How will you ever source a Bolt Pistol, there is simply no way to do it from the hundred other Space Marine kits.
Now it might just be a few people who keep this attitude going, but those people are constantly doing it, which makes it annoying. They can't let the people who are enjoying the new stuff enjoy it and have to remind everyone just how much they aren't enjoying it.
H.B.M.C. wrote: According to TOW thread, the game is DOA. So was LI. KT is apparently "on life support". People here call HH a dead game.
Not sure where any of this comes from.
This is where I see the negativity on Dakka. Everything that isn't 40k or AoS (or maybe AoS as well I don't really look in on those threads anymore) is a "dead game" or "unsupported" and the reasoning seems to be pretty much exclusively "I want X and GW isn't giving me what I want".
HH is the big one for me because it has been my bread and butter for some time now. I agree that certain releases have been a bit odd with timescales but then I also have the retrospective ability to look at how HH used to be and be much happier that in the past year or so, a huge portion of the Heresy range has massively dropped in price and become far easier to deal with in plastic form. The game has mainline status and I can walk into a GW shop and buy a Spartan or a Leviathan.
But then I see people complaining that new kit X doesn't have part Y and it irritates me that the legacy of HH from those earliest days is being trampled on by whiney children who complain when everything isn't spoon-fed onto their painting table. Oh no, there isn't a Bolt Pistol in the Mk6 Tactical Kit? How will you ever source a Bolt Pistol, there is simply no way to do it from the hundred other Space Marine kits.
Now it might just be a few people who keep this attitude going, but those people are constantly doing it, which makes it annoying. They can't let the people who are enjoying the new stuff enjoy it and have to remind everyone just how much they aren't enjoying it.
Just my two pennies.
You shouldn't have to buy a separate kit or hunt through a bits box to complete a unit you just bought. If you do then you should at least be able to buy what you need (and only what you need) online. I remember when that wasn't an issue because GW hadn't yet stomped out the secondary market bits sellers... So yeah, GW can sell the stuff needed on the box or feth off at this point.
Yeah but this has resulted in the drastic loss of options within the game, and, now with 10th, is even impacting the structure of units (Spawn being an obvious example, and why things like Ripper "Swarms" top out at 3 bases).
Canadian 5th wrote: You shouldn't have to buy a separate kit or hunt through a bits box to complete a unit you just bought.
I can't remember the last time GW sold a unit where you couldn't build a valid loadout without using parts from other kits.
The usual complaint comes from people wanting to min-max options given in the codex without even putting in any effort to kitbash it themselves, which is a pretty crappy attitude for a game styled after a historical.
Canadian 5th wrote: You shouldn't have to buy a separate kit or hunt through a bits box to complete a unit you just bought.
I can't remember the last time GW sold a unit where you couldn't build a valid loadout without using parts from other kits.
The usual complaint comes from people wanting to min-max options given in the codex without even putting in any effort to kitbash it themselves, which is a pretty crappy attitude for a game styled after a historical.
Catachan Jungle Fighter infantry squad with a Heavy Weapon Team, or with any Special Weapons that aren't a flamer.
Oh, and Cadians if you want to run them as a regular Infantry Squad and take a Heavy Weapon (and let's not forget that Cadians only just got the ability to take a Plasma/Melta/Sniper Rifle without needing to buy an extra Command Squad box in 2022, a cool 19 years after the last Cadian refresh).
Also also, let's not assume that the majority of people who want to buy bits individually are both min-maxers and unwilling to kitbash. There's plenty of reason to lament the loss of individual part purchases for people who have a specific unit/theme in mind, or want to run a fluffy force (remember, some factions/regiments/etc have a preference for certain weapons), and GW plastic is nowhere near cheap enough to wave off buying a whole extra kit just to get some spare parts. Hell, my first kitbash was a Griffon Mortar - I bought a Demolisher Cannon barrel second-hand for the muzzle, no way would buying an entire Leman Russ to get that have been feasible or even remotely warranted, and I didn't have the skill or time to try crafting a muzzle from plasticard or greenstuff.
You shouldn't have to buy a separate kit or hunt through a bits box to complete a unit you just bought. If you do then you should at least be able to buy what you need (and only what you need) online. I remember when that wasn't an issue because GW hadn't yet stomped out the secondary market bits sellers... So yeah, GW can sell the stuff needed on the box or feth off at this point.
Those bitz sellers are still commonplace in the UK (where Gert's profile flag says they are from). I'm not entirely sure on what basis GW was able to suppress bitz sellers in North America.
You shouldn't have to buy a separate kit or hunt through a bits box to complete a unit you just bought. If you do then you should at least be able to buy what you need (and only what you need) online. I remember when that wasn't an issue because GW hadn't yet stomped out the secondary market bits sellers... So yeah, GW can sell the stuff needed on the box or feth off at this point.
Those bitz sellers are still commonplace in the UK (where Gert's profile flag says they are from). I'm not entirely sure on what basis GW was able to suppress bitz sellers in North America.
When GW shut down their own bits service there was a very popular store in north America called "the war store" who would buy GW kits break them up and sell the bits both in the store and online. he ended up getting a cease and desist notice from GW threatening legal action if he continued his bits service.
You shouldn't have to buy a separate kit or hunt through a bits box to complete a unit you just bought. If you do then you should at least be able to buy what you need (and only what you need) online. I remember when that wasn't an issue because GW hadn't yet stomped out the secondary market bits sellers... So yeah, GW can sell the stuff needed on the box or feth off at this point.
Those bitz sellers are still commonplace in the UK (where Gert's profile flag says they are from). I'm not entirely sure on what basis GW was able to suppress bitz sellers in North America.
When GW shut down their own bits service there was a very popular store in north America called "the war store" who would buy GW kits break them up and sell the bits both in the store and online. he ended up getting a cease and desist notice from GW threatening legal action if he continued his bits service.
In addition to this, GW has shut down numerous bit selling operations on EBay, such as BulletBits from a few years back. They also aggressively gak down Etsy and eBay stores selling pieces which look remotely like GW stuff, and I’m not talking about re-casts or straight copies either.
Also: While I understand the origins of HH from scrounging bits boxes to make accurate conversions, making the product mainline should get rid of those requirements. If every legion is encouraged to run melee elements, and fully half of the legions are encouraged to run predominantly melee elements, there should be a better method to make those generic melee squads than “buy the tactical box, then drop an additional $180 on 4 assault squad boxes to salvage bolt pistols and chainswords.”
Especially when GW discontinues that box almost half a year before they release the HH melee dudes!
H.B.M.C. wrote: Yeah but this has resulted in the drastic loss of options within the game, and, now with 10th, is even impacting the structure of units (Spawn being an obvious example, and why things like Ripper "Swarms" top out at 3 bases).
GW sucks. They could easily put more value into their kits be that via higher model counts per box or via including loadouts instead of cutting and consolidating them. They could also officially kill WYSIWYG and then what the model had wouldn't impact its rules.
They will do none of these things because they don't have any profit incentive to do so.
Canadian 5th wrote: You shouldn't have to buy a separate kit or hunt through a bits box to complete a unit you just bought.
I can't remember the last time GW sold a unit where you couldn't build a valid loadout without using parts from other kits.
The usual complaint comes from people wanting to min-max options given in the codex without even putting in any effort to kitbash it themselves, which is a pretty crappy attitude for a game styled after a historical.
Or GW could put enough bits to make all of a unit's load-outs in the box with the models. That would also work.
insaniak wrote: ... In which case that's a few people being negative, not the forum being negative.
Bit weird that you cut out the next sentence of my post which makes the point clearer. If you have the same people constantly being negative, it doesn't matter if there are only a few of them, they're always there.
Like it or not, the people who post the most are going to get seen the most and there are huge chunks of Heresy threads filled with people complaining and whinging. I come to the forum for background and Heresy discussion and not so long ago both of those parts of the forum were toxic as hell and almost made me dump the site.
So from my point of view, Dakka is a pretty negative place.
Canadian 5th wrote: You shouldn't have to buy a separate kit or hunt through a bits box to complete a unit you just bought. If you do then you should at least be able to buy what you need (and only what you need) online.
In principle sure but its irrelevant when the bits missing from those kits are some of the most common in circulation. If you're going to complain about a kit not having a Bolt Pistol, you deserve to be laughed at.
I remember when that wasn't an issue because GW hadn't yet stomped out the secondary market bits sellers... So yeah, GW can sell the stuff needed on the box or feth off at this point.
Dunno where you are mate but I can easily go on eBay or a fair few bitz sellers to get what I need. Or I do it the old-fashioned way and just speak to fellow players.
There are super easy solutions but people like you would rather whinge than take two seconds to fix the problem. Spoon fed is the only way you'll do it.
With the aggressive and rude tone of this post being yet another argument in favour of the theory that those people who talk about negativity are those same people who make the place unpleasant.
Like it or not, the people who post the most are going to get seen the most and there are huge chunks of Heresy threads filled with people complaining and whinging. I come to the forum for background and Heresy discussion and not so long ago both of those parts of the forum were toxic as hell and almost made me dump the site.
So from my point of view, Dakka is a pretty negative place.
While you are of course entitled to your point of view, that is a door that swings both ways. I recognize you pretty well Gert. Mostly because I find you an extremely antagonistic poster who I feel gets incredibly aggro on anyone that disagrees with your stances.
Yes, I realize that's a bit Oroborous of me to say, given my largest contributions to the site for a couple of years has been distaste for GW's in ability to competently design 40k / encouraging people to not buy GW and go 3rd party / pointing out the contemptable idiocy of GW's releases (the aforementioned year+ wait time for the second most basic kit in the entire HH range).
And with that said, I suppose I do have to agree that Dakka is more "negative" than many other 40k spaces. But frankly I also think that's because there's actual discussions to be had here, because people are passionate and are allowed to voice their opinions even if they're negative (so long as they maintain some very basic respect). Which is very much in counter-point to every other forum-esque entity I see for 40k / 30k, which tend to be nothing but people posting pictures of their models. So while Dakka skews negative, it's because Dakka allows its patrons to actually discuss rather than forcing them to shill.
Like it or not, the people who post the most are going to get seen the most and there are huge chunks of Heresy threads filled with people complaining and whinging. I come to the forum for background and Heresy discussion and not so long ago both of those parts of the forum were toxic as hell and almost made me dump the site.
So from my point of view, Dakka is a pretty negative place.
While you are of course entitled to your point of view, that is a door that swings both ways. I recognize you pretty well Gert. Mostly because I find you an extremely antagonistic poster who I feel gets incredibly aggro on anyone that disagrees with your stances.
Yes, I realize that's a bit Oroborous of me to say, given my largest contributions to the site for a couple of years has been distaste for GW's in ability to competently design 40k / encouraging people to not buy GW and go 3rd party / pointing out the contemptable idiocy of GW's releases (the aforementioned year+ wait time for the second most basic kit in the entire HH range).
And with that said, I suppose I do have to agree that Dakka is more "negative" than many other 40k spaces. But frankly I also think that's because there's actual discussions to be had here, because people are passionate and are allowed to voice their opinions even if they're negative (so long as they maintain some very basic respect). Which is very much in counter-point to every other forum-esque entity I see for 40k / 30k, which tend to be nothing but people posting pictures of their models. So while Dakka skews negative, it's because Dakka allows its patrons to actually discuss rather than forcing them to shill.
There's a difference between constructive discussion and both reinforced positive or negative conversation, I appreciate the candour in acknowledging you feel your own content is almost entirely critical negatively toned comments, but you consider the other option else to be "shilling" which is in itself, a loaded term designed to infer a negative image.
A healthy conversation can have "I don't like X", it can also have "we're here to talk about Y so please stop bringing X into it" when relevant. Space marine kits and their level of monobuild is always a fine line I see walked on B&C which has a rep for being positively skewed by moderation as an example, where "they're a bit mono pose to me, I'm not a fan of this trend" is ok, but "GW have been making boring monopose sculpts since they made that terrible decision to primaris everything and I'm angry they got rid of options XYZ" isn't helpful and would likely get blatted.
Like it or not, the people who post the most are going to get seen the most and there are huge chunks of Heresy threads filled with people complaining and whinging. I come to the forum for background and Heresy discussion and not so long ago both of those parts of the forum were toxic as hell and almost made me dump the site.
So from my point of view, Dakka is a pretty negative place.
While you are of course entitled to your point of view, that is a door that swings both ways. I recognize you pretty well Gert. Mostly because I find you an extremely antagonistic poster who I feel gets incredibly aggro on anyone that disagrees with your stances.
Yes, I realize that's a bit Oroborous of me to say, given my largest contributions to the site for a couple of years has been distaste for GW's in ability to competently design 40k / encouraging people to not buy GW and go 3rd party / pointing out the contemptable idiocy of GW's releases (the aforementioned year+ wait time for the second most basic kit in the entire HH range).
And with that said, I suppose I do have to agree that Dakka is more "negative" than many other 40k spaces. But frankly I also think that's because there's actual discussions to be had here, because people are passionate and are allowed to voice their opinions even if they're negative (so long as they maintain some very basic respect). Which is very much in counter-point to every other forum-esque entity I see for 40k / 30k, which tend to be nothing but people posting pictures of their models. So while Dakka skews negative, it's because Dakka allows its patrons to actually discuss rather than forcing them to shill.
Did you turn oroboros into an adjective on purpose, or was that a typo? Either way, it's the most (intentionally or unintentionally) brilliant thing I've seen all day, cheers
And on that note, you 100% nailed it with your post; it weirds me out a bit how little some people actually want to talk about this thing they supposedly like.
And on that note, you 100% nailed it with your post; it weirds me out a bit how little some people actually want to talk about this thing they supposedly like.
You've also hit the nail on the head. Someone openly admitting they're a net negative input is someone you consider to like things.
my largest contributions to the site for a couple of years has been distaste for GW's in ability to competently design 40k / encouraging people to not buy GW and go 3rd party / pointing out the contemptable idiocy of GW's releases
That doesn't sound like someone that likes something, that sound like someone who is a negative state of disapproval towards something. I'm also willing to place a fair bet it comes from a place of frustration and broken expectations.
Dudeface wrote: That doesn't sound like someone that likes something, that sound like someone who is a negative state of disapproval towards something. I'm also willing to place a fair bet it comes from a place of frustration and broken expectations.
I thought it showed a refreshing level of self-awareness. I typically stay away from "current edition" threads because I'm uninterested and don't want to be That Guy saying it all sucks. I prefer threads celebrating old editions and sharing my favorite features of those older designs in the hopes of recruiting more players for the game I prefer.
I have also noticed that many of the people decrying the negativity of others are ones I purposefully avoid because they are so relentlessly negative themselves. I like an old-time flame war as much as the next Gen Xer, but at a certain point, one recognizes the futility of it all.
I'm much more locked into threads about 2nd ed. 40k and now Bolt Action. That's what brought me back and what I really enjoy.
Dakka is a casualty of the internet becoming smaller and more condensed. Why be forced to hang out with people you hate or disagree with when you could be in the echo chamber of your choice via places like Discord and Reddit? All those posters who complained endlessly about toxic negativity or positivity on here? The /pol/ types who want to complain about minorities in their games? The WAAC players and the fluffbunnies? Most of them have almost certainly migrated to communities that are more in tune with how they feel about the game. Also, in general places like Reddit which has a much larger population in general also tends to have faster traffic. When I had an interest in AoS around the 2.0 era I would often try to take a peak in the AoS board here and it's been dead for years. Pretty much every board that isn't the off-topic board or the 40K boards has had slow traffic for a loooong time, the rot is only just now starting to seep into the 40K area as well.
Dakka is unfortunately just a relic of a bygone era. Community boards are out of fashion and they're all dying slow deaths.
BlaxicanX wrote: Dakka is unfortunately just a relic of a bygone era. Community boards are out of fashion and they're all dying slow deaths.
And yet here you are, someone I've not encountered in all the time I've been here, helpfully telling me I'm wasting my time because everyone is so negative right after I talk about all my positive experiences.
I've always been a bit glass-half-empty, but not only do I completely agree with morganfreeman, I think it's a good example that negativity and toxicity are not the same. And I don't think he meant that if you're not critical of GW then you're shilling for them, more like this forum facilitates both good and bad opinions of GW.
I also don't have a problem with your example complaint: "GW makes boring monopose sculpts ...terrible decision to primaris everything ... I'm angry they got rid of options XYZ"
Obviously it's not constructive by itself but to me it sounds like someone passionate about the hobby that wishes GW didn't take it this direction.
And that leads into morganfreeman advocating for 3rd party models and the like. If someone is happy just buying from GW and playing the current edition, that's fine and they shouldn't be insulted for it, but a hobby vet offering their opinion on why they think alternatives are better is fine too.
Spurred by this relative lull in forum activity, I think this thread became the Horus Heresy over Dakka's reputation. This Forum Shall Burn!
BlaxicanX wrote: Dakka is unfortunately just a relic of a bygone era. Community boards are out of fashion and they're all dying slow deaths.
And yet here you are, someone I've not encountered in all the time I've been here, helpfully telling me I'm wasting my time because everyone is so negative right after I talk about all my positive experiences.
Thanks for that.
What? No one is talking to you, hell I didn't even read the page your post is on before posting. If you're wasting your time here it's because your posts are low-quality, assuming they're all like this, and the only one being negative here is you.
BlaxicanX wrote: Dakka is unfortunately just a relic of a bygone era. Community boards are out of fashion and they're all dying slow deaths.
And yet here you are, someone I've not encountered in all the time I've been here, helpfully telling me I'm wasting my time because everyone is so negative right after I talk about all my positive experiences.
Thanks for that.
What? No one is talking to you, hell I didn't even read the page your post is on before posting. If you're wasting your time here it's because your posts are low-quality, assuming they're all like this, and the only one being negative here is you.
Yikes no cap, this homeboy blaxi be bussin straight outta fortcringe.
In all seriousness the vast majority of the players and old blood are no longer the target market of the game. There is less profit to be found in people that have already invested in product, and more to be found in the younger audience that all have ADHD due to the increasingly biologically toxic environment.
Things need to be streamlined, easy to produce and consume and for us, we just aren't it any more.
BlaxicanX wrote: Dakka is unfortunately just a relic of a bygone era. Community boards are out of fashion and they're all dying slow deaths.
And yet here you are, someone I've not encountered in all the time I've been here, helpfully telling me I'm wasting my time because everyone is so negative right after I talk about all my positive experiences.
Thanks for that.
What? No one is talking to you, hell I didn't even read the page your post is on before posting. If you're wasting your time here it's because your posts are low-quality, assuming they're all like this, and the only one being negative here is you.
Yikes no cap, this homeboy blaxi be bussin straight outta fortcringe.
In all seriousness the vast majority of the players and old blood are no longer the target market of the game. There is less profit to be found in people that have already invested in product, and more to be found in the younger audience that all have ADHD due to the increasingly biologically toxic environment.
Things need to be streamlined, easy to produce and consume and for us, we just aren't it any more.
that last bit is certainly true of myself and most of the people in my game group even the younger ones. i have something akin to 8K in points just for my salmanders (and i still have 2 other "smaller" armies)....and most of it is legends in 10th, i have a bunch of models from FW that they have not made in years. but even then having all the old codexes i can still enjoy 40K the way i always enjoyed it because even if i am not the target audience. i still have everything i need to play the game in the edition/manner i choose. without spending a cent on GW product and that's the last point perfectly.
On a fun side note, i met a brand new 10th ed player last week on game night who plays space wolves...so i showed him the 5th ed codex, after a bit of looking through it and a breif explanation about how the game used to play his response was-"They seem like they were better before".... i just smiled.
BlaxicanX wrote: Dakka is unfortunately just a relic of a bygone era. Community boards are out of fashion and they're all dying slow deaths.
And yet here you are, someone I've not encountered in all the time I've been here, helpfully telling me I'm wasting my time because everyone is so negative right after I talk about all my positive experiences.
Thanks for that.
What? No one is talking to you, hell I didn't even read the page your post is on before posting. If you're wasting your time here it's because your posts are low-quality, assuming they're all like this, and the only one being negative here is you.
So who then were you speaking to?
I mean, you're the one who posted on a forum page for all to read.....
Maréchal des Logis Walter wrote: As humble and insignificant as they might be, i think our crappy photographed subpar tabletop paintjobs and overly common hobby projects are equally the raison d'etre of such a forum.
They are but more aspects we can share and chat about, just as much as rulesets and tactics or stuff. Wargaming is a hobby, it is unnecessary and pointless by itself, and so are any chat about it. If only for us to have a good time. Sharing stories, battlereps, paintjobs, etc help build a good time.
There is a ton of people, who only have their army painted, because minus 10VP means for unpainted army means a lost game, by practicaly every army. They aren't interested in the hobby, they are interested in playing the game. And 10th made a ton of armies they collected legends. Besides a store closing I can't find something that kills a community faster, then people finding out that the armies they have been saving money for a year or two, or more if they are kids, happens to no longer be legal. You are not going to find many people interested in good time, because they are not having a good time right now. Having and being stuck with an annoying army, or one that isn't fun to play was always a reality,at least in the 8-10th ed. But now there is also the aspect of some people and some armies having their armies gone. And to makes matters worse, GW sees no problem with removing marine units from the game, but keeping eldar ones that are much eldar. Armies that had a specific design paradigma, which GW doesn't switch in codex, in an index got demolished. How many Knight Players or dudes who played Custodes, especialy if they had a non FW based army, are in to having fun with w40k right now? Around here they feel more as if GW stole their money, by selling a product that doesn't work.
That's a good point. I can't believe GW actually retired all those models instead of releasing a proxy or counts-as guide, so officially tactical squads count as intercessors, etc.
Maréchal des Logis Walter wrote: As humble and insignificant as they might be, i think our crappy photographed subpar tabletop paintjobs and overly common hobby projects are equally the raison d'etre of such a forum.
They are but more aspects we can share and chat about, just as much as rulesets and tactics or stuff. Wargaming is a hobby, it is unnecessary and pointless by itself, and so are any chat about it. If only for us to have a good time. Sharing stories, battlereps, paintjobs, etc help build a good time.
There is a ton of people, who only have their army painted, because minus 10VP means for unpainted army means a lost game, by practicaly every army. They aren't interested in the hobby, they are interested in playing the game. And 10th made a ton of armies they collected legends. Besides a store closing I can't find something that kills a community faster, then people finding out that the armies they have been saving money for a year or two, or more if they are kids, happens to no longer be legal. You are not going to find many people interested in good time, because they are not having a good time right now. Having and being stuck with an annoying army, or one that isn't fun to play was always a reality,at least in the 8-10th ed. But now there is also the aspect of some people and some armies having their armies gone. And to makes matters worse, GW sees no problem with removing marine units from the game, but keeping eldar ones that are much eldar. Armies that had a specific design paradigma, which GW doesn't switch in codex, in an index got demolished. How many Knight Players or dudes who played Custodes, especialy if they had a non FW based army, are in to having fun with w40k right now? Around here they feel more as if GW stole their money, by selling a product that doesn't work.
I was thinking more about wargaming in general rather than GW games. However you may have a point on the specific GW front, and I can't blame anyone expressing how revolted they are that the collection they have committed so much to are unceremoniously waved away into oblivion. Though this wouldn't be the first time it happens, as, if I am not mistaken, between squats, codices like inquisition, and sub codices that allowed peculiar lists (for instance catachan) have all been disappearing along GW history. Sadly enough.
Still, my point stand: hopefully, wargaming is a way wider hobby than playing a GW ruleset, with many rules, games, minis, and aspects of it from painting to writing stories to converting, or chatting in places like dakka. There is plenty of joy and good times to be found.
Maréchal des Logis Walter wrote: I was thinking more about wargaming in general rather than GW games. However you may have a point on the specific GW front, and I can't blame anyone expressing how revolted they are that the collection they have committed so much to are unceremoniously waved away into oblivion. Though this wouldn't be the first time it happens, as, if I am not mistaken, between squats, codices like inquisition, and sub codices that allowed peculiar lists (for instance catachan) have all been disappearing along GW history. Sadly enough.
Still, my point stand: hopefully, wargaming is a way wider hobby than playing a GW ruleset, with many rules, games, minis, and aspects of it from painting to writing stories to converting, or chatting in places like dakka. There is plenty of joy and good times to be found.
There's nothing wrong with commiserating with fellow hobbyists. In some respects, it's a great way to know that you aren't alone in being disappointed.
It can also result in the formation of a community that keeps the old stuff going. The support and interest I get from other 2nd ed. enthusiasts has rekindled my interest and inspired me to expand my circle of opponents.
And of course, I've picked up a new game thanks to input here in Dakka.
For that, I'm sure to get another dose of flame for being negative.
Dominar_Jameson_V wrote: That's a good point. I can't believe GW actually retired all those models instead of releasing a proxy or counts-as guide, so officially tactical squads count as intercessors, etc.
They did that for some models, for others there's legends which are absolutely valid rules to use. If people invent houserules that disallow legends they... should just not use that houserule when it prevents them from playing their minis.
There is a ton of people, who only have their army painted, because minus 10VP means for unpainted army means a lost game, by practicaly every army. They aren't interested in the hobby, they are interested in playing the game. And 10th made a ton of armies they collected legends. Besides a store closing I can't find something that kills a community faster, then people finding out that the armies they have been saving money for a year or two, or more if they are kids, happens to no longer be legal. You are not going to find many people interested in good time, because they are not having a good time right now. Having and being stuck with an annoying army, or one that isn't fun to play was always a reality,at least in the 8-10th ed. But now there is also the aspect of some people and some armies having their armies gone. And to makes matters worse, GW sees no problem with removing marine units from the game, but keeping eldar ones that are much eldar. Armies that had a specific design paradigma, which GW doesn't switch in codex, in an index got demolished. How many Knight Players or dudes who played Custodes, especialy if they had a non FW based army, are in to having fun with w40k right now? Around here they feel more as if GW stole their money, by selling a product that doesn't work.
I was thinking more about wargaming in general rather than GW games. However you may have a point on the specific GW front, and I can't blame anyone expressing how revolted they are that the collection they have committed so much to are unceremoniously waved away into oblivion. Though this wouldn't be the first time it happens, as, if I am not mistaken, between squats, codices like inquisition, and sub codices that allowed peculiar lists (for instance catachan) have all been disappearing along GW history. Sadly enough.
Oh if in general then I totaly agree. Now I don't claim to be on every forum and every reddit that deals with w30k and w40k, but the amount of talk about how "legion" specific uniforms looked for specific periods in Hail Cesar, clothes/uniforms and banners looked for all the historical games is incomperable to what is done with w40k. w30k seems to be a place where people do more hobby, but then again, that community resamblances to me some of the classic sports communities, where they got to the other end of the spectrum and suddenly "your dudes" are no longer your dudes, because they have to be period accurate eg you can't use certain moves/throws/etc because pre 1968 those were not used. etc.
I also think that perspective is important. 30 years of gaming on one person, will make them immune to certain changes, or no longer suprised by them. On the other hand someone like me , who started as a kid in 8th, the "we will keep stuff in indexs, so people go out and buy those things, and then remove them 3 months later in the actual codex" is a hands on expiriance we didn't get. And just being told that X can happen or happened isn't the same, as going through it on your own.
Still, my point stand: hopefully, wargaming is a way wider hobby than playing a GW ruleset, with many rules, games, minis, and aspects of it from painting to writing stories to converting, or chatting in places like dakka. There is plenty of joy and good times to be found.
I agree, with the asterix that there is a ton of people who are not that much interested in anything outside of w40k, gaming aspect. There is far more people that quit the game, because they had no one to play or the rules were no longer fun to play, then the number of people that quit, because they suddenly stoped liking the lore. It is a bit like the argument that Y activity, maybe not great, but with friends is good. True argument, but then one checks how many people in the population in the 15-35y male age group have no friends, and the argument becomes slightly weaker. Still for all those that can have full enjoyment, through out an edition, from just painting models is only to envy.
If people invent houserules that disallow legends they... should just not use that houserule when it prevents them from playing their minis.
It is not house rules. They don't even have rules for those units on the app, or in the codex. Now GW may think that open or narrative, is the same kind of a game as matched played, but it is not. And no amount of GW saying that, if your opponent allows it you can use it, won't fix the problem. Remember when rule of 3 was supposed to be just for tournaments, or that 10VP handicap for unpainted was , according to some people, just for tournament games? Well somehow people treated both rules very serious.
There's a difference between constructive discussion and both reinforced positive or negative conversation, I appreciate the candour in acknowledging you feel your own content is almost entirely critical negatively toned comments, but you consider the other option else to be "shilling" which is in itself, a loaded term designed to infer a negative image.
A healthy conversation can have "I don't like X", it can also have "we're here to talk about Y so please stop bringing X into it" when relevant. Space marine kits and their level of monobuild is always a fine line I see walked on B&C which has a rep for being positively skewed by moderation as an example, where "they're a bit mono pose to me, I'm not a fan of this trend" is ok, but "GW have been making boring monopose sculpts since they made that terrible decision to primaris everything and I'm angry they got rid of options XYZ" isn't helpful and would likely get blatted.
So I really don't appreciate the first part of this. While I acknowledge the negative aspects of my posting. I'm distinctly not indicating talking about discussion because those "negatives" only come up in threads and conversations where it's pertinent. And then they're rarely the point I'm making in and of itself.
I've no issue voicing my opinions but only when relevant and they're rarely the "main" point. IIRC the last time I commented on not supporting GW was when the HH Rumors thread started talking about how many 3rd party Etsy bits were available. And my contribution was to point out that a large portion of that "boom" was due to GW's own incompetence.
That doesn't sound like someone that likes something, that sound like someone who is a negative state of disapproval towards something. I'm also willing to place a fair bet it comes from a place of frustration and broken expectations.
I'm detecting a bit of a theme here.
I don't agree with how you construe negative. Or, at least, I don't think it applies to Dakka.
I view myself as "negative" in that I hold negative opinions of aspects of the hobby and will not refrain from voicing them if they become relevant. However I am not negative in the sense of barelling into every thread and yeeting out hatred where it has absolutely no place. So discussing negative aspects, but only when relevant or called for; not trolling or forcing my opinion into unwelcome spaces. Furthermore, for me at least, the negativity is often times not the point. Referring to my comment on the 3rd party HH scene, the point of that was at the glut of options available. The "negativity" was indicating that the cause was GW's incompetent, which also served to highlight how they're often their own undoing given GW's constant efforts to strangle the third party scene.
As for me myself: I really like 40k as a hobby and a setting. I spend hours and mad amounts of $$$ on it for those reasons. I also think GW is a company run by brain damaged hogs and 40k is garbage as a wargame.
And even then I'm specific. I hate what 40k is because it's no longer the wargame hobby I bought in to. I believe that, as a wargame, 40k has become objectively worse with time. That's not to say that it's a bad game; looking around the internet it honestly looks fine as a babies-first-deck-builder / CCG with hyper expensive tokens and a play-time slowed down by insane little details. That is frankly a fine niche to occupy. And that's absolutely not what I want from 40k.
that last bit is certainly true of myself and most of the people in my game group even the younger ones. i have something akin to 8K in points just for my salmanders (and i still have 2 other "smaller" armies)....and most of it is legends in 10th, i have a bunch of models from FW that they have not made in years. but even then having all the old codexes i can still enjoy 40K the way i always enjoyed it because even if i am not the target audience. i still have everything i need to play the game in the edition/manner i choose. without spending a cent on GW product and that's the last point perfectly.
On a fun side note, i met a brand new 10th ed player last week on game night who plays space wolves...so i showed him the 5th ed codex, after a bit of looking through it and a breif explanation about how the game used to play his response was-"They seem like they were better before".... i just smiled.
Bit of an unrelated tangent here, but this gives me the perfect opportunity to voice a thought I've had: GW's current strategy is exactly the same as DC's was before Marvel got big.
I'm not much of a comic buff, but for those not in the know DC was the original big-boy. However they decided comics only appealed to children. So they made their strategy to just re-do the same arcs with the same characters every few years, with the idea that their audience was naturally cycling in and out. All they'd have to do was change a few words here and there, maybe draw the art a bit better each time, and other than that very little effort required for never-ending profit.
Well, suffice it to say they were dead wrong. The staleness they brought to the genre they unequivocally controlled allowed other brands to get a foot in the door and then even get on equal footing, leading us to where we are now.
Sound familiar? I won't hold my breathe, but I'd be tickled pink of history repeated itself.
If people invent houserules that disallow legends they... should just not use that houserule when it prevents them from playing their minis.
It is not house rules. They don't even have rules for those units on the app, or in the codex. Now GW may think that open or narrative, is the same kind of a game as matched played, but it is not. And no amount of GW saying that, if your opponent allows it you can use it, won't fix the problem. Remember when rule of 3 was supposed to be just for tournaments, or that 10VP handicap for unpainted was , according to some people, just for tournament games? Well somehow people treated both rules very serious.
If you're not in a tourney it most certainly IS a house rule.
The rules for Legends are published, by GW, on GWs Community site.
These are the official rules for all (well, most anyways. Seems they akways overlook something.) of the discontinued (and now HH) models in your collection.
It does not matter that they are not printed in the codex or provided in the app.
And the reason they are not in the codex or app? Is because GW is not advertising models they don't sell.
There's a difference between constructive discussion and both reinforced positive or negative conversation, I appreciate the candour in acknowledging you feel your own content is almost entirely critical negatively toned comments, but you consider the other option else to be "shilling" which is in itself, a loaded term designed to infer a negative image.
A healthy conversation can have "I don't like X", it can also have "we're here to talk about Y so please stop bringing X into it" when relevant. Space marine kits and their level of monobuild is always a fine line I see walked on B&C which has a rep for being positively skewed by moderation as an example, where "they're a bit mono pose to me, I'm not a fan of this trend" is ok, but "GW have been making boring monopose sculpts since they made that terrible decision to primaris everything and I'm angry they got rid of options XYZ" isn't helpful and would likely get blatted.
So I really don't appreciate the first part of this. While I acknowledge the negative aspects of my posting. I'm distinctly not indicating talking about discussion because those "negatives" only come up in threads and conversations where it's pertinent. And then they're rarely the point I'm making in and of itself.
I've no issue voicing my opinions but only when relevant and they're rarely the "main" point. IIRC the last time I commented on not supporting GW was when the HH Rumors thread started talking about how many 3rd party Etsy bits were available. And my contribution was to point out that a large portion of that "boom" was due to GW's own incompetence.
That doesn't sound like someone that likes something, that sound like someone who is a negative state of disapproval towards something. I'm also willing to place a fair bet it comes from a place of frustration and broken expectations.
I'm detecting a bit of a theme here.
I don't agree with how you construe negative. Or, at least, I don't think it applies to Dakka.
I view myself as "negative" in that I hold negative opinions of aspects of the hobby and will not refrain from voicing them if they become relevant. However I am not negative in the sense of barelling into every thread and yeeting out hatred where it has absolutely no place. So discussing negative aspects, but only when relevant or called for; not trolling or forcing my opinion into unwelcome spaces. Furthermore, for me at least, the negativity is often times not the point. Referring to my comment on the 3rd party HH scene, the point of that was at the glut of options available. The "negativity" was indicating that the cause was GW's incompetent, which also served to highlight how they're often their own undoing given GW's constant efforts to strangle the third party scene.
As for me myself: I really like 40k as a hobby and a setting. I spend hours and mad amounts of $$$ on it for those reasons. I also think GW is a company run by brain damaged hogs and 40k is garbage as a wargame.
And even then I'm specific. I hate what 40k is because it's no longer the wargame hobby I bought in to. I believe that, as a wargame, 40k has become objectively worse with time. That's not to say that it's a bad game; looking around the internet it honestly looks fine as a babies-first-deck-builder / CCG with hyper expensive tokens and a play-time slowed down by insane little details. That is frankly a fine niche to occupy. And that's absolutely not what I want from 40k.
First up, sorry if any offense was taken, that really wasn't the intent. I actually really appreciated the openness and tone of your post. I haven't really noted your posts in particular and didn't drove through your post history to review content, I leaned on your own admission of having negative thoughts.
I do agree that the definition of negative is actually the issue here, as it isn't a clear thing and the mods seemingly aren't set on what it represents either.
There are 3 types of negativity in my opinion you can run into, the first being genuine negative comment regards a product/practice/company as they have done something less than great or that could be done better, which is likely where I'd imagine the bulk of yours fall from your explanation. This generally comes from a place of passion for something and caring how good it is. Generally this results in good open conversation.
The second are those who simply dislike things and feels a need to constantly state how bad something is, assume the worst, irrespective of what it is. The "GW bad and always will be" camp if you like. Those who are never pleased with anything they put out and seemingly are here because they're entrenched in the game/setting and are either playing old editions or just sticking with it out of a lack of options. These are the "negative majority" you tend to hit a lot or associate with dakka, in my experience. It's not fun to engage with, becomes tiring to read over and over and you question if they even enjoy what they do.
The third kind are those who tell you you're doing it wrong if you don't agree or happen to like something. These are the perpetual boycotters, make critical comments against others who aren't on their page, tell you not to support things, want the game and the company to go under etc. What would otherwise be a confrontational troll. Some of these have gone lately, some posters fall in here part time, but there's still a few which don't help that negative image of the forum.
That's not to say that there aren't other people who have a poor tone (evidently mine included) sometimes who aren't being negative, but they tend to be the minority in the bun fight.
Regardless it feels a pointless conversation to me, as negative in the context of the forum behaviour is a subjective construct, but given it's the label of discussion here and it is an emotionally charged one, it's hard to fairly ascribe it to a place or person in a detached logical manner.
There's a difference between constructive discussion and both reinforced positive or negative conversation, I appreciate the candour in acknowledging you feel your own content is almost entirely critical negatively toned comments, but you consider the other option else to be "shilling" which is in itself, a loaded term designed to infer a negative image.
A healthy conversation can have "I don't like X", it can also have "we're here to talk about Y so please stop bringing X into it" when relevant. Space marine kits and their level of monobuild is always a fine line I see walked on B&C which has a rep for being positively skewed by moderation as an example, where "they're a bit mono pose to me, I'm not a fan of this trend" is ok, but "GW have been making boring monopose sculpts since they made that terrible decision to primaris everything and I'm angry they got rid of options XYZ" isn't helpful and would likely get blatted.
So I really don't appreciate the first part of this. While I acknowledge the negative aspects of my posting. I'm distinctly not indicating talking about discussion because those "negatives" only come up in threads and conversations where it's pertinent. And then they're rarely the point I'm making in and of itself.
I've no issue voicing my opinions but only when relevant and they're rarely the "main" point. IIRC the last time I commented on not supporting GW was when the HH Rumors thread started talking about how many 3rd party Etsy bits were available. And my contribution was to point out that a large portion of that "boom" was due to GW's own incompetence.
That doesn't sound like someone that likes something, that sound like someone who is a negative state of disapproval towards something. I'm also willing to place a fair bet it comes from a place of frustration and broken expectations.
I'm detecting a bit of a theme here.
I don't agree with how you construe negative. Or, at least, I don't think it applies to Dakka.
I view myself as "negative" in that I hold negative opinions of aspects of the hobby and will not refrain from voicing them if they become relevant. However I am not negative in the sense of barelling into every thread and yeeting out hatred where it has absolutely no place. So discussing negative aspects, but only when relevant or called for; not trolling or forcing my opinion into unwelcome spaces. Furthermore, for me at least, the negativity is often times not the point. Referring to my comment on the 3rd party HH scene, the point of that was at the glut of options available. The "negativity" was indicating that the cause was GW's incompetent, which also served to highlight how they're often their own undoing given GW's constant efforts to strangle the third party scene.
As for me myself: I really like 40k as a hobby and a setting. I spend hours and mad amounts of $$$ on it for those reasons. I also think GW is a company run by brain damaged hogs and 40k is garbage as a wargame.
And even then I'm specific. I hate what 40k is because it's no longer the wargame hobby I bought in to. I believe that, as a wargame, 40k has become objectively worse with time. That's not to say that it's a bad game; looking around the internet it honestly looks fine as a babies-first-deck-builder / CCG with hyper expensive tokens and a play-time slowed down by insane little details. That is frankly a fine niche to occupy. And that's absolutely not what I want from 40k.
that last bit is certainly true of myself and most of the people in my game group even the younger ones. i have something akin to 8K in points just for my salmanders (and i still have 2 other "smaller" armies)....and most of it is legends in 10th, i have a bunch of models from FW that they have not made in years. but even then having all the old codexes i can still enjoy 40K the way i always enjoyed it because even if i am not the target audience. i still have everything i need to play the game in the edition/manner i choose. without spending a cent on GW product and that's the last point perfectly.
On a fun side note, i met a brand new 10th ed player last week on game night who plays space wolves...so i showed him the 5th ed codex, after a bit of looking through it and a breif explanation about how the game used to play his response was-"They seem like they were better before".... i just smiled.
Bit of an unrelated tangent here, but this gives me the perfect opportunity to voice a thought I've had: GW's current strategy is exactly the same as DC's was before Marvel got big.
I'm not much of a comic buff, but for those not in the know DC was the original big-boy. However they decided comics only appealed to children. So they made their strategy to just re-do the same arcs with the same characters every few years, with the idea that their audience was naturally cycling in and out. All they'd have to do was change a few words here and there, maybe draw the art a bit better each time, and other than that very little effort required for never-ending profit.
Well, suffice it to say they were dead wrong. The staleness they brought to the genre they unequivocally controlled allowed other brands to get a foot in the door and then even get on equal footing, leading us to where we are now.
Sound familiar? I won't hold my breathe, but I'd be tickled pink of history repeated itself.
I know next to nothing about comic book history either but is there a Marvel or even a company the next tier down there to take the crown from GW. I've seen them come close to having competitors a few times (Mantic, War Machine) but they've always faded away when GW puts in a big marketing and PR push.
I don't know anything about comics - but GW is successful precisely because it manages that process of cycling players in and out, and has done for decades.
Any competitor has to do the same thing. Look at Warmahordes, look at X-Wing. They've broken themselves on this process. Your business depends on selling existing players new stuff. This brings bloat, complexity and puts new players off. But then you have a reset and you alienate the existing players. Which results in games that were at one point giving 40k a run for its money are now toast.
Battletech for instance is doing well at the moment - but will it last? Or is it the case that a lot of people are buying in - and once they are in that's it. They are done. And then they'll fade out and the sales will fade away with them.
Dominar_Jameson_V wrote: That's a good point. I can't believe GW actually retired all those models instead of releasing a proxy or counts-as guide, so officially tactical squads count as intercessors, etc.
The Chapterhouse lawsuit and its consequences have been a disaster for humankind. Sometimes it feels like kitbashing and proxying are the boogeyman that keeps GW awake at night.
BlaxicanX wrote: The Chapterhouse lawsuit and its consequences have been a disaster for humankind. Sometimes it feels like kitbashing and proxying are the boogeyman that keeps GW awake at night.
I'd say that reliable and good clones or piracy of their golden goose (the models) is exactly what keeps them up at night!
Dai wrote: [ I'd say that reliable and good clones or piracy of their golden goose (the models) is exactly what keeps them up at night!
And as Gaben Newell famously said, "piracy is always a service problem". GWs problems are all self-inflicted through combinations of apathy and greed. Especially during the era when the chapterhouse lawsuit was going on, for a "golden goose" GW was sure doing a terrible job of supporting it.
Dai wrote: [
I'd say that reliable and good clones or piracy of their golden goose (the models) is exactly what keeps them up at night!
And as Gaben Newell famously said, "piracy is always a service problem". GWs problems are all self-inflicted through combinations of apathy and greed. Especially during the era when the chapterhouse lawsuit was going on, for a "golden goose" GW was sure doing a terrible job of supporting it.
I don't disagree, just saying if there is one thing that they are having sleepless nights about it is copies of their minis being made cheaply and reliably available!
Dai wrote: [
I'd say that reliable and good clones or piracy of their golden goose (the models) is exactly what keeps them up at night!
And as Gaben Newell famously said, "piracy is always a service problem". GWs problems are all self-inflicted through combinations of apathy and greed. Especially during the era when the chapterhouse lawsuit was going on, for a "golden goose" GW was sure doing a terrible job of supporting it.
I don't disagree, just saying if there is one thing that they are having sleepless nights about it is copies of their minis being made cheaply and reliably available!
This conjures up an image of gw's offices being entirely staffed by Mr. Krabs clones, which made me laugh.
Interesting observation when we discussed this topic at the FLGS this weekend. when it comes to 10th, we see loads of people playing tournaments in our anecdotal experience. but almost nobody playing pickup/casual games at the FLGS. if you look back through my posts in my weekly game store updates we see at most 3 different games of 10th ed 40K being played, but usually less, by comparison some nights there are half a dozen different battle tech games going on as well as everything else. including oldhammer, and various non-GW games. most of the 40K vets just are "not feeling" the new edition. it isn't the kind of game they are looking for.
Interesting side note...recent interview with Andy Chambers, he wanted to do away with the IGOUGO system in 3rd ed, BUT GW would not let him. that would have completely changed the design flow of the game IMHO.
Was that why 3.5ed was created in a few weeks and the "real" 4th ed rules were used to make the Starship Trooper game, after he left GW? Because that is what people around here tell how it went down.
From my point of view I can only envy people that have those 100+ players communities where different types of w40k can and are played. Around here the difference between tournament games and tournament rules, and the regular store games, is more linked to how much a given player can afford and how easy, for a regular player, it is to get a specific models.
So the csm tournament player will have the 3 lords, 3 rhinos, 3 chosen, 3 mutants and dark commune, with forgefiend support and nurglings. While the regular store player or someone who is just starting csm will have the same list minus the 6 boxes of mutants+commune, because those are hard to get and super expensive. So his list may have oblits, maybe some legioneries or cultists. The eldar player, is probably not running 2 hornets, but the rest of the list will be the same. the space marine player sure as hell didn't buy 3 boxes of kill team to get primaris scouts or the centurions, but the maxed aggresor unit with maxed intereceptors are going to be there.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ccs 812319 11620858 wrote:
And the reason they are not in the codex or app? Is because GW is not advertising models they don't sell.
If GW were to remove from the game all the units that they don't sell, then we would be in an "interesting" position. Because on one hand a great chunk their core model lines are out of stock for months, and stores can not order them. While at the same time, there are units, mostly eldar for some reason, like Fugen, which GW doesn't sell, but somehow do not get legened for some reason. If something is not in the codex, not in the app, and GW doesn't care for updating the rules, never mind the units they just straight up removed. Then to allow those things is a house rule. But this argument has no point, it is like telling people that X is fine in narrative or fixed by opponent being "nice". Legends are not played at events, and if they aren't played at events, people won't allow them to be used in regular games.
The Chapterhouse lawsuit and its consequences have been a disaster for humankind. Sometimes it feels like kitbashing and proxying are the boogeyman that keeps GW awake at night.
GW, if it was possible for them, would be open to have models that bio degrade after 2-3 years. The stuff they do just so people have to buy every load out, can't use same units for multiple games is so bad, that at some points it just becomes laughable. Plastic contemtpors and other HH tanks/models , which they advertised as usable in w40k, suddenly became illegal, because of "lore" updates. Some factions can have basic gear for their entire army, when others have a page sized upgrade option list for one unit. Design team members are allowed to have pet projects and pet armies, with which they run wild, no matter, if models for the stuff are plastic/resin/etc, others have perfectly fine and new plastic model lines removed. And on top of that the changes and fixing takes YEARS for GW. Primaris came out in 8th, GW will maybe finish updating their stuff for various marines factions in maybe 11th or 12th ed? That is maybe okey for a community of 35+ super fans, what is another 6-9 years of waiting when they already waited for that long or more. But a large enough group of new players, who want to start a specific army, are not going to stay for 6 years. Hoping that now they will spend 600-1000$ on stuff they do not want, but maybe in the future GW will update it and then they can rebuy the army.
Other games, including ones from other companies, are much better at player retention then what is going on with w40k. I wonder if the company even cares about it though, maybe their business plan is that in the next 10-15years their core audiance will be 45-60y oldes and practicaly no new players. GW is to a large degree a monopolist that runs on inertia. If they were a new company, and tried the stuff they are doing now, their games and the company would be dead in 3-4 years.
Interesting side note...recent interview with Andy Chambers, he wanted to do away with the IGOUGO system in 3rd ed, BUT GW would not let him. that would have completely changed the design flow of the game IMHO.
That's not what he said.
He says verbatim-
Definitely by 3rd edition we should have ditched the IGOUGO approach. I stood up for it, I used to argue for it. I like the way it let you sort of like execute a plan with all of your stuff at once. It seemed very clear cut to me, but looking back on it now now, there's just seeds of destruction are built into that, there are really too much hangs off who gets first turn and stuff like that, and you can mitigate it by hiding and overwatch and stuff like that, but at its core, satisfying as it is to be able to use your whole army at once, it's it's a flawed mechanism I feel. I don't design games like that any more. And I mean, if I'd learned properly earlier on I wouldn't have done it at that point but there you go...
The "it" he is referring to in that quote is the Andy Chambers of the mid 90s favouring IGOUGO in game design, which present day Andy Chambers does not.
Other games, including ones from other companies, are much better at player retention then what is going on with w40k.
This is difficult to prove.
Certainly right now, there's a lot of annecdotal evidence that legacy players are leaving this particular edition.
But GW continue to be the dominant force in the industry, so they are replacing legacy players with equal or close to equal numbers of new players.
You look at a game like Battletech, and certainly it's as old as 40k or close to it, and it's seeing a surge in popularity now, but it's changed ownership 4 or 5 times in its lifespan.
Other games, including ones from other companies, are much better at player retention then what is going on with w40k.
This is difficult to prove.
Certainly right now, there's a lot of annecdotal evidence that legacy players are leaving this particular edition.
But GW continue to be the dominant force in the industry, so they are replacing legacy players with equal or close to equal numbers of new players.
You look at a game like Battletech, and certainly it's as old as 40k or close to it, and it's seeing a surge in popularity now, but it's changed ownership 4 or 5 times in its lifespan.
I think if 40k faced the same issues as Battletech has it wouldbe in even worse shape.
Other games, including ones from other companies, are much better at player retention then what is going on with w40k.
This is difficult to prove.
Certainly right now, there's a lot of annecdotal evidence that legacy players are leaving this particular edition.
But GW continue to be the dominant force in the industry, so they are replacing legacy players with equal or close to equal numbers of new players.
You look at a game like Battletech, and certainly it's as old as 40k or close to it, and it's seeing a surge in popularity now, but it's changed ownership 4 or 5 times in its lifespan.
I think if 40k faced the same issues as Battletech has it wouldbe in even worse shape.
I think you've reversed the games in that sentence....
Other games, including ones from other companies, are much better at player retention then what is going on with w40k. I wonder if the company even cares about it though, maybe their business plan is that in the next 10-15years their core audiance will be 45-60y oldes and practicaly no new players. GW is to a large degree a monopolist that runs on inertia. If they were a new company, and tried the stuff they are doing now, their games and the company would be dead in 3-4 years.
Player retention is more of concern if goal is to sell those 45-60yo's more models.
Less so when strategy is to sell to NEW players.
Compare profit of gw and companies with better player retention to see who has better strategy.
ccs wrote: I think you've reversed the games in that sentence....
No. I'm saying that if 40k had been tangled up in an IP issue since the 1990s that prevented them from using Dreadnoughts, Terminators, Land Raiders, and Bolters the game likely wouldn't have survived whereas Battletech has.
ccs wrote: I think you've reversed the games in that sentence....
No. I'm saying that if 40k had been tangled up in an IP issue since the 1990s that prevented them from using Dreadnoughts, Terminators, Land Raiders, and Bolters the game likely wouldn't have survived whereas Battletech has.
Sure it would've. BTech was never prevented from using mechs, or Warhammers, Phoenix Hawks, etc. Or even the stats for those mechs in question. Just particular art.
GW would've changed just the art/minis. Indeed they've done exactly that for dreads/termies/Land Raiders/& bolters multiple times anyways.
ccs wrote: I think you've reversed the games in that sentence....
No. I'm saying that if 40k had been tangled up in an IP issue since the 1990s that prevented them from using Dreadnoughts, Terminators, Land Raiders, and Bolters the game likely wouldn't have survived whereas Battletech has.
Sure it would've. BTech was never prevented from using mechs, or Warhammers, Phoenix Hawks, etc. Or even the stats for those mechs in question. Just particular art.
GW would've changed just the art/minis. Indeed they've done exactly that for dreads/termies/Land Raiders/& bolters multiple times anyways.
Except that wasn't the entirety of it.
"However, FASA was sufficiently shaken by the experience to unilaterally stop using not only the Super Dimension Fortress Macross mechsnote but the Dougramnote and Crusher Joe note derived mechs as well, and any other design not created by FASA themselves. This ended in the odd situation of having to ban the designs created for FASA by Studio Nue (who had created Super Dimension Fortress Macross) so that BattleTech could be exported to Japan while not stepping on any toes. These 'Mech designs became known as the Unseen. The stats were (and still are) valid and legal for game purposes, but the ban did not allow any artwork or new miniatures to be made (and because no new artwork could be made, technical readout sourcebooks couldn't include updated variants as the timeline advanced and new technology was added to the game world, meaning the Unseen lagged behind with their most recent variants topping out around 3050).
This was especially devastating because the list of 'Mechs was more or less a who's-who of the most popular 'Mechs in the entire game - the Marauder, Warhammer, Archer and BattleMaster in particular were some of the most beloved 'Mechs of all time among the fans, the Griffin, Shadow Hawk, and Wolverine are "the 55-ton triangle,"note the Locust, Wasp, Stinger, and Phoenix Hawk are in-universe the most commonly-available 'Mechs during the Succession Wars period, and the Warhammer, Marauder, and BattleMaster even had something of a special place in BattleTech fiction: a tricked-out Warhammer being Natasha Kerensky's personal ride, her rival The Bounty Hunter cruising in a Marauder, and Hanse Davion and the Red Corsair piloting BattleMasters."
So those designs couldn't just have new art made, for fear of that sparking another lawsuit.
I can't imagine 40k still being around if Marines and Orks were forcibly squatted in the mid-90s.
ccs wrote: I think you've reversed the games in that sentence....
No. I'm saying that if 40k had been tangled up in an IP issue since the 1990s that prevented them from using Dreadnoughts, Terminators, Land Raiders, and Bolters the game likely wouldn't have survived whereas Battletech has.
Sure it would've. BTech was never prevented from using mechs, or Warhammers, Phoenix Hawks, etc. Or even the stats for those mechs in question. Just particular art.
GW would've changed just the art/minis. Indeed they've done exactly that for dreads/termies/Land Raiders/& bolters multiple times anyways.
Except that wasn't the entirety of it.
"However, FASA was sufficiently shaken by the experience to unilaterally stop using not only the Super Dimension Fortress Macross mechsnote but the Dougramnote and Crusher Joe note derived mechs as well, and any other design not created by FASA themselves. This ended in the odd situation of having to ban the designs created for FASA by Studio Nue (who had created Super Dimension Fortress Macross) so that BattleTech could be exported to Japan while not stepping on any toes. These 'Mech designs became known as the Unseen. The stats were (and still are) valid and legal for game purposes, but the ban did not allow any artwork or new miniatures to be made (and because no new artwork could be made, technical readout sourcebooks couldn't include updated variants as the timeline advanced and new technology was added to the game world, meaning the Unseen lagged behind with their most recent variants topping out around 3050).
This was especially devastating because the list of 'Mechs was more or less a who's-who of the most popular 'Mechs in the entire game - the Marauder, Warhammer, Archer and BattleMaster in particular were some of the most beloved 'Mechs of all time among the fans, the Griffin, Shadow Hawk, and Wolverine are "the 55-ton triangle,"note the Locust, Wasp, Stinger, and Phoenix Hawk are in-universe the most commonly-available 'Mechs during the Succession Wars period, and the Warhammer, Marauder, and BattleMaster even had something of a special place in BattleTech fiction: a tricked-out Warhammer being Natasha Kerensky's personal ride, her rival The Bounty Hunter cruising in a Marauder, and Hanse Davion and the Red Corsair piloting BattleMasters."
So those designs couldn't just have new art made, for fear of that sparking another lawsuit.
I can't imagine 40k still being around if Marines and Orks were forcibly squatted in the mid-90s.
Oh, now we're moving the goal posts to actually squatting whole factions rather than just changing the designs....
BT? Yeah, I know the full history. If you feel the need to rehash it let's move it to the BT section rather than clog a 40k thread.
Other than that we'll just have to disagree wether we think 40k could've survived if GW had had to change the art/designs on some stuff early on.
You think no, I think yes, neither of us is likely to change our opinion, & we'll never know because it didn't happen.
ccs wrote: Oh, now we're moving the goal posts to actually squatting whole factions rather than just changing the designs....
That's pretty much how important to BTech the Unseen mechs were at that stage/
BT? Yeah, I know the full history. If you feel the need to rehash it let's move it to the BT section rather than clog a 40k thread.
Other than that we'll just have to disagree wether we think 40k could've survived if GW had had to change the art/designs on some stuff early on.
If you know the whole history why are you claiming they could have just changed the art? That wasn't the case given the 2017 lawsuit for using entirely new designs for a computer game. Now we can argue about whether they should have won the case or not but back in 1996 it wasn't something they could afford to risk having to fight again especially as we don't know what the settlement was.
Battletech it should be noted is quite differant from warhammer in one key area. "presentation".
Battletech is not a Miniatures DRIVEN game, like Warhammer is. people can sue whatever tokens they want and most players don't care, (it's record sheet based, which meant that even though the art etc dissappered the classic mechs where still in USE (I'd used the marauder etc many times during the height of the unseen debacle) warhammer 40k is. so yeah if 40k was hit with a lawsuit making all their images unseen it'd be a disaster, whereas with FASA the real damage was honestly how costly the legal fight was. so GW would be able to likely fight it out, but if they did lose it would gut them.
I think there is some truth to the argument that 10th Edition WH40k is losing longer term players. It certainly doesn't interest me, and I have been playing since RT. The relentless edition / codex cycle is part of that, but basically I don't like the current iteration of the game. I might dive back in when they get around to giving the Orks a codex, but Heresy 2.0 is the system I prefer to play. In fact, I came back to Dakka principally in the hope of finding Heresy players who wanted to talk about the models and army lists. There are few who post somewhat regularly, but the 30k sub-forum is generally pretty moribund. Overall, there seems to be a lot less activity on modelling topics than there used to be.
Snord wrote: I think there is some truth to the argument that 10th Edition WH40k is losing longer term players. It certainly doesn't interest me, and I have been playing since RT. The relentless edition / codex cycle is part of that, but basically I don't like the current iteration of the game. I might dive back in when they get around to giving the Orks a codex, but Heresy 2.0 is the system I prefer to play. In fact, I came back to Dakka principally in the hope of finding Heresy players who wanted to talk about the models and army lists. There are few who post somewhat regularly, but the 30k sub-forum is generally pretty moribund. Overall, there seems to be a lot less activity on modelling topics than there used to be.
I think long term players are definitely not that interested generally speaking (if anyone reading this is long term and loves 10th, no shade, just going off anecdotal stuff and enjoy your game!). Question is does that actually bother GW, they seem to be attracting more new players than ever. They showed with fantasy battle that they are happy to throw old boys and girls under the bus to try attract a younger, hipper audience
I don't know how it looks at the stores in other countries, but 8th was huge for new players. When I started there was like 24+ of us begining. Older players didn't knew what to do with us. 9th, while a better system, was not so fun for some armies, and a lot of new players learned that GW does not fix things and if they try it takes years sometimes for them to do anything. By the time 9th was ending the four stores I have played on a regular basis were all old players and returning old players. 10th brought no new players to w40k. The cost+rules+how deep the changes are to the list killed interest for the game among old and new players. OPR is played a lot, AoS exists, and people actualy started playing skirmish systems other then GW ones. A new player right now, post covid, mid of a war, with super high inflation etc after hearing that an army costs around 700-900$ and that it can be invalidated next FAQ or edition, just do a 180.
And that is with recast being EXTREMLY popular here. We have stores that have their own recast/3d printing serices, there is Kromlech stuff, there are people that get their files from the german printers which are almost perfect copies of GW originals. All that and new people still don't want to play.
The cost to fun ratio in my country just got breached. I assume it is different else where, and I am both happy for those people and very envious of them, at the same time.
Karol wrote: I don't know how it looks at the stores in other countries, but 8th was huge for new players. When I started there was like 24+ of us begining. Older players didn't knew what to do with us. 9th, while a better system, was not so fun for some armies, and a lot of new players learned that GW does not fix things and if they try it takes years sometimes for them to do anything. By the time 9th was ending the four stores I have played on a regular basis were all old players and returning old players. 10th brought no new players to w40k. The cost+rules+how deep the changes are to the list killed interest for the game among old and new players.
I really got started with 8th edition and I can say that out of the three I have been through it was my favorite. 9th got way to over complicated with rules bloat and as you said GW either did not fix things or often made things worst and now with 10th it feels to me like n over correction in the other direction. To be fair we only have like 4 codexes and it's been less then half a year or so but I have little real interest right now.
Question I am asking myself is: while I imagine a fair few older players would stick to painting, modeling, etc, how many new players would strive into wargaming after quickly quitting 40k?
Older players around are, I find, often not only there for the GW rules: either they like other aspects of the hobby, or they know and play other games they came to know after, for a fair few, being introduced to the world of wargaming via Warhammer.
But is the same true of newer player? Do they tend to stick around for the rest of the wargaming hobby or other games, or do they simply give up?
I mean, I'd be interested to see if GW are actually attracting more new players than ever before OR if long-term players are increasingly leaving the game. Nobody has any actual data to back this up, probably because it's inherently difficult to track.
At least anecdotally 10th has essentially flatlined the 40k player numbers; a bunch of 20-30 year olds left and are playing other games, but a bunch of 40+ dads came back. I have to yet to meet anyone who started in 10th; most people started in 8th or 9th. Tournament attendance is WAAAAAY down with fewer tickets being sold and more drop-outs the day of. The LGS sold 80 copies of Leviathan compared to 125 of Indomitus.
But that's the thing; all of that is anecdotal and there could be a myriad of intertwined reasons why it's happening. 80 boxes vs 125 boxes might just be because of allocation. Tournament attendance dropping could be because there's generally more events than there used to be in mid-8th and general economic conditions mean that a lot of out-of-towners might not want to spend on money, travel, accomm, food etc. I know for a fact why a bunch of those 20's-30's year old players stopped playing because I asked them (they felt 9th was in a good spot and didn't need a complete overhaul and that 10th is still a gigantic hot mess only made worse by how boring Indexhammer is) but again, that could just be a unique factor of my local area.
Certainly when it comes to reactions online, I think 10th is the most polarizing edition I've personally experienced. I'm in a few comp-leaning/focused Discord communities and the enthusiasm for the game is basically at rock-bottom. Even the promise of "fixed" winrates isn't promising to bring a lot of people back as they fundamentally just don't find things fun even when playing a balanced army vs a balanced army.
As I said in the 2023 thread my two closest FLGPs (places not stores) are booming with 10th ed as the main cause of the boom.
I have seen some tournaments struggle to get players, but there are more tournaments to choose from in my area of the UK so I think players are going to the better ran events or better value events.
Overall it feels like there are more tournaments across the UK than ever before. UKTC is running 14 massive events this year, I think they were running just 1 event five years ago? What is also funny is you can run your own local event on the same day as these UKTC events and not worry about them canablising your player base.
Online it seems to me there is more written, audio and video content for 40k and 10th ed than ever before too, covering the full hobby spectrum including news, casual play, tournament play, painting and modelling, etc.
The only unknown answer is what the mix between new/existing players is, but I don't think it matters as either the answer is existing players are sticking around or there is a really big pipeline of new players replacing and exceeding the existing ones leaving every year. I think this is just a classic dakka-detail-derail though.
The conclusion I have to the thread question "Where is everybody?" is therefore:
"Everybody" is enjoying 10th ed 40k and spending their time with fellow 10th ed 40k enjoyers.
Dakka is not where "everybody" goes for high quality social interaction.
Maréchal des Logis Walter wrote: Question I am asking myself is: while I imagine a fair few older players would stick to painting, modeling, etc, how many new players would strive into wargaming after quickly quitting 40k?
Older players around are, I find, often not only there for the GW rules: either they like other aspects of the hobby, or they know and play other games they came to know after, for a fair few, being introduced to the world of wargaming via Warhammer.
But is the same true of newer player? Do they tend to stick around for the rest of the wargaming hobby or other games, or do they simply give up?
So I don't have any proof of this, but honestly I feel most new players are Kill Teamers or Combat Patrollers.
I'm sure there probably are people who go out and get enough stuff for a 2k army to start, but I think they'd be a real minority of the new player base.
It was better in 8th and 9th when you could take detachments of allies. Buying two allied combat patrols that can be fielded individually or combined makes WAY more sense to me than buying a single larger force.
Maréchal des Logis Walter wrote: Question I am asking myself is: while I imagine a fair few older players would stick to painting, modeling, etc, how many new players would strive into wargaming after quickly quitting 40k?
Older players around are, I find, often not only there for the GW rules: either they like other aspects of the hobby, or they know and play other games they came to know after, for a fair few, being introduced to the world of wargaming via Warhammer.
But is the same true of newer player? Do they tend to stick around for the rest of the wargaming hobby or other games, or do they simply give up?
So I don't have any proof of this, but honestly I feel most new players are Kill Teamers or Combat Patrollers.
Maybe somewhere. But definitely not in my area.
At least not at the local shops.
Whats going on with people who don't play/start at the shops =?.
●10e brought us a fair # of new players. And a few returning players from editions prior to 9th.
The fact that the rules start off free really helped.
●Combat Patrol? On its own? Dead in the water. No one, new/returning/or existing players, see much value in playing this format when they could just play "real 40k".
The one shop ran an 8wk Combat Patrol league back in oct/Nov. It attracted 2 new players, 2 existing players started new forces, and a few others just pulled from stuff they already owned.
Overall it was deemed "meh" & somewhat unbalanced depending on the patrol chosen. See above comments concerning just playing "real 40k".
Most also didn't like that there's zero choice of what to use in this format.
Now small 500 or 750 pt games? Those get played. And as new peoples forces grow so do the sizes of games. You don't need CP to play small games.....
●Kill Team.
This game just doesn't have a large base in my area. At least not at the shops. If you post in the shops "Looking for Game" Discord channel you'll probably get a game. But it's rare to just walk in & see KT being played.
Most who pick it up do so as existing players looking to play something different 40k wise (that's not CP or a small game).
Anectotical as well but locally plenty of new players since 10th.
Tournaments tend to sell out but place count not that big and often same faces.
Then again we are bit far from bigger places and players from there either have to pay lot to come alone or do group travel...at which point it often feels like same guys, different city and easier to just play at own city
Gw's demand isn't showrng decrease though. So on the #1 measurement it's succeeding.
You shouldn't have to buy a separate kit or hunt through a bits box to complete a unit you just bought. If you do then you should at least be able to buy what you need (and only what you need) online. I remember when that wasn't an issue because GW hadn't yet stomped out the secondary market bits sellers... So yeah, GW can sell the stuff needed on the box or feth off at this point.
Those bitz sellers are still commonplace in the UK (where Gert's profile flag says they are from). I'm not entirely sure on what basis GW was able to suppress bitz sellers in North America.
When GW shut down their own bits service there was a very popular store in north America called "the war store" who would buy GW kits break them up and sell the bits both in the store and online. he ended up getting a cease and desist notice from GW threatening legal action if he continued his bits service.
In addition to this, GW has shut down numerous bit selling operations on EBay, such as BulletBits from a few years back. They also aggressively gak down Etsy and eBay stores selling pieces which look remotely like GW stuff, and I’m not talking about re-casts or straight copies either.
Also: While I understand the origins of HH from scrounging bits boxes to make accurate conversions, making the product mainline should get rid of those requirements. If every legion is encouraged to run melee elements, and fully half of the legions are encouraged to run predominantly melee elements, there should be a better method to make those generic melee squads than “buy the tactical box, then drop an additional $180 on 4 assault squad boxes to salvage bolt pistols and chainswords.”
Especially when GW discontinues that box almost half a year before they release the HH melee dudes!
I am aware GW has shut down North American bitz sellers. My question is under what legal basis? They have been unable to do so here in the UK and we still enjoy the option of purchasing bitz. I believe Europe is the same.
Surely selling secondhand parts is legal in North America? I find it very odd that GW can get away with preventing it.
Surely selling secondhand parts is legal in North America? I find it very odd that GW can get away with preventing it
threat of legal action-
even if a bitz seller were to prevail legally it might cost them 100s of thousands of dollars or more to fight the court case.
GW legal has much deeper pockets than a FLGS/retailer like the war store was. it is a fight not worth having.
It is why harmony gold got away with the macross IP blockade in the USA for decades even after they lost in court in Japan. the mere threat of legal action over every single perceived IP infraction to which they had no actual legal standing was enough for even bandai to wash it's hands over the issue until they recently buried the hatchet a few years back.
Surely selling secondhand parts is legal in North America? I find it very odd that GW can get away with preventing it
threat of legal action-
even if a bitz seller were to prevail legally it might cost them 100s of thousands of dollars or more to fight the court case.
GW legal has much deeper pockets than a FLGS/retailer like the war store was. it is a fight not worth having.
It is why harmony gold got away with the macross IP blockade in the USA for decades even after they lost in court in Japan. the mere threat of legal action over every single perceived IP infraction to which they had no actual legal standing was enough for even bandai to wash it's hands over the issue until they recently buried the hatchet a few years back.
^ this. The legal system in the US is highly pay to play, with even victories being ruinously expensive. Admittedly this is kind of an international issue, but IIRC European nations have far more robust / protective laws for smaller operations, and will happily smash big companies with gigantic fines / resolution costs for doing stuff like that.
That’s what set the Chapter House legal action apart. The guy had actual legal representation (IIRC probono too) which allowed him to participate in the system and therefor win, because GW was trying to crush a small fry despite not having much of a case.
Won so hard he stopped fulfilling orders and went out of business.
So even when you can get representation, let alone effective representation? You can still lose.
Automatically Appended Next Post: On the Bitz?
Partial informed, partial speculation - there are rules about breaking down New Products as a retailer.
Essentially, if I wholesale you a crate containing 10 boxes of 10 Tactical Marines, and those boxes are individually sealed? That’s how you have to sell them.
Now, as a private individual, once I’ve bought a box I can, more or less, do with it as I want. If I want to part it out, there’s little to stop me. But if I bought at wholesale from GW? I’m prevented from doing that.
Surely selling secondhand parts is legal in North America? I find it very odd that GW can get away with preventing it
threat of legal action-
even if a bitz seller were to prevail legally it might cost them 100s of thousands of dollars or more to fight the court case.
GW legal has much deeper pockets than a FLGS/retailer like the war store was. it is a fight not worth having.
It is why harmony gold got away with the macross IP blockade in the USA for decades even after they lost in court in Japan. the mere threat of legal action over every single perceived IP infraction to which they had no actual legal standing was enough for even bandai to wash it's hands over the issue until they recently buried the hatchet a few years back.
^ this. The legal system in the US is highly pay to play, with even victories being ruinously expensive. Admittedly this is kind of an international issue, but IIRC European nations have far more robust / protective laws for smaller operations, and will happily smash big companies with gigantic fines / resolution costs for doing stuff like that.
That’s what set the Chapter House legal action apart. The guy had actual legal representation (IIRC probono too) which allowed him to participate in the system and therefor win, because GW was trying to crush a small fry despite not having much of a case.
Huh, interesting. I'm surprised that tactic hasn't worked in the UK. We must have some reasonable protections for small operations. Bitzbox certainly isn't a massive company, for example. I wonder if small vendors can settle such a dispute in Small Claims court, given the values involved. I don't think the US has an equivalent to the Small Claims court, it is designed for settling small disputes cheaply.
Partial informed, partial speculation - there are rules about breaking down New Products as a retailer.
Essentially, if I wholesale you a crate containing 10 boxes of 10 Tactical Marines, and those boxes are individually sealed? That’s how you have to sell them.
Now, as a private individual, once I’ve bought a box I can, more or less, do with it as I want. If I want to part it out, there’s little to stop me. But if I bought at wholesale from GW? I’m prevented from doing that.
This. It wasn't legal threats, it was simple retailer account contracts that stopped it.
There were some bits sellers that were just buying at retail from wherever it was cheaper (that's how I used to do it) but when GW bought in the regional locks on sales, that killed that option off.
I suspect that the current rules trend to limit units to what's on the sprue has also resulted in there simply being less demand for bits in general. All of that, combined with current sprue design making it a massive pain in the nethers to clip stuff off sprues just makes it a much less viable business plan than it used to be.
Well just to throw my 2 cents in as someone who hasn't posted here regularly since 2019, and is here because I'm trying to call someone for work on a sunday and while thinking of things to do while hopign they pick up remembered dakkadakka exists, I'd say it's two things for me.
1) Covid happened, I stopped playing 40k and have never got back into it. I still wargame, but I joined a club mostly focused on historicals about a year ago and found that compared to 8th (at least after indexhammer, which I enjoyed) I have more fun playing some 60 year old guy's personal variation of some naval wargame I've never heard of, or a refight of the battle of the Marne using 3x4" blocks with 10 6mm figures on them to represent whole companies, etc, etc, and my desire to get back into 40K is basically zero. I might finish painting my armies and go back to an older edition at some point. It doesn't help that I like 'firstborne' and they're going the way of the dodo.
2) Forums are a fething ancient way of communicating. I think they're probably the best way of talking about a hobby like this but the format is so old and the userbase is so small.
I'm really looking forward to TOW though, shame I'll be starting a new job in January and won't have any time for it.
Haighus wrote: ...I am aware GW has shut down North American bitz sellers. My question is under what legal basis? They have been unable to do so here in the UK and we still enjoy the option of purchasing bitz. I believe Europe is the same...
...Have they shut down the bits resellers? I was under the impression that the thing that made it a viable business model was the boom in demand for weapon bits in 7e, when competitive lists were all looking for the right combi-weapons or Skitarii guns or whatever for their WYSIWYG drop-pod alpha strike, and once GW started shifting in 8e to no-instructions-no-rules and no-options kits the demand dried up and they died out, no legal action necessary.
.
