Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Im in a small playgroup of players both new and old. Two of our players are vets from 7th and older, and dislike most of the edition.

But its almost always because they are suprised or caught off guard by rules changes, and get salty mid game. Its became very very clear to me they just outright refuse or cant be asked to read the actual rule book, because Its became every game ive had, ive had to clarify a 7th to 8th change.

Should I just let them fall out of the game on their own, or try to wrangle them back in to show them maybe it isnt as bad as they imagine?

If they refuse to change then there's not much you can do about it. You can see it on this board with the huge amount of people having Stockholm syndrome and still declaring 8th to be the worst edition and that we should roll back to 7th (HA, if we roll back to anything it should be 3rd edition).

This is especially bad if they started in 7th edition with the flavour of the month. If you notice, the majority of people who had a good to "meh" reaction tends to be those who started back in 2nd or 3rd edition, and are thus used to the massive upheavals that happen between updates.

If they refuse to read and learn 8 pages of rules feth them.

It's tough when your playgroup starts to disappear because people don't want to move forward. The new rules are easy, just 8 pages. There are very helpful FAQ's that answer the biggest questions, and they're releasing new FAQ's every month. If they can't get on board with that, there's really nothing you can do. Here's a list of what I consider the best things in 8th edition:

#1 - Simple rules. As I mentioned already, it's only 8 pages long. Everything else is on the unit's dataslate. If it sounds like you can do it, you can do it.

#2 - No restrictions. You can have one model in the unit shoot one way, another shoot another way, then charge a third way. You can split up your movement or shooting or close combat any way you like to maximize your potency. When you suffer casualties, you choose who dies, allowing units to not be "moved" in directions by killing from a direction.

#3 - Infantry matter. Infantry finally have abilities that other unit types don't; they benefit most from cover, and can move through cover more easily than others. This makes being an Infantry something to be desired, rather than avoided!

#4 - More weapons, powers, and models are useful than ever before. There's fewer broken units. There was a tourney-winning list that was mostly TACTICAL MARINES because the guy just out-played people. Sometimes you want a Lascannon, sometimes you want a Plasma Gun, and sometimes you want a Heavy Bolter. And don't get too comfy on an indestructible unit, because Mortal Wounds (mostly hard to get a lot of, except in spam-lists, and there's likely a "fix" coming) can get through all your pesky defences.

--------------------

EDIT; #5 - Transports are good BECAUSE they Transport things!

This may be more faction-specific right now, but the fact that Rhinos and Wave Serpents are good because they actually do what they are supposed to do - transporting things - speaks to just how far we've come from 7th edition where the best use of transports was to kill things with them. There are still very good killy-transports, but I will take a Rhino in each and every game I play with my Chaos Marines because it does what it's supposed to do just SO WELL.

To be fair, if they constructed their armies for 7th and don't want to adapt to 8th but are competitive players, I can see why.

Things like Riptide Wing and Deathstars don't exist any more, and the edition finally returns footslogging infantry to the fore (which is neat).

Sadly, there are even some people on this board who are upset that their 200+ point super unit can only completely obliterate one unit a turn instead of a whole bunch, so *shrug.* People can't (or won't) adapt.

1) Don't insult them, say feth them, say they have Stockholm, etc. This is a fringe hobby anyway, so no need to throw more salt into the equation.
2) Ask yourself: Are you playing 8th exactly by the rules? Did you play 7th exactly by the rules? Hell, 6th? Whether its cover for 8th, "one Lord of War max" for 7th, "redraw impossible Maelstrom objectives" for both, or "1999+1" points for 6th, I don't recall any of these games actually being played 100% "by the book."
3) Find out what the real grievances are. If it's stuff like "Muh Screamerstar," then those players are the same ones that will spam Malefic Lords or run Crusaders with Psychic Barrier. If it's stuff like "I converted up these Arbites Enforcers to count as Carapace Veterans with Shotguns," or "what about my Looted Wagons" then work out some houserules to port them over. Just because GW only wants you to play with out-of-the-box models doesn't mean you *should*...but of course, it's up to you and your group to figure out what is reasonable.

Also Yarium, I wish to dispute your claim #5. Transports themselves are mostly redundant for transporting things, due to the relative reduction in speed differences between infantry and transports. Rhinos are tougher, yes, but 12+6 -> 10 + d6 doesn't have the same oomph compared to 6+d6. Add the fact that Transports are now 3" disembark instead of 6" move + 6" disembark, and their transport utility has also gone down. It is particularly telling that the transports that do get used (Stormravens, Taurox Primes, Razorbacks) are usually run "empty" and are more for the dakka they carry.

 MagicJuggler wrote:
Also Yarium, I wish to dispute your claim #5. Transports themselves are mostly redundant for transporting things, due to the relative reduction in speed differences between infantry and transports. Rhinos are tougher, yes, but 12+6 -> 10 + d6 doesn't have the same oomph compared to 6+d6. Add the fact that Transports are now 3" disembark instead of 6" move + 6" disembark, and their transport utility has also gone down. It is particularly telling that the transports that do get used (Stormravens, Taurox Primes, Razorbacks) are usually run "empty" and are more for the dakka they carry.

Maybe it's how people in your area use them, but for me, there's a bunch of gains:

#1 - They are tougher than the unit they carry, meaning they actually protect the unit better than it protects itself.
For slightly more than a naked Marine squad, I get something that has double the number of wounds, and those wounds are T7 rather than T4. This makes the unit pretty much immune to anti-infantry weapons. Dedicated fire can, of course, take it out, but hey, this is the cheapest 10 wounds at vehicle-toughness you can get, so your opponent isn't winning any medals off of that. The unit inside is often more expensive than this Rhino due to weapon upgrades or being specialists or whatever, and the unit inside is deadlier than the transport. So, yeah, it's a box that increases the unit's survivability compared to its damage output in a cost-competitive fashion. I like that. Considering that on the first turn you're probably throwing up Smoke Launchers for that -1 to being hit, and the unit gets much tougher. This survivability means that they also often can act in further turns to transport the same unit or a second unit to a new location.

#2 - They allow the unit they carry to move faster.
Units starting the game inside a transport, before it even moves, can end up 3" further than they otherwise would have, since they can disembark within 3" then move 6", which is 3" further than they otherwise can move. This can be abused during the game too, having units end their move within 3" and hoping into the Rhino and then next turn starting 3" out on the other side of the Rhino and moving their 6". The Rhino can move 12 inches and advance 6 inches for EIGHTEEN inches of speed AND still pop smokes on the first turn. Give you disembark next turn and move that 3" plus 6", and that's 33 inches of distance a unit has moved in just two turns. Even if that unit got a perfect 6 inches on their Advance rolls each turn they couldn't make up that kind of distance. While you can only drop off a unit at the start of their move, a unit can hop into it later than turn, meaning you can have units jumping in and out of a transport all game long for all the extra movement in the world!

#3 - Multiple units can be in one transport.
Compounding both of these early points, you can transport multiple units. Two 5-man squads can drop off one 5-man where they need to be while the other 5-man goes to the next spot they need to be, safely and quickly.


As for taking transports for the dakka, yes that still happens in a few cases, hence why I said "there are still very good killy-transports", but if the only reason you're seeing more transports is for their dakka, then I imagine you must have a very stale environment of shooting-centric armies, because in my local scene, transports... transport things. Only time I don't see transports transporting things is when they're Storm Ravens, and even then, most of the players here make use of the transport ability as a bonus, rather than ignore it.

 Yarium wrote:

 MagicJuggler wrote:
Also Yarium, I wish to dispute your claim #5. Transports themselves are mostly redundant for transporting things, due to the relative reduction in speed differences between infantry and transports. Rhinos are tougher, yes, but 12+6 -> 10 + d6 doesn't have the same oomph compared to 6+d6. Add the fact that Transports are now 3" disembark instead of 6" move + 6" disembark, and their transport utility has also gone down. It is particularly telling that the transports that do get used (Stormravens, Taurox Primes, Razorbacks) are usually run "empty" and are more for the dakka they carry.

Maybe it's how people in your area use them, but for me, there's a bunch of gains:

#1 - They are tougher than the unit they carry, meaning they actually protect the unit better than it protects itself.
For slightly more than a naked Marine squad, I get something that has double the number of wounds, and those wounds are T7 rather than T4. This makes the unit pretty much immune to anti-infantry weapons. Dedicated fire can, of course, take it out, but hey, this is the cheapest 10 wounds at vehicle-toughness you can get, so your opponent isn't winning any medals off of that. The unit inside is often more expensive than this Rhino due to weapon upgrades or being specialists or whatever, and the unit inside is deadlier than the transport. So, yeah, it's a box that increases the unit's survivability compared to its damage output in a cost-competitive fashion. I like that. Considering that on the first turn you're probably throwing up Smoke Launchers for that -1 to being hit, and the unit gets much tougher. This survivability means that they also often can act in further turns to transport the same unit or a second unit to a new location.

#2 - They allow the unit they carry to move faster.
Units starting the game inside a transport, before it even moves, can end up 3" further than they otherwise would have, since they can disembark within 3" then move 6", which is 3" further than they otherwise can move. This can be abused during the game too, having units end their move within 3" and hoping into the Rhino and then next turn starting 3" out on the other side of the Rhino and moving their 6". The Rhino can move 12 inches and advance 6 inches for EIGHTEEN inches of speed AND still pop smokes on the first turn. Give you disembark next turn and move that 3" plus 6", and that's 33 inches of distance a unit has moved in just two turns. Even if that unit got a perfect 6 inches on their Advance rolls each turn they couldn't make up that kind of distance. While you can only drop off a unit at the start of their move, a unit can hop into it later than turn, meaning you can have units jumping in and out of a transport all game long for all the extra movement in the world!

#3 - Multiple units can be in one transport.
Compounding both of these early points, you can transport multiple units. Two 5-man squads can drop off one 5-man where they need to be while the other 5-man goes to the next spot they need to be, safely and quickly.


As for taking transports for the dakka, yes that still happens in a few cases, hence why I said "there are still very good killy-transports", but if the only reason you're seeing more transports is for their dakka, then I imagine you must have a very stale environment of shooting-centric armies, because in my local scene, transports... transport things. Only time I don't see transports transporting things is when they're Storm Ravens, and even then, most of the players here make use of the transport ability as a bonus, rather than ignore it.

Honestly, "Transports in 8th" could easily be its own topic, as one could argue til the cows come home about "Assault vs Tank Shock", Fire Points, Pin checks versus "1 in 6 passengers die", etc.

Anyway, back on topic, "I thought that's how the previous edition worked" is a common thing in 40k. Personally, I blame the informal manner in which many rules are written, hence arguments like "Before the Battle versus Before Deployment," as well as GW's historical cop-out of "use a rolloff?"

Are there any specific 7th->8th changes that have caused Salt?

 MagicJuggler wrote:
1) Don't insult them, say feth them, say they have Stockholm, etc. This is a fringe hobby anyway, so no need to throw more salt into the equation.
2) Ask yourself: Are you playing 8th exactly by the rules? Did you play 7th exactly by the rules? Hell, 6th? Whether its cover for 8th, "one Lord of War max" for 7th, "redraw impossible Maelstrom objectives" for both, or "1999+1" points for 6th, I don't recall any of these games actually being played 100% "by the book."
3) Find out what the real grievances are. If it's stuff like "Muh Screamerstar," then those players are the same ones that will spam Malefic Lords or run Crusaders with Psychic Barrier. If it's stuff like "I converted up these Arbites Enforcers to count as Carapace Veterans with Shotguns," or "what about my Looted Wagons" then work out some houserules to port them over. Just because GW only wants you to play with out-of-the-box models doesn't mean you *should*...but of course, it's up to you and your group to figure out what is reasonable.

Also Yarium, I wish to dispute your claim #5. Transports themselves are mostly redundant for transporting things, due to the relative reduction in speed differences between infantry and transports. Rhinos are tougher, yes, but 12+6 -> 10 + d6 doesn't have the same oomph compared to 6+d6. Add the fact that Transports are now 3" disembark instead of 6" move + 6" disembark, and their transport utility has also gone down. It is particularly telling that the transports that do get used (Stormravens, Taurox Primes, Razorbacks) are usually run "empty" and are more for the dakka they carry.

This post shows to me your inherent bias. You know you discard impossible Maelstrom objectives in 8th, right? You're also able to discard one whenever the opponent achieves one, so even "not technically impossible but realistically impossible" ones can be discarded.

MISSIONS
Q: If I am playing the Spoils of War mission, and I generate
the Priority Orders Received Tactical Objective, which then
generates a Secure Objective X Tactical Objective, can my
opponent achieve it and/or can I discard it?
A: Your opponent cannot achieve the Priority Orders
Tactical Objective and you can discard it as you
normally would.

Also saying "7th was never played by the book" is disingenuous because the whole edition was a raging dumpster fire and literally impossible to play by the book.

I will agree with you that transports are overcosted for what they do. They need to allow disembarking after movement, lower the costs, or do SOMETHING to fix them.

If they're so salty, just don't play them. Simple as that. You're in control of how you enjoy your hobby --- if someone detracts from that, move on, find new players, etc.

I mean, I liked 7th, and I can easily say that 8th is better. I’m unhappy that my lists got changed the way they did, but at the same time I’m happy for a shuffle as well. Is the source of their discontent actually the rules, or is it that their lists aren’t as badass as they once were? Perhaps suggest starting some new armies. Things did change, no doubt, and maybe starting something fresh will provide the opportunity to learn from the ground up with an army that they don’t yet “know” how to play.

Either that or they’re just miserable and they’ll work their ways out the door in time. In which case just let nature take its course, provided they’re not being problematic. If they are, you can always speed their exit up.

Change is hard. People get better with time, as they learn the new ruleset. Give them some room while they adjust.

It's really hard to control other people's actions. Roping them back in is likely going to backfire, you don't want to be 'selling' the game, the goal is to be enjoying the game. Nothing makes people want to play more than seeing other people genuinely having a good time.

I made peace with the fact 40k is not ideal a long time ago. This allowed me to accept it's faults and roll with the changes that come up with each new Edition / FAQ. Some people turn that corner, others do not, and there's only so much you can do to help steer people the right way.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
This post shows to me your inherent bias. You know you discard impossible Maelstrom objectives in 8th, right? You're also able to discard one whenever the opponent achieves one, so even "not technically impossible but realistically impossible" ones can be discarded.

MISSIONS
Q: If I am playing the Spoils of War mission, and I generate
the Priority Orders Received Tactical Objective, which then
generates a Secure Objective X Tactical Objective, can my
opponent achieve it and/or can I discard it?
A: Your opponent cannot achieve the Priority Orders
Tactical Objective and you can discard it as you
normally would.

Also saying "7th was never played by the book" is disingenuous because the whole edition was a raging dumpster fire and literally impossible to play by the book.

I will agree with you that transports are overcosted for what they do. They need to allow disembarking after movement, lower the costs, or do SOMETHING to fix them.

I missed that FAQ. I know that redrawing a tactical objective is now an option in 8th if you spend 2 CP, but I avoided Maelstrom either way. I personally consider it the worst addition to 7th (worse than Magnus, the Barkstar, etc) because it explicitly takes scoring out of the hands of the player.

"I killed 3 of your Razorbacks for...(rolls dice)...1 VP."
"I killed 3 of your Razorbacks for...(rolls dice)...3 VP. I win. Me am good strategist."

And I really don't see why it's disingenious. I'm not aiming for a "false equivalance" scenario here ("everything is bad, therefore everything is equally bad"), so much as some things in 7th worked that don't work in 8th (ex: Transport rules, cover) and vice-versa (non-random warlord traits/psy powers, move stats, better rule formatting).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 techsoldaten wrote:
I made peace with the fact 40k is not ideal a long time ago. This allowed me to accept it's faults and roll with the changes that come up with each new Edition / FAQ. Some people turn that corner, others do not, and there's only so much you can do to help steer people the right way.

This. 40k is more about who you play with than the edition anyway.

 vaklor4 wrote:
Im in a small playgroup of players both new and old. Two of our players are vets from 7th and older, and dislike most of the edition.

But its almost always because they are suprised or caught off guard by rules changes, and get salty mid game. Its became very very clear to me they just outright refuse or cant be asked to read the actual rule book, because Its became every game ive had, ive had to clarify a 7th to 8th change.

Should I just let them fall out of the game on their own, or try to wrangle them back in to show them maybe it isnt as bad as they imagine?

To answer the underlined question, I wouldn't bother. I'm not saying to ignore them or call them names, just don't go out of your way to wrangle them back in. It sounds like they just aren't interested in 8th edition.

Move on and play the other players at your store/club. If they see that you guys/gals are having fun, then maybe they'll want to join in, too. The burden of learning the 8th edition rules is on them, though. You are not expected to do their "heavy lifting" for them. They can learn 8 damn pages.

As for calling them veterans of the game, I started in 2008 and have been through 5th edition, 6th, 7th, and now 8th edition. I would certainly NOT call myself a veteran, much less these guys. If you play warhammer 40k for more than a few years, you will eventually have to learn the new edition. It's part of it.

Throw as much salt as you possibly can on them. Add it till they run away crying and are hopefully out of your life forever. Change is constant, the wise adapt.

The "burden" of learning 8th edition?

I played 7th and 8th for years. I know 8th better already, because 8th actually makes some sense and does not have tons of rules who are in the rulebook for no apparent reason (unit types, USR that practically nothing has/do nothing worth doing, messy tables)

8th is so godamn simple. the only complexity comes from the unit slates themselves, and most are not any more complex than their 7th counterparts.

As far as people asking what specifically bothers them, believe it or not they actually find it MORE complicated...im chalking this up to not reading the damn book.

They think cover is BS, they think deepstriking is BS, they dont like vehicles being simplified, and they think stratagems and CP is not as good as formations.

I started in 4th edition, but didn't really started "memorizing" rules until 5th. So to date, I have 4 full edition's worth of rules rattling around in my head.
So far, 8th is my favorite despite having much less time now to play than I did in prior editions. This is because the rules are very streamlined and easy to remember.

My biggest challenge between editions is "forgetting" older stuff. Since 8th is such a dramatic change compared to the prior 3 editions, this has been actually easier for me to do.

My advise when dealing with stubborn players is to be patient. Understand that change is hard and that people deal with it differently. This is not a race and telling people to "feth off' is the worst sort of poor sportsmanship.
But your time is also valuable, so if you can't be bothered to go through a casual game without discussing the rules, you need to ask yourself why YOU are playing this kind of game in the first place.

By far the most fun games I have EVER had have been those in which I get to discuss new rules/ tactics with my opponent. If this does not appeal to you, that is fine, you can deny those players a game as long as you explain why.
A decent human being will understand that you just want to knock out a fast game in 1-2 hours and move on.

EDIT: Regarding being complicated: I actually might agree to a small extent. 7th was a complicated mess and 8th was promised to be a streamlined experience. At first it was, but with every Codex adding more layers, I can see how a player would get frustrated. It was impossible in 7th for any player to know EVERY rule for EVERY army. 8th could head that way pretty fast.

-

I still know 2nd ed rules, and I had little trouble with 8th.

 vaklor4 wrote:
As far as people asking what specifically bothers them, believe it or not they actually find it MORE complicated...im chalking this up to not reading the damn book.

They think cover is BS, they think deepstriking is BS, they dont like vehicles being simplified, and they think stratagems and CP is not as good as formations.

"Not reading the book"?
Its hardly a book and more of a small pamphlet.

Reeks of pure stubbornness rather than an actual reasoning.

Going point by points
Cover is BS? compared to 7th where if you got decent armor cover is worhtless and when you got no armor its amazing? heck, cover is so much better (and simple! not a separate type of save)
Deepstriking is BS? a bit, yea. no more risk/reward factor, replaced by simple choice making. it has both its up and downsides. easier to drop, easier to block drops.
Vehicles being simplfied, yes its a bummer-but it was necessary. the game was bloated and in many cases (mostly xeno vehicles) telling facings was an issue, while imperial sponsorns made LoS targeting a repeat argument.
Formations-the problem is is that the CONCEPT of formations is great, far better than the force charts we have now, but the actual way it was done was horrible, and I don't think GW has the writing capability to make formations right.

I started in 2nd and had the rules memorized quite quickly and easily (plus the 2 card cheat-sheets had every major rule you needed to know to play)

Then 3rd came out and I got lost. I tried to learn the rules but they were pretty disorganized from what I remember and there was a lot of flipping back and forth trying to find a specific rule. I played 1 game. Couldn't find anyone else who played, then I lost all my stuff.

Started back up I think at 6th ed but by then the rules were a complete mess and had a heck of a time trying to figure out how to play the game. Never did get a single game in. But part of that too, was life getting in the way.

Now 8th is out and it seems the rules are pretty streamlined and easy enough (although because the other editions were so complicated I keep thinking I'm missing something. "It can't be this simple")

I hope to start getting games in soon.

*edit*
Almost forgot the whole point. See, coming from streamlined, easy to follow rules and trying to get into detailed complicated rules it really threw me off and my knee-jerk reaction was "what is this crap? It's not the game I fell in love with" And I could easily see the opposite holding true.
They've come from a game that was complicated and detailed in comparison to 8th and are probably thinking "This game is so dumbed down, it's no longer the hardcore wargame I loved, but now a child's game"

Stay patient with them, keep playing games with them (even when they act like a douche) for as long as they want to keep trying. Eventually the rule changes will sink in and they'll come to terms with the changes or they'll move on to something else. But if they don't play, then there's no chance that they'll learn the game and accept what it is now.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
To be fair, if they constructed their armies for 7th and don't want to adapt to 8th but are competitive players, I can see why.

Things like Riptide Wing and Deathstars don't exist any more, and the edition finally returns footslogging infantry to the fore (which is neat).

Sadly, there are even some people on this board who are upset that their 200+ point super unit can only completely obliterate one unit a turn instead of a whole bunch, so *shrug.* People can't (or won't) adapt.

If they're actually competitive players then they'd be used to the idea that they need to completely reconstruct their army every year or two (minimum).

 Scott-S6 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
To be fair, if they constructed their armies for 7th and don't want to adapt to 8th but are competitive players, I can see why.

Things like Riptide Wing and Deathstars don't exist any more, and the edition finally returns footslogging infantry to the fore (which is neat).

Sadly, there are even some people on this board who are upset that their 200+ point super unit can only completely obliterate one unit a turn instead of a whole bunch, so *shrug.* People can't (or won't) adapt.

If they're actually competitive players then they'd be used to the idea that they need to completely reconstruct their army every year or two (minimum).

Right, no I meant the type of competitive player that doesn't like to adapt - i.e. the ones that don't win tournaments but do their best to roflstomp other people anyways.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Scott-S6 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
To be fair, if they constructed their armies for 7th and don't want to adapt to 8th but are competitive players, I can see why.

Things like Riptide Wing and Deathstars don't exist any more, and the edition finally returns footslogging infantry to the fore (which is neat).

Sadly, there are even some people on this board who are upset that their 200+ point super unit can only completely obliterate one unit a turn instead of a whole bunch, so *shrug.* People can't (or won't) adapt.

If they're actually competitive players then they'd be used to the idea that they need to completely reconstruct their army every year or two (minimum).

Right, no I meant the type of competitive player that doesn't like to adapt - i.e. the ones that don't win tournaments but do their best to roflstomp other people anyways.

This can be hard for a semi-competitive person. My b/f was getting back into 40k and dropped about $700 on a new Tau army from scratch about a year before 8th dropped. He bought most of the good things (a few riptides, in particular) from back then and was really disheartened with how bad they are now. Not just neutral, but bad. It's not the money so much, but just losing the army's quality so rapidly is hard to see. It definitely bummed him out. Hoping for a new Tau codex soon.

I have a few armies at this point.

My main army, biggest in size, is Tyranids. They just got a codex, so i can't definitively say if they suck in 8th, but so far they have, and they sucked in 7th too. Naturally, not happy, but it's not like i expected them to be good.

I probably have about 2,000 points of Ultramarines, and about 3000 points of Grey Knights.

I was amped for 8th edition because suddenly i can play my custom paladins and terminators. The dollar cost of my custom conversions wasn't the problem. Every single model in my army is on a custom made 3rd party base (let that sink in). It is built with love.

After 8th dropped was pretty bitter for a good while about the state of GK. They're pretty bad. Then, the codex was coming, and I got amped again. And, another let down. GK isn't my main army. 3000 points is not a lot compared to some collectors. But i put my heart & soul into that army and to have it be so bad really hurts.

I guess what i'm saying is, I can empathize with people who really care about their army, only to see it suck in 8th.

 Marmatag wrote:
I have a few armies at this point.

My main army, biggest in size, is Tyranids. They just got a codex, so i can't definitively say if they suck in 8th, but so far they have, and they sucked in 7th too. Naturally, not happy, but it's not like i expected them to be good.

I probably have about 2,000 points of Ultramarines, and about 3000 points of Grey Knights.

I was amped for 8th edition because suddenly i can play my custom paladins and terminators. The dollar cost of my custom conversions wasn't the problem. Every single model in my army is on a custom made 3rd party base (let that sink in). It is built with love.

After 8th dropped was pretty bitter for a good while about the state of GK. They're pretty bad. Then, the codex was coming, and I got amped again. And, another let down. GK isn't my main army. 3000 points is not a lot compared to some collectors. But i put my heart & soul into that army and to have it be so bad really hurts.

I guess what i'm saying is, I can empathize with people who really care about their army, only to see it suck in 8th.

I'd rather have that situation than what I have now.

I put my heart and soul into my superheavy tank regiment (and lost tons of games with it back in the day). But now it won't see the table at all.

At least if I lost every game, I could still play the army. As it stands, they're too powerful, and so I don't even bring them out to play anymore.

I'd rather play a terrible army than have an abruptly and unexpectedly OP one that never sees the table.

Get them to play eachother.

They're less likely to get salty. They'll learn the rules with other people learning the same thing. One of them won't get curbstomped. Their opponent will understand why they made their mistake.

Give that a try.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
I have a few armies at this point.

My main army, biggest in size, is Tyranids. They just got a codex, so i can't definitively say if they suck in 8th, but so far they have, and they sucked in 7th too. Naturally, not happy, but it's not like i expected them to be good.

I probably have about 2,000 points of Ultramarines, and about 3000 points of Grey Knights.

I was amped for 8th edition because suddenly i can play my custom paladins and terminators. The dollar cost of my custom conversions wasn't the problem. Every single model in my army is on a custom made 3rd party base (let that sink in). It is built with love.

After 8th dropped was pretty bitter for a good while about the state of GK. They're pretty bad. Then, the codex was coming, and I got amped again. And, another let down. GK isn't my main army. 3000 points is not a lot compared to some collectors. But i put my heart & soul into that army and to have it be so bad really hurts.

I guess what i'm saying is, I can empathize with people who really care about their army, only to see it suck in 8th.

I'd rather have that situation than what I have now.

I put my heart and soul into my superheavy tank regiment (and lost tons of games with it back in the day). But now it won't see the table at all.

At least if I lost every game, I could still play the army. As it stands, they're too powerful, and so I don't even bring them out to play anymore.

I'd rather play a terrible army than have an abruptly and unexpectedly OP one that never sees the table.

Play them against Nids and Eldar. They'll be fine.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Scott-S6 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
To be fair, if they constructed their armies for 7th and don't want to adapt to 8th but are competitive players, I can see why.

Things like Riptide Wing and Deathstars don't exist any more, and the edition finally returns footslogging infantry to the fore (which is neat).

Sadly, there are even some people on this board who are upset that their 200+ point super unit can only completely obliterate one unit a turn instead of a whole bunch, so *shrug.* People can't (or won't) adapt.

If they're actually competitive players then they'd be used to the idea that they need to completely reconstruct their army every year or two (minimum).

Right, no I meant the type of competitive player that doesn't like to adapt - i.e. the ones that don't win tournaments but do their best to roflstomp other people anyways.

Ah, yes. The guys that make local tournaments miserable things.

Martel732 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
I have a few armies at this point.

My main army, biggest in size, is Tyranids. They just got a codex, so i can't definitively say if they suck in 8th, but so far they have, and they sucked in 7th too. Naturally, not happy, but it's not like i expected them to be good.

I probably have about 2,000 points of Ultramarines, and about 3000 points of Grey Knights.

I was amped for 8th edition because suddenly i can play my custom paladins and terminators. The dollar cost of my custom conversions wasn't the problem. Every single model in my army is on a custom made 3rd party base (let that sink in). It is built with love.

After 8th dropped was pretty bitter for a good while about the state of GK. They're pretty bad. Then, the codex was coming, and I got amped again. And, another let down. GK isn't my main army. 3000 points is not a lot compared to some collectors. But i put my heart & soul into that army and to have it be so bad really hurts.

I guess what i'm saying is, I can empathize with people who really care about their army, only to see it suck in 8th.

I'd rather have that situation than what I have now.

I put my heart and soul into my superheavy tank regiment (and lost tons of games with it back in the day). But now it won't see the table at all.

At least if I lost every game, I could still play the army. As it stands, they're too powerful, and so I don't even bring them out to play anymore.

I'd rather play a terrible army than have an abruptly and unexpectedly OP one that never sees the table.

Play them against Nids and Eldar. They'll be fine.

I will try this in the future, certainly, if they accept. Lately they've been too afraid of it though.