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.
2017/05/05 16:53:58
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 4th May 17 - Warp rift fluff
The blame should go on GW for creating the mess, not fixing it. A clean break had to happen.
As I said, if they are capable of complete unit rebalance, what stoppes them from complete formation rebalance except the reasons I've pointed out?
because the fundamental concept was broken, inherently so. There was no fixing what ultimately was a sales mechanism pushing power creep for webstore bundles.
Besides, it's hardly the first time they've invalidated large amounts of material in a short timespan
It doesn't in any way make it an ok thing to do though.
It was a necessary thing, like it or not. Be mad at GW for pushing out garbage content in the first place, by all means. I am.
I'm not going to cry when they demolish the condemned ruins however.
More to the point, the quality of the material was so poor, and the prices so high, I quit buying new books two years ago. Dont support and incentivize garbage material and you wont be burned when it is invalidated
Not to mention it was being said that 8th was in the making for 2 years so it's not like they had to rush it out.
we have no idea whats true or not in that regard, but again, be mad at GW for pushing garbage in the first place by all means, but not for fixing it.
We can make a reasonable extrapolation.
Sad Panda said some time ago that the Codex update cycle had been stopped until the new edition, and we'd only see mini Dexes and Campaign Supplements until after the update. That's been borne out, so one can reasonable assume 8th has been in development since a few months before the last Codex update for a full faction, which I think was Tau?
Not super precise, of course, but there is evidence to suggest at roughly what point 8th started development.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/05 16:54:38
We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark
The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.
The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox
Almost like different people have different ideas, eh?
Barely. Formations were pretty universally hated on Dakka, in fact, this thread shows most of people calling 7th the "Formation Edition" or the "Free Edition".
Liberal_Perturabo wrote: Oh nice, another moronic decision from GW. I wonder how far they will go in their idiocy?
"Hey Dave, since we are completery rebalancing every unit in our game maybe we should do the same for all the formations and detachements so we won't lose on huge amount of variety while simultaneously fixing balance issues they caused?
Nah, man, that would require actual effort on our part! Besides, fitiing your army into formation will make you spend more than 5 minutes on building a list and force strategical decisions and that's a no-go. And do I even need to tell you that all this will be too hard to play for lil Timmy who can barely tell left from right?
I guess so.
Yup. So just trow in in the pile, there is still some room left between armor values, proper melee and interesting setting. We'll make a nice campfire out of all of that once we are finished gutting our franchise into oblivion."
I also love GW's jolly attitude with all that.
Like "Hey guys, check this out! We've made this super cool thing that we are going to show you right now! Ready? Ok, here it goes: all the books that we've released for several past months, the ones that you've been extremely exited about and spent your own money on ARE NOW COMPLETELY USELESS PIECES OF JUNK! Hahaha, amazing, right? Yeah, we are just a bunch of geniuses. Consumer friendly too!
Also buy our models, you fething loser."
Lol, always one masochist in the bunch. The formations and the books that you're lamenting the passing of were too intertwined. 7th edition was the attempt at taking the flaws of 6th and doubling down on them; yet another tweak that kept the crap that Gw's marketing team threw at us intact would fix nothing and just be moisturizer applied to the rotting corpse gw's flagship golden line.
So, with the whole overhaul thing I assume you are expecting broken units to be fixed. You know, things like scatterbikes, riptides and what have you. You don't expect them to be deleted from the game because they were broken, you just expect their rules to change. And that would be ok, right?
But when the same thing is said about formation rules it's suddenly "moisturizer applied to the rotting corpse" and can never-ever be fixed and should only be whiped out from the game?
Would you please explain the logic in that?
Jervis stated on a Twitch Stream that all armies where worked on at the same time to better grind out the core mechanics of the game and balance everything. Some of the nonsense we know of now will likely change.
Heck, we already know weapon profiles are changing. It looks like if a ranged weapon isn't specifically anti-monster/vehicle it may not have a rend value.
But you need something to exist to apply changes to. Weapon profiles are still here. Formations are not.
Also I'm expressing my opinion on the information GW gives us at the moment. Sure, things may change drastically in the future. Or they may not. That's not the point.
Dropping formations was a large change as it removed the free bonus rules gak that was ruining the game. The change is a full blown removal of free rules for formation builds and will likely be replaced by regular FOCs which can offer specific rules with unit taxes. Full on better change.
2017/05/05 16:57:49
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 4th May 17 - Warp rift fluff
ZebioLizard2 wrote: I will miss the more fluffy detachments.. But I can say this is for the better overall. So long as I keep my Legion benefits.
Chapter Tactics and Legion Traits were confirmed to still exist. And from a comment on Facebook today apparently more specific Legion Rules will be dropping too.
Hopefully toned down to reduce amount of codex hopping going around. Telling that many cite ability to switch between chapter as reason to paint custom chapter colour...
But colour me positively surprised overall regarding army construction. I was expecting more AOS style with point costed formations etc but this is even better. Albeit the formations shown so far are bit bland(take more minimums, get more extra and command points) which is boring compared to HH rites of war but maybe there are some more interesting ones. And compared to HH much more scalable(HH literally has maximum size army you can build...) which is nice. I hate all non-scalable rules like FB 5th ed magic, 0-1 units, AOS style army general command ability etc. Unscalable rites of war is also the one thing I don't like about HH rules.
2024 painted/bought: 109/109
2017/05/05 16:58:56
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 4th May 17 - Warp rift fluff
changemod wrote: Frankly I've found the attempts to shut down all negativity far more unpleasant to read than any ammount of the negativity itself.
-This is a discussion board, positive and negative views are all part of the discussion.
-It is not unreasonable to comment on rules as they come out, or speculate on how they fit together. We'll get a fuller picture as we go, but there's no crime on commenting on the current picture.
-The idea that one must have perfect information to have an informed view is -sometimes- correct, but is being overused here. To use a fairly non-inflammatory analogy: You need to have a lot of information about Indiana Jones 4 to definitively comment on it's quality, but hearing without seeing it that it uses aliens is enough to comment on the idea of introducing aliens to a franchise without them, and how you think that could impact things.
-A lot is changing, and certain patterns are emerging. These are things which will inevitably cause a lot of negative feeling amongst many, and someone who lashes out at every detail has every bit as much right to discuss the new edition as someone who is hyped up to the point where they'll defend every single aspect of it.
Great post. This phenomenon of having some posters who are adament on always defending GW from all kind of criticism, is weird to say the least, and also very annoying. Only explanation that I can guess is that they are a bit like groupies that live vicariously through some celebrities, but they are doing it through a company.
I feel like it's less "defending GW" and more saying that it makes 0 sense to claim the sky is falling when there is less than half information and a month to go before we know everything.
It's one thing to say "Losing Formations is a bad change, I disagree with it", and another to say "By losing formations there is NO LONGER A WAY TO MAKE FLUFFY THEMED ARMIES BECAUSE THAT WAS THE ONLY WAY", when we haven't seen all the base Detachments nor any of the Faction Detachments. Similar with many of the other complaints, like the idea that we know everything about Morale from a post with 5 paragraphs and saying the sky is falling for X or Y army.
Sensationalist anger has no place. Neither does blind fanboyism, but just because you're arguing against one doesn't mean you exemplify the other.
Not really. Not liking a game or a rules is pretty much a completely subjective thing. If someone think a certain rule ruins the game for him, it is the case, and no amount of posters telling him he is wrong will make him change his mind.
At the very least, I could understand if someone made a post or two defending the new rules, but it is the same poster who are continuously coming to GW rescue.
lost and damned log
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/519978.page#6525039
2017/05/05 17:01:41
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 4th May 17 - Warp rift fluff
Because formations really don't add ANYTHING to the game. They are just another layer of rules for no real reason to exist. I despise that they still exist in AoS. At least there they have points.
Formations should only be something of Narrative games to create fluffy things.
They add tactical depth. They create new playstiles. A good formation will have sensible restrictions while compensating for it with sensible benefits. It's only whoever writes the rules's fault for making insanely OP things run wild, not the system itself.
the thing is some mechanics are much easier to find a balance with than others, especially in a game which already has so many complex interactions. In theory every unit in the game could have a "win condition" where if they achieved that you just win the game, if it was tailored properly and made sufficiently difficult in theory that could be balanced, but may god have mercy on the writers asked to do that. With general formations and command points I feel it will be easier.
2017/05/05 17:03:07
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 4th May 17 - Warp rift fluff
Formations were bad for the game because they were so inconsistent across factions as to who had them, what types they had, the level of cool rules they provided and what the tax was to take them.
Now everyone has the same access. I can theoretically make an all terminator army with any chapter, not just Dark Angels. I can now make a moster mash/dread army with any army, not just the ones lucky enough to get a formation or detachment that allowed it. And I have the ability to take general command abilities or faction ones and give my army specific flavor? Awesome.
Still a lot we don't know but so far I am very optimistic so far.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/05 17:03:46
snoogums: "Just because something is not relavant doesn't mean it goes away completely."
Iorek: "Snoogums, you're right. Your arguments are irrelevant, and they sure as heck aren't going away."
2017/05/05 17:04:16
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 4th May 17 - Warp rift fluff
Liberal_Perturabo wrote: Oh nice, another moronic decision from GW. I wonder how far they will go in their idiocy?
"Hey Dave, since we are completery rebalancing every unit in our game maybe we should do the same for all the formations and detachements so we won't lose on huge amount of variety while simultaneously fixing balance issues they caused?
Nah, man, that would require actual effort on our part! Besides, fitiing your army into formation will make you spend more than 5 minutes on building a list and force strategical decisions and that's a no-go. And do I even need to tell you that all this will be too hard to play for lil Timmy who can barely tell left from right?
I guess so.
Yup. So just trow in in the pile, there is still some room left between armor values, proper melee and interesting setting. We'll make a nice campfire out of all of that once we are finished gutting our franchise into oblivion."
I also love GW's jolly attitude with all that.
Like "Hey guys, check this out! We've made this super cool thing that we are going to show you right now! Ready? Ok, here it goes: all the books that we've released for several past months, the ones that you've been extremely exited about and spent your own money on ARE NOW COMPLETELY USELESS PIECES OF JUNK! Hahaha, amazing, right? Yeah, we are just a bunch of geniuses. Consumer friendly too!
Also buy our models, you fething loser."
Lol, always one masochist in the bunch. The formations and the books that you're lamenting the passing of were too intertwined. 7th edition was the attempt at taking the flaws of 6th and doubling down on them; yet another tweak that kept the crap that Gw's marketing team threw at us intact would fix nothing and just be moisturizer applied to the rotting corpse gw's flagship golden line.
So, with the whole overhaul thing I assume you are expecting broken units to be fixed. You know, things like scatterbikes, riptides and what have you. You don't expect them to be deleted from the game because they were broken, you just expect their rules to change. And that would be ok, right?
But when the same thing is said about formation rules it's suddenly "moisturizer applied to the rotting corpse" and can never-ever be fixed and should only be whiped out from the game?
Would you please explain the logic in that?
Jervis stated on a Twitch Stream that all armies where worked on at the same time to better grind out the core mechanics of the game and balance everything. Some of the nonsense we know of now will likely change.
Heck, we already know weapon profiles are changing. It looks like if a ranged weapon isn't specifically anti-monster/vehicle it may not have a rend value.
But you need something to exist to apply changes to. Weapon profiles are still here. Formations are not.
Also I'm expressing my opinion on the information GW gives us at the moment. Sure, things may change drastically in the future. Or they may not. That's not the point.
Dropping formations was a large change as it removed the free bonus rules gak that was ruining the game. The change is a full blown removal of free rules for formation builds and will likely be replaced by regular FOCs which can offer specific rules with unit taxes. Full on better change.
Why not just rewrite the rules that add bonus units/points/upgrades/whatever? Heck, they could have just removed those alone and it would have been fine. There are dosens of formations in 40k and only a part of them are broken. Removing the whole system kills a huge chunk of variety.
2017/05/05 17:06:49
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 4th May 17 - Warp rift fluff
Liberal_Perturabo wrote: Oh nice, another moronic decision from GW. I wonder how far they will go in their idiocy? "Hey Dave, since we are completery rebalancing every unit in our game maybe we should do the same for all the formations and detachements so we won't lose on huge amount of variety while simultaneously fixing balance issues they caused? Nah, man, that would require actual effort on our part! Besides, fitiing your army into formation will make you spend more than 5 minutes on building a list and force strategical decisions and that's a no-go. And do I even need to tell you that all this will be too hard to play for lil Timmy who can barely tell left from right? I guess so. Yup. So just trow in in the pile, there is still some room left between armor values, proper melee and interesting setting. We'll make a nice campfire out of all of that once we are finished gutting our franchise into oblivion."
I also love GW's jolly attitude with all that. Like "Hey guys, check this out! We've made this super cool thing that we are going to show you right now! Ready? Ok, here it goes: all the books that we've released for several past months, the ones that you've been extremely exited about and spent your own money on ARE NOW COMPLETELY USELESS PIECES OF JUNK! Hahaha, amazing, right? Yeah, we are just a bunch of geniuses. Consumer friendly too! Also buy our models, you fething loser."
Lol, always one masochist in the bunch. The formations and the books that you're lamenting the passing of were too intertwined. 7th edition was the attempt at taking the flaws of 6th and doubling down on them; yet another tweak that kept the crap that Gw's marketing team threw at us intact would fix nothing and just be moisturizer applied to the rotting corpse gw's flagship golden line.
So, with the whole overhaul thing I assume you are expecting broken units to be fixed. You know, things like scatterbikes, riptides and what have you. You don't expect them to be deleted from the game because they were broken, you just expect their rules to change. And that would be ok, right? But when the same thing is said about formation rules it's suddenly "moisturizer applied to the rotting corpse" and can never-ever be fixed and should only be whiped out from the game? Would you please explain the logic in that?
Jervis stated on a Twitch Stream that all armies where worked on at the same time to better grind out the core mechanics of the game and balance everything. Some of the nonsense we know of now will likely change.
Heck, we already know weapon profiles are changing. It looks like if a ranged weapon isn't specifically anti-monster/vehicle it may not have a rend value.
But you need something to exist to apply changes to. Weapon profiles are still here. Formations are not. Also I'm expressing my opinion on the information GW gives us at the moment. Sure, things may change drastically in the future. Or they may not. That's not the point.
Dropping formations was a large change as it removed the free bonus rules gak that was ruining the game. The change is a full blown removal of free rules for formation builds and will likely be replaced by regular FOCs which can offer specific rules with unit taxes. Full on better change.
Why not just rewrite the rules that add bonus units/points/upgrades/whatever? Heck, they could have just removed those alone and it would have been fine. There are dosens of formations in 40k and only a part of them are broken. Removing the whole system kills a huge chunk of variety.
There is also a LOT of formations and for all we know some of them might end up breaking with the army updates. it would be easier to nuke everything and start from scratch than taking a scalpel to it. 99% sure some of the formations will be coming back as book specific detachments.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/05 17:07:29
Great post. This phenomenon of having some posters who are adament on always defending GW from all kind of criticism, is weird to say the least, and also very annoying. Only explanation that I can guess is that they are a bit like groupies that live vicariously through some celebrities, but they are doing it through a company.
Yea that isn't the issue at hand at all. And you can easily see this problem demonstrated mere posts from yours
1) GW is perfect
2) I am happy with what I've heard so far and want to hear more.
3) I like most things, but I really need to know more before I can judge.
4) This all sounds terrible and I don't care to listen.
5) THIS IS THE WORST THING EVER. I QUIT.
People think #2 is the same as #1. When the real problem in my opinion involves #4 and #5.including several of your own posts.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/05 17:07:19
2017/05/05 17:07:55
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 4th May 17 - Warp rift fluff
Theres a point where one game designer has to ask hitself.
"Did my game really gain something for adding more rules?"
I have coming to this doing my own games. Like, not adding racial bonuses because really they didn't add that much to the game experience, or because then the rule system begin to be much bigger that I want.
Is not about making formations viable or not, is about...Did formations bring really that much to the game, to merit all the balancing effort? I don't think so. But obviously, people look for different things in their games.
Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.
ERJAK wrote: Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.
2017/05/05 17:08:17
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 4th May 17 - Warp rift fluff
Kriswall wrote: 100% agreed. Formations COULD have been awesome, but in practice created some massive power divides. I'm not a fan of free benefits with no downside. That downside could be a points cost (formations were free) or some other sort of restriction.
At first I thought formations were created to encourage people to bring more themematic armies. If you take this crap unit, you get X benefit to encourage you to take it. Alternativly, it could have been a "If you want to get this really good ruleset, you need to take this crap unit too"
In practice, there were formations released that had no drawback to taking them, nor gave a thematic drawback. They were simply better ways of taking units. Given the lack of playtesting, it lead for some seriously unbalanced formations.
2017/05/05 17:09:10
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 4th May 17 - Warp rift fluff
"If your army is built using Formations right now, you’re going to be fine. In their place are a dozen new game-wide Detachments that are available to all factions."
I wait eagerly to see how they're going to make a generic Battle Forged layout that lets me replicate what the Infernal Tetrad allows (ie: 5 Demon Princes in 1850).
2017/05/05 17:09:17
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 4th May 17 - Warp rift fluff
I'm a bit sad that formations will go. Granted, there are some that were definitely overpowered and abused to no end like the riptide wing too though so I'm happy I won't face that anymore.
I found the formations gave me more variety in list-building contrary to what some celebrants are saying. For example, I have a Tau Star Wars Themed Army and I wanted Astra Militarum Sentinels to be the AT-ST's and that wouldn't be possible with this system since they're different factions or I'd have to invest in other troops and hq's that don't match the rest of the theme.
I also had fun playing very different lists from week to week like using an absurd number of Alpha Legion's resurrecting cultists one game and then playing a maulerfiend heavy khorne match the next. I found that most of the formations led to using units I rarely fielded without them. Lots of people complain about the demi-company, for example, but how often did you see tacticals and razorbacks before it?
I'll be a little sad with them all leaving, but I'm still excited for 8th. I think I just wish they had gone the route of balancing them better or adding costs to make them less overpowered.
I'm also curious how an army of imperial knights, for example, will work now since a detachment that is only lords of war slots sounds unlikely.
2017/05/05 17:09:57
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 4th May 17 - Warp rift fluff
Liberal_Perturabo wrote: Oh nice, another moronic decision from GW. I wonder how far they will go in their idiocy?
"Hey Dave, since we are completery rebalancing every unit in our game maybe we should do the same for all the formations and detachements so we won't lose on huge amount of variety while simultaneously fixing balance issues they caused?
Nah, man, that would require actual effort on our part! Besides, fitiing your army into formation will make you spend more than 5 minutes on building a list and force strategical decisions and that's a no-go. And do I even need to tell you that all this will be too hard to play for lil Timmy who can barely tell left from right?
I guess so.
Yup. So just trow in in the pile, there is still some room left between armor values, proper melee and interesting setting. We'll make a nice campfire out of all of that once we are finished gutting our franchise into oblivion."
I also love GW's jolly attitude with all that.
Like "Hey guys, check this out! We've made this super cool thing that we are going to show you right now! Ready? Ok, here it goes: all the books that we've released for several past months, the ones that you've been extremely exited about and spent your own money on ARE NOW COMPLETELY USELESS PIECES OF JUNK! Hahaha, amazing, right? Yeah, we are just a bunch of geniuses. Consumer friendly too!
Also buy our models, you fething loser."
Lol, always one masochist in the bunch. The formations and the books that you're lamenting the passing of were too intertwined. 7th edition was the attempt at taking the flaws of 6th and doubling down on them; yet another tweak that kept the crap that Gw's marketing team threw at us intact would fix nothing and just be moisturizer applied to the rotting corpse gw's flagship golden line.
So, with the whole overhaul thing I assume you are expecting broken units to be fixed. You know, things like scatterbikes, riptides and what have you. You don't expect them to be deleted from the game because they were broken, you just expect their rules to change. And that would be ok, right?
But when the same thing is said about formation rules it's suddenly "moisturizer applied to the rotting corpse" and can never-ever be fixed and should only be whiped out from the game?
Would you please explain the logic in that?
Jervis stated on a Twitch Stream that all armies where worked on at the same time to better grind out the core mechanics of the game and balance everything. Some of the nonsense we know of now will likely change.
Heck, we already know weapon profiles are changing. It looks like if a ranged weapon isn't specifically anti-monster/vehicle it may not have a rend value.
But you need something to exist to apply changes to. Weapon profiles are still here. Formations are not.
Also I'm expressing my opinion on the information GW gives us at the moment. Sure, things may change drastically in the future. Or they may not. That's not the point.
Dropping formations was a large change as it removed the free bonus rules gak that was ruining the game. The change is a full blown removal of free rules for formation builds and will likely be replaced by regular FOCs which can offer specific rules with unit taxes. Full on better change.
Why not just rewrite the rules that add bonus units/points/upgrades/whatever? Heck, they could have just removed those alone and it would have been fine. There are dosens of formations in 40k and only a part of them are broken. Removing the whole system kills a huge chunk of variety.
Which is honestly easier to balance:
A. A couple of dozen of FOCs between the generic ones and the ones given to each faction
OR
B. Over three dozen unique formations that range from useless to utterly broken?
Because frankly A looks like what we got because B would take so long that 8th would come out in 2019.
2017/05/05 17:10:55
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 4th May 17 - Warp rift fluff
Great post. This phenomenon of having some posters who are adament on always defending GW from all kind of criticism, is weird to say the least, and also very annoying. Only explanation that I can guess is that they are a bit like groupies that live vicariously through some celebrities, but they are doing it through a company.
Yea that isn't the issue at hand at all. And you can easily see this problem demonstrated mere posts from yours
1) GW is perfect 2) I am happy with what I've heard so far and want to hear more. 3) I like most things, but I really need to know more before I can judge. 4) This all sounds terrible and I don't care to listen. 5) THIS IS THE WORST THING EVER. I QUIT.
People think #2 is the same as #1. When the real problem in my opinion involves #4 and #5.including several of your own posts.
Well, if you think some of my posts fall in nb 4 or nb 5 you clearly have some major reading comprehension deficiencies, since I've said numerous times that I'm happy with most of the change so far, and I have been generally positive toward 8th edition
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2017/05/05 17:17:47
lost and damned log
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/519978.page#6525039
2017/05/05 17:14:22
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 4th May 17 - Warp rift fluff
What was so inherently broken about formations concept?
Aside from "buy specific X get Y tailored freebies" (e.g. "buy our webstore bundle of devastator and assault marines and drop pods and they get to come in turn 1, shoot as Relentless and assault from deesptrike!") being terrible game design in and of itself, when coupled with allies, multiple detachment rules, formations/detachments made up of other formations, etc promoted lots of spam (and did little for army variety at events) and exacerbated issues with unintended syngergies between things that weren't really intended to work together or made them dramatically more powerful than they were originally designed to be.
They're also just an unnecessary layer of complexity that has to be separately managed, balanced and updated in addition to everything else.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/05 17:17:21
IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.
New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights! The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.
2017/05/05 17:15:26
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 4th May 17 - Warp rift fluff
Liberal_Perturabo wrote: Oh nice, another moronic decision from GW. I wonder how far they will go in their idiocy?
"Hey Dave, since we are completery rebalancing every unit in our game maybe we should do the same for all the formations and detachements so we won't lose on huge amount of variety while simultaneously fixing balance issues they caused?
Nah, man, that would require actual effort on our part! Besides, fitiing your army into formation will make you spend more than 5 minutes on building a list and force strategical decisions and that's a no-go. And do I even need to tell you that all this will be too hard to play for lil Timmy who can barely tell left from right?
I guess so.
Yup. So just trow in in the pile, there is still some room left between armor values, proper melee and interesting setting. We'll make a nice campfire out of all of that once we are finished gutting our franchise into oblivion."
I also love GW's jolly attitude with all that.
Like "Hey guys, check this out! We've made this super cool thing that we are going to show you right now! Ready? Ok, here it goes: all the books that we've released for several past months, the ones that you've been extremely exited about and spent your own money on ARE NOW COMPLETELY USELESS PIECES OF JUNK! Hahaha, amazing, right? Yeah, we are just a bunch of geniuses. Consumer friendly too!
Also buy our models, you fething loser."
Lol, always one masochist in the bunch. The formations and the books that you're lamenting the passing of were too intertwined. 7th edition was the attempt at taking the flaws of 6th and doubling down on them; yet another tweak that kept the crap that Gw's marketing team threw at us intact would fix nothing and just be moisturizer applied to the rotting corpse gw's flagship golden line.
So, with the whole overhaul thing I assume you are expecting broken units to be fixed. You know, things like scatterbikes, riptides and what have you. You don't expect them to be deleted from the game because they were broken, you just expect their rules to change. And that would be ok, right?
But when the same thing is said about formation rules it's suddenly "moisturizer applied to the rotting corpse" and can never-ever be fixed and should only be whiped out from the game?
Would you please explain the logic in that?
Jervis stated on a Twitch Stream that all armies where worked on at the same time to better grind out the core mechanics of the game and balance everything. Some of the nonsense we know of now will likely change.
Heck, we already know weapon profiles are changing. It looks like if a ranged weapon isn't specifically anti-monster/vehicle it may not have a rend value.
But you need something to exist to apply changes to. Weapon profiles are still here. Formations are not.
Also I'm expressing my opinion on the information GW gives us at the moment. Sure, things may change drastically in the future. Or they may not. That's not the point.
Dropping formations was a large change as it removed the free bonus rules gak that was ruining the game. The change is a full blown removal of free rules for formation builds and will likely be replaced by regular FOCs which can offer specific rules with unit taxes. Full on better change.
Why not just rewrite the rules that add bonus units/points/upgrades/whatever? Heck, they could have just removed those alone and it would have been fine. There are dosens of formations in 40k and only a part of them are broken. Removing the whole system kills a huge chunk of variety.
There is also a LOT of formations and for all we know some of them might end up breaking with the army updates.
it would be easier to nuke everything and start from scratch than taking a scalpel to it. 99% sure some of the formations will be coming back as book specific detachments.
There are several times more units in the game than formations. Each with their own special rules, wargear and so on. Many of them broken too.
Even still GW decided to rebalance the whole thing and not just nuke everything, since people are not particularly fond of their models suddenely becoming invalid.
Yes, making a good game is hard. Balancing is hard. It doesn't mean we should excuse developers for not doing so.
2017/05/05 17:16:15
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 4th May 17 - Warp rift fluff
Well, if you think some of my posts fall in nb 4 or nb 5 you clearly have some major reading comprehension problems, since I've said numerous times that I'm happy with most of the change so far, and I have been generally positive toward 8th edition
You know what you're right on that. I've unjustly mis-characterized your posts. I apologize for lashing out from frustration.
2017/05/05 17:18:29
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 4th May 17 - Warp rift fluff
Well, if you think some of my posts fall in nb 4 or nb 5 you clearly have some major reading comprehension problems, since I've said numerous times that I'm happy with most of the change so far, and I have been generally positive toward 8th edition
You know what you're right on that. I've unjustly mis-characterized your posts. I apologize for lashing out from frustration.
No problem, gak happens
lost and damned log
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/519978.page#6525039
2017/05/05 17:19:28
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 4th May 17 - Warp rift fluff
Liberal_Perturabo wrote: Oh nice, another moronic decision from GW. I wonder how far they will go in their idiocy?
"Hey Dave, since we are completery rebalancing every unit in our game maybe we should do the same for all the formations and detachements so we won't lose on huge amount of variety while simultaneously fixing balance issues they caused?
Nah, man, that would require actual effort on our part! Besides, fitiing your army into formation will make you spend more than 5 minutes on building a list and force strategical decisions and that's a no-go. And do I even need to tell you that all this will be too hard to play for lil Timmy who can barely tell left from right?
I guess so.
Yup. So just trow in in the pile, there is still some room left between armor values, proper melee and interesting setting. We'll make a nice campfire out of all of that once we are finished gutting our franchise into oblivion."
I also love GW's jolly attitude with all that.
Like "Hey guys, check this out! We've made this super cool thing that we are going to show you right now! Ready? Ok, here it goes: all the books that we've released for several past months, the ones that you've been extremely exited about and spent your own money on ARE NOW COMPLETELY USELESS PIECES OF JUNK! Hahaha, amazing, right? Yeah, we are just a bunch of geniuses. Consumer friendly too!
Also buy our models, you fething loser."
Lol, always one masochist in the bunch. The formations and the books that you're lamenting the passing of were too intertwined. 7th edition was the attempt at taking the flaws of 6th and doubling down on them; yet another tweak that kept the crap that Gw's marketing team threw at us intact would fix nothing and just be moisturizer applied to the rotting corpse gw's flagship golden line.
So, with the whole overhaul thing I assume you are expecting broken units to be fixed. You know, things like scatterbikes, riptides and what have you. You don't expect them to be deleted from the game because they were broken, you just expect their rules to change. And that would be ok, right?
But when the same thing is said about formation rules it's suddenly "moisturizer applied to the rotting corpse" and can never-ever be fixed and should only be whiped out from the game?
Would you please explain the logic in that?
Jervis stated on a Twitch Stream that all armies where worked on at the same time to better grind out the core mechanics of the game and balance everything. Some of the nonsense we know of now will likely change.
Heck, we already know weapon profiles are changing. It looks like if a ranged weapon isn't specifically anti-monster/vehicle it may not have a rend value.
But you need something to exist to apply changes to. Weapon profiles are still here. Formations are not.
Also I'm expressing my opinion on the information GW gives us at the moment. Sure, things may change drastically in the future. Or they may not. That's not the point.
Dropping formations was a large change as it removed the free bonus rules gak that was ruining the game. The change is a full blown removal of free rules for formation builds and will likely be replaced by regular FOCs which can offer specific rules with unit taxes. Full on better change.
Why not just rewrite the rules that add bonus units/points/upgrades/whatever? Heck, they could have just removed those alone and it would have been fine. There are dosens of formations in 40k and only a part of them are broken. Removing the whole system kills a huge chunk of variety.
There is also a LOT of formations and for all we know some of them might end up breaking with the army updates.
it would be easier to nuke everything and start from scratch than taking a scalpel to it. 99% sure some of the formations will be coming back as book specific detachments.
There are several times more units in the game than formations. Each with their own special rules, wargear and so on. Many of them broken too.
Even still GW decided to rebalance the whole thing and not just nuke everything, since people are not particularly fond of their models suddenely becoming invalid.
Yes, making a good game is hard. Balancing is hard. It doesn't mean we should excuse developers for not doing so.
I dont understand how is nuking everything suddenly invalidating models that people have? they are redoing everything from the ground up. everyone and everything starts off at equal footing. there was way too much imbalance between ALL armies and even all units within those armies and between.
During the FAQ he held up a piece of paper and said he thought there were 14 formation in the book. He may have mis-remembered and gone back and counted to find there were 12. What does it really matter between 12 and 14? Simply put, there are a number of formation in the book. They generally give command points.
It's up to the player to figure out the best balance of formations to command points.
Since, we know you can spend a command point per phase. And I would guess a game will be between 5 and 7 turns. The most command points you could spend is 50-70 command points. I have a feeling that number would be near impossible to get in a 2000 point game or less. So, they really are a tactical item to be used when needed.
Do you like to have extra things to use? Build armies that take advantage of the command points. If not build armies that don't have alot of command points.
Tournament organizers will probably start applying more rules to those as we go along. I would bet at the very beginning though this will be a near free for all of army building.
I wouldn't be surprised if the first few tournaments are bring a battle-forged 1500pt army. Follow the rulebook.
2017/05/05 17:22:25
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 4th May 17 - Warp rift fluff
What was so inherently broken about formations concept?
Aside from "buy specific X get Y tailored freebies" (e.g. "buy our webstore bundle of devastator and assault marines and drop pods and they get to come in turn 1, shoot as Relentless and assault from deesptrike!") being terrible game design in and of itself, when coupled with allies, multiple detachment rules, formations/detachments made up of other formations, etc promoted lots of spam (and did little for army variety at events) and exacerbated issues with unintended syngergies between things that weren't really intended to work together or made them dramatically more powerful than they were originally designed to be.
They're also just an unnecessary layer of complexity that has to be separately managed, balanced and updated in addition to everything else.
Nothing you've mentioned couldn't be fixed with a rewrite and a proper restriction as a requirement for you having a formation. Formations consisting of formations I can agree with, but just removing those would fix that problem.
Also, I do not belive that more playstyle variety is something unnecessary for a game to have.
2017/05/05 17:22:35
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 4th May 17 - Warp rift fluff
Liberal_Perturabo wrote: Why not just rewrite the rules that add bonus units/points/upgrades/whatever? Heck, they could have just removed those alone and it would have been fine. There are dosens of formations in 40k and only a part of them are broken. Removing the whole system kills a huge chunk of variety.
By variety guess you mean free bonus rules since apart from those what it differs if you can take same units anyway_
Great post. This phenomenon of having some posters who are adament on always defending GW from all kind of criticism, is weird to say the least, and also very annoying. Only explanation that I can guess is that they are a bit like groupies that live vicariously through some celebrities, but they are doing it through a company.
Yea that isn't the issue at hand at all. And you can easily see this problem demonstrated mere posts from yours
1) GW is perfect
2) I am happy with what I've heard so far and want to hear more.
3) I like most things, but I really need to know more before I can judge.
4) This all sounds terrible and I don't care to listen.
5) THIS IS THE WORST THING EVER. I QUIT.
People think #2 is the same as #1. When the real problem in my opinion involves #4 and #5.including several of your own posts.
You forgot "This sounds bad. Hopefully GW has some ace in sleeve but with GW's track record I'm not going to stick my head in sand and pretend everything is fine" which is more accurate of the complains.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/05 17:24:17
2024 painted/bought: 109/109
2017/05/05 17:24:36
Subject: Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 4th May 17 - Warp rift fluff
Almost like different people have different ideas, eh?
Barely. Formations were pretty universally hated on Dakka, in fact, this thread shows most of people calling 7th the "Formation Edition" or the "Free Edition".
Liberal_Perturabo wrote: Oh nice, another moronic decision from GW. I wonder how far they will go in their idiocy?
"Hey Dave, since we are completery rebalancing every unit in our game maybe we should do the same for all the formations and detachements so we won't lose on huge amount of variety while simultaneously fixing balance issues they caused?
Nah, man, that would require actual effort on our part! Besides, fitiing your army into formation will make you spend more than 5 minutes on building a list and force strategical decisions and that's a no-go. And do I even need to tell you that all this will be too hard to play for lil Timmy who can barely tell left from right?
I guess so.
Yup. So just trow in in the pile, there is still some room left between armor values, proper melee and interesting setting. We'll make a nice campfire out of all of that once we are finished gutting our franchise into oblivion."
I also love GW's jolly attitude with all that.
Like "Hey guys, check this out! We've made this super cool thing that we are going to show you right now! Ready? Ok, here it goes: all the books that we've released for several past months, the ones that you've been extremely exited about and spent your own money on ARE NOW COMPLETELY USELESS PIECES OF JUNK! Hahaha, amazing, right? Yeah, we are just a bunch of geniuses. Consumer friendly too!
Also buy our models, you fething loser."
Lol, always one masochist in the bunch. The formations and the books that you're lamenting the passing of were too intertwined. 7th edition was the attempt at taking the flaws of 6th and doubling down on them; yet another tweak that kept the crap that Gw's marketing team threw at us intact would fix nothing and just be moisturizer applied to the rotting corpse gw's flagship golden line.
So, with the whole overhaul thing I assume you are expecting broken units to be fixed. You know, things like scatterbikes, riptides and what have you. You don't expect them to be deleted from the game because they were broken, you just expect their rules to change. And that would be ok, right?
But when the same thing is said about formation rules it's suddenly "moisturizer applied to the rotting corpse" and can never-ever be fixed and should only be whiped out from the game?
Would you please explain the logic in that?
Jervis stated on a Twitch Stream that all armies where worked on at the same time to better grind out the core mechanics of the game and balance everything. Some of the nonsense we know of now will likely change.
Heck, we already know weapon profiles are changing. It looks like if a ranged weapon isn't specifically anti-monster/vehicle it may not have a rend value.
But you need something to exist to apply changes to. Weapon profiles are still here. Formations are not.
Also I'm expressing my opinion on the information GW gives us at the moment. Sure, things may change drastically in the future. Or they may not. That's not the point.
Dropping formations was a large change as it removed the free bonus rules gak that was ruining the game. The change is a full blown removal of free rules for formation builds and will likely be replaced by regular FOCs which can offer specific rules with unit taxes. Full on better change.
Why not just rewrite the rules that add bonus units/points/upgrades/whatever? Heck, they could have just removed those alone and it would have been fine. There are dosens of formations in 40k and only a part of them are broken. Removing the whole system kills a huge chunk of variety.
There is also a LOT of formations and for all we know some of them might end up breaking with the army updates.
it would be easier to nuke everything and start from scratch than taking a scalpel to it. 99% sure some of the formations will be coming back as book specific detachments.
There are several times more units in the game than formations. Each with their own special rules, wargear and so on. Many of them broken too.
Even still GW decided to rebalance the whole thing and not just nuke everything, since people are not particularly fond of their models suddenely becoming invalid.
Yes, making a good game is hard. Balancing is hard. It doesn't mean we should excuse developers for not doing so.
Formations were buffs to units on top of any broken rules they may have already had.
Balancing units is easier than balancing formations as the first can be done through points costs and rules tweaks, formations on the other hand can only be adjusted via rules tweaks. Formations could have been good if there were unit taxes built in, but then they might as well just been FOC bonuses for specific builds.
2017/05/05 17:27:26
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 4th May 17 - Warp rift fluff
Liberal_Perturabo wrote: Oh nice, another moronic decision from GW. I wonder how far they will go in their idiocy?
"Hey Dave, since we are completery rebalancing every unit in our game maybe we should do the same for all the formations and detachements so we won't lose on huge amount of variety while simultaneously fixing balance issues they caused?
Nah, man, that would require actual effort on our part! Besides, fitiing your army into formation will make you spend more than 5 minutes on building a list and force strategical decisions and that's a no-go. And do I even need to tell you that all this will be too hard to play for lil Timmy who can barely tell left from right?
I guess so.
Yup. So just trow in in the pile, there is still some room left between armor values, proper melee and interesting setting. We'll make a nice campfire out of all of that once we are finished gutting our franchise into oblivion."
I also love GW's jolly attitude with all that.
Like "Hey guys, check this out! We've made this super cool thing that we are going to show you right now! Ready? Ok, here it goes: all the books that we've released for several past months, the ones that you've been extremely exited about and spent your own money on ARE NOW COMPLETELY USELESS PIECES OF JUNK! Hahaha, amazing, right? Yeah, we are just a bunch of geniuses. Consumer friendly too!
Also buy our models, you fething loser."
Lol, always one masochist in the bunch. The formations and the books that you're lamenting the passing of were too intertwined. 7th edition was the attempt at taking the flaws of 6th and doubling down on them; yet another tweak that kept the crap that Gw's marketing team threw at us intact would fix nothing and just be moisturizer applied to the rotting corpse gw's flagship golden line.
So, with the whole overhaul thing I assume you are expecting broken units to be fixed. You know, things like scatterbikes, riptides and what have you. You don't expect them to be deleted from the game because they were broken, you just expect their rules to change. And that would be ok, right?
But when the same thing is said about formation rules it's suddenly "moisturizer applied to the rotting corpse" and can never-ever be fixed and should only be whiped out from the game?
Would you please explain the logic in that?
Jervis stated on a Twitch Stream that all armies where worked on at the same time to better grind out the core mechanics of the game and balance everything. Some of the nonsense we know of now will likely change.
Heck, we already know weapon profiles are changing. It looks like if a ranged weapon isn't specifically anti-monster/vehicle it may not have a rend value.
But you need something to exist to apply changes to. Weapon profiles are still here. Formations are not.
Also I'm expressing my opinion on the information GW gives us at the moment. Sure, things may change drastically in the future. Or they may not. That's not the point.
Dropping formations was a large change as it removed the free bonus rules gak that was ruining the game. The change is a full blown removal of free rules for formation builds and will likely be replaced by regular FOCs which can offer specific rules with unit taxes. Full on better change.
Why not just rewrite the rules that add bonus units/points/upgrades/whatever? Heck, they could have just removed those alone and it would have been fine. There are dosens of formations in 40k and only a part of them are broken. Removing the whole system kills a huge chunk of variety.
There is also a LOT of formations and for all we know some of them might end up breaking with the army updates.
it would be easier to nuke everything and start from scratch than taking a scalpel to it. 99% sure some of the formations will be coming back as book specific detachments.
There are several times more units in the game than formations. Each with their own special rules, wargear and so on. Many of them broken too.
Even still GW decided to rebalance the whole thing and not just nuke everything, since people are not particularly fond of their models suddenely becoming invalid.
Yes, making a good game is hard. Balancing is hard. It doesn't mean we should excuse developers for not doing so.
I do not and will not let GW off the hook for the 7th edition disaster. There, now you see that I'm not a GW Fanboi. Removing free rules (AKA formations) for buying SPECIFIC models is the right way to go because they couldn't figure out how to balance them correctly. I know, I know, they should have called you first but they didn't. Time to move on.
2017/05/05 17:28:50
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 4th May 17 - Warp rift fluff
Liberal_Perturabo wrote: Oh nice, another moronic decision from GW. I wonder how far they will go in their idiocy?
"Hey Dave, since we are completery rebalancing every unit in our game maybe we should do the same for all the formations and detachements so we won't lose on huge amount of variety while simultaneously fixing balance issues they caused?
Nah, man, that would require actual effort on our part! Besides, fitiing your army into formation will make you spend more than 5 minutes on building a list and force strategical decisions and that's a no-go. And do I even need to tell you that all this will be too hard to play for lil Timmy who can barely tell left from right?
I guess so.
Yup. So just trow in in the pile, there is still some room left between armor values, proper melee and interesting setting. We'll make a nice campfire out of all of that once we are finished gutting our franchise into oblivion."
I also love GW's jolly attitude with all that.
Like "Hey guys, check this out! We've made this super cool thing that we are going to show you right now! Ready? Ok, here it goes: all the books that we've released for several past months, the ones that you've been extremely exited about and spent your own money on ARE NOW COMPLETELY USELESS PIECES OF JUNK! Hahaha, amazing, right? Yeah, we are just a bunch of geniuses. Consumer friendly too!
Also buy our models, you fething loser."
Lol, always one masochist in the bunch. The formations and the books that you're lamenting the passing of were too intertwined. 7th edition was the attempt at taking the flaws of 6th and doubling down on them; yet another tweak that kept the crap that Gw's marketing team threw at us intact would fix nothing and just be moisturizer applied to the rotting corpse gw's flagship golden line.
So, with the whole overhaul thing I assume you are expecting broken units to be fixed. You know, things like scatterbikes, riptides and what have you. You don't expect them to be deleted from the game because they were broken, you just expect their rules to change. And that would be ok, right?
But when the same thing is said about formation rules it's suddenly "moisturizer applied to the rotting corpse" and can never-ever be fixed and should only be whiped out from the game?
Would you please explain the logic in that?
Jervis stated on a Twitch Stream that all armies where worked on at the same time to better grind out the core mechanics of the game and balance everything. Some of the nonsense we know of now will likely change.
Heck, we already know weapon profiles are changing. It looks like if a ranged weapon isn't specifically anti-monster/vehicle it may not have a rend value.
But you need something to exist to apply changes to. Weapon profiles are still here. Formations are not.
Also I'm expressing my opinion on the information GW gives us at the moment. Sure, things may change drastically in the future. Or they may not. That's not the point.
Dropping formations was a large change as it removed the free bonus rules gak that was ruining the game. The change is a full blown removal of free rules for formation builds and will likely be replaced by regular FOCs which can offer specific rules with unit taxes. Full on better change.
Why not just rewrite the rules that add bonus units/points/upgrades/whatever? Heck, they could have just removed those alone and it would have been fine. There are dosens of formations in 40k and only a part of them are broken. Removing the whole system kills a huge chunk of variety.
There is also a LOT of formations and for all we know some of them might end up breaking with the army updates.
it would be easier to nuke everything and start from scratch than taking a scalpel to it. 99% sure some of the formations will be coming back as book specific detachments.
There are several times more units in the game than formations. Each with their own special rules, wargear and so on. Many of them broken too.
Even still GW decided to rebalance the whole thing and not just nuke everything, since people are not particularly fond of their models suddenely becoming invalid.
Yes, making a good game is hard. Balancing is hard. It doesn't mean we should excuse developers for not doing so.
I dont understand how is nuking everything suddenly invalidating models that people have? they are redoing everything from the ground up. everyone and everything starts off at equal footing. there was way too much imbalance between ALL armies and even all units within those armies and between.
Nuking as in completely removing from the game like they did with formations. GW oblosly wouldn't do that to something like a wraithknight.
2017/05/05 17:30:47
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40k 8th Edition - Summary (all info in OP) 4th May 17 - Warp rift fluff
Liberal_Perturabo wrote: Nuking as in completely removing from the game like they did with formations. GW oblosly wouldn't do that to something like a wraithknight.
Yea. They aren't nuking models. They can nuke rules though. They nuked LD8 from space marines as well.
What matters more is that you can still use your models. So far all you have lost is free bonus rules.
~1.5k
