Switch Theme:

Problem with 40k Balance  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba






 AnomanderRake wrote:
 the_scotsman wrote:
...which is pretty weird, given just how many forgeworld models are currently staples of competitive tournament play.


They're very careful to make sure nothing I own is ever a staple of competitive play. The 30k SM units are either unplayable or don't have rules (for some reason (*cough*nokitnorules*coughcough*) loyalists are allowed to use their Cataphractii and Chaos isn't), the resin Knights are paying a huge tax for being resin, and the Mechanicum stuff straight-up has no rules. What FW models are staples of competitive play?


As far as I recall, wraithseers, hornets, death riders, everything nids, the FW castelian dreads or whatever theyre called, at least a couple of the fw knights, lots of custode stuff...

...my fw knight appeaers to pay a supremely modest tax for the extra gak it gets to do. 30pts more than a warden for 25% more shots, 2 more wounds, and a main sword thats more effective vs heavy infantry.

"I can't believe all these tryhard WAACs out there just care about winning all the time when it's supposed to be a game for fun!!!!!!! Also here's my 27 page essay on why marines are OP and Orkz should get a bunch of OP rules so I can win more games

-the_scotsman"

-ERJAK 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





 AnomanderRake wrote:
I've sold a lot of this off because I couldn't do what I wanted to with it, but over the course of 8th/9th I've had a Corsairs army (soft-squatted in 8th and hard-squatted in 9th), an Ordo Malleus army (the Inquisition stuff is just useless at this point, so it's half a GK army I can't really use because I want to use the PAGK instead of playing whatever the one Paladin deathstar/Dreadknights netlist GW decided to make actually work is, and half a Guard army I couldn't really use because I refuse to buy a whole new army of Guard vehicles), a Mechanicum/Knights army (which I can't really use without buying a whole new army because GW's decided to fix the army by adding new horrendously expensive kits instead of fixing what was already there, and because the FW Mechanicum stuff never got 8e rules), an Alpha Legion army (which was supposed to be 30k/40k dual-purpose, which isn't possible anymore given how bad the CSM book is if you aren't searching out Daemon-based combo builds), a Thousand Sons army (same), a Deathwatch army (selling that off was more of a ragequit because I hate their 9e supplement), and a Custodes army (which wasn't unplayable, just incredibly random/boring to play).


Thanks. That helps me understand your perspective more. What did you keep? A good portion of those should be reasonable capable armies.

   
Made in us
Gore-Soaked Lunatic Witchhunter







 the_scotsman wrote:
 AnomanderRake wrote:
 the_scotsman wrote:
...which is pretty weird, given just how many forgeworld models are currently staples of competitive tournament play.


They're very careful to make sure nothing I own is ever a staple of competitive play. The 30k SM units are either unplayable or don't have rules (for some reason (*cough*nokitnorules*coughcough*) loyalists are allowed to use their Cataphractii and Chaos isn't), the resin Knights are paying a huge tax for being resin, and the Mechanicum stuff straight-up has no rules. What FW models are staples of competitive play?


As far as I recall, wraithseers, hornets, death riders, everything nids, the FW castelian dreads or whatever theyre called, at least a couple of the fw knights, lots of custode stuff...

...my fw knight appeaers to pay a supremely modest tax for the extra gak it gets to do. 30pts more than a warden for 25% more shots, 2 more wounds, and a main sword thats more effective vs heavy infantry.


The Dreadnaughts work great in loyalist Codexes where "Dreadnaught" is a keyword, so there are stratagems that work on them. In Chaos GW has chosen to interpret "Helbrute" as the name of the Helbrute datasheet in the CSM book so the Dreadnaughts get zero stratagems. As to Wraithseers, Hornets, Death Riders, and Tyranid units we're back in "buy a different army to play the game" territory, I sold off my Custodes because they were incredibly boring to play, and I had two of the other FW Knights who were paying a ~100pt handicap for being resin, not that one.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Daedalus81 wrote:
 AnomanderRake wrote:
I've sold a lot of this off because I couldn't do what I wanted to with it, but over the course of 8th/9th I've had a Corsairs army (soft-squatted in 8th and hard-squatted in 9th), an Ordo Malleus army (the Inquisition stuff is just useless at this point, so it's half a GK army I can't really use because I want to use the PAGK instead of playing whatever the one Paladin deathstar/Dreadknights netlist GW decided to make actually work is, and half a Guard army I couldn't really use because I refuse to buy a whole new army of Guard vehicles), a Mechanicum/Knights army (which I can't really use without buying a whole new army because GW's decided to fix the army by adding new horrendously expensive kits instead of fixing what was already there, and because the FW Mechanicum stuff never got 8e rules), an Alpha Legion army (which was supposed to be 30k/40k dual-purpose, which isn't possible anymore given how bad the CSM book is if you aren't searching out Daemon-based combo builds), a Thousand Sons army (same), a Deathwatch army (selling that off was more of a ragequit because I hate their 9e supplement), and a Custodes army (which wasn't unplayable, just incredibly random/boring to play).


Thanks. That helps me understand your perspective more. What did you keep? A good portion of those should be reasonable capable armies.


Most of what I can still use in 30k (the Mechanicum and the CSM). I'm not planning to come back to playing 9th, but I'd love to hear your logic for how largely mechanized Undivided CSM with no daemons are "reasonably capable"; last time I asked someone how that worked I got a long spiel about abusing the AL closest-target stratagem with magic box terrain that sounded incredibly theorycrafted.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/09 02:01:56


Balanced Game: Noun. A game in which all options and choices are worth using.
Homebrew oldhammer project: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/790996.page#10896267
Meridian: Necromunda-based 40k skirmish: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/795374.page 
   
Made in de
Ork Admiral Kroozin Da Kosmos on Da Hulk






Almost all of your stuff also seems to be lacking their corresponding 9th edition codices, so things might start to look a lot better for you when GK, TS, CSM and Custodes get their books.
My impression of 9th edition codices is that their internal balance has improved by a lot, so you have decent shot at playing good game if you play TAC vs TAC, even if you don't use the most efficient build from the book.

Earth is not flat
Vaccines work
We've been to the moon
Climate change is real
Chemtrails aren't a thing
Evolution is a fact
Orks are not a melee army
Stand up for science!
 
   
Made in ch
Warped Arch Heretic of Chaos





I'd not be as optimistic Jid. They already fethed up and we all know how well csm got supported the last time around...

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page
A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

In the 41st millennium there is only overpriced hamberders.

 
   
Made in de
Ork Admiral Kroozin Da Kosmos on Da Hulk






Not Online!!! wrote:
I'd not be as optimistic Jid. They already fethed up and we all know how well csm got supported the last time around...


How did they feth up? Because they missed combos in the books? That happens to companies which are hundred times more professional than GW in their rules design - nobody is perfect. The important part is that they fixed it within a reasonable timeframe.

It's also worth noting that many of the problems you read and hear about don't really apply to your regular gaming tables, because people don't just go out, buy and paint huge piles of models that are the flavor of the month. And from what I can tell, AnomanderRake doesn't seem like the kind of guy who is looking for tournament wins.

Every one in our group is happy with their 9th edition codices, a first since ever. The elephant in the room, of course, is the huge gap between 8th and 9th edition codices, but that problem will solve itself eventually.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/09 07:22:17


Earth is not flat
Vaccines work
We've been to the moon
Climate change is real
Chemtrails aren't a thing
Evolution is a fact
Orks are not a melee army
Stand up for science!
 
   
Made in ch
Warped Arch Heretic of Chaos





 Jidmah wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
I'd not be as optimistic Jid. They already fethed up and we all know how well csm got supported the last time around...


How did they feth up? Because they missed combos in the books? That happens to companies which are hundred times more professional than GW in their rules design - nobody is perfect. The important part is that they fixed it within a reasonable timeframe.

It's also worth noting that many of the problems you read and hear about don't really apply to your regular gaming tables, because people don't just go out, buy and paint huge piles of models that are the flavor of the month. And from what I can tell, AnomanderRake doesn't seem like the kind of guy who is looking for tournament wins.

Every one in our group is happy with their 9th edition codices, a first since ever. The elephant in the room, of course, is the huge gap between 8th and 9th edition codices, but that problem will solve itself eventually.


Truly? Reasonable timeframe?

Gw already did first day DLC including cut content.

We already had DE and the DLC being of lackluster quality controll like in ye olden day, ie none.

I can guarantee you that if you only have a few comp minded people in a small group that you will see an increase in the power gap that makes casual gaming rather annoying.

And the power gap could've been resolved long time ago, needless to say that minimal board standards and the 9th ruleset are gak especially for more wargame side of players.

there's 0 indication as to what CSM will get that looks even remotly sensible.

There's 0 indication what CWE will get which he may be able to use the corsairs for.



https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page
A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

In the 41st millennium there is only overpriced hamberders.

 
   
Made in de
Ork Admiral Kroozin Da Kosmos on Da Hulk






The only impact that DLC had on my gaming group is me playing one of the narrative missions from it.

It really does little for the game, even the crusade rules for DG that totally should have been in the codex suck so much, you can just ignore them.

Earth is not flat
Vaccines work
We've been to the moon
Climate change is real
Chemtrails aren't a thing
Evolution is a fact
Orks are not a melee army
Stand up for science!
 
   
Made in it
Gargantuan Gargant




Italy

 Jidmah wrote:


Every one in our group is happy with their 9th edition codices, a first since ever. The elephant in the room, of course, is the huge gap between 8th and 9th edition codices, but that problem will solve itself eventually.


Agree, and some people may have forgotten than also in the past editions there was a gap between updated codexes and old ones, but it used to take much more time for GW to update codexes. An ork one touched 4 editions between 4th and 7th. Now it's 2 at most, and for everyone. Not to mention the regular releases of FAQs to fix some imbalance.


 
   
Made in gb
[DCM]
Stonecold Gimster






 Jidmah wrote:

Every one in our group is happy with their 9th edition codices, a first since ever. The elephant in the room, of course, is the huge gap between 8th and 9th edition codices, but that problem will solve itself eventually.

But it won't be solved. As soon as the last 9th codex is released, we'll be onto the repeat cycle of 10th and there's the same problem all over again - just old 9th vs new 10th codices. It's a problem that will never go away with GW and it' release cycle linking to profits.

My Painting Blog: http://gimgamgoo.com/
Currently most played: Kill Team, Kings of War, Silent Death, Beyond the Gates of Antares, Dracula's America, Bolt Action (inc K47), DzC and X-Wing 
   
Made in it
Gargantuan Gargant




Italy

But if the gap between old and new codex isn't extremely hight and every army has its codex updated withing 3 years this is not really a problem. Releasing everything at the beginning of an edition would be the ideal result yes, but I don't think the current state of codexes releasing and power creep is bad, it's actually one of the highest moments in 40k's history about this matter.


 
   
Made in de
Ork Admiral Kroozin Da Kosmos on Da Hulk






 Gimgamgoo wrote:
 Jidmah wrote:

Every one in our group is happy with their 9th edition codices, a first since ever. The elephant in the room, of course, is the huge gap between 8th and 9th edition codices, but that problem will solve itself eventually.

But it won't be solved. As soon as the last 9th codex is released, we'll be onto the repeat cycle of 10th and there's the same problem all over again - just old 9th vs new 10th codices. It's a problem that will never go away with GW and it' release cycle linking to profits.


That's just your assumption, friend. For all we know 10th might move to a digital ruleset where changing one army at time is less advantageous than changing all armies at once more often because they can shift more models that way.

Earth is not flat
Vaccines work
We've been to the moon
Climate change is real
Chemtrails aren't a thing
Evolution is a fact
Orks are not a melee army
Stand up for science!
 
   
Made in gb
Ship's Officer





Bristol (UK)

They shift one army at a time so they don't overwhelm people's salary.
If they released all faction rules at the same time, chances are a lot of people would only buy 1-2 things as that's all they could afford that month, and by the time it rolls around to next month a lot of the hype has died.
The progressive release means they maintain the hype and new things to buy every month.
   
Made in it
Longtime Dakkanaut





kirotheavenger wrote:They shift one army at a time so they don't overwhelm people's salary.
If they released all faction rules at the same time, chances are a lot of people would only buy 1-2 things as that's all they could afford that month, and by the time it rolls around to next month a lot of the hype has died.
The progressive release means they maintain the hype and new things to buy every month.


This^.

Blackie wrote:But if the gap between old and new codex isn't extremely hight and every army has its codex updated withing 3 years this is not really a problem. Releasing everything at the beginning of an edition would be the ideal result yes, but I don't think the current state of codexes releasing and power creep is bad, it's actually one of the highest moments in 40k's history about this matter.


And most importantly this^.

9th edition dexes being on a different level to 8th edition ones is a false narrative which has never been proven with data.

Currenly all factions sit comfortably between 45% and 55% win ratio, with Tau and IK being outliers and only at 40% (which is still terribly high for the worst faction) and obviously DE being really high until we start seeing the effects of the nerf.

When I say that they are all between 45 and 55, I don't mean that the 9th edition ones are gravitating toward the top of that range and the 8th edition ones toward the bottom. They are perfectly mixed in there.

9th edition dexes are 100% better than the 8th edition ones, but better doesn't mean more powerful. They sport a really good internal balance and express the fluff and playstyle much better. In regards to the external balance though, they are about on level with 8th edition ones... barring DE obviously.
   
Made in gb
Ship's Officer





Bristol (UK)

Tournament data is difficult to pass judgements like that.
45% winrate is really bad, since tournaments match players of equal wins together, after the first few games of an event it's just losers vs losers and winners vs winners - thus everything trends to 50%.

Additionally, a lot of what you see in tournaments I would describe as gimmicks. Tyranids spamming Dimacharions (/whatever) and doing well isn't really representative of the faction.

Balance is definitely better than 7th, but our resident generic chaos marine player is not having a good time.
   
Made in de
Ork Admiral Kroozin Da Kosmos on Da Hulk






 kirotheavenger wrote:
Tournament data is difficult to pass judgements like that.
45% winrate is really bad, since tournaments match players of equal wins together, after the first few games of an event it's just losers vs losers and winners vs winners - thus everything trends to 50%.

Additionally, a lot of what you see in tournaments I would describe as gimmicks. Tyranids spamming Dimacharions (/whatever) and doing well isn't really representative of the faction.

Balance is definitely better than 7th, but our resident generic chaos marine player is not having a good time.


Not just chaos marines - playing orks into something like dark angels or drukhari isn't a lot of fun either, and playing DG against craftworld, guard, TS or pre-codex drukhari genuinely feels like baby seal clubbing.

It's nowhere near the level of imbalance that 7th edition's codices showed amongst codices of the very same edition, as there still usually is a top build that can eek out wins - but the difference is very much present in a "my stuff vs your stuff" game. It just feels bad when you have to run the one tournament builds your army has while the other codex can just bring any coherent army and still do just as well as you are doing.

This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2021/06/09 10:52:23


Earth is not flat
Vaccines work
We've been to the moon
Climate change is real
Chemtrails aren't a thing
Evolution is a fact
Orks are not a melee army
Stand up for science!
 
   
Made in us
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba






 Jidmah wrote:
 kirotheavenger wrote:
Tournament data is difficult to pass judgements like that.
45% winrate is really bad, since tournaments match players of equal wins together, after the first few games of an event it's just losers vs losers and winners vs winners - thus everything trends to 50%.

Additionally, a lot of what you see in tournaments I would describe as gimmicks. Tyranids spamming Dimacharions (/whatever) and doing well isn't really representative of the faction.

Balance is definitely better than 7th, but our resident generic chaos marine player is not having a good time.


Not just chaos marines - playing orks into something like dark angels or drukhari isn't a lot of fun either, and playing DG against craftworld, guard, TS or pre-codex drukhari genuinely feels like baby seal clubbing.

It's nowhere near the level of imbalance that 7th edition's codices showed amongst codices of the very same edition, as there still usually is a top build that can eek out wins - but the difference is very much present in a "my stuff vs your stuff" game. It just feels bad when you have to run the one tournament builds your army has while the other codex can just bring any coherent army and still do just as well as you are doing.


I think I have a different perspective, as I've got currently what is basically the best of the best army in town (dark eldar) and two of the absolute bottom of the pits worst ones (thousand sons and gsc) as welll as some pretty heavily purposefully handicapped meme lists, like "foot eldar with one of every aspect warrior squad plus an avatar" and "2000pts of only grot units and characters".

Switching between those armies is not NEARLY , not anywhere CLOSE as bad as in the previous edition, going from one of my factions that had already gotten its codex to one that was waiting semi-eternally for that update like orks and gsc. My worst armies have their combo moments right now where people playing new codexes have to sit back and go 'woah, my army can't do that gak', like thousand sons double shooting with +1 to wound on a squad for a total of 2cp.

"I can't believe all these tryhard WAACs out there just care about winning all the time when it's supposed to be a game for fun!!!!!!! Also here's my 27 page essay on why marines are OP and Orkz should get a bunch of OP rules so I can win more games

-the_scotsman"

-ERJAK 
   
Made in pl
Fixture of Dakka




Okey but that is based on the idea of switching and being able to switch to a good army in the first place. And possibly your opponents being able to do that too.
If your closest playgroup consists of a 3xmarine , DG, DE, 2xSoB and a GSC player, the GSC player is not going to think that the differences between armies are minimal. Plus that argument works only for people that knew editions prior 9th or 8th. If someone started in 9th, then telling them that imbalance was worse in the past, doesn't really sound that convincing. Because people don't generally care about times, they did not play in.

And If on top of that GSC is your only army for 9th, I can tell you that the player does not feel happy about it, and no amount of telling them that they just should play a list with tyranids and 3 scythboys fixs that. I actually seen that in action, same with tau players.

If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain. 
   
Made in us
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba






Karol wrote:
Okey but that is based on the idea of switching and being able to switch to a good army in the first place. And possibly your opponents being able to do that too.
If your closest playgroup consists of a 3xmarine , DG, DE, 2xSoB and a GSC player, the GSC player is not going to think that the differences between armies are minimal. Plus that argument works only for people that knew editions prior 9th or 8th. If someone started in 9th, then telling them that imbalance was worse in the past, doesn't really sound that convincing. Because people don't generally care about times, they did not play in.

And If on top of that GSC is your only army for 9th, I can tell you that the player does not feel happy about it, and no amount of telling them that they just should play a list with tyranids and 3 scythboys fixs that. I actually seen that in action, same with tau players.


Sure, the fact that I can switch armies is nice. What I'm saying is that the games I play as Drukhari, and the games I play as GSC, I feel like my army that I am playing is closer and more like two things that exist in the same game system than when, for example, I used to play Orks and Necrons in 7th edition, and my Necrons had access to the Decurion super-formation while my orks didnt have gak for formations at all, or in mid-8th switching between my drukhari after they got a codex and my harlequins or gsc before they had gotten one.

Playing vs a person who got subfaction traits, got stratagems other than the cp reroll and interrupt, got relics, and got WLTs other than the 6+FNP was such an utterly miserable experience, playing my GSC now vs an army like DG doesnt even come close to as bad. it's annoying, sure, it's annoying that the DG player has an ability to make me -1T when he gets me within 3" or whatever, and I get no ability to compensate for that, and also I don't have chapter traits on my vehicles still for no real reason. GSC's current rules state is irritating as hell, but I can still recognize what we're playing as the same edition of the same game, unlike playing my formation-having necrons one game and my formation-less orks the next in 7th.

"I can't believe all these tryhard WAACs out there just care about winning all the time when it's supposed to be a game for fun!!!!!!! Also here's my 27 page essay on why marines are OP and Orkz should get a bunch of OP rules so I can win more games

-the_scotsman"

-ERJAK 
   
Made in pl
Fixture of Dakka




I am not saying it is not nice. But saying that the over all difference balance in the game is small, is only defendable, if between one game of GSC you can fit a game of something that at least kind of a works, and every 4th or 5th game in between, being something like a game with DE.

But again I don't really have much of an idea how a meta game functions, when a substential number of people have multiple armies to go back to. What I know is what happens when you wait for 2-3 years for an update, having one army. And it is generally not a very fun thing to go through, if the army is bad. If the army is good, it is actually fun.

If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain. 
   
Made in it
Gargantuan Gargant




Italy

Having one army with not many models, actually.

I'm sure people who play with 33% or less of their collections could easily enjoy 9th edition, even if they have to stick with 8th codexes, regardless of their armies' rate.

If you have the models to change your lists you don't need to wait 2-3 years. Not in 8th or 9th editions of 40k.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/09 12:46:06



 
   
Made in us
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba






 Blackie wrote:
Having one army with not many models, actually.

I'm sure people who play with 33% or less of their collections could easily enjoy 9th edition, even if they have to stick with 8th codexes, regardless of their armies' rate.

If you have the models to change your lists you don't need to wait 2-3 years. Not in 8th or 9th editions of 40k.


I often have extremely limited model swaps available for any of my armies. I'm a 'built to 2k, move on to another army' kind of player usually.

I dont have significantly different winrates with GSC/Tsons and Drukhari/Deathwatch. the armies I have that have 8th ed dexes do not win way less than the armies I have 9th ed dexes for, regardless of what faction im playing against.

Mostly, it has to do with opponent. I have opponents I generally win vs, and opponents I generally lose vs, and the faction theyre currently playing being good or bad usually doesn't make much of a difference. The only time I have seen a new book take an opponent I'd generally consider 'an easier matchup' to 'a harder matchup' is marine 2.0 taking our local ih player from baby seal you had to avoid clubbing to basically unbeatable.

I haven't played our local admech+knight player since the new dex dropped. He's always been relatively competitive, and I lose vs him as much as I win, but given that I don't think he actually owns more than 10 skitarii I don't expect him to be super crazy hot gak with the new book.

"I can't believe all these tryhard WAACs out there just care about winning all the time when it's supposed to be a game for fun!!!!!!! Also here's my 27 page essay on why marines are OP and Orkz should get a bunch of OP rules so I can win more games

-the_scotsman"

-ERJAK 
   
Made in pl
Fixture of Dakka




 Blackie wrote:
Having one army with not many models, actually.

I'm sure people who play with 33% or less of their collections could easily enjoy 9th edition, even if they have to stick with 8th codexes, regardless of their armies' rate.

If you have the models to change your lists you don't need to wait 2-3 years. Not in 8th or 9th editions of 40k.


Which is a crux of a problem for people, who wait a year to get an army to 2000s and then, if the army is bad, don't have much incentive to pay money to update it, specially in 9th when it involved painting it too. And if the army is good there is even less incentive to invest and buy new stuff either, because why spend money, when the thing works perfectly fine.

And if the game is 2000pts, having it be 33% of your collection often implies years of playing. Probably over multiple editions. Making it not really an option for a new player either. Unless of course someone can splurge 2-3k $ in one go, but if you can do that, the problems in your life are probably way different then, why does my GSC army not work in 9th ed.


I dont have significantly different winrates with GSC/Tsons and Drukhari/Deathwatch. the armies I have that have 8th ed dexes do not win way less than the armies I have 9th ed dexes for, regardless of what faction im playing against.

You know, I am not interested in examples that are hard to translate to the over all population of the game. I don't know what armies you, play what are the opposing armies and who are the opponnts. What I do know is that having a GSC army have the same win rate over multiple games as a DE one would require some very rare circumstances. And very rare isn't very helpful for other people. Because then the whole thing comes down to two people spending money, one saying they are happy, so changes are not needed, and the other not being happy and being suppose to do what? spend more money, quit game and take a 1000$ or higher hit. Because I am really not seeing the argument line being able to spread to more generic terms of playing w40k in this edition or in 8th.

If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain. 
   
Made in us
Daemonic Dreadnought




The dark hollows of Kentucky

 AnomanderRake wrote:
 the_scotsman wrote:
...which is pretty weird, given just how many forgeworld models are currently staples of competitive tournament play.


They're very careful to make sure nothing I own is ever a staple of competitive play. The 30k SM units are either unplayable or don't have rules (for some reason (*cough*nokitnorules*coughcough*) loyalists are allowed to use their Cataphractii and Chaos isn't), the resin Knights are paying a huge tax for being resin, and the Mechanicum stuff straight-up has no rules. What FW models are staples of competitive play?

What 30k CSM units are you using that are "unplayable"? If it's a Typhon, I get you. Removing their ability to double their range by not moving was a nasty and arbitrary move. But pretty much everything else is quite good, and better than it was. Contemptors are reasonably tough, and can be equipped to be either good for ranged offense or straight up vicious in melee. Leviathans are the same, and hard as nails. Sicarans are fast as most bikes and have good ranged output, while being tougher than most tanks in their weight class thanks to their 2+ save. The Achilles and Proteus are both what all Land Raiders should be, and either a Fellblade or Falchion offer massive firepower in a tough platform. Martial Legacy is a bitter pill to swallow, but the diminished CP pool can be worth it. And all of these can be buffed by our sorcerers, DAs, and Chaos Lords. CORE isn't currently a problem for CSM.

You're Alpha Legion sounds a lot like my Night Lords: no daemons, lots of fw. It can work. It does work. What have you tried, and what problems are you seeing?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/09 14:55:02


 
   
Made in it
Gargantuan Gargant




Italy

Karol wrote:


And if the game is 2000pts, having it be 33% of your collection often implies years of playing. Probably over multiple editions. Making it not really an option for a new player either.


I think this kind of mentality is terrible for the game. As a kid it took me 5ish years to complete a 2500ish points collection and play at the standard format (1500 back then) with a functioning list and game knowledge, so what's the problem? I played with proxies or smaller games when I couldn't field enough models for a standard game, I've done it for years, like pretty much all the other guys my age that I knew that started in my same period.

A new player should be focussed on learn the rules, the game mechanics, how to paint, etc... which takes a lot of time, as it should. When I started the hobby, and even several years after that, to paint something like half Indomitus it would have taken me approx 6 months. A new player should NOT be focussed on maximizing his/her investment into the hobby and become a competitive player almost immediately.

Trend with current young people is demanding EVERYTHING NOW!!!! (and forever) which is toxic.


 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





 Blackie wrote:
Karol wrote:


And if the game is 2000pts, having it be 33% of your collection often implies years of playing. Probably over multiple editions. Making it not really an option for a new player either.


I think this kind of mentality is terrible for the game. As a kid it took me 5ish years to complete a 2500ish points collection and play at the standard format (1500 back then) with a functioning list and game knowledge, so what's the problem? I played with proxies or smaller games when I couldn't field enough models for a standard game, I've done it for years, like pretty much all the other guys my age that I knew that started in my same period.

A new player should be focussed on learn the rules, the game mechanics, how to paint, etc... which takes a lot of time, as it should. When I started the hobby, and even several years after that, to paint something like half Indomitus it would have taken me approx 6 months. A new player should NOT be focussed on maximizing his/her investment into the hobby and become a competitive player almost immediately.

Trend with current young people is demanding EVERYTHING NOW!!!! (and forever) which is toxic.


I think there is a divide in certain age groups. Players like us who started young and developed with the game and players currently their early 20s who jumped in and didn't build that same kind of appreciation. I sound like a crotchety old man, but I'm technically a millennial.

   
Made in us
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba






 Daedalus81 wrote:
 Blackie wrote:
Karol wrote:


And if the game is 2000pts, having it be 33% of your collection often implies years of playing. Probably over multiple editions. Making it not really an option for a new player either.


I think this kind of mentality is terrible for the game. As a kid it took me 5ish years to complete a 2500ish points collection and play at the standard format (1500 back then) with a functioning list and game knowledge, so what's the problem? I played with proxies or smaller games when I couldn't field enough models for a standard game, I've done it for years, like pretty much all the other guys my age that I knew that started in my same period.

A new player should be focussed on learn the rules, the game mechanics, how to paint, etc... which takes a lot of time, as it should. When I started the hobby, and even several years after that, to paint something like half Indomitus it would have taken me approx 6 months. A new player should NOT be focussed on maximizing his/her investment into the hobby and become a competitive player almost immediately.

Trend with current young people is demanding EVERYTHING NOW!!!! (and forever) which is toxic.


I think there is a divide in certain age groups. Players like us who started young and developed with the game and players currently their early 20s who jumped in and didn't build that same kind of appreciation. I sound like a crotchety old man, but I'm technically a millennial.


Yeah, i get you lol. Every single new person who asks 'hey what should I do to collect' I give the advice "GO. SLOWLY. LEARN THE GAME AS YOU GO." but then i see them in 2 weeks playing with an all-grey extremely skewed 2k list that's going to either be nearly nonfunctional out of the gate or soon to be nerfed into oblivion.


"I can't believe all these tryhard WAACs out there just care about winning all the time when it's supposed to be a game for fun!!!!!!! Also here's my 27 page essay on why marines are OP and Orkz should get a bunch of OP rules so I can win more games

-the_scotsman"

-ERJAK 
   
Made in ca
Longtime Dakkanaut





Given the justified complaints of Chaos players, I'm really hoping they are the next dex after GK/ Ksons.

CWE and Guard need range updates and love, it's true, but the Chaos situation is pretty terrible. The fact that they haven't updated to 2W yet means they clearly aren't going to until the dex drops, so it's got to be coming soon.

Even if all the announced dexes were all supposed to be out by the end of this month (which we have very good reason to believe they were), that would still mean CSM wouldn't have been out until July (assuming they are the next dex).

And going from October til July on uneven footing with loyalist was a bad idea, and bad planning. Even if I like 9th (which I do) I cannot deny this.

Sure, CSM are Heretics, and undeserving of the Emperor's mercy, but there are limits to the suffering that even they should have to endure.
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: