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.

Hold judgement on Necrons because they were written for 6th ed. When it releases they may be dumber then GK are now.

alsycho wrote:Hold judgement on Necrons because they were written for 6th ed. When it releases they may be dumber then GK are now.

True, but I think gk was kind or written for 6th aswell, so the new edition will bring them into line with most of the other books

Try shifting from RT to 2nd(loved it)! I stopped playing during 3rd(hated it), gave 4th a try, quit that. Gave 5th a go and it was pretty good.

Now on the 6th. Point is, GW is a journey. Your not going like every edition. You don't have to play. I didn't play 2 whole editions, I turned out ok.

tuiman wrote:Wow, sorry LordOfTheSloths, does me giving games workshop my money and some credit offend you?

Wow, sorry Tuiman, no it doesn't "offend" me, you can do whatever you like with your money and credit. Just remember--just because you like rules revisions doesn't mean everybody does.

tuiman wrote:Games Workshop is a business, like all, their main goal is to make money.

Of course it is, of course it is. Their main goal is to make money. And the way they choose to make money is to issue what amounts to new games every few years, heavily market to newbies, fanboys and 9-year-old brats with ADD and daddies who have too much money, while alienating much of their existing customer base. So far, they've managed to get more new $$$ than they lose from alienated former customers. As long as that situation endures, their business model will likewise endure, and existing customers will continue to be alienated.

tuiman wrote:Yes it is a multi-variable game, the problem is, so many variables are just so bad that no-one ever takes them, so we get stuck seeing the same list over and over.

And you see "the same list over and over" in chess, Monopoly and Texas Hold 'Em. But unlike the last two games, in 40K you have different scenarios, different landscapes, and more than one set of pieces to play with/against. If that much variety still isn't enough for you, go ahead and wallow in GW's rule-reshuffling cycle.

tuiman wrote:If 6th makes the game even slightly more balanced would that not be an achievement?

6th ed isn't being produced to make the game "even slightly more balanced."

tuiman wrote:As a side, I really dont see the hate towards Matt Ward and his codex's. Ok, so GK might be a little stronger than average, but if you look out there, people have been able to beat them, and beat them well. In my opinion he has done a great job with Necrons.

The reasons for Ward-hate have been discussed at tedious length here and elsewhere, and I agree with almost all of them. As for his Necron product, my opinion is exactly the opposite of yours, again for reasons that have been done to death by now.

I know people won't like it, you can't please everyone, and I respect your opinion on this matter.

40k has plenty of variaty for me, however after 4 years and lots of playing, I do look forward to some change.

Again, if this is your opionion, then thats fine with me, you don't have to play. Although I'm quite interested to hear the reasons why you don't like edition changes.

I will also say that I agree in that the system they have is not perfect, rulebooks are not cheap, and having certain parts of your army become useless is not a good feeling (I have been there myself), I would prefer that edition changes were not so frequent, giving older codexs a chance to catch up.

It won't be.

Sure, there will be people that actually do hate it. And boyhowdy will they be loud about it on the internet. But that's not a unique phenomena.

I know this will sound weird, especially on Dakka, but the vast majority of 40k players like playing 40k. They will continue doing so no matter what the base rules are as they have through every other edition.

If it is, my LGS would probably play 5th still (AFAIK we are keeping 5th for some tournaments for the 1st month after 6th).

Personally, I would end up playing more warmachine than I do now, especially since I enjoy it far more than 40k.

BTNeophyte wrote:(AFAIK we are keeping 5th for some tournaments for the 1st month after 6th)

That's a fairly standard practice. It has nothing to do with animosity towards 6th edition, it's just that it's too difficult to learn all the nuances of a rules system while potentially retooling your army to fit the new ruleset in the course of a month. A month gives time to not only get used to the rules, but to allow for a metagame to begin to develop.

tuiman wrote:I know people won't like it, you can't please everyone, and I respect your opinion on this matter.

40k has plenty of variaty for me, however after 4 years and lots of playing, I do look forward to some change.

Again, if this is your opionion, then thats fine with me, you don't have to play. Although I'm quite interested to hear the reasons why you don't like edition changes.

I will also say that I agree in that the system they have is not perfect, rulebooks are not cheap, and having certain parts of your army become useless is not a good feeling (I have been there myself), I would prefer that edition changes were not so frequent, giving older codexs a chance to catch up.

Personally, I preferred 3rd edition. When I got started in 40K, I didn't even realize there had been previous editions. I didn't like 4th, and I didn't like 5th. 6th looks to be a continuation of that trend, if not an intensification due to its apparent convergence to 8th ed WHFB, about which I also have little good to say.

Why I don't like edition changes? Among other reasons:

1) They reduce or eliminate the value of units, if not entire armies, in which I have made large investments of time and money.
2) They reduce or eliminate the number of games I can play, because so many fanboys just love those new editions and go right along with whatever GW chooses to put out, abandoning everything that's gone before.
3) They never produce an overall improvement IMO. For every problem they allegedly solve, they introduce two new ones.
4) Codex creep. 'Nuff said.
5) Unwarranted expense.

I've offered my own solutions before: more campaign books, more books of different missions, and generally, additions rather than deletions. Seems to fall on deaf ears.

GW's out to make money. Fine. They just won't make it from me. I see no need to buy into a new game every few years just to improve their bottom line.

LordOfTheSloths wrote:

tuiman wrote:I know people won't like it, you can't please everyone, and I respect your opinion on this matter.

40k has plenty of variaty for me, however after 4 years and lots of playing, I do look forward to some change.

Again, if this is your opionion, then thats fine with me, you don't have to play. Although I'm quite interested to hear the reasons why you don't like edition changes.

I will also say that I agree in that the system they have is not perfect, rulebooks are not cheap, and having certain parts of your army become useless is not a good feeling (I have been there myself), I would prefer that edition changes were not so frequent, giving older codexs a chance to catch up.

Personally, I preferred 3rd edition. When I got started in 40K, I didn't even realize there had been previous editions. I didn't like 4th, and I didn't like 5th. 6th looks to be a continuation of that trend, if not an intensification due to its apparent convergence to 8th ed WHFB, about which I also have little good to say.

Why I don't like edition changes? Among other reasons:

1) They reduce or eliminate the value of units, if not entire armies, in which I have made large investments of time and money.
2) They reduce or eliminate the number of games I can play, because so many fanboys just love those new editions and go right along with whatever GW chooses to put out, abandoning everything that's gone before.
3) They never produce an overall improvement IMO. For every problem they allegedly solve, they introduce two new ones.
4) Codex creep. 'Nuff said.
5) Unwarranted expense.

I've offered my own solutions before: more campaign books, more books of different missions, and generally, additions rather than deletions. Seems to fall on deaf ears.

GW's out to make money. Fine. They just won't make it from me. I see no need to buy into a new game every few years just to improve their bottom line.

I'm a fanboy for going to the new edition? What? Why am I a Fanboy for wanting to play in a tourny or be able to talk tactics with other people?

Possibly the evolution of another, most likely negative, forumitis trend.

That is until a FAQ/addendum patches it up or a "back to 5th ed revolution" occurs.