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.

Wayne, I wouldn't say anyone here has drunk the kool aid (nome of the posters so far anyway) but are simply new to the game and don't have as much experience with other games or how GW treats us to be jaded yet.
Just look at whos on what side in this thread and then see when they joined the forum.

 koooaei wrote:
Those who were the most vocal and salty started playing Warmahordes and every time they've sighted a 40k game over other tables, they emidiately started patrolling round it and barking happilly how awful 40k is and how superior Warmachine rules are.

Ironically, after a few months they grew tired of warmachine cause they said that every game was the same and that tourney builds are boring but everything else is garbage and unplayable.

So, we've got no warmahordes running atm. Some are trying mantic now - they like it so far.

X-wing is about to be started too.

As for me, i somewhat agree that 40k has a lot of crappy rules and an awful lot of balacne issues and that it deserves a hefty lot of criticysm but it's still playable and is very capable of being interesting, tactical and fun.

I do think that a lot of things need improvement and that you need at least some houserules to make the game more enjoyable. And that all this problems can be easily overcome if GW was a bit more caring and insightful.

Haha that's kinda why I was looking back at 40k, but again I was all in on it a few days ago (money was a small concern, but alleviated now). Just I can't bring myself to pay that kind of money for a game that, judging from games I've watched both in person and online, is basically push stuff forward, roll buckets of dice, remove figures. There seemed to be zero tactical depth involved, and the fact the rules are so imbalanced makes me sick sometimes.

I easily have the cash reserves right now to go to the Warhammer shop and drop like $400 on 40k, the question is why would I?

Because I own enough models to put a down payment on a house, and have spent enough time on this game to have raised a child instead.

Despite that, this game has become pretty bad for me lately. The armies are more unbalanced than ever, and the online forums have become even worse, with clearly marked factions between competitive and casual at all costs players.

I never wanted to play other table top games, but 40k just doesn't do it for me like it used to. It's still my favorite in terms of fluff, and if the game was fixed I'd drop WMH in a heartbeat, but for now I can't make this game my main focus. I play necromunda to get my 40k, and play about 1 time a month.


As for why others hate it, everyone nailed it.

1) This hobby is expensive. Many of us have played for years and own a lot of models. When you have such a hefty cash investment, you get emotionally involved.

2) This hobby is time intensive. Games take a while, its not always easy to find one (lately) so you may have to drive, collecting and assembling an army takes a while too. From that time, you get invested as well.

If this game was like SSB4, where it's 60, a GC controller + adapter and a 7 minute session, I wouldn't care, despite me being a big SSB fan

3) The online community. The online community for this game was pretty great. There were always a few negative people or those who weren't realistic, but for the most part this community was a tight knit group of semi-competitive fluff nuts, and it was great. Lately it's been divided into semi/majority competitive and casual at all costs, with the two being unable to see eye-to-eye on anything. Most of the topics devolve into name calling or insults (oddly enough, from the casual crowd more often) whenever it becomes a stalemate.

 vipoid wrote:

 gmaleron wrote:
It's easier to complain and be negative then be positive and constructive, people don't want to put the effort in and take the easy way out.

I always find it interesting how many people on these forums bleat about how everyone should be positive, constructive, polite etc., only to immediately dismiss any legitimate criticism of GW/40k with not just negativity but also bile, insults, condescension etc..

Posting only half of what I said in claiming that I'm dismissing issues with the game is not constructive. If you were to look at my entire post I even said there's certain things about the game that disappoint me and they could be changed I would be all for it. The only point I'm trying to make is that regardless of how much we complain about certain things, it's not going to change anytime soon. Better to suck it up and learn to deal with it until it's updated or as ITC has gone about things be constructive and tweak things to make them better. Complaining doesn't get you anywhere, especially in this case with GW, it does not mean I blindly support them.

bless, I love these discussions, they are very amusing.
They would be a lot shorter if people supported their opinions with evidence, but not nearly as fun to read.

 gmaleron wrote:
Posting only half of what I said in claiming that I'm dismissing issues with the game is not constructive.

Nor is claiming that any negative views are people just not wanting to put the effort in.

 gmaleron wrote:
If you were to look at my entire post I even said there's certain things about the game that disappoint me and they could be changed I would be all for it.

That doesn't alter or excuse the first part of your post.

 gmaleron wrote:
The only point I'm trying to make is that regardless of how much we complain about certain things, it's not going to change anytime soon. Better to suck it up and learn to deal with it until it's updated or as ITC has gone about things be constructive and tweak things to make them better. Complaining doesn't get you anywhere, especially in this case with GW, it does not mean I blindly support them.

Then try understanding that not everyone feels that way, and people deal with their frustrations in different ways. At the very least, why should we act as if everything is fine? Dakkadakka is not GW's marketing department and shouldn't act like it.

Saying that any negativity is just 'taking the easy way out' is both extremely insulting and dismissive of the many problems. Also, what about all the people who complain about the rules and take the time to make their own? I guess they're just taking the easy way out, too.

Discussing an issue with the game in a mature manner is one thing, having a nerd rage rant and demanding on reasonable changes is another. Not saying any one particular is guilty of this but I have seen a lot more of the latter rather than the former on here. My original post was not to upset individuals but there's no reason to be so sensitive about it I'm just calling it as I see it and unfortunately on here more people tend to go with this sucks it should be changed or to what I want rather than this sucks let's figure out a solution for everyone.

When the game's creator seems to feel there's an issue, it's fair to say there's probably an issue...

http://unpluggedgames.co.uk/features/blood-dice-and-darkness-how-warhammer-defined-gaming-for-a-generation/

Because 30k exists. It is a deeply flawed game with countless kinks and imperfections, and it is the Messiah of wargaming compared to 40k.

Some people are upset because the flavour is being sucked out the game. The history (characters dropped etc), the fluff contradicting the rules (for some models), the playstyle of certain models because they have unusable rules.

Sometimes simply because the game is unfair balance-wise in a big way.

Some of us still play occasionally, we've turned into thematic players who occasionally play to 'forge the narrative' while expecting our bad guys to be curb-stomped. We still like what the game story is and how the rules could be - but we are disenchanted.

Throw into that the ever increasing price gouging making the game even more inaccessible (currently £60 for x3 AoS knights on horse as an example) and you have a big barrier to entry or army building for many people.

Many of the *angry* grumpy gamers seem (to my eye at least) to be those who are competitive players, or a lot more competitive than me still at least - where I've give up hope, they still expect it to be competitive.


For competitive games, I've moved onto Saga, Lion Rampant, Frostgrave and am currently organising things to make a set for Canvas Eagles. They're balanced and fulfill that role for me now.

GW has an on the street presence while the other games I've mentioned you have to be deep into the rabbit hole of tabletop to find out about them. GW got me started but in many respects 40k is like a broken children's toy that I'm both fond of for the stories, but have outgrown when I want something competitive.

While this is full on opinion i find it strange how people prefer other games models over GW. But i am a tyranid fan. I just love turning up to game nights and people have different armies and models.

However this line of thought is reliant on people not succumbing to the power trips. A good friend plays Necrons and never does cheese so i am lucky there.

But i don't truly think anyone is truly happy with GW's attitude, they are less vocal as some people just hate being negative where as others are happy to voice critism.

 koooaei wrote:
Those who were the most vocal and salty started playing Warmahordes and every time they've sighted a 40k game over other tables, they emidiately started patrolling round it and barking happilly how awful 40k is and how superior Warmachine rules are.

Ironically, after a few months they grew tired of warmachine cause they said that every game was the same and that tourney builds are boring but everything else is garbage and unplayable.

So, we've got no warmahordes running atm. Some are trying mantic now - they like it so far.

X-wing is about to be started too.

As for me, i somewhat agree that 40k has a lot of crappy rules and an awful lot of balacne issues and that it deserves a hefty lot of criticysm but it's still playable and is very capable of being interesting, tactical and fun.

I do think that a lot of things need improvement and that you need at least some houserules to make the game more enjoyable. And that all this problems can be easily overcome if GW was a bit more caring and insightful.

Shows what you know, I have never been interested in warmahordes at all

Although there are many good points that people have brought up in regards to reasons for their frustration with 40k, I think the issues are really boiling down to cost, and GW's attempts to make more and more money from the same experience.

This obviously starts with the constant price increases. We may have moved away from the yearly across-the-board increases, but now each new faction/kit comes with those prices incorporated, so you have an imbalance in prices between factions. But the question is why are we experiencing these year-on-year price increases on kits (way beyond inflation) in the first place? Kit quality has certainly improved, but the pricing between the kits never seems to be based on complexity or even material involved. And then you have blatant cost increases like the halving the dife avengers box- even the most die-hard GW fan has to admit that's purely a cash grab.

The codexes have become their own attempt to cash in on the experience as well. New books are released with no attempt to improve, merely to change. And what used to be a 4-year shuffling seems to have very quickly moved to a 2-year thing. Hell, the Imperial Knight book lasted one year!

And for all of these price increases, are people not still trying to play the same 1500pt game? (Although what's 1500pt now is significantly larger than its earlier iterations). People are paying more and more for the same thing, and it's chaffing more of the 40k crowd than previously.

You can see this with some of the positive changes too- the Battle at Calth is seen as a pretty good deal and the Horus Heresy stuff is becoming more popular for its attempt at balance and forward progression rather than just shake-up. But if GW doesn't commit to reversing the trends it's established over the last 10 years, I think things will only get worse for them and the community.

Just I can't bring myself to pay that kind of money for a game that, judging from games I've watched both in person and online, is basically push stuff forward, roll buckets of dice, remove figures. There seemed to be zero tactical depth involved, and the fact the rules are so imbalanced makes me sick sometimes.

This is my personal situation too. I'm somewhat insulated from balance issues because of the guys I would play, I'm somewhat insulated from prices as I'm not above "importing" my models for the Far East, but even by minimising these two fundamental issues, the game just wasn't fun for me anymore. 6th started to erode player choice in favour of random tables, 7th doubled down on this. My issues were magnified as I was primarily playing daemons, so the amount of bookkeeping required, much of which it was only fair to do in front of my opponent, meaning I couldn't just turn up ready to go, was excessive.

40K games seem to boil down to 1) move or don't. 2) shoot, what target? 3) assault or not, what target? Interspersed with long periods of inactivity while one's opponent has their go and bracketed by long periods setting up and packing away.

When one has no guarantee of a fair game, and there's very little one can do once the game starts (as so much is determined by list construction) I'm just not prepared to invest the time necessary to play when there's so many options without those drawbacks.

I think Accolade has explained one of the big factors for me personally. I just can't afford the combination of the higher prices with the rapid pace of making things I've bought redundant (codices) or ineffective (half my armies and units which then have to be replaced with models that are now effective thanks to the new codex)

I hate the idea of quoting myself, but I don't fancy retyping it all: In addition to this, it's the attitude of GW in general that gets to me.

 Wulfmar wrote:
Anecdotal - I got a few emails from games companies today. Out of them, 3 of the emails (such as Warlord Games) said a simple 'Merry Christmas' or 'Happy Holidays'.

The GW email said 'now you have your Christmas money, why not spend it on these' with a link to an imperial knight, archon on that flying beast and some dragon (smaug I think?) - some of their most expensive models.

Needless to say the difference in attitude between the smaller companies and GW was plain to see. It doesn't help with people's negative perception of GW.

I can't help but get the feeling that GW speaks to us like we are children / simpleton cash cows while other companies seem mature and relaxed. I visited Warlord, Perry and North Star and there was no pushing to sell things at all - they were 100% interested in the games we had played (including their competitors games which they also played and were fans of! I don't know many GW shops that would do that) and showing us the concept art and ideas for (in this case Beyond the Gates of Antares) the games they were producing - interested in our thoughts and what would be awesome to include.

TL/DR for the last part - Other companies appear to be gamers selling to gamers. The passion and respect is there. GW arent interested in the product, only the profit - they're salesmen

I have been enjoying playing 7th ed. I really have. I've been playing for about 14 or so years now and though I admit the game used to be much better, I'm still enjoying myself. However, I understand other people's experiences and opinions, and feel it to be awfully churlish to deride people's complaints, even their particularly angry complaints (how often do you see people complaining about others gushing over something they don't like on this forum?) to simply be 'hating', all because they hold different opinions. Seriously, I presume most of us are adults here? Maybe it's time to stop complaining about other people not liking the same toys as you.

The internal/external balance is gak and some of the rules could be fixed.

I've still enjoyed playing this edition so far, but let's not pretend the game doesn't need lots of fixing.

I shifted gears to 30k and have never looked back!

Is there a volkite resistent version of IG in 30k, I don't realy follow FW stuff?

Makumba wrote:
Is there a volkite resistent version of IG in 30k, I don't realy follow FW stuff?

What do you mean by volkite resistant? There's no 'armoured ceramite' rule that works on volkite. If you mean "gets saves against" then yes, the Solar Auxilia have 4+ armour saves, but so does the regular guard in 40k. And so does anyone in ruins. *shrug*

Heck you can get power-armoured IG in 30k if you run Survivors of the Dark Age imperial milita.

Clicked the topic, saw how long the OP was... Typed this and left.

Don't spam the forum

 Krug001 wrote:
Why are people so negative, yet stick around? Why do people who seem to have nothing, but bad, to say about the hobby not just do something else? There are tons of different things to do with your time - why pick something that infuriates you?

I have no idea. If GW decided to quit making 40k models and that historical models were their new thing, I'd bid them a fond farewell for my many years of fun, be sad for a bit, be happy that my wallet is going to be fatter, and then do something else.

 Tainted wrote:

xana666 wrote:
Some of the blame is on us too. Sure some of the new codices are really strong (looking at you eldar/tau/necrons) but we don't have to play super cheese all the time, it hurts the game. I play tau, but I started before it was this good, I had no idea what it was like when I rejoined 7thed. I played them because I liked them, and as such I don't bring cheese. I'm never going to bring stormsurges, no more than 1 Riptide, and avoid the new stealth cadre. I play with alot of friends, one of which is brand new to the game, played like 4 games, so what's the fun in bring cheese and smashing him? We all need the chill out a bit and do the same with our lists.

I don't think it's fair to hold players responsible for the game's balance issues. A company is responsible for the quality of its product, not the consumer. As the saying goes, "hate the game, not the player".

Oh you are so wrong. Tainted is correct and part of the problem is the players. Funny before 5th edition, there was not many Eldar and Tau players. Funny how 6th edition comes out not many Eldar and Tau players. Then all of a sudden a lot of Eldar and Tau players are out. Then there is not as many Eldar and Tau players again. What this mean is there are a lot of people out there than need to win with plastic toy soldiers. So yes it is players who are responsible for not going to "flavour of the month" and just fielding the "best units" even when it's a "balanced codex". What makes the codex balanced people will just ignore and go and use other codices to make their army better.

So yes the players are to blame.

Davor wrote:

 Tainted wrote:

xana666 wrote:
Some of the blame is on us too. Sure some of the new codices are really strong (looking at you eldar/tau/necrons) but we don't have to play super cheese all the time, it hurts the game. I play tau, but I started before it was this good, I had no idea what it was like when I rejoined 7thed. I played them because I liked them, and as such I don't bring cheese. I'm never going to bring stormsurges, no more than 1 Riptide, and avoid the new stealth cadre. I play with alot of friends, one of which is brand new to the game, played like 4 games, so what's the fun in bring cheese and smashing him? We all need the chill out a bit and do the same with our lists.

I don't think it's fair to hold players responsible for the game's balance issues. A company is responsible for the quality of its product, not the consumer. As the saying goes, "hate the game, not the player".

Oh you are so wrong. Tainted is correct and part of the problem is the players. Funny before 5th edition, there was not many Eldar and Tau players. Funny how 6th edition comes out not many Eldar and Tau players. Then all of a sudden a lot of Eldar and Tau players are out. Then there is not as many Eldar and Tau players again. What this mean is there are a lot of people out there than need to win with plastic toy soldiers. So yes it is players who are responsible for not going to "flavour of the month" and just fielding the "best units" even when it's a "balanced codex". What makes the codex balanced people will just ignore and go and use other codices to make their army better.

So yes the players are to blame.

So, players go for what's good. That's their nature. It's GW's fault that they made some units far superior to others, so the players go for those units and armies. If things were balanced, there wouldn't be major shifts to one codex or another. Oh...wait...perhaps that's intentional and GW does codex churn to sell more models.
So, yeah. GW's fault.

People are salty because 40K is an extremely expensive game with an extreme number of flaws that only take a modicum of effort to fix, yet never will be because the game-makers have made it explicit that they don't care.

Every time Games Workshop says "We're a models company, not a rules company... but give us $60 for our rules", it's basically a slap in the face to the consumer.

 koooaei wrote:
Those who were the most vocal and salty started playing Warmahordes and every time they've sighted a 40k game over other tables, they emidiately started patrolling round it and barking happilly how awful 40k is and how superior Warmachine rules are.

Ironically, after a few months they grew tired of warmachine cause they said that every game was the same and that tourney builds are boring but everything else is garbage and unplayable.

So, we've got no warmahordes running atm. Some are trying mantic now - they like it so far.

X-wing is about to be started too.

As for me, i somewhat agree that 40k has a lot of crappy rules and an awful lot of balacne issues and that it deserves a hefty lot of criticysm but it's still playable and is very capable of being interesting, tactical and fun.

I do think that a lot of things need improvement and that you need at least some houserules to make the game more enjoyable. And that all this problems can be easily overcome if GW was a bit more caring and insightful.

This is essentially what happened around here and after those players left our membership went up. And the WMH community is basically back to nonexistent because, guesssss what game is also dominated by zero fun netlists that basically exist to make your opponent hate their lives?

 vipoid wrote:

 gmaleron wrote:
It's easier to complain and be negative then be positive and constructive, people don't want to put the effort in and take the easy way out.

 Rayvon wrote:
Because some people suck and feel the need to bring others down as well as themselves.

 Tigramans wrote:
Because neckbeards, that's why.

I always find it interesting how many people on these forums bleat about how everyone should be positive, constructive, polite etc., only to immediately dismiss any legitimate criticism of GW/40k with not just negativity but also bile, insults, condescension etc..

Indeed, I don't understand these threads. It's absolutely fine if you're enjoying 40K, but don't insult other players (the L2P element in the OP was particularly troll worthy) if they're not enjoying it.

My own feelings - I enjoy 40K played on a kitchen table amongst close friends. Outside of that I wouldn't play it - it's not designed for pick up games at clubs/shops or tournament play.
I'm switching to Bolt Action for pick up play and spending my hobby £'s there instead.

the_scotsman wrote:

This is essentially what happened around here and after those players left our membership went up. And the WMH community is basically back to nonexistent because, guesssss what game is also dominated by zero fun netlists that basically exist to make your opponent hate their lives?

Sounds like a player thing, and they sound like really bad players (and I mean attitude wise as well). It's a shame really - for what it's worth, wmh is so much more than just 'zero fun netlists' thst make people hate their lives. Frankly, if people are playing that way, they're doing it wrong, and they're not that clever or creative. And creative players, At th end of the day, ar the ones that go further and win games.

Bad attitudes and toxic players can destroy communities faster than bad games in my experience. Glad your rid of them though.

By the hobby, I presume you mean Teh HHHobby (i.e. Games Workshop.)

The hobby of table top games and wargames is in rude health. Speaking as a veteran of over 40 years experience, I can say there is an unprecedented amount of choice available in rules, figures and terrain. It's never been easier to find information, ideas and things to play with.

GW of course is in some decline. WHFB is dead. AoS has met with a very mixed reception, and we need a year or two to say if it is going to be a good success. 40K is still very popular, but GW's declining sales figures overall show that all is not well with the company.

Still, there are signs of change that give rise to hope. The return of Specialist Games perhaps shows that the management have come to understand some of their mistakes and are preparing to address them.