Switch Theme:

What do you love and hate about 8th?  [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
Flailing Flagellant




Colorado, USA

 Hollow wrote:
I think it is becoming clear that bigger, better, LOS blocking and large area terrain is needed for 8th edition. Which I love, I've always disliked the sparely populated boards of the past.


This +1.

My likes:

- no more deathstars.
- keywords.

My dislikes:

- that moronic reroll "clarification" - it's just plain stupid from a common sense perspective.
- no army builder app (GW should just have bought the fan made app one and sold it as theirs IMO).
- no vehicle fire arcs (this one messes with my suspension of disbelief big time).
- *all* vehicles not being able to leave combat without penalty (particularly stupid when they are loaded up with anti-infantry weapons, but for some idiotic reason are not allowed to shoot into combat with them).
- the fact that a vehicle can actually be pinned in combat by infantry. IMO this is patently idiotic, esp. for tanks which would just drive over the enemy if they have to.
- Sisters of Battle 'shield of faith' rule as it applies to DtW - as written it is unusable (2% chance of working on only the 8 weakest powers in the game (out of 49)). It has to be either a typo or a rule they didn't bother to playtest even once.
- terrain not affecting normal movement.
- they should have just called the Advance movement rule "Run" as it would be more descriptive of what the unit is actually doing.
- Maelstrom missions - played one yesterday and it was the same old "chase the shiny" stupidity as the previous edition.
- Morale rule - if you play MSU with decent leadership you will likely never even test. Not sure that was the intent or not, but anyway.
- The lack of unit cards for sale yet :-).

Overall I like 8th edition a lot. Very fun. The above are just minor annoyances mostly (except for the reroll thing which is just plain stupid).




This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/06/26 19:10:06


Admin - Bugman's Brewery

"Every man is guilty of all the good he didn't do." - Voltaire
"Stand up for what you believe in, even if it means standing alone." - Unknown 
   
Made in us
Rough Rider with Boomstick





Waaaghpower wrote:
 ross-128 wrote:

For the two negative nancies here though, I think a more constructive exercise than jumping into every single thread to shout "EVERYTHING SUCKS! THE END IS NIGH!" would be to write up somewhere what you think the rules should be. I think that would be much more interesting to read.

Start with whichever edition was your favorite to save time, then write up whatever changes you would make to it in order to make it the best 40k that you can think of. Should be much more interesting than responding to every. single. rule. ever. with "NO! IT SUCKS!" With the sheer breadth of things that you hate, surely you must have some idea in your head of what the "right" rule would be? Write it down.

In its own thread of course.

A couple things:
Firstly, most people that I've seen complain (Myself included) (And I realize that 'Stuff I've seen' is not a universal or scientific standard to go by) are offering reasons for why the changes are bad. Sure, that's not an explicit, standardized 'Here would be a better alternative', but saying 'I think that the new terrain rules are bad, because [It doesn't impact movement] [The buffs are too weak for some unit types] [Line-of-sight blocking no longer matters unless it's completely blocked]', that's a pretty clear intention as to what that person would prefer.

Also, we are not the GW design team. We are not paid to write rules, and we are not expecting customers to pay for the rules that we write. I shouldn't have to come up with fixes for something that a paid design team broke.


Well, I did specify that I was only talking about two people.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut







 ross-128 wrote:
Waaaghpower wrote:
 ross-128 wrote:

For the two negative nancies here though, I think a more constructive exercise than jumping into every single thread to shout "EVERYTHING SUCKS! THE END IS NIGH!" would be to write up somewhere what you think the rules should be. I think that would be much more interesting to read.

Start with whichever edition was your favorite to save time, then write up whatever changes you would make to it in order to make it the best 40k that you can think of. Should be much more interesting than responding to every. single. rule. ever. with "NO! IT SUCKS!" With the sheer breadth of things that you hate, surely you must have some idea in your head of what the "right" rule would be? Write it down.

In its own thread of course.

A couple things:
Firstly, most people that I've seen complain (Myself included) (And I realize that 'Stuff I've seen' is not a universal or scientific standard to go by) are offering reasons for why the changes are bad. Sure, that's not an explicit, standardized 'Here would be a better alternative', but saying 'I think that the new terrain rules are bad, because [It doesn't impact movement] [The buffs are too weak for some unit types] [Line-of-sight blocking no longer matters unless it's completely blocked]', that's a pretty clear intention as to what that person would prefer.

Also, we are not the GW design team. We are not paid to write rules, and we are not expecting customers to pay for the rules that we write. I shouldn't have to come up with fixes for something that a paid design team broke.


Well, I did specify that I was only talking about two people.


Note, I've mentioned most of my issues are with *core mechanics*. I'm working on a scratch rewrite, and should have a working copy ready soon. (If you go through my "topics started" history, a good deal of them are Proposed Rules, and a good few deal with "core rules" rather than fandex expansions).
   
Made in us
Devastating Dark Reaper






 DarknessEternal wrote:
I hate that craftworld Eldar were deliberately designed to be bad.


What do you mean?

Hige sceal þē heardra || heorte þē cēnre,
mōd sceal þē māre || þē ūre mægen lytlað.  
   
Made in gb
Fixture of Dakka




 Marsyas wrote:
 DarknessEternal wrote:
I hate that craftworld Eldar were deliberately designed to be bad.


What do you mean?

A lot of Craftworld Eldar units are bad or were nerfed a lot so some people have the idea it's intentional. I can see why when I look at some units.

tremere47-fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate, leads to triple riptide spam  
   
Made in us
Shade of Despair and Torment







Love - It's not 7th, Hate - It's 8th. That leaves me in a pickle!

***** Space Hulk Necromunda Genestealer Patriarch Ripper Jacks Broodlord ALIENS THEME https://www.ebay.com/sch/carcharodons/m.html?_nkw=&_armrs=1&_ipg=&_from=ssPageName=STRK:MESELX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1555.l2649 
   
Made in us
Irked Necron Immortal




Newark, CA

Love:
- The rules simplification.
- The addition of morale casualties to shooting.
- The removal of sweeping advance.
- The relaxing of the terrain rules.
- The removal of USRs.
- How two armies can have, essentially, the same special rule, and can have it customized to the context of their army rather than relying on a USR version that may or may not work without breaking the army, should it ever be changed.
- The de-fanging of death stars.
- The addition of the fall-back move.
- The even playing field between CC and shooting.
- The inclusion of all the super-heavies.
- The standardization of stat blocks (vehicles have wounds now! woo!)
- The new armor penetration rules (2+ saves don't invalidate entire armies anymore!)
- The re-classification of some units, and the creation of entire new forces (The Minisortium, the Adeptus Telepathica, etc)

Hate:
- All the typos and oversights in the indexes (Necron super-heavies can be locked in CC? WTF?)
- How the xenos armies didn't get half the attention the imperium did.
- How chaos didn't get a quarter of the attention the imperium did.
- How IG has more super heavy tanks than Gene Stealer cults have unit entries.

Wake. Rise. Destroy. Conquer.
We have done so once. We will do so again.
 
   
Made in gb
Killer Klaivex




The dark behind the eyes.

Love:
- Reduced rules-bloat
- Split Fire
- Removal of Formations
- New plasmaguns (I like that there's a high-risk mode and also a no-risk mode for vehicles and characters).
- Infantry guard is actually playable again.
- Infantry in general is actually a useful and functional part of an army, as opposed to something that Imperial Knights occasionally have to scrape off their feet.
- Necron RPs have gone back to reviving models as opposed to being FNP+1.
- Vehicles use toughness and wounds.
- D-weapons have finally buggered off.
- Units can voluntarily disengage from combat.


Hate:
- The means by which units disengage feels far too easy. It would seem more logical if they had a chance to suffer mortal wounds when they left combat (to represent the enemies attacking them as they try to escape), but then the survivors can act normally afterwards.
- I find alternating deployment irritating as it slows the game down considerably.
- Why do units that spend their entire turn doing nothing but running still somehow cover far less ground than units which first stop to shoot and then stop again to fight?
- Why are neither Advance distances nor Assault distances affected by a model's movement speed?
- WS table (I don't see why we can't just compare WS).
- Removal of Initiative (I think it was a useful mechanic and the new combat rules feel really clunky and unintuitive)
- Homogenisation of both weapon-types and weapons.
- Removal of gear (my Necrons had few enough options already . . .)
- Dubious auras. Why does my Archon - the leader of a glass-cannon faction no less - grant a worthless Ld aura instead of some sort of offense-boosting aura? You know, like the one given to every commander worth a damn. Also, why is my Haemonculus - a sculptor of flesh - able to buff vehicles with his aura but not kabalite warriors?
- Still no sodding wings/jetbike/skyboard option for any DE HQ.
- The fact that I have to take special characters to get an HQ that's even remotely interesting (with the exception of Necrons, weirdly enough).
- The fact that FW removed the Corsair Prince (my favourite HQ in the game in 7th), and for all intents and purposes axed Corsairs altogether (my favourite faction in 7th).
- Necron HQs no longer have RPs in any form. That just seems completely wrong - especially since it would have been pretty easy to give them their own version of the current RPs.


To be clear, I do prefer 8th to 7th, but I also think that a lot of the core rules changes involved throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/06/26 19:41:49


 blood reaper wrote:
I will respect human rights and trans people but I will never under any circumstances use the phrase 'folks' or 'ya'll'. I would rather be killed by firing squad.



 the_scotsman wrote:
Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"

 Argive wrote:
GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.


 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

"Prepare to open fire at that towering Wraithknight!"
"ARE YOU DAFT MAN!?! YOU MIGHT HIT THE MEN WHO COME UP TO ITS ANKLES!!!"


Akiasura wrote:
I hate to sound like a serial killer, but I'll be reaching for my friend occam's razor yet again.


 insaniak wrote:

You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.

Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





pm713 wrote:
 Marsyas wrote:
 DarknessEternal wrote:
I hate that craftworld Eldar were deliberately designed to be bad.


What do you mean?

A lot of Craftworld Eldar units are bad or were nerfed a lot so some people have the idea it's intentional. I can see why when I look at some units.

We have documented evidence from the playtesters saying this was intentional.

"'players must agree how they are going to select their armies, and if any restrictions apply to the number and type of models they can use."

This is an actual rule in the actual rulebook. Quit whining about how you can imagine someone's army touching you in a bad place and play by the actual rules.


Freelance Ontologist

When people ask, "What's the point in understanding everything?" they've just disqualified themselves from using questions and should disappear in a puff of paradox. But they don't understand and just continue existing, which are also their only two strategies for life. 
   
Made in gb
Killer Klaivex




The dark behind the eyes.

 DarknessEternal wrote:
We have documented evidence from the playtesters saying this was intentional.


Could you elaborate on this a bit? You've made me quite curious.

 blood reaper wrote:
I will respect human rights and trans people but I will never under any circumstances use the phrase 'folks' or 'ya'll'. I would rather be killed by firing squad.



 the_scotsman wrote:
Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"

 Argive wrote:
GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.


 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

"Prepare to open fire at that towering Wraithknight!"
"ARE YOU DAFT MAN!?! YOU MIGHT HIT THE MEN WHO COME UP TO ITS ANKLES!!!"


Akiasura wrote:
I hate to sound like a serial killer, but I'll be reaching for my friend occam's razor yet again.


 insaniak wrote:

You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.

Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
 
   
Made in us
Irked Necron Immortal




Newark, CA

pm713 wrote:
 Marsyas wrote:
 DarknessEternal wrote:
I hate that craftworld Eldar were deliberately designed to be bad.


What do you mean?

A lot of Craftworld Eldar units are bad or were nerfed a lot so some people have the idea it's intentional. I can see why when I look at some units.


Give specifics. If you're talking about scat-laser bike-spam, boo-freaking-hoo. Eldar players are the only ones who had any kind of fun with that.

Eldar have a lot going for them this edition.

3 factions that can cooperate. Only the Imperium has more.

More psyker flexibility than you can shake a stick at (most of which covers for things they're otherwise bad at. S3? You can reroll that)

The best flyers in the game, bar nothing. Just for their ability to turn-move-turn. You almost cannot accidentally fly them off the board.

Drain makes Howling Banshees all but immune to CC...

Add a swooping hawk exarch's sun rifle for added lolz...

Best jump infantry in the game (warp spiders...advancing 4d6"...)

Your great transports got even better.

The falcon is even better, and it was already really good.

Wraith units don't need a baby-sitter to be useful. The spirit seer simply makes them better.

Storm Guardians are freaking awesome, and pair beautifully with a farseer (reroll everything!!!)

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/06/26 19:59:33


Wake. Rise. Destroy. Conquer.
We have done so once. We will do so again.
 
   
Made in si
Foxy Wildborne







 mugginns wrote:
dosiere wrote:

Dislike: the very gamey nature of the core rules. Shady pile in moves and micro management of models placement feels completely at odds with the casual new vibe. Like AoS it's fans call it tactics but I am not a fan of it.


I've seen this a few times, does anyone have any examples of this problem?


My Nurgling charges a lone Marine standing next to a Land Raider. I have plenty of movement to reach base to base, but I stop 1" away because I love me some pile-in moves. I pile in sideways, getting within 1" of the Land Raider. It is now engaged but did not get to fire Overwatch, and will forfeit all its shooting next turn regardless of whether it drives off or tries to melee my one Nurgling on 6+

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/06/26 20:06:23


Posters on ignore list: 36

40k Potica Edition - 40k patch with reactions, suppression and all that good stuff. Feedback thread here.

Gangs of Nu Ork - Necromunda / Gorkamorka expansion supporting all faction. Feedback thread here
   
Made in us
Nurgle Veteran Marine with the Flu




Southern California

You cannot make a pile in move if you cannot move CLOSER to the unit you are engaged with.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/06/26 20:12:39


 
   
Made in no
Dakka Veteran




 Sal4m4nd3r wrote:
You cannot make a pile in move if you cannot move CLOSER to the unit you are engaged with.


Charge requires within 1", not base-to-base, so leave 0,1 inch between you and the target, close the gap while you pile in and pivot to drag in another unit, no?
   
Made in us
Nurgle Veteran Marine with the Flu




Southern California

If you cannot end your pile in move CLOSER to the unit your engaged with (ie within one inch of) then you cannot make a pile in move. So if your one inch away, you cannot move "sideways" and still be one inch away but also drag another unit in. That is not closer than you were previous to the pile in move.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/06/26 20:39:54


 
   
Made in gb
Arch Magos w/ 4 Meg of RAM





 Sal4m4nd3r wrote:
If you cannot end your pile in move CLOSER to the unit your engaged with (ie within one inch of) then you cannot make a pile in move. So if your one inch away, you cannot move "sideways" and still be one inch away but also drag another unit in. That is not closer than you were previous to the pile in move.


You start the pile in move 0.1 inch away, you shimmy 3" to the side to tag the Land Raider but end your move 0.09" from the closest enemy model. That makes it a legal move.

Anyway I am a fan of this sort of tactic. I've been playing AoS since launch and like it.

Bye bye Dakkadakka, happy hobbying! I really enjoyed my time on here. Opinions were always my own :-) 
   
Made in gb
Legendary Dogfighter





England

Love;
Movement stats are back,
multi damage weapons.
Being able to take any imperial unit in the same army easily.

Hate;
pretty much everything. I wasn't opposed to a ground up re-write, just not the steaming pile of grot gak we got.

Everything has a movement stat, but the 1-2 inch difference doesn't matter when running / charging etc are all still random rolls.

Multi damage weapons, why are they all D3 / D6. Because GW were too lazy to balance weapons and pick a fixed number for them.

Same as above but for multi shot weapons including blast / template.

The imperial keyword. As much as taking an army using any imperial unit is nice, you now basically have one army that consists of half of the units in the game. When you compare this to the limited choses available to factions such as necrons....

Vehicles don't exist anymore - there just bigger infantry. getting locked in combat. no arcs, shooting from any point all stupid. Totally breaks immersion.

USR gone - everything has it's own special snowflake rules that are almost the same but not quite.

Everything can hurt everything. Ok a conscript killing a land raider is a one in a million shot. But I don't want to roll dice to play out the 999,999 times he doesn't.

Bloat, every unit having it's own special rules was an issue in 7th. Now every unit HAS to have it's own special rules.

Turn 1 charges, nobody I've ever meet wanted this in the game.

The mosh pit. Combat and in particular the pile in rules are a mess. Every game I have seen ends in one of two ways. One army is shot off the board in 2-3 turns or it turns into one massive combat blob in the middle of the board.

Really Hate;
the fluff. It's been butchered. Chasm to hell splitting the land in half, really original there GW. Don't get me started on the Primarus +1 super space marine garbage.

it's the quiet ones you have to look out for. Their the ones that change the world, the loud ones just take the credit for it. 
   
Made in gb
Killer Klaivex




The dark behind the eyes.

Oh, I remembered a couple more:

Love:
- That anything in the game can damage anything else.

Hate:
- Random shots for blast and template weapons. Also random damage. 1d6 is especially awful. Could it not have been 2d3?

I think small blasts should have been something like '2 shots plus 1 additional shot per 5 models in the squad (up to a maximum of 4 shots), and large blasts and flamers could have been 2 shots plus 2 additional shots per 5 models in the squad (up to a maximum of 6). I know the numbers probably aren't perfect, but the idea is that the number isn't random and increases based on squad size (with the limit representing that, regardless of squad size, you can still only catch a limited number of models in a blast).

 blood reaper wrote:
I will respect human rights and trans people but I will never under any circumstances use the phrase 'folks' or 'ya'll'. I would rather be killed by firing squad.



 the_scotsman wrote:
Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"

 Argive wrote:
GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.


 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

"Prepare to open fire at that towering Wraithknight!"
"ARE YOU DAFT MAN!?! YOU MIGHT HIT THE MEN WHO COME UP TO ITS ANKLES!!!"


Akiasura wrote:
I hate to sound like a serial killer, but I'll be reaching for my friend occam's razor yet again.


 insaniak wrote:

You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.

Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
 
   
Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut




Love:

-That the game has been totally AoSified,despite all the threads over the past couple of years on this forum and others that it would most certainly "Never Happen!!" to GW`s "cash cow" 40k.

Now I can start working on my 40k armies along side my AoS ones

Hate:
-I dont hate on much especially in games,,they are only games ya know...
   
Made in us
Devastating Dark Reaper






pm713 wrote:

A lot of Craftworld Eldar units are bad or were nerfed a lot so some people have the idea it's intentional. I can see why when I look at some units.


Interesting. That doesn't match my experience on the table, though. The only units that really got nerfed that I can see are windriders and Wraithknights, both of which were desperately in need of nerfing, and both of which are still useful units with their own distinct place in the army. As far as I can tell, most of the changes seem to have moved the Eldar back in the direction of the "army of specialists" notion that used to be their motif prior to 7th edition.

Swooping Hawks got side-graded. They lost their anti-flyer abilities, but they're an excellent anti-horde option. Dark Reapers are amazing. Shining Spears are actually worth taking, and that has never been true before. Fire Dragons are better than they've ever been, and can now destroy monsters and vehicles alike with equal impunity. Hemlock Wraithfighters and Crimson Hunters are excellent. Vypers got better. Honestly, all of our vehicles got better, not least because they all fly, which means that it is often worth driving them right into the heart of enemy gunlines, taking the generally ineffective and pathetic melee attacks plus the generally ineffective and pathetic overwatch fire, and then disengaging on your turn to continue shooting. It also means that enemies who "pile in" to try to lock our vehicles in combat will just get laughed at, since we can just disengage and continue shooting regardless.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/06/26 21:35:12


Hige sceal þē heardra || heorte þē cēnre,
mōd sceal þē māre || þē ūre mægen lytlað.  
   
Made in gb
Ridin' on a Snotling Pump Wagon






Loving?

Excuse to start a new army. So far got 30 Rubricae, 5 Scarab Occult, 3 Exalted Sorcerers, and just built Magnus, sans armour as I'll be following Duncan's painting guide.

Hating?

I really need to actually paint this army.....bah

   
Made in us
Raging Ravener




Mid-Michigan

 Bottle wrote:
 Sal4m4nd3r wrote:
If you cannot end your pile in move CLOSER to the unit your engaged with (ie within one inch of) then you cannot make a pile in move. So if your one inch away, you cannot move "sideways" and still be one inch away but also drag another unit in. That is not closer than you were previous to the pile in move.


You start the pile in move 0.1 inch away, you shimmy 3" to the side to tag the Land Raider but end your move 0.09" from the closest enemy model. That makes it a legal move.

Anyway I am a fan of this sort of tactic. I've been playing AoS since launch and like it.


Do you think 40k players are ready to play that sort of game with all the huge units, different base sizes etc?
   
Made in us
Stealthy Warhound Titan Princeps







Gotta actually play the game, but I never loved melee base positioning shenanigans in any edition, so hearing that it is key really sucks.
   
Made in us
Terrifying Doombull




 ForceChoke wrote:
8th edition has changed the face of the game. What do you love about it. And what makes you want to pull your hair out?


The horrible disorganization and cross-referencing involved with the indexes. There is no point -GW can keep a list of points they can change regardless of where they appear in the actual book. At the very least, point for wargear and units should be in the same section as the army.

Flipping between unit, unit points, wargear and wargear points (as well as weapon profiles for most things, and army special rules, which could easily fit on most unit cards, especially if they replaced the rule name with the actual rule), is pointlessly crazy making.

Efficiency is the highest virtue. 
   
Made in us
Storm Trooper with Maglight






Catachan

As an IG player, I too am tempted to complain about the streamlining of cover rules. Then I remember that I now get an armor save against bolters and other previously AP5 weapons and it doesn't seem so bad. Put them in cover and we're back to 4+. Sudenly I'm rolling 5+ saves against heavy flamers whilst in cover-- previously unheard of!

   
Made in us
Repentia Mistress






Pro:
----
My fav underdog armies are nearly longer roflstomped.

Streamlined play

Overall just way more fun, seeeing new blood interested in it.

Con:
---
Overwatch rules seem broken - namely flamers. wall of death should be a thing. And open top transport troops should be able to fire overwatch also when vehicle charged. Both of these can be resolved by faq

Terrain - seems to be less of it. I don't
miss the cover rules, but basic los blocking was a huge part of dark eldar speed play.




 
   
Made in us
Monster-Slaying Daemonhunter





Like:
Points costs all consolidated in one place. No need to flip through the book looking for that unit and it's cost and the cost of wargear, just flip to the "points cost" page.
The entire Charge and Close Combat Phases. There's so much more thought in the phase than pointing and clicking.
Command Points and Strategems. I wish there were more Strategems.
Indecies instead of Codecies. I like having one book for all the army rules, instead of one for each.
Improved balance, and the general feel and pacing of the game.

Dislike:
Unit points costs not including base wargear. I lose a bit of the benefit of the nicely concentrated costs because I have to go see what a unit actually has on it.
Battleshock. Morale to run away and rally later was better.
Wounds. I hate hitpoint systems, and vehicles becoming MC's only makes it worse.
Random shot counts. Exorcists were bad enough to plan around, at least they were good. Why do my Leman Russes and Shadowsword and Wyverns do it now too?
Multiple Damage. Remember where I said I hate hitpoints. Well, weapons don't need damage stats, and especially don't need random D6 rolls and D3 rolls for them, if things don't have hitpoints.
Erratic translations: Missile Launchers and H-K Missiles do D6 Damage, but Exorcist Missiles do D3. In reverse, the Predator is T7 W11, the Exorcist, which is on the same chassis, has the defensive statline of a Leman Russ. Why did Repentia get a worse Eviscerator? Why can't TC's and Pask have HK Missiles? Why did the Leman Russ Exterminator go from Heavy 4 Twin-Linked to Heavy 4 instead of Heavy 8? Why is the Monolith Sv3+ while the Land Raider is Sv2+. Why does the Gauss Pylon have 30W while the Baneblade has 26W, and has the Macro type while the Shadowsword doesn't, despite being actually bigger, and historically being more resilient.
Poor Scaling: Acts of Faith, and the Grey Knight army comes to mind.

Guardsmen, hear me! Cadia may lie in ruin, but her proud people do not! For each brother and sister who gave their lives to Him as martyrs, we will reap a vengeance fiftyfold! Cadia may be no more, but will never be forgotten; our foes shall tremble in fear at the name, for their doom shall come from the barrels of Cadian guns, fired by Cadian hands! Forward, for vengeance and retribution, in His name and the names of our fallen comrades! 
   
Made in es
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain




Vigo. Spain.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

Erratic translations: Missile Launchers and H-K Missiles do D6 Damage, but Exorcist Missiles do D3. In reverse, the Predator is T7 W11, the Exorcist, which is on the same chassis, has the defensive statline of a Leman Russ. Why did Repentia get a worse Eviscerator? Why can't TC's and Pask have HK Missiles? Why did the Leman Russ Exterminator go from Heavy 4 Twin-Linked to Heavy 4 instead of Heavy 8? Why is the Monolith Sv3+ while the Land Raider is Sv2+. Why does the Gauss Pylon have 30W while the Baneblade has 26W, and has the Macro type while the Shadowsword doesn't, despite being actually bigger, and historically being more resilient.


I doubt those are erratic translations. The reason to make a new ruleset is to rebalance everything. The "It was X before, so it should be the same or all should be translated in the same way now" is a flawed argument to me, at least. Is a error to expect things to remain the same with a hard-reset like 7th to 8th. Someones remainted the same, I assume because they were balanced as is, and to retain some resemblance and common metric from 7th to 8th to make re-balancing things more easy. But if something needed to change for balanced reasons, whats the problem?

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/06/27 01:55:56


 Crimson Devil wrote:

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.

 
   
Made in au
Missionary On A Mission





Australia

this is my list:

Rule wise

+ the rules are more streamline
+ keywords
+ it's not 7th...

- LOS is gone. damn some of those tanks should be limited on what they can see.
- PL. god damn.... some of these armies get huge benefits from having access to large numbers of weaponry.

on a more personal note for my SoB.
+ i love the fact i have a book.
+ my HQ Canoness has improved slightly now with a 4++
+ Seraphim are first turn combat with St Cel + AoF

- everything is so expensive... flamers for a flame based army get expensive. don't get me wrong they're deadly but it is a significant draw back.
- no SoF on the Pen engines.
- AoF once per turn on one unit if you don't include St Cel & Imaginifiers so they're both auto includes now.

: 4500pts

Lothlorien: 3500pts
Rohan: 1500pts
Serpent: 2000pts
Modor: 1500pts 
   
Made in us
Devious Space Marine dedicated to Tzeentch




Love:
No more line of sight from gun barrels or fire arcs or facing. I never liked those.
Everything can hurt everything.
No more huge distinction between the rules for an Eldar walker and an Imperial walker (i.e. armor values are gone).
Vehicle melee attacks.
Most/all move-shoot-move is gone.
Turn one charges.
Deep strike.
Some old anti-tank weapons are good again thanks to the damage stat.
The Imperial and Chaos keywords.
Eldar lost some cheese.
Tyranids look better.
Strategems, the concept. I hope we see some good ones in every new codex and battlezone.

Hate:
The new terrain rules, especially cover.
The rules layout. Some important stuff is buried in sidebars.
No more USRs. Instead we have rules lawyers picking apart the slightly different phrasing of each weapon.
Move - charge - pile in - consolidate. I don't want to move so many times.
The new point costs clearly didn't have a lot of thought or refinement put into them.
Ork shooting: expensive guns, now with negative hit modifiers to worry about!
Grenades: especially in melee. Bring back a pile of infantry trying to clamp melta bombs or haywires onto a dread.
Re-rolls. The new re-roll rules are bad, and I just plain hate re-rolls.
The Supersonic turning rule leaves one last vestige of facing.
Strategems, the execution (another re-roll).
Conscripts.
The Forgeworld Indices.
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: