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.

Hmm nope, since it is infact the most playtested edition of 40k.

stratigo wrote:
I'm mostly grumpy they doubled down on the nonsensical modifiers and rerolls issue. It seems so contrary to their core assertions about this edition. And could be simply fixed by just indicating natural rolls of 1 are what are rerolled to prevent shenanigans with modifiers and rerolling 1s. They didn'tneed to infect other rerolls (and poor plasma guns) with the same nonsense. Especially poor plasma guns.

It actually puts a bit of onus on you as a player with regards to that. And that's good. No longer are rerolls a guaranteed sure thing. No longer can you use plasma effortlessly without risk. I'm more than happy to see that. Plasma spam from 3rd to 6th was almost as toxic as Grav spam was.

 Runic wrote:
Hmm nope, since it is infact the most playtested edition of 40k.

No. We can't "all agree" on this. If you don't like it, play something else. Bye.

I do think this is edition is a huge improvement over the last two, But still a huge disappointment.
I do not think a lot of the issues are playtesting issues.
I think the big issues are still on the design team, Playtesting could be almost useless if the Devs are not asking the right questions or even listening to everything that is said back.

Can't agree with that either. Typos and little quirks aren't nothing compared to having gamebreaking armies be massively up above you.

"Most playtested" isn't "Most comprehensively playtested" - you can play 10,000 test games of Marines Vs Chaos Marines and never come across a problem with the Tau list, for example.

Most of 8ths most prominent issues arise from proofreading errors, poor quality playtesting or poor editorship, and in games design a lot of those can get conflated

 DarkStarSabre wrote:

stratigo wrote:
I'm mostly grumpy they doubled down on the nonsensical modifiers and rerolls issue. It seems so contrary to their core assertions about this edition. And could be simply fixed by just indicating natural rolls of 1 are what are rerolled to prevent shenanigans with modifiers and rerolling 1s. They didn'tneed to infect other rerolls (and poor plasma guns) with the same nonsense. Especially poor plasma guns.

It actually puts a bit of onus on you as a player with regards to that. And that's good. No longer are rerolls a guaranteed sure thing. No longer can you use plasma effortlessly without risk. I'm more than happy to see that. Plasma spam from 3rd to 6th was almost as toxic as Grav spam was.

it goes against the idea that this edition is supposed to be more intuitive than the last ones, and generally fething over plasma guns has no purpose except for you to go "Ha! I dun have any, so suck it". And it frankly makes no god damn sense at all that plasmas suddenly explode more often at night.

stratigo wrote:
And it frankly makes no god damn sense at all that plasmas suddenly explode more often at night.

Yeah, I think plasma should only explode on an unmodified roll of 1.

stratigo wrote:

 DarkStarSabre wrote:

stratigo wrote:
I'm mostly grumpy they doubled down on the nonsensical modifiers and rerolls issue. It seems so contrary to their core assertions about this edition. And could be simply fixed by just indicating natural rolls of 1 are what are rerolled to prevent shenanigans with modifiers and rerolling 1s. They didn'tneed to infect other rerolls (and poor plasma guns) with the same nonsense. Especially poor plasma guns.

It actually puts a bit of onus on you as a player with regards to that. And that's good. No longer are rerolls a guaranteed sure thing. No longer can you use plasma effortlessly without risk. I'm more than happy to see that. Plasma spam from 3rd to 6th was almost as toxic as Grav spam was.

it goes against the idea that this edition is supposed to be more intuitive than the last ones, and generally fething over plasma guns has no purpose except for you to go "Ha! I dun have any, so suck it". And it frankly makes no god damn sense at all that plasmas suddenly explode more often at night.

Yet it makes sense that it never explodes if your captain is near you?

What was wrong with unmodified rolls and being able to take a save, and only losing a wound?

Besides, plasma spam wasn't a thing in 5th; you only used Plasma as a backup weapon for Razorbacks. th was Meltahammer-edition.

Spoletta wrote:

stratigo wrote:

 DarkStarSabre wrote:

stratigo wrote:
I'm mostly grumpy they doubled down on the nonsensical modifiers and rerolls issue. It seems so contrary to their core assertions about this edition. And could be simply fixed by just indicating natural rolls of 1 are what are rerolled to prevent shenanigans with modifiers and rerolling 1s. They didn'tneed to infect other rerolls (and poor plasma guns) with the same nonsense. Especially poor plasma guns.

It actually puts a bit of onus on you as a player with regards to that. And that's good. No longer are rerolls a guaranteed sure thing. No longer can you use plasma effortlessly without risk. I'm more than happy to see that. Plasma spam from 3rd to 6th was almost as toxic as Grav spam was.

it goes against the idea that this edition is supposed to be more intuitive than the last ones, and generally fething over plasma guns has no purpose except for you to go "Ha! I dun have any, so suck it". And it frankly makes no god damn sense at all that plasmas suddenly explode more often at night.

Yet it makes sense that it never explodes if your captain is near you?

Far more sense, yes.

It's a badly written set of rules that people only like cause they get to nerf plasmas, and nerf space marine buff bubbles.

How is plasma nerfed? I would say buffed because they no longer Gets Hot normally and they are half the points they used to be for my Astra Militarum. Maybe save overcharging until you need it as a last resort? As for the game, I have a little trepidation over the codexes and balance though I do want all my flavor back.

 MagicJuggler wrote:
What was wrong with unmodified rolls and being able to take a save, and only losing a wound?

It's binary and doesn't allow for much difference in flavour between weapons, armour etc... ?

I would happily agree that whoever playtested the armies for balance was either a fething moron or was completely ignored by the writers because there is no way an Ork player playtested this codex and said "Yup this is good enough".

almost ZERO synergy between units and abilities (Looking at you Battlewagon and over priced and squishy Flash Gitz) And people are all excited about orkz getting their 6+ save? Really? I mean the new rules for terrain hurt ork probably the hardest, I used to utilize the crap out of that 4+ ruins save, now I basically ignore cover and go for straight speed.

Nope, this wasn't playtested enough or they chose not to listen to the testers.

Ruin wrote:

 Runic wrote:
Hmm nope, since it is infact the most playtested edition of 40k.

I excitedly await your proof of this edition not being the most playtested out of all the WH40K editions.

 Runic wrote:

Ruin wrote:

 Runic wrote:
Hmm nope, since it is infact the most playtested edition of 40k.

I excitedly await your proof of this edition not being the most playtested out of all the WH40K editions.

You missed the point. It's not a claim that this edition wasn't the most playtested, it's pointing out that "most playtested" doesn't necessarily mean much. If 7th got 5 minutes of playtesting and 8th got 6 minutes then 8th is "most playtested" even though neither had anywhere near enough. And that seems to be the case with 8th, it might be the most playtested but it's still clearly a barely-tested dumpster fire that only gets the title because previous editions got even less.

IOW, sucking the least is weak praise.

They playtested this game for like 2 years under the name Age of Sigmar.

As for GW's disregard for editing or having amyone on their staff who passed high school english - its been like that for years.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Runic wrote:

Ruin wrote:

 Runic wrote:
Hmm nope, since it is infact the most playtested edition of 40k.

I excitedly await your proof of this edition not being the most playtested out of all the WH40K editions.

You missed the point. It's not a claim that this edition wasn't the most playtested, it's pointing out that "most playtested" doesn't necessarily mean much. If 7th got 5 minutes of playtesting and 8th got 6 minutes then 8th is "most playtested" even though neither had anywhere near enough. And that seems to be the case with 8th, it might be the most playtested but it's still clearly a barely-tested dumpster fire that only gets the title because previous editions got even less.

IOW, sucking the least is weak praise.

No, I understood completely. OP and mr. comic don't understand the concretical meaning of "most playtested" - it means the edition has been playtested more than any previous edition. It is not a guarantee of quality, success, or anything else. GW has only claimed it's the most playtested edition they've done.

The claim is not incorrect.

However while on the subject, I've found 8th to be way more solid than 7th or 6th. A game with this many units will never, ever be perfect. Anyone expecting that just isn't being realistic.
Atleast now the FAQ's have come in faster than ever before, and they even included actual gameplay balance changes (rare).

To focus on the negative or the positive, that is ones own choice.

 Runic wrote:
No, I understood completely. OP and mr. comic don't understand the concretical meaning of "most playtested" - it means the edition has been playtested more than any previous edition. It is not a guarantee of quality, success, or anything else. GW has only claimed it's the most playtested edition they've done.

The claim is not incorrect.

However while on the subject, I've found 8th to be way more solid than 7th or 6th. A game with this many units will never, ever be perfect. Anyone expecting that just isn't being realistic.
Atleast now the FAQ's have come in faster than ever before, and they even included actual gameplay balance changes (rare).

To focus on the negative or the positive, that is ones own choice.

The comic guy never said that it wasn't the most playtested edition. He also didn't say it was a guarantee of quality, success, or anything else. He just said that the last edition were so undertested that saying this one is the 'Most playtested' doesn't mean much. Stop trying to pick fights with people that are basically agreeing with you, man.

Just had a weekend of 12 players and 48 games. It went smooth. I will grant you some of the scenarios got a bit out of bounds, as orks ambushing from 12" away was harsh. There were first turn charges indeed.

Playtesting. It takes time. And if you ever want to release your product, said time is finite.

As soon as it's out in the wild? Thousands upon thousands hours of more play time are suddenly logged, and globally.

That's when your errors occur. That's when issues truly pop up.

 Intruder wrote:
The comic guy never said that it wasn't the most playtested edition. He also didn't say it was a guarantee of quality, success, or anything else. He just said that the last edition were so undertested that saying this one is the 'Most playtested' doesn't mean much. Stop trying to pick fights with people that are basically agreeing with you, man.

Unneccesarily linking a sarcastic comic to a factual comment is basically picking a fight. The intention was clearly to undermine what was said. Luckily, it is true and hence cannot be undermined.

It still stands that 8th is the most playtested edition - anything beyond is not relevant when the claim considers the amount of playtesting and nothing else, and I refuse to be sidetracked and will not partake in such action.

Stop shifting the blame of picking a fight to people who did not originally do so, man.

edited by moderator

No... relative to all the other editions, this edition was actually play tested, that makes 8th edition de facto the most play tested edition.

Also, anyone who is surprised with FW writing bad rules, clearly wasn't dumb enough (as I was) to buy the FW book Aeronautica Imperialis. That book was the biggest travesty of badly written rules and airplanes that simply didn't even work. Like, there was a flying transport with a heavy bolter that could only snap shot, its only purpose was to exist as a high speed transport. Clearly no one from FW played the game, because there was literally no rules for the aircraft to disembark its passengers, so the transport was essentially a snap shooting flying coffin you would beg your opponent to shoot down.
And don't even get me started on the vehicle upgrades in the book that literally did nothing.

 portugus wrote:
How is plasma nerfed? I would say buffed because they no longer Gets Hot normally and they are half the points they used to be for my Astra Militarum. Maybe save overcharging until you need it as a last resort? As for the game, I have a little trepidation over the codexes and balance though I do want all my flavor back.

plasma hasn't been nerfed, I don't mind over charged plasma being risker in certain situations because it's A CHOICE. if I have modifiers that'd make a 4 or less kill my plasma gunner, I don't use over charge, as simple as that

8th edition is a hundred times more balanced than the broken mess of IMBA that was the 6th and 7th edition. Anyone remember rolling for psychic powers, trying to get that invisibility that would ruin the game completely? Or the Iron Hands chapter master that could be buffed so hard that he was pretty much unkillable? Or wraithnight spam, helldrake spam, vendetta spam? Or the 6th edition waveserpent spam from hell? Or the godawful jetseer council?

Seems perfectly fine so far.

not perfect but no one should really expect that.

seems FW really dropped the ball on a lot of stuff though.

the ONLY thing iv seen so far is the difference between eldar rangers and Space marine camo snipers.

Straight inferior for days while around the same points.

but nothing points adjustments cant fix.

This is one of the tightest set of rules they've released. The problem as always is people see rules and decided to try and break things.

HoundsofDemos wrote:
The problem as always is people see rules and decided to try and break things.

And sufficient playtesting (along with good game design in the first place) prevents this from happening.