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.

Some good talk in here, and some interesting opinions. It's clear to me that there are parts of 40k that people are really frustrated by, but it's hard to get around the bias of 'I want my army to be the best'. Tau and Astra Militarum army owners always get shook up when anyone suggests anything to do with melee getting better, while anyone with Khorne or Orks is always frustrated that they're getting shot off the table turn 2.

I will add one point - I haven't seen any terrain in any of my local stores that comes close to the detail and modularity of GW's new terrain. Some of their old stuff was pretty cumbersome, but the new stuff is really sharp and doesn't even need a good paintjob to look good. On the other hand, I've seen pieces of terrain that people brag 'cost them nothing', made out of styrofoam and soda cans, and after about 2 months of gaming, they start to fall apart. The next step up from that tend to be fake little mountains and hills made of stacked foam that are.. ok.

It's up to the individual whether the terrain is a 'good deal' or not. There is no such thing as a consensus or hard set of facts when it comes to spending disposable income. I won't judge people for buying GW terrain and I won't judge people for making a set of reactors out of the beer they just drank last night. It all comes down to how you enjoy the hobby.

As for 40k, I do hope they come out with some sort of 8.5 in the next year or so. The game has really bloated up over the past year and it feels cumbersome and way off of what it used to be. There's very few armies that hit the table that I see that feel... like they're being loyal to the universe. A couple of Blood Angels Captains with the same weapon loadout leading a squad of 32 imperial guardsmen and then whatever actual powerhouse you want to add in, like knights, custodes, or whatever other imperium thing... It's just gross.

One thing I'm curious about is the the radium rifle for Ad-mech, on 6s to wound it now does 3 damage instead of 1. Kinda seemed like a needless buff imo

Kill Team is the only thing tethering me to the 40k universe.

drbored wrote:
All of the codexes updated before the end of the following year? Regular FAQ's born from community feedback? Incredible! And here we are, a year later, and they're making good on their promise.

>In before Ork and Space Wolf players complain. We get it. I'm not going to coddle you any longer. You'll get your Codex when you get your Codex.

Where did they say the bolded part?

I know they said it but I can't find it for the life of me. I believe it was said when they announced the codexes were going to be released at the start of 8th but perhaps they changed their community article because it doesn't say anything like this now.

We haven't been 'coddled' by anyone. Not you, not GW. We have, yet again, been treated like gak.

Also failing to deliver on your promise is not 'making good on a promise'. But who cares that they've upset two massive parts of the community? As long as its not your faction, right?

drbored wrote:
Some good talk in here, and some interesting opinions. It's clear to me that there are parts of 40k that people are really frustrated by, but it's hard to get around the bias of 'I want my army to be the best'. Tau and Astra Militarum army owners always get shook up when anyone suggests anything to do with melee getting better, while anyone with Khorne or Orks is always frustrated that they're getting shot off the table turn 2.

Eh, there's a lot of assault armies that are great right now and I'm saying that as a person who's not even taking advantage of assault with my primary force.

Knights, Custodes, Blood Angels, Celestine, Catachans, Bullgryns, Daemon Princes, Cultists, Plaguebringers, Harlequins, Wyches, Ork Boyz, and a lot more. There's some great assault units out there. And there's some great shooting armies too, of course. Take a look at the top finishes at BAO last week, and you'll see a good mix of many different styles of armies. All 4 of the lists that were undefeated at BAO going into the final round (Death Guard, Custodes, and two Knights) included a mix of both shooting and assault elements.

That's why I don't take the whole "assault sucks" stuff very seriously. It doesn't suck, at all.

meleti wrote:

drbored wrote:
Some good talk in here, and some interesting opinions. It's clear to me that there are parts of 40k that people are really frustrated by, but it's hard to get around the bias of 'I want my army to be the best'. Tau and Astra Militarum army owners always get shook up when anyone suggests anything to do with melee getting better, while anyone with Khorne or Orks is always frustrated that they're getting shot off the table turn 2.

Eh, there's a lot of assault armies that are great right now and I'm saying that as a person who's not even taking advantage of assault with my primary force.

Knights, Custodes, Blood Angels, Celestine, Catachans, Bullgryns, Daemon Princes, Cultists, Plaguebringers, Harlequins, Wyches, Ork Boyz, and a lot more. There's some great assault units out there. And there's some great shooting armies too, of course. Take a look at the top finishes at BAO last week, and you'll see a good mix of many different styles of armies. All 4 of the lists that were undefeated at BAO going into the final round (Death Guard, Custodes, and two Knights) included a mix of both shooting and assault elements.

That's why I don't take the whole "assault sucks" stuff very seriously. It doesn't suck, at all.

It doesn't suck for everyone, but there are armies that should be able to do assault builds but can't quite nail that due to a lot of internal (and in some cases, external) balance issues that keep assualt from being effective.

I mean how often are Flayed Ones on tables? Assault Marines? Kroot? You get my point. Not all melee is good melee, so the idea that some armies can do it reasonably well doesn't mean everyone can.

Sounds like problems with specific units or armies rather than "assault doesn't work." Not everything has to be insane hyperbole.

Kroot are fine, by the way. They aren't an actual assault unit, they're a chaff unit that screens for your important stuff, and they work just fine in that role.

meleti wrote:
Sounds like problems with specific units or armies rather than "assault doesn't work." Not everything has to be insane hyperbole.

Kroot are fine, by the way. They aren't an actual assault unit, they're a chaff unit that screens for your important stuff, and they work just fine in that role.

Kroot are also the only unit the Tau have that can do assault reasonably well, but since they were only being used to screen a lot of players seem to be leaving them on the side to bring other stuff since alpha strikes aren't as strong anymore (needing you to be on the table at the start of the turn and most armies only able to get a single unit into melee on turn one).

I'm not saying that there aren't good assault units, but I wouldn't say all armies have the same level of tools available to run with. There is a serious issue for some armies that needs addressing so every army has the ability to play the melee game on some level beyond "let me just pick up this unit since it's basically dead".

No, it's not a test bed. More of a sideproject like swa. Btw, swa is much better than killteam.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
I mean how often are Flayed Ones on tables? Assault Marines? Kroot? You get my point. Not all melee is good melee, so the idea that some armies can do it reasonably well doesn't mean everyone can.

Striking Scropions are missing from your list.

I think part of the problem is most of the melee units simply not hitting hard enough. Some month ago, there was a discussion thread between a BT player and some ork players, with the BT player complaining that his vanguard veterans with dual chainswords simply don't measure up to boyz.

He was absolutely right on this. Those veterans get four attacks each, S4, no AP, at the cost of trading all ranged weaponry for chain swords. However, if that very same veteran had kept his bolter, that bolter would have shot twice at 12", in addition to hitting twice in combat with his fist, for the very same result.

So, two chain swords are strictly worse than a bolter, despite costing the same and the bolter marine being able to shoot things from 24" away. The chainsword should deal a lot more damage than a bolter, considering you have to actually connect with your opponent for it to do anything.

Another related story is from a game two weeks ago, when a unit of 8 striking with Karandras nearby and activated Supreme Disdain stratagem charged my blight lord terminators in cover. They exploded into a ridiculous amount of attacks (two bonus attacks on 5+, exarch three bonus attacks on 5+, hitting on 2+), but again all of them S4 and no AP. They killed a single blight lord, and the remaining four struck back with bubotic axes and a flail, wiping out the scorpions.

So, combat specialists need to have way better weapons than they have now. They usually only get one or two rounds of combat over the course of a game, if any at all. During those few turns, they need to be able to deal as much damage as similar unit that just shoots all game. Currently, that is not possible for most close combat units.