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.

One day someone is going to have to show me those good other faction armies, which against GK could do ok. Just to know what is considered a casual army in other countries.

Karol wrote:
One day someone is going to have to show me those good other faction armies, which against GK could do ok. Just to know what is considered a casual army in other countries.

Your area seems unusually brutal in how they play 40k. No one is going to say GKs are in a good place right now but if someone wanted a game with them I would tone my list down considerably. There are ways to give GKs a chance.

 DarkBlack wrote:
The other piece of advice for GK is to stick to playing casual games with people that not donkey-caves.

This is the biggest problem with 40k, people equating playing an inherently competitive game with the intent to win said game with donkey-cave behavior. I don't play anything without trying to win. If certain units give my army an advantage, that's what I'm going to buy, build, and paint.

hobojebus wrote:
Depends do you like gun lines? If yes it's great, if you don't keep walking past.

Pretty much this.

ValentineGames wrote:

A.T. wrote:

meleti wrote:
I find that this board is much more negative about 8E than people out there in shops and clubs actively playing the game.

That is to be expected though isn't it?
You aren't going to find the people who have walked away from the game playing in the clubs.

Yeah bit of a daft statement really.

But rightly so that it should be negative. 8th is the worst thing to happen to 40k...apart from 7th but we ignore that wreckage.

[Citation Needed] since 8th edition seems to be the most popular edition since 5th which was the most popular edition since 3rd.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Karol wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:


The game has shifted a lot from alpha strike focused, to being more beta strike heavy like past editions (and without Marines getting the only exception to that rule) and unless you know someone who is playing a Castellan and 32 Guardsmen the game is pretty balanced (and most of us expect to see some changes to said Castellan list in CA to help fix that too).

He said he played GK. The rules of 8th and being balance do not apply here.

And I was speaking more for the general state of the game, not listing the "how broken (good) and how broken (bad) each codex is".

Marines in general have a problem of being overcosted in relation to anything that isn't a Marine, lack durability, and the Grey Knights double down on that problem by being costed relative to how much better they are over regular Marines and not how good they are in relation to the rest of the game.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DarkBlack wrote:
The other piece of advice for GK is to stick to playing casual games with people that not donkey-caves.

Well that or do what a lot of Marine players who go competitive do: bring mostly Guard with a splash of Marines and call it a Marine list.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

HoundsofDemos wrote:

Karol wrote:
One day someone is going to have to show me those good other faction armies, which against GK could do ok. Just to know what is considered a casual army in other countries.

Your area seems unusually brutal in how they play 40k. No one is going to say GKs are in a good place right now but if someone wanted a game with them I would tone my list down considerably. There are ways to give GKs a chance.

Some examples of ways to tone down against Grey Knights:
dust off some cool units that don't perform as well.
Don't bring all scouts or cultists in your Marine lists.
Leave the Loyal 32 at home.
Run a rainbow list (the old "one of everything" style of list building).
Run a Primaris only marine army.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

ValentineGames wrote:

A.T. wrote:

meleti wrote:
I find that this board is much more negative about 8E than people out there in shops and clubs actively playing the game.

That is to be expected though isn't it?
You aren't going to find the people who have walked away from the game playing in the clubs.

Yeah bit of a daft statement really.

But rightly so that it should be negative. 8th is the worst thing to happen to 40k...apart from 7th but we ignore that wreckage.

[Citation Needed] since 8th edition seems to be the most popular edition since 5th which was the most popular edition since 3rd.

The anti-8th people on Dakka won't be persuaded by such details as the massive popularity of 8th edition in the real world.

meleti wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

ValentineGames wrote:

A.T. wrote:

meleti wrote:
I find that this board is much more negative about 8E than people out there in shops and clubs actively playing the game.

That is to be expected though isn't it?
You aren't going to find the people who have walked away from the game playing in the clubs.

Yeah bit of a daft statement really.

But rightly so that it should be negative. 8th is the worst thing to happen to 40k...apart from 7th but we ignore that wreckage.

[Citation Needed] since 8th edition seems to be the most popular edition since 5th which was the most popular edition since 3rd.

The anti-8th people on Dakka won't be persuaded by such details as the massive popularity of 8th edition in the real world.

Can't have a narrative ruined by pesky things like facts, eh?

Indeed. According to some of the vocal minority - If no one in their immediate area plays 40k, then GW is about to file bankruptcy

8th is a dumpster fire (see my sig), but it's not a dumpster fire laced with acid spitting cobras (aka 7th).

 NurglesR0T wrote:
Indeed. According to some of the vocal minority - If no one in their immediate area plays 40k, then GW is about to file bankruptcy

I remember hearing stuff like that in the Dark Age of Kirby, but that seemed to die off since 8th and the Age of Roundtree. Clearly some are still lost in that dark age and will never escape it only because the path out of that dark age isn't paved with the particular shade of gold brick they wanted.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
8th is a dumpster fire (see my sig), but it's not a dumpster fire laced with acid spitting cobras (aka 7th).

Your sig doesn't prove it's a dumpster fire, it proves that it's a beer and pretzels game that is slowly being shaped into a tighter game that can withstand the stress put on it by a competitive community that it was never designed for.

 Giantwalkingchair wrote:
Depends entirely who you talk to and how you like to play.

Those who like to roll dice and have fun and remember its just a game: its fun and easy to jump in to. It has some quirks but nothing that cant be sorted on the fly between chill players.

To those who try to play competitive and take everything way too seriously: *insert screeching and foaming at the mouth*

8th has been quite the shake up. Armies with lots of bodies are in a pretty good place with low number elite armies needing to play like they do in the fluff (completing their objective aka playing the mission, as opposed to killing everything in sight).
Point sizes are more ot less what they always have been but 2k maybe being the most common.
8th is much more killy and things die a lot faster than they used to.

The basic core rules are available on the GW website as a free pdf, so you can easily see for yourself the core changes that have come about.

"Dude anyone who cares about well written products are just taking it too seriously XDDD"

Games Workshop could write in crayon and smear faeces between the pages and some people would defend it.

 Arbitrator wrote:
"Dude anyone who cares about well written products are just taking it too seriously XDDD"

Games Workshop could write in crayon and smear faeces between the pages and some people would defend it.

I honestly get a little frustrated when I see people do this to write off any defense of GW. On the overall 40k is a pretty good game with some rough spots that GW has shown some serious effort in the last year to try and smooth out. To claim it to be a dumpster fire, or claim that just because people like it they'd like anything GW puts out is trying to turn any arguement for the game into a strawman just to validate an opinion on why you don't like it. And frankly I don't like that.

Look, it's fine to not like 8th edition. There's definitely stuff I feel needs to be fixed (more terrain rules, more modifiers for shooting, more importance placed on positioning) but unlike 7th edition I'm actually doing more than reading through my collection of ebooks and claiming that I'll start playing again when Sisters finally see plastic despite having no desire to play the game with how just bad it got. I checked out during 6th edition and if it wasn't for Gathering Storm grabbing my attention and 8th pulling me back in I may have never come back. And I assume others are in the same boat as me.

Liking the current edition doesn't mean we can't see faults in it, nor does it mean that we can't defend it without drinking the kool-aid. It just means we like it and we don't think it's as bad as some people claim it is.

Ok how did they try to fix GK? Because there was what 4-5 FAQs they brough up at some time, they had a CA, and nothing got improved. A lot of things got worse, because instead of fixing the hammer BA cpt, they just nerf deep strike or when gulliman re-rolls were a problem they didn't fix him, no they nerfed razorbacks and stormravens.

What is even worse, the stuff that really isbroken they do not fix at all. Where is the nerf to Inari ? They screw up BA and other imperial mid or bottom tier lists, with the CP battery nerf. And say it is done so people stop taking the same 32 models in every list. But nothing changes, it is like they eldar changes, the meta already was shifting to 2-3 reaper units, so GW "nerfs" them, and eldar still use 2-3 units of them.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Arbitrator wrote:
"Dude anyone who cares about well written products are just taking it too seriously XDDD"

Games Workshop could write in crayon and smear faeces between the pages and some people would defend it.

I honestly get a little frustrated when I see people do this to write off any defense of GW. On the overall 40k is a pretty good game with some rough spots that GW has shown some serious effort in the last year to try and smooth out. To claim it to be a dumpster fire, or claim that just because people like it they'd like anything GW puts out is trying to turn any arguement for the game into a strawman just to validate an opinion on why you don't like it. And frankly I don't like that.

Look, it's fine to not like 8th edition. There's definitely stuff I feel needs to be fixed (more terrain rules, more modifiers for shooting, more importance placed on positioning) but unlike 7th edition I'm actually doing more than reading through my collection of ebooks and claiming that I'll start playing again when Sisters finally see plastic despite having no desire to play the game with how just bad it got. I checked out during 6th edition and if it wasn't for Gathering Storm grabbing my attention and 8th pulling me back in I may have never come back. And I assume others are in the same boat as me.

Liking the current edition doesn't mean we can't see faults in it, nor does it mean that we can't defend it without drinking the kool-aid. It just means we like it and we don't think it's as bad as some people claim it is.

I fully agree with basically everything you said and yet I find myself the mirror opposite of your situation with 40k. I grew to love 40k with 6th and 7th edition and it wasn't until the Gathering Storm where my joy of the hobby started to falter (The fluff changes were not good but somewhat ignorable, the rules spawned some god awful Ynnari/Craftworld cheese lists and IoM super friends deathstars). 8th did the opposite where instead of drawing me in, it pushed me out because i kept hitting this brick wall of simplicity with the game where I wanted to dig into list building, evaluating the battlefield to figure out plans of attack, and finding niche ways to use units to not just "remove models from the table". Instead 8th feels like running damage calculators to find out what kills the things the best (spam this because its the best ), blob up around aura buffs to be more killy, and generally mash your army into the enemy army until one army is dead. What I loved about 7th was that there where so many semi viable options to really throw some screwballs and create unusual battlefield situations for the opponent. (Battlewagon wall for AV14 to neutralize the majority of the enemy shooting until I could close the distance where my boyz / MANz / flash gitz / etc could be effective , using land speeder storms to mass flash bang enemies to keep them combat ineffective while my Sternguard heavy army could punch a hole in the enemy's lines with drop pods, my Tau variation on Hammer and Anvil strategy to gain board presence and force difficult decisions for the opponent due to having fast moving heavy hitters striking from the rear/flanks while my main battle line provided ranged fire support and pumped out steady damage, etc). Instead 8th feels like every weapon/unit just puts out a net damage result and while certain weapons are better at killing one thing over another, the differences in their effectiveness isn't all that pronounced unless your going after really high wound stuff. Terrain, cover, and positioning are so gutted that you just point at a target, roll dice, and they remove models/wounds like its a game of Risk. Stratagems feels like playing MtG type cards where "I'm going to tap my 2 CP and give this unit +1 to wound"... that isn't really compelling game play.

For me the frustrating part is that I experience this feeling of the game being just unfun and boring but the internet is filled to the brim with people who proclaim that 8th is the best thing since sliced bread. I'm over here seeing all these flaws and mechanics missing that I use to love but it feels like people are happy playing a more basic game (and GW financials seem to confirm that) which leaves my hobby future as basically because I don't see GW turning the ship around for people like me when the masses "love" this new direction the game and fluff are going (my hatred of primaris is another major issue with 8th but that isn't really relevant to how the game itself plays). It frustrating that concerns that I have tend to get lumped into the "haters gonna hate" category by a lot of people when I defend some of the merits of 7th (don't get me wrong, 7th was a dumpster fire by the end of it but its core had a good if bloated amount of depth. It just had zero oversight with its game balance and so the game quickly derailed horribly at the upper competitive levels with the fallout seeped into the competitive but casual crowd via net lists.)
I can hope that maybe some people in GW are feeling the lack of depth with the game and want to dig back into a more complex game design but as is well known in the 40k universe "Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment".

As far as I see it, 40k is a game that should be played only with like-minded friends, with a degree of adherence to the 'fluff' and an understanding not to utterly optimise an army, abuse allies (for me it's one army, one book), or to play without a metric tonne of terrain. 40k is not a tighly balanced game and it is not designed around highly competitive play, and as becomes apparent, it falls apart very quickly under those conditions. 8th edition is probably the best it has been in a long time (certainly several light years ahead of 6th and 7th) in terms of its base mechanics, but it still isn't perfect by a fairly long chalk.
Could it be better? Yes. Should it be better? Probably. But it isn't, and likely never will be. Maybe I'm just getting old, but personally I've just accepted that 40k will always be a busted mess if you let it, so you have to have self-imposed restrictions on how you play it if it's going to be enjoyable, and I think that there are enough tabletop games out there that if a highly competitive, carefully balanced game is what you want, then 40k isn't going to suit.
So, yeah...I'm definitely becoming one of those 'you're having fun wrong!' types with regards to tournaments et al, but I've likewise come to accept that too. I enjoy 40k for what it is, and have enough models stashed up over the years/from eBay that I don't mind buying a Codex now and then, despite extortionate pricing.
So in short, 40k is as fun as you can make it, or as horrible a broken mess as you can push it to. It all depends on how you and your group approach it.

8th edition can be fun played casually, as a competitive game it falls apart. this becomes less true at the lower point levels I think; 1-1.2K games tend to balance reasonably so long as people don't run massively optimised lists.

The game is in decent state, but still recovering from the huge shift back to the older way of dealing with fixed stats and Ap modifiers... I think depth may well creep back into the game slowly.

Playing with friends it takes an evening to write up house-rules for terrain features or give back firing arcs, establish bonuses for attacking vehicles from behind and so forth. it's important to remember you're playing a game.

MalusCalibur seems to put it well "40k is as fun as you can make it, or as horrible a broken mess as you push it to" have an exalt my new friend

If you're grey knights I'm guessing you like the marine aesthetic? if you can find players 30k is a lot of fun.

GamerGuy

8th needs less house ruling than 7th for things to work smoothly but it's probably like every other edition of 40k. (I started in 5th). Find a group of people who want to play the game the same way you do. 40k is like any other activity, if the people participating don't want the same things no one is going to have a good time. It's like a group of friends wanted to play a game of football. If most of the players want to play tackle and a few want to play flag, issues are going to arise.

 MalusCalibur wrote:
As far as I see it, 40k is a game that should be played only with like-minded friends, with a degree of adherence to the 'fluff' and an understanding not to utterly optimise an army, abuse allies (for me it's one army, one book), or to play without a metric tonne of terrain. 40k is not a tighly balanced game and it is not designed around highly competitive play, and as becomes apparent, it falls apart very quickly under those conditions. 8th edition is probably the best it has been in a long time (certainly several light years ahead of 6th and 7th) in terms of its base mechanics, but it still isn't perfect by a fairly long chalk.
Could it be better? Yes. Should it be better? Probably. But it isn't, and likely never will be. Maybe I'm just getting old, but personally I've just accepted that 40k will always be a busted mess if you let it, so you have to have self-imposed restrictions on how you play it if it's going to be enjoyable, and I think that there are enough tabletop games out there that if a highly competitive, carefully balanced game is what you want, then 40k isn't going to suit.
So, yeah...I'm definitely becoming one of those 'you're having fun wrong!' types with regards to tournaments et al, but I've likewise come to accept that too. I enjoy 40k for what it is, and have enough models stashed up over the years/from eBay that I don't mind buying a Codex now and then, despite extortionate pricing.
So in short, 40k is as fun as you can make it, or as horrible a broken mess as you can push it to. It all depends on how you and your group approach it.

This.

Don't like the terrain rules? Make your own. Don't like soup lists? Make a house rule to allow only one book armies. This is what we do in my gaming group.

Personally I like 8th edition really much. There are flaws yes, but a lot less than before. Cover and armor piercing makes a lot more sense, the unit statistics are clear, wound chart is no longer a mess of numbers etc. Yes, it makes the game a bit more simple, but I would not say it's a bad thing. As a friend of mine who I introduced into the game back in 7th said "8th edition seems like a bunch of guys sat down with pints of beer and actually thought about the rules".

There are of course some things I do not like, for example I dislike mortal wounds, as many armies can spam them a bit too much to my liking. Tournament lists seem to focus more on picking units that maximize the command points, rather than units that synergize well together. But then again, I do not play as competitive as I used to, so I might be wrong here.

The game will never be perfect, but then again, could it ever be so that everyone would like it.

Mind you, I'm not trying to defend the edition, just writing my own opinion.

I've played since the 2nd edition. The current edition is far from perfect, I have my fair share of criticism for it. However, the game is easily in the best shape it has ever been. People who want super tight tournament focused system will always be disappointed; that's not what GW games have ever been. Make some lore appropriate armies and enjoy the mayhem with your friends!

I personnaly haven't made the transition yet to 8th eddition. I lost my gaming group about a year ago after I had to move to a new part of town for work and another literally changed country. Before hte shift, I was mostly playing homemade armies with codexes I wrote myself (I wrote 6 of them and was working on the 7th and 8th one when the new eddition arrived) and I don't really have the courage yet to work my way through them to make them fit in a quite different system. The fact I was proud of my work on them doesn't help. So, I got stucked in the limbo of 7th with the set of house rules we pulled to correct some of GW weaknesses.

Despite this, I heard rather good things for the 8th eddition and will probably make the jump in the future. It's main weakness seems to be comming from the monstrous amount of firepower armies have access to making slow, armored and ponderous units nearly useless and the fact close combat is apparently even worse then it used to be (and it was already pretty bad). It still has some of the old weaknesses to like point imbalance of gimmicky list building, but not as bad as it used to be. If you play Grey Knights, you might investigate into allies because apparently, they, alone, are terrible. Maybe in very small game (500 pts) they could be better. Sometimes, when firepower is a problem, smaller scale games tend to help a bit.