Switch Theme:

The downward edition spiral of 40k all started with 6th edition  [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 gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Grimtuff wrote:
 AnomanderRake wrote:
Deadnight wrote:
...Everyone's 'best times' was right when they started and the ideal was just before then...


You know you're talking to someone who starting in 3rd and thinks 5th was the golden spot, right?


Nah, let him wheel out the cliches to tell someone why they are wrong for thinking older editions are superior...

I'm in more or less the same boat as the OP. Started in late 2nd, but didn't really hit my stride until 3rd. 5th was peak 40k then they went and gak the bed with 6th and 7th.


Oh please.

Firstly -Poor phrase which I've since corrected to better present my thoughts.

Seconfly - I'm not saying he's wrong to prefer an older edition. Or to think 5th was the peak. I have some fond memories of 4th and most of my favourite lore was written back in 2nd. I hated fifth. Absolutely detested it. It was on no way any kind of 'pinnacle' of 40k for me.

I disagree with the notion that the 'downward spiral' was some recent phenomenon that can be pinpointed to a specific moment in time. Or that the 40k ecosystem of games and media is somehow 'worse now than it was then. It'll differ for everyone.

Plenty folks would have said that for third too and I've seen enough posts from people saying they've had more fun with 8th ed 40k than they've had in years to simply assume we are living in 'lesser days' now.

ccs wrote:
Deadnight wrote:

Everyone's 'best times' was right when they started and the ideal was just before then.


Having started in the closing days of RT I'm going to disagree with that.
There was nothing "before" 40k wise.
RT is definitely not my favorite edition nor does it include any of my "best times".

I'd prefer the 3rd - 5th era with some of 8th/9th.


Please see my edit. What i wrote poorly conveyed my thoughts; I meant to imply 'back when you started and the first few years in the hobby' by what I said. But hey, internet.

 KingmanHighborn wrote:

Not really. 3rd was perfect. 4th had some things I didn't like but it was still good. (3rd had sweeping advance, 'catch and kill' units failing moral checks, and charging out of vehicles. Seriously these need to come back.) 5th was meh, but I still loved the lore and the game was still more for the hobby, and not Pay 2 Win esports with miniatures that it is now.


I'll disagree on third being 'perfect'. rhino rush or shoot the rhino rush. And sweeping advance and charging out of rhinos was ridiculous.

 KingmanHighborn wrote:

And yeah the models LOOK better, but there's less options to build them out, not as conversion friendly as GW is trying to KILL conversions at every chance,


I played warmachine for ten years. Single pose models is something I've gotten used to and their conversion policy was way more stringent than gws (don't stop me though!). For what it's worth though I prefer the more dynamic modern poses than what I saw as pseudo variety of older kids (another debate entirely) and for what it's worth, you can still convert the hell out of your 40k stuff.

 KingmanHighborn wrote:

there was as many ways to enjoy GW games in 2000-2004 as there is today. Cause yeah you got Kill Team, and Necromunda and Blood Bowl, but back in the day you HAD THAT AND there was also healthy support for Warmaster, Battle Fleet Gothic, Epic 40K (the only place a knight titan army should be.), Gorkamorka, and Inquisitor.


Fair points all. Maybe it's fairer to say 'we've not had so many ways of enjoying the 40k universe in years'.

Saying 'things are worse now, gw used to do a tonne of games' would be a perfectly fair thing to say in the death throes of the kirby era when they'd pruned everything back to.just 40k and wfb. Now I just dont agree.

Again, good thing all told. Not a downward spiral. They brought back specialist games and have introduced the likes of bsf (which I loved), there's also all the computer games and the TV stuff coming along. Honestly I've never been happier in my hobby.

 KingmanHighborn wrote:

And yeah, their share prices are up. So are EA's, and GW is the tabletop equivalent of EA. They saw what the predatory Triple A video game industry has been doing, and they set out to mimic it much as they could for little plastic soldiers.


Oh trust me, I understand this. gw are not my 'friend'. They're a business minded company. Point was, they're doing OK.

This message was edited 6 times. Last update was at 2021/07/30 10:17:05


greatest band in the universe: machine supremacy

"Punch your fist in the air and hold your Gameboy aloft like the warrior you are" 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut






There's already another entire thread of people pissing and moaning about the supposed terminal decline of 40K, is another one really necessary?
   
Made in pl
Fixture of Dakka




Deadnight 800015 11186509 wrote:

Everyone's 'best times' was when they started and the first couple of years in the hobby, whenever that was.


I am not sure about that. I started at the very start of 8th ed. 8th ed was not fun and in general a horrible expiriance for me. I found the start of 9th very nice and fun to play, till DE book came out. And even now with DE and Ad mecha being the way they are, it is still more fun then it was in 8th.

If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain. 
   
Made in gb
Killer Klaivex




The dark behind the eyes.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

Flyers are absolutely possible to balance reasonably. The Valkyrie under the 4e FW flyer rules was 175pts for 11/11/10 and otherwise pretty much the same loadout/stats as the 6e incarnation, and was completely fine. The 100pt 12/12/10 Valkyrie as a flyer in 6th was silly.


So you make no distinction between Flier rules and Skimmer rules?

Because Flier rules literally didn't exist until 6th- everything before then (at least going back to 3rd, which was when i started) was a skimmer.

 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 gb
Ship's Officer





Bristol (UK)

FW had apocalypse rules for flyers.

6th edition flyer rules more or less dumped FW flyer rules on top of 40k Skimmer rules.
   
Made in de
Terrifying Doombull






Nuremberg

Started in 2e and enjoyed (more or less) every edition until the end of 5th. 5th was the best time for me playing, but I'm not sure I can disagregate that from having a great and active group of friends and my particular faction (orks) having a really fun and deep book to use. 5e definitely had issues, but I felt like I had the tools to tackle most of them. 6e was enormously offputting to me and 7th even worse. I am constantly on the verge of getting back into 40k now that they've overhauled it but it seems like a lot of effort to keep up with everything they are releasing and the general pace of the game at this point in my life. I reckon if I was in a different stage where I had more time and a good group I could be having a lot of fun with the current edition. I still think fliers and superheavies look stupid on the tiny boards though.

   
Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut




 vipoid wrote:
 AnomanderRake wrote:

Flyers are absolutely possible to balance reasonably. The Valkyrie under the 4e FW flyer rules was 175pts for 11/11/10 and otherwise pretty much the same loadout/stats as the 6e incarnation, and was completely fine. The 100pt 12/12/10 Valkyrie as a flyer in 6th was silly.


So you make no distinction between Flier rules and Skimmer rules?

Because Flier rules literally didn't exist until 6th- everything before then (at least going back to 3rd, which was when i started) was a skimmer.


3rd Ed had flyer rules, but they were only in the FW books that contained flyers and in the Vehicle Design Rules in Chapter Approved. They were very much an ‘opponent’s permission’ thing though.

They were however more like how a flyer would operate - they did very distinct strafing/bombing runs across the battlefield and had a range modifier for incoming attacks to represent how high up they were.
   
Made in gb
[SWAP SHOP MOD]
Killer Klaivex







I'd agree that 5th was the best edition generally, but with some caveats.

-Late 3rd had some wonderful flavour to it in choices that 4th stripped out in the name of simplicity that never came back for 5th.
-Late 5th was also subject to horrendous codex creep from mid-way through. Things like Grey Knights needed serious toning down.
-The main 5th rulebook had some screwups with regards to wound allocation and the like which needed ironing out.
-6th did introduce a handful of useful things which could have been integrated with 5th with little issue - like the way psychic powers worked.

If you could rewrite 5th whilst addressing those points, you'd likely have the best edition of the game anyone could ever want. Your main problem now would be successfully integrating things like titans and flyers (since everyone has them) without ruining the core gameplay experience.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/30 11:09:18



 
   
Made in pl
Contagious Dreadnought of Nurgle




I'd say 40Ks downward spiral started at the end of 5th and ended with the end of 7th Edition.
Then it went downhill again with SM Codex 2.0, but from a casual view 9th Codizes look pretty balanced against each other, so much so that my gaming group is discussing to stick with 9th if 10th doesn't finally bring alternating activations. 3 years lifespan for an Edition is simply too short for casual gamers that also have 3-5 other gaming systems that don't change their rules literally every time you play them.
It's still unbelievable GW could write Lotr in 2001 and made it as perfect so it basically hasn't changed for 20years.
   
Made in gb
Ship's Officer





Bristol (UK)

I think GW has some excellent writers that are capable of writing some excellent rules.
But they're held back by the weight of 40k. Even 8th edition wasn't that much of a reboot honestly. It feels the only things they did was remove vehicles, blasts, and independent characters, and add strats.
Also the sheer breadth of armies creates a big problem. Trying to account for everything from Guard to Knights to Space Marines and everything in between is really difficult.
   
Made in ca
Longtime Dakkanaut





I sat out for 6 and 7. GSC were gone and the 6th ed sister dex was terrible compared to Witch Hunters. There was no reason to play.

GSC would have brought me back to 7th. I bought the dex, but by the time I decided to get the BRB, they had announced that 8th was on the way, so I waited til it dropped to buy back in.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/30 11:28:58


 
   
Made in de
Terrifying Doombull






Nuremberg

Adding superheavies and fliers to the game was a mistake but once added they have to be kept or it screws over the people who bought them. So the rules writers need to sort out how to manage them. I would make destroying a superheavy a major contribution to the win conditions of any game they are in but I can see problems with that approach too.

   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut





Deadnight wrote:
Everyone's 'best times' was when they started and the first couple of years in the hobby, whenever that was. and the ideal was just before then.
Eh... started in rogue trader - wasn't the best times. Restarted in each successive edition with differing impressions.

I think early 5th was the last time I could pick any army from the roster and get both an acceptably level playing field. By the end of 5th I no longer felt that.

It was no single change though as different players have different priorities - for example I never cared for the various abusable faction freebie rules, in my mind something like an Evil Sunz list was defined by taking lots of bikes and not by getting ++bike rules, but the loss of those kind of rules are the start of the downward spiral for others.
   
Made in us
Hacking Shang Jí





Fayetteville

While I'd agree that a lot of the problems current 40K has got their start in 6th (flyers, fortifications, allies/detachments), I'd point the beginning of the downward spiral to 3rd. That seems to be the point at which the sales guys defeated the design guys and model sales became the focus. Many know the story of how 3rd was originally a refinement of 2nd, but got scrapped in favor of a hastily modified WWII ruleset that significantly increased the model count.

The Imperial Navy, A Galatic Force for Good. 
   
Made in gb
Fresh-Faced New User




Deadnight wrote:
I disagree with the notion that the 'downward spiral' was some recent phenomenon that can be pinpointed to a specific moment in time. Or that the 40k ecosystem of games and media is somehow 'worse now than it was then. It'll differ for everyone.

Plenty folks would have said that for third too and I've seen enough posts from people saying they've had more fun with 8th ed 40k than they've had in years to simply assume we are living in 'lesser days' now.


I do tend to think a big issue has been the rise of the more competitive side of the game which has come to dominate most discussion on the net and is always more likely to expose weakensses in the rules.
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




moreorless wrote:
Deadnight wrote:
I disagree with the notion that the 'downward spiral' was some recent phenomenon that can be pinpointed to a specific moment in time. Or that the 40k ecosystem of games and media is somehow 'worse now than it was then. It'll differ for everyone.

Plenty folks would have said that for third too and I've seen enough posts from people saying they've had more fun with 8th ed 40k than they've had in years to simply assume we are living in 'lesser days' now.


I do tend to think a big issue has been the rise of the more competitive side of the game which has come to dominate most discussion on the net and is always more likely to expose weakensses in the rules.


I dunno. That side of it has always been there and I don't think it's any 'worse'. It's not a recent phenomenon at all. I remember portent (pre warseer) back twenty odd years ago and the same chats being centred around the competitive game, rules exploits and list building for advantage dominated then,as now.
Back then gw leaked like a siv. You'd know everything in a codex three to six months before release- all the broken builds would be mathed out even before the codex hit the shelves. Fun times!
.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/30 13:18:09


greatest band in the universe: machine supremacy

"Punch your fist in the air and hold your Gameboy aloft like the warrior you are" 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut





 Arschbombe wrote:
That seems to be the point at which the sales guys defeated the design guys and model sales became the focus. Many know the story of how 3rd was originally a refinement of 2nd, but got scrapped in favor of a hastily modified WWII ruleset that significantly increased the model count.
I've not heard that story, but the problem with the 2nd ed rules in general was that it was a system designed for individual models to engage other individual models that had the concept of a squad unit for limited purposes such as moving together - each model had their own facing, their own sub-combat phase, and were targeted as an individual.

3e onwards was squad vs squad.
   
Made in gb
Killer Klaivex




The dark behind the eyes.

 kirotheavenger wrote:
I think GW has some excellent writers that are capable of writing some excellent rules.
But they're held back by the weight of 40k. Even 8th edition wasn't that much of a reboot honestly. It feels the only things they did was remove vehicles, blasts, and independent characters, and add strats.


The other aspect is that, despite the changes made, 8th and 9th's editions rules still feel very clunky.

For a non-wargame example, 5th edition D&D made an effort to streamline many of the rules from prior editions. And whilst hardly perfect, combat at least felt smoother than in, say, 3.5. It often came down to simple things - like being able to spread your movement into sections. So if you had 30ft of movement, you could move 10ft, attack an enemy, move 5ft and attack a different enemy, and then move the remaining 15ft. Whereas, in 3.5, you'd have only been able to either move and attack or attack and then move. It was a very simple and straightforward change but it made a huge difference to how combat felt.

Meanwhile, in 40k, none of the changes really help in this area - often because their replacements were just as awkward. We now have movement characteristics but both Advancing and Charge distances still use random numbers anyway. Initiative is gone but instead we have a mess of always-strikes-first and always-strikes-last abilities, combined with a resolution system whereby a unit fighting on one side of the table causes a unit on the other side of the table to fight more slowly. Blasts and Templates are gone but instead we have piles of weapons with random numbers of shots. Independent characters are gone but instead characters have to stay within 3" of a unit or else be shot to death . . . so they might as well have just left them in and increased coherency from 2" to 3". The psychic phase is simplified from 7th but it's simplified to the point that there's no strategic or tactical aspect at all, so we might as well have just gone back to 5th's method and have characters cast powers with Ld checks in the appropriate phase.

It just seems that they've yet to get to the core of the issue in terms of fixing 40k's clunkiness as a system.

 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
Longtime Dakkanaut




NE Ohio, USA

Deadnight wrote:


ccs wrote:
Deadnight wrote:

Everyone's 'best times' was right when they started and the ideal was just before then.


Having started in the closing days of RT I'm going to disagree with that.
There was nothing "before" 40k wise.
RT is definitely not my favorite edition nor does it include any of my "best times".

I'd prefer the 3rd - 5th era with some of 8th/9th.


Please see my edit. What i wrote poorly conveyed my thoughts; I meant to imply 'back when you started and the first few years in the hobby' by what I said. But hey, internet.


Still disagree as my 3rd-5th ed days were a decade + away. Hardly my 1st few years of the hobby.
He'll, as my HOBBY is miniature wargaming, RT & 2e aren't even my first few years - merely my earliest concerning 40k

Don't get me wrong, obviously since I've spent 30+ years & $$$$$ in the 40k universe I had enough fun with RT/2e.....
And here in 8th/9th I've had fun (and the models are better than ever overall).

But my favorite period, when I had the most fun, was 3-early 5th.
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar






Deadnight wrote:


ccs wrote:
Deadnight wrote:

Everyone's 'best times' was right when they started and the ideal was just before then.


Having started in the closing days of RT I'm going to disagree with that.
There was nothing "before" 40k wise.
RT is definitely not my favorite edition nor does it include any of my "best times".

I'd prefer the 3rd - 5th era with some of 8th/9th.


Please see my edit. What i wrote poorly conveyed my thoughts; I meant to imply 'back when you started and the first few years in the hobby' by what I said. But hey, internet.

Still incorrect. I started in 2nd and my best/favorite time was during 4th, about 10 years in.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/30 14:54:08


And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Insectum7 wrote:
Deadnight wrote:


ccs wrote:
Deadnight wrote:

Everyone's 'best times' was right when they started and the ideal was just before then.


Having started in the closing days of RT I'm going to disagree with that.
There was nothing "before" 40k wise.
RT is definitely not my favorite edition nor does it include any of my "best times".

I'd prefer the 3rd - 5th era with some of 8th/9th.


Please see my edit. What i wrote poorly conveyed my thoughts; I meant to imply 'back when you started and the first few years in the hobby' by what I said. But hey, internet.

Still incorrect. I started in 2nd and my best/favorite time was during 4th, about 10 years in.


Fair enough. I guess I'm reading too much into my own, and my peer experience.

Appreciate your pov.

greatest band in the universe: machine supremacy

"Punch your fist in the air and hold your Gameboy aloft like the warrior you are" 
   
Made in pl
Fixture of Dakka




10 years is "first few years" only when you are like 40 or something.

If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain. 
   
Made in us
Da Head Honcho Boss Grot




New Jersey, State of Perfection

 AnomanderRake wrote:
I may be marked a heretic and purged for this, but I'd argue the downward spiral started in 5th (right after Priestly & Co. left). Loss of options, statline bloat, the push to sell powerful new big models over fixing the stuff that existed, the push to make named characters better than generic characters, and the push to make new Space Marines over half of all releases all started in 5th.


Agreed. 4th was the last good edition IMO (I really like 8th, not so sure about 9th but haven't had a chance to play it really). 5th was boring, 6th and 7th were painful.


This ain't no pansy GW Armor, son - Digital Sculpting Plog, Now with Heavy Weapon Platforms!
Sympathy for the Devil, or: The Project Log from Hell

Ma55ter_fett wrote:It reads like the ramblings of a Nigerian lobotomized Shakespeare typed into a cellphone with a very aggressive autocomplete function.
 
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar






Yeah 5th brought some real unfortunate things, imo. Return to TLOS/poor terrain mechanics, terrible multi-wound mechanics, the splitting of BA, DA, SW into their own codexes with accompanying unit-bloat, the eventual "Newcron reboot", the removal of lots of unit/army customization, more importance given to special characters and a dramatic increase in the prevalence on high AP weapons, which simultaneously gave rise to an increased prevalence of invuln saves (THSS Terminators gaining a 3++, for instance.)

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/30 16:28:01


And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in us
[MOD]
Imperial Guard Landspeeder Pilot




On moon miranda.

I don't think there's any edition of 40k that doesn't have massive, glaring failures. As tabletop wargames, they're all pretty bad taken on just their rules, they're not anything anyone would play or really develop these days without GW's IP behind it, same way most RPG's these days look little like D&D and its painfully mechanistic paradigm.

Each edition has had major problems both with core rules and codexes, as well as power and scale bloat. For my own part, and not having played 9th, I think late 3rd/early 4th was among the best for flavor and expression of lore in the rules, 5th was probably all around the best "tournament" edition (in terms of reasonable army sizes, limited rules to memorize, broad if imperfect meta balance, etc), with mid 2019 pre-SM supplement 8th probably being the best overall balanced in a faction meta sense.

IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.

New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights!
The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.  
   
Made in ca
Excited Doom Diver






I've played every edition beginning with 3rd. All are great in their own way, all had their own flaws. Just the nature of the beast. I do enjoy 9th the most so far (as does my club), but I did have a lot of fun in 7th with the super formations.


I remember playing with the playtest rules for 4th edition, and being outraged that you could always get 2 shots in half range for rapid-fire weapons even if you moved I thought that was too much firepower and would ruin the game. Oh how naive I was lol.

Space Wolves 4k
Harlequins 2k
Chaos Knights 2k
Spiderfangs 2k
Ossiarch Bonereapers 1k 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut





 Insectum7 wrote:
...the removal of lots of unit/army customization, more importance given to special characters and a dramatic increase in the prevalence on high AP weapons, which simultaneously gave rise to an increased prevalence of invuln saves (THSS Terminators gaining a 3++, for instance.)
That all started piecemeal in the latter half of 4th edition and became more standardized in 5th.

It's interesting to look at the codex releases around then as you can see distinct patterns in rule and balance conventions. In 4th you'd get a couple of similar books one after another before the goal posts move, whereas in 5th the books are all over the place. Makes me wonder if someone running oversight in the studio left or moved onto other projects, or if it's just a coincidence.
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar






A.T. wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
...the removal of lots of unit/army customization, more importance given to special characters and a dramatic increase in the prevalence on high AP weapons, which simultaneously gave rise to an increased prevalence of invuln saves (THSS Terminators gaining a 3++, for instance.)
That all started piecemeal in the latter half of 4th edition and became more standardized in 5th.

It's interesting to look at the codex releases around then as you can see distinct patterns in rule and balance conventions. In 4th you'd get a couple of similar books one after another before the goal posts move, whereas in 5th the books are all over the place. Makes me wonder if someone running oversight in the studio left or moved onto other projects, or if it's just a coincidence.
It's true, it did start at the tail end of 4th. I think the DA book was the first iirc. But the super-customization codexes prior to that shift were just fantastic. Peak codexes, if you ask me. Those first "proto-5th" codexes also didn't have the AP inflation that characterized later books in the era if I'm remembering correctly. The DA one was still a bit restrained iirc.

The only things I would introduce to the 4th ed (marine) books from the later ones would be the re-equipping marines with bolt pistols, frag and krak grenades by default, and the re-introduction of combat squads.

And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in us
Confessor Of Sins




Deadnight wrote:
 Wolflord Patrick wrote:
So, hear me out... While I'm a huge 40k fan, my best times playing the game were in the 3rd through 5th editions of the game. I'd still gladly go back and play any of those today. Here's why I think the downward spiral started in 6th edition and why I think they're desperately trying to recover still from it.



Take off the rose tints Patrick.

The downward spiral began right after they decided to do a warhammer game, but in spaaaace back in thr 80s.

Everyone's 'best times' was when they started and the first couple of years in the hobby, whenever that was. and the ideal was just before then. There'll be folks who say 6th and 7th were the best, and folks that'll say 2nd. For me, I joined in 3rd, 4th was the edition I was most familiar with and to my mates who I played with, 2nd was the best to them, and everything since then was a disappointment.

The game back then was just as broken and frustrating as now, just in a different way.

And for all the doom regarding the doom spiral, the models have never been better, there have never been more ways of playing anf enjoying gw games, and *glances at share prices*, gw are doing well.

Edit: better phrases.


As much as I think 'downward sprial' is hogwash and 5th edition is the best is a circlejerk (half the comments about how great 5th was include the asterisk "so long as you ignore half the codexes in the edition" 6th and 7th were still objectively terrible. I started in 6th and still have 0 fond memories of either ruleset. 8th and 9th are head and shoulders above the dumpster fire that was 6th and 7th.

People on Dakka like to pretend that stuff like the current Admech codex can even compare to how busted 6th and 7th got but they forget that on release, Eldar could table all but 3 factions without losing a single MODEL in some cases.

2500pts
2500
3000


 
   
Made in us
Da Head Honcho Boss Grot




New Jersey, State of Perfection

 Vaktathi wrote:
I don't think there's any edition of 40k that doesn't have massive, glaring failures. As tabletop wargames, they're all pretty bad taken on just their rules, they're not anything anyone would play or really develop these days without GW's IP behind it, same way most RPG's these days look little like D&D and its painfully mechanistic paradigm.

Each edition has had major problems both with core rules and codexes, as well as power and scale bloat. For my own part, and not having played 9th, I think late 3rd/early 4th was among the best for flavor and expression of lore in the rules, 5th was probably all around the best "tournament" edition (in terms of reasonable army sizes, limited rules to memorize, broad if imperfect meta balance, etc), with mid 2019 pre-SM supplement 8th probably being the best overall balanced in a faction meta sense.


I admit 4th was my first real experiences with the game and my lack of familiarity with other rulesets at the time has likely significantly colored my perspective of how good the 40k ruleset was. I diversified into other rules beginning with 5th which is where I began to realize the poor quality of GWs game design in general, and possibly influenced my perception of 5th edition.

That being said, again, I thought 8th was great - not perfect, mind you, but a big improvement (though after the dumpster fire that 6th/7th was my perspective might be colored by having entered 8th with bargain basement expectations and being pleasantly surprised to find not just a serviceable ruleset, but one I actually enjoyed playing).

Again, have not played 9th, it seems to continue on the trajectory established by 8th with what seem to be solid improvements in some areas of the game design - but every now and again I see threads or posts along the lines of "9th is a failure" or whatever and I have to wonder if it isn't actually a step backwards.

This ain't no pansy GW Armor, son - Digital Sculpting Plog, Now with Heavy Weapon Platforms!
Sympathy for the Devil, or: The Project Log from Hell

Ma55ter_fett wrote:It reads like the ramblings of a Nigerian lobotomized Shakespeare typed into a cellphone with a very aggressive autocomplete function.
 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: