Switch Theme:

State of 40k  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Poll
State of 40k
Awesome! Love the updates!
Good. Playing steady.
Still unbalanced but fun enough for occasional games.
Bad. No fun. To much cheese.
Sold all my armies.

View results
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
Wicked Warp Spider





 Crimson wrote:
Kaiyanwang wrote:

I am afraid you got it wrong. Is 42% of the players that find the game flawed. The middle is "Still unbalanced but fun enough for occasional games." It does not end well. Is the same pattern of 7th.
Eh. That has basically been my opinion on 40K for twenty years. I don't consider it being particularly negative, but merely being realistic about how well a game that contains both cretchin and knight titans can be balanced.

Is very possible you are irritatingly right.

Generic characters disappearing? Elite units of your army losing options and customizations? No longer finding that motivation to convert?
Your army could suffer Post-Chapterhouse Stress Disorder (PCSD)! If you think that your army is suffering one or more of the aforementioned symptoms, call us at 789-666-1982 for a quick diagnosis! 
   
Made in us
Scarred Ultramarine Tyrannic War Veteran




McCragge

 Kaiyanwang wrote:
 Primark G wrote:
 thekingofkings wrote:
 Primark G wrote:
It seems like the vocal minority are the ones complaining looking at the results of the poll. Also it is annoying to me when people casually suggest UGIG like it is super easy to implement right after the release of a new edition.


the results of the poll and reading the comments show that while even the ones with positive leanings still generally are not without complaint, primarily on terrain rules. on a pro-gw board 53% positive is still not stellar by any means.


13% is almost less than one in ten unhappy just saying.


I am afraid you got it wrong. Is 42% of the players that find the game flawed. The middle is "Still unbalanced but fun enough for occasional games." It does not end well. Is the same pattern of 7th.
Also, you accuse people of whining. Look at the short report of flamingkillamajig. That thing happened after a book that was supposed to be an improvement of gameplay.
I don't know you, but I could have had 10 times the people to play with if GW hired competent designers. Many people I played with just gave up. I did and still do for periods when the stupidity is off scale.
Is just that I enjoy other aspects of the hobby.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
 wuestenfux wrote:
Wayniac wrote:
really, they can also adjust things. If a unit is too good with Furious Charge, errata it to remove Furious Charge. Like, I much like the way PP balances Warmahordes, they will adjust a unit's stats (harder to do in 40k, granted) or remove or swap around rules on its card.

Seems like GW is hearing what the community says, whining inclusive.

The situation is not so much different with PP. In mk3, they crippled Cryx quite hard and then rolled back to some extent, see Asphyxious 2.

FTFY


I find you quite hilarious. Can you provide any evidence you can bring 10 times as many gamers?

Bow down to Guilliman for he is our new God Emperor!

Martel - "Custodes are terrible in 8th. Good luck with them. They take all the problems of marines and multiply them."

"Lol, classic martel. 'I know it was strong enough to podium in the biggest tournament in the world but I refuse to acknowledge space marines are good because I can't win with them and it can't possibly be ME'."

DakkaDakka is really the place where you need anti-tank guns to kill basic dudes, because anything less isn't durable enough. 
   
Made in dk
Regular Dakkanaut




As a WFB player who stopped at the end of 8ed, and who have now taken up w40k in its 8ed after a 20 year hiatus from w40k i can say that

1) WFB 8ed was far more strategic than w40k 8ed is, which surprised me because i’ve often seen more mature w40k players and more kids in the fantasy scene.

2) the CA was a absolutely fantastic improvement. The points increases to FW models was needed. IMO FW models should not be part of the official rules, the models take the battles to a scale they werent designed for.

3) army composition rules are ridiculous. While i like the command points, the detachment rules are too easily abused to spam.. even spamming characters. WFB had far superior rules, where certain percentages HAD to be taken from core/troop choices, and there were a max point allowance to characters, elites etc.

Not only did this make army lists more balanced, but also more fluffy. No army in w40k should be comprised entirely of assassins or psychers, for example.

4) psychis powers are a joke in W40k. From vastly imbalanced smite lists, to which there’s no defence for many armies bar a culexus assassin. A culexus is now always included in my army lists, because i am a huge opponent of list tailoring, and it is my only chance against smite lists. WFB 8ed had a great system and fun spells, the only problem being the vortexes (moving templates) that could kill half an army in a turn.

5) the aura rules for characters are a bit of a shame, since it incites players to create bubbles rather than spread their force out on the battlefield. Trying to outmaneuvering the opponent is punished by this mechanic.
   
Made in ca
Lord of the Fleet






Halifornia, Nova Scotia

Northern85Star wrote:

2) the CA was a absolutely fantastic improvement. The points increases to FW models was needed. IMO FW models should not be part of the official rules, the models take the battles to a scale they werent designed for.



Yeah, anybody buying FW (an official part of games workshop) should get fethed right! All those totally massive heavy mortars, flyers the same size as regular flyers, alternate tanks models the same size as regular tanks, and characters the same size as regular characters are totally designed for a completely different scale. Can you imagine playing a game where somebody brought a field artillery kit instead of a basilisk!? It would be madness, there's like a whole inch of difference in the size they take up on the battlefield! Completely different scale.

Mordian Iron Guard - Major Overhaul in Progress

+Spaceship Gaming Enthusiast+

Live near Halifax, NS? Ask me about our group, the Ordo Haligonias! 
   
Made in gb
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain





Earth

Northern85Star wrote:
As a WFB player who stopped at the end of 8ed, and who have now taken up w40k in its 8ed after a 20 year hiatus from w40k i can say that

1) WFB 8ed was far more strategic than w40k 8ed is, which surprised me because i’ve often seen more mature w40k players and more kids in the fantasy scene.

2) the CA was a absolutely fantastic improvement. The points increases to FW models was needed. IMO FW models should not be part of the official rules, the models take the battles to a scale they werent designed for.

3) army composition rules are ridiculous. While i like the command points, the detachment rules are too easily abused to spam.. even spamming characters. WFB had far superior rules, where certain percentages HAD to be taken from core/troop choices, and there were a max point allowance to characters, elites etc.

Not only did this make army lists more balanced, but also more fluffy. No army in w40k should be comprised entirely of assassins or psychers, for example.

4) psychis powers are a joke in W40k. From vastly imbalanced smite lists, to which there’s no defence for many armies bar a culexus assassin. A culexus is now always included in my army lists, because i am a huge opponent of list tailoring, and it is my only chance against smite lists. WFB 8ed had a great system and fun spells, the only problem being the vortexes (moving templates) that could kill half an army in a turn.

5) the aura rules for characters are a bit of a shame, since it incites players to create bubbles rather than spread their force out on the battlefield. Trying to outmaneuvering the opponent is punished by this mechanic.



1: yep WFB is still a vastly superior game to 40k and had they take. Most of that and turned it into 8th 40k we would have a much better game, with the exception of blocks of course.

2: you are wrong on every level here, chapter approved was not a good book at all, the points changes were almost universally bad, fw is made for normal 40k, a dread is still a dread, a sicarion is just a more expensive Predator etc. If your talking super heavies then again your wrong, the fw Ines got price hikes when they are almost the same as the gw ones and even have similar weapons and stats, bad balance.

3: agreed

4: they are not crap, it's just mortal wounds that are the problem, get rid of that mechanic and smite isn't as bad.

5: "end of deathstars" don't know about you, but my deathstars got better due to 8th, gw failed again.
   
Made in fi
Longtime Dakkanaut






 Formosa wrote:
Northern85Star wrote:
As a WFB player who stopped at the end of 8ed, and who have now taken up w40k in its 8ed after a 20 year hiatus from w40k i can say that

1) WFB 8ed was far more strategic than w40k 8ed is, which surprised me because i’ve often seen more mature w40k players and more kids in the fantasy scene.

2) the CA was a absolutely fantastic improvement. The points increases to FW models was needed. IMO FW models should not be part of the official rules, the models take the battles to a scale they werent designed for.

3) army composition rules are ridiculous. While i like the command points, the detachment rules are too easily abused to spam.. even spamming characters. WFB had far superior rules, where certain percentages HAD to be taken from core/troop choices, and there were a max point allowance to characters, elites etc.

Not only did this make army lists more balanced, but also more fluffy. No army in w40k should be comprised entirely of assassins or psychers, for example.

4) psychis powers are a joke in W40k. From vastly imbalanced smite lists, to which there’s no defence for many armies bar a culexus assassin. A culexus is now always included in my army lists, because i am a huge opponent of list tailoring, and it is my only chance against smite lists. WFB 8ed had a great system and fun spells, the only problem being the vortexes (moving templates) that could kill half an army in a turn.

5) the aura rules for characters are a bit of a shame, since it incites players to create bubbles rather than spread their force out on the battlefield. Trying to outmaneuvering the opponent is punished by this mechanic.



1: yep WFB is still a vastly superior game to 40k and had they take. Most of that and turned it into 8th 40k we would have a much better game, with the exception of blocks of course.

2: you are wrong on every level here, chapter approved was not a good book at all, the points changes were almost universally bad, fw is made for normal 40k, a dread is still a dread, a sicarion is just a more expensive Predator etc. If your talking super heavies then again your wrong, the fw Ines got price hikes when they are almost the same as the gw ones and even have similar weapons and stats, bad balance.

3: agreed

4: they are not crap, it's just mortal wounds that are the problem, get rid of that mechanic and smite isn't as bad.

5: "end of deathstars" don't know about you, but my deathstars got better due to 8th, gw failed again.


2. *sigh* Nice generalization there while going just as badly wrong there yourself. It is a good book, for what it is: it gives many Index armies something while they are waiting for their codexes, it gives plenty of interesting scenarios to play, it gives some rules changes official status and what not. Also, many points changes were good for the game, regardless of what you may wish to think while refusing to look at it in its broader context. Certainly it isn't the final say in balance-as-GW-understands-the-term, but it is in the right direction. Overpriced things went down (like Pred. autocannons, Plague Marines and what not) whereas some undercosted things received points hikes (Guard artillery, for instance) and since people are going to carry on screaming about how wrong those changes were or weren't, we'll see them hee and haw in the future too now that GW might actually care to do so. Still, not perfect, but good. Also interestingly, some inklings of terrain rules which can easily be extended to work with other terrain than named Sector Mechanicus pieces: infantry on factorylike terrain receives cover, other things too with 50 % obscured, being within 1" of Death World flora gives cover (which could just as well be applied to normal trees too) and so on and so on.

4. Mortal Wounds are fine, though Smite could do with some restrictions with smaller casters, yes. Then again, see below. Problems, when they arise in more competetive circles, come from the relative ease to get so many of them.

5. I highly doubt that, really. It is easier to deal with Death Stars now than it was before, especially with some mortal wounds available to almost every army. They work very well as a balancing factor against almost unkillable units.

#ConvertEverything blog with loyalist Death Guard in true and Epic scales. Also Titans and killer robots! C&C welcome.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/717557.page

Do you like narrative gaming? Ongoing Imp vs. PDF rebellion campaign reports here:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/786958.page

 
   
Made in us
Enigmatic Chaos Sorcerer




Tampa, FL

On the subject of mortal wounds, the issue is they made the same mistake as in AOS: Mortal wounds are so good you want to maximize them. It's been thought for a while that mortal wound spam (surprise surprise also Tzeentch in AOS) is ruining AOS, and they kept it in 40k and what a shock it's also a problem there. Turns out that not needing to roll to wound and automatically doing damage unless you get a FNP save is pretty damn strong.

- Wayne
Formerly WayneTheGame 
   
Made in us
Quick-fingered Warlord Moderatus




Is very possible you are irritatingly right.


I think Crimson is right. I've played since the tail end of the RT era, and there's never really been an edition that was truly "balanced". While I do think GW could do a better job (and for the most part feel like have improved lately), I also sometimes feel like 40k players are chasing after an ideal that doesn't really exist anywhere. For every time someone says "It should be more like game "B", game "B" is prefectly balanced!", there's someone else saying "Yeah, it's balanced until you use unit "x" or supplement "y".

Over all 8th was really well received by my local community, but it does seem like they dropped the ball with CA. Players in my area were already starting to get a little nervous leading up to CA, and the way GW handled it seems to have pushed a lot of them off the proverbial ledge. They didn't like the price, they didn't like a lot of the adjustments and also felt like the "extras" weren't really worth it. I think we would all have preferred something in the $20-25 range and just have updated FAQs and unit sheets. In some ways it surprises me that some of the local players are so mad - a lot of these folks played through 6/7 like champs. I guess this was just the last straw. lol

I'm still optimistic, but it does seem like GW can't get out of their own way at times ...

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/12/14 14:18:36


Edit: I just googled ablutions and apparently it does not including dropping a duece. I should have looked it up early sorry for any confusion. - Baldsmug

Psiensis on the "good old days":
"Kids these days...
... I invented the 6th Ed meta back in 3rd ed.
Wait, what were we talking about again? Did I ever tell you about the time I gave you five bees for a quarter? That's what you'd say in those days, "give me five bees for a quarter", is what you'd say in those days. And you'd go down to the D&D shop, with an onion in your belt, 'cause that was the style of the time. So there I was in the D&D shop..." 
   
Made in gb
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain





Earth

 Sherrypie wrote:
 Formosa wrote:
Northern85Star wrote:
As a WFB player who stopped at the end of 8ed, and who have now taken up w40k in its 8ed after a 20 year hiatus from w40k i can say that

1) WFB 8ed was far more strategic than w40k 8ed is, which surprised me because i’ve often seen more mature w40k players and more kids in the fantasy scene.

2) the CA was a absolutely fantastic improvement. The points increases to FW models was needed. IMO FW models should not be part of the official rules, the models take the battles to a scale they werent designed for.

3) army composition rules are ridiculous. While i like the command points, the detachment rules are too easily abused to spam.. even spamming characters. WFB had far superior rules, where certain percentages HAD to be taken from core/troop choices, and there were a max point allowance to characters, elites etc.

Not only did this make army lists more balanced, but also more fluffy. No army in w40k should be comprised entirely of assassins or psychers, for example.

4) psychis powers are a joke in W40k. From vastly imbalanced smite lists, to which there’s no defence for many armies bar a culexus assassin. A culexus is now always included in my army lists, because i am a huge opponent of list tailoring, and it is my only chance against smite lists. WFB 8ed had a great system and fun spells, the only problem being the vortexes (moving templates) that could kill half an army in a turn.

5) the aura rules for characters are a bit of a shame, since it incites players to create bubbles rather than spread their force out on the battlefield. Trying to outmaneuvering the opponent is punished by this mechanic.



1: yep WFB is still a vastly superior game to 40k and had they take. Most of that and turned it into 8th 40k we would have a much better game, with the exception of blocks of course.

2: you are wrong on every level here, chapter approved was not a good book at all, the points changes were almost universally bad, fw is made for normal 40k, a dread is still a dread, a sicarion is just a more expensive Predator etc. If your talking super heavies then again your wrong, the fw Ines got price hikes when they are almost the same as the gw ones and even have similar weapons and stats, bad balance.

3: agreed

4: they are not crap, it's just mortal wounds that are the problem, get rid of that mechanic and smite isn't as bad.

5: "end of deathstars" don't know about you, but my deathstars got better due to 8th, gw failed again.


2. *sigh* Nice generalization there while going just as badly wrong there yourself. It is a good book, for what it is: it gives many Index armies something while they are waiting for their codexes, it gives plenty of interesting scenarios to play, it gives some rules changes official status and what not. Also, many points changes were good for the game, regardless of what you may wish to think while refusing to look at it in its broader context. Certainly it isn't the final say in balance-as-GW-understands-the-term, but it is in the right direction. Overpriced things went down (like Pred. autocannons, Plague Marines and what not) whereas some undercosted things received points hikes (Guard artillery, for instance) and since people are going to carry on screaming about how wrong those changes were or weren't, we'll see them hee and haw in the future too now that GW might actually care to do so. Still, not perfect, but good. Also interestingly, some inklings of terrain rules which can easily be extended to work with other terrain than named Sector Mechanicus pieces: infantry on factorylike terrain receives cover, other things too with 50 % obscured, being within 1" of Death World flora gives cover (which could just as well be applied to normal trees too) and so on and so on.

4. Mortal Wounds are fine, though Smite could do with some restrictions with smaller casters, yes. Then again, see below. Problems, when they arise in more competetive circles, come from the relative ease to get so many of them.

5. I highly doubt that, really. It is easier to deal with Death Stars now than it was before, especially with some mortal wounds available to almost every army. They work very well as a balancing factor against almost unkillable units.


2: sigh all you like, my generalisation is in response to yours, but let's go over your point properly, it did not give index armies much, if anything worthwhile, necrons and tau got ignored, orks needed a hell of a lot more, there are a couple of interesting scenarios but on the whole most will never be played in mainstream games, many of the point changes were arbitrary while a few were needed, almost universally fw got the middle finger, and this is looking at the bigger picture, as personally 2 entire armies and another still being unplayable AFTER a supposed re ballance is painting a pretty big picture.

Underpriced things stayed underpriced, overpriced things also went up in cost, and casually dismissing people's annoyance that a product they paid for and was advertised as a balance update, was incompetent at best, is also wrong. As for terrain, my group has already dealt with that snafu from gw, they should have playtested properly and we would have actual terrain rules already, not "counts as" terrain rules as you suggest.

Most of what people care about in that book should have been a free PDF, instead we got a phoned in badly thought out book with balance changes that are laughable.

4: no mortal wounds are not fine, all or nothjng mechanics with no distinction for scaling is very very bad.

5: it's so easy to hide my multi buff characters, but rather than buffing one unit like before, now I buff all within 6", add to this that few armies can get enough mortal wounds onto those characters to actually dent them, character spam was an inevitable result, so deathstars are still around. And mortal wounds doesn't help balance it at all, because it doesn't scale and not everyone has enough access to cheap smite spam to curb these Death Stars,
   
Made in ca
Fresh-Faced New User




Where's the "Still Unbalanced, but Good, Playing Steady" option?
   
Made in us
Wicked Warp Spider





 Primark G wrote:

I find you quite hilarious. Can you provide any evidence you can bring 10 times as many gamers?

I find you not, contempt does not make me cheerful.
In your endless quest for shilling, you completely missed my point. You are reading the poll with an optimism that is almost surreal. That was the point.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/12/16 01:08:12


Generic characters disappearing? Elite units of your army losing options and customizations? No longer finding that motivation to convert?
Your army could suffer Post-Chapterhouse Stress Disorder (PCSD)! If you think that your army is suffering one or more of the aforementioned symptoms, call us at 789-666-1982 for a quick diagnosis! 
   
Made in ca
Junior Officer with Laspistol





London, Ontario

I don't think the optimism is unfounded.

Only 13% of those polled, in a place where the salt runs like a river, are getting out of the game. 87% of people that answered the poll are at least "OK" with it. I think if you polled the satisfaction with 7th, even now that the rose-tint is coming out of the glasses, you'd find many people are simply enjoying the game more.

I'm one of them. I'm not thrilled with 40k. I play Guard, and having to go outside the game to balance it for myself and my opponents isn't that great. [10% points disadvantage is a good start.]

I couldn't stand playing 7th any more. I'd quit playing, and was actively considering selling my models. 8th rolled in and while I'm not in love with it, I don't HATE it, either. I like it enough that while I bought the Index, I'm not planning on buying the Codex. I don't need it, for the few games I play now.

For me, the biggest issue was that 7th killed my interest, and mostly my friends' interest in 40k. We've found other systems, other games that we're more interested in. If 8th was just 7th edition version 2.0, I would have sold off my non-Guard army [Blood Angels]. I'll hold onto the Guardsmen forever, if only has a keepsake.

I'm not very interested in buying more Guard models, so obviously I'm not GW's target customer. I'm somewhat interested in buying some more Scions. I like them well enough. I am also interested in getting a Manticore, as I never got around to it and I enjoy the model / rules for it. I don't think I'd buy it at list price though. I'd need to see a hefty discount to open my wallet. Again, not GW's ideal customer.

I bought the Rulebook, and I bought the Index. I don't feel ripped off by those, though the Rulebook was kind of a joke.

At this point, I can make the game fun with a simple tweak. I've just got other interests now that are more exciting and fun.
   
Made in us
Shas'la with Pulse Carbine





Florida

Sgt. Cortez wrote:
 D6Damager wrote:

If balance is what you are looking for in a war game, you won't find it in any of Games Workshop's offerings.


Yes you will in lotr.


Disagree. Iron Hills and Rivendell Knights lists have been dominating for some time now. Easterlings are considered a "joke" army for competitive play etc. etc.

I play:
40K: Daemons, Tau
AoS: Blades of Khorne, Disciples of Tzeentch
Warmachine: Convergence of Cyriss
Infinity: Haqqislam, Tohaa
Malifaux: Bayou
Star Wars Legion: Republic & Separatists
MESBG: Far Harad, Misty Mountains 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: