Switch Theme:

40k is at its worse point since 7th 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 us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





 Aenar wrote:
 AnomanderRake wrote:

I don't know if this is more of a shift in the playerbase rather than in the game, but I find in the past people were willing to fudge things or adjust for GW not bothering to fix things. Today people who play 40k will give me the spiel about how "at least GW's fixing things, this is the best 40k's ever been" and then in the next sentence tell me that if I don't want to get tabled in two turns I need to go buy different minis because all my stuff is terrible. GW's addressing the most egregious combos now, but the gap between good models and bad models is much wider than it's ever been before (so a "soft list" from a good army book will still casually table anything from a bad army book), GW's no more willing to fix the bad models.

Almost independent of anything GW does I want 40k players to stop telling me 9th is so much of an improvement. I'm glad you're having fun, but from where I'm sitting everything that's wrong with 9th is the exact same stuff that was wrong with 7th only worse. The "game is great as long as you buy a new army you don't like every six months!," "if you don't like GW maybe wargaming isn't the hobby for you?", and "real wargamers have fun getting two-turn tabled every turn, if you want to have a chance you obviously only care about winning" narratives I keep getting out of the 9e advocates are slowly strangling the community.

Amen to that.
I'd also add that most of those who keep repeating to themselves that 40K now is the best it has ever been have barely played anything pre 9th or pre 8th. Certainly not any of the older editions.
I welcome the attempts of fixing broken rules and balancing armies every 6 months via new point costs, but the end result (ie how fun the game is) is still lacking compared to the past. Even compared to the much hated 7th ed.


Yea, no. Been playing since 2nd. Got into the hobby through HeroQuest.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/29 19:29:33


   
Made in it
Focused Fire Warrior





 Tyran wrote:
 Aenar wrote:

Amen to that.
I'd also add that most of those who keep repeating to themselves that 40K now is the best it has ever been have barely played anything pre 9th or pre 8th. Certainly not any of the older editions.
I welcome the attempts of fixing broken rules and balancing armies every 6 months via new point costs, but the end result (ie how fun the game is) is still lacking compared to the past. Even compared to the much hated 7th ed.

That is extremely subjective. I had far more fun in 8th than I ever got in 7th, 6th or 5th.

I had some good fun in 8th (2019 pre SM 2.0 was a really great period, balance-wise and rules-wise pre PA bloat), but I still prefer older editions like 5th and 7th to some extent.
But we're talking about 9th now and it pales in comparison. Rules bloat, obsolete factions, terrible balance, slow release schedule.


 
   
Made in us
Sneaky Striking Scorpion




North Carolina

 Daedalus81 wrote:


And let's not get into what it costs to win with MtG.



That was probably true with a few years ago when Marine armies (which are almost always the most affordable way to go) were the hotness. Now that it's Admech, I don't think you can make an affordability argument if you want the best of the best in 40k. Then again, I haven't checked the prices of MTG singles in a few years, so maybe it's also gone insane. But we're at the point where an Admech player can basically expect to pay $1 per point, which is ludicrous.
   
Made in de
Dakka Veteran



Bamberg / Erlangen

I couldn't care less how GW phrases it or if they make a statement at all.

What counts is that there will be an errata tomorrow.

Imperial Guard Space Marines
 
   
Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut




Voss wrote:
Salt donkey wrote:

Yuk I agree with most of what you’ve said here, but I don’t think anything with the internal balance is broken beyond what it’s supposed to be. Maybe not everything went exactly as intended, but I’m now certain GW has mastered the art of making overpowered rules to sell models.


Given how often they fail to do so, even for their fabled poster-boys, the evidence is against you, I'm afraid. Primaris took multiple iterations to become functional, and that was the new face of the entire game, and the entire corporation. There are units that sit on painting/store shelves for multiple editions at a time because the rules are so bad and never get fixed.


GW is hit and miss, consistently. Sometimes things are too good, sometimes things are too awful. They fail at catching both, so the idea they've 'mastered' anything when it comes to entire rules process (from conception all the way to playtesting and final revisions) is clearly wrong.

Some of it is simply that their design process is entirely, utterly wrong: they start with models that have passed the approval process and then start designing rules (sometimes for every little trivial detail on the sprue), rather than creating models based on finished and tested rules.


You’re wrong on a key assumption here. GW doesn’t want to make new models OP. They want to make inventory clogging models OP. Why? Because new models sell regardless of their rules, whereas old models don’t.

People assume that GW want sell the maximum amount of the new stuff, but the reality is they want to sell out of the inventory they produce. The want to produce as much product as possible to sell, but GW’s level of production available is very limited for it’s size. the name of the game is produce a new model with rules that will cause it sell what GW can produce, but not anything greater than that “.

As an example for selling too much product look no further than the indomitus debacle as a time where GW sold much more than they wanted, Reasons for this include box set effect “more on this later”, video marketing,worse production than expected, and very effective FMO exploiting. However, there’s no doubt in mind that some of this extra sales came from the perceived-rules power level. I doubt even you disagree with me here. This incident could have gone much better for GW had they handled it better, and they likely lossed potential future gains by making the Indomitus rules worse. At least I doubt that wouldn’t have sold out had eradicators only gotten 1 shot instead of 2.

The weak primaris rules was them going too far the other way. However, I think the 8.5 release was in large part made to sell off a bunch of the non-primaris stuff that didn’t sell enough with the first books release. Who knows exactly, but you are assuming GW was unhappy with how primaris sold at first , and I’m not so sure it was that far behind expectations,

Which leads us to now. With the ork release we see them again shaping the environment to make the correct number of sales. The “box set effect” I was talking about early is that new box sets sell well unless the value perceived as very low (and GW didn’t know this until that terrible eldar, psychic awakening came out). That said GW Rarely gives more than 1 unit very good rules on each side in a given box set, We see this again with the current ork beastsnagga box, where only the squig riders are very good. However, you’ll notice that untie outside of the box tend to be priced to move (T-Rex, better battle wagon) and also that the last ork release models also got improved (to move off all the leftover orktober product).

This is a clear system, and it’s why GWs stock as risen so much recently.
   
Made in mx
Tunneling Trygon




Mexico

 Aenar wrote:

I had some good fun in 8th (2019 pre SM 2.0 was a really great period, balance-wise and rules-wise pre PA bloat), but I still prefer older editions like 5th and 7th to some extent.
But we're talking about 9th now and it pales in comparison. Rules bloat, obsolete factions, terrible balance, slow release schedule.

Yeah I don't see it, and at least when it comes to 9th's release schedule, while slower than 8th, is still far faster than 7th and earlier release schedules in which only Space Marines had a guaranteed release each edition.

When people say new GW is old GW with better marketing (which honestly, it is a big change considering how old GW had a stupid disdain for marketing), that also means the old editions have pretty much the same issues that 9th has, because GW hasn't become worse at writing rules, they just always have been kinda awful at it.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





 Gene St. Ealer wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:


And let's not get into what it costs to win with MtG.



That was probably true with a few years ago when Marine armies (which are almost always the most affordable way to go) were the hotness. Now that it's Admech, I don't think you can make an affordability argument if you want the best of the best in 40k. Then again, I haven't checked the prices of MTG singles in a few years, so maybe it's also gone insane. But we're at the point where an Admech player can basically expect to pay $1 per point, which is ludicrous.


Admech is sort of the exception that proves the rule, but that army will still be useful 10 years from now over the quarterly buy in for MtG.

I love Commander, but I am under no delusion that I will ever be able to play competitively simply because I won't spend $50+ for certain cards in decks that play in ways I find completely unfun.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/07/29 20:11:34


   
Made in us
Sneaky Striking Scorpion




North Carolina

 Daedalus81 wrote:
 Gene St. Ealer wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:


And let's not get into what it costs to win with MtG.



That was probably true with a few years ago when Marine armies (which are almost always the most affordable way to go) were the hotness. Now that it's Admech, I don't think you can make an affordability argument if you want the best of the best in 40k. Then again, I haven't checked the prices of MTG singles in a few years, so maybe it's also gone insane. But we're at the point where an Admech player can basically expect to pay $1 per point, which is ludicrous.


Admech is sort of the exception that proves the rule, but that army will still be useful 10 years from now over the quarterly buy in for MtG.

I love Commander, but I am under no delusion that I will ever be able to play competitively simply because I won't spend $50+ for certain cards in decks that play in ways I find completely unfun.



Yeah, I hear you. But kitchen table MtG is just as valid as beer and pretzels 40k, so those expensive cards don't have to go to waste (though yes, I know exactly what you mean and I couldn't stomach paying that much for cardboard either.)
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Tyran wrote:


When people say new GW is old GW with better marketing (which honestly, it is a big change considering how old GW had a stupid disdain for marketing), that also means the old editions have pretty much the same issues that 9th has, because GW hasn't become worse at writing rules, they just always have been kinda awful at it.


There's truth here. But I think the reason that GW looks worse these days is because the world has moved on, but GW largely hasn't. Back in the 90s and early 00s not updating your broken book releases in a timely fashion was more excusable. In 2021, we expect more because we have reason to expect more. There are probably people patting themselves on the back in GW HQ that it "only" took them 2 months to nerf the Ad Mech mess they released, but that's a snail's pace compared to the speed with which competitive gaming generally is now adjusted and balanced.

GW needs to either embrace more dynamic balancing, or it needs to put more effort into not releasing broken junk in the first place. Stuff like waiting a month for them to fix the Sisters codex to have Paragons not cost 240 points a model and ignore D1 weapons isn't good enough, nor is releasing the broken junk they did for DE and Ad Mech and then taking months to fix what was obvious to people within days was completely busted.

   
Made in us
Dark Eldar Arena Slave





 Gene St. Ealer wrote:
 Daedalus81 wrote:


And let's not get into what it costs to win with MtG.



That was probably true with a few years ago when Marine armies (which are almost always the most affordable way to go) were the hotness. Now that it's Admech, I don't think you can make an affordability argument if you want the best of the best in 40k. Then again, I haven't checked the prices of MTG singles in a few years, so maybe it's also gone insane. But we're at the point where an Admech player can basically expect to pay $1 per point, which is ludicrous.


MTG is hard to compare with as it has an insane range between the floor and ceiling. The floor can be as low as popping out to the store with your buddy and each buying a $15 starter deck (though these can be inconsistent, you will have a miserable time if you use the bad one versus the better one your friend got while playing waiting for the Peter Noone concert to start...). The ceiling easily gets into the 10s of thousands of dollars for eternal formats, if you can even find copies of some of the cards to buy.
   
Made in us
Reading a Book in the Tower of Prospero





Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!

 xeen wrote:

Bottom of the Warcom article:https://www.warhammer-community.com/2021/07/29/metawatch-how-the-mechanicus-and-sororitas-are-shaking-up-warhammer-40000-tiers-in-a-major-way/

"As a result, expect to see a FAQ release for Adeptus Mechanicus tomorrow dealing with some of the sharpest ends of their collective stick – in particular, large blocks of Skitarii troops and some of the interactions over-tuning Ironstrider Ballistari."

I know this is not the rule set etc.....but right here, this is why 40k is in a better place then all previous editions. In the past the meta would be dealing with this Admec crap for YEARS.

All the other stuff complained about on this thread, (power creep, certain armies being more competitive, etc.) has existed in every edition of 40k and I have played them all. The difference is now, sh** gets fixed, or at least there is an attempt to fix it. Could past editions have been better with this treatment? Probably. But that is not what existed and this right here is why 40k is in a better state than it ever has been. Is it perfect, no. But there is no other point in 40k history that I would prefer over the current state.

This is my just my opinion, take it or leave it.


I remember 40k back when Chaos SM had codex 3.5 (great codex btw) and I played regularly starting 5th edition.

I echo all of what xeen stated.

The absolute gripe with tournaments and competitive lists was the absolute lack of support from GW.

I'd take 9th edition, with the current support, over any edition and I say that having issues with how the game is played today.

6000
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!

4000

∞ Chaos Daemons and CSM


 
   
Made in us
Boosting Black Templar Biker






yukishiro1 wrote:
GW needs to either embrace more dynamic balancing, or it needs to put more effort into not releasing broken junk in the first place. Stuff like waiting a month for them to fix the Sisters codex to have Paragons not cost 240 points a model and ignore D1 weapons isn't good enough, nor is releasing the broken junk they did for DE and Ad Mech and then taking months to fix what was obvious to people within days was completely busted.


I most certainly agree. I prefer the preventative solution instead where they catch obvious typos and mistakes before the book is off to the presses. But considering how little they pay their designers I'd be surprised if they even pay for a copy editor.
   
Made in gb
Tunneling Trygon






Salt donkey wrote:
The Ad-mech codex was released on may 29th. It is now July 29th. You and I have different definitions of “timely” (and “effective” as well, drukhari are still at a >60% win rate). Imagine if it took 2 months for wizards of the coast to nerf a MTG deck with a 70% winrate in any competitive formate? Maybe you don’t play MTG, but I can tell you, pretty much no one would be praising WOTC when they did actually nerf the deck.


Two months is pretty quick when a fair chunk of that time can't generate useful data. Most people didn't start immediately winning tournaments with Lucius AdMech on May 29th. It can take time to assemble & paint up new lists, and many players have practice games to trial those lists before competitions! Some tournament formats don't even allow brand new books to be used until a few weeks after release, allowing players to have a chance to learn about them first. GW shouldn't really be accepting a bunch of game results from random folks playing TTS on May 30th. They need reliable data from organised events.

To be honest I'm glad GW waited a little while for fixes. Just because you think something is broken doesn't mean you know how much or how to fix it. Seeing the difference between a 55/60/65/70% win rate is an indication on how strong the nerf bat needs to swing. The alternative would be more kneejerk changes as we saw for the Commissar nerf a few years ago.

Seeing a wide range of results helps find if there is more than one issue to fix. They could have easily thrown out a nerf to Skitarii in mid-June and missed the Ironstrider issue completely. Piecemeal balances changes are even worse for the game than a slight delay.
   
Made in ca
Longtime Dakkanaut





 AnomanderRake wrote:


I don't know if this is more of a shift in the playerbase rather than in the game, but I find in the past people were willing to fudge things or adjust for GW not bothering to fix things.


In my experience, folks who play casually in houses or garages with friends do still put in hot fixes. I just had a conversation today about how my group allows Inquisitorial detachments and exception to breaking army purity rules, and just a few weeks ago, I mentioned that we also made Platoon Commanders HQ choices rather than elites in order to better fit the needs of the Imperial Faction in our map based campaign.

People who play competitively, or play with strangers, or play in neutral locations like gaming clubs may not have the options to do these things. That's not their fault- these folks don't really have the option of house-ruling.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

Today people who play 40k will give me the spiel about how "at least GW's fixing things, this is the best 40k's ever been"


I've given this response before, and when I have, I've done so under the assumption that the person I'm responding to belongs to the group I described above- they can't house-rule because of where they play or who they play with; in that context, this advice/ feedback is valid. If you've played for 30 years and never been able to house-rule, this IS a good time to be playing, because official fixes do come now, where they never did before.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

and then in the next sentence tell me that if I don't want to get tabled in two turns I need to go buy different minis because all my stuff is terrible.


This sucks man. I'm sorry folks said that to you- I see it as pretty bad advice/ feedback. Some of my go-to advice for people in those situations probably wouldn't feel any better- first thing I'd do is ask about underperforming units and comb the dex for any strats/ relics/ chapter tactics/ auras or psychic powers that could offset the most egregious weaknesses of the problem units. Of course, you'd have probably done that already too, so my advice still wouldn't be helpful. I'd ask about your choices of secondaries. Then I'd inquire about cover. Then I'd ask if you had the option of playing Crusade, which might offer other kinds of satisfaction than victory, and may also offer battle honours that can comensate for the weakness of underperforming units.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

GW's addressing the most egregious combos now, but the gap between good models and bad models is much wider than it's ever been before (so a "soft list" from a good army book will still casually table anything from a bad army book),


Maybe? But I'm not so sure. Using only 9th edition codices, pick two armies. For one army, make the best army that you can make at 25, 50, 100 and 150 PL. Then do it again for 500, 1000, 2000 and 3000 points. For the other army, make the worst. Then play them against each other.

Which game was most imbalanced? If a 2000 point battle feels worse than a 100 PL battle, might the problem be related to having to nickel and dime the cost of optimizing a unit via points rather than "Worst Edition Ever?" If an Incursion sized game with either points or PL feels better than its corresponding Strike Force game, might the default Strike Force game size be the problem and not Worst Edition Ever?

Now look, I know that can come across as someone telling you how to play, which is also not going to feel great. I'm really not trying to tell people how to play; I'm inquiring about how much of the current game they've actually played, and pointing out that if there are ways to play that they haven't tried yet which might be more satisfying, playing in those ways is the cheapest, most effort free way to solve the problem, because as your fellow gamer, and just all around compassionate dude, I just want you to be happy.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

GW's no more willing to fix the bad models.


Tend to agree here; the update fixes do try to be minimal. Fixing the problem with the least amount of change is the best solution, but sometimes in their efforts to achieve "the least amount of change" they do err on the side of not fixing the problem. The flipside is that if they did fix underperforming units by reworking them from the ground up, just as many people would be upset about how extreme the changes are.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

Almost independent of anything GW does I want 40k players to stop telling me 9th is so much of an improvement. I'm glad you're having fun, but from where I'm sitting everything that's wrong with 9th is the exact same stuff that was wrong with 7th only worse.


Well, okay. But how is that different than folks who are having fun being told by other players that they are wrong because it's the worst edition ever? We get just as sick of our beliefs and feelings being questioned or challenged, and just as many of us have been on the receiving end of hostile responses when things start to escalate. I believe that negative anti-GW opinions are more common in Dakka General than positive pro-GW opinions, and I feel like people who enjoy the game probably feel what you feel only more often because 80% of everything we read here is negative.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

The "game is great as long as you buy a new army you don't like every six months!,"


Again, this is terrible. I can recall seeing this comment made to illustrate a problem, but I can't recall ever seeing it expressed by someone who was saying it as genuine advice; that's not to say it hasn't happened. I've certainly never suggested this myself- I tend to suggest any alternative to chasing the meta.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

"if you don't like GW maybe wargaming isn't the hobby for you?",


I can't recall this either. Most people, if they were going to go this route, would say maybe 40k isn't for you. Many would list other games that might make you happier- they'd probably advise Bolt Action, X-Wing, Infinity... There's a list. The you get guys like me, who think you'd be happier if you were able to continue using the models and resources you've already invested in; we'd recommend Crusade, Apocalypse, Kill Team.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

and "real wargamers have fun getting two-turn tabled every turn, if you want to have a chance you obviously only care about winning" narratives I keep getting out of the 9e advocates are slowly strangling the community.


So first off, yeah, there are some people who escalate to win at all costs pretty quickly and pretty aggressively. I typically don't throw WAAC around until the discussion escalates, and even then I try to avoid it. But I do say stuff that might come across that way; as a Crusade player, I care far more about achieving agendas than winning, because that's the way the system encourages me to play. If I get tabled turn two, but a single unit of Repentia redeem themselves in the eyes of the Emperor, even though I've just suffered an embarrassing defeat, it's still going to feel like an awesome game, because one unit completed a quest they've been working on over multiple games.

If you don't have a 9th dex yet for your faction of choice, that's a problem. But it is an edition churn problem, not a 9th edition problem.

As for 9e advocates strangling the community, I think we need to discuss who you mean by "community" and unpack the statement a bit. The Warhammer 40k Community? The Dakka General Community? The Wargame Community?

I mean, if we hypothesize that the best way to support a community based on a game is to ensure that the game continues to be played, those who support 9th edition are doing a lot for the community. Sure, there are people who are still playing older editions that have completely boycotted GW. If they didn't have us satisfied folks to keep the game going, how long would they continue to play fifth ed oldhammer and post in Dakka 40k General?

Dakka itself would survive the demise of GW, because it's not exclusively a 40k or even GW forum. But this particular forum wouldn't be here without satisfied people spending money on the game. So how exactly are we bad for the community?

I get it- financial success =/= game integrity. But the dollars coming in have to mean that somebody, somewhere likes what's going on.


   
Made in us
Hacking Interventor





GW continues to financially succeed only because they've created this massive self-feeding ecosystem and setting they have a monopoly over, which allows them, barring truly catastrophic fuckups, to weather their own price increases and the half-assed rules created far too slowly by underpaid rules writers.

I know it's no small order, but what GW needs is some form of noteworthy competition that might lead them to bother to put out a quality product at a reasonable price in the first place; Instead, as what is often the only game in town, they could just dangle bat feces on a string and call it a codex knowing people will pay for it anyway, so you get undertested codexes with glaring errors and gamebreaking combos every couple months, and the prices will just keep going up.

It's why I keep advocating 3d printing and alternate rulesets - There needs to be a viable alternative to 40K, not necessarily to destroy GW, but in order to put pressure on them to make 40K itself actually worthy of your time and money.

"All you 40k people out there have managed to more or less do something that I did some time ago, and some of my friends did before me, and some of their friends did before them: When you saw the water getting gakky, you decided to, well, get out of the pool, rather than say 'I guess this is water now.'"

-Tex Talks Battletech on GW 
   
Made in gb
Executing Exarch






 CEO Kasen wrote:
GW continues to financially succeed only because they've created this massive self-feeding ecosystem and setting they have a monopoly over, which allows them, barring truly catastrophic fuckups, to weather their own price increases and the half-assed rules created far too slowly by underpaid rules writers.

I know it's no small order, but what GW needs is some form of noteworthy competition that might lead them to bother to put out a quality product at a reasonable price in the first place; Instead, as what is often the only game in town, they could just dangle bat feces on a string and call it a codex knowing people will pay for it anyway, so you get undertested codexes with glaring errors and gamebreaking combos every couple months, and the prices will just keep going up.

It's why I keep advocating 3d printing and alternate rulesets - There needs to be a viable alternative to 40K, not necessarily to destroy GW, but in order to put pressure on them to make 40K itself actually worthy of your time and money.


Well put. That's about the crux of the problem

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/772746.page#10378083 - My progress/failblog painting blog thingy

Eldar- 4436 pts


AngryAngel80 wrote:
I don't know, when I see awesome rules, I'm like " Baby, your rules looking so fine. Maybe I gotta add you to my first strike battalion eh ? "


 Eonfuzz wrote:


I would much rather everyone have a half ass than no ass.


"A warrior does not seek fame and honour. They come to him as he humbly follows his path"  
   
Made in us
Hacking Interventor





 Argive wrote:
 CEO Kasen wrote:
GW continues to financially succeed only because they've created this massive self-feeding ecosystem and setting they have a monopoly over, which allows them, barring truly catastrophic fuckups, to weather their own price increases and the half-assed rules created far too slowly by underpaid rules writers.

I know it's no small order, but what GW needs is some form of noteworthy competition that might lead them to bother to put out a quality product at a reasonable price in the first place; Instead, as what is often the only game in town, they could just dangle bat feces on a string and call it a codex knowing people will pay for it anyway, so you get undertested codexes with glaring errors and gamebreaking combos every couple months, and the prices will just keep going up.

It's why I keep advocating 3d printing and alternate rulesets - There needs to be a viable alternative to 40K, not necessarily to destroy GW, but in order to put pressure on them to make 40K itself actually worthy of your time and money.


Well put. That's about the crux of the problem


I love that despite our divergent political viewpoints, we can just come together and agree on "Screw these guys.*"

* For their own good and the health of the game, of course.

"All you 40k people out there have managed to more or less do something that I did some time ago, and some of my friends did before me, and some of their friends did before them: When you saw the water getting gakky, you decided to, well, get out of the pool, rather than say 'I guess this is water now.'"

-Tex Talks Battletech on GW 
   
Made in us
Tunneling Trygon




Mexico

I don't think 3d printing and alternate rulestets can put pressure on GW.

We need a comparable corporation that can compete by creating its own self-sustaining ecosystem with an unique IP. Basically that it is capable of beating GW at its own game.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/29 23:50:19


 
   
Made in us
Feldwebel





I've never had more fun in the last few years than pulling out my 5th ed rulebook with my friend and playing that again. It feels so much more genuine without all the bloat everywhere. Everything I need is in my codex and that's that.
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle






a_typical_hero wrote:
I couldn't care less how GW phrases it or if they make a statement at all.

What counts is that there will be an errata tomorrow.
Same here. We should be encouraging GW to do this more, not showing them that the playerbase will be unhappy even when they do fix things. Like, at least stop to say 'I am glad they are fixing this, but...' before leaping into paragraphs describing how they did it badly.

In before strawman response!

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/07/30 01:47:25


Road to Renown! It's like classic Path to Glory, but repaired, remastered, expanded! https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/778170.page

I chose an avatar I feel best represents the quality of my post history.
ERJAK wrote:
...probably has a some amount of Nazi memorabilia, has many concerning opinions about racial and cultural minorities, and/or likely refers to women as 'females'.
--Saying this about another member does not violate Dakka's Rule #1, apparently. 
   
Made in pl
Fixture of Dakka




 Tyran wrote:
I don't think 3d printing and alternate rulestets can put pressure on GW.

We need a comparable corporation that can compete by creating its own self-sustaining ecosystem with an unique IP. Basically that it is capable of beating GW at its own game.


In general, outside of war, the only thing that can bring a very big company down it its own structure. A ton of companies did it over time, often missing an important thing, they thought people wouldn't need or buy, or when they decided that people should really like something, but they don't.

Other companies won't kill GW. But if in 20 years people decide that they are interested in painting mostly, and not so much in to gaming, but GW decides to sell only pre paints, which are hard to paint over, it could kill the company.

Also player retention can be something that kills GW. If they keep it up there is no way, that my generation in 20-30 years is going to have the same number of players, painters, etc as the there are now among 30-40y old today. And there is a point, at which a 300$ for a box of 5 tacticals, maybe too much for even a 30+ year old to buy.

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
Longtime Dakkanaut





 kirotheavenger wrote:
What boggles my mind is every time you raise the price issue, people come down on you like "no! If you buy this boxset you save so much money, every character alone is worth £25!"
Just... urgh... that's not how value works


Well that is the real joke isn't it. They have inflated the prices so high they can rip you off in a box set for a monopose character or two and then make you think it's a deal only by comparing it to how over the top expensive all the other offerings have become. I'd say its quite clever if it wasn't so awful at the same time. I remember when characters were like 15 USD, now you are looking at 30 or more for generics and around the 50 mark for named or " strong " ones.
   
Made in pl
Fixture of Dakka




 Daedalus81 wrote:


Admech is sort of the exception that proves the rule, but that army will still be useful 10 years from now over the quarterly buy in for MtG.

I love Commander, but I am under no delusion that I will ever be able to play competitively simply because I won't spend $50+ for certain cards in decks that play in ways I find completely unfun.


A full set of cards from a new MtG set bought from china costs a lot less, then then 2000pts recast army though. You can easily cover a year of playing with an investment of 200-350$ per year. And there is unplayable or unusable cards in an entire regular set . On the other hand you can buy a regular GW army, even a recast one at 2/3 the price, but you can easily end up with a bad army for 700 plus dollars, and that is assuming a full recast army. If someone goes for an army which isn't recast or GW originals, even from second hand, the cost of an army become astronomically high. So it is not a very favorable comparation.

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 ie
Ruthless Rafkin





 CEO Kasen wrote:
GW continues to financially succeed only because they've created this massive self-feeding ecosystem and setting they have a monopoly over, which allows them, barring truly catastrophic fuckups, to weather their own price increases and the half-assed rules created far too slowly by underpaid rules writers.

I know it's no small order, but what GW needs is some form of noteworthy competition that might lead them to bother to put out a quality product at a reasonable price in the first place; Instead, as what is often the only game in town, they could just dangle bat feces on a string and call it a codex knowing people will pay for it anyway, so you get undertested codexes with glaring errors and gamebreaking combos every couple months, and the prices will just keep going up.

It's why I keep advocating 3d printing and alternate rulesets - There needs to be a viable alternative to 40K, not necessarily to destroy GW, but in order to put pressure on them to make 40K itself actually worthy of your time and money.


The problem is the fans as much as GW. You see it here all the time, people with the opinion that "I'm having my fun and thats all that matters". They don't want to hold GW to a higher standard even though it would improve their enjoyment of the game as well. It boggles the mind. Having GW fix it gakky practices would benefit them but because they're okay with being gouged and paying for broken at release codexes somehow theres no point in trying to fix it? Its like Stolkholm syndrome.


 
   
Made in us
Gore-Soaked Lunatic Witchhunter







PenitentJake wrote:
...As for 9e advocates strangling the community, I think we need to discuss who you mean by "community" and unpack the statement a bit. The Warhammer 40k Community? The Dakka General Community? The Wargame Community?...


Everyone. Dakka. People I know who play 40k. People I meet randomly at game stores. People I meet randomly on the Internet. I wouldn't be ranting about "the community" as a general phenomenon except that I have zero counterexamples; everyone I've spoken to about 9th is either giving me the same cookie-cutter spiel presuming I'm somehow not playing it right, or has quit. Even you, a perfectly pleasant person who's only trying to help, have in the course of your post told me that everything would be fine if I tried Crusade (it isn't; if I'm getting tabled in two turns because my models are terrible in matched play games I'm still getting tabled in two turns because my models are terrible in Crusade games, and the satisfaction of getting some minute advancement after getting tabled is really undercut by the fact that the people whose models aren't terrible are also getting advancements; yes, I have tried it) and that if I had a 9e Codex everything would be fine (which it wouldn't; the one army I used to own that got a 9e Codex (Deathwatch) got a pile of straight-up nerfs to things that didn't need nerfing and ended up more unplayable than if I'd just kept using their 8e book, which I can't, because that's not the Officially Sanctioned Way To Play The Game (TM) (R) (C)), presuming that if I were playing the game the way you are I'd be having fun. You're well-intentioned. Thank you for being that way. But we've had this argument a lot now and I don't think telling me that Crusade will solve all my problems again is going to make much difference.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/30 07:20:29


Balanced Game: Noun. A game in which all options and choices are worth using.
Homebrew oldhammer project: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/790996.page#10896267
Meridian: Necromunda-based 40k skirmish: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/795374.page 
   
Made in ch
Warped Arch Heretic of Chaos





 Sim-Life wrote:
 CEO Kasen wrote:
GW continues to financially succeed only because they've created this massive self-feeding ecosystem and setting they have a monopoly over, which allows them, barring truly catastrophic fuckups, to weather their own price increases and the half-assed rules created far too slowly by underpaid rules writers.

I know it's no small order, but what GW needs is some form of noteworthy competition that might lead them to bother to put out a quality product at a reasonable price in the first place; Instead, as what is often the only game in town, they could just dangle bat feces on a string and call it a codex knowing people will pay for it anyway, so you get undertested codexes with glaring errors and gamebreaking combos every couple months, and the prices will just keep going up.

It's why I keep advocating 3d printing and alternate rulesets - There needs to be a viable alternative to 40K, not necessarily to destroy GW, but in order to put pressure on them to make 40K itself actually worthy of your time and money.


The problem is the fans as much as GW. You see it here all the time, people with the opinion that "I'm having my fun and thats all that matters". They don't want to hold GW to a higher standard even though it would improve their enjoyment of the game as well. It boggles the mind. Having GW fix it gakky practices would benefit them but because they're okay with being gouged and paying for broken at release codexes somehow theres no point in trying to fix it? Its like Stolkholm syndrome.


As someone that was baited to return with the change of tune from 7th to 8th only for me to have my main army destroyed more or less, getting priced out and then getting sold 4 separate books for his faction (5) that still is there... yeah.
The harsh truth is, and the harder this hits the longer you have been partaking, that GW has adopted a videogame marketing stratgey, including all the bad practices, and cranked that to 11.

Meanwhile we hear how much GW has improved, in regards to rules, but it stands to reason that 8th and 9th only really improved due to streamlining any actual depth out of the game and that lead to bloating rules with how many releases at the end of 8th? Hell we even have now cut content being sold separately, as a form of DLC equivalent.

Also the quality aspect that people praise is just, not there, 2w csm are not there despite being an easy FAQ fix, GSC still are a army crippled by its own design despite it being able to be fixed with a half decent FAQ and CA. CA still costs money including the pts update manual, because monetising a balance patch is acceptable by and large seemngly for the community..
The recent crackdown on the fandom also just shows how completely monopolistic GW's behaviour and strategy is, especially since Warhammer + on that part of the Hobby, BUT GW HAS INCREASED PARTICIPATION..

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/07/30 07:57:10


https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page
A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

In the 41st millennium there is only overpriced hamberders.

 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




NE Ohio, USA

 AnomanderRake wrote:
PenitentJake wrote:
...As for 9e advocates strangling the community, I think we need to discuss who you mean by "community" and unpack the statement a bit. The Warhammer 40k Community? The Dakka General Community? The Wargame Community?...


Everyone. Dakka. People I know who play 40k. People I meet randomly at game stores. People I meet randomly on the Internet. I wouldn't be ranting about "the community" as a general phenomenon except that I have zero counterexamples; everyone I've spoken to about 9th is either giving me the same cookie-cutter spiel presuming I'm somehow not playing it right, or has quit. Even you, a perfectly pleasant person who's only trying to help, have in the course of your post told me that everything would be fine if I tried Crusade (it isn't; if I'm getting tabled in two turns because my models are terrible in matched play games I'm still getting tabled in two turns because my models are terrible in Crusade games, and the satisfaction of getting some minute advancement after getting tabled is really undercut by the fact that the people whose models aren't terrible are also getting advancements; yes, I have tried it) and that if I had a 9e Codex everything would be fine (which it wouldn't; the one army I used to own that got a 9e Codex (Deathwatch) got a pile of straight-up nerfs to things that didn't need nerfing and ended up more unplayable than if I'd just kept using their 8e book, which I can't, because that's not the Officially Sanctioned Way To Play The Game (TM) (R) (C)), presuming that if I were playing the game the way you are I'd be having fun. You're well-intentioned. Thank you for being that way. But we've had this argument a lot now and I don't think telling me that Crusade will solve all my problems again is going to make much difference.


So how do you want to play 40k?
What's stopping you and a few friends from simply getting together, making a list of changes, & applying them to your games?
   
Made in us
Gore-Soaked Lunatic Witchhunter







ccs wrote:
...So how do you want to play 40k?...


At this point the lowest-effort way to get a version of 40k that I'd want to play is probably patching xenos into 30k...

...What's stopping you and a few friends from simply getting together, making a list of changes, & applying them to your games?...


The fact that where I am it seems like the attitude of the 40k players is driving people who don't want to play tournament-standard 9th to quit wargaming entirely instead of trying to hack on the rules or play something else. Which is why I describe the attitude of the people who are playing tournament-standard 9th as "strangling the community".

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/30 07:57:33


Balanced Game: Noun. A game in which all options and choices are worth using.
Homebrew oldhammer project: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/790996.page#10896267
Meridian: Necromunda-based 40k skirmish: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/795374.page 
   
Made in gb
Ship's Officer





Bristol (UK)

 AnomanderRake wrote:

The fact that where I am it seems like the attitude of the 40k players is driving people who don't want to play tournament-standard 9th to quit wargaming entirely instead of trying to hack on the rules or play something else. Which is why I describe the attitude of the people who are playing tournament-standard 9th as "strangling the community".

I think this is very powerful, and reinforced by the community.
If someone says they're not a fan of 9th edition for whatever reason, I can't suggest houserules or old hammer because 9th ed fans will jump on me about how bad 7th was, or how great GW is now, etc etc.
They very much set the position of "9th edition is the best it can be", so people that don't like it figure their only option is to leave. I can't really complain, my Necromunda group is swelling from all the disillusioned 40k players

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/30 09:03:22


 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





That is all true and very much an issue I think there is no real answer for. People who love 9th will love it even if their core faction has 20 books with their rules in them, the models cost 200$ for new guard krieg box and 50% of a codex needs to be faqed day 1. That is obviously hyperbole for comedy sake but suffice to say GW can do little bad in some points of view.

In other points of view the game is broken and far from a great place for them to play. So no amount of real ground that can be had between these different view points.

I would say I had a lot of hope in 8th edition, but now I'm seeing a lot of the same things that made 7th bad, bloat, power creep, formations ( as armies of renown ) and add crazy prizes to the mix and over all this doesn't feel like a great time for me.

I'm glad others love it, but don't discount those who do not as I think really both views are valid based on what you want to tolerate or feel good with.
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: