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.

6th edition is great. 7th edition will be even better. Of course there is no balance whatsoever but 7th edition will transform the gaming scene into a true eye of terror where random wacky things happen on a daily basis.

I believe that if balance isn't possible, and the evidence from the last 20 years points me to thinking that it isn't for GW, the fun alternative is an anarchy of legal armies with hundreds of options. Sure people will get blown to bits and hard countered left and right, but atleast there's endless variations to the ways in which you can lose the game. There's nothing I have hated more in all my years playing GW games than stagnation.

That's why I'm very happy GW keeps releasing ridiculous mini-codices. Noone I know can even name off the top of their head how many legal armies there are in 40K right now, and when you add in dataslates and allies the combinations are in the hundreds. Once 7th edition finally without a shadow of a doubt legalises Forgeworld and all superheavies the evolution of the game is complete.

And to the guy who whined about tournaments only consisting of Tau, Eldar, Taudar and Necrons, there's never any more viable armies than that at the cutting edge. 7th edition will make a mess out of the current pecking order as well, since everyone else benefit a lot more from the inclusion of superheavies than Tau does.

 pretre wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
So happy that I haven't bought anything from them in 8 months or so.

The real downer has been some of the relentless negativity surrounding GW.

Welcome to the internet, where every single sports, gaming and politics forum is filled with relentless negativity.

themadlbb wrote:

 pretre wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
So happy that I haven't bought anything from them in 8 months or so.

Spoiler:

I love the pace of releases and all the new things coming out. The real downer has been some of the relentless negativity surrounding GW.

That's why I made this thread. For the longest time, the complaint around 40k was one of stagnation, repetitive gameplay, and lack of rules updates. I would never argue that GW is perfect, but they do seem to be actively giving the playerbase what we've said we wanted for years now. I can't help but be both ecstatic at this and simultaneously disappointed in the fans a little bit. As soon as GW releases something crazy and cool the discussion now turns immediately to how we can ban that thing, or else how to shame someone for bringing the best and coolest units in their army.

That's because new stuff costs money, and people have always bitched about power creep whether real or imagined. I agree with you fully because I remember the times when I was expecting a new SM codex and the most interesting things would be if an assault cannon had 3 shots or 4, and what the new librarian psychic powers were. That was about the level of forward movement the game had. The stagnation was pretty terrible and the battles were much less balanced than what we have now or will have in the future.

I played my first 40K tournament when I was 14 years old and my opponent's entire army consisted of Space Wolf Terminators with Assault Cannons & Cyclone Launchers, lead by one teleporting Terminator Librarian I can clearly remember just thinking how crazy in a fun way it was to get wiped out in one turn to some strange army, but I guess times were different

Martel732 wrote:
Even more unbalanced models is not what I, or anyone else in my play group, requested. The new releases are blatant money grabs with very little thought behind them.

What did you, or your group request then?

 pretre wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Even more unbalanced models is not what I, or anyone else in my play group, requested. The new releases are blatant money grabs with very little thought behind them.

Gamers have been clamoring for plastic titans for years. No one should be surprised if GW makes them. I can't wait for the rage when GW surprises us with some other long requested item like Plastic Sisters or a Thunderhawk. People will gak themselves with how angry it makes them that GW is forcing super heavy flyers or women on their games.

Especially if the flyer or the new Sisters are competitive. The more competitive GW makes them, the more people get angry. This is not what we requested!

I honestly think a lot of people request stagnation so that they wouldn't feel compelled to spend money, even though noone in reality is forcing them to. I can't see how a casual gamer would get angry if a new cheesy army enters the game, because his casual army is already curbstomped by the existing cheesy armies. What's the difference? So the only conclusion is that the angry people are those who intentionally built cheesy armies to curbstomp casual players, and now have to spend money to keep the habit going.

Martel732 wrote:
I'm not requesting stagnation. I'm requesting that the abomination of Eldar vs Nids not exist.

What's the abomination? I'm sure guys like jy2 win games with his Nids. You act like bad matchups are new to GW games. Armies are not equal in gaming terms. They never have been nor will they ever be.

Martel732 wrote:

 Therion wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
I'm not requesting stagnation. I'm requesting that the abomination of Eldar vs Nids not exist.

What's the abomination? I'm sure guys like jy2 win games with his Nids. You act like bad matchups are new to GW games. Armies are not equal in gaming terms. They never have been nor will they ever be.

Maybe I'm just sick of it after playing since 1995. You've just accepted it. I'm happy for you.

Well, being all delusional about the game we're playing doesn't benefit anyone. Honesty does. GW games are fun because of a wide variety of (sometimes hard to explain) reasons, and the fictional universe they created is very immersive and addictive. That said, the game isn't balanced and isn't designed for competitive play. If we nevertheless decide to try play it competitively, it would be good to understand what we're walking into. Every edition is (and has been) dominated by a handful of competitive builds and every other army in comparison to those is always utter trash.