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.

marielle wrote:Keep it coming guys, this thread is pure comedy gold.

Indeed.

Q: How would you react to a foreign occupation?
A: I'd complain loudly on the internet. Maybe sign an online petition.

I don't see the issue. Assaulting was somewhat overpowered in 5ed. Plus, it's not THAT much worse now. Even charging a squad of 20 shoota boyz (which was an example someone gave here) isn't THAT dangerous. Hitting on 6s makes that, what, 6,6 hits? My math-fu is terrible so that's probably wrong, but it's not WAY off. 6 hits with str 4 is usually 3 wounds. On MEQ, that translates into maybe 1 wound if you're unlucky.

And random charges, meh. It's not that bad. You'll average out half an inch further than 5ed. Sure SOMETIMES you'll fall short, but just walk closer if you're scared.

This comes from someone who JUST finished a wysiwyg 2000p assaulty blood angels list a week before 6ed came out. What kinda got to me personally was the nerfing of FNP, but even that won't stop me playing the army. It's still a fun game.

Personally I think the new stand and shoot rule is great. Makes it much more realistic for a squad of guys to shoot at a bunch of wackos charging across an open field to attack with hand weapons. Just watch any war movie and the new rule makes sense. Guys arnt gonna sit there acting all shocked and in awe while they get charged.

As far as the rest of the rules go, I'm indifferent. It's the same old really, and I've been in this hobby for 16 years or so now. Rules change and go back to the same, or stay the same.

The only thing I'm concerned about is allies. I think it's s great idea to allow people to buy specific units they like and in a way, it can cut down costs so you don't need to buy a whole force to use a couple units you like. My concern comes with game imbalance. Tau can now be shooty and assaulty. Orks can now get good shooty units. Grey knights can overcome numbers problem and throw in some guard. Although it makes the game much more interesting, I think certain weaknesses in forces no longer matter. It makes the game much more open ended to people who wanna play for fun and still win some games, and Waac or tourney players can build some nasty lists. For me though, I prefer to face one enemy on a board when facing one player.

This could be way off, but a part of me wonders if they implemented allies to perhaps take away stress from writing new codecs to be balanced? Who cares if the players like it or not or if one unit or several get nerfed....just take allies and you make up for a bad codex.

Just my two cents. For what it's worth.

EPIC-NEW-EDITION-WHINE-DETECTOR-INITIATED

Can I haz your stuffs?

The game changes; live with it. Noone knows exactly how 6th ed. will play and won't until it's been extrensively tested.

I only read the first few posts; after that my whinometer went crazy.

I literally lol'd at someone moaning that their all paladin list is now broken... The whole concept of that netlist was based upon one abuse of a rule. I for one am extremely glad GW have amended the abuse of wound allocation.

For those who have played a long time, this happens every edition. Things change, meta changes and people go on.

People should not be surprised their FOTM army is suddenly not the face-eating monster it used to be.

The internet has been fantastic for developing painting and modelling. FOTM netlists, and hearing unsupported whining about how your broken list is suddenly unbroken is, however, a big price to pay.

Here's my advice: Play a few games, amend your armies, sell stuff you don't like and if you still don't like the rules, play 5th edition. Easy.

Eiríkr wrote:GW are a company.

What do companies do? Make money, lots of money, especially for shareholders and execs.

Enjoy the ride and play. Don't enjoy it anymore? Then step off the ride and find something else to do.

Well derr. I'm not sure why you feel the need to say this, it's not like people are oblivious to the fact they can quit. I've been gaming GW games for about 16 years and still know a lot of the people I gamed with back in the day and only a couple are still playing, and I myself rarely actually game any more.

The problem is, it's not an on/off switch for most people. People just don't pack up and say "well it's not fun any more, I quit". People can still enjoy the hobby but be frustrated at the moves GW makes. Personally I still love almost all the GW models and despite rarely gaming still buy and paint models and don't really get involved in the gaming aspect... but that doesn't mean I don't pay attention to it and aren't frustrated by it at times. Unfortunately 40k has fluff and armies that I'm really interested in, over the years I've collected about 6 different 40k armies yet have probably only played a dozen actual games since 3rd edition, each edition hoping GW will fix their friggin slowed moves and make 40k (from a gameplay perspective) entertaining again.

Comments like "If you don't enjoy it don't play" are obvious and about as useful as "the sky is falling" comments. The world is not black and white, this is a discussion forum, if you don't like the discussion you can always leave and find another thread more to your liking

Since this is the complaining thread, ill make my complaint about GW. dont worry though, ill back up my arguments and ill skip the super obvious ones (like cost increases in the last 10 years)

My biggest complaint with GW is an unawareness of their majority player base. If you think about the individuals who play WH40k it really breaks down into 3 groups, that can spill over: the tournament group, the local hobby store group/official GW store group, and the people who play at home with their buddies.

The Tournament group is a no hold barred, take full advantage of rules and lists to win. This is a competitive world where you are expected to abuse your options to do well. People see crazy annoying armies and dont complain, because thier army is just as crazy and they are expecting it.

The local store group is generally more friendly, there is nothing really on the line during their games except pride, and the biggest issue they face is that they dont always know whos gonna set up on the table across from them.

The friend/home group (I generally fit in here, though i do local store sometimes) is generally a more fluffy, fun group where your playing with friends and usually those friendships are more important than dropping 3 flyers on the table against an orc army (or someone else without skyfire options)

The problem that GW really has not done anything to address is that they need to build their game to cater to all three groups. Now the friend/home group is generally pretty safe, your not gonna see much list/rules abuse their and they tend to go with the flow. alot of those people collect armies based on what they like and the concept of money is power does not come into effect much here (the money is power idea is that i have a pretty good surplus income so i could build pretty much the strongest army i wanted and roll some 15 year old who cant even afford to pick up transports for all his troops).

So basically the problem is tourneys vs local store gaming. The fact that certian builds are so much stronger than others makes it problematic for people like me who need the local store to provide opponents, but dont really want to face off against some triple land raider triple flyer list. its just not fun for the weaker army and the chance of winning is painfully slim.

An example would be me and my friend who were fooling around at the local store doing a 1000pts battle w/ my DE against his black templar. we were having fun and some dude comes in and asks to play. Were totally cool with it but dont have a ton of models with us so we ask for 2v1 at 2000 points, with each of us having 1000pts. Both our armies are assulty oriented with him being mostly foot slogging melee guys and me being a wych/raider army. we tell this dude that we just play for fun and we would rather he played a list that was good, but more for fun than anything else. he seems agreeable, but then puts down 2 stormravens, 3 land raiders(w/ termies), 2 5 man tac squads and i think his name is mephiston (the blood angels dude). there was a few other things but it was a 100% legal list. The problem was that it was something id expect to see at a tournament, not something just for fun. my buddy and i are pretty laid back so we go with it. Long story short we got tabled. just crushed. We killed like a land raider, a marine squad and maybe one other thing. thats it. we just couldnt compete.

The point of that story is this: his army was totally cool, and totally fine, and probably around 400 bucks. it was a list that maximized the strengths of his codex while our list (now mind you we both come from 3rd edition and remember a time when SC did not exist/were very much frowned upon) was for fun, and fluffy. i love my wyches, but they dont stand a chance against alot of armies without flyer support or various other DE junk. But i dont want to take those things because its not fluffy.

Now both fluffy lists and tournament lists have a place in the game but when the majority of players are in a situation where they are playing against a stranger, and have no idea if the opponent understands the game is for fun or if the guy just wants to win the vast disparity GW has created in army strenght really comes out.

Im not saying the GW way is totally wrong, there should be a competitive scene in warhammer but it should not create situations where armies just cant deal with certian threats. Back in the good old day (before flyers) every army could put out an answer to any problem. yea, there were still horrible match ups, but generally all lists could answer all threats in some way. Nowadays it seems that is no longer the case. my wyches cant stop flyers. they quite simply have 0% chance of winning. same with termie heavy armies now. Yea, i can still lance them to death but i have zero way to stop them in cc anymore beyond huge attack dice and hoping for failed saves. yet i play a 100% cc oriented army.

Every codex has multiple ways to play thier army that are hugely different. every army can field pretty serious shooting, and most can field strong cc and the ones that cant tend to have good kiting alternatives. However alot of those variant army lists are dying out now and its leaving us with really one way to play each codex which for those of us who like themed armies that fit our personality, thats really sad.

Examples of this would be...DE cc is pretty much dead due to overwatch and wwp nerfs (and dont say overwatch only kills 2-3 wyches, when you only got 10 in each transport 2-3 is a huge blow to cc power). Tau kiting is pretty much dead due to flyers and flying MCs. vanilla marines cant cc or shoot better than any of their offshoot codexes, so you might as well use those.

I could go on but the TLDR is basically that new rules and new allies and flyers is making the gap between strong codexes and weak codexes so huge that the possibility of those players who play for fun to have a good game is going way, way down and that ruins the game for people like me. Yea, i can shrug off a loss, and if i get my butt kicked im ok with it as long as the game was epic and felt cool but going against armies that i cannot touch in cc or shooting is just depressing.

Frozen Ocean wrote:I was pointing out that, while the extremes exist, the people of this thread are not part of it. Legitimate complaints can exist without the general response being "play something else".

The problem that comes in for me is the phrase "legitimate complaints". Anyone who has played this game for a while knows that a new edition comes out and everything changes. It has *always* been that way. GW has never been a company that improves and fixes its rules. They instead change them to remove problems, introducing new problems instead. The only difference is who is complaining the loudest about the changes in a new version. This is how GW does things and has done things for a long time. People complaining about how GW doesn't care about them need to get over it. GW showed that a long time ago, and to still be here expecting to be different and complaining that it isn't is just pointless. If this is the first time someone has dealt with a version change then their complaints a bit more valid to me. If the complaint comes from someone who has been playing since 3rd edition I just don't care. It is no different than being in an abusive romantic relationship and you keep telling yourself that things will change and get better. It isn't a matter of be a fan boy or get out. It is a matter of be a smart consumer. Hate the company and the way they continue to do business over the last decade plus of years? Then stop giving them your business. What will likely happen, though, is the same usual passive aggressive patterns: GW screwed me over with the new edition again and my army is useless. Guess I'll go out and buy a new army to play instead. Yeah that is a brilliant solution right there. Reward the company that just angered you greatly by buying an entirely new army from them...

I expect GW to provide me with a game and the minis to play that game with for my dollars. That is exactly what I get. I never build my armies based on what is hard hitting and rockin' in the rules. I build my armies based on interest in the minis and the story behind the army. So drastic changes to the rules don't change my armies at all because the reasons I chose to play them in the first place are still completely valid despite a change to the rules and I will still have just as much fun. I have little sympathy for folks who are only about the rules and winning at all costs being upset when the constraints for winning at all costs changes. Don't focus on winning and the "perfect" army and you can be just as laid back and unbothered by a new edition as I am. I play with supposedly "useless" units all the time and still have fun playing the game when I do.

I have to say as I read through the 6th edition rulebook that I continue to be pleasantly surprised that the rules are well spelled out and detailed. That is a first for a version of 40k in my lifetime, and I've been playing since Rogue Trader. 6th edition isn't perfect by any means, but I given GW's past methods my expectations have been fulfilled. I know what I would have *liked* to see, but what we got is more what I *expected* to see.

Skriker

Frozen Ocean wrote:Yes, there are. Your earlier comment - about this thread being 'pure comedy gold' - indicates that you are disregarding those who are complaining as the latter extreme, that they are whining about 6E simply because it is 6E. Your post also added absolutely nothing to the thread, save to deride those people.

I was pointing out that, while the extremes exist, the people of this thread are not part of it. Legitimate complaints can exist without the general response being "play something else".

EDIT: "it" referring to the "hate new things because they're new" category.

I'm not disregarding anybody. What makes it comedy gold is that the memes they espouse can be demonstrated as fallacious with minimal amounts of research.

Demonstrate, then. Don't just post something that implies "You are all fools! Hahaha!". Demonstrate your point - with minimal amounts of research - if you do, in fact, have a point.

It would be nice to see "My Ork list is totally crap now, bla bla" that isn't followed by "lol don't play Orks then, durrr". While the person (in this example) who is complaining about their Orks isn't reacting maybe how they should, it doesn't call for so much of the feedback to be "suck it up".

I'm not agreeing with all the statements made here. I don't agree that GW added flyers or allies to force people to spend more money. Even if I did, I still wouldn't really care. The issue I see here is far too many responses being crude and unhelpful, even downright derisive.

Maybe it's because I'm a forum admin, I don't know, but this is not how discussions are done.

Adapt to the new rules changes with your army, start a different army, play an older, or tweaked (Houseruled) version of the rules, or stop playing. These are really your only options.

Everyone has had to do this. Adapt or die off. It is the natural way.

Rules changes can hurt, you can either run from it, or learn from it.

Frozen Ocean wrote:Maybe it's because I'm a forum admin, I don't know, but this is not how discussions are done.

I don't know what internet you are a forum admin on, but this is pretty much standard activity for most computer based forums I've been a part of the since the days of BBSs and Usenet all the way to where we are now. Anonymity breeds contempt and rudeness. People say things they'd be afraid to say to others face to face. Of course the internet does not have a monopoly on the "I'm right and I know it and if you don't you suck!" approach either. Some people are just jerks plain and simple.

Real discussions involve back and forth, respect and understanding. I would hazard to say that most internet forum communication does not fall into the category of "real discussions".

Skriker

I have quit. If people don't want to hear a complaint, don't read a complaint thread. If you don't have something to contribute to the thread, don't contribute.
You are quite right there DeathReaper, if you can't beat em join em, and if you don't want to join them then you have to give it up. My circumstances are some what unfortunate in regards to your suggestions though. If I go to my local gaming store I have to play 6th Ed, if I go to my local gaming club they don't play 40k any more, the only other one who does is TFG. And with my mates all having quit 40k an edition back I have no other alternatives. All in all I am still thankful for the time I have had with it and I don't regret (well not all of it) the time, money and effort I have put into it. Though I still must say GW is going to go under sooner or later, it has a shrinking fan base, to compensate for that it increases it's prices, causing a rapider shrink, so on and so on.

Eldarain wrote:Find likeminded people and play the edition that brings you all the most joy. We still play a slightly tweaked form of 2nd.

That's the best advice. I'll repeat my oft-stated suggestion that it's time for a website, Facebook page or the like where people who prefer earlier editions and earlier codices, and aren't plastic-crack addicts or brain-dead GW fanboys, can connect. I'm not much of a website designer or I'd try doing one myself. Or maybe I'll do one anyway . . . .

Games are fun if you make them so. A lot of your fun / bad time, comes from your outlook going into it.

I am personally trying to figure out the new rules and how to enjoy them. I personally loved 5th editions get up the table and get into your opponents type of play (and I used Eldar of all things). What sucks for me is that I just spent the last 6 months buying and painted a GK army.

But hey I'll figure out how to have fun with it or wind up assembling and painting the rest of my Khador.

"Nothing endures but change" - Heraclitus.

Whether it's this silly game we play or the restaurant on the corner taking your favorite meal off of the menu...

The unfortunate thing is that, for the most part, we can't control the shifting sands that we try to stand upon. However, we generally can control our interaction with it.

For some, change is almost unbearable. They wear the same shirt, eat the same food and take the same path to work each day; never bothering to explore outside of their own world.

For others, change is an exiting part of life that adds spice and depth.

I'm not making a value judgement on which camp you fall into. If it's the former, then perhaps sticking with 5th Ed rules for the foreseeable future might be the best bet. If the latter, then embrace 6 and see what happens. At the end of the day, GW moves so slow that a move to 6 now will pretty much guarantee YEARS of working in the new rule system.

clively wrote:"Nothing endures but change" - Heraclitus.

Whether it's this silly game we play or the restaurant on the corner taking your favorite meal off of the menu...

The unfortunate thing is that, for the most part, we can't control the shifting sands that we try to stand upon. However, we generally can control our interaction with it.

For some, change is almost unbearable. They wear the same shirt, eat the same food and take the same path to work each day; never bothering to explore outside of their own world.

For others, change is an exiting part of life that adds spice and depth.

I'm not making a value judgement on which camp you fall into. If it's the former, then perhaps sticking with 5th Ed rules for the foreseeable future might be the best bet. If the latter, then embrace 6 and see what happens. At the end of the day, GW moves so slow that a move to 6 now will pretty much guarantee YEARS of working in the new rule system.

Amen.

Yes, 6th invalidated alot of armies, and I'm not talking about minor shake ups but full scape butt-b***-raping.
It's probably time for them to put the game aside, or at least take a break for a while.
There are many fishes in the sea, cliched I know, and not matter what we have move forward.

Whether that means, rewriting lists for 6th, continuing to play 5th, or jumping ship to another hobby, the choice is yours, and only yours.
I with all of you a bright and hopeful future.

clively wrote:For some, change is almost unbearable. They wear the same shirt, eat the same food and take the same path to work each day; never bothering to explore outside of their own world.

For others, change is an exiting part of life that adds spice and depth.

It's not really that simple though and again is not black and white like that. I'm not adverse to change when that change is indifferent to me or I see it as an improvement. The problem comes when that change is for the negative or remove aspects I previously enjoyed. That's why, after all these years, I STILL hate the AP system for armour because I think it's moronic and inherently unbalanced. I STILL hate the fact they decided to remove guess range weapons because for me it was always fun to see how close I could get my mortar shells to where I wanted them.

I don't hate change, but I do dislike change for no reason and especially when that change is a negative (and a negative would be reducing the usefulness of troops I spent hundreds of dollars buying and hundreds of hours painting).

At the moment I'm pretty indifferent to 6th edition, it has some changes I like and some I don't, though I've felt 40k has been pretty generic and not nearly as entertaining for several editions now anyway.

"GW Fatigue" is a good title for this thread. It's not hating change or whining for the sake of whining, rather it's getting tired of the more frustrating aspects of GW games and their approach.

Doesn't this happen with EVERY edition? I well remember change from 4th to 5th, many balance changes were big - lots of people declared ragequit because of True LOS, Sweeping advance and whatnot.

Backfire wrote:Doesn't this happen with EVERY edition? I well remember change from 4th to 5th, many balance changes were big - lots of people declared ragequit because of True LOS, Sweeping advance and whatnot.

This happens in pretty much every tabletop wargame and pen and paper RPG when they change editions. I have adapted and look forward to new opportunities for building new lists outside the norm of what was 5th Edition.

Of course, I myself ragequit MtG when they changed to 6th Edition, so maybe I am not one to criticize

Funnily enough, lots of time you see people holding MtG as some sort of paragon how GW should run things. I always get a good laugh out of it.

I'm amazed at how anyone could hate 6th without having already quit over 5th. It's a vast improvement in pretty much every way.

Testify wrote:I'm amazed at how anyone could hate 6th without having already quit over 5th. It's a vast improvement in pretty much every way.

It seems to me the people that are quitting are the ones who made their lists very specific in build and now they no longer function as they did, most of these players seem to have only purchased the models for that build and as such can't experiment or come up with new things, so they quit. Example being all the WWP Wyche armies popping up on Ebay, I mean you could put them in Raiders and they have a 14"-24" first turn assault range.

Testify wrote:I'm amazed at how anyone could hate 6th without having already quit over 5th. It's a vast improvement in pretty much every way.

Like I said earlier in the thread, I've been disappointed since 3rd edition Gimme back my save modifiers, S4 Chainswords that gave -1 save modifier, S8 Lightning Claws, auto-wounding Thunder Hammers, movement characteristics, etc etc. It's the models and interesting armies that keep me collecting. If I could find a local group of people still playing 2nd edition I'd join up.

These days I play a lot more Flames of War than 40k, but still buy and collect GW armies/minis because I like them. I have to say that the more I read 6th edition, the more I am inclined to get back to more 40k game play. The rules are clearer and more specific which should remove a lot of the arguements that used to dominate 5th edition games. In 5th edition I felt like many of the games I was fighting more against the rules than my opponent and that got boring after a while.

I am looking forward to playing some more 40k.

It is definitely all about expectations and expecting GW to do something completely different from how they have done them for ages now is just going to lead to disappointment.

Skriker

My 2c:

GW as 'money-whores': they only make 6million pounds a year, less than what the average American CEO receives in yearly bonuses (well they receive 10million so about the same), and sell roughly 1-4million boxes of minis (depending what the average price is) annually.

Unlike every single other wargames manufacturer, they have stores to get you into the hobby (many people 'start when GW was good then moved on', what if there were only these online companies? Wargaming is small enough as it is), at least they're trying to control costs here.

The minis aren't all that expensive compared to other hobbies either; Warmahordes is roughly the same yet they produce extra products like GW without a local presence; Infinity only produce models and rules (not even designing a rulebook to be published) which is how they can keep it in the price range of about $100 for an army (yet having a lot of customisability which is very deceptive) as their games are designed to be played small (think if W40k was based around 500 points instead, probably about $50 for it with as much customisability as infinity).

GW are also issuing more dividends than they are making profit when I glanced at their financial statements, anyone would tell you this is indicative of a sinking ship but I'd have to look deeper to know for certain.

GW and price gouging; lots do it to us, but the price is absurd and I go around it (illegally) so I don't talk about it.

If i'm going to another hobby; Infinity I love the rules, warmahordes the models (rules are a bit iffy for me, I'd have to doublecheck), malifaux hell no, and then there's kings of war (likely as I like big battles).

Thankfully the nearest games store is only 15km away and isn't a GW one (there was a GW one 5mins away but australia is a very spread out country so it went under) and maybe I can convince some of the guys to play kings of war with me, as I also like how it has a painting-only side for those of us who can't get time to play games with it so we can get creative with the extras they provide for display armies and conversions.

Backfire wrote:Of course, I myself ragequit MtG when they changed to 6th Edition, so maybe I am not one to criticize

Funnily enough, lots of time you see people holding MtG as some sort of paragon how GW should run things. I always get a good laugh out of it.

You do realize that the game was barely playable until they introduced the stack that instantly fixed just about every timing issue that could even occur in the game when they revised the rules, right? You ragequitting MtG when they did the rules overhaul is very laughable since they... ya know... fixed the game with it.

As for the new rules in 40K, to the OP: quit. I have not played a game of 40K in a very long time. I started in 5th and quit in 5th. The game is really bad and GW don't give a rat's ass about fixing any of it. Seriously. They don't. The sooner you realize this the sooner you can sell your stuff off and go do other things with your money.

Backfire wrote:Funnily enough, lots of time you see people holding MtG as some sort of paragon how GW should run things. I always get a good laugh out of it.

From a rules standpoint this makes sense. They refined and enhanced their rules to make them better and to resolve problems with the rules. They listened to their player community and implemented improvements to the game that made people happier playing it. Through all of its various incarnations there card verbage has gotten clearer and much more specific and if there are any questions as to how a card plays they usually respond to it with a faq ruling pretty quickly.

This are all things that GW could greatly benefit from. Often they try to reinvent the wheel when they write their rules instead of refining and enhancing them. The shift from 5th to 6th seems less of a dramatic change and maybe they are learning this *finally*. The simple fact is that by improving and continually refining their game, Wizards of the Coast has seen magic continue to be popular and wholly profitable for over 20 years with minimal price increases on the product. They keep coming out with new card sets and people contiue to buy them. That is pretty darn impressive and something other game companies could learn from.

Skriker

This is sounding more and more like 3d edition, De ja vu all over again.


Kinda worried.

I play Tyranids, stealer list. Not only I like Cruddace codex, I'm eager to play 6th edition with my particular nids just to see if I can win with them nerfed so much (no assault the turn you outflank, change to fleet, overwatch, wound allocation from the nearest model). I'm willing to accept changes that make the whole game better, more tactical etc even at the cost of (probably) long time nerf to my current army, uphill battle is fun and rewarding. Allocating wounds is so much better now (apart from "look out sir", not mechanicaly though, rather the silly explanation) that I don't care it hurts my stealers for example. Ofc having the balanced armies is crucial but what I want to say is I can live with and even have fun from nerfing my list in the process of rules change.

And here's the trouble, there are so many backwards changes in my eyes. What I hate most in 6th are the additional throws. Throw for warlord abilities, throw for mysterious forsest, throw for mysterious river, throw for mysterious objectives, throw for night fighting etc. So many things totaly out of control that can make the game unfair from the beggining, I can house rule it all out but I'd prefer to play by the book and don't like the adventure game direction it all takes. It's easier for GW to get away with their cheap codex and rules writing with such aproach, I want this game to be as tactical and skill based and possible even playing for fun. That's why it's so important to have the tournament scene and the game makers listening to them, to keep the game as far as possible from random, cheesed affair.

Now someone please explain to me the randomness of 2d6 charges. Is that GWs way around balancing movement and weapon ranges, what's the point? Fun? Serious question, I don't get it.

Now, let's falsly assume for the moment that what I mainly want from 40k is adventure, cinematics, mood - "fun" - this is what I'd have to live with in 6th edition, top of my head:

- there's Calgar walking in the front with 10 tactical marines and they get under fire - it's either 10 man doing nothing but jumping to catch bullets with their bodys or papa smurf doing nothing but ducking and hiding behind their backs and doing tiny jumps from one to another as they get shot

- widely assumming one turn is seconds up to a minute maybe, it takes few minutes tops from pitch black night to fully lighted day

- widely assuming than an inch is 10 meters, the charge distance of an unit varies from 20m to 120m, on the plain field

- warlords, actualy more like warladies have abilities dependable on day or mood or sth

- there are grimdark forests of death everywhere and special units of the Imperium, space marines and their tactical god of war are unable to research said forest before the battle

6th edition looks kind of ridiculous so far for me, and I haven't even played it yet. Hi to all, btw.

Kurce wrote:

Backfire wrote:Of course, I myself ragequit MtG when they changed to 6th Edition, so maybe I am not one to criticize

Funnily enough, lots of time you see people holding MtG as some sort of paragon how GW should run things. I always get a good laugh out of it.

You do realize that the game was barely playable until they introduced the stack that instantly fixed just about every timing issue that could even occur in the game when they revised the rules, right? You ragequitting MtG when they did the rules overhaul is very laughable since they... ya know... fixed the game with it.

That was indeed a good change: it was everything else which went to hell, which is why I quit. Along with all my Magic-playing friends. Note that I did not quit because of 6th ed, timing was coincidental.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Skriker wrote:
This are all things that GW could greatly benefit from. Often they try to reinvent the wheel when they write their rules instead of refining and enhancing them. The shift from 5th to 6th seems less of a dramatic change and maybe they are learning this *finally*. The simple fact is that by improving and continually refining their game, Wizards of the Coast has seen magic continue to be popular and wholly profitable for over 20 years with minimal price increases on the product. They keep coming out with new card sets and people contiue to buy them. That is pretty darn impressive and something other game companies could learn from.

Uh, of course MtG is profitable. GW really has NOTHING on WOTC when it comes to milking money from the playerbase. It got really, really cynical after 4th Ed, which is why we quit.