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.

Just going along with poster above my post

 Ignatius wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:

 Ignatius wrote:

I can't wait to hear this.

I don't.
Not with that atrocious writing.

I've resigned trying to get a real conversation out of the kid, I'm just finding it amusing at this point.

Really?
We need to do this?
Valid point, so many rules spread all over the place it makes for an easy breeding ground for WAAC players to bamboozle all they like.
<edit> "Bad" spelling is not a crime... but hard to read...

Dakka Posting Rules wrote:Please remember that posting and reading online is a visual format and as such the spelling, grammar and look of your posts is the only way others understand what you are saying. Therefore, in order to be polite, all users are expected to make an effort to use proper spelling, grammar and punctuation and should refrain from using internet shorthand or other distracting methods of writing, such as writing a post completely bolded, with capital letters, in a strange color, etc.

It's only bewildering if you try.

 Azreal13 wrote:

Dakka Posting Rules wrote:Please remember that posting and reading online is a visual format and as such the spelling, grammar and look of your posts is the only way others understand what you are saying. Therefore, in order to be polite, all users are expected to make an effort to use proper spelling, grammar and punctuation and should refrain from using internet shorthand or other distracting methods of writing, such as writing a post completely bolded, with capital letters, in a strange color, etc.

You have some history seeing the style of writing, could we not assume an "effort" is being made?
I had a heck of a time with dyslexia so there are a multitude of reasons to exercise some tolerance without ridicule.
The topic is about confusion; GW's writing is example enough where we cannot sometimes understand what they are saying in a rule.

 Talizvar wrote:

 Ignatius wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:

 Ignatius wrote:

I can't wait to hear this.

I don't.
Not with that atrocious writing.

I've resigned trying to get a real conversation out of the kid, I'm just finding it amusing at this point.

Really?
We need to do this?
Valid point, so many rules spread all over the place it makes for an easy breeding ground for WAAC players to bamboozle all they like.
<edit> "Bad" spelling is not a crime... but hard to read...

Need? No of course not. He's going to respond regardless of me saying anything, but asking a question of him will at least keep him from "contributing" to the thread and allows it to be ignored. I'll acknowledge it's not the most responsible thing to do but sometimes I can't help myself.

Also, Dakka rules say to use correct grammar and spelling.

On topic, I am not bewildered in 7th. If someone has rules I do not, then I'll ask for clarification when they bring up a rule. If they bring up something I've never heard of before, I'll politely ask what it is and what it does. For example, say I've never played against Necron before and they go to do their Reanimation Protocols, I'll ask what it is. Then ask if they mind me reading the rule while they role their dice to make sure it's what they are claiming.

 Talizvar wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:

Dakka Posting Rules wrote:Please remember that posting and reading online is a visual format and as such the spelling, grammar and look of your posts is the only way others understand what you are saying. Therefore, in order to be polite, all users are expected to make an effort to use proper spelling, grammar and punctuation and should refrain from using internet shorthand or other distracting methods of writing, such as writing a post completely bolded, with capital letters, in a strange color, etc.

You have some history seeing the style of writing, could we not assume an "effort" is being made?
I had a heck of a time with dyslexia so there are a multitude of reasons to exercise some tolerance without ridicule.
The topic is about confusion; GW's writing is example enough where we cannot sometimes understand what they are saying in a rule.

Anyone who pluralises with a 'z' is not making any sort of effort.

EDIT

I've also frequently seen people draw attention to his spelling and grammar, and not once has it ever been addressed. Of course dyslexia would be a perfectly valid reason to struggle, but, and I freely admit my ignorance here, so consequently happy to be corrected, the style of spelling and grammar suggests more teen txt spk than a genuine difficulty with words.

All could be resolved with a simple "I struggle with words" or "English isn't my first language" but time after time it is ignored and the behaviour continues.

Topic, anyone?

 Voidwraith wrote:

 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

 Ratius wrote:
I agree with the point AG of having to keep up with them :(

Hence my Q about it being bewildering :(
Im really lost sometimes.

Yeah, the specific example that annoyed me was the formation for BA that allows you to assault out of deep strike. There's some basic design philosophies in 40k that seem to be set in stone, like invulnerable saves can't be ignored by any means. Assaulting from deep strike has been one for a really long time (and on the very rare occasions that they allowed it, you paid through the nose for lacklustre units). Now imagine you're playing someone and they say "oh by the way, because I took a few specific units, my models get to assault from deep strike for free!" It's just silly and annoyingly restrictive in some ways.

BTW, I'm not butthurt about losing to these formations as I haven't even played against them. I just don't like the concept and we already know that this is going to result in some game-breaking, auto-take formations.

I play Blood Angels, and after the "holy crap" moment wore off, I realized I would never consider playing this formation in any sort of competitive environment. The formation, with it's 3 stormravens and 30 tactical marines, is going to cost one a lil' over 1000pts minimum. Now, factor in that whatever detachment you take to make up the rest of your list will still require 2 troop choices (unless, of course, you choose another formation), you're not left with a ton of points to take advantage of the amazingly game breaking ability of turn 1 charges from the deep strike.

I just made a list in army builder (at 1850) trying to take advantage of this formation, and it came away very wanting. Maybe if the tournament is playing at 2500 or so it'd be able to abuse the special rule, but anything under 2000 just feels meh.

That's the nice thing about that formation, but the fact that it exists kind of worries me. If GW is going to break their own design philosophies for formations, then I figure that sooner or later it's going to happen on a formation that's actually worth taking.

*EDIT* Actually, the free power weapons/combi-weapons formation is WAY worse IMHO. I'm not sure what the requirements are, but that's just ridiculously arbitrary. Take X units and get tons of points worth of free upgrades, basically giving your opponent an auto-handicap? Welcome to 7th ed.

 Azreal13 wrote:
Not the complete overhaul and dumbing down that was 3rd.

Then you have people like me who started in 3rd And LOVED the simplicity and balance of 3rd, and really WANT 7th to be blown up and simplified back to the way 3rd did things. And it REALLY needs it. At the very least need to get rid of ALL the random tables. And get rid bs like Run and random charges, and being able to buy buildings, that's a sin worth a paddlin'.

 Voidwraith wrote:

 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

 Ratius wrote:
I agree with the point AG of having to keep up with them :(

Hence my Q about it being bewildering :(
Im really lost sometimes.

Yeah, the specific example that annoyed me was the formation for BA that allows you to assault out of deep strike. There's some basic design philosophies in 40k that seem to be set in stone, like invulnerable saves can't be ignored by any means. Assaulting from deep strike has been one for a really long time (and on the very rare occasions that they allowed it, you paid through the nose for lacklustre units). Now imagine you're playing someone and they say "oh by the way, because I took a few specific units, my models get to assault from deep strike for free!" It's just silly and annoyingly restrictive in some ways.

BTW, I'm not butthurt about losing to these formations as I haven't even played against them. I just don't like the concept and we already know that this is going to result in some game-breaking, auto-take formations.

I play Blood Angels, and after the "holy crap" moment wore off, I realized I would never consider playing this formation in any sort of competitive environment. The formation, with it's 3 stormravens and 30 tactical marines, is going to cost one a lil' over 1000pts minimum. Now, factor in that whatever detachment you take to make up the rest of your list will still require 2 troop choices (unless, of course, you choose another formation), you're not left with a ton of points to take advantage of the amazingly game breaking ability of turn 1 charges from the deep strike.

I just made a list in army builder (at 1850) trying to take advantage of this formation, and it came away very wanting. Maybe if the tournament is playing at 2500 or so it'd be able to abuse the special rule, but anything under 2000 just feels meh.

Agreed, it sounds a lot better than it is. Its all I ever hear about with BA(on the nets). All hype and very situational.

 KingmanHighborn wrote:
Thing is back in the days of 3rd/4th Rhino Rush as a spam tactic was VERY situational. It was great on the 4x4 boards at GW and the FLGS when there was sparse terrain. But on longer boards, or boards with a lot of terrain, it'd get bogged down and you could pick it apart piecemeal. I played Eldar in 3rd and with a single wraithlord, falcon and fire prism I could dance around most* rhino rushers and pick them apart. (*Blood Angels and their Death Company and their overcharged engines, very hard to stop.)

The biggest problem is all the unneeded rules and models, flyers have been nice I'll give ya, but don't need the plethora of stupid rules, just a tweak on skimmers and you're done.

Then adding in all the random BS, dear god the random rolls are the single biggest annoyance in 7th I have. And Run, and being able to buy buildings. (That should outlawed!!!!!)

Things like MCs used to just be 'they ignore armor saves and hurt things' for example.

Then you have things that should have NEVER been, like Centurions, all the marine flyers beside the Stormraven and Thunderhawk (not counting speeders.), All the Cron vehicles minus the monolith...maybe..., etc. etc.

Wait, 4x4 is the standard?
I thought it was 6x4....

I no longer feel impressive never being challenged by the Rhino Rush in 3rd.


On Topic,
My local meta disallows formations and strongly discourages most allies (Some, like ultramarines or Chaos with IG, or Chaos with Demons is fine) so I haven't run into that issue. But everytime I learn something is crazy good with a codex, it's usually a formation...like me recently learning about a certain necron formation.

The rules are hard, and people get them wrong all the time. Just the other day I played a game where someone thought they could teleport everywhere because they didn't understand how LoS was spelled out in the game. It wasn't cheating, he just got it wrong. It made for an incredibly lopsided game that took 2 hours and left us feeling frustated however.
40k has this in spades if you allow all the options. It's just too much to memorize, and a lot of options are just dead weight (Howling Banshees).

I wish they had missions that worked for an actual narrative. Take Necromunda and adapt it to 40k rules and I would be such a loyal customer. I love it when my guys get nicknames and have backstories based off of past performances that really cares over, instead of random tables determining everything.

Akiasura wrote:

 KingmanHighborn wrote:
Thing is back in the days of 3rd/4th Rhino Rush as a spam tactic was VERY situational. It was great on the 4x4 boards at GW and the FLGS when there was sparse terrain. But on longer boards, or boards with a lot of terrain, it'd get bogged down and you could pick it apart piecemeal. I played Eldar in 3rd and with a single wraithlord, falcon and fire prism I could dance around most* rhino rushers and pick them apart. (*Blood Angels and their Death Company and their overcharged engines, very hard to stop.)

The biggest problem is all the unneeded rules and models, flyers have been nice I'll give ya, but don't need the plethora of stupid rules, just a tweak on skimmers and you're done.

Then adding in all the random BS, dear god the random rolls are the single biggest annoyance in 7th I have. And Run, and being able to buy buildings. (That should outlawed!!!!!)

Things like MCs used to just be 'they ignore armor saves and hurt things' for example.

Then you have things that should have NEVER been, like Centurions, all the marine flyers beside the Stormraven and Thunderhawk (not counting speeders.), All the Cron vehicles minus the monolith...maybe..., etc. etc.

Wait, 4x4 is the standard?
I thought it was 6x4....

I no longer feel impressive never being challenged by the Rhino Rush in 3rd.


On Topic,
My local meta disallows formations and strongly discourages most allies (Some, like ultramarines or Chaos with IG, or Chaos with Demons is fine) so I haven't run into that issue. But everytime I learn something is crazy good with a codex, it's usually a formation...like me recently learning about a certain necron formation.

The rules are hard, and people get them wrong all the time. Just the other day I played a game where someone thought they could teleport everywhere because they didn't understand how LoS was spelled out in the game. It wasn't cheating, he just got it wrong. It made for an incredibly lopsided game that took 2 hours and left us feeling frustated however.
40k has this in spades if you allow all the options. It's just too much to memorize, and a lot of options are just dead weight (Howling Banshees).

I wish they had missions that worked for an actual narrative. Take Necromunda and adapt it to 40k rules and I would be such a loyal customer. I love it when my guys get nicknames and have backstories based off of past performances that really cares over, instead of random tables determining everything.

4x4 WAS the standard of 3-5th ed. at least. The GW store that used to be at Concord Mills in NC, had 3 4x4 boards and slightly smaller board for LOTR and demo games. 6x4 was recommend size for very large point games.

As I said the Rhino Rush wasn't too bad, it's best version was used by Blood Angels, but as long as I could avoid the Death Company my single Wraithlord (when I used to play Eldar in 3rd and 4th) could wreck the rhinos as they came in and the Fire Prism and 'sniper' vyper, and haywire grenade carrying Striking Scorpions and my Singing Spear Farseer in a Falcon, was enough to do damage.

The really scary stuff (which got fixed in the 3rd edition to 4th updated version), was the sweeping advance rule, where a squad of hormagaunts could burn across a table just by winning an assault. Nids were HARDCORE tough in 3rd. But still not broken.

And again if they'd blow it up and go back to the simpler 3rd, the 3rd edition missions were great for competitive play AND story telling.

I played from 4th and we always played on 4x6 ...

only cityfight was done on 4x4.

but honestly as to the OP its not hard to keep up.
lots of supplements sure but only a couple things here and there.

My first army was eldar, and my brothers were nids. I ran a very atypical list, with warp spiders and swooping hawks, and I don't believe I ever lost to rhino rush or nids. At the very least, not often.

It was really IG that caused me massive amounts of headaches. There was really nothing I could do to stop all that firepower from flying my way.

I don't play at a GW store, never have really. I had a bad experience with the workforce regarding some conversions a friend had done and never went back. Our local store that I originally played at was 6x4, and every local store after that has been 6x4 as well.

I can't recall it being defined in the army book...I think they just showed pictures of tables and had both. I was pretty young in 3rd so I could just be wrong here, I don't have my book on hand.

 KingmanHighborn wrote:
4x4 WAS the standard of 3-5th ed. at least. The GW store that used to be at Concord Mills in NC, had 3 4x4 boards and slightly smaller board for LOTR and demo games. 6x4 was recommend size for very large point games.

4x4 has long been the standard in GW stores due to their lack of space. Everywhere else, 4x6 has been 'standard' since 3rd edition. 2nd edition used to suggest 2' of board per 500 points, so with 2nd edition games generally running at 2000 points, 4x8 was common back then.

 insaniak wrote:

 KingmanHighborn wrote:
4x4 WAS the standard of 3-5th ed. at least. The GW store that used to be at Concord Mills in NC, had 3 4x4 boards and slightly smaller board for LOTR and demo games. 6x4 was recommend size for very large point games.

4x4 has long been the standard in GW stores due to their lack of space. Everywhere else, 4x6 has been 'standard' since 3rd edition. 2nd edition used to suggest 2' of board per 500 points, so with 2nd edition games generally running at 2000 points, 4x8 was common back then.

I find it a bit bewildering that they feel no need to mention that in the $100 dollar rulebook they expect us to buy

Looking back I have no idea why I thought 6x4 was the standard over 4x4

Our necromunda boards are really small relatively speaking, but I think that is the nature of that game. It's closer to 2nd in rules anyway

If only GW posted a list of rules a model can be used with.

If the model was listed in certain books, and those books were mentioned on the model's store page on GW's site, that would take a lot of the guesswork out of the game.

We had to point zilka86 to where the rules for the wall of Martyrs were. It isn't listed anywhere on the GW site.
Lots of people avoid Forgeworld stuff due to the confusing mess of IA and Apoc books. The Baneblade may be a semi-iconic IG tank, but it's not in the IG codex.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

zilka86 wrote:
Just going along with poster above my post

Use the quote button to avoid confusion.

Also, that's the first clear post I've seen.

There are certainly a staggering number of rules and unit profiles in the game.
This issue is compounded by the large range of formats and locations they can be found in.

As someone who grew up with the game, I find it to be manageable, as I am already accustomed to most of the units, but to new players I am sure it is daunting at best.

Personally I have tried to make it easier for my gaming group by doing some rules/codex organisation.

I have taken all the codices, dataslates, formations and FW books for each faction (ebooks or scans), and put them in their own folder (to give an indication of how much this is, my current folder is over 5GB of content).
This way players who are less familiar with the game can more easily view all of the options at their disposal. All we need is 1 tablet at the table and we have all the rules at out disposal.

That said, from time to time when I update all the files I have to do a thorough search for content, as there are so many little datalsate and formations being put out, especially around xmas.