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.

At the OP:

What exactly were you expecting from this thread? Sympathy? Shows of support? Uproars of agreement followed by similar pledges of boycotting GW?

You want to boycott GW because they have no apparent interest in balancing the army you invested in any time soon? Fine, go ahead; but how does that concern us?

Plus the way I see it is that Orks are not meant to be competitive. Orks are meant to be fun with hilarious fluff who say "Dakka Dakka" to make their stubbers shoot. Play for fun and not for competitive play, and I'll guarantee you'll have a better time (regardless of what army you play). Need more incentive/help? House rule it. The rules are a guideline, not law.

 Crazyterran wrote:
Okay.

Bye.

Coll story, bro. Needs more dragons.

 Sidstyler wrote:

 Wulfmar wrote:
I wish they were competitive

Why? Tau and Eldar are competitive, but no one wants to play against us anymore because of our "OP" books, so our armies gather dust on shelves right alongside the bad, unplayable ones. What good does being competitive do you when you're not even "allowed" to play the game anymore?

Being a top-tier army is a fething curse, just as bad as being bottom-tier. Maybe even worse, because at least with a bottom-tier army you can still participate. Hardly anyone would turn down a game with Orks or Tyranids like they would Tau or Eldar.

There is almost no point in playing those armies with BA. I do it to give people games, but no one gets anything out of it. And I have forfeited two of my last five games because I couldn't sit through it.

 IllumiNini wrote:
At the OP:

What exactly were you expecting from this thread? Sympathy? Shows of support? Uproars of agreement followed by similar pledges of boycotting GW?

You want to boycott GW because they have no apparent interest in balancing the army you invested in any time soon? Fine, go ahead; but how does that concern us?

Plus the way I see it is that Orks are not meant to be competitive. Orks are meant to be fun with hilarious fluff who say "Dakka Dakka" to make their stubbers shoot. Play for fun and not for competitive play, and I'll guarantee you'll have a better time (regardless of what army you play). Need more incentive/help? House rule it. The rules are a guideline, not law.

 Crazyterran wrote:
Okay.

Bye.

Coll story, bro. Needs more dragons.

This^^^^^ These rage quitting threads never made any sense to me. To each their own...fair thee well OP!

Can we get a "Martel732 complaining about BA in a non-BA related thread" bingo square please?

Grumble, But this is a "Rage/somewhat boycott GW but not really because I still need the rules but will only buy 3rd party stuff or trade" thread. He's still playing despite the abuse Orks have gotten.

Normally I would lament along with you OP on this issue, as 40k has been such a mess these last few years. However, I am giving GW much more the benefit of the doubt on things lately with the improvements they've made. I'd at least tell you to wait until the book-specific FAQs are complete before giving up entirely, and even then I'd just move to holding pattern.

I can't really understand the "Orks/Chaos/DEldar are just uncompetitive" tone of some of these comments, they sound like they're coming from Imperial players who just want to be able to fight opponents that aren't the same faction. There is simply no good reason that any of these factions should be poor...there's really no reason *any* faction should be better than another, especially from GW's perspective (that of making the most money possible). Keeping things balanced benefits all player groups. And 40k as a game is frankly just too expensive to not be well put together.

I do see more light these days though. The FAQs are actually being put out as rough drafts, something I don't remember GW ever doing. They've recognized that putting effort into the game itself is what is necessary to keep people buying, the mysterious class of wealthy collectors can only do so much to sustain the company.

All the talk about GW showing "glimpses of improvements" and making "clear steps into the right direction" is little more than the rambling of desperate hostage customers.

GW's (and by extent, 40k's) biggest issues at the moment, and for a long while:

1. Bad rules (an unsurmountable, inflated mess of bad rules as of recently).
2. Crazy expensive prices.

None of that has been solved, and it doesn't seem it will be solved anytime soon. The FAQs are nice, yes. But they won't fix the game. The game has deep issues that are only getting worse as time passes, with new formations, detachments, special rules, campaign books, supplements, etc. that make it virtually impossible of keeping track of the very game you're playing. It's insane. 40k needs a complete reboot from the ground, and there is no such a thing in the inmediate future.

As for the pricing, again the box bundles are fine, but the box bundles are mostly made up of kits that have been around for a while. The newer stuff just keeps getting more and more expensive. Look at the Wulfen... five plastic, humanoid-sized, infantry models for 45€. That's my favourite "Rountree is turning things around" signal.

I'm also sure that, if AoS had been the success GW expected, 40k would have gone down the same route by now.

Cling to hope all you want, the ship is sinking. I won't be completely sunk by tomorrow, nor by next month, buth both 40k and GW suffer from deep issues no quick patching is going to fix. And the sooner the game is discontinued, for the community to take over (as it happened to Epic, Bloodbowl and now Fantasy), the better. Because GW wouldn't be able to properly write a rules system even if their lives were at the stake.

 Korinov wrote:
All the talk about GW showing "glimpses of improvements" and making "clear steps into the right direction" is little more than the rambling of desperate hostage customers.

GW's (and by extent, 40k's) biggest issues at the moment, and for a long while:

1. Bad rules (an unsurmountable, inflated mess of bad rules as of recently).
2. Crazy expensive prices.

None of that has been solved, and it doesn't seem it will be solved anytime soon. The FAQs are nice, yes. But they won't fix the game. The game has deep issues that are only getting worse as time passes, with new formations, detachments, special rules, campaign books, supplements, etc. that make it virtually impossible of keeping track of the very game you're playing. It's insane. 40k needs a complete reboot from the ground, and there is no such a thing in the inmediate future.

As for the pricing, again the box bundles are fine, but the box bundles are mostly made up of kits that have been around for a while. The newer stuff just keeps getting more and more expensive. Look at the Wulfen... five plastic, humanoid-sized, infantry models for 45€. That's my favourite "Rountree is turning things around" signal.

I'm also sure that, if AoS had been the success GW expected, 40k would have gone down the same route by now.

Cling to hope all you want, the ship is sinking. I won't be completely sunk by tomorrow, nor by next month, buth both 40k and GW suffer from deep issues no quick patching is going to fix. And the sooner the game is discontinued, for the community to take over (as it happened to Epic, Bloodbowl and now Fantasy), the better. Because GW wouldn't be able to properly write a rules system even if their lives were at the stake.

You know for all your talk about how GW is an unplayable mess, how come around here the Only tabletop wargames that are played in Large amounts are GW games(40k and AOS) and X-wing. And it is the same just about everywhere in the country and some parts of the world I've been to.

Infinity, Mallafaux, Battletech and Warmahordes all have thier places and I encounter them In many places, but GW and X-Wing (Armada as well) dominate in number of players with the above mentioned stuff being relegated to side games.

Is 40K a tight Ruleset? No, not at all, are things unbalanced? Sure. But the game is still Playable, and fun for huge swathes of the wargaming community.

In the end, if you are mad about the state of your army and the fine thats great. Go ahead and Quit, take a break, or find a new game, no one should expect you to play a game you aren't having fun with after all.

But by the same token, it's not your place to start telling others not to play, how they should spend their money, or honestly Rant about how you should "stick it to the Great evil". All it does is make you sound like a bitter wannabe edge lord out to try and ruin others fun.

If you're done? Be done, and let others get on with their own lives.

Nobody is saying GW isn't still the 400lb gorilla in the room.

That said, it's not the 800lb gorilla it used to be. Its popularity relies a *lot* on inertia, you can see this in all sorts of things, where massive problems don't cause something to just die off instantly. It's a well known IP that many people are familiar with even if they don't play the game, and has been around since the 80's which cannot be said for things like Infinity, Firestorm Armada, Dropzone Commander, Malifaux, etc. That gives 40k a huge advantage.

Relative to what it used to be, GW has far more competition, and there are now some game stores that don't carry GW at all, something that would have been unheard of 10 years ago, and GW's non-40k stuff has been massively eclipsed by other games. Fantasy used to be the #2 tabletop game behind 40k, then it dropped behind Warmahordes ~2009, and became almost extinct by the time they launched AoS, which *is* extinct in many places.

The fact that X-wing is even being talked about as on par with GW's games shows that the market is changing.

For my piece, in my experience, 40k isn't the behemoth it once was. 40k tournaments are no longer by far the largest wargaming events or play nights anymore, it's fragmenting a lot depending on local store groups. My favorite LGS got 4 people to show up to the last 40k tournament, where once they routinely had 18-24 in 4E and 5E. Their Warmahordes event had 9 people show up. At the big store downtown, Infinity and Flames of War are no less popular than 40k at this point and receive almost equal shelf space. So yes, 40k is still a huge presence, but it's not the *only* presence that it used to be, nor even the majority presence it used to be everywhere. It's far more variable these days.

Finally, this is an internet discussion forum about a toy soldier game. If you don't like what someone has to say, you can just not enter the conversation, instead of telling them not to discuss the topic on an internet discussion board dedicated to the topic.

 Chapter Master Angelos wrote:
You know for all your talk about how GW is an unplayable mess, how come around here the Only tabletop wargames that are played in Large amounts are GW games(40k and AOS) and X-wing. And it is the same just about everywhere in the country and some parts of the world I've been to.

Infinity, Mallafaux, Battletech and Warmahordes all have thier places and I encounter them In many places, but GW and X-Wing (Armada as well) dominate in number of players with the above mentioned stuff being relegated to side games.

Either you provide some solid evidence to back such claims or it won't get past the usual "at my place we play X a lot so X must be doing amazing worldwide".

In the end, if you are mad about the state of your army and the fine thats great. Go ahead and Quit, take a break, or find a new game, no one should expect you to play a game you aren't having fun with after all.

I haven't quit yet because first, I'm not "mad" about the state of my main army (CSM suck, but I can live with that), and second, I have the luxury of playing in an environment where I don't mind losing, because I still have fun.

If I were to rely on pick-up games, I would have never bothered with starting to play 40k in the first place.

But by the same token, it's not your place to start telling others not to play, how they should spend their money, or honestly Rant about how you should "stick it to the Great evil". All it does is make you sound like a bitter wannabe edge lord out to try and ruin others fun.

I have not done that in the slightest.

I've just stated that the "GW has learnt from their mistakes" and "GW is finally going back to the good old ways" claims are self-deluded bullgak. The rules are not improving (FAQs are band aids to a wide open and festering gut), prices keep going higher.

People are so desperate to be thrown a bone after so many years of neglect, disrespect and insult, that some will accept anything as a sign that "things are finally changing". They aren't. At least not in any substantial way.

Well, from my neck of the woods - GW appears to have a big following if you look at how many people have forces.

When you look at who's buying new things for their forces, it starts to tell a different story - there are few new kits being bought, fewer new forces being started and a lot of the 'new' stuff is actually kit-bashed and proxied using non-GW kits.

Many of the GW players have been more frequently seen playing X-Wing (which I dislike, but then, I dislike Star Wars due to everyone always going on about it and it's cultural saturation) and other more indy games such as SAGA.

Chipping in for the lulz: 4E and 5E 40k used to be rather popular in my area, along with the Fantasy editions at the time. However, since then, not only have players been dropping out due to high prices and poorly written and imbalanced rules, but no new recruits have been found either.
And since 40k is often the first point of contact that many have with wargaming, this has put the potential recruits off wargaming entirely in my area.

I have only three people who are even vaguely into the idea of wargaming and miniature creation. One of them is me, another is a GW fan who refuses to play anything that isn't strictly GW produce (won't allow houserules or converted models), and the other is a guy who likes building and painting Tau, but can't stand the tedium of spending hours on end staring at rulebooks and having half your gametime spent doing nothing.

I think more people are interested in a 40k video game (like Space Marine or Dawn of War) than they are in the table-top game. Who can blame them? A video game is vastly cheaper, often better-written (note that GW isn't actually involved in this process...), and often offers something different every time you play it.

Does the TT game do this? No, not really.

At this point, the only thing that interests me in the slightest in 40K is the background. The TT game is dead to me.

Welcome to Dawn of War 3, where anorexic space marines abound, and I will be putting Sonic The Hedgehog logos on everything.

 Selym wrote:
Welcome to Dawn of War 3, where anorexic space marines abound, and I will be putting Sonic The Hedgehog logos on everything.

May the Chapter serve the Emperor with honor and distinction.

 Selym wrote:
Chipping in for the lulz: 4E and 5E 40k used to be rather popular in my area, along with the Fantasy editions at the time. However, since then, not only have players been dropping out due to high prices and poorly written and imbalanced rules, but no new recruits have been found either.

This is exactly my experience. My local group has few new recruits, and of those, most are people who played before but moved to the area recently, we've had one truly *new* person actually stick around in the last ~18 months or so (who got in with Eldar, his brother who got in with Orks quickly tired and stopped showing up). Most of the routine faces are those that have been playing since 5E or earlier, while Fantasy/AoS is entirely dead aside from a couple people who show up once a month or so to play 7th.

I WONT LET CHU GO! give money to GW paint minis and play the game competattively or I WILL KILL A KAT!

Another competitive player wants to rage quit... Sweet! Glad to see you go.

Chapter Master Angelos wrote:But by the same token, it's not your place to start telling others not to play

But it's your place to tell him whether or not he should tell others whether or not they should play?

how they should spend their money

But it's your place to tell him whether or not he should tell others how they should spend their money or not?

Rant

But it's your place...

And for that matter, who died and left you as the supreme arbiter of what place people do and do not have to say things?

I'm sure you get my point by now.

It seems to me as though you have two options:

1. You disagree with his right to express his opinion.

2. You disagree with the content of what he said.

If the former, then see the above.

If the latter:

In his posting, he made a number of points. How would you answer the specific points that he's made?

One more thing, OP...If you play orks, you can get a good game from AS, BA, CSM, DE, IG, GK, SW & Nids. Some are harder than others for orks, but you can beat all of these armies a lot of the time. If you always lose to these armies, then....l2p?

As others have said, and Ill repeat it.....

K , bye!

 Selym wrote:
Chipping in for the lulz: 4E and 5E 40k used to be rather popular in my area, along with the Fantasy editions at the time. However, since then, not only have players been dropping out due to high prices and poorly written and imbalanced rules, but no new recruits have been found either.
And since 40k is often the first point of contact that many have with wargaming, this has put the potential recruits off wargaming entirely in my area.

I have only three people who are even vaguely into the idea of wargaming and miniature creation. One of them is me, another is a GW fan who refuses to play anything that isn't strictly GW produce (won't allow houserules or converted models), and the other is a guy who likes building and painting Tau, but can't stand the tedium of spending hours on end staring at rulebooks and having half your gametime spent doing nothing.

Doesn't allow conversions? What kool aid is this guy drinking to think that? GW themselves actively encourage converting models.

You should tell that to the last three GW managers I've met. I once got threatened with a store ban for using blu-tac as a cheap moulding material on a nurgle dreadnought.

 JimOnMars wrote:
One more thing, OP...If you play orks, you can get a good game from AS, BA, CSM, DE, IG, GK, SW & Nids. Some are harder than others for orks, but you can beat all of these armies a lot of the time. If you always lose to these armies, then....l2p?

even among the power armies some arent that bad in a friendly setting. space marines have some insane power builds, but there are a lot of "average builds" you can do with em too.

I was in Manchester the other day so I called into a few stores and what little GW stuff they had was hidden away and was all older stuff nothing that came out this year.

I also went into the GW store had a natter with a staff member he said on their busiest nights they had 16 players, that shows how bad things are.

This isn't a small town it's a big city and they get 16 players, back in 2004 stoke store had 20-30 people some nights and that's a small store with four tables.

They must drastically improve rules and slash prices soon or they will go bust.

hobojebus wrote:
I was in Manchester the other day so I called into a few stores and what little GW stuff they had was hidden away and was all older stuff nothing that came out this year.

I also went into the GW store had a natter with a staff member he said on their busiest nights they had 16 players, that shows how bad things are.

This isn't a small town it's a big city and they get 16 players, back in 2004 stoke store had 20-30 people some nights and that's a small store with four tables.

They must drastically improve rules and slash prices soon or they will go bust.

Manchester is the store I frequent. There is an element of truth in this. There are less regular players for AoS. Things seem to be picking up but not quite 20-30 people. The only time I've seen that many was in Derby for the birthday event. Warhammer World was apparently packed with at least 100 (but I've been there and it blows any GW store, flagship or outlet, out the water for what it provides).

 Psienesis wrote:
, and often offers something different every time you play it.

Does the TT game do this? No, not really.

Just like chess.
Same pieces. Same moves. Same game every time.
Why would anyone event want to play it?

OP White Knight!

I'm with the OP on this with the Orks pretty much, I like the background and stuff for the Orks but I would never pick them up looking at how much effort I would put into a horde only to have a struggling force that would be mostly outdated when they finally do fix them up properly again. To me the fun of horde melee armies like the Orks died when overwatch came into the game, specifically the Tau's version of it really.

40k is great and all with the background and the models I enjoy the look of (that's what keeps me going in it of course ), but the imbalance between armies is really frustrating. I shelved my Eldar army when the update came out as I spent ages working on a foot wraith themed list and really enjoyed it, but seeing the power they and the wraithknight got while stuff like leaving the wraithlord even more in the dust and the rest of the army, it lost it's charm to me; more so with how I would need to take even more wraithknights to run the list I have, two was pushing it back then so I liked to use just a single and with the upgrade to GMC and the power it got overall I'd think one is enough. However now I'm working on Imperial Knights, but I feel a pure knight list has a lot more room for weaknesses than Eldar would; the wraithknight really kind of scares me a bit with them.

Deleted do to lack of concern.

 Selym wrote:
You should tell that to the last three GW managers I've met. I once got threatened with a store ban for using blu-tac as a cheap moulding material on a nurgle dreadnought.

Tell them to get fethed. That kind of behaviour is a blight on this hobby no matter what game. I'd love to hear their opinions on the early work of John Blanche and Mike McVey and other GW staff of that time.

Scratch that. Would they even know who Mike McVey was? I've heard stories of certain Warhammer World staff not recognising his name.

 n0t_u wrote:
I'm with the OP on this with the Orks pretty much, I like the background and stuff for the Orks but I would never pick them up looking at how much effort I would put into a horde only to have a struggling force that would be mostly outdated when they finally do fix them up properly again. To me the fun of horde melee armies like the Orks died when overwatch came into the game, specifically the Tau's version of it really.

40k is great and all with the background and the models I enjoy the look of (that's what keeps me going in it of course ), but the imbalance between armies is really frustrating. I shelved my Eldar army when the update came out as I spent ages working on a foot wraith themed list and really enjoyed it, but seeing the power they and the wraithknight got while stuff like leaving the wraithlord even more in the dust and the rest of the army, it lost it's charm to me; more so with how I would need to take even more wraithknights to run the list I have, two was pushing it back then so I liked to use just a single and with the upgrade to GMC and the power it got overall I'd think one is enough. However now I'm working on Imperial Knights, but I feel a pure knight list has a lot more room for weaknesses than Eldar would; the wraithknight really kind of scares me a bit with them.

Pretty much this, I love the fluff, I love the idea behind the Orks, I love the ascetics, I love everything about the Ork army except that when I play against most armies I know I am showing up at a distinct disadvantage, even before we put models on the table.

Eldar have been top tier basically every edition
SM have been mid to top tier every edition
Tau have been mid to top tier every edition (since they were released)
Necrons have been mid to top tier every edition.

Orks? We were maybe mid to maybe middle high in 5th and 6th edition, but only if you spammed Nob Bikers and used the wound allocation shenanigans.

Why do we have to have codex's every edition that are down in the mud, dead to the competitive world, and those same codices never EVER become top tier, at least not that I have yet to see. (Bottom tier armies: Orks, DE, Chaos, IG and Tyranids) These armies have 1-2 competitive builds, none of which are the best, but definitely competitive, but the codex as a whole is such utter trash that unless you constantly run those 1-2l lists your going to be losing to most other armies well above 50% of the time.

(None of my statements are based on player skill level but on over all power inside the codex. I have beaten up a bad Eldar player who brought Scat bikes and a Wraith Knight, and I have been tabled by almost the exact same list played by a merely competent player.)