[POLL} Is 8th edition ruleset the best ever?

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.

**ZebioLizard2**

Not the best, but it certainly is one of the better editions.

**Mr Morden**

Too early to tell - its far better than 6th and 7th certainly.

**Martel732**

I don't like characters tanking for units. That's part of the core of 7th. I don't like MCs being functionally immune to meltas and lascannons. I don't like vehicles being worthless piles of junk.

**MagicJuggler**

Martel732 wrote:
I don't like characters tanking for units. That's part of the core of 7th. I don't like MCs being functionally immune to meltas and lascannons. I don't like vehicles being worthless piles of junk.

Eh, to each their own on the first one. By contrast, I don't like that a Crisis Commander or Farseer can hang out in the middle of nowhere just because there's a Gun Drone hanging out closer.

**Melissia**

Feels on par with fifth for me, fifth being the best we've had. But time will tell, I suppose. Fifth also introduced horrible things, so...

**Crablezworth**

MagicJuggler wrote:
Martel732 wrote:
I don't like characters tanking for units. That's part of the core of 7th. I don't like MCs being functionally immune to meltas and lascannons. I don't like vehicles being worthless piles of junk.

Eh, to each their own on the first one. By contrast, I don't like that a Crisis Commander or Farseer can hang out in the middle of nowhere just because there's a Gun Drone hanging out closer.

A drone that isn't it even in los to anything hiding under the floor in a corner of a ruin no less.

**Darkmind**

I doubt half the players here ever played 3rd edition and just here what the interwebs says about it since they where most likely not even thought of at the time lul. Are the haters the 3 wraithknight, gladius, tunastar lewt tournament players that have to use tactics now instead of a netlist? Anyways, loving 8th edition.

**EmberlordofFire8**

I honestly loved 7th, but only for 30k. Other than that, I played 5th edition with a few modifications. But Im really excited to get into 8th, with all new rules (It sucked having to lug around a library of books to every game) and fluff. So yes, 8th is THE BEST THING EVER if you exclude root beer and Sharrowkyn.

**Selym**

EmberlordofFire8 wrote:
So yes, 8th is THE BEST THING EVER if you exclude root beer and Sharrowkyn.

Who?

**EmberlordofFire8**

Selym wrote:
EmberlordofFire8 wrote:
So yes, 8th is THE BEST THING EVER if you exclude root beer and Sharrowkyn.
Who?

http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Nykona_Sharrowkyn

**mrhappyface**

EmberlordofFire8 wrote:
So yes, 8th is THE BEST THING EVER if you exclude root beer and DOOMRIDER!

Fixed that for you.

**MagicJuggler**

Darkmind wrote:
I doubt half the players here ever played 3rd edition and just here what the interwebs says about it since they where most likely not even thought of at the time lul. Are the haters the 3 wraithknight, gladius, tunastar lewt tournament players that have to use tactics now instead of a netlist? Anyways, loving 8th edition.

I played 3rd, but I was a young'un then. All I remember is that vehicles were incredibly static (Ordnance was move-or-fire and Defensive Weapons weren't a thing), that is unless you were Eldar (grumble-grumble Crystal Targeting Matrix). Of course, there was a dramatic shift in codex implementation from early 3rd to later 3rd: Guard and Chaos both got 2 codexes this edition, the first for both being incredibly bland affairs. The second Guard codex was the Doctrines one and the second Chaos one was infamous for Iron Warriors.

IIRC, no notable tournaments did triple Wraithknights for 7th, becauae LOWs. Tunastar? Come again? The most egregious offender for 7th afaik was the Barkstar.

**DaemonJellybaby**

8th is certainly in the set of 'good versions of 40k'.
I'd probably call 5th and 8th 'good' versions of 40k, I've played both and enjoyed them thoroughly.
I'm too young to properly appreciate 3rd or 4th and I've read 2nd, but never played it. I played a small amount of 6th but never got into it.

Each edition has had a different set of problems that were compounded by the hamfisted attempts at fixing previous edition's problems.
Usually these problems stemmed from poorly concieved rules, like the excessive cover saves provided in 5th ed and the Barkstar of 7th.

In other cases, the power creep and the poor internal balance of the codices caused problems (also a 5th problem).

If you look at all of the elements of 40k over the years, there are some quality rules for everything, but no edition has managed to accumulate them all in one book.

Frankly, I prefer the homogeneous rules of 8th, there are some oddities, but nothing quite as unpleasant as the

storm that was 7th ed.
I think that 8th will improve if the codex releases are well designed in terms of internal and external balance.

**skycapt44**

It's pretty good so far in my experience but 5th was my favourite edition by far.

**Runic**

Seems that the old saying of "unhappy people make more noise" stands as always. Almost twice the amount of people voting yes, but a lot of negative threads.

Good to see that this is a widespread thing, as empirically I see old players returning, new ones entering the game more than in years and people in general having fun with the game more than with Gladiuses, deathstars, 7th Ynnari and the like.

**Wagguy80**

Rules aren't really going to matter if GW continues it's pattern of each codex blowing the last one out of the water to keep people buying new models.

That said 8th is my favorite rules set since 4th.

**Selym**

What made 4th good?

**Shiro-chan**

I have only witnessed 5th edition and later, so I cannot give an accurate statement about the best to date. But out of those 4, 7th was terrible (in fact, I basicly skipped that edition almost entirely), 6th was a little better and 5th was ok, but already showing the issues. By that metric, 8th looks the best and also the most promising.

**insaniak**

mrhappyface wrote:
I wonder how much of the "3rd/5th was way better" comes from people viewing those editions through nostalgia goggles. Not saying that 3rd or 5th weren't good, I played both and thoroughly loved 3rd (not as much love for 5th but it was still good), but I still feel that 8th is recieving a lot of unfair judgement and that 3rd/5th seem to be getting the 'pedestal of perfectness' treatment when both were far from perfect.

People saying another edition was better are not saying that edition was perfect. Just better.

5th edition certainly had its issues, but it's the edition (narrowly beating out 2nd) that I had the most fun playing, so wins for me.

**JohnHwangDD**

insaniak wrote:
mrhappyface wrote:
I wonder how much of the "3rd/5th was way better" comes from people viewing those editions through nostalgia goggles. Not saying that 3rd or 5th weren't good, I played both and thoroughly loved 3rd (not as much love for 5th but it was still good), but I still feel that 8th is recieving a lot of unfair judgement and that 3rd/5th seem to be getting the 'pedestal of perfectness' treatment when both were far from perfect.

People saying another edition was better are not saying that edition was perfect. Just better.

5th edition certainly had its issues, but it's the edition (narrowly beating out 2nd) that I had the most fun playing, so wins for me.

QFT. "Best" isn't the same as perfect.

Consider a round of golf. A perfect score is 18 strokes, but the prize still goes to the best score.

**Gamgee**

Honestly no not really. The meta is just make an alpha strike list that abuses the first turn rule of always going first.

My meta likes the rest of the rules, but the alpha strike meta is so strong its ruining a lot of people's fun.

**TheCustomLime**

Vaktathi wrote:
No, 8th increasingly looks like yet another mediocre rules resuscitation after an appalling 5 year performance since 6th edition topped by the absurdity 7th produced.

8E is better than 7E, no question, it's even dramatically better than 6E, but I don't think it's better than 5E (which was itself a far from perfect ruleset with heaps of issues). 8E has some wonkiness and lots of very poorly translated units and weapons and some major unit level balance problems and wonkiness.

What I do think 8E does however is offer a better fundamental base for balance than we've seen in a while. The execution is, as typical for GW, flawed in a way that you'd have to intentionally go out of your way to do (replete with plainly obvious "why would anyone ever use that/why would you not run as many of those as possible" issues in some cases), but it is better than what we've had before for potential balance.

If they can keep up the living ruleset and do a better job of unit balance, the future looks better than the last 5 years. The whole Primaris absurdity and some issues with unit translations into the new ruleset (why are fromerly AV14 Russ tanks only very marginally more resilient than most other vehicles for instance?) really drag stuff down, but the latter at least is fixable and the former one can mostly just try and ignore.

My thoughts exactly. Hopefully GW will be more proactive in balancing 40k these days.

JJ

Probably my favourite so far but I've only dipped my toe into the other editions. This one has been super approachable and I've only had good experiences with it so far.