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.

Pancakey wrote:

pismakron wrote:

Pancakey wrote:
8th edition meta is list building. You can easily lose the game at the list building phase.

It's always been this way , but 8th is doubling down on this concept.

Remeber 8th ed is the MOST play tested version ever and the game WE asked for.

Well, at least the game is not decided when rolling for invisibility on the telepathy table. Small steps...

It's easier just to not take invis than to fix the raging pyre that 8th is becoming only 6 months after release.

It is not at all easy. When playing against opponents most are going to assume that the official rules will be followed. House rules makes sense when you are playing the same opponent regularly and casually.

As for 8th being a raging pyre, it is certainly an edition I would play sooner than 7th edition by a large margin. And it is my impression that most people feels the same. Regards

List building was more important in 6/7th than it is now in 8th, that's a fact.

Spoletta wrote:
List building was more important in 6/7th than it is now in 8th, that's a fact.

List building has always be important.
Synergy is key.

Synergy he says! Oh yes, so complex, so nuanced...synergy... right. Because it takes a lot of skill to put together the synergy for taking as many things that cast smite as possible as cheaply as possible, or playing Cadian IG Plasma spam and rolling dice. Yeah. "Synergy".

You know what actual synergy is? Needing various different pieces that perform a different task all working together in unison to complete an objective. That is not what competitive 40k looks like right now from my perspective.

Spoletta wrote:
List building was more important in 6/7th than it is now in 8th, that's a fact.

It depends on the armies. Those ones that must rely in on the index have only a few options now, SW, orks and drukhari have way lesser viable options now than they used to have in 7th. So, at least for those armies, list building is more important now than before.

ultimentra wrote:Synergy he says! Oh yes, so complex, so nuanced...synergy... right. Because it takes a lot of skill to put together the synergy for taking as many things that cast smite as possible as cheaply as possible, or playing Cadian IG Plasma spam and rolling dice. Yeah. "Synergy".

You know what actual synergy is? Needing various different pieces that perform a different task all working together in unison to complete an objective. That is not what competitive 40k looks like right now from my perspective.

Gotta love dakkadakka

You know how many thread there are right now that claim that the SYNERGY between cheap screens, no LOS arty and good battle tanks makes for an OP army?

Yeah, spam those plasma, there are soooo many winning lists with that strategy

Blackie wrote:

Spoletta wrote:
List building was more important in 6/7th than it is now in 8th, that's a fact.

It depends on the armies. Those ones that must rely in on the index have only a few options now, SW, orks and drukhari have way lesser viable options now than they used to have in 7th. So, at least for those armies, list building is more important now than before.

I'd say that is true for almost all armies. You say that it is only true for index armies, but most of the codex armies gained a lot of potential in list building.

Space marines had 2 incredibly boring lists in 7th, either centstar or gladius. Now there is a bit of polarization toward GMan, but at least there are variations to that and the Ravenguard lists also exist.
The Mechanicus had one build in 7th. In 8th there is a problem with Cawl being too good, but that is only a fraction of the list, the rest of it can be designed with a reasonable freedom.
Chaos Marines had no chances in 7th (except in the last months of the edition). In 8th Mortarion and Magnus are overused, and obliterators are underpriced but you see a lot of diveristy in list building (especially with the removal of malefic lords)
Astra Militarum and Tyranids went from 0 to 100. They had no freedom at all in list building, now they can put whatever they want in it and still have a good list.
Grey knights used to be codex "Draigo Taxi" now it is codex "NDK"... not much of a gain indeed.
Dark Angels is too early to tell.
Blood Angels i have honestly no knowledge on how they actually build lists, but i have to say that they were extinct in 7th, so it can only be a gain.
Eldars spammed 2 models in 7th and now spam 2 models in 8th, but at least here we can hope every 3 months for a nerf to said models instead of having to wait the next Brokedar codex.

I'm not talking about tournament lists or super competitive games. I'm referring to semi-competitive friendly and casual games. Now even in those kind of metas, my index armies have way lesser viable options than they had in 7th.

SM had lots of viable units in 7th and they still have lots of them in 8th. Of course in a tournaments they'll only have one list but in every edition tournaments are like that, with only a few ultracompetitive lists and 80% of the GW catalogue considered "garbage". Tournament games are only a tiny part of 40k.

Now codex armies have lots of viable options, even SM. Index armies still must rely on a few choices and for them list building is fundamental even for the fluffiest games.

 Blackie wrote:
I'm not talking about tournament lists or super competitive games. I'm referring to semi-competitive friendly and casual games. Now even in those kind of metas, my index armies have way lesser viable options than they had in 7th.

SM had lots of viable units in 7th and they still have lots of them in 8th. Of course in a tournaments they'll only have one list but in every edition tournaments are like that, with only a few ultracompetitive lists and 80% of the GW catalogue considered "garbage". Tournament games are only a tiny part of 40k.

Now codex armies have lots of viable options, even SM. Index armies still must rely on a few choices and for them list building is fundamental even for the fluffiest games.

With this, I agree.

OP


Read your post and skipped to here so I might have missed something.

Getting tabled sucks and happens to everyone and it super sucks when like you, youre in it for fun. I played the same way just trying out units and going for the joy of the game. All you can do is before a game ask your opponents if they would rather play fun and fluffy lists rather than min/max super lists. Ask that and hope because some might bring hard as nails lists just to survive on a gamestore not realizing that you dont care aboit the best netlists. Some wont care and just want their list to win because it actually does something for them.

So all you can do is just try your best to play the game youd like to play and try and filter out the WAAC players