Army Size - What Happened to 40K?

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.

**Backspacehacker**

Well its just a biproduct of the hobbie being around for so long, after some what, 30 years? people amass armies quickly.

If GW does not make the shift to small elite armies at large point costs, IE knights, people wont want to get into the hobbie. Thats what happened to fantasy, in order to get into the hobby and play at normal game level you needed to drop 600+ bucks on an army.

This is the result of that same effect but mitigated. You can get into 1850 games, for around 300 bucks if you are running knights or elites.

**Backspacehacker**

King Pariah wrote:
It's the result of the malignant tumors originating from 6th edition known as escalation and formations.

This as well, i appreciate what formation SHOULD be there for, "Fluffy armies", but they are not and end up getting abused.

Honestly there was no reason to do away with the CAD, and HQs that turned specific unites into troops verse elites.

IE being able to run a deathwing troop army.

**Backspacehacker**

Nevelon wrote:
The shift of accepting more of the big stuff that was previously relegated to things like apocalypse games really started in 6th.

40k still plays fine at the old levels, you just need to be sure you are on the same page of the type of game you want to play with your opponent. The biggest problem I have with 40k these days is that it’s trying to be everything from kill team skirmish to titan scaled apoc battles. So you get the big stuff filtering down into smaller games where IMHO they don’t fit/belong.

But in a tournament, where the gloves are off and the nasty stuff is hitting the table, you should expect to see those sort of things.

In a friendly game where you decide not to trot out the really nasty units/formations, a more old school list can still work.

The hard part is negotiating with your opponent to ensure a fun game for all. Power balance is so out of whack, it’s easy to get a one sided curb stomp, which isn’t really fun for anyone.

This, i still cringe when i see the following hit the table in non apoc games

Super heavy walkers
Super heavy tanks
GMC
D weapons of anykind
Torrent weapons
Anything larger then an 8 inch blast excluding the orbital bombardment

They just are out of place imo, also the amount of AP on the field is staggering.

**Backspacehacker**

Martel732 wrote:
AP is not the issue as much as wound spam now.

Yeah that is true, but im more referring to the ease of access to ap 1 and 2

**Backspacehacker**

I think they should just bring back the CAD and HQs that make cretin models troop choices

**Backspacehacker**

BossJakadakk wrote:
Yarium wrote:
Kanluwen wrote:
Vaktathi wrote:
Lets be fair, it took most regular players 6 months to almost a year to really get 7E's detachment and formation rules down, most people did nit immediately or intuitively grasp them, theyre the single most convoluted and complicated army construction rules I can think of for any tabletop game out there by far.

Oh please.

If you had a basic understanding of the way the FOC worked before, it absolutely was not difficult for someone to understand the way the Detachment system worked.

Formations, sure that's a different story...but Formations also weren't exceedingly widespread.

Whether or not they're easy for you is besides the point. Empircally, people have issues with them. I know I have one friend whom I've had to describe the rules on detachments probably over a dozen times. He's only just know understanding it, and he finally understood now why he shouldn't be calling a CAD attached to his formation an "allied detachment". Once you understand it, it clicks, and perhaps it makes sense for new folks getting into the game even, but a lot of returning players get very confused because the core army composition of the game from the rest of the history of the game they can remember was "1 HQ, 2 Troops, and then I build from there..."

I've got that friend too. And it took me a bit as well, I understood the CAD just fine when I started in January, but other detachments took me a bit, mostly the Decurion-style ones, because I didn't know they even existed, since my first codex didn't have one.

We have a guy whos been in the hobby since like 2nd, and even he still needs to remember that formations are a thing, The CAD was so ingranded in his understanding of the game for so long, he forgets that you dont need to follow it anymore.