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.

I've been out of the loop for quite a while now, and I am lost as to how the game works now and what the fluff is like. I'm pretty much unaware of anything after Guilliman came back as I sort of mentally checked out after that. So to condense a whole bunch of reading into one thread, I would ask: Is the 40k game any good, and is the lore still good?

8th is good but for a few MAJOR flaws, but it's better than 7th.

The lore has been stupid and bad for a long time.

It might just be me but I found that whenever GW makes lore for sale's sake it sucked ass, but when they made sales for lore's sake it generally worked out.

Goto and Ward not included.

It's not THAT bad, but there are better games by far.

The game is ok (better than 7th by a long shot) and the fluff is more interesting to me, as I've been reading the same recycled fluff for the last 20 years. Nice to get something new.

The game is ok, and the fluff is ok. I voted good and good, which overstates my opinion.

I'd say there's overall more viable options on the competitive-but-not-cut-throat scene. There is always a best list on top.

I would say best it has been since early 6th edition, pre Knights. For me, that was the breaking point. These days, the game has been rescoped to allow interaction between all models. No matter what, you can wound on a 6. I personally like almost all of the changes that came with 8th, to make an easy, Saturday evenings with some friends game.

 JNAProductions wrote:
It's not THAT bad, but there are better games by far.

The various forms of Epic 40k, for instance. Though the GW models and traditional paintjobs look horrific.

Slowly working my way to a point where I can fix that.

Lore's been either eh or outright bad since Gathering Storm. My friends and I have quit in 8th because we don't like it. So it's that bad to us. But other people seem to like what I don't in 8th so there you go.

Game is great if you aren't playing top tier competitive level (which is the only level Dakka will talk about). Lore is meh. It's very space marine/primarch focussed right which my least favourite part of the lore so takd take that with a grain of salt.

 Sim-Life wrote:
Game is great if you aren't playing top tier competitive level (which is the only level Dakka will talk about). Lore is meh. It's very space marine/primarch focussed right which my least favourite part of the lore so takd take that with a grain of salt.

Are they still doing continuous SM releases?
I got tired of that a good couple of years before I checked out...

 Selym wrote:

 Sim-Life wrote:
Game is great if you aren't playing top tier competitive level (which is the only level Dakka will talk about). Lore is meh. It's very space marine/primarch focussed right which my least favourite part of the lore so takd take that with a grain of salt.

Are they still doing continuous SM releases?
I got tired of that a good couple of years before I checked out...

Sort of? There was some major SM and CSM stuff early in the edition, and some Custodes in January, but since then we've also got an AdMechvNecrons box set, a new miniKnight, and we're looking at a new bigKnight too. Also, a Cryptek surfing on a Scarab and Sly Marbo.

I caveat my vote for Game is good, lore is good with:

1) Relating to the game - there is a lot of errata associated with the rules
2) Relating to the lore - there is some concern that GW may drop non-Primaris Space Marines

Aside from that, 8th edition rules are great, and the quality of the Codexes and miniatures are better than ever.

 deathwinguk wrote:
I caveat my vote for Game is good, lore is good with:

1) Relating to the game - there is a lot of errata associated with the rules
2) Relating to the lore - there is some concern that GW may drop non-Primaris Space Marines

Aside from that, 8th edition rules are great, and the quality of the Codexes and miniatures are better than ever.

IMO the rules are the worst I have ever seen. Way below the quality I expect from GW, the lore has gotten even worse. Really hate the size and scale creep, way too many models that are too big on way too small of a board, add in the awful terrain rules and you have just gak for a game.

 thekingofkings wrote:

 deathwinguk wrote:
I caveat my vote for Game is good, lore is good with:

1) Relating to the game - there is a lot of errata associated with the rules
2) Relating to the lore - there is some concern that GW may drop non-Primaris Space Marines

Aside from that, 8th edition rules are great, and the quality of the Codexes and miniatures are better than ever.

IMO the rules are the worst I have ever seen. Way below the quality I expect from GW, the lore has gotten even worse. Really hate the size and scale creep, way too many models that are too big on way too small of a board, add in the awful terrain rules and you have just gak for a game.

Yeah, I never much appreciated GW's push to move an obviously skirmish scale to accommodate Company-level battles using semi-RPG rules. Back in 7E all my games consisted of spending an hour setting up, and then either removing half my stuff T1, or spending two turns moving everything forward on a dead straight line and hoping that I didn't fail my wound and armour rolls.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

 Selym wrote:

 Sim-Life wrote:
Game is great if you aren't playing top tier competitive level (which is the only level Dakka will talk about). Lore is meh. It's very space marine/primarch focussed right which my least favourite part of the lore so takd take that with a grain of salt.

Are they still doing continuous SM releases?
I got tired of that a good couple of years before I checked out...

Sort of? There was some major SM and CSM stuff early in the edition, and some Custodes in January, but since then we've also got an AdMechvNecrons box set, a new miniKnight, and we're looking at a new bigKnight too. Also, a Cryptek surfing on a Scarab and Sly Marbo.

It depends on how you define SM releases. There has been A LOT of power armour releases over the last year.

The lore has gotten pretty bad. As for the game itself, it's hard to say. It's definitely a lot better than 6th or 7th edition, that's for sure. But it still has a lot of problems, and GW's staff seems to be all over the place without a real vision for how they want the game to actually be.

I'm in kinda the same position, last time I played actively was 5th edition and have only recently returned.

Rules-wise I'd say that 8th is probably the worst mess I've seen in a long time as a tabletop & RPG player, seems like GWs game designers are flinging refuse at a teflon wall with this one. People are praising it as much better than 7th/6th, but I don't know as I never played those.

Fluff-wise I kinda zoned out after reading the synopsis, so don't really know as I haven't read any of the new Black Library stuff.

The real question here is...
Is dakkadakka good now?

 Selym wrote:

 Sim-Life wrote:
Game is great if you aren't playing top tier competitive level (which is the only level Dakka will talk about). Lore is meh. It's very space marine/primarch focussed right which my least favourite part of the lore so takd take that with a grain of salt.

Are they still doing continuous SM releases?
I got tired of that a good couple of years before I checked out...

Space Marines are the bread and butter of 40k, and frankly what the empire GW have created is built on. They will dominate releases for this reason. They always have done and always will.

I don't really understand why people who have a serious problem with this get in to or stay with the game.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Selym wrote:
It might just be me but I found that whenever GW makes lore for sale's sake it sucked ass, but when they made sales for lore's sake it generally worked out.

Goto and Ward not included.

I don't think we can really know which is which to be honest. Lots of people dislike Primaris fluff for example, but it's entirely plausible that the people designing it were super in to the ideas they were coming up with.

Everything will have the ultimate goal of making money for the company of course, but I don't think we really have any way to correlate what ideas connected best with the players with how passionate the people behind them were.

The game is better than ever. Now, there obviously still are issues, but is pretty decent. The lore however has gone to hell in a handbasket since Gathering Storm.

Both the lore and the game are better than they have been for several editions.

Generally speaking, ignore the two extremist camps.

1) The game is not garbage.
2) The game is not amazing.

It's 40K. It's probably the best version of 40K for the average player in a long time. Tournament players will never be happy with 40K because they're sadists and seem to actually expect a tight, cohesive, tournament-minded game - something 40K is not, and never will be. If you choose to go that route, you'll be disappointed, just as people have been for the past 15-20 years.

It's 40K. It's still just as breakable as 40K has always been. WAAC and "that guy"s are commonplace, again as they've always been.

It's 40K. The game becomes 10x better with a handful of house rules and common sense, but again those sheep who hesitate to change a game in any way, shape or form will not enjoy it as much as they could (for some unknown reason).

The lore? You can ignore it. Unless you're hooked on casual pick-up games, you don't even need to ever encounter new models, or Primaris marines, etc. You can play in whatever setting you want, at whatever stage of the fluff/lore you thought was best. Want all Eldar to be Eldritch Raiders? Go nuts. The last three-book campaign was a lazy mess and didn't actually really push the story anywhere useful. The large warp-rift is probably the best thing to come out of it. Again, pretend it didn't happen and play 40K when you want to play 40K.

It's 40K. It's not a brilliantly designed game, but it's good enough to be fun. GW has never produced amazing rule sets, but have often produced pretty fun and thematic rules. If you go into this understanding its a typical GW game, you'll have fun. If you compare it to other, rather good game designs, it'll fall short every time. This game is about putting 10-15 lbs. (or more) of plastic on a table and scooping it off in buckets. It's fun for an afternoon but there is little in the way of genius rules-writing here. Despite the massive changes to the core mechanics, the game is still rather typical 40K fare.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Both the lore and the game are better than they have been for several editions.

This several times over. Having watched interest, enthusiasm, and participation decline over the past few editions,the sheer turnaround since 8th hit has been amazing.

 Bookwrack wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
Both the lore and the game are better than they have been for several editions.

This several times over. Having watched interest, enthusiasm, and participation decline over the past few editions,the sheer turnaround since 8th hit has been amazing.

its been just the opposite for us, but I have heard both in various spots.

Game is good, lore is good.

I'd be careful to say that. The game is now more a board game, no longer a complex table top as it has been. The depth of the game has severely decreased. This is not what I like. But for GW, acquiring new customers is a basic issue and with a complex rule set this is hardly possible.

 wuestenfux wrote:
Game is good, lore is good.

I'd be careful to say that. The game is now more a board game, no longer a complex table top as it has been. The depth of the game has severely decreased. This is not what I like. But for GW, acquiring new customers is a basic issue and with a complex rule set this is hardly possible.

Though I voted the same as wuestenfuchs, I disagree with his opinion. Complexity has decreased, but depth has severely increased. Unlike before the game needs actual tactics now. I also like that every unit is playable now, balance is pretty good.
If you look at the rulebook and Codizes very little has changed about the Lore. 90% is the same, always followed by a small paragraf about the great rift.

If you play an army with the codex the edition is amazing. Index 8th edition is terrible.

Lore is good, except for primaris, but I wasn't a fan of vanilla marines even before.

The thing about the lore being good.

I kind of disagree. I said before it's become too Space Marine focussed which is true since the fluff is mainly based around Primaris and Guilliman. But it's INTERESTING if nothing else. After 20-odd years of stagnation anything would be interesting at this point. I won't say it's good but it doesn't cause physical pain to read so its better than a kick in the teeth.

 Sim-Life wrote:
The thing about the lore being good.

I kind of disagree. I said before it's become too Space Marine focussed which is true since the fluff is mainly based around Primaris and Guilliman. But it's INTERESTING if nothing else. After 20-odd years of stagnation anything would be interesting at this point. I won't say it's good but it doesn't cause physical pain to read so its better than Matticus Wardicus.

FTFY

For someone trying to catch up on the last two years of lore, what would you recommend I read?

Depends on it you like gun lines or not, if you play a melee army it's pretty dire.

hobojebus wrote:
Depends on it you like gun lines or not, if you play a melee army it's pretty dire.

Well, yeah. The game isn't balanced around being a one trick army. You're supposed to mix tactics.

Which is all well and good, and generally makes for more fun games in my opinion, except some armies have virtually no shooting.

Daemons being probably the biggest issue here, especially Khorne. But Daemons are a weird one, because they share a model range with fantasy, so they're limited to what can be done to balance it.

I'm not sure what the answer is, but I don't think it's just make melee better...