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.

Has anyone come up with rules etc for the Armiger warglaive for 7th ed?
We got one and don't want to use it as a "count's as" model!

Are you playing 7th for 30k? I believe 30k still uses the 7th rules if I'm not mistaken?

If not, why, oh why, are you playing 7th? I can't say 8th is perfect, but it's a damn sight better than 7th edition.

Best of luck getting the Armiger's rules ported over all the same. Take it easy.

-Red__Thirst-

As long as players have right attitude 7th>8th. Problem is abuses in codex as vastly superior 30k shows. If players avoid that abuse 7th ed beats crap out 8th

tneva82 wrote:
As long as players have right attitude 7th>8th. Problem is abuses in codex as vastly superior 30k shows. If players avoid that abuse 7th ed beats crap out 8th

Exactly this. If you’re playing a pick up game, 7th massively exacerbates the still-extant balance issues. But if you’ve got a group of like-minded, mature players with good communication, 7th has so much more depth to enjoy.

On-topic, google 30k Armiger fan rules, they’ll function just as well in 7th Ed 40k.

The Armiger stats align with a standard SM Dreadnought with a DCCW, a Heavy Stubber, a 30” Small Blast Multi-Melta, and 4 HP. Not sure how to workout the extra speed, though.

SJ

I'd say
Points ~MM contemptor cortus
WS4 BS4 S6 FA12 SA12 RA11 I3 A4 HP4
DCCW,
heavy stubber, swap for meltagun for x points
small-blast 30" multimelta as SJ said.

Then you could use a rule similar to what the skitarii light walkers had in 7th. They move x" (probably 12, same as bikes and regular knights). Then give it an ion shield. Boom, done. Make a rule that it cannot be your warlord for 40k, and in 30k questrous knights army they are Troops/Fast only.

licclerich wrote:
Has anyone come up with rules etc for the Armiger warglaive for 7th ed?
We got one and don't want to use it as a "count's as" model!

Posted this in the 30k forums a while ago

TeAXIIIT13 wrote:

licclerich wrote:
Has anyone come up with rules etc for the Armiger warglaive for 7th ed?
We got one and don't want to use it as a "count's as" model!

Posted this in the 30k forums a while ago

What about the speed ?

kombatwombat wrote:
But if you’ve got a group of like-minded, mature players with good communication, 7th has so much more depth to enjoy.

This is so wrong I don't even know where to begin - you're mistaking pointless, useless minutiae such as needing to ensure vehicle guns with very badly defined firing arcs (but somehow, no other big models) need to point precisely at imaginary point (because obviously tank can't move during abstract few minutes each round takes despite everything else doing so, amIrite?) or badly written exceptions to exceptions to exceptions turning the system into a quagmire of badly interacting rules grandfathered in from last 6 editions is 'depth', eh?

The very fact several people said in this very thread 'what about speed' should tell you which system is more flexible and has far greater depth while being vastly easier to learn.

Personally, I found 7th to be a dumpster fire, with 8th not much better. But my local gaming group hates 8th, loves the current 30k version of 7th. So we are playing 7th with 30k and 40k armies (rolls eyes).

As such, we are converting 8th only units over to 7th, hence my post on how the Armiger’s 8e stats align with the SM Dreadnought 8e stats, giving a 7e baseline to build from.

SJ

PS - the new Dominus Knights align with standard Questoris Knights stat-wise, only with 1 more hull point.

 Irbis wrote:

This is so wrong I don't even know where to begin

I’ll give you some starting points then:

Explain to me why it’s good that my Cataphracti Captain’s armour and power field can shrug off a direct hit from a Volcano Cannon - a weapon designed to bring down a Titan - but has exactly zero protection from a ramshackle buggy that was punched to death by human fists and went bang.
Or how said Captain is just as likely to be outright killed by his transport being forcibly decommissioned as an Ork in a T-shirt and a steel pot helm.
Or how a zombie mindlessly beating his stump against the leg of a Warlord Titan actually has a non-negligible chance of damaging it.
Or that a Shadowsword’s ungainly, fixed-axis cannon can shoot at that zombie... backwards... over a hill that stands higher than the cannon... shooting from its tall aerial.
Or that said Shadowsword’s sponsons can shoot through itself to target something on the far side without annihilating everybody onboard.
Or that a Berzerker can sneak up on a defended position and get just as close as a Drop Pod slamming directly into the battlements itself can.
Or that said Drop Pod, a”ong with all forms of teleportation, are 100% perfectly accurate 100% of the time.
Or that a single guy has a slow firing gun that can fire exactly once per turn suddenly gains the rate of fire of a minigun when being charged by multiple units in the half second he has to react.
Or how a lumbering Grav-tank can try to ram a supersonic plane.
Or how a short-range flamethrower is a legitimate choice for bringing that plane down.
Or how that flamethrower can pour a gout of promethium into a horde of cultists packed into a small bunker and only hit one guy.
Or how the terrifyingly enormous explosion from a Baneblade Cannon shell is no more likely to hit something when firing into a horde of fifty guys than when trying to hit a single dude in an open field.
Or that a Demolisher shell lobbed into the middle of a tightly-packed unit can hit, at most, 6 guys.
Or how one Thousand Son Sorceror shooting a bolt of lightning puts a hard ban on any of his peers or underlings attempting the same thing.
Or how a Lascannon is no more likely to hurt a Centurion than a Land Raider.
Or how a Guardsman charging the Emperor’s Champion is going to be able to attack before the superhuman, bullet-timing monster with the six foot sword cuts him the in half.

Go on, begin with those. There’s more where that came from.

I’m not bagging on 8th Ed. I play both editions, and enjoy both. They each have their strengths and weaknesses. Movement speeds are a weakness for 7th, as are the Monstrous Creature rules in the context of Walkers. But let’s not hold up 8th Ed as some paragon of excellence, it has mountainous issues of its own. How like-minded your group is determines how smoothly the game runs far more than what Edition you’re playing. I’m sorry if I prefer my flamethrower to hit more than 2 cultists when firing down a narrow alley packed with them. I prefer an immersive experience to a gamey one.

Yeah, while I definitely like 8th's Movement Values and Damage Values, I prefer 7th to it.

kombatwombat wrote:

 Irbis wrote:

This is so wrong I don't even know where to begin

I’ll give you some starting points then:

Explain to me why it’s good that my Cataphracti Captain’s armour and power field can shrug off a direct hit from a Volcano Cannon - a weapon designed to bring down a Titan - but has exactly zero protection from a ramshackle buggy that was punched to death by human fists and went bang.
Or how said Captain is just as likely to be outright killed by his transport being forcibly decommissioned as an Ork in a T-shirt and a steel pot helm.
Or how a zombie mindlessly beating his stump against the leg of a Warlord Titan actually has a non-negligible chance of damaging it.
Or that a Shadowsword’s ungainly, fixed-axis cannon can shoot at that zombie... backwards... over a hill that stands higher than the cannon... shooting from its tall aerial.
Or that said Shadowsword’s sponsons can shoot through itself to target something on the far side without annihilating everybody onboard.
Or that a Berzerker can sneak up on a defended position and get just as close as a Drop Pod slamming directly into the battlements itself can.
Or that said Drop Pod, a”ong with all forms of teleportation, are 100% perfectly accurate 100% of the time.
Or that a single guy has a slow firing gun that can fire exactly once per turn suddenly gains the rate of fire of a minigun when being charged by multiple units in the half second he has to react.
Or how a lumbering Grav-tank can try to ram a supersonic plane.
Or how a short-range flamethrower is a legitimate choice for bringing that plane down.
Or how that flamethrower can pour a gout of promethium into a horde of cultists packed into a small bunker and only hit one guy.
Or how the terrifyingly enormous explosion from a Baneblade Cannon shell is no more likely to hit something when firing into a horde of fifty guys than when trying to hit a single dude in an open field.
Or that a Demolisher shell lobbed into the middle of a tightly-packed unit can hit, at most, 6 guys.
Or how one Thousand Son Sorceror shooting a bolt of lightning puts a hard ban on any of his peers or underlings attempting the same thing.
Or how a Lascannon is no more likely to hurt a Centurion than a Land Raider.
Or how a Guardsman charging the Emperor’s Champion is going to be able to attack before the superhuman, bullet-timing monster with the six foot sword cuts him the in half.

Go on, begin with those. There’s more where that came from.

I’m not bagging on 8th Ed. I play both editions, and enjoy both. They each have their strengths and weaknesses. Movement speeds are a weakness for 7th, as are the Monstrous Creature rules in the context of Walkers. But let’s not hold up 8th Ed as some paragon of excellence, it has mountainous issues of its own. How like-minded your group is determines how smoothly the game runs far more than what Edition you’re playing. I’m sorry if I prefer my flamethrower to hit more than 2 cultists when firing down a narrow alley packed with them. I prefer an immersive experience to a gamey one.

A lot of those are abstractions. Just saying.
Also scattering deep strike in awful, perfectly accurate makes more sense. Why would you rely on technology that occasionally teleports your elite battle hardened warriors equipped with ancient, irriplacable relics of the chapter into a wall? In fact anything to do with the scatter dice is awful.

Saying that it’s an abstraction isn’t a justification, though. You need to justify both on a case-by-case basis the merits of each abstraction, and the overall whole. Saying ‘it’s an abstraction because I felt like abstracting it’ isn’t a strong position.

Assuming perfect accuracy of dynamic entry is foolish. Your Drop Pod might be clipped by an errant shell at the last second or a strong gust of wind and be knocked slightly off course. When it comes to teleportation, you’re not going to know the exact topography of a battlefield that changes every time a shell lands or somebody moves. So a slight inaccuracy is welcome and means we don’t need the contrived 9” away rule that is required in 8th Ed. It’s also a really nice mechanic for blasts, though the downside is time consumption there in some cases.

kombatwombat wrote:
Saying that it’s an abstraction isn’t a justification, though. You need to justify both on a case-by-case basis the merits of each abstraction, and the overall whole. Saying ‘it’s an abstraction because I felt like abstracting it’ isn’t a strong position.

Assuming perfect accuracy of dynamic entry is foolish. Your Drop Pod might be clipped by an errant shell at the last second or a strong gust of wind and be knocked slightly off course. When it comes to teleportation, you’re not going to know the exact topography of a battlefield that changes every time a shell lands or somebody moves. So a slight inaccuracy is welcome and means we don’t need the contrived 9” away rule that is required in 8th Ed. It’s also a really nice mechanic for blasts, though the downside is time consumption there in some cases.

Except the whole game is based on abstractions. Do you think tanks remain stationary to fire and waits on the rest of the army to move before doing so? That the armies are really taking turns? That when a space marine fires a bolter the bullet hovers in the air till the space marine rolls a dice to find out if it hit? Why are all explosions in 7th perfectly uniformed to two sizes across the whole galaxy? Why do all flamers have the same range and spread? That all infantry actually walk at the exact same speed? To complain that a baneblade is firing through itself and that it being an abstraction is an invalid argument when you already accept other abstractions that are just as ridiculous is hypocritical. What makes that abstraction different from the ones that you accept?

Same goes for deep striking and scatters. Perfect deep striking is great because it means I don't have to deal with other peoples "interpretation" of which way the scatter dice is pointing. I can justify that abstraction in my brain by saying "well in 38,000 orbital mapping technology has advanced a bit removes any significant margin of error" or whatever. However you're interpretation of non-perfect deep striking is a perfect example of justifying an abstract that you accept but my justification is wrong somehow? You can explain scattering on deep strike off the top of your head but can't accept something as simple as "the baneblade turns" for when a baneblade shoots through itself. I'm not saying you're wrong for liking 7th (I didn't so I skipped most of it) I'm just pointing out your own bias towards it.

The game doesn’t exist in a binary realm where it must be absolutely abstraction or absolutely simulation. The game sits on a spectrum between the two. There isn’t really any denying that 7th Ed sits closer to the simulation end than 8th Ed does.

You can’t just abstract for the sake of abstraction. If you do the final result is that you end up with a game where you flip a coin, heads wins, game over. You need to justify why you are making that abstraction. The metric for the why being ‘does it make the game experience better’.

I just rattled off a list of things that were abstracted in the move from 7th to 8th. I then asked quite directly to explain to me how those changes were good - i.e. I challenged (the generic) you to justify why those abstractions made the game experience better.

Now, you can say that the overall justification was expediency. Fine, but that’s not a reason why the game is better - what that’s effectively saying is that ‘I prefer the game to be faster at the cost of simulation’, to which I would ask ‘then why not go further and play chess, or go the whole hog and coin flip?’ So you can’t make one sweeping statement, you must instead address each point individually and justify each one against the metric ‘does it make the game experience better’. This is exactly what I’ve asked for. For example, how does the Captain shrugging off a Volcano Cannon but having zero protection from a buggy exploding improve the game experience?

If perfect deep striking improves your gaming experience by removing arguments over scatter angle then great, you’ve provided a legitimate response to that question. But I’d counter that my original point explicitly qualified that 7th Ed requires a more mature mindset - namely a group of people who understand that the joy of the gaming experience is more important than clipping that 4th marine in the blast radius.

Regarding the Baneblade shooting point, GW have previously said that a 40k game (albeit an earlier edition) covers about 60 seconds in real time, which makes it a few seconds per turn. A Baneblade can’t turn to shoot from one side and then about face in a few second. I’d actually say that the 7th Ed vehicle rules do a reasonable job of representing how a vehicle moves within the timeframe.

The point is that while 7th is closer to a simulation (which is laughable in itself but okay) 8th is the better game experience overall for being more abstract. Your idea that abstracting the game to the level of chess is a false equivilancy, so I'm not going to address that and I'm not going to address each of your points individually because I'm on a phone and it's pointless because you won't change your mind. No one in the history of broken up quote arguments on the internet has ever changed their mind because someone picked apart their arguments one by one.

You can justify the Captain shrugging off a volcano cannon by assuming he wasn't directly hit but the shot was close enough that the blast would have killed him if not for his Iron Halo or whatever.

GW say a lot of stuff. Taking one comment someone made up on the spot years ago as gospel is foolish.

I will also point out that this:

But I’d counter that my original point explicitly qualified that 7th Ed requires a more mature mindset

Let's just say statements like this don't do your arguments any favors.

I play Orks so screw 7th... yet even I will admit we had more variety but only because absolutely everything sucked so it didn't matter what we took. XD

Holy crap...I was onlt asking about the Warglaive people.....thanks for the 30k stats...perfect
Love you guys

 Sim-Life wrote:
No one in the history of broken up quote arguments on the internet has ever changed their mind because someone picked apart their arguments one by one.

While I don’t agree with the rest of what you’re saying, I’ll give you that this is probably the most true thing ever said on this forum. Doesn’t mean we just stop the conversation, though.

8th is the better game experience overall for being more abstract.

Why? How? If it’s just more abstract = better, then there’s no reason not to abstract further. Which does lead you to chess or a coin flip if taken to its final conclusion. Since a coin flip is not generally a better game than 40k, the argument that more abstract = better in isolation simply doesn’t stand. Which leaves us back at my challenge to justify why the abstractions have made the game experience better.

Unless all you’re just saying that 8th is better than 7th in your opinion. Which is perfectly fine, as I’ve said I enjoy both editions for different reasons. It doesn’t make my opinion wrong, nor refute any of my points above.

I'm not going to address that and I'm not going to address each of your points individually because I'm on a phone and it's pointless because you won't change your mind.

Fine, cool, we don’t all have the time to while away debating minutiae on a forum about toy soldiers. But I have posted a fairly long list of places where I believe the abstractions made in 8th have damaged the gaming experience rather than improving it. They’re up there for all the world to see and I haven’t seen anything to refute them.

You can justify the Captain shrugging off a volcano cannon by assuming he wasn't directly hit but the shot was close enough that the blast would have killed him if not for his Iron Halo or whatever.

That’s not quite what I meant. It was a jab at the Mortal Wound mechanic - namely that the Captain’s armour/shielding is so indomitable that it can tank a direct hit from a weapon designed to hunt Titans, and yet somehow a buggy going bang is so utterly lethal that the Captain doesn’t even get to try and stop it.

GW say a lot of stuff. Taking one comment someone made up on the spot years ago as gospel is foolish.

Certainly, but I think this one holds true. Ten seconds for a soldier to jog six times his body length while firing a rifle, charge that much again or a little further and take a swing with his bayonet is probably not a bad estimate. Some turns require a bit longer and some a bit shorter, and a couple of special rules might bend the time a bit, but as an overall average it seems reasonable. So six ten-second turns does give you a minute.

I will also point out that this:

But I’d counter that my original point explicitly qualified that 7th Ed requires a more mature mindset

Let's just say statements like this don't do your arguments any favors.

While what I said certainly seems provocative in hindsight, I think it stands up. I consider arguing over the exact angle of a scatter die or deliberately fudging it rather than just trying your best to be honest and give your opponent the benefit of the doubt to be an immature thing to do. Doing something immature like that harms the game experience, so a level of maturity to not do that is required to make the game experience enjoyable. 8th Ed doesn’t have scatter, so it doesn’t have that issue, so it doesn’t have the maturity requirement to avoiding harming the game experience. So one Edition has a maturity requirement to enjoy it that the other doesn’t have. Ergo,

7th Ed requires a more mature mindset.

I never said that people playing 7th Ed are more mature, only that there is a higher barrier for entry into an enjoyable gaming experience owing to the existence of things like the scatter die.

We're playing 40k. A game where fantasy Orcs have guns and fast bikes! A game that requires plastic toys! Nobody here is ever mature in either mindset or maturity.

Why does being mature mean you can’t enjoy things stereotyped as being childish? Being able to enjoy the things you enjoy rather than trying to fit in to avoid being teased is a sign of maturity.

Being childish doesn’t mean enjoying toy soldiers or cartoons or RPGs. It means behaving like a child - such as being petulant or arguing over little things because you must win. When you’re playing a board game as a family and one of the children wails and cries to their parents because their sibling did something unfair is similar to my eyes to getting upset about your opponent’s angle being a bit off. Or deliberately moving a blast template to hit more models. It’s the behaviour I’d expect of a ten year old, not someone triple that age.

kombatwombat wrote:
Why does being mature mean you can’t enjoy things stereotyped as being childish? Being able to enjoy the things you enjoy rather than trying to fit in to avoid being teased is a sign of maturity.

Being childish doesn’t mean enjoying toy soldiers or cartoons or RPGs. It means behaving like a child - such as being petulant or arguing over little things because you must win. When you’re playing a board game as a family and one of the children wails and cries to their parents because their sibling did something unfair is similar to my eyes to getting upset about your opponent’s angle being a bit off. Or deliberately moving a blast template to hit more models. It’s the behaviour I’d expect of a ten year old, not someone triple that age.

Exactly this, I play fantasy and 7th (mostly just heresy now 8th edition killed all of my drive for my 40k armies and I’ve not got that back yet).

I despise 8th edition for 2 reasons 1: it is not a war game, it is a trading card game with board game elements disguised as a war game, you collect the combos that will do the most damage for your side and try to stomp your opponents (I mean look at any battle reports o line or in white dwarf and all the models are clumped in the center with no tactical thinking to there placement).

2: it was designed by and for the immature tournament community that destroyed 7th themselves (everyone loved 7th till the tournament community decided it was suddenly broken, and rather than fix it themselves like they claim to do with their biased missions that imbalances the game they went online to systematically destroy the game). The tournament community is not what the game was originally made for, it was made for the narrative, jervis even said as much. Speaking of jervis anyone notice how him and almost everyone else you see in pictures and videos playing 8th or sigmar don’t look happy or like they are enjoying it? They all look bored and depressed.

Maturity is a requirement for a game to be good (differing levels of maturity), if two people come to play a game one is being serious and the other is acting like a toddler that was just told no do you think that going to be a good game?

Some People like 8th and aos, fine enjoy what you like, but neither of those are wargames, that’s like saying dnd is a platforms.

TeAXIIIT13 wrote:

kombatwombat wrote:
Why does being mature mean you can’t enjoy things stereotyped as being childish? Being able to enjoy the things you enjoy rather than trying to fit in to avoid being teased is a sign of maturity.

Being childish doesn’t mean enjoying toy soldiers or cartoons or RPGs. It means behaving like a child - such as being petulant or arguing over little things because you must win. When you’re playing a board game as a family and one of the children wails and cries to their parents because their sibling did something unfair is similar to my eyes to getting upset about your opponent’s angle being a bit off. Or deliberately moving a blast template to hit more models. It’s the behaviour I’d expect of a ten year old, not someone triple that age.

Exactly this, I play fantasy and 7th (mostly just heresy now 8th edition killed all of my drive for my 40k armies and I’ve not got that back yet).

I despise 8th edition for 2 reasons 1: it is not a war game, it is a trading card game with board game elements disguised as a war game, you collect the combos that will do the most damage for your side and try to stomp your opponents (I mean look at any battle reports o line or in white dwarf and all the models are clumped in the center with no tactical thinking to there placement).

2: it was designed by and for the immature tournament community that destroyed 7th themselves (everyone loved 7th till the tournament community decided it was suddenly broken, and rather than fix it themselves like they claim to do with their biased missions that imbalances the game they went online to systematically destroy the game). The tournament community is not what the game was originally made for, it was made for the narrative, jervis even said as much. Speaking of jervis anyone notice how him and almost everyone else you see in pictures and videos playing 8th or sigmar don’t look happy or like they are enjoying it? They all look bored and depressed.

Maturity is a requirement for a game to be good (differing levels of maturity), if two people come to play a game one is being serious and the other is acting like a toddler that was just told no do you think that going to be a good game?

Some People like 8th and aos, fine enjoy what you like, but neither of those are wargames, that’s like saying dnd is a platforms.

Oh wow. There's a lot going on here. Most of incredibly it insulting to just about everyone. But you said at the end that we can enjoy what we like so it's okay.

Oh wow. There's a lot going on here. Most of incredibly it insulting to just about everyone. But you said at the end that we can enjoy what we like so it's okay.

I do chuckle at the idea of anyone stating 40K was ever a proper wargame...at all.

TeAXIIIT13 wrote:


Oh wow. There's a lot going on here. Most of incredibly it insulting to just about everyone. But you said at the end that we can enjoy what we like so it's okay.

No I’ve not insulted everyone, just the tournament community and those that follow and enable them, I mean they don’t even know how to run a tournament, they are trying to run a league as a tournament when they should be doing a bracket system and having heats, also a win should equal a win, in the current system a guy that loses the final game can be the winner of the tournament... all I can think of is bane telling batman that victory has defeated him. Give it a few years and people will try to destroy 8th just like they did 7th.

I seriously wonder whether you couldn't call 8th an utter failure. It did bring a little new blood but the claims it had to be all new and fix the problems 7th had to cope with, and achieving the goals you claim being the tape to tell a failure from a success, are nothing.

If you look at the treads out there you see poeple arguing that some factins are useless (eg GK), some other utterly OP (eg eldars) so it looks like the power creep isn't gone. The game's said to resemble even more a "bring things and trhow them about on the table" spirit, which I ould really agree with after watching battle reports, broken mechanics such as the conscript before or the CP spam, bubblewrap etc are also debated debated as burning issues in a few treads, and the game still doesn't look like it found a balanc between gunline and close combat, instead pushing forward mass mobs armies...

Plus the game's been extremely toned down as far as the rules, looking very underdevelopped whereas their predecessors were overly complex...

All in all from all infos and treads I see about 8th edition it really seems not to bring or actually improve anything, it looks like it simply traded some issues with new ones and dumbed the game down. I'm very skeptical of it.

Don't judge peoples opinions of 8th on Dakka. When Warseer died all the whiners came here. Not to mention you don't go onto the internet and tell everyone you love something. Dakka is just an echo chamber of pissing and moaning. It's a great place if you want some confirmation bias that 8th is awful and everyone hates it.

GW's stock hasn't increased so much because the people who came back after leaving during 6th and 7th decided they wanted to play a different version of a terrible game.

 Sim-Life wrote:
Don't judge peoples opinions of 8th on Dakka. When Warseer died all the whiners came here. Not to mention you don't go onto the internet and tell everyone you love something. Dakka is just an echo chamber of pissing and moaning. It's a great place if you want some confirmation bias that 8th is awful and everyone hates it.

GW's stock hasn't increased so much because the people who came back after leaving during 6th and 7th decided they wanted to play a different version of a terrible game.

I understand your argument that poeple talking gak about the game might be because of the fact that 1. you don't need to shout out loud that you love a game 2 we welcomed some whiners from former forums.

But still, don't you think that if the whiners do keep going and are able to get their treads to be that controversial, followed and stuff? If you look at Bolt Action or KoW for example you don't find many whine treads, for BA they actually almost dn't exist at all.

Of course the larger scale and importance of 40k implies that it will necessary get more whiners but really such scale seems... over the top?

PS: I personnally don't feel like jumping onto 8th because after reading the rules I found them way to simple, and because they feel really awkward to me, mostly armour represented by toughness or the save system that doesn't seem to actually suit a game with weapons we meet in 40k. You may call me biased gak if you wish but still, I am extremly skeptical about that edition.