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.

 Lance845 wrote:

thekingofkings wrote:

 Irbis wrote:

 godardc wrote:

30k is as different from 40k as AOS is from WHFB, noone can deny that.

What?

Everyone with eyes sees 30K is mere expansion to 40K, always was, always will be. Only a bunch of die hard elitists (who, between others, diss players using Calth/Prospero models as 'fake' 30Keers) are desperate to "prove" their game is somehow different, so they can then ""prove"" it's better. FW laziness doesn't change that. What FW should have done was releasing Index 30K with trial rules for Legions, then, once the feedback was gathered, released updated Army books. Hell, GW team did 90% of the job for them, they could have just copied stats of SM stuff, come up with missing rules for 30K gear (which would be tiny in number, even Volkite and Contemptors made its way to 40K these days), done. Bunch of diehards wanting rules for ancient, bad system could have been placated with literally 1 page of rules for new stuff at the end of new HH books, everything else should have been made for 8th as not doing so is costing them both money and playerbase...

While I dont fully agree with Godardc, I think you are also missing the mark here. 1) it is not '"elitist" to prefer your setting and rules instead of a "upgrade" to a ruleset you dont like. and 2) the loss of playerbase would happen if they did move to 8th. Those of you who like 8th will still be buying and playing 8th, those of us who think 8th is garbage, will not move, so changing HH to 8th is what will cause us to leave. They have your money anyhow.

More importantly, is the amount of people who would "leave" because they don't like 8th > the amount of people they would GAIN because they switched to 8th.

Now compare 40ks sales from 7th to 8th. I think if GW has any understanding of even basic math they are wringing their hands and waiting to move 30k to 8th. It's only going to boost sales.

Harsh but true, the loss of the few of you who prefer 7th is meaningless compared to the growth from the influx of 8th.

Are we comparing complete and utter lack of marketing with actual marketing and engagement with the customers? As it seems pretty clear to me that is the main reason 8th is doing so well, it's not the game, it's the outside factors around the game, a lot of people left as they felt ignored and the issues with the game were not being adressed, no faqs etc. Now they seem to be actively trying to assuage people issues to some extent, that. Breeds good will and give the appearance of caring, 8th is the same mess as 7th when it comes to the actual game, the mess just shifted around like it does every edition, but because gw looks like it cares, people are buying it.

As to who would come to 30k and who would leave, well that's uncertain, I would stop playing but still collect bits here and there, just because 8th is not the game I want to play, in the same way as battletech classic and alpha strike, same models, same universe but one game is simply not on the level of complexity and depth I want from my wargames.

If all the polls going around are to be trusted, then it looks like 8th would gut the 30k player base, it would recover eventually I'm sure but it wouldn't be the same semi historical casual games, it would be changed, I have a pretty good idea how but it doesn't help the conversion.

As someone who plays both 30k and 40k:

I prefer 8th edition, immensely.

7th is a mess, even in the Heresy. My Castellax Robots are clearly better and more useful than Contemptor Dreadnoughts, despite explicitly being the same technology, because of the massive spread between Walker and Monstrous Creature rules.

Blasts always made me laugh, because the Baneblade's 10" blast got exactly the same number of hits against an enemy tank as a plasma cannon's 3" blast, while being only marginally more destructive (str 9 vs str 7, all else the same). Why doesn't a Baneblade just have 6 or 8 plasma cannons? Good question.

Armour saves on MCs but not on Vehicles makes me upset a bit too. A Thanatar has a 2+ save, and is immune to Boltguns at T8, while a Dreadnought can die to Boltguns and has no save. Why? At least in 8th one would be T8 2+ and the other would be T7 3+, giving easily comparable durability point-for-point, instead of having one drastically be better than the other "just cause".

etc. etc. Really, there's more reasons 8th is better than 7th than I have time to elucidate them.

7e has not more 'depth' than 8e, it has more pointless measuring, minutiae and micromanaging.

 Crimson wrote:
7e has not more 'depth' than 8e, it has more pointless measuring, minutiae and micromanaging.

Yeah I agree, having to check to see how many d6 shots you get then roll to hit then roll to wound then roll for saves after working out ap and what your final save is, then actually rolling to save.... wait, this is pretty much the same, if not more steps


Automatically Appended Next Post:
eah I agree, having to check to see how many d6 shots you get then roll to hit then roll to wound then roll for saves after working out ap and what your final save is, then actually rolling to save.... wait, this is pretty much the same, if not more steps

 Formosa wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
7e has not more 'depth' than 8e, it has more pointless measuring, minutiae and micromanaging.

Yeah I agree, having to check to see how many d6 shots you get then roll to hit then roll to wound then roll for saves after working out ap and what your final save is, then actually rolling to save.... wait, this is pretty much the same, if not more steps

As opposed to having to place a template (one of potentially 4 depending on the weapon type) and figure optimal placement, roll a scatter die, adjust the template based on the scatter die, then argue over who is or isnt under the template, or if the arrow is pointing left or slightly more forward left, before you even get to wounds?

Thats not even getting into the systemic design issues where such weapons woefully underperformed against single large targets.

8E isn't perfect. The random shots replacement for templates was one of the better changes, even if execution on some.is lacking, the concept and general function is superior, if less cinematic and fidgety.

 Lance845 wrote:

thekingofkings wrote:

 Irbis wrote:

 godardc wrote:

30k is as different from 40k as AOS is from WHFB, noone can deny that.

What?

Everyone with eyes sees 30K is mere expansion to 40K, always was, always will be. Only a bunch of die hard elitists (who, between others, diss players using Calth/Prospero models as 'fake' 30Keers) are desperate to "prove" their game is somehow different, so they can then ""prove"" it's better. FW laziness doesn't change that. What FW should have done was releasing Index 30K with trial rules for Legions, then, once the feedback was gathered, released updated Army books. Hell, GW team did 90% of the job for them, they could have just copied stats of SM stuff, come up with missing rules for 30K gear (which would be tiny in number, even Volkite and Contemptors made its way to 40K these days), done. Bunch of diehards wanting rules for ancient, bad system could have been placated with literally 1 page of rules for new stuff at the end of new HH books, everything else should have been made for 8th as not doing so is costing them both money and playerbase...

While I dont fully agree with Godardc, I think you are also missing the mark here. 1) it is not '"elitist" to prefer your setting and rules instead of a "upgrade" to a ruleset you dont like. and 2) the loss of playerbase would happen if they did move to 8th. Those of you who like 8th will still be buying and playing 8th, those of us who think 8th is garbage, will not move, so changing HH to 8th is what will cause us to leave. They have your money anyhow.

More importantly, is the amount of people who would "leave" because they don't like 8th > the amount of people they would GAIN because they switched to 8th.

Now compare 40ks sales from 7th to 8th. I think if GW has any understanding of even basic math they are wringing their hands and waiting to move 30k to 8th. It's only going to boost sales.

Harsh but true, the loss of the few of you who prefer 7th is meaningless compared to the growth from the influx of 8th.

you are wrongfully assuming all those 8th sales are by folks who like it, I bought it and despise it, most of us who hate it, bought it and played it which is how we know we despise it. you are making a bad assumption there. if it aint broke dont break it.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Formosa wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
7e has not more 'depth' than 8e, it has more pointless measuring, minutiae and micromanaging.

Yeah I agree, having to check to see how many d6 shots you get then roll to hit then roll to wound then roll for saves after working out ap and what your final save is, then actually rolling to save.... wait, this is pretty much the same, if not more steps

As opposed to having to place a template (one of potentially 4 depending on the weapon type) and figure optimal placement, roll a scatter die, adjust the template based on the scatter die, then argue over who is or isnt under the template, or if the arrow is pointing left or slightly more forward left, before you even get to wounds?

Thats not even getting into the systemic design issues where such weapons woefully underperformed against single large targets.

8E isn't perfect. The random shots replacement for templates was one of the better changes, even if execution on some.is lacking, the concept and general function is superior, if less cinematic and fidgety.

You can ignore my post entirely dude, it cut more than half of it off again and posted it twice... again, I haven't a clue what's going on but it's a bloody annoying bug.

Technology!!!!!!!

The main population of people I see saying "I'd play HH if it was 8th" or "It'd be better if was 8th" are largely people who have never played HH, or people who currently only play 8th ed.

99% of HH players i've asked are thrilled it's still 7th and are hugely happy with the new quality of the book.

I'll be frank. I'm a new player who got in because of the nice simplified rules in the battle primer. warhammer had a reputation for overly complex rules interactions and as much as the 30k stuff looks cool, I remember the long lists of house rules 'to balance the game' that every 5-7th ed tournament had. Why would I want to invest in that? In a rule system that's already become obsolete?

When HH updates to a modern ruleset I'll invest, but until then it's just a bunch of pretty models I won't use.

Locally the popularity of the HH grew in proportion to the unpopularity of 40k. The marine vs marine nature of the HH lead to a lot more of a balanced experience than in 40k. When 8th came out, the HH player base got gutted as people went back to what they really wanted to play all along, 40k. There are about five or so die hards that are still trying to keep it going, but their schedules never line up and things don't happen consistently at all.

I don't think switching to 8th would actually solve the issue. I think the HH player base will continue to decline as it's not very accessible and depends on the weakness of 40k to attract players to the alternative.

I can't see HH attracting many new players now. Like it or not 40k is quite popular again and in general it's much easier to find a game. So imo it was a bad business decision to not move along. Also I don't see how anyone can say HH is fine with Custodes and Thousand Sons OPness from Inferno which has a lot of unanwsered questions regarding many rules.

 AaronWilson wrote:
The main population of people I see saying "I'd play HH if it was 8th" or "It'd be better if was 8th" are largely people who have never played HH, or people who currently only play 8th ed.

99% of HH players i've asked are thrilled it's still 7th and are hugely happy with the new quality of the book.

99% of HH players is still a significantly smaller community then 100% of all 40k players. HH is a niche community within a niche community. If GW can grab 20% of the 40k crowd but loose 50% of the HH crowd they are probably actually still growing the HH community. What your essentially asking for is for the HH community to stagnate where it's at instead of grow. None of the new blood 40k has brought in will want to go back to 7th. None of the clearly large amount of players who ditched 7th for 8th will want to go back to 7th. A good enough chunk of HH players started and damn near completed a project to convert it to 8th. I am sure they would love to have some official support.

By ANY metric the people who want HH to stay 7th are a minority. And it makes NO sense for GW to plan to keep the game stuck in a now outdated rule set for the sake of a minority when they have the clear potential for growth.

Since I've been looking into this heavily for the last week I have to say that the 30k community stagnating is fundamentally untrue, all indicnations I have seen and heard about from reliable people show it's growing and not shrinking, there are several you tube channels that have also been doing research into the subject and back that up with statistics, each individually small but together it builds a consistent picture.

It's also being consistently shown that primarily 40k players want the shift to 8th, and primarily 30k players want 7th to stay, another annoyingly constant trend is 40k players not being able to differentiate between 7th 40k and 7th 30k as they have never actually played it or are being wilfully ignorant.

Also another thing I had not expected but shouldn't be surprised by is people who have played 8th and then jumped to heresy due to preferring it's rules, style and community (several factors).

In short the above post isn't supported by the data and I would encourage him to go and talk to various other communities and research a lot more, as it's simply untrue what he is saying.

 Formosa wrote:
, another annoyingly constant trend is 40k players not being able to differentiate between 7th 40k and 7th 30k as they have never actually played it or are being wilfully ignorant.

What kind of insultingly nonsensical statement is that? 7th Edition 40K and 7th Edition 30K used the same exact rulebook. So the exact same issues with wound allocation, vehicles, the AP system, the disparity between walkers and MCs, superheavies, flyers, close combat, shooting, template interaction with multilevel terrain, etc., were ALL equally present. Just because you see people complaining about formations doesn't mean you can just outright dismiss them as being " willfully ignorant". I'm sorry this poll isn't serving as a confirmation of your beliefs, but you asked the question of THIS community, and you don't get to tell everyone they're wrong just because you don't like the answers.

Personally given there is an unofficial set of lists to play under 8th, which GW haven't squashed, why not just let it continue as is?

Yes I prefer 8th as a set of rules, but frankly if you're playing an involved game against someone who is fun to play against the rules don't actually matter all that much.

Given GW haven't squashed the 8th version they may be happy to keep it as an unofficial alternative until they get round to it

 Tannhauser42 wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
, another annoyingly constant trend is 40k players not being able to differentiate between 7th 40k and 7th 30k as they have never actually played it or are being wilfully ignorant.

What kind of insultingly nonsensical statement is that? 7th Edition 40K and 7th Edition 30K used the same exact rulebook. So the exact same issues with wound allocation, vehicles, the AP system, the disparity between walkers and MCs, superheavies, flyers, close combat, shooting, template interaction with multilevel terrain, etc., were ALL equally present. Just because you see people complaining about formations doesn't mean you can just outright dismiss them as being " willfully ignorant". I'm sorry this poll isn't serving as a confirmation of your beliefs, but you asked the question of THIS community, and you don't get to tell everyone they're wrong just because you don't like the answers.

Case in point thank you, they did not use the "same exact rule book" they shared a rule book and then it was slightly modified, later becoming heavily modified to the point that armies behaved very differently, the rest is your opinion (which is fine) as to "issues", the only one I actually agree with was the disparity between vehicles and monstrous creatures, somthing that rarely cropped up in 30k, until mechanicum turned up, and after then was still rare as it was mostly Marine on Marine.

And yes, I do dismiss them as being wilfully ignorant when they constantly cite "formations" etc. As a reason that it should change, in spite of being told repeatedly across many sources, it shows they either haven't played 30k or are just ignoring what others are telling them repeatedly, and yes this poll has confirmed my beliefs, which is primarily 40k players want the change, and I have told no one they are wrong, I've asked open question to get more clarity from some, as I wanted to know what the general consensus was across SEVERAL communities, sites and pages, I have that info now and have a broader idea of what's going on, but please feel free to also take a look across several sites, contact page admins, different sites, you tube channels etc. To confirm for yourself.

 Formosa wrote:

 Tannhauser42 wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
, another annoyingly constant trend is 40k players not being able to differentiate between 7th 40k and 7th 30k as they have never actually played it or are being wilfully ignorant.

What kind of insultingly nonsensical statement is that? 7th Edition 40K and 7th Edition 30K used the same exact rulebook. So the exact same issues with wound allocation, vehicles, the AP system, the disparity between walkers and MCs, superheavies, flyers, close combat, shooting, template interaction with multilevel terrain, etc., were ALL equally present. Just because you see people complaining about formations doesn't mean you can just outright dismiss them as being " willfully ignorant". I'm sorry this poll isn't serving as a confirmation of your beliefs, but you asked the question of THIS community, and you don't get to tell everyone they're wrong just because you don't like the answers.

Case in point thank you, they did not use the "same exact rule book" they shared a rule book and then it was slightly modified, later becoming heavily modified to the point that armies behaved very differently, the rest is your opinion (which is fine) as to "issues", the only one I actually agree with was the disparity between vehicles and monstrous creatures, somthing that rarely cropped up in 30k, until mechanicum turned up, and after then was still rare as it was mostly Marine on Marine.

And yes, I do dismiss them as being wilfully ignorant when they constantly cite "formations" etc. As a reason that it should change, in spite of being told repeatedly across many sources, it shows they either haven't played 30k or are just ignoring what others are telling them repeatedly, and yes this poll has confirmed my beliefs, which is primarily 40k players want the change, and I have told no one they are wrong, I've asked open question to get more clarity from some, as I wanted to know what the general consensus was across SEVERAL communities, sites and pages, I have that info now and have a broader idea of what's going on, but please feel free to also take a look across several sites, contact page admins, different sites, you tube channels etc. To confirm for yourself.

Useing a different foc, introducing rites of war, changing a psychic power, and adding even more usrs doesnt make it a different game.

Its like saying 3rd edition shadowrun was a different game from core dnd because it had different classes and had rules for guns. The game was exactly the same. They played the same way. They had all the same mechanics. They had all the same highs and lows.

HH ran on 7th. They were same game. They had all the same problems with their core mechanics. They had new armies (kind of) and introduce little tweeks. But HH is 7th. Its why we are talking about it updating to ith. HH would in all likelyhood retain the more restrictive focs. Its armies. Maybe rites of war. Its only the core mechanics that would change.

I feel like people heavily invested in 30k feel encroachment on their comfort zone whenever anyone even mentions upgrading to 8th edition. To me it is silly to write rules for BA, DA and WS based upon the old rules. Those who tenaciously cling to 7th edition should be happy - they have a rulebook now so they can play it forever... however they should not get bent if FW decides to overhaul everything imo.

 Formosa wrote:

It's also being consistently shown that primarily 40k players want the shift to 8th, and primarily 30k players want 7th to stay, another annoyingly constant trend is 40k players not being able to differentiate between 7th 40k and 7th 30k as they have never actually played it or are being wilfully ignorant.

Also another thing I had not expected but shouldn't be surprised by is people who have played 8th and then jumped to heresy due to preferring it's rules, style and community (several factors).

In short the above post isn't supported by the data and I would encourage him to go and talk to various other communities and research a lot more, as it's simply untrue what he is saying.

Surely the above poll in this thread should be seen as PART of the data?

The only other ‘polls’ I’ve seen on this are on Crusade & Heresy - the big HH Facebook group, which consistently come up the other way and generate so much argument they’ve recently been banned from being posted again. However, as various people point out in them:

- Crusade & Heresy has a bit of a hard core of old-time Heresy players with all-resin armies, and those guys tend to fall on the side of 7ed. Some of the elitist/purist comments in the threads were ridiculous - people who wanted to play a Crusade-era vs xenon being told that they aren’t REAL Heresy players and xenon should never face a Heresy army for example.
- It’s a Facebook group asking this question six months after the release of 8ed, and a lot of people who are maybe playing Heresy a bit less (or play both 30k and 40k) might well not be following that group as much as they used to be compared to people who only ever want 7ed.
- It’s not unheard of in the past for some of the big HH podcasts who are very anti-8ed to see these polls and encourage their own fans to come over and vote.

Also, media channels tend to attract people who already agree with them. It’s really interesting that here on Dakka, often seen as a more 40k-heavy forum, the majority of people vote for 8ed and not surprising at all that a similar vote on, say, The Eye Of Horus podcast’s FB page would fall the other way.

I think, realistically, the only vote that matters is going to be with the wallet. If Heresy sales slow down or remain level over the next couple of years as less people migrate over from 40k, then I fully expect them to switch to 8ed. If they keep growing with all the new players eager to try out 7ed then I imagine the rules will stay the same.

With regard to events, I think their good levels of sign-up could also be explained in a few ways - the Sons Of Heresy podcast did great work generating interest in Heresy events throughout last year, for example. However, having been to a fair few UK ones, it is quite common to see the same faces at a lot of those events, and to keep sales high we need to know that those established players who already own armies will spend more in the next few years than all the players who’s Heresy purchases have dropped recently as they got into 40k again AND all the players who prefer Heresy as for modelling and setting but have slowed down because they prefer the 8ed ruleset (like me)!

 Formosa wrote:


Case in point thank you, they did not use the "same exact rule book" they shared a rule book

"same exact rule book" is not the same as "they shared a rule book"?
What the feth?
Tell me, which copy of the Warhammer 40,000 rulebook did you use to play Horus Heresy games, one not published by GW? Which rules for shooting did you use? Which rules for close combat did you use? Vehicles? USRs?

You know, when you first started posting about 30K, you were doing your best to get people interested in it, to get people to want to play it. Now, it looks like you're just doing your best to drive people away from it unless they follow your One True Path.

So is 30k still plauged by super strong admech and IG lists?

asides from the outliers i figure marine on marine action really doesnt matter what system its done in.

 Tannhauser42 wrote:

 Formosa wrote:


Case in point thank you, they did not use the "same exact rule book" they shared a rule book

"same exact rule book" is not the same as "they shared a rule book"?
What the feth?
Tell me, which copy of the Warhammer 40,000 rulebook did you use to play Horus Heresy games, one not published by GW? Which rules for shooting did you use? Which rules for close combat did you use? Vehicles? USRs?

You know, when you first started posting about 30K, you were doing your best to get people interested in it, to get people to want to play it. Now, it looks like you're just doing your best to drive people away from it unless they follow your One True Path.

No it's not the same and you know it's not the same, you take the 40k rulebook, you apply the changes that heresy made, suddenly it's a different set of rules... shock horror!!!

Or are you trying to tell me, as you have been, that heresy made zero modifications to the rules?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ArbitorIan wrote:

 Formosa wrote:

It's also being consistently shown that primarily 40k players want the shift to 8th, and primarily 30k players want 7th to stay, another annoyingly constant trend is 40k players not being able to differentiate between 7th 40k and 7th 30k as they have never actually played it or are being wilfully ignorant.

Also another thing I had not expected but shouldn't be surprised by is people who have played 8th and then jumped to heresy due to preferring it's rules, style and community (several factors).

In short the above post isn't supported by the data and I would encourage him to go and talk to various other communities and research a lot more, as it's simply untrue what he is saying.

Surely the above poll in this thread should be seen as PART of the data?

The only other ‘polls’ I’ve seen on this are on Crusade & Heresy - the big HH Facebook group, which consistently come up the other way and generate so much argument they’ve recently been banned from being posted again. However, as various people point out in them:

- Crusade & Heresy has a bit of a hard core of old-time Heresy players with all-resin armies, and those guys tend to fall on the side of 7ed. Some of the elitist/purist comments in the threads were ridiculous - people who wanted to play a Crusade-era vs xenon being told that they aren’t REAL Heresy players and xenon should never face a Heresy army for example.
- It’s a Facebook group asking this question six months after the release of 8ed, and a lot of people who are maybe playing Heresy a bit less (or play both 30k and 40k) might well not be following that group as much as they used to be compared to people who only ever want 7ed.
- It’s not unheard of in the past for some of the big HH podcasts who are very anti-8ed to see these polls and encourage their own fans to come over and vote.

Also, media channels tend to attract people who already agree with them. It’s really interesting that here on Dakka, often seen as a more 40k-heavy forum, the majority of people vote for 8ed and not surprising at all that a similar vote on, say, The Eye Of Horus podcast’s FB page would fall the other way.

I think, realistically, the only vote that matters is going to be with the wallet. If Heresy sales slow down or remain level over the next couple of years as less people migrate over from 40k, then I fully expect them to switch to 8ed. If they keep growing with all the new players eager to try out 7ed then I imagine the rules will stay the same.

With regard to events, I think their good levels of sign-up could also be explained in a few ways - the Sons Of Heresy podcast did great work generating interest in Heresy events throughout last year, for example. However, having been to a fair few UK ones, it is quite common to see the same faces at a lot of those events, and to keep sales high we need to know that those established players who already own armies will spend more in the next few years than all the players who’s Heresy purchases have dropped recently as they got into 40k again AND all the players who prefer Heresy as for modelling and setting but have slowed down because they prefer the 8ed ruleset (like me)!

Yes this poll is part of the greater whole being considered, our idea was to wait two weeks with various pols up and then gather all the data, combine it with Ones the you tubers have done and get an idea of what as much of the community as we can thinks.

You raise some good points on the ... purists, and frankly I would rather the game went to 8th than have to deal with hobby nazis like that...

I also agree that the media channels tend to attract people that agree with them, and there will always be an element of bias, but this is a 40k forum primarily and there is an element of bias here too, so with a bit of luck it shouldn't affect the numbers too badly.

If your bouncing around the country at heresy events then you have probably met me, I'm very active in the heresy community (different names on different sites), you've probably seen what I've seen too, heresy players on hold until the rule book dropped, but as I said before I've seen the community get stronger and stronger over the years, I do agree it's quite likely down to increased media and social media presence as well as strong word of mouth, and I agree the next couple of years will be important to the future of heresy.

So... I know I've posted in this thread before.

Yes, 30k changes the rules... but not enough.

There's still a massive disconnect between superheavies and lesser tanks as far as damage resolution (why can a malcador not Explode but a Land Raider Spartan can? The spartan is bigger with thicker armour and only 1 fewer hull point...)

There's still huge dissonance between walkers and MCs (Any of my Cybernetica bots will happily crunch dreadnoughts).

There's still the ridiculousness of armour facings. (Oh, you deepstruck behind my Thanatar while he shuffled through a narrow alleyway? He'll just pirouette like a ballet dancer, blast you with plasma and bolt cannons, and then when the rest of your army shoots him in the back it doesn't even matter. God help you if you're a Vindicator in that situation though).

There's still the fiddlyness of blast templates (I can't quite tell if you hit the Thanatar next to the other Thanatar, did you move it along the axis? Sure, you can have it. Oh, it's nice of you to say you don't think you do but I insist...)

There's still the Independent Character/Closest Model wall problem. (Wow, good thing the Mauler Bolt Cannon is AP3! I'm sure to heavily damage that Tactical Squad with these four Castellaxi with ETAs! Oh, your lead model is your artificer sergeant. Well, I guess I'll be lucky to kill him, maybe, if he actually fails a save and whatever FNP he has easy access to).

There's still the silly Instant Death rule, and even sillier Eternal Warrior (Man, my Decimus got insta-killed by a force weapon. Oh, don't worry, just play Decima Invictus and suddenly he's 100% immune to force weapons all the time.)

I know yo gathering data but you are skewing that data by not posting this in the 30k forum.

TeAXIIIT13 wrote:
I know yo gathering data but you are skewing that data by not posting this in the 30k forum.

Funnily enough I was told the same thing when I posted over on another site, that site was primarily 30k focused and they said that "your not including the 40k players so this will be skewed"

Formosa wrote:If your bouncing around the country at heresy events then you have probably met me, I'm very active in the heresy community (different names on different sites), you've probably seen what I've seen too, heresy players on hold until the rule book dropped, but as I said before I've seen the community get stronger and stronger over the years, I do agree it's quite likely down to increased media and social media presence as well as strong word of mouth, and I agree the next couple of years will be important to the future of heresy.

Oh very possibly - I'm usually at them with a small trolley holding a giant pink Militia & Cults army!

However, the last I attended was either Warhammer Fest or The London Heresy this year (whichever was second). After that 8ed was released and I have no desire to try and keep 7ed and 8ed in my head at the same time, so I have no plans to be attending any for the foreseeable. I think we're going to try and organise an 8ed Heresy event this year, and at the next London GT I'm signed up for the Necromunda event!

 Formosa wrote:

TeAXIIIT13 wrote:
I know yo gathering data but you are skewing that data by not posting this in the 30k forum.

Funnily enough I was told the same thing when I posted over on another site, that site was primarily 30k focused and they said that "your not including the 40k players so this will be skewed"

If you're talking about the Crusade and Heresy poll, I believe the comment was more "Those who stopped playing 30k once 8th came out due to preferring the rules likely won't see this post".