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.

Well I guess I don't give a damn, either, because the people expecting restraint from gamers are living in fantasy la la land. If there is a way to shoot people off the board by turn 2, gamers will find it and use it.

I'm 100% with Peregrine in that the GW apologists are acting like people are somehow twisting rules or rules lawyering here. No, taking the generic stock WS is quite OP without bending a single rule.

Quit making excuses for the lazy game design and testing of GW. If they'd ever had real competition in the last 20 years, they almost certainly would have lost.

It is NOT possible to "fix" player attitudes because even if you don't think finding the most efficient list isn't fun, other players WILL. You don't get to dictate what is fun for others.

The solution is to make it so there is no single most efficient list. But GW is too stupid/lazy/both to make this happen. Instead, they trot out the Vendetta, the helldrake, and the Wave Serpent.

xruslanx wrote:
Oh peregrine, peregrine, peregrine. What do you think about the people who *do* enjoy 40k? Do you consider them to be an inferior species? Or are they all drunk?

If they enjoy it because of the fluff/models, fine. If they enjoy it because of the rules then sorry, they have no idea what they're talking about.

Has it not occurred to you in the slightest that you might not be 40k's target audience, as far as rules are concerned?

Of course I'm not. I have high standards for the things I spend money on, which is why I don't buy GW rules. GW's target audience is clearly people with low standards who will pay $50 for garbage and be thankful for it, or kids who whine until their parents buy them a box of space marines and a codex.

Of course they do. Because if every single unit were just as powerful as all the others it'd be a fething dull game.

Again, you have absolutely no clue what you're talking about. We've already explained why you're wrong about this, but you just bury your head in the sand and pretend 40k is a good game.

And you still think that GW are somehow good game designers?

Yup.

Well, you have no idea what you're talking about then. Not that we expect much else from someone who thinks that playing a non-GW game is like having sex with your dog.

Peregrine doesn't give a damn about actual ideas, he'll just quote you to death.

You seem to be having trouble telling the difference between "not giving a damn about your ideas" and "thinking your ideas are utterly stupid".

 Peregrine wrote:

xruslanx wrote:
Oh peregrine, peregrine, peregrine. What do you think about the people who *do* enjoy 40k? Do you consider them to be an inferior species? Or are they all drunk?

If they enjoy it because of the fluff/models, fine. If they enjoy it because of the rules then sorry, they have no idea what they're talking about.

I really think you should spend more time thinking about other people...you can't possibly imagine why people enjoy playing the most popular wargame in the world? There are hundreds of thousands of perfectly rational, intelligent people out there who enjoy 40k regularly. Try harder at understanding why this is the case.

I get why you don't like 40k - because it isn't designed for your competative tourney-style gameplay. Try to understand why other people DO like it.

Has anyone thought that this debate wouldn't be happening if GW did competently play test and produce a balanced, fair, and clear rule set?

That alone should speak volumes about the state of this game.

xruslanx wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

xruslanx wrote:
Oh peregrine, peregrine, peregrine. What do you think about the people who *do* enjoy 40k? Do you consider them to be an inferior species? Or are they all drunk?

If they enjoy it because of the fluff/models, fine. If they enjoy it because of the rules then sorry, they have no idea what they're talking about.

I really think you should spend more time thinking about other people...you can't possibly imagine why people enjoy playing the most popular wargame in the world? There are hundreds of thousands of perfectly rational, intelligent people out there who enjoy 40k regularly. Try harder at understanding why this is the case.

I get why you don't like 40k - because it isn't designed for your competative tourney-style gameplay. Try to understand why other people DO like it.

They'd like it better I bet if each unit choice in the codex had a legitimate use.

I want to believe stuff gets a lot of playtesting...

xruslanx wrote:
I really think you should spend more time thinking about other people...you can't possibly imagine why people enjoy playing the most popular wargame in the world?

I can understand why. The game has good fluff and models, and GW's business practices (driving independent stores out of business, etc) have given them a dominant position in the market such that if you want to play a tabletop wargame in a lot of places your choices are 40k, WHFB, or that one guy who plays something else once a month.

What I can't understand is how anyone who understands anything about game design can claim that 40k's rules are good. Which, by the way, you have yet to explain. All you've done is insist that they're adequate for what you want and whine about how we hurt poor GW's feelings.

I get why you don't like 40k - because it isn't designed for your competative tourney-style gameplay. Try to understand why other people DO like it.

40k isn't designed for casual gaming either. In fact it isn't designed for anything beyond having the idea of a cool game exist so that kids will buy space marine kits.

 Peregrine wrote:

xruslanx wrote:
I really think you should spend more time thinking about other people...you can't possibly imagine why people enjoy playing the most popular wargame in the world?

I can understand why. The game has good fluff and models, and GW's business practices (driving independent stores out of business, etc) have given them a dominant position in the market such that if you want to play a tabletop wargame in a lot of places your choices are 40k, WHFB, or that one guy who plays something else once a month.

What I can't understand is how anyone who understands anything about game design can claim that 40k's rules are good. Which, by the way, you have yet to explain. All you've done is insist that they're adequate for what you want and whine about how we hurt poor GW's feelings..

You are factually incorrect, yet again.

So tell me, why do you think so many people enjoy playing 40k rules? Nothing to do with fluff or models.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:

They'd like it better I bet if each unit choice in the codex had a legitimate use.

I never said every 40k codex is perfect. But there's a big gulf between "40k is a fun ruleset but it has its problems", and "40k is absolute garbage with no effort put into it whatsoever".

People play 40K because they can get a game. That's my experience. It's the only game in town for this genre in many cases.

xruslanx wrote:
You are factually incorrect, yet again.

You know, if you were a reasonable person you'd want us all to forget about how you made a biased poll and even admitted it was a biased poll that was intended to "prove" that people like 40k. But I guess you'd prefer to brag about it.

So tell me, why do you think so many people enjoy playing 40k rules? Nothing to do with fluff or models.

Yeah, let's just conveniently ignore the fact that you left out an "average" option so that anyone who thinks the rules are adequate for what they want to do but not great is forced to say they like the rules "a lot".

But there's a big gulf between "40k is a fun ruleset but it has its problems", and "40k is absolute garbage with no effort put into it whatsoever".

You're right, there is. Too bad GW is on the wrong side of it.

xruslanx wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

xruslanx wrote:
Oh peregrine, peregrine, peregrine. What do you think about the people who *do* enjoy 40k? Do you consider them to be an inferior species? Or are they all drunk?

If they enjoy it because of the fluff/models, fine. If they enjoy it because of the rules then sorry, they have no idea what they're talking about.

I really think you should spend more time thinking about other people...you can't possibly imagine why people enjoy playing the most popular wargame in the world? There are hundreds of thousands of perfectly rational, intelligent people out there who enjoy 40k regularly. Try harder at understanding why this is the case.

I get why you don't like 40k - because it isn't designed for your competative tourney-style gameplay. Try to understand why other people DO like it.

False. I play the game because I enjoy the fluff and models. Never been to a tournament (excluded local fluff ones) and I have never used a net list. i want a more balanced game. Again I will use the example of starcraft, a balanced game that was fun for both the high level competitive and the casual gamer. Better balance would allow the fluff players like myself to have a better chance at winning games. I know that if I put my deathwing on the table and I face eldar, tau, necrons, grey knights, bikers, orks, IG or tyranids I have a less than 30% chance at winning. Why? Is it because I am a bad player? Is it because i make poor choices in game? Not really it is because my units are not designed in a way to have any kind of equal footing against these armies. Will I still put my deathwing on the table? Yes, why you ask because I like them and think its fun. I still want a more balanced game. Balance does not equal bland.it means that each army and list within that army have a even chance to win. Within that I will make a caveat starcraft example, there were strategies and unit compositions that were demostratably worse at fighting certain units. However they could overcome that disadvantage through player skill. I am sorry but no amount of player skill will allow a deathwing player to beat even 3 wave serpents with guardians.

TL: DR Balance is good for BOTH fluff and competitive players. It leads to strategic depth and a reliance on player skill to overcome difficult matchups and opponents. Balance is not bland it is the ability to take any unit and make it work and synergize with your personal playstyle and army

 Peregrine wrote:

xruslanx wrote:
You are factually incorrect, yet again.

You know, if you were a reasonable person you'd want us all to forget about how you made a biased poll and even admitted it was a biased poll that was intended to "prove" that people like 40k. But I guess you'd prefer to brag about it.

So tell me, why do you think so many people enjoy playing 40k rules? Nothing to do with fluff or models.

Yeah, let's just conveniently ignore the fact that you left out an "average" option so that anyone who thinks the rules are adequate for what they want to do but not great is forced to say they like the rules "a lot".

But there's a big gulf between "40k is a fun ruleset but it has its problems", and "40k is absolute garbage with no effort put into it whatsoever".

You're right, there is. Too bad GW is on the wrong side of it.

I find it astounding that you actually believe that people don't enjoy playing 40k.

I think I'll just...leave you to it.

xruslanx wrote:
I find it astounding that you actually believe that people don't enjoy playing 40k.

I find it astounding that you can read what I said and think that it was "people don't enjoy playing 40k". I'm just not sure whether it's astoundingly poor reading comprehension, or astounding dishonesty.

xruslanx wrote:
I find it astounding that you actually believe that people don't enjoy playing 40k.

I think I'll just...leave you to it.

I find it astounding that you could fail to understand his point, repeatedly, and in fact are purposely misstating what he's saying.

 Peregrine wrote:

xruslanx wrote:
I find it astounding that you actually believe that people don't enjoy playing 40k.

I find it astounding that you can read what I said and think that it was "people don't enjoy playing 40k". I'm just not sure whether it's astoundingly poor reading comprehension, or astounding dishonesty.

So you admit that people do enjoy playing 40k?

Why do you think that is? Third time's the charm...

Because Forgeworld models are pretty! That's why people enjoy playing 40k. There is no other reason to play the game or you are doing it wrong!

rigeld2 wrote:

xruslanx wrote:
I find it astounding that you actually believe that people don't enjoy playing 40k.

I think I'll just...leave you to it.

I find it astounding that you could fail to understand his point, repeatedly, and in fact are purposely misstating what he's saying.

I find what he has to say to be beneath contempt and I'd rather he answered my question - why people enjoy playing 40k.

I often find that extremists position their arguments so as to make it seem that the only possible way one could disagree with them would be to be lacking in critical faculties at all, or having the outlook of a child. I'm interested as to why Peregrine thinks that intelligent, rational adults enjoy playing 40k, I've asked him three times now...interesting to see if he actually bothers to reply.

xruslanx wrote:
So you admit that people do enjoy playing 40k?

I've already said that people enjoy playing 40k despite the poor rules. Either you didn't pay enough attention to notice, or you'd rather make up straw man arguments to "counter".

Why do you think that is? Third time's the charm...

Because of the fluff and models, and because for some people even playing a bad game is better than playing no game at all.

xruslanx wrote:
I find what he has to say to be beneath contempt and I'd rather he answered my question - why people enjoy playing 40k.

Yeah, expecting a high quality product when you pay $50 a book is beneath contempt for every reasonable person...

I've asked him three times now...interesting to see if he actually bothers to reply.

Me: 40k's rules suck, the only reason to play is the fluff/models.
You: WHY ARENT YOU TELLING ME WHY PEOPEL LIKE THE GAME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Me: because of the fluff/models and GW's dominant position in the market.
You: WHY DONT U REPLY TO MY QUESTION!!!!!!!!!!!!

xruslanx wrote:

So you admit that people do enjoy playing 40k?

Why do you think that is? Third time's the charm...

We play because

1) we enjoy the fluff
2) we like the models
3) its what our friends/peers/local group play
4) we enjoy the hobby and a game is good motivation to paint/model more

you see how none of those involve any sense of affection for the rules. The rules are...adequate to play a game. The rules currently are not good. They serve the purpose to facilitate a game but they do not do it well of even okay. I would enjoy the game more and play more if the rules were

A) better writen (that is to say less convoluted, more concise, user friendly, not full of useless rules that are added simply to add complexity)
B) writen so that I could play a game and go without the mandatory rules debate between players
C) Did not add random events that take away from a players ability to use skill to defeat an opponent and instead go "Well gak my army just got neutered by this crazy random happenstance game over."

 Peregrine wrote:

xruslanx wrote:
So you admit that people do enjoy playing 40k?

I've already said that people enjoy playing 40k despite the poor rules. Either you didn't pay enough attention to notice, or you'd rather make up straw man arguments to "counter".

Why do you think that is? Third time's the charm...

Because of the fluff and models, and because for some people even playing a bad game is better than playing no game at all.

xruslanx wrote:
I find what he has to say to be beneath contempt and I'd rather he answered my question - why people enjoy playing 40k.

Yeah, expecting a high quality product when you pay $50 a book is beneath contempt for every reasonable person...

I've asked him three times now...interesting to see if he actually bothers to reply.

Me: 40k's rules suck, the only reason to play is the fluff/models.
You: WHY ARENT YOU TELLING ME WHY PEOPEL LIKE THE GAME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Me: because of the fluff/models and GW's dominant position in the market.
You: WHY DONT U REPLY TO MY QUESTION!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yup, classic peregrine. Keep 'em coming

xruslanx wrote:
Yup, classic peregrine. Keep 'em coming

Yup, classic xruslanx: ignore everything everyone else says, come right back and make the same argument like nothing ever happened.

xruslanx wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

xruslanx wrote:
I find it astounding that you actually believe that people don't enjoy playing 40k.

I think I'll just...leave you to it.

I find it astounding that you could fail to understand his point, repeatedly, and in fact are purposely misstating what he's saying.

I find what he has to say to be beneath contempt and I'd rather he answered my question - why people enjoy playing 40k.

I often find that extremists position their arguments so as to make it seem that the only possible way one could disagree with them would be to be lacking in critical faculties at all, or having the outlook of a child. I'm interested as to why Peregrine thinks that intelligent, rational adults enjoy playing 40k, I've asked him three times now...interesting to see if he actually bothers to reply.

Mate, he's answered your question and I believe a bunch of people demonstrated that you are wrong in your assertion that just because people play 40k despite it's horrible balance means they enjoy the rules. The fact that you yourself said "Forge World cheese" means you don't enjoy the imbalance. Have you ever considered that people play despite how horrible the rules are? I myself am more into the painting/modeling side of things and I'd be totally happy if I never saw a tournament. I think the rules are utter crap and make casual play worse. I play because I love the setting and the models. Warmachine and Bolt Action have better rules yet I am not all that interested in them since I find the models are bland.

I personally try to avoid playing 40k competitively as much as possible because its mainly just about the lists and little about gameplay. If I want to play a game competitively I look more towards fantasy (I haven't had any cheese struggles yet) or malifaux because both are much more about the game play and less about the armies. I also don't need to worry as much about FotM players and codex creep for those things either in the competitive scene (look at the crossroads GT in fantasy, a Brettonia player came in 7th).

40ks rules balance wise are utter garbage and should never be taken seriously as a game at all (look at the tau bomber that can't drop bombs, or the vengance battery that has to shoot its battlecannon at a flier since the flier is closest but it can't since its a flier, or better yet something that brakes the game since the start of 6th, when I put my 5 warriors that are carrying the relic in a NS and it is destroyed what happens? It can't be dropped since the unit is already off the table and had specific permission to be removed from the table via transport, but now that it is in reserves what happens?) There shouldn't be these game braking moments that occur from normal gameplay. If you think a player is a **** for bringing 5-7 riptides to a friendly game then you should try looking at it from his perspective. Maybe the only reason that player started playing tau was because he loves the gundam series and thought it would be fantastic to run an army themed on it which tau riptides happen to be a perfect fit for.

xruslanx wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

xruslanx wrote:
I find it astounding that you actually believe that people don't enjoy playing 40k.

I think I'll just...leave you to it.

I find it astounding that you could fail to understand his point, repeatedly, and in fact are purposely misstating what he's saying.

I find what he has to say to be beneath contempt and I'd rather he answered my question - why people enjoy playing 40k.

He has answered your question. Multiple times in fact.

I often find that extremists position their arguments so as to make it seem that the only possible way one could disagree with them would be to be lacking in critical faculties at all, or having the outlook of a child. I'm interested as to why Peregrine thinks that intelligent, rational adults enjoy playing 40k, I've asked him three times now...interesting to see if he actually bothers to reply.

Because intelligent, rational adults enjoy doing a lot of things in groups, regardless of the actual activity. The artistic part of the hobby helps as well.

The fact that the rules are pathetic and that I could do a better job in a weekend is appalling but that doesn't stop me from having fun with friends.

It might take more than a weekend by yourself, but not if I helped

The rules are bad, from a technical and competitive point of view, and in comparison to other Wargames they don't stand up.

However that doesn't stop them being enjoyable for what they are in their own vacuum. When played in the spirit of the game. Or when you 'Forge the Narrative'

And xruslanx, I can't believe you have made me say this, but Peregrine is right, you really aren't listening.

Eldercaveman wrote:
The rules are bad, from a technical and competitive point of view, and in comparison to other Wargames they don't stand up.

However that doesn't stop them being enjoyable for what they are in their own vacuum. When played in the spirit of the game. Or when you 'Forge the Narrative'

And xruslanx, I can't believe you have made me say this, but Peregrine is right, you really aren't listening.

Indeed it is a momentus occasion when the majority begin to agree with peregrine (personally I enjoy the points he brings up and always like reading what he has to say but I see why people may not always want to agree with what he has to say)

In a vacuum the rules themselves hold up well its just when the races are introduced imbalances occur due to random point values for things and random fancy rules, and the lack of proofreading in the codecis and rulebook can add to frustration with rule confusions and people claiming units are op and would rather not fight them en masse (look at how the FMCs have relentless smash, not relentless, and smash

Eldercaveman wrote:
The rules are bad, from a technical and competitive point of view, and in comparison to other Wargames they don't stand up.

However that doesn't stop them being enjoyable for what they are in their own vacuum. When played in the spirit of the game. Or when you 'Forge the Narrative'

You have to forge some serious narrative to make stuff like 1ksons work , like forge a whole new army just to play against with an army like that .

xruslanx wrote:

You are factually incorrect, yet again.

So tell me, why do you think so many people enjoy playing 40k rules? Nothing to do with fluff or models.

And your proof is, what, exactly? a thread with a poll which you yourseld admitted was deliberately biased and one sided?

But you know, dont let the facts get in the way! 75% of folks questions held 40k to be adequate at best, and even then, with issues. and this is a poll that is a lot less biased than yours, which, and i repeat, you yourself admitted it was deliberately biased.

xruslanx wrote:


So tell me, why do you think so many people enjoy playing 40k rules? Nothing to do with fluff or models.
.

(1) its their first game.
(2) no time/resources for other games.
(3) their friends play it.
(4) they like the fluff
(5) they like the models
(6) they're kids and don't know any better.

you will find most folks enjoy 40k in spite of the rules, not because of them. even your threads contains lots of posts asserting this.

xruslanx wrote:

I never said every 40k codex is perfect. But there's a big gulf between "40k is a fun ruleset but it has its problems", and "40k is absolute garbage with no effort put into it whatsoever".

It lies towards the latter. experience with other games (again, odd that you were willing to compare analogies to computer games, and sex with animals, but you weren't willing to accept the validity or value other ttg's could bring to the debate), and even common sense easily shows the failures of 40k. Lets leave out other games for the moment. i pointed out to you multiple instances where 40k's rules were cluttered, counter intuitive, excessive, bloated, poorly proofread, and poorly playtested. even ignoring the presense of other games, these issues with 40k remain, and very put slide 40k into the "garbage with no effort put in" category.

Not that you'll listen.

xruslanx wrote:
40k is written with the assumption that players won't be dicks. That doesn't mean that there is no baslance, and point adjustments in codexes reflect that the devs are aware of this.

Like grey hunters becoming cheaper? GW make "changes", they don't make "improvements".

xruslanx wrote:

Some people play for fun. Other people play to win. These are different types of people, though only one of those groups assumes its playstyle is universally and objectively superior.

considering the amount of "casual" players who play for "fun" who leave snide belittling remarks to the cometitive crowd (and vice versa), there are those on both sides who refuse to listen. there is nothing wrong with casual gaming. heck, our flames of war games are extremely casual. there is nothing wrong with competitive games. our warmachie group is great fun, and nothing beats a good cut throat tourney. However, there is a problem when it comes to insisting that 40ks set of rules that are demonstrably cluttered, counter intuitive, excessive, bloated, poorly proofread, and poorly playtested, especially from a perspective of utter and clomplete indifference and ignorance of other ttg's (and refusal to accept their validity with regard to the hobby) and insisting despite this, that 40k and GW are the best, whilst ignoring any and all arguments that counter it.

xruslanx wrote:

I never said that no units weren't over or under costed. Clearly some units just aren't good enough, but we can throw around individual examples of everything all day.

but yet, thats somehow not an issue? I'd argue that yes, it is an issue. and a big one. admitting there are issues, and yet dismissing them at the same time as you do doesnt really work, son. you cant just say "there are problems, and here they are, and so what", and then claim everything is somehow OK.

A poll in the specific 40K Discussion area of a mainly 40K forum will naturally show a positive to 40K because people who dislike or have never heard of 40K won't ever have bothered to look at it.

So that piece of "evidence" is bs.