Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I dont know dude. I have only ever had to return 2 or 3 products to GW. I have gotten stuff from non-sci-fi competition that had worse QA, from what I can see, in my limited consumer experience.

Anything I've bought retail from my flgs that was bad dice they replaced at no cost to me. AOK in my book. Better than electronics dealers and the hassle they put you through.

I am no fan boy. I convert whatever I can. But on top of Customer Service (with a capital CS), I'd go one further and say that GW's 40k product design team is the most creative and organized on the market. If you disagree, name another product line you think is more creative.

 Markerlight Junkie wrote:
Also the game is not complex at all

Say, what?!?!?!?!?!!?!!!!!!

There are four books of rules that are listed under the "essentials" heading. What's funny about that is even with those, "essentials" you still wouldn't be able to play a game because it doesn't contain any of the SEVENTEEN rule books that are required to play, known as codexes.

Factor in Imperial armor, rules published in a magazine, on-line only rules and you're got well over thirty books of rules.

I think that this would qualify as complicated under any measure.

That's before you even look into what those rules are or how they interact!

Even the core rulebook is overly convoluted. The rules are basically "here is a simple set of rules... now here's a bazillion exceptions to those rules". Where a more concise rules system creates a core set of rules, and then additional rules simply compliment them by fitting within them instead of breaking them.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
Even the core rulebook is overly convoluted. The rules are basically "here is a simple set of rules... now here's a bazillion exceptions to those rules". Where a more concise rules system creates a core set of rules, and then additional rules simply compliment them by fitting within them instead of breaking them.

People like 40k BECAUSE of the Special Rules. If you didnt want to play special rules, you'd group the models into proxy units where my cool models counts as your cool models.and we'd roll 4+s on everything.

I think the USR system is a good idea. It enable lots of fun, characterful SF kind of rules to be attached to things very easily, and it is all there in the core rulebook.

Creating a unique new unit becomes a matter of defining its stats and adding some USRs. If you want a special HQ bodyguard unit, give it "Look out, Sir!". If you want an unkillable monster, give it "Feels No Pain" and "It Won't Die!"... And so on.

The excessive complexity arises when GW add lots of extra individual special rules on to separate units in the codexes.

That amount of complexity is not adding interesting problems, it is just making the game difficult and slow to play, IMO.

A much more interesting problem would be, "In what order is it best to activate my units to move and fire?" That should be a key tactical problem for each player, that would arise continuously throughout every single turn of the game, as the tactical situation changes as each unit does its action.

Unfortunately, the very simplistic UGOIGO turn sequence in 40K reduces that kind of tactical decision making.

I agree that the turn sequence system needs to be reworked.

A card activation system could be lifted out of historical wargames. There are several variations for testing. You could even provide alternatives in the rules and let players pick and change for each game.

The best thing from GW's viewpoint is that they could publish packs of unit cards that would be cheap to design and produce but sell in huge quantities because everyone would want them.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
I think the USR system is a good idea. It enable lots of fun, characterful SF kind of rules to be attached to things very easily, and it is all there in the core rulebook.

Creating a unique new unit becomes a matter of defining its stats and adding some USRs. If you want a special HQ bodyguard unit, give it "Look out, Sir!". If you want an unkillable monster, give it "Feels No Pain" and "It Won't Die!"... And so on.

The excessive complexity arises when GW add lots of extra individual special rules on to separate units in the codexes.

That amount of complexity is not adding interesting problems, it is just making the game difficult and slow to play, IMO.

A much more interesting problem would be, "In what order is it best to activate my units to move and fire?" That should be a key tactical problem for each player, that would arise continuously throughout every single turn of the game, as the tactical situation changes as each unit does its action.

Unfortunately, the very simplistic UGOIGO turn sequence in 40K reduces that kind of tactical decision making.

Meh. I think part of the fun is I don't know what the shiznuts is in the Black Holy Templar White Crusader codex + 3 DLC Dataslates until someone locally aquires the codices(es) builds it, paints it, and plunks it down on the table, which is rare enough

I don't like 40k because of special rules!?! just leaving that there.

I do find the game a bit complicated because, like the other comments have said, too many books. I have a 3rd company Imperial Fist army, not only did I buy the new SM codex a week ago, I bought the Sentinels of Terra book too, that was pricy even with 20% off. The added rules for my army kind of broke it for me. My army now runs completely different then my other SM armies. Having to remember all the differet things that goes along with my four different SM armies gets a little annoying.

Now before someone slams a book on my , like i've seen a couple times already with this war between new and old players, I started at the end of 2nd ed into 3rd when you had differences in rules between SM like Dark Angles, Blood Angels, Wolves and vanilla marines. Now my Imperial Fists run different than another player playing Imperial Fists.

To add to the flyer fight, I like flyers, but I also don't. I do agree that there is not enough space on a 48" table for them. Also the need to include a AA choice just incase you run into a flyer is a wrong thing to make players do. Back in 3rd I allowed a player to take his Ork Bomber because it was well painted and I wanted to see it. 8 Lascannons later it was not and issue. The need to hit on 6s was not an issue at the time other than it taking away from the other stuff I needed to shoot at. I guess where I'm getting at with flyers is that in FoW I can afford to take a unit of AA to save my butt against planes because 40mm bofors work wonders on infantry as well. I also don't need to worry about my tanks because they all have an AA machine gun on the turret, something GW has not done with 40k tanks. That machine gun on the turret has a bigger reason that shooting infantry with an extra gun, it was made to protect the vehicle from aircraft.

All in all I do have to say that I like the game and still play it from time to time.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
A card activation system could be lifted out of historical wargames. There are several variations for testing. You could even provide alternatives in the rules and let players pick and change for different games.

The best thing from GW's viewpoint is that they could publish packs of unit cards that would be cheap to design and produce but sell in huge quantities because everyone would want them.

D&D Battle System from the 80s (or whatever its called) has the drop on everything non-40k (I'm a believer that 40k is fun because of its special rules). Simple conversions for special rules in that system

Hail Caesar is a good system for non-mojo rules.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
Even the core rulebook is overly convoluted. The rules are basically "here is a simple set of rules... now here's a bazillion exceptions to those rules".

Yeah, my favorite example of this is the fear USR. Making certain units really scary to fight up close is fluffy, and might add some interesting strategy. But then you realize that shooting units don't care because they get slaughtered in melee anyway, dedicated assault units tend to be fearless or have high enough LD to ignore it most of the time, and even when it does work the broken WS system makes it a fairly minor penalty. And then just to make sure it's never relevant you make the most popular armies outright ignore it. The rule might as well be blank text, but new players still have to learn it.

@jasper76.
If people like 40k because of the extra rules added on to fix the core rules, because the core rules do not cover the game play that well.

Then saying you like 40k because of the special rules is agreeing the rules are over complicated because the core rules are not good enough.BUT accepting it because you are not aware of the alternatives.

IF when 40k switched from a skirmish RPG game of RT to 2nd ed.To the larger battle game of 3rd ed to 6th ed.
They ditched the WHFB (1970s Napoleonic) skirmish based rules.
And based the new rules on the rule set that work really well for large battle games.(Epic SM , 1990s modern sci fi battle game rules.)
(This is the only difference between my synopsis and KKs.)

Then they would have been writing rules for the game play.

The reason GW plc likes special rules, is to pimp the latest releases and make all models fit for one specific purpose.
So people have to by new models to use their army in different ways.

Epic Armageddon (last version, )covers ALL the game play options of 40k and ALL of its expansions, and includes all of the E.A. army lists in the 138 page rules.

Any one want my reasons for saying using the rules for a game where large block of troops walk up an hit each other with sticks,and shooting is only used in a supporting role.
Might not be the best choice for basing the 40k rules on ?

 jasper76 wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
I think the USR system is a good idea. It enable lots of fun, characterful SF kind of rules to be attached to things very easily, and it is all there in the core rulebook.

...
...

A much more interesting problem would be, "In what order is it best to activate my units to move and fire?" That should be a key tactical problem for each player, that would arise continuously throughout every single turn of the game, as the tactical situation changes as each unit does its action.

Unfortunately, the very simplistic UGOIGO turn sequence in 40K reduces that kind of tactical decision making.

Meh. I think part of the fun is I don't know what the shiznuts is in the Black Holy Templar White Crusader codex + 3 DLC Dataslates until someone locally aquires the codices(es) builds it, paints it, and plunks it down on the table, which is rare enough

Are you not interested in tactical problems?

For ranged attacks, simply give models with pistols a X range, models with rifles a 2xX range, and longer range 3xX range, and roll everything on 4+s, armored units on 3+. All CC on 4+. Done.

Isnt that BoltAction, or whatver? I just assumed.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
I think the USR system is a good idea. It enable lots of fun, characterful SF kind of rules to be attached to things very easily, and it is all there in the core rulebook.

...
...

A much more interesting problem would be, "In what order is it best to activate my units to move and fire?" That should be a key tactical problem for each player, that would arise continuously throughout every single turn of the game, as the tactical situation changes as each unit does its action.

Unfortunately, the very simplistic UGOIGO turn sequence in 40K reduces that kind of tactical decision making.

Meh. I think part of the fun is I don't know what the shiznuts is in the Black Holy Templar White Crusader codex + 3 DLC Dataslates until someone locally aquires the codices(es) builds it, paints it, and plunks it down on the table, which is rare enough

Are you not interested in tactical problems?

Yes, but I think 40k is more a vehicle for fast campaign games.

 jasper76 wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
Even the core rulebook is overly convoluted. The rules are basically "here is a simple set of rules... now here's a bazillion exceptions to those rules". Where a more concise rules system creates a core set of rules, and then additional rules simply compliment them by fitting within them instead of breaking them.

People like 40k BECAUSE of the Special Rules. If you didnt want to play special rules, you'd group the models into proxy units where my cool models counts as your cool models.and we'd roll 4+s on everything.

Sorry I didn't mean to say I don't want diversity in the units. Someone once said (I forgot who) 40k is an exception based game, and I think that's what makes it excessively convoluted. They went with a reasonably simple core system then just piled on the exceptions to those core rules to make the diversity. The alternative is to make a slightly more detailed core rules and then have your special abilities compliment existing rules instead of breaking them.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
A much more interesting problem would be, "In what order is it best to activate my units to move and fire?" That should be a key tactical problem for each player, that would arise continuously throughout every single turn of the game, as the tactical situation changes as each unit does its action.

I think you would really like 1 aspect of the Hail Caesar game (was this in WHHB?). Your division commander issues commands, and they have a progressive rate of failure. 3 commands per turn. Maybe the first one is automatic, the others have chances of failure that are realistic in terms of consequences. Fun stuff.

I haven't played that rules though I have played a lot of historical rules with various types of command systems and turn sequences.

Yeah, then you know what I'm about.

@jasper76.
I am curious why you think 40k 6th ed rules are a vehicle for 'fast campaign games?'

Is it because they have such high strategic focus?

What would happen if the rules allowed fast paced tactical battles, that were suitable for narrative campaigns AND competitive play.
And players did not HAVE TO AGREE to interpret the rules in the same way ,before they HAVE TO AGREE how to amend the rules,before they HAVE TO AGREE on what units to use/include,BEFORE they even get to the issue of game size and level of competitive play.

Would this make the 40k rules more appealing to a wider range of players?

Players who would like clearly defined and elegant intuitive rules , are not being catered for by 40k 6th ed.

40k rules are now written for ',,,model collectors who do not care that much about the rules..' and '...new players who probably never even get to play a full game of 40k..'

Lanrak wrote:
@jasper76.
I am curious why you think 40k 6th ed rules are a vehicle for 'fast campaign games?'

Is it because they have such high strategic focus?

What would happen if the rules allowed fast paced tactical battles, that were suitable for narrative campaigns AND competitive play.
And players did not HAVE TO AGREE to interpret the rules in the same way ,before they HAVE TO AGREE how to amend the rules,before they HAVE TO AGREE on what units to use/include,BEFORE they even get to the issue of game size and level of competitive play.

Would this make the 40k rules more appealing to a wider range of players?

Players who would like clearly defined and elegant intuitive rules , are not being catered for by 40k 6th ed.

40k rules are now written for ',,,model collectors who do not care that much about the rules..' and '...new players who probably never even get to play a full game of 40k..'

To me, it sounds like you have a good set of house rules. In the gaming community I play in, there are MANY (often CRUEL) house rules.

As you say, the most important thing is player consent, the basis by which all games are played.

Dude, when WHATEVER 40K codex plays randomly against a different 40K codex, insanity will ensue. Trust me. Make a 2K list. Tell your best gaming buddy to do the same. And say nothing whatsoever else Build f-ck-ng fluff list.

If you do that, and still say 40k is gak, more power to you.

I

Oh, sorry I didn't answer your first question. (I like beer, do you?)

It is good for campaign games because the system is quick and full of Grade AA Fluff.

Wow, seeing posts claiming 40Krules are complicated surprises me. I've been playing board games and RPGs for over 25 years and I prefer games which are quick and easy to get into, it's why I like 40K, is a simple system.

Even if you count all the add on Imperial Armour books you are no where near D&D for rules.

In a lot of places if you asked for a 2k points game people would say that they have max 1750 or 1999points. The main problem is not that different stuff brings crazy things. the problem is that if someone says no formations to someone who has build an army with formation he suddenly can't play .

 jasper76 wrote:


It is good for campaign games because the system is quick and full of Grade AA Fluff.

Not likely!

Kaldor Draigo wants a word...

Deadnight wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:


It is good for campaign games because the system is quick and full of Grade AA Fluff.

Not likely!

Kaldor Draigo wants a word...

No clue who Kaldor Draigo is, no worries. If I am ever in the UK I will resurrect this post and request the privilege of an introduction, If you are ever in the DC area, hit me up too, if you like. We have an active and friendly table-gaming crowd in the vicinity,

 Ugavine wrote:
Wow, seeing posts claiming 40Krules are complicated surprises me. I've been playing board games and RPGs for over 25 years and I prefer games which are quick and easy to get into, it's why I like 40K, is a simple system.

40k might not be the most complicated game in absolute terms, but relative to its depth it's incredibly complicated. The basic mechanics are fairly simple, but there are so many special rules and exceptions to special rules and exceptions to the exceptions piled onto it, with no coherent design strategy beyond "this sounds cool". For example, the leadership system is pretty basic (roll 2D6, compare to LD and fall back or not) but then each army has its own special rules for ignoring the leadership system. Meanwhile the strategy in 40k isn't all that complicated, you pretty much just alternate turns of killing as much stuff as you can until it's time to count up the final score. The IGOUGO turn structure ensures that your opponent will never interfere with your actions in any meaningful way, so the game is reduced to an exercise in target priority. You could simply remove a large percentage of 40k's rules without making any noticeable impact on gameplay.

 jasper76 wrote:
It is good for campaign games because the system is quick and full of Grade AA Fluff.

Under which standards is 40k a quick system? Even ignoring the problem of the IGOUGO system creating long periods of time where you could walk away from the table entirely and not miss anything the game really isn't all that fast. A 500 point skirmish might only take an hour or so, but once you start getting up to 2000+ points the biggest challenge is not falling asleep from boredom.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 jasper76 wrote:
No clue who Kaldor Draigo is, no worries.

One of GW's worst fluff abominations in the past few years. He makes a cruel joke out of your claim that 40k has "grade A fluff".

 Peregrine wrote:
Under which standards is 40k a quick system? Even ignoring the problem of the IGOUGO system creating long periods of time where you could walk away from the table entirely and not miss anything the game really isn't all that fast. A 500 point skirmish might only take an hour or so, but once you start getting up to 2000+ points the biggest challenge is not falling asleep from boredom.

We play 2K point games in about 2 hrs if everyone knows their own codex. 2500 starts to get into 3 hours, more points go multiple days, and when you get to more points, Apocalypse begins to get fun. This has all kind of changed with Escalation, but WTF, get (or better yet fabricate) an Escalation model for your army!

I don't think that the game is fast nor simple :

You have to roll to hit : count how many model are in range, gather a large number of dice, and roll again a pseudo table (everyone know that CT4 = 3+ to hit, but why not put CT 3+ on the statline?).
If your weapon are twinlinked, or you have a divination psyker (not hard to get), you can reroll those dice.

Then you roll to wound, using another table. one again, it's easy enough to remember, but it's add tothe game complexity
Some special rules let you reroll those dice again(lighting claw, shred)

Then you roll to save. for once, it easy : the save is on the statline, and either you have it or you don't... Wait, you may have a cover and/or an invunerable, and you must choose...

And finally, some model may have feel no pain, and roll again the failed saves again FNP value...

=>this is a basic attack sequence, with one squad, equiped with the same weapon, and I won't even touch the remove from the front or wound pool problem....

This is quite insane! other game can usually do that with 2 rolls and far less dice... without being less "tactical"!

I like 40K lore (well the old one at least...), and I really want to play the game again... but the rules are stopping me. I have a large Eldar and Tau force(So good army in today's Meta), but I will not use them until the base rules get all least decent...

 jasper76 wrote:


No clue who Kaldor Draigo is, no worries. If I am ever in the UK I will resurrect this post and request the privilege of an introduction, If you are ever in the DC area, hit me up too, if you like. We have an active and friendly table-gaming crowd in the vicinity,

Deal!

Funny story fir you.

It's funny though, really. I used to live 40k for the game, for the fluff, for the models...

I mainly played in fourth end, with tau. And then the 3.5th ed chaos codex, with that iron warriors set of rules from Pete haines was released which utterly broke the game. I mean, literally, there was no point playing against it. It utterly ruined the game for me. But I kept playing, kept trying, until the frustration got the better of me and I walked away.... (Then, as an aside I discovered warmachine as a game, and now can't even look at 40k any more.)

But this is about 40k. Even if I wasn't playing, I was actively involved. The fluff, you see. I held the belief that the game was rubbish, but the lore was amazing, and well worth maintaining my status as a '40k player'. It was something I genuinely enjoyed. Then fifth edition happened. Nope, I wasn't buying armies, but I bought the codices. So many high water marks. Orks- brilliant. Dark eldar - brilliant. Space wolves (my mate got a mention in the special thanks) - brilliant. Imperial guard? Brilliant. Tyranids? I enjoyed it. Blood angels - yeah, I enjoyed it. Space marines - yeah, it was ok, a bit silly, but ok. So much good stuff. Plus - forgeworld. Love that stuff.

And then, things changed. Codex grey knights. Utterly terrible fluff. As in the 'we're so pure, so uncorruptible, but need to wear the blood of our allies not to be corrupted', there's the sword of un fathomable evil that it too dangerous to be locked away on Titan, so they run around battlefields with it. There were so many ridiculous things that I just rolled my eyes. Capped off with Kaldor bloody Draigo. That guy is probably the most stupid, unbelievable and over the top fanboy spank I have ever read. He alone would have killed the codex.but you know what? Maybe it was a once off... I'll give them a chance. Next up is necrons. And they're rewriting them, giving them actual fluff rather than ++++kill the living ++++ and 'the c'tan did everything'. And I had hopes. I wanted to see tragedy. I wanted to see loss. An ancient race plucked from slumber to see everything they'd known, everything they'd built and everything they'd fought for pass through their hands like dust. Gone, all gone. A race out if time, struggling to hold on and understand... Like I said, I wanted tragedy. What I got was 'codex: comedy robots' with a whole bunch of eccentric academics who collect battles and send emails to inquisitors. Then there was the guy whose circuits are completely fried to such an extent that he thinks orks are necrons with green face paint. Headdesk. It wasn't tragedy, it was bad comedy. And it turned me off if 40k's vaunted lore.

And I know why - it was kiddified. Fair play, if that's the choice gw wanted to make. I won't hold it against them. But it did mean the lore was no longer for me. It was gw saying 'I'm too old for this now'. And then a thought hit me - the nostalgic 'it was better in the old days' attitude. Which I don't necessarily believe (so much stuff I loved as a kid, well, it's aged terribly, and I can't understand how I, or other kids used to enjoy it! But we did) well, I checked my fluff bible and read all the lore I loved as a teenager. And reading it as an adult, it didn't grab me. At all. It was just really, really light. It was 'ok', but not engaging. Nostalgia wouldn't save me! This was the same fluff - written fir kids, and as a kid, I enjoyed it. As an adult, I didn't. As an adult, I'd simply moved on.

So I took a grown up decision and walked away from most of the fluff. I've checked some of the fluff from sixth ed out of loyalty to my tau, which was ok, and some other stuff (chaos) which I thought was terrible. And I still genuinely enjoy the workings of forgeworld. Imperial armour books are big and crunchy enough that I can really enjoy them (even if the three vraks books boiled down to 'we'll win, because we'll throw more guardsmen at you than you have bullets') and I'm quite enjoying the heresy books too.

So yeah, from a guy who loved the game, fluff and models, I became a guy who loved the fluff. And would say to any one - '40ks lore is fantastic'. Now, I'm a guy who enjoys reading forgeworld imperial armour books - that's my last foothold in the lore if 40k. What's in the codices? Yeah, I'm sorry but it's childish at best, and gibberish at worst. feel free to disagree though!

But yes jasper, I will hold you to this meeting - in dc or here in Scotland. it'll be good!

Deadnight wrote:

Then fifth edition happened. (...) So many high water marks. Orks- brilliant. Dark eldar - brilliant. Space wolves (my mate got a mention in the special thanks) - brilliant. Imperial guard? Brilliant. Tyranids? I enjoyed it. Blood angels - yeah, I enjoyed it. Space marines - yeah, it was ok, a bit silly, but ok. So much good stuff. Plus - forgeworld. Love that stuff.

And then, things changed. Codex grey knights. Utterly terrible fluff. As in the 'we're so pure, so uncorruptible, but need to wear the blood of our allies not to be corrupted', there's the sword of un fathomable evil that it too dangerous to be locked away on Titan, so they run around battlefields with it. There were so many ridiculous things that I just rolled my eyes. Capped off with Kaldor bloody Draigo. That guy is probably the most stupid, unbelievable and over the top fanboy spank I have ever read. He alone would have killed the codex.but you know what? Maybe it was a once off... I'll give them a chance. Next up is necrons. And they're rewriting them, giving them actual fluff rather than ++++kill the living ++++ and 'the c'tan did everything'. And I had hopes. I wanted to see tragedy. I wanted to see loss. An ancient race plucked from slumber to see everything they'd known, everything they'd built and everything they'd fought for pass through their hands like dust. Gone, all gone. A race out if time, struggling to hold on and understand... Like I said, I wanted tragedy. What I got was 'codex: comedy robots' with a whole bunch of eccentric academics who collect battles and send emails to inquisitors. Then there was the guy whose circuits are completely fried to such an extent that he thinks orks are necrons with green face paint. Headdesk. It wasn't tragedy, it was bad comedy. And it turned me off if 40k's vaunted lore.

And I know why - it was kiddified. Fair play, if that's the choice gw wanted to make. I won't hold it against them. But it did mean the lore was no longer for me. It was gw saying 'I'm too old for this now'. And then a thought hit me - the nostalgic 'it was better in the old days' attitude. Which I don't necessarily believe (so much stuff I loved as a kid, well, it's aged terribly, and I can't understand how I, or other kids used to enjoy it! But we did) well, I checked my fluff bible and read all the lore I loved as a teenager. And reading it as an adult, it didn't grab me. At all. It was just really, really light. It was 'ok', but not engaging. Nostalgia wouldn't save me! This was the same fluff - written fir kids, and as a kid, I enjoyed it. As an adult, I didn't. As an adult, I'd simply moved on.

So I took a grown up decision and walked away from most of the fluff. I've checked some of the fluff from sixth ed out of loyalty to my tau, which was ok, and some other stuff (chaos) which I thought was terrible. And I still genuinely enjoy the workings of forgeworld. Imperial armour books are big and crunchy enough that I can really enjoy them (even if the three vraks books boiled down to 'we'll win, because we'll throw more guardsmen at you than you have bullets') and I'm quite enjoying the heresy books too.

Wow, just wow. That´s exactly my feelings on the matter, almost word by word. You only skipped the Sisters of Battle WD thing between GK and Necrons. Also, some of the old stuff is still great in my eyes. But I am shocked by the similarities.

Is there more people out there who feel exactly the same? 2011 as the year 40k changed?

40k isn't fast to play,you random roll mission, you random roll deployment, you can spend 30 minutes on terrain setup depending on how high the rolls are, then you random roll your traits, then roll your powers, then set up your army and after 45-60 minutes you might start the game.

Then if your a horde player you can spend 20 minutes moving models which you'll have to random roll difficult terrain for.

Shooting makes no sense you should do saves after hits not wounds, then anything that gets through you roll to wound.

I played a game at 2k on Wednesday and it took a good three hours with both players being vets well acquainted with the rules, and it gets boring.

I play x-wing as well and that's a fast game with clear rules that you can play in under an hour.

40k is becoming too complex for what it is.