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.

Are people really claiming that Maelstrom of War missions helps weaker tiered armies ITT?

The lion's share of the strongest armies in 6th edition had "mobility" as one of their defining strengths (Eldar, biker SM, FMC-Daemons, Taudar, Deldar etc).

The lion's share of the weakest armies in 6th had weak mobility as their defining strengths.

Maelstrom of War puts what attribute on a pedestal? Mobility.

I dunno how the Maelstrom missions are supposed to help Imperial Guard and every other army that doesn't have a plethora of 12+" movement options available to them.

- - - -

In any case, I think I prefer 6th edition- 7th edition is just 6th edition with a <redacted - language! --Janthkin>psychic system for me, though the fixes to Monstrous Creature deathstars was welcome.

That's not saying much though. 5th edition > 6th and 7th by a mile.

5th was a mess of parking lots, death stars and MSU spam. Not to mention people constantly jumping from whatever was the Best Marine book of the month to the next one to gain an advantage in the game.

I did like my old tau codex, though...

 BoomWolf wrote:


Yaknow, I keep hearing this claim, but never, even for pickup games, have I needed more than 20 seconds of debates on what is "kosher", and even these 20 seconds are only because I always bring up the "master of ambush" nerf.

Well clearly it happens somewhere. If you keep hearing it, maybe there's a reason.

Plus, it could still have been a 20 second debate that ended in both people not playing eachother because they were looking for something different. Which doesn't speak anything positive about the game either.

Also, I'd avoid calling people idiots for leaving the game. Doesn't reflect well on you if you go immediately to insults when someone says they or someone else has left the game for reasons you're not aware of.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
5th was a mess of parking lots, death stars and MSU spam. Not to mention people constantly jumping from whatever was the Best Marine book of the month to the next one to gain an advantage in the game.

6th edition replaced parking lots with flyers, 2++ saves galore, broken allies shenanigans, super-heavies all over the place and overpowered xenos.

While also completely fething assault over for everyone and adding "moar random!!! forge that narrative!" to nearly everything in the game.

Never said 5th was perfect, far from it, but it beats out 6th edition.

 BlaxicanX wrote:


6th edition replaced parking lots with flyers, 2++ saves galore, super-heavies all over the place and overpowered xenos.

While also completely fething assault over for everyone and adding "moar random!!! forge that narrative!" to nearly everything in the game.

Never said 5th was perfect, far from it, but it beats out 6th edition.

Couldn't agree more.

Even just the basic concept of unit by unit resolution was so, so much better. None of this cover by model, or shooting at random models, or having to randomly determine casualties. Just remove them as you see fit and carry on.

 BlaxicanX wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
5th was a mess of parking lots, death stars and MSU spam. Not to mention people constantly jumping from whatever was the Best Marine book of the month to the next one to gain an advantage in the game.

6th edition replaced parking lots with flyers, 2++ saves galore, broken allies shenanigans, super-heavies all over the place and overpowered xenos.

While also completely fething assault over for everyone and adding "moar random!!! forge that narrative!" to nearly everything in the game.

Never said 5th was perfect, far from it, but it beats out 6th edition.

I think it did some things better, sure, but I don't think it beats 6th universally. When compared against each other in the end I feel that they come out about even in the end and preference being individual on which they like best.

Honestly I want to see 8th just reboot 40k immediately following the Heresy and building from there, reworking the universe to include all the current armies. Building from 30k to 40k they could do so much more than just building from M40.98 to M40.99 like they keep doing. Go with a full shake up from the ground up and do a massive rework of the game like they did from 2nd to 3rd (or RT to 2nd). They have a lot of ideas that are getting better, but honestly it needs more work still and I feel the current system is just holding the game back more than it's contributing.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
5th was a mess of parking lots, death stars and MSU spam. Not to mention people constantly jumping from whatever was the Best Marine book of the month to the next one to gain an advantage in the game.

5th had it's problems (so much so that I'm surprised I'm defending it...), but it was far more playable than the current game, and vehicles were at least universally useful as opposed to the very clear Skimmer/Non-Skimmer gap that has once again re-opened (as one will notice the armies that do well with lots of vehicles are the Skimmer armies or Knights, while stuff like mechanized IG is seen as thoroughly mediocre). MSU spam still exists, and, if anything, is pushed even harder with the current game (particularly in Maelstrom missions where lots of small, fast units can snag lots of board objectives). Meanwhile, the Deathstars of 7th are even better than the deathstars of 5th (barring Nob bikers).

For me its been like this:

Since coming back into the hobby shortly after 5th was released we have clocked up a lot of games.

We easily played 5th edition the most and our games were pretty close using this edition.

6th edition came along and although we had a lot of games they were all very one sided, if one of us won it would be by miles.

Got 7th edition the day it came out, so far have only had 1 game. Felt just like 6th edition.

Now playing lots more Fantasy and FoW plus just got into X-wing. I love the 40k universe but by christ their rule system needs to just be redone from scratch.

I havent played 7th.but I do know that ffg and battlefront LOVE it.

But on the other hand, havent 7th edition's codexes been pretty balanced?

I mean I dont hear players saying "ugh. the orks codex is so much worse than the space wolves codex" or "dang, why do the dark eldar get so much OP'ed stuff compared to us Grey Knights?"

 Sir Arun wrote:
But on the other hand, havent 7th edition's codexes been pretty balanced?

I mean I dont hear players saying "ugh. the orks codex is so much worse than the space wolves codex" or "dang, why do the dark eldar get so much OP'ed stuff compared to us Grey Knights?"

Grey Knights have a small internal balance issue with PAGK, and PAWG are in a weird place, but generally, yes the books are seens as more internally balanced and on a more even keel to each other from what I've see. Tau and Eldar will need some serious beatings with the NERF bat to get them into balance with the other books, but otherwise the game is coming off as more balanced if this continues, even if it will feel a bit more bland.

Narlix wrote:
Non-eldlar psykers actually work in 7th that's a huge plus. really 7th brough most of my areas gamers back in to start playing again.

how does that make sense? It's hard for secondary psykers to cast anything now.

In 6th edition and earlier, each psyker was his own guy. It was irrelevant how many you had in your army.

In 7th, having lots of psykers means one of your psykers is guaranteed to kick ass. But the others are worse because rolling 1 die for a ML1 psyker is only a 50% change of passing it - actually even less since the enemy can deny it.

In 6th, an LD8 psyker (like a sanctioned psyker or eldar warlock) had a 66.66% chance of passing his test.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
5th was a mess of parking lots, death stars and MSU spam. Not to mention people constantly jumping from whatever was the Best Marine book of the month to the next one to gain an advantage in the game.

5th may have made Transports very effective, but remember that Glancing hits could still destroy them with a good roll, and Melta Guns were destroying vehicles on a 4+.


Real warfare is a mess of parking lots and MSU spam. As for Deathstars, I don't really remember that being a serious problem in 5th. 6th was far worse when it came to Deathstars.




If you look at what worked very well in 5th edition, it was pretty much:

Purifiers in Psybacks backed up by Psyrifledreads.

Mech Vets in Chimeras with Melta or Plasma Guns backed up by Manticores and Vendettas.

Plague Marines in Rhinos backed up by Obliterators and supported by Lash Sorcerers.

Deathwing (everybody gets a TH/SS)

Blood Angels Las-Plas Razorback spam

Dark Eldar Venoms & possibly Beast Pack

Drop Marines with Melta Guns and Flamers backed up by Vulkan.

Orks running the Kan Wall or Battlewagon Rush.


Every army had its own flavor. Even Sisters were in there kicking ass with 3x Exorcists. 6th edition was this horrendous amalgamation of overpowered undercosted air power (Necrons), Deathstars (O'Vesa star should never have been a thing, 2++ rerollables should never have been a thing, etc.), and Serpent Spam.


7th kind of fixed it, but not back to what made 5th edition great. It fixed it by simply fudging what made some of the former Deathstars of 6th edition work. I've been having fun with 7th, but 5th was a MUCH better game in terms of tactics required, each army having its own unique flavor, and there being a good balance between shooting and assault.

Instead of 7th, how about playing Epic with WH40k scale models (and ranges and movement scaled obviously).

-As a Tau player the worst thing about 7th is the psychic phase. Its basically a free opportunity for my opponent to kill or debuff my own guys and buff his own guys in crazy ways and which I can do barely anything about.

-2nd worst thing is the allies chart. The Tau, who are famed for wanting to be friends with everyone, can't move with 6" of anyone apart from Eldar and Necrons without the chance of freezing up.

Super Heavies being immune to standard armour pen results is stupid as well imo. Why can't I immobilise a knight?

As for what's better? I can't really think of much sadly

That's because the Tau know the Orks will never be a part of the Greater Good, and because the Imperium doesn't trust Xenos, even those who have allied with them. It's still an uneasy alliance for worlds that have betrayed the Imperium.

Daemons see them as hard-to-reach food. CSM see them as pawns or soon-to-be sacrifices. Dark Eldar see them as flesh-puppets, new things from which to learn the ways to make them whimper.

Tyranids have no allies.

Super Heavies being immune to standard armour pen results is stupid as well imo. Why can't I immobilise a knight?

Because it's a super-heavy. You need bigger guns.

The Super Heavy rules come from the Apoc relaunch during 6th, not 7th.

Psychic phase is not unlike the Magic Phase in WFB. The problem is the game doesn't have the system balanced out or enough anti-psyker stuff in the game, yet. I kind of expect to see stuff fixed more as armies get updated in the future.

For me, the only thing that 7th edition has 'fixed' from 6th is LOS, finally doing away with the 'model's eyes' requirement.

But that's offset by the fact that building an army is confusing and broken, wound allocation is broken, casualty removal is painful in mixed units, the psychic phase rules are a complete and utter shambles, walkers still suck, the terrain rules are a mess, and percentage-based, model-by-model cover is ridiculous in a squad-level game.

So no, the investment in 7th edition 2 years after 6th was not worth it. They should have waited taken another 2 years to actually finish 7th edition before releasing it.

I like the new codexes so for for 7th hate the Brb.

 Blacksails wrote:

 BoomWolf wrote:


Yaknow, I keep hearing this claim, but never, even for pickup games, have I needed more than 20 seconds of debates on what is "kosher", and even these 20 seconds are only because I always bring up the "master of ambush" nerf.

Well clearly it happens somewhere. If you keep hearing it, maybe there's a reason.

Plus, it could still have been a 20 second debate that ended in both people not playing eachother because they were looking for something different. Which doesn't speak anything positive about the game either.

Also, I'd avoid calling people idiots for leaving the game. Doesn't reflect well on you if you go immediately to insults when someone says they or someone else has left the game for reasons you're not aware of.

Except I hear it as a reason for why people -stopped- playing, meaning the people that bring it up are apparently the people who do not actually play, and therefor not having these "debats" to begin with.

Also, while I might have overstepped there, and should have written it better. the REASON (given) for quitting was silly and irrational, if there was something else outside of it its a different story, but as it was written these people decided to quit "because 7th sucks" (only relation given was that 7th got released and they quit)
And given that I know for a fact that some people have quit because their "new codex sucks", before even seeing it, let alone playing it once, I have having an easy time assuming people lately tend to go on a "hate for hate's sake" calls, rather than being rational or reasonable.

7-th is way better than 6-th. Less stupid challenges. No broken focussed fire and precision shots on everyone. Sturdier vehicles, maelstorm missions and everything scoring provided much more opportunities for listbuilding allowing units that have never seen the board before, to show their heads above the ground - heck, the game was all about lurking in the backfield and than flat-outing on a point in the last turn in 6 ed. Now THAT was stupid.

Psy phase is a mixed bag. On one hand, it makes a single psycher more vulnerable to getting countered by 30 dtw dice, but on the other hand, you now don't get reliable power casts with no drawbacks - and that's great. This system is plain better and more interesting than just ld checks and an unstoppable buff-machine.

I have an oldschool greentide list pulling wins vs tau and eldar from time to time and basically winning an objective game vs imperial knights. And that's telling something.

Besides, new codexes are much-much better than middle 6-th ed ones. And i like the formation system.

I've found 7th to be extremely fun, minus the damn dataslates for everything. It made some interesting tweaks and made for a more enjoyable game. It ain't perfect, but feth it

 BoomWolf wrote:

 Blacksails wrote:

 BoomWolf wrote:


Yaknow, I keep hearing this claim, but never, even for pickup games, have I needed more than 20 seconds of debates on what is "kosher", and even these 20 seconds are only because I always bring up the "master of ambush" nerf.

Well clearly it happens somewhere. If you keep hearing it, maybe there's a reason.

Plus, it could still have been a 20 second debate that ended in both people not playing eachother because they were looking for something different. Which doesn't speak anything positive about the game either.

Also, I'd avoid calling people idiots for leaving the game. Doesn't reflect well on you if you go immediately to insults when someone says they or someone else has left the game for reasons you're not aware of.

Except I hear it as a reason for why people -stopped- playing, meaning the people that bring it up are apparently the people who do not actually play, and therefor not having these "debats" to begin with.

Also, while I might have overstepped there, and should have written it better. the REASON (given) for quitting was silly and irrational, if there was something else outside of it its a different story, but as it was written these people decided to quit "because 7th sucks" (only relation given was that 7th got released and they quit)
And given that I know for a fact that some people have quit because their "new codex sucks", before even seeing it, let alone playing it once, I have having an easy time assuming people lately tend to go on a "hate for hate's sake" calls, rather than being rational or reasonable.

If you want the highground with regards to rationality or being reasonable, you need to dial it down with the logical fallacies.

 Thud wrote:

If you want the highground with regards to rationality or being reasonable, you need to dial it down with the logical fallacies.

And what about the fact that there are an absurd amount of people who judge 7th based on rumors and what they read on the web. I've seen countless of people saying that,
- they "quit some editions ago but 7th looks stupid"
-"Haven't played it yet, it looks like 6th so it's half assed and I won't bother."
-"Unbound is stupid, I quit when I heard that"
-"It's impossible to play pick up games because it clearly takes 20+ minutes to discuss with my oponent before we start a game"
-"Flyers looks dumb, and so does Super Heavies, I am going to assume that they can 1 shot half my army and they are totally OP"
-"I played 2 games of 7th edition, with the same lists I used from 6th, the same missions from 6th, it felt like 6th edition, I am totally shocked and appalled, and immidieatly quit playing 7th"
-"Daemonolgy is OP, I don't care that it takes 3 WC and any doubles causes perils, everyone will use them and I think it sounds broken. I also saw this wierd video on youtube where some random dudes plays with the wrong rules of 7th, summons 2k points. I don't care if that list still lost and had 0 offensive potential and still lost to a dude who made the worst SM list ever concieved"
-"In my shop my Ork/GK/what ever list that just got released player used the same list as before and now it doesn't work anymore, that's clearly a nerf and GW sucks. He sold his army"

 BoomWolf wrote:
the REASON (given) for quitting was silly and irrational

these people decided to quit "because 7th sucks"

I don't know about you, but quitting something because it sucks is pretty rational and not silly.

Maybe you should stop looking for reasons to be angry at people for leaving 40k for any number of reasons. Face it, 7th isn't that good of an edition, in a game going through its 7th incarnation, with increasingly expensive rules and models, in a world filled with cheaper and better alternatives.

Go read Thud's posts again. The reasons given are to vague for you to jump on them for being idiotic, silly, or irrational. You have no idea given those posts the specific reasons, just that they disliked 7th.

At least you're not calling people's posts idiotic anymore, but silly and irrational are still a pretty big stretch.

 Zewrath wrote:

 Thud wrote:

If you want the highground with regards to rationality or being reasonable, you need to dial it down with the logical fallacies.

And what about the fact that there are an absurd amount of people who judge 7th based on rumors and what they read on the web. I've seen countless of people saying that,
- they "quit some editions ago but 7th looks stupid"
-"Haven't played it yet, it looks like 6th so it's half assed and I won't bother."
-"Unbound is stupid, I quit when I heard that"
-"It's impossible to play pick up games because it clearly takes 20+ minutes to discuss with my oponent before we start a game"
-"Flyers looks dumb, and so does Super Heavies, I am going to assume that they can 1 shot half my army and they are totally OP"
-"I played 2 games of 7th edition, with the same lists I used from 6th, the same missions from 6th, it felt like 6th edition, I am totally shocked and appalled, and immidieatly quit playing 7th"
-"Daemonolgy is OP, I don't care that it takes 3 WC and any doubles causes perils, everyone will use them and I think it sounds broken. I also saw this wierd video on youtube where some random dudes plays with the wrong rules of 7th, summons 2k points. I don't care if that list still lost and had 0 offensive potential and still lost to a dude who made the worst SM list ever concieved"
-"In my shop my Ork/GK/what ever list that just got released player used the same list as before and now it doesn't work anymore, that's clearly a nerf and GW sucks. He sold his army"

You know it is entirely possible to look at a rulebook and decide you don't like the game in the same way you can look at a menu and know you wont like a meal without trying it based on the ingredients listed. You're presenting legitimate arguments in a deliberately absurd way.

I've played a single game of 6th when it came out and found the wound resolution and removal from the front mechanics tedious. I know 7th hasn't changed in any way I would consider meaningful way so I know I will dislike that.

 Zewrath wrote:

 Thud wrote:

If you want the highground with regards to rationality or being reasonable, you need to dial it down with the logical fallacies.

And what about the fact that there are an absurd amount of people who judge 7th based on rumors and what they read on the web. I've seen countless of people saying that,
- they "quit some editions ago but 7th looks stupid"
-"Haven't played it yet, it looks like 6th so it's half assed and I won't bother."
-"Unbound is stupid, I quit when I heard that"
-"It's impossible to play pick up games because it clearly takes 20+ minutes to discuss with my oponent before we start a game"
-"Flyers looks dumb, and so does Super Heavies, I am going to assume that they can 1 shot half my army and they are totally OP"
-"I played 2 games of 7th edition, with the same lists I used from 6th, the same missions from 6th, it felt like 6th edition, I am totally shocked and appalled, and immidieatly quit playing 7th"
-"Daemonolgy is OP, I don't care that it takes 3 WC and any doubles causes perils, everyone will use them and I think it sounds broken. I also saw this wierd video on youtube where some random dudes plays with the wrong rules of 7th, summons 2k points. I don't care if that list still lost and had 0 offensive potential and still lost to a dude who made the worst SM list ever concieved"
-"In my shop my Ork/GK/what ever list that just got released player used the same list as before and now it doesn't work anymore, that's clearly a nerf and GW sucks. He sold his army"

Because there are several ways you can view the rulebook (some more legal than others) without actually buying it?

You can make an educated guess for having played this game for god knows how long and you can objectively see the rules are a half-arsed pile of crap compared to everything else that is out there right now.

Edit: And Jono makes the same point at the same time.

 Zewrath wrote:

 Thud wrote:

If you want the highground with regards to rationality or being reasonable, you need to dial it down with the logical fallacies.

And what about the fact that there are an absurd amount of people who judge 7th based on rumors and what they read on the web. I've seen countless of people saying that,
- they "quit some editions ago but 7th looks stupid"
-"Haven't played it yet, it looks like 6th so it's half assed and I won't bother."
-"Unbound is stupid, I quit when I heard that"
-"It's impossible to play pick up games because it clearly takes 20+ minutes to discuss with my oponent before we start a game"
-"Flyers looks dumb, and so does Super Heavies, I am going to assume that they can 1 shot half my army and they are totally OP"
-"I played 2 games of 7th edition, with the same lists I used from 6th, the same missions from 6th, it felt like 6th edition, I am totally shocked and appalled, and immidieatly quit playing 7th"
-"Daemonolgy is OP, I don't care that it takes 3 WC and any doubles causes perils, everyone will use them and I think it sounds broken. I also saw this wierd video on youtube where some random dudes plays with the wrong rules of 7th, summons 2k points. I don't care if that list still lost and had 0 offensive potential and still lost to a dude who made the worst SM list ever concieved"
-"In my shop my Ork/GK/what ever list that just got released player used the same list as before and now it doesn't work anymore, that's clearly a nerf and GW sucks. He sold his army"

So true.

But the bright side is that i'm the guy who bought that ork army.

 koooaei wrote:
Besides, new codexes are much-much better than middle 6-th ed ones. And i like the formation system.

care to elaborate?