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.

There have been a good few posts of late in some of the subforums around taking X or using Y in 7th.
Suppliments, Dataslates, Sub Codicies, FAQs, FW or not FW, LoW choices, Detachments and Subs etc.

Dont get me wrong, I've enjoyed 7th, especially if you take the view of "forging the narrative". . Yes I acknowledge a lot of people dont agree or want in a game system. But personally its been fun for me of late.

Having said that, in 7th there seems to be an overwhelming system of choice, combinations and diversity.
Is this good? Bad? Or simply kinda bewildering?

It's bad from the perspective that the player base has gotten used to a game that's supposed to be competitive, and Games Workshop has basically said "We expect you to play for fun."

As if that kind of social contract will ever hold up, lol.


If you just are willing to throw your hands up and say "feth it, I'm just here to dance" then you'll probably have a good time. Personally I think I there's a lot of stuff in the rules that just doesn't work at the scale 40K was originally designed to be played at like giant walkers and flyers. But again, if your group is all about just rolling dice and having fun, it's probably not an issue.

It's bad from the perspective that the player base has gotten used to a game that's supposed to be competitive,

But, was this ever really the case with GW?

Wasnt it all fun even from the early editions? Hell in their own official tourneys they had rules like WYSIWYG, offiical models, hard n fast rules and GW heavy TOs?

I dunno maybe, but over here, tourneys are dead competitive but if I bring a Falcon as a WS no one bats an eyelid.

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:
It's bad from the perspective that the player base has gotten used to a game that's supposed to be competitive, and Games Workshop has basically said "We expect you to play for fun."

As if that kind of social contract will ever hold up, lol.

Tell us....who hurt you?

It's astoundingly bewildering.

Not only is it difficult to keep up with all the sources for everything, but the cost for owning all of the currently legal rules, not even getting into Forgeworld stuff, has increased about seven-fold over 5th.

 Ratius wrote:

It's bad from the perspective that the player base has gotten used to a game that's supposed to be competitive,

But, was this ever really the case with GW?

Wasnt it all fun even from the early editions? Hell in their own official tourneys they had rules like WYSIWYG, offiical models, hard n fast rules and GW heavy TOs?

I dunno maybe, but over here, tourneys are dead competitive but if I bring a Falcon as a WS no one bats an eyelid.

You can't blame them for enforcing official models, and WYSIWYG is pretty much standard fare for most tournies AFAIK (Falcons are about 90% Waveserpents already really.) Coupled with the fact that with GW's legendary ability to only put one of the best bit in each box, it must have been quite the money spinner.

Personally, as a 2nd Edition baby, there's more familiar in 7th than strange, but I've certainly found the uneven landscape of Codex power has undercut my enjoyment of the game a little, which, as a consequence, has meant I'm less motivated to stay up to date with other armies, and tend to focus on my own, so on a few occasions I've had a WTF moment while playing against some of the newer books.

I've gone from buying all the codexes to hardly being bothered to read the epubs I've torrented, so my knowledge of the game (at least at a time when I've been actively interested) is at an all time low outside of my own armies and those I regularly face.

Granted. I was trying to make the point though that GW even in the early days of real "hobbying" never said they had a competitive game.

Or did they? I didnt really follow their corporate themes back then (2-4th edition).

As to torrenting codicies, pffff, I have. You have. We have. Most have? I dont want to get he thread locked but codex prices can and do get "circumnavigated".

Alessio has publicly said it was his intent to make 40K a competitive game.

I have no idea how far he got with his ideas. Given JJ was there, and the effluent he's spouted in his column in WD, I'd imagine nowhere as far as he wanted.

EDIT
As for torrents, we're ok, as with recasts, if we don't openly speak about the whos, hows and wheres, but my point was that I've acquired the rules for no investment or real effort on my part, and I still can't be arsed to read them.

I still do buy books for anything I intend to play, weirdly.

Again granted but didnt Aless leave post 5th?

Non competitive, beer n pretzels ideology still reigned overall no?

EDIT
As for torrents, we're ok, as with recasts, if we don't openly speak about the whos, hows and wheres, but my point was that I've acquired the rules for no investment or real effort on my part, and I still can't be arsed to read them.

Again granted. Without getting a banning I havent bought a GW publication since Eldar 7th. Make of that what you will.

Honestly, the game seems crazy bloated, and that's why at my flgs when they ask me to get in on a tourny, I just have absolutely no urge to do so. The system has literally become unfun for me to even bother to keep up with.

I'll always have fond memories of 5th. I've got my single faction, you've got your single faction, everything is easy and clear to keep up with. Now it's just...well like i said, just feels overwhelmingly bloated as a system.

I agree its bloated but damn it can be fun to chuck a WK with a Baneblade VS 150 Orks and a Gargant and just pewpewpew.

Or is that just me? :(

 Ratius wrote:

Or is that just me? :(

Ehhhh, not my cup of whiskey.

I was much happier when Apoc was its own game and buying a codex got you all the rules you needed for your faction.

Thats cool Black. I just look at it, as an option.

I dont play apoc or super Hvs much. But if I want to mix it up and write a crazy batrep with "all in" its an option.

No?

I think its a blast and the choice is great. The dataslates and LoW along with some of the FW are OP and not very fun, but my meta doesn't have a ton of it. Outside the dataslates. I think formations are a cool new way to play the same old units

At the moment, formations are just bothering me to no end. Getting tons of special rules for taking arbitrary models is really silly and lazy compared to unit synergy. I'm not too keen on all the new special detachments either. Like, as an opponent, how am I supposed to keep up with all these things, not to mention that it sucks that some armies have them in abundance while others are out in the cold.

I agree with the point AG of having to keep up with them :(

Hence my Q about it being bewildering :(
Im really lost sometimes.

 Ratius wrote:
I agree its bloated but damn it can be fun to chuck a WK with a Baneblade VS 150 Orks and a Gargant and just pewpewpew.

Or is that just me? :(

Obviously not just you because people still play the game. Certainly does nothing for me. I'm something of a fluff monkey, and I've certainly always despised how the game was radically different than the fluff they hold so high. Take for example terminator armor. Supposedly incredibly rare stuff, damn hard to maintain, kept as priceless artifacts of the past. Except in the game you can throw a whole army of them at whatever because you have that many just sitting around. Something like one termi squad per 5 tactical squads would help the situation, and it would change based on chapters, but yeah I doubt that will ever happen.

Also spam lists. Based on my limited experience playing tabletop wargaming (40k/fantasy, mercs, infinity, warmahordes, battletech), no system spams like a GW system and it irritates me to no end.

 Ratius wrote:
Thats cool Black. I just look at it, as an option.

I dont play apoc or super Hvs much. But if I want to mix it up and write a crazy batrep with "all in" its an option.

No?

The way I see it is that Apoc was an option as well. It was clear what was intended when Apoc was brought up. The option that exists now affects different gamers based on their situations; club players are likely unchanged or minimally so, pick up players have to deal with differing game expectations where everything is kosher, and tournament players are presented with more rock/paper/scissor gameplay when you can invest so many points into one model in a standard list.

Apoc still gave you the options for a wacky, crazy batrep, and if you didn't want to run that many points, your superheavy was a houserule or negotiation away. Now, rather than being the exception, its the rule. For me I feel like the game suffers for it, and that putting them back in a distinct sub-game would improve standard gameplay yet retain the option to field huge models among friends.

If huge tanks all the time are your narrative, then have at'er, its just not mine. Not by a long shot.

But spam was back even in 3rd/4th no Nec? Rhino rush, Falcon rush, Ork BWs in 5th, DE venoms, SM bikes etc?

Spam cant be really eliminated can it?
I havent played fow or WMH etc but surely people "spam" optimals and optimal units? Or did GW allow it too much?

I dunno.

 Ratius wrote:


Spam cant be really eliminated can it?

Why should it?

The problem isn't that spam exists, its that balance is bad enough to promote taking multiples of a unit simply because other options are inferior. Remove that and spam just another list building aspect, or better termed, redundancy. Plus, taking multiple copies of a unit is as fluffy as any other choices.

Spam isn't a problem. Balance is.

Spam was a thing back in 2nd.

The difference was that the net wasn't so developed, so the community was a series of bubbles dotted all over the planet, so, with the odd exception here or there, an issue such as Serpent spam would only occur if so,some in your area thought of it.

Heck, I hadn't heard of the monstrosity that was 2nd Wolfguard spam until last year, and the overwhelming majority of my 2nd Ed games were against my mate's Wolves!

^^ both posts .Granted. Man I'm using that word a lot these days

Granted, you are.

 Ratius wrote:
^^ both posts .Granted. Man I'm using that word a lot these days

Unfortunately, it gets thrown around a lot in a purely negative fashion without understanding why its negative. As a Guard player, being told my army is spammy and/or un-fluffy because I have 3 copies of every unit doesn't make me inclined to play that person.

*Edit* Oh, you were talking about granted.

I'm not a clever man.

 Ratius wrote:
But spam was back even in 3rd/4th no Nec? Rhino rush, Falcon rush, Ork BWs in 5th, DE venoms, SM bikes etc?

Spam cant be really eliminated can it?
I havent played fow or WMH etc but surely people "spam" optimals and optimal units? Or did GW allow it too much?

I dunno.

I think it can to some degree, WM/H has very minor instances of spamming, and it's only particular things that happen to synergize well. The only true spam list I can think of that operates by itself is ebutcher reaver spam. PP did a good job making things not so independently capable. If you're opponent has any sort of strong anti infantry focus, that reaver spam list gets spanked. It's hard to explain, but in order to win in WM/H you have to build a list that works together. In 40k it just feels like you take one really good unit and use as many of that as you can, and only a minimum of what you have to take to make it a legal army.

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:
It's bad from the perspective that the player base has gotten used to a game that's supposed to be competitive, and Games Workshop has basically said "We expect you to play for fun."

As if that kind of social contract will ever hold up, lol.


If you just are willing to throw your hands up and say "feth it, I'm just here to dance" then you'll probably have a good time. Personally I think I there's a lot of stuff in the rules that just doesn't work at the scale 40K was originally designed to be played at like giant walkers and flyers. But again, if your group is all about just rolling dice and having fun, it's probably not an issue.

As to which edition was more competitive? Your answer will most likely vary due to which army you favored more - I imagine.

 Blacksails wrote:

 Ratius wrote:
^^ both posts .Granted. Man I'm using that word a lot these days

Unfortunately, it gets thrown around a lot in a purely negative fashion without understanding why its negative. As a Guard player, being told my army is spammy and/or un-fluffy because I have 3 copies of every unit doesn't make me inclined to play that person.

*Edit* Oh, you were talking about granted.

I'm not a clever man.

Nonsense, you just suffer from the fact I'm in GMT and consequently slightly ahead of you in time!

 Blacksails wrote:

 Ratius wrote:
Thats cool Black. I just look at it, as an option.

I dont play apoc or super Hvs much. But if I want to mix it up and write a crazy batrep with "all in" its an option.

No?

The way I see it is that Apoc was an option as well. It was clear what was intended when Apoc was brought up. The option that exists now affects different gamers based on their situations; club players are likely unchanged or minimally so, pick up players have to deal with differing game expectations where everything is kosher, and tournament players are presented with more rock/paper/scissor gameplay when you can invest so many points into one model in a standard list.

Apoc still gave you the options for a wacky, crazy batrep, and if you didn't want to run that many points, your superheavy was a houserule or negotiation away. Now, rather than being the exception, its the rule. For me I feel like the game suffers for it, and that putting them back in a distinct sub-game would improve standard gameplay yet retain the option to field huge models among friends.

If huge tanks all the time are your narrative, then have at'er, its just not mine. Not by a long shot.

On this, it's interesting how the tournament world has split along so many lines, now offering multiple different events at many different major tournaments, with "narrative" events and "championship" events and the like. The player base is fragmenting along certain lines, and it'd be really easy to simply codify that into the rules.

Have the "Alpha", "Gamma", and "Omega" concepts from 4E, but instead use them to differentiate different levels of gameplay. "Alpha" being say, strict singular old-school FoC with no Flyers or Superheavies, "Gamma" adding in Allies and Flyers, and "Omega" adding in Formations and Superheavies ad Multiple Detachments and Unbound. Or something along these lines.

It seems like gaming groups and events are often self-segregating into the above groups (or something like them) anyway, this way each game could be codified beforehand and events could advertise what level they're playing at so everyone has a clearer expectation of what to expect and pickup games could be made a whole lot cleaner.

Unfortunately, it gets thrown around a lot in a purely negative fashion without understanding why its negative. As a Guard player, being told my army is spammy and/or un-fluffy because I have 3 copies of every unit doesn't make me inclined to play that person.

Woah, relax BS. I wasnt having a go. I just meant, I will openly throw out questions to this forum and if someone agrees I will acknowledge their point via "granted".
Its not condescending. It means I agree rather than pick your post apart piece by piece. #hugs!

 Ratius wrote:
But spam was back even in 3rd/4th no Nec? Rhino rush, Falcon rush, Ork BWs in 5th, DE venoms, SM bikes etc?

Spam cant be really eliminated can it?
I havent played fow or WMH etc but surely people "spam" optimals and optimal units? Or did GW allow it too much?

I dunno.

Most units in WMH are limited by allowed numbers of units (unit A has a field allowance of 2) and you generally want a larger variety of unit types. In Infinity a spam list would be weak because you'd need hackers, engineers, medics, etc.