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.

Last weekend me and my friend thought about going back to our local GW, just to see if the game was fun and to see some people we used to play with a lot. We went and had a pretty crappy game, I played my Eldar and he played is Blood Angels: it took us stupidly long to set up since we didn't re-learn the rules and we only own the 6th edition rulebook. So now I'm at a predicament (this may go into somewhat "anti-games workshop rant" territory):

When I used to play, at first I just bought models that sounded and looked cool, but then I felt kind of angry that my strategies were completely nonviable when put against someone with an even half-competitive list. My Eldar force consists mostly of Dire Avengers, Rangers, one unit of Jetbikes, Guardians, Fire Dragons and a Crimson Hunter.

The issue I have with 40k is that you can't build an army that simply "looks cool" to you if you want to actually win some games, emphasizing the idea that perhaps Games Workshop really don't know how to balance the game. The main part that I enjoy about the 40k experience is the lore and the modelling/painting, since whenever I try to play, otherwise clunky game mechanics or poor balancing get in the way of fun.

So now I'm left with three options:
Should I keep playing, and pick up the 7th edition rulebook and continue with my Eldar
Should I pick up 7th edition with another, new army
Or should I just not play?

I personally like the idea of having a mostly-infantry based army without too many models, which can still hold its own against the shooting-dominant meta game which my store seems to have. I guess Eldar just can't fill that role, despite their lore?

If any army can work as a "field what you like" army, its Eldar. There are hardly any "bad" choices in that book. There might be some that are less optimized at a certain role versus others, but they all have their uses.

Infantry heavy Eldar work fine against most armies, especially in smaller games, but occassionally, as with any build that favors a certain style, you will run into those hard counters. For a foot-dar force, I'd imagine a tank-heavy AM/IG force will be quite the challenge. Just understand that any infantry heavy force will take loads of casualties as it gets into position, so plan accordingly, take max size units, and try to put in some long range support in your backfield.

Option #4. Play a different game. There are a ton of better games out there that are more balanced and cheaper.

Yeah, I'll echo MWH.

40k is fine if you have a group of friends that all understand what kind of gaming you all enjoy and follow whatever gentlemen's agreement you've all come up with. 40k also comes with some great lore, and I still find 40k is one of my favourite styles of sci-fi/sci-fantasy.

That said, there really is a great variety of games that are simpler, better balanced, provide greater depth of gameplay, and are much, much cheaper. Before you go any further in any game, I'd advise looking around in other shops and see what's played there.

If the local GW is the only store you've got, and 40k is the only game played in your area, you might be out of luck if you're set on wargaming.

If you decide to stick around with 40k, your Eldar army can make excellent use of Wave Serpents supporting/transporting your infantry. Jetbikes are also really solid.

To be clear, Eldar's "excellent use of wave serpents" for Dire Avengers is, unfortunately, to kill what your DAs want dead, while still carrying them inside.

Footdar can work fun the way you want in a casual meta. I do it all the time. I've been saying for a long time, though, with that style of army: fear the boltgun.

Unfortunately, in a more competitive meta, it, like most lists, will get destroyed.

Other games do a better job in some areas. For instance, when I played WMH, any one model could be made to be critical if you built a list around it. Unfortunately, just fielding what you think is cool does even worse than in 40k (in my experience).

40k really seems to only shine when you have a great environment. Its not as social-heavy as d&d in that regard, but it really is up to he group to build a fun meta.

You should get a softcover 7e rulebook. They range from free to $20 and are exactly the same as BRB (but smaller, and softcover ).

Depending on how many models you own, Kill Team may be a way to go. KT games are popular in my area; the games are small, quick and infantry.

http://www.games-workshop.com/en-CA/Warhammer-40-000-Kill-Team-Interactive-iBook-Edition

7-th is the best edition (after rogue-trader probably) for playing with the models you like the most due to maelstorm missions and everything scoring. There are lots of examples of fun themed lists winning vs tournament lists. The guy with tons of bloodletters winning against sm + imperial knights, all-scout army going second in a large tournament, a bunch of tactical marines with Calgar going second and 5-th (or 6-th) in a GT and many more.

I myself play footslogging orkses with a bunch of different stuff - generally i pick whatever i like and make it work. However, there are always some restricions. Got to stick to the theme.

And you've got a good range of effective eldar models - you can definitely make it work if you play for the mission. It's gona be much harder than just spamming wave serpents and knights but it can and will work. And you'll have more fun and will eventually get much-much better as a general than those who follow an easy path.

The main part that I enjoy about the 40k experience is the lore and the modelling/painting, since whenever I try to play, otherwise clunky game mechanics or poor balancing get in the way of fun.

If thats how you feel, I'd recommend continuing to collect your eldar from a modelling perspective or picking up another army to model.
Then try another game altogether.
If the rules/mechanics dont suit you in 40k dishing out cash on rules/codices/supplements isnt going to be fruitful.

Buy the softcover rulebook, for 20$ its not a bad deal.
Read and learn the rules, (if you had a bad game because you did not read the rules...thats not really 40k's fault)
you will get faster at setup, it just takes practice...
stick with the eldar for a bit, try to learn your meta

footdar can work! large guardian blobs to hold back field objectives, jet-bikes boosting around stealing from your opponent, warp spiders, jumping in and out all over the place, swooping hawks dropping nade's in faces.

Trust me if there is one army that can pull off ''bring the models i like'' its eldar. You just have to learn the rules and know how to play to your strengths.

Dont blame the system, like you said you just got back into the game, there is going to be a curve.

If anything 7e is the most fun ive had since I started playing. There is a lot of opportunity now for so many different styles of play.

dont let GW haters get you down... Im so tired of people just telling everyone to quit and play another game. its still a really fun game, with rules that work, and there is ways around how ''expensive'' it is.

 Cheebs wrote:
that work, and there is ways around how ''expensive'' it is.

I agree. Plus, 40k is much less expensive if you enjoy the modelling aspects -- dollar for hour entertainment, it's pretty reasonable, if you actually *like* modelling futuristic toy soldiers. Being able to play my collections vs. my friends' collections is just awesome, for me. In my opinion, 40k is a terrible hobby/game for people who just want gaming pieces for a tabletop wargame.

stick with the eldar if you like em, they're a good army over all. and upgrading to be moderatly compeitive is going to be easier then scrapping it and starting a whole new army.

dollar for hour entertainment, it's pretty reasonable, if you actually *like* modelling futuristic toy soldiers. Being able to play my collections vs. my friends' collections is just awesome, for me.

Yes I agreeeee, especially with ebay/swap shops/local trades/the newer box deals they have been doing and then getting those at futher discount from 3rd party's its not as bad as every one makes it seem.

In my opinion, 40k is a terrible hobby/game for people who just want gaming pieces for a tabletop wargame

I just don't think its a terrible game :( The LVO proves that even at the most competitive level, out of the box thinking and being a great player is still better than taking what people assume are auto win net lists. You just have to know the rules. The internet blows so much out of proportion, and is just so negative as a whole, its quite depressing to read stuff about war-hammer sometimes. Im not trying to white knight for gw or anything, I think they have made some really bad decisions as a company, but the game is still good. Or at least as good as you and group makes it.

I mean i think or assume I suppose that warmachine/hordes is its ''main'' competitor, and this may not be true (more so because I think there are so many games out there now). And granted I have little real play experience with that game. But all of the battle reports that I watch, literally end up with both sides just lining up across from each other after reposistioning, and then casting a few powers/shooting a few time, only to eventually become one big blob of melee, it just doesn't seem that interesting. The tactics/strategies that go into setup and list building may be more in depth but the gameplay just does not interest me.

Infinity on the other hand is great and satisfies my skirmish game desires with great rules and models. But when I want that big battle with awesome fluff feels, I always end-up going back to 40k.

 Cheebs wrote:


I just don't think its a terrible game :( The LVO proves that even at the most competitive level, out of the box thinking and being a great player is still better than taking what people assume are auto win net lists. You just have to know the rules. The internet blows so much out of proportion, and is just so negative as a whole, its quite depressing to read stuff about war-hammer sometimes. Im not trying to white knight for gw or anything, I think they have made some really bad decisions as a company, but the game is still good. Or at least as good as you and group makes it.

If you're not going to white knight GW, then surely you can agree that 40k's rules are pretty poorly worded, have a lot of excess bloat/redundancies or marginally useful rules, and is pretty poorly balanced. None of those issues exist in most other games to the degree it exists in 40k. Those other games avoid that through play testing and testing groups, and community feedback.

Further, 40k's rules are often lacking when you think about how well the rules represent the fluff we all know and love. Yet again, other games, have rules that mesh far better with established fluff.

You can call it negative all you like, but that doesn't make it bad, wrong, or something to be ashamed of. For the sake of everyone, and especially new players, explaining all the pitfalls and positives of the game is the best course, and explaining that 40k is really a poor ruleset compared to half a dozen other fairly popular rules is the best thing you can do for someone asking what to do with 40k.

If enough people are negative about the game, wouldn't that indicate there are issues with the game?

But all of the battle reports that I watch, literally end up with both sides just lining up across from each other after reposistioning, and then casting a few powers/shooting a few time, only to eventually become one big blob of melee, it just doesn't seem that interesting. The tactics/strategies that go into setup and list building may be more in depth but the gameplay just does not interest me.

And this differs from 40k...how? Honestly, if you didn't state that you were describing WM/H, I'd assume you were describing a game of 40k.

Infinity on the other hand is great and satisfies my skirmish game desires with great rules and models. But when I want that big battle with awesome fluff feels, I always end-up going back to 40k.

One of 40ks main draws for me is that its the most popular ruleset I know of for sci-fi with tanks at a 28mm scale. Then again, Bolt Action would probably be a better platform if 40k's fluff and wargear was ported over.

 SpartanHedgey wrote:
Last weekend me and my friend thought about going back to our local GW, just to see if the game was fun and to see some people we used to play with a lot. We went and had a pretty crappy game, I played my Eldar and he played is Blood Angels: it took us stupidly long to set up since we didn't re-learn the rules and we only own the 6th edition rulebook. So now I'm at a predicament (this may go into somewhat "anti-games workshop rant" territory):

When I used to play, at first I just bought models that sounded and looked cool, but then I felt kind of angry that my strategies were completely nonviable when put against someone with an even half-competitive list. My Eldar force consists mostly of Dire Avengers, Rangers, one unit of Jetbikes, Guardians, Fire Dragons and a Crimson Hunter.

The issue I have with 40k is that you can't build an army that simply "looks cool" to you if you want to actually win some games, emphasizing the idea that perhaps Games Workshop really don't know how to balance the game. The main part that I enjoy about the 40k experience is the lore and the modelling/painting, since whenever I try to play, otherwise clunky game mechanics or poor balancing get in the way of fun.

So now I'm left with three options:
Should I keep playing, and pick up the 7th edition rulebook and continue with my Eldar
Should I pick up 7th edition with another, new army
Or should I just not play?

I personally like the idea of having a mostly-infantry based army without too many models, which can still hold its own against the shooting-dominant meta game which my store seems to have. I guess Eldar just can't fill that role, despite their lore?

Spartan, I'm not quite understanding you - you and your friend played a game together, using the 6th rulebook, and using the codexes you already owned? So - how was it at all different from two years ago for you?

If you still like 40k, try out the new Maelstrom missions. They make the game a lot more interesting (though you'll encounter some here who don't like the randomness), and allows infantry to contribute more.

From my understanding, the Eldar do actually match their lore mostly. They usually use FAST deployment, in fast moving vehicles (Falcons/Serpents), or with fast-moving units (Hawks, jetbikes, Warp Spiders). Surgical strikes and dancing around the enemy is the name of the game.

You should also look into the Iyanden supplement, as it is themed around Wraith units, which have a very high resiliency and high firepower (though the Wraithguard units are short-ranged, so benefit from a vehicle or Deep strike in all but a few configurations).

The list you gave us is foot units without any real mobility - those units are not known for standing up well to enemy fire. Without a transport or heavy distraction units (Fire Prisms/Wraithknights/Dark Reapers), having those units exposed is like having a glass hammer - except without the hammer part.

IF you do want a real elite infantry-based army, look into Grey Knights.

These are my thoughts after considering and ultimately choosing not to play 40k again around 4-5 times during the past two years. I last played during mid 3rd edition, so around 2001-2002 (in fact I stopped playing right after the Tau were originally released).

First, I still really like the models for 40k and the background. To this day I remember bits of background that I read in old books or White Dwarf, I recall with fond memories playing 2nd edition and 3rd edition, I remember having an Outrider (back when those were things) show up to my local game store with the 3rd edition box to demo it. The background and figure quality is almost without peer; the prices are steep, but while I don't like the price point I like the quality.

However, I've always been a gamer. I don't like to do much in the way of conversions; simple head/weapon swaps are the limit of my conversion skill, and my painting is mediocre at best and sloppy at worst as I aim for a tabletop standard not lavish detail. I frequently cut corners by using shading washes and drybrushing to get models painted quickly.

From a pure game standpoint, the 40k rules are subpar to say the least. The way the rules are written, you are encouraged to pick what you like, what is cool and/or what fits your theme/concept of the army you're building. This has always been the case, there were even articles written back in my day about the "spirit of the game" and what that entailed in army creation. The problem is that the rules don't match this. In the same book you'll have units that are so amazingly good that there's no compelling reason not to take them alongside units that are lacking in many ways to where you would scratch your head as to why you would bother to take them. Fluff reasons, perhaps, but fluff reasons don't help you win games and ultimately 40k is a game between two players.

I think 40k shines with a close-knit, established group. Remember that the traditional playstyle in the UK is/was a gaming club with memberships and the like, while in the USA the style is more going to a game store and looking for a game, possibly against a complete stranger. So 40k is best played with a group that knows each other (possibly friends but at the least something closer to co-workers than random guys who both happen to be at the game shop on the same day and time) where you can shore up the gaps and holes and wrinkles in the rules with club/group rules designed to foster a friendlier environment and maybe ensure that nobody is bringing some crazy broken list to the same game where someone has a fluffy and underpowered list.

However in anything other than that, I think 40k fails miserably. It's not a game where you can just turn up to the shop and see who wants to play, there are too many variables and issues that could arise. You have a fluffy Deathwing army, he has Eldar + Dark Eldar with an Imperial Knight for the lulz, the game will probably not be fun for either of you. There's too great a disconnect between what units you like and what works well. If you really like Khorne Berzerkers, for example, you'd be hard pressed to play them effectively because rules-wise they are bad and Plague Marines are good, but what if you don't like Nurgle? You're stuck deciding to play what you like and lose because they aren't balanced right, or play what you dislike in order to stand a chance.

For me personally the poor rules were too much, coupled with increasing prices and the fact that there is no 40k club but people who show up to the store and ask "Anyone want to play a game of 40k tomorrow at 2pm?" which isn't conducive to the game environment. Such an environment I think would be too convoluted with trying to solve the issues or come up with a balance, especially with me being someone who never cared that much for "competitive" 40k lists but liked the fluffy, thematic lists that fit the background material.

The biggest question you'll have to ask yourself is if the rules and the fact that you might resign yourself to constantly losing with a fluffy/cool army is worth playing. If your friends play 40k then that's at least something as you know your opponents.

If you want to play then do so. If you want to keep playing less mathhammer focused lists then find other gamers witha similar mentality and form a group to play together. My group also prefers to use everything in the books and not just the perfect high return on cost units. Our armies often contain "useless" units.

The sad fact is that 40k isn't and never will be balanced and you need to find the meta that works for you. Best thing that worked for me was building my own table and collecting scenery for it and having a group of 8-10 friends who have the same approach to the game as I do as regular opponents. We have plenty of fun because there are no "my fluff list vs. TFG deathstar tourney list" games ever.

Skriker

WayneTheGame wrote:

The biggest question you'll have to ask yourself is if the rules and the fact that you might resign yourself to constantly losing with a fluffy/cool army is worth playing. If your friends play 40k then that's at least something as you know your opponents.

I agree. However, being able to just pick models that you like and expecting an effective army that you can win with, against a similarly experienced, optimize army, out of it in any game that I can think of is a myth.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Skriker wrote:
If you want to play then do so. If you want to keep playing less mathhammer focused lists then find other gamers witha similar mentality and form a group to play together. My group also prefers to use everything in the books and not just the perfect high return on cost units. Our armies often contain "useless" units.

The sad fact is that 40k isn't and never will be balanced and you need to find the meta that works for you. Best thing that worked for me was building my own table and collecting scenery for it and having a group of 8-10 friends who have the same approach to the game as I do as regular opponents. We have plenty of fun because there are no "my fluff list vs. TFG deathstar tourney list" games ever.

Skriker

This exactly describes our group except we have a little less numbers than yours. In my 20+ years of experience with wargames and TCGs, games with friends are better than any of the games with strangers -- win, lose or draw.

 Talys wrote:

WayneTheGame wrote:

The biggest question you'll have to ask yourself is if the rules and the fact that you might resign yourself to constantly losing with a fluffy/cool army is worth playing. If your friends play 40k then that's at least something as you know your opponents.

I agree. However, being able to just pick models that you like and expecting an effective army that you can win with, against a similarly experienced, optimize army, out of it in any game that I can think of is a myth.

You can do it with eldar, to use a GW example. Same is true for star wars or malifaux. In fact there are few game systems that have stuff like w40k has, where a codex can have as few as 3-4 viable units. And when I say few, I mean that I never heard about a system that is like w40k, but I also can't claim that I know all table top systems that ever existed.

Terms like fluff or casual army exist only in GW games, out of all the systems I know. In all other system you just play a game.

What does dollar per hour entertainment mean?

Terms like fluff and casual did exist when I played a different tabletop game.

The difference was fluff armies were even more pointless, and people would rarely ever play casual, because the people who played it wanted to compete.

So, no, those terms are not unique to 40k.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dollars per hour of entertainment simply means that $100 dollars for 50 hours of fun is cheaper than $10 for 2 hours of fun. In that scale.

Bharring wrote:
Terms like fluff and casual did exist when I played a different tabletop game.

The difference was fluff armies were even more pointless, and people would rarely ever play casual, because the people who played it wanted to compete.

So, no, those terms are not unique to 40k.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dollars per hour of entertainment simply means that $100 dollars for 50 hours of fun is cheaper than $10 for 2 hours of fun. In that scale.

Its in ALL games in general.

Best thing i can suggest is play lower points. keep it simple and enjoy with people that share your feelings.
If some one in the group starts pulling ahead in win ratios talk to each other and see why, and how you can all improve your experience, from changing up the missions (campaigns) to possible house ruled limitations. and what not.

Otherwise. keep your toys, paint them up reaaaaaallly nice and chuck in in a display case. come back in a few years and try it again.

You filthy casuals

Cuts both ways, though, if you want a friendly meta!

If you're winning too much (60%?), its probably time to change your list.

(Filthy casual and proud of it!)

 Talys wrote:

WayneTheGame wrote:

The biggest question you'll have to ask yourself is if the rules and the fact that you might resign yourself to constantly losing with a fluffy/cool army is worth playing. If your friends play 40k then that's at least something as you know your opponents.

I agree. However, being able to just pick models that you like and expecting an effective army that you can win with, against a similarly experienced, optimize army, out of it in any game that I can think of is a myth.

To an extent, but the gap is smaller in other games than in 40k. Also the big problem is that you can pick things that should work in 40k and they won't. An all Berzerker army, or an all Terminator army spring to mind; cool and fluffy but terrible on the table, especially when compared to a fluffy-but-great list like White Scars or Saim-Hann jetbike Eldar. There's no reason why some fluffy lists should be great, and some should be garbage, which is another of 40k's major flaws IMHO.

To the OP

A lot has changed in 40k in the last two years: super heavies, formations, stronghold assault, lords of war, 2 editions, more random tables to roll on, ect ect. Your better off doing some research in the game before you jump in head first. If balance of the game is a major issue I might recommend trying other games like Infinity, warmachine, bolt action ect ect.. There are so many gaming companies that simple just do it better. If you do enjoy playing codex Russian roulette then 40k is the game for you.