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.

GW always had crap rules and good, but not great models, but now they have something new that is slowly depleting their customer base with no sign of stopping.

Competition.

There are now great rulesets with equal or better quality minis out there cheaper than GWs and GW is utterly failing to attract customers or maintain its old ones. Its not a trend that will suddenly stop either unless GW can suddenly change their business model from the ground up

 Paradigm wrote:
Will I play it as a tournament game? No, because I never have, and I never intend to, and it was never designed for that.

That said, I fully intend to keep playing 40k as long as there is a 40k to play, and even after if it comes to it. I still find the game amazingly fun, and have everything I'd need to keep playing even if GW goes bust tomorrow in one form or another. It's almost 5 years to the week since I first started playing, and in that time, none of the supposed decline of 40k has affected me; I ignore or fix the bits I don't like, expand the bits I do, and keep on playing.

I'll buy other games, maybe even better ones, but that doesn't mean I have any reason to quit 40k.

This.

Can't see tournament 40k still being around in a year from now where I am (good riddence), but the noncompetitive community will still be going and all the bail outs mean I can get the stuff I want for great prices

This is a great response to my question and even a better question was suggested, and I agree with most of what is posted.
I will continue to play this game and hope it gets better not worse concerning tourney play. At the same time at this point
I think the better question in which I don't have an answer for is in what capacity will I continue to play this game.

Casual or tournament ?

Both are very different...

I play with a pretty laid back crowd at our local GW, no reason to quit now. New marine book will come out, either be rediculously broken or more of how it is now, only slightly broken.

Though it is a bit refreshing to see the codex chapters having the broken stuff for once rather than space wolves and blood Angels taking turns bring full of gak. Dark Angels are still poopy, since they day they were made you til the day they die.

reply extracted - wrong thread

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
I agree with the OP, I've also noticed a distinct decline in the last five years.

I started in mid 5th having been on hiatus since the end of 2nd/beginning of 3rd.

Shortly after, a local club started, initially it was almost exclusively 40K, not by design, just by dint of the popularity of the game. Recent years has seen attendance to the club fall away, and fewer and fewer games of 40K happening while other systems have gained popularity.

Personally, the latest Eldar book has simply snuffed out all desire I currently have to play. I'm not angry about it, I just don't care enough anymore to waste that sort of energy. I'll still keep working on armies as painting projects (I've got a trunk full of back catalogue to work through) as I primarily paint anyway, but I'll keep my game time for X Wing, and perhaps the occasional 40K game for nostalgia, and simply retain a mild optimism that things will pick up again in the future.

This is something I'm seeing a lot of and feel myself. There's just not as many people showing up as there once were on game nights and local events, tournaments at many places aren't run as frequently, affordability is rapidly declining, and the rules are increasingly simply insane and feel more and more out of place for the scale the game is intended to play at.

40k was once the 800lb gorilla with Fantasy as its 600lb sibling dominating a room with the occasional 10lb visitor monkey, now Fantasy appears to have died a slow and undignified death, while 40k is down to the 400lb gorilla in a room with a bunch of 250lb chimps swarming around it.

That pretty much sums it up. Tons of other good systems around that seem to stay, catering to everyones asthetic needs and interests and not just the grimdark world. I still enjoy playing 40k, but it's become diluted with other systems, systems that often offer more balanced tournament rules and are easy to get into.

Another thing that heavily weighed in in our area was the fact that GW really pissed off our local storeowner, who was instrumental in getting fresh blood into 40k and FB. He built terrain, had store armies for people to play with, organized tournaments etc... Then GW disallowed his onlinestore to use official GW pictures, cut prize-support, moved tons of merchandise from their store-lineup to mail-order, weighed in on his pricing and finally placed a one-man gw-store (which doesn't draw gaming crowd) right in his vicinity. Now the store owner went from actively promoting 40k, to FoW, Bolt Action, FSA and tons of other systems, to a point where the GW-systems almost died out. WHFB and LOTR are dead now and we have a handful of 40k people left for the occasional game, but no new faces for quite some time...

 Stinkyninja wrote:

My question for those who have been in the game of 40k for a few years is this

Do you see yourself playing this game as a tournament style game a year from now ?

If so why ?

If not why?

Before I walk away I really would like feed back from the old school war gamers if there any left out there...

Oh, I gave up years ago. Like you say there are lots of reasons:

I finally cottoned on that the rules are horribly gritty and nitpicky, above and way beyond the stretched out roll to hit roll to wound roll to save rigmarole. Aaall those huge lists of available wargear and abilities, special rules and rerolls and exceptions and things that the game has to stop and pause for. That doesn't build 'character', it builds boredom. It's no good when you're pushed towards bigger and bigger games and armies, which has turned into a ridiculous combination. Trust me, you need a bit more abstraction in big games, to keep them going smoothly. It's not killing off the character; broader strokes are capable of that (not to mention minis and fluff). It's just common sense.

On that note, the game's all about pre-game strategy, specifically listbuilding. Someone might pull an actual tactic (i.e. a bit of canny know-wots during the game, in reaction to events occuring in-game) out of nowhere and impress someone else, but ninety-nine point nine recurring percent of the game is about sitting down in a darkened room with a codex and a calculator and mathammering away where no-one can see you.
When I tried out Epic: Armageddon years ago, I was surprised that the listbuilding options basically boiled down to what infantry platoons or vehicle squadrons you decided on, let alone units, and just about no wargear or kitted-out characters; and that piling on the most powerful space marine units and combos was not the way to an easy win. Coming from 40K and WHFB, which were the only wargames I really knew at that point, I thought it was a weird way to do things, and thought I might not like it. I ended up loving it, because the rules were elegant and smooth in their simplicity, with hidden depth from the greater focus on tactical play. The lack of tiny, fiddly details to add actually helped that, and was refreshing, because it was more about coordinating and maneuvering your army than fussing over single minis. I could go on.
When I went back to the core two, I soon got tired with them. I started seeing them in a new light. It came to a head when I was trying to put an OK list together for FB. Does it really matter if one MSU of bulls have an ironfist or an extra hand weapon, when they do almost the same thing, and you're trying to play a big, sweeping game with them? It's a load of rubbish. It's ALL a load of rubbish.

I've heard it said that all of that - the dependence of the game on listbuilding, mathammering, memorising reams of special rules and tables, playing on rails, and so on - is intended to appeal to young brains, preteens and young teens, able to soak up and categorise loads of info but still somewhat uncoordinated. Compared to more abstracted games that emphasise on-the-spot tactics, analysis, and the bigger picture. I can't disagree too strongly, because all that former stuff used to appeal to me, and now it doesn't. Not as much as the latter. (I also happened to read about the development of the prefrontal cortex recently, which I guess is where the original statement came from) That's not intended as an insult, not to say that kids playing 40K are dumb (I still think they could easily play something better, though); but if you've been playing for years and that style of game is starting to wear thin for you or your gaming group, then I'd say that's only natural, and not surprising.

Ah, but there's more to put people off, of course. The ever-rising prices for those ever-growing games. How necessary is that? The unending rules churn. The constant imbalance. The unfair treatment of FLGSs, online stores, bits sellers, and whole regions of the world. The IP bullying of other miniatures manufacturers and even novelists who happen to use two familiar words. The gloating by directors and other muckety-mucks about customer 'sheep' buying whatever they make and market research (i.e, listening to your customers) being pointless. All of that stuff that creates a strong impression that GW is just a cold money machine and you're the raw material that goes into the hopper at the front.

Add all of that up and it's not difficult to see why gamers are leaving in droves. It's not an unusual step to take, Stinkyninja. It's not even a bad step to take. You've seen plenty take it yourself. There'll be a bit of culture shock when you see how different some games are, and I know that feeling myself, but it'll be fine.

Vote with your wallet. If you like GW's product and release rate, feel free to spend your money on GW's product. If you do not like GW's product and/or release rate, feel free to not spend your money on their product. Judging by GW's falling profit line, we can assume that quite a few players are in fact voting with their wallets.

My only complaint with GW is their current release schedule. They have been putting out more "cool" things at too fast of a rate since 6th, which includes 7th, as well as invalidating at least one codex that is barely a year old. This kind of release schedule stuns their market, causing customers to hesitate in buying new product due to the very likely chance that their purchase will be invalidated within s few months. GW cannot sustain these loses before someone with half a brain either puts on the breaks, or a buyer such as Hasbro scoops them up.

TL;DR, GW is intentionally killing themselves by over saturating their own market. This won't kill their game, but it will alienate their customer base.

SJ

Our store has a large collection of good players and then 5 or so tourney tryhards. Those of us that play for fun will continue to do so, and will continue to not take army compositions that are questionable in the realm of fair play.

Can't force people to play like this though. Our tryhard 5 flying hive tyrant player, the "everything in one invisible unit" dude and other players just don't get games unless it's tournament day. Even then, they complain about not being able to take their 4 force org lists.

I will be playing until I am too old to stand over a table for 2-3 hours. I only have one real opponent to play with, two kids and a new promotion. I don't play often, but I enjoy it every time I do.

I think a lot of players are waiting to see what tournaments like NOVA do before they make a final decision on the game.

 greyknight12 wrote:
I think a lot of players are waiting to see what tournaments like NOVA do before they make a final decision on the game.

See, one question I've always had is how much of the player base is actually tournament/competitive oriented? One of the common opinions in these threads is competitive will suffer, but casual will remain largely the same.

Dakka is a forum dedicated to TT gaming, so I think we see a large number of players who are more serious and committed to the hobby than most. Tournament play seems to be low on GW's list of concerns, and tournament players are routinely disappointed with a lack of balance.

I play 40k because as a kid I always thought the model were cool, but did not have the $ to buy or the skill/patience to build and paint. Now I am older and have the $ to buy the models and have patience (skill is still up for debate) to build and paint the models. I enjoy this part of the hobby. It gives me an opportunity to sneak away from the family for a couple of hours every other weekend or so and work on my little men.

As for the game itself, i could take or leave the rules and the tournaments. I like to play and will go out, and have played in a couple of local tournaments, but usually not super competitive. I play what I like and so be it. There is not really any more than a $40-$50 store credit prize at steak. If I wanted $50 for models I would for sure do something else to get the $50 rather than trying to out netlist so 20 something punk.

The thing I like best about the game is even with the "sky is falling" sentiments it still has the largest and most accessible player base (at least in my area). I can find an opponent all most any day of the week on a couple hours notice and for sure any weekend afternoon. So even if the rules are a mess (I am not convinced of that), it is better to play a bad game with another human being that a great game with nobody.

 clamclaw wrote:

 greyknight12 wrote:
I think a lot of players are waiting to see what tournaments like NOVA do before they make a final decision on the game.

See, one question I've always had is how much of the player base is actually tournament/competitive oriented? One of the common opinions in these threads is competitive will suffer, but casual will remain largely the same.

Dakka is a forum dedicated to TT gaming, so I think we see a large number of players who are more serious and committed to the hobby than most. Tournament play seems to be low on GW's list of concerns, and tournament players are routinely disappointed with a lack of balance.

I think many are like me, don't care a thing about tournaments but still are sick of the imbalance.
I see the casual play at FLGS's suffering as well because tournament people who quit won't be showing up to play their more casual lists or what not.
Losing players and customers is bad for 40k even if "it's THOSE kinds of players."

 MWHistorian wrote:

 clamclaw wrote:

 greyknight12 wrote:
I think a lot of players are waiting to see what tournaments like NOVA do before they make a final decision on the game.

See, one question I've always had is how much of the player base is actually tournament/competitive oriented? One of the common opinions in these threads is competitive will suffer, but casual will remain largely the same.

Dakka is a forum dedicated to TT gaming, so I think we see a large number of players who are more serious and committed to the hobby than most. Tournament play seems to be low on GW's list of concerns, and tournament players are routinely disappointed with a lack of balance.

I think many are like me, don't care a thing about tournaments but still are sick of the imbalance.
I see the casual play at FLGS's suffering as well because tournament people who quit won't be showing up to play their more casual lists or what not.
Losing players and customers is bad for 40k even if "it's THOSE kinds of players."

That's true, losing players is never going to be a benefit particularly with a more niche hobby such as TT gaming. Whether you play competitively or not, a lot of what they do drives a good portion of income for GW, and even more so exposure/advertising. I would imagine a tournament or Con event gets more attention than a few guys around a kitchen table.

 clamclaw wrote:
One of the common opinions in these threads is competitive will suffer, but casual will remain largely the same.

That's because some people don't understand that the problems that hurt competitive tournaments are just as bad for "casual" players. The only reason "casual" play can remain the same is if you've already accepted that GW's rules suck and written your own game based on 40k, which you'll be able to continue doing no matter what GW does.

 Peregrine wrote:

 clamclaw wrote:
One of the common opinions in these threads is competitive will suffer, but casual will remain largely the same.

That's because some people don't understand that the problems that hurt competitive tournaments are just as bad for "casual" players. The only reason "casual" play can remain the same is if you've already accepted that GW's rules suck and written your own game based on 40k, which you'll be able to continue doing no matter what GW does.

That's a pretty extreme extrapolation on how people can choose to play... I play with the standard 7th ed. rules and have no problems, it's entirely possible to have enjoyable games.

Yeah, it sucks that competitive 40K seems to get the shorter end of the stick, which can lead to smaller profits for GW as a whole (thus bad for the hobby). But I don't feel impact of imbalance hard enough to have me make my own rules.

@clamclaw.
I am sure you play your interpretation of 40k 7th ed rules just fine.
Its just you/your player groups interpretation of the rules can be different to other peoples.

Basically each casual group play their own version of the 40k rules.They may not physically write a new version of the rules, but they play their own interpretation of them.Which will be different enough to cause issues with other player groups versions of 40k, if they were to play other groups as is done random pick up games and tournaments.

 clamclaw wrote:
But I don't feel impact of imbalance hard enough to have me make my own rules.

So you play every single thing strictly RAW without any house rules or RAI interpretations? You allow and encourage free use of every unit and option, no matter how powerful, without imposing any limits (whether explicit or implied and enforced by social pressure) on army construction?

You know, come to think of it, there are a handful of things we 'let slide' in how we play. Not so much a re-write for any portions, but more liberal interpretation and less binding overall. Never really thought of that.

Huh, I posted this in response to Lanrak but it's funny because he said essentially the same thing as Peregrine but more... gently...

On a related note, just a few hours ago I commented on an article revolving around how everything is great, if you don't think the game is better than ever before you just aren't forging the narrative hard enough and are a TFG that doesn't play the game right, noting how I have friends who play fluffy CSM armies and I can't help effortlessly wiping the floor with them even when playing decidedly sub par army lists on purpose and that this is terrible for casual and narrative gaming just as much as it is for competitive gaming if not moreso.

What reply did I get?

I guess you should be even more casual and let your friend take some more "competitive" lists

As for the OP, I don't see myself leaving the game anytime soon but I'm decidedly unhappy with how GW is steering it right now.

I started getting my hopes up when the 7th ed codices looked to be fairly well balanced, but Codex: Necrons and Codex: Eldars dashed them (I would've forgiven Codex: Necrons if only because they at least greatly improved the internal balance, so I was willing to give them the benefit of the doubt about failing to do external balance properly, but Codex: Eldars showed they really have learned nothing).

The local 40K community has been shrinking for a while now, and the closure of our FLGS earlier this year makes me rather pessimistic about the odds of this trend reversing anytime soon...

 Galorian wrote:
On a related note, just a few hours ago I commented on an article revolving around how everything is great, if you don't think the game is better than ever before you just aren't forging the narrative hard enough and are a TFG that doesn't play the game right, noting how I have friends who play fluffy CSM armies and I can't help effortlessly wiping the floor with them even when playing decidedly sub par army lists on purpose and that this is terrible for casual and narrative gaming just as much as it is for competitive gaming if not moreso.

What reply did I get?

I guess you should be even more casual and let your friend take some more "competitive" lists

That's an amazing answer, now neither of you can take the lists you want.

40k in the future eh... can't see me still giving a damn about this game in a year, other than maybe watching some battle reps or streams every once and a while.

I stopped playing years ago, and every time I consider doing it again I seriously have to ask myself why I would bother since the game is awful. The only reason I could even see to pick it up again is there's for whatever reason a large group that still are ingrained into 40k and don't acknowledge alternative, better games. If I didn't find a small but laid back group to play Warmachine with (which grinds my gears too as I want to play that competitively and they treat it similar to 40k's approach) I would have been forced to play 40k again.

I keep eyeing the figures but I can't think of any good reason why I'd ever bother spending that amount of money for such poor quality.

I didn't answer since I played sporadically from 2nd to 6th edition, but finally called it quits and stopped buying rulebooks in 6th. Though not a tournament player, after 20 some years in the hobby I consider myself an old-school wargamer, and that's precisely why I don't do the 40k dance anymore. I've got the perspective have seen:
-The constant price raises that far outstrip inflation
-The futility of constantly reworking a platoon level skirmish game that is played at an ever increasing company level.
-The cynicism with which GW treats it's customers.

Some old-schoolers still love them some 40k and more power to them. However, when I really understood how many other gaming options were out there and that I could pursue many of them at once for the same cost as a 40k hobby, there was just no reason to stick around.

As for the shrinking of the hobby, it seems like there's still an active 40k community here in Chicago. Adepticon was full of 40k players, but that's not a great example since it's big enough to draw from all over the country.

That said, my advice is a bit different from my experience.
What I would say to you is that if you still love the game, but it's the gamers who are driving you away, then find some new gamers. They're out there.

If however, it's the game that you don't like anymore, there's absolutely no reason to keep playing. There are many more options out there some of which have vibrant tournament and FLGS scenes. If you do walk away, I do recommend keeping your armies for a year or so, just in case you get the bug. Too many of us have sold stuff off only to regret it months or years later.

Best of luck whatever you decide.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Galorian wrote:
On a related note, just a few hours ago I commented on an article revolving around how everything is great, if you don't think the game is better than ever before you just aren't forging the narrative hard enough and are a TFG that doesn't play the game right, noting how I have friends who play fluffy CSM armies and I can't help effortlessly wiping the floor with them even when playing decidedly sub par army lists on purpose and that this is terrible for casual and narrative gaming just as much as it is for competitive gaming if not moreso.

What reply did I get?
en shrinking for a while now, and the closure of our FLGS earlier this year makes me rather pessimistic about the odds of this trend reversing anytime soon...

I read your post and you're right about the imballances. However, to be fair, much of the article was about forging narrative games and interesting scenarios. Your response was "I've taken a crappy list and still win" which kind of misses the point of narrative gaming. Narrative gaming and scenario writing isn't about just taking a crappy list. It's about crafting a scenario where the forces involved and objectives revolve around a narrative. It actually has very little to do with giving everyone the same chance of winning. In fact many scenarios are deliberately unbalanced.

I've been playing 40k for nearly 20 years, along with Necromunda and Epic 40k for a spell while they were supported. During that time I was on again/off again due to school, job, kids, etc. I really have 2-3 people that I get games with on a semi-regular basis and don't get a chance to hit any of the LGS in my area for games. However, I do get a chance to go to said stores for short stints on nights when 40k is supposed to be being played. As well, I am on the 40k Facebook page for my region. I can say that I have seen just what the OP and others have been echoing which is a decline in 40k being played overall. This is certainly reflected in the major tournaments that have been played here (TactiCon and Genghis Con) which have seen declining participation in the last 3-4 years. Feast of Blades has also seen a drop, though not as dramatic as it is seen as a much more competitive tournament with more like-minded players consistently attending.

I have never been one to play 40k competitively as I (like others) never saw it that way. I grew up loving the models and fluff of the various armies. I have kept 2 armies throughout the years, Chaos and Tyranids. I love painting and modeling and most of my free time is spent in that realm. A number of years ago when Hordes hit the markets I played a few games and really enjoyed the mechanics and the rules. I felt like each faction was relatively balanced against each other. PP also does an excellent job errataing rules that are found to be over powered. They listen to their player base and care about balance in order to keep players coming back.

GW is also doing themselves no favors by alienating non-GW retail outlets by constraining the business practices of said stores. The release schedule (accelerated from previous editions), multi-source rules (new with the advent of digitalization) and codex creep (not new, but still problematic) all make tournament play inaccessible to many who just can't keep up either money-wise or time-wise. So they stop going. They play casual games at the local store. I also have seen people playing the latest and greatest get snubbed for games and labeled as a power gamer or what have you. This is also detrimental to the game as a whole because if someone can't play, what's the reason to keep playing? Unfortunately, GW is helping this mentality along because the above issues begrudge old farts like myself who want to have fun, not get shot off the table by 180 scatter laser shots. To hopefully deter any Peregrine response in the negative to this, I don't advocate any kind of comp to the rules as written. It simply means that you need to self-comp at times given the meta that you are playing in, if it enriches the environment on the whole.

TL;DR - No tournament play for me, but I'll be playing the game for sure. GW needs to take a look at other games which are successful and perhaps take some notes on keeping player bases intact, because theirs is suffering.

Cheers

Well to be fair in my mind, while yes GW has pulled some rather dubious stunts to say the least over the
past few years. I mean it even feels like at times when it comes to customer relations I look at GW as a whole and get
this mental image, of me sitting on a park bench at the zoo.

Right there in front of me you have this cage full of monkeys and they bounce around the cage and sling their poop
at people passing by.

I mean I get it but to be fair a lot of your other game companies are just as guilty they just do it to ya on a different scale.
I've played other games and have seen it, first hand.

I think the thing that gets to me the most is coming to the understanding that I don't get the return from
both my time and money investment that I use to get.

On top of that I have 4 armies in 40k I can not afford to keep all four current any longer. That really bugs me...
I mean the day of running and maintaining multiple armies is gone for certain.

The one thing I do want to say that I noticed from the local con last weekend.
While both warmahorde and 40k players were busy dry humping each others legs over who had the cheese master 4000 list
to rule lawyer them all. I looked over at the older war gamers, who were running historical war games some were home brew games. Some were just rule books where
they would provide and create 15mm scale armies etc...

Those guys were having fun and I think that may be where I may find myself going in the future...

Hey just want to say you guys are really stepping up with this topic and I am grateful for the input.

The short answer is yes.

I have tons of fun with 40k, and find it more immersive and entertaining than any of the alternatives that I've tried. Also, it's by far the most extensive model range, and I greatly enjoy the hobby.

 Peregrine wrote:

 clamclaw wrote:
But I don't feel impact of imbalance hard enough to have me make my own rules.

So you play every single thing strictly RAW without any house rules or RAI interpretations? You allow and encourage free use of every unit and option, no matter how powerful, without imposing any limits (whether explicit or implied and enforced by social pressure) on army construction?

Not a question posed at me but one I felt compelled to reply, as someone who has played innumerable games in just this manner. As a manager of a lgs part of my job is to play games with any of the customers who are looking for a game and not finding one. As one might expect this was mostly what people on this forum would call WaaC or TFG, and at first I won't lie I hated it to the point where I would only play when necessary. After a while of it grinding me down I decided to change, instead of trying to make the game into what I wanted it to be, I played it as the broken power-creeped mess that it was. And I loved it.

I've played against some insane lists since I had this, for lack of a better term, epiphany; 6 riptide, pentflyrants, warhounds, revenants, unbound everything and anything, void shield spam, full knights army, adlance knights w/allies, daemon summoning, etc. Every game was enjoyable even the ones I was doomed to lose, actually I've been tabled three times by turn three and those were some of the best games, they showed me a weakness in my lit and what I needed to improve.

That all said and done, and I'm sure this will surprise everyone, I completely agree Peregrines stance, this game is hopelessly broken and honestly the best solution would probably be along the lines that Peregrine has suggested gut or or just all together get rid of the rule set or start fresh. Why? Because I am not normal, most people would rather pound their head against a wall then struggle through an entire game knowing they have no chance of winning. Not to mention one of my armies, which I rather liked before their new codex the necrons, is obscenely powerful, and so once I started building competitive lists I suddenly had a chance of winning. But what about those players who aren't lucky enough to play one of the power armies, or heaven forbid someone who actually wants to abide by fluff and the backstory so won't go all out, or likes an army even if it is considered weak?

TL: DR You can have fun with the game rules as written if your masochistic/sadistic, but otherwise the game tends to be less fun than pulling out your fingernails with rusty pliers if you don't comp the game

Well, the question is kinda vague but I'll post a short answer to my vote. I noted 'no' thinking you meant: "Will you be buying new up to date models / playing socially." I play 5th still with a group of friends which range from Kill Team to 2k lists. We even modify rules or add made up units ourselves now and then for some role play. We also try and avoid spamming the same unit multiple times(Unless they're troops kind of divide those evenly then.) We also let a player get away with a 250 point handicap when ever they play. You could say we play yes, but we are stuck in the past. We enjoy it quite a lot... save time, money and social frustration involved in 40k.
40k socially is kinda like buying coke but everyone(even the dealer) wants to tell you how to cut it, take it or smoke it. I still kinda scratch my head with all this 'competitive' play stuff. I mean games day is done, all this hole-in-the-wall tourney stuff doesn't mean much outside the store you won it in. I mean the 'official' channel is done... You could tell me you won this that or the other in 40k and I'll say "That's nice..." Kappa(What TO rule bending went on with that tourney is in my head. Or what key army was missing to beat you, or how many people actually showed up to this thing ten?) you tell me you won games day, you'll have my attention. Hell tell me you made top 10, you would have it. But its far far easier to get my attention by saying you converted & painted a model with its own base for a Crystal Brush entry. What I really feel Kreygasm, is that GW is turning to selling bottles of Acqua di Cristallo... and no one can take that seriously. I have other addictions that need some of my disposable income.
40k is great with my friend group(of 3) but frankly its kind of a side note other then fluff, fluff game play, casual game play and painting. In the end I always feel like Dark helmet on Spaceballs during the doll scene when my girl walks into the room during game play. I get the look and, It is now known as playing my 'nerd game'

I don't play 7th edition because the Veteran players at my FLGS all decided to boycott it.

Oddly, the community has grown for people who don't want to play 7th edition. They do 2nd edition and 4th edition nights a few times a month. There's a lot of Star Wars and Warmahordes games going on as well.

I don't see myself getting back into playing unless there are other people interested in the current Codex. It's fun to play a pickup game using the 2nd rules sometimes, but I would rather be using Fire Raptors than Daemon bombs / unstoppable Chaos Lords.