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.

Hello fellow dakkanaughts!

I taken time away from game after gw killed off 5th edition which I really liked.

I was wondering how are things in 7th in terms of tournamentz? I mean I am personally so confused with all the detachments, formations, allies and apoc units being allowed into normal 40k

So how do tournaments iron all this out? So they just ban anything that is not in normal codex and dont allow allies,formations or detachments?

How do they bring order to the chaos the game has taken?

Is there no diatinction or difference anymore between normal 40k and apoc?

Apoc is still a thing, and is supposedly getting an update this year. The chief difference between the two is Apoc is designed for large games with absurd rules that involves taking swaths of minis off at a time. Standard 40k has 7 other variant playstyles and can *usually* only bring in one super-heavy - except in the case of Knights or double CAD. Anyone who says "standard" 40k is the same as Apoc hasn't actually played one of them or just thinks they're more clever than they are. The gulf between them is still pretty big.

The tournament scene is a mess. GW has really boned tourney players by focusing their rules on garage play. They just don't work for tournaments anymore, leading to a whole new set of rules and restrictions colloquially known as ITC-hammer. The anger over the shift is pretty rabid, leading to a lot of overreactions about new codexes or rules. But they're not wrong to say that balance in tournament geared 40k is borked. Trouble is all the new restrictions are against the expansion of the ruleset, limiting or prohibiting many of the things that balance out the various exploits with the view that the old exploits are better than the new ones.

The whole thing has created a pretty wide schism in the community, dividing the very happy garage players from the very unhappy tournament players. You just pulled a pin in that grenade and get a front row seat to the carnage. So let the screaming and teeth gnashing commence!

It is either go big or go home. It seems everyone runs even in friendly games the max possible. With all the formations and such it makes it easy, any army can bring cheese to the 99th power. Eldar have scatter bikes out the butt o ya they still got WK and WS as well. Nercos got hordes that come back no matter how many you kill in addition to all Kinds of fun those Fliers are still good.. Sadly either you run the cheese or you get rolled if your game last past turn 1 you got lucky but good luck turn 2. Even friendly games are min/max. If you bring something nice 9 out of 10 players bring something that just rolls you. Do not bother bring any codex before made before Nid's nothing before had formations even comparable to the new ones put out and DA is right there with them. C:sm has 500 points about of free ob sec transports. Not to mention a turn 1 formation that can table you. O ya if you decide ill make them go first and null deploy your fubared because that formation comes in turn 1 with other drop pods they can block the deployment zone by spreading out the troops which makes it even more fun. Ok I'm Done drops the Mic.

How about a realistic view now that we've had "ohhhhhh noooo it suuuuucks"

Formations are quite powerful in some cases, but often the units required for them softens the list. For instance, for a SM player to gain free transports they must take 6 Tactical Marine squads (and a few other things) which means their army has trouble fighting killier lists.

The big difference between 7th and 5 th is the objectives. The "maelstrom of war" missions and their variants require you to be claiming objectives all through the game rather than just at the end. This is why lists with say, Superheavies, tend not to win tournaments.

Tournaments generally reign in the craziness in a couple ways. First, they restrict usually to two detachments (a detachment is what you would think of as an army from 5th, or a special formation). That prevents a lot of formations for a ton of special rules. They also usually weaken things like apocalypse weaponry (Strength: D).

Overall some tournaments have been really diverse (LVO had every army represented in the top 20 armies out of 220) but since the Necron codex the ones since that have been really powerful and now most other armies are usually less present. Currently Necrons Eldar SMs and Dark Angels are the best armies around but you still see Blood Angels Orks Tau and Chaos Daenons pulling out wins.

If you play a game in a place where you don't just put down a legal army a play, you need to take for a few hours to be very clearly what you want to use. Starting from basic rules, followed by what type of errata or faq your going to be using and then what units , combination of units, formations your ok with. Without that w40k is very unfun for at least one person.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/653048.page

This thread might help in giving you an overview of how the changes that GW instituted since you left (so 6/7th edition) have been received at least on dakka. Your local scene may vary obviously. Just a quick note..."normal" 40k is now what used to be called apoc. The only differences are that it is played at any points value and GW no longer charges any points for the formations no matter how powerful.

Each local scene will vary wildly. Mine is ultra conservative: common rules restrictions include no maelstrom, no allies, no D, no ranged D, one (or two if extremely lucky) detachments, no formations, no fortifications, no digital codexes, and no random objective/terrain rules.

 Jimsolo wrote:
Each local scene will vary wildly. Mine is ultra conservative: common rules restrictions include no maelstrom, no allies, no D, no ranged D, one (or two if extremely lucky) detachments, no formations, no fortifications, no digital codexes, and no random objective/terrain rules.

I agree with all that except for the digital codexes. If the maelstrom, allies, str D plus ranged str D, unlimited detachments, formations, fortifications, and random objectives/terrain/abilities rules didn't pretty much kill interest in my area for 40k, I might actually still be playing.

tournament play with 40k? LOL!
It's a mess of a rule set that requires a tight group of likeminded people. This doesn't lend itself to tournament play which GW actively discourages.

Someone here has a good sig describing 40k in terms of that 50 shades of grey movie. It goes something like "7e 40k is like bondage... you should only do it with people you trust and always have a safe word in case things get too uncomfortable."

 warboss wrote:

 Jimsolo wrote:
Each local scene will vary wildly. Mine is ultra conservative: common rules restrictions include no maelstrom, no allies, no D, no ranged D, one (or two if extremely lucky) detachments, no formations, no fortifications, no digital codexes, and no random objective/terrain rules.

I agree with all that except for the digital codexes. If the maelstrom, allies, str D plus ranged str D, unlimited detachments, formations, fortifications, and random objectives/terrain/abilities rules didn't pretty much kill interest in my area for 40k, I might actually still be playing.

I can get behind banning (or better yet restricting) Strength D, ESPECIALLY ranged D. I'm ambivalent about the two random tables.

I think Maelstrom heavily favors mobile armies, which is nice since those are the armies I play, and it's a nice break from the Eternal War missions which heavily favor static gunline armies.

I think allies, and fortifications are something the game needed a long time before it had them at large. They add more than they detract, and I wish that competitive settings would loosen their restrictions in this regard.

I think the same thing about formations and alternate detachments, and in addition note that banning formations/alternate detachments imposes a de facto ban on certain armies such as Haemonculus Covens and Harlequins, which is pretty unfair to people who've spent a great deal of time painting and collecting such forces.

Since I got into 40k, it seems like there is a great deal of speculation about all the horrible things that would happen if the new rules were allowed with no restriction. This goes to such a point that I've literally never seen a competitive event take place where people just played with the rules as they are, without adding a bunch of restrictions and house rules. I'm not saying there isn't potential for brokenness, but I think it might be refreshing, just for once, to play by the actual game rules. Just to see if any of these hypothetical crazy situations manifest in actuality. Just once.

 Jimsolo wrote:
Each local scene will vary wildly. Mine is ultra conservative: common rules restrictions include no maelstrom, no allies, no D, no ranged D, one (or two if extremely lucky) detachments, no formations, no fortifications, no digital codexes, and no random objective/terrain rules.

***begin sarcastic rant***
No maelstorm: yay gunline armies. Who needs to play the objective anyways
No allies: at least DE and marine players must not hear "well you can fix your weakness by allying in X" in your meta
No D or ranged D: We don't like your toys, because we can't all have them, you don't get them
Limited detachments: because necrons and eldar can abuse this mechanic (we still have to see SM and DA shift the meta and actually play) no one gets this.
No Formations: just like above. Some of the lesser powered books only have one leg to stand on, but it's pretty easy to kick that out too I guess
No Fortifications: Well at least not EVERYTHING favors the gunline armies. they can't bring their own terrain
No digital codex: This must be a troll post. "Oh you paid for that like everyone else, but because you didn't want to lug around your books, you can't play". Just wow.
No random objective/terrain rules: why even bother, you basically set it up so the armies just sit there and shoot, objectives will never trigger.

So basically, your local area is set up to buff tau, doesn't even phase eldar, or really necrons that much, and then needlessly limits the already downtrodden codex. Well the xenos players won't have to face gladis. Might as well say no marines, no assault, no terrain. That way every game can be tau lining up one side while eldar race or necrons crawl towards them.
***end sarcasm***
These really don't seem so much to balance as just stop everyone from bringing something one army can abuse. Some codex really do rely on formation/detachments/allies to keep up with the newer codex, even when the new ones go straight CAD. Also the no digital is just absolutely unfathomable to me.

As to OP, yeah, alot has changed. Just go check out a few FLGS yourself, and get a real picture of what it is like (especially in your area) before you let forum hyperbole ruin it for you. as always YMMV

 Jimsolo wrote:
Each local scene will vary wildly. Mine is ultra conservative: common rules restrictions include no maelstrom, no allies, no D, no ranged D, one (or two if extremely lucky) detachments, no formations, no fortifications, no digital codexes, and no random objective/terrain rules.

soooo basicly your local meta plays 5th edition?

Tournaments are a mess.
Each tourney has its own restrictions and special rules.
Superheavies? CADs? Formations? FW? Bound or unbound?

Thank you for all the replies, I feel like I have a much better idea of what i am walking into if I come back.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Jimsolo wrote:
Each local scene will vary wildly. Mine is ultra conservative: common rules restrictions include no maelstrom, no allies, no D, no ranged D, one (or two if extremely lucky) detachments, no formations, no fortifications, no digital codexes, and no random objective/terrain rules.

soooo basicly your local meta plays 5th edition?

That's hardly moving back to 5E in anything near its entirety. Even the non-maelstrom missions are different from their 5E iterations, as are deployment types, along with things like vehicle mechanics, charge distances, overwatch, snapshots, wound allocation, psychic mechanics, rapid fire weapons, challenges, etc.

I feel like we are at a major shift in the game, like when 2nd edition with it unbound armies ended and 345 Foc took over

6+7 are transition us out of Foc into formations which might be only option for army build in 8th edition.

Just weird seeing these builds which don't follow 345 Foc and getting war gear and superpowers for no point cost. It's like rules are rewritten to incentivise us to buy most models n in exchange we bribed with free war gear and super abilities.

Kinda kills it for people who enjoy the 345 style play. This reboot formation 40k has tonnes of crazy builds by 345 standards... Buy once last 3 or 5 codex updated to be formations maybe it will seem bland and there will be a similar number of broken/cheese/Uber power builds as in the past?




Automatically Appended Next Post:
How can there be whole armies with no hq in the codex!! What the.... Adept mech

 sumi808 wrote:
How can there be whole armies with no hq in the codex!! What the.... Adept mech

It's because these factions are designed to be used primarily as allies rather than as self contained armies. It's part of why the Harlequin's book is so bad on its own; it was designed to augment Eldar and DE. Even the crazy Adeptus Mechanicus formation requires you to run troops from three different factions - 3 allies as one strong force.

That is one of the strangest things i heard in 40k. But it is also innovative, it would open up so many permutations and builds

Does this mean that in the current 7th edition i an allowed to take imperial armour 1 second edition tank company in a normal 1000 or 1500 point game and it is legal? I mean if others are allowed to take super heavies in a normal 40k game.... its ok?