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.

I haven't played 40k since about 4th edition, and even then i never learned all the rules fully. I've been wanting to get back into 40k recently but i haven't got the latest rulebook yet. I've been seeing rumours about 8th edition next year, and while they are just rumours, some of the implications about it being simplified have me somewhat worried. Something like the psychic phase being changed i can understand, but when the rumours mention things like "speeding up playtime" or "making it more accessible" that sort of hints that the core gameplay itself could be changed quite a lot, and after seeing some of Age of Sigmar that has me a bit worried.

So basically, as someone who hasn't played in years and hasn't seen the 7th rules yet, am i thinking along the wrong sort of lines? Can someone explain the problems with the current edition that the rumours could be referring to? I'm just a bit concerned about starting 40k again and then suddenly having the next edition do something drastic like remove vehicle armour values or any of the stats, so changing the core gameplay itself rather than just specific rules or something like that. Basically: In what way is 7th more complex/harder to play than previous editions?

7th bombed badly and drove alot of people away, 8th was going to be an AoS style reboot but after the disastrous first year of AoS it was scrapped.

What 8th will turn out like no one knows but you may want to hold off it'd be a shame to buy in heavily only to find 8th is not to your liking.

I haven't played since 4 or 5 (been that long) and just came back. I've been 50/50 about the rules, but most of the fun is the local group. So.e of the old guys (relative term) are still playing, and the new guys are really cool. Some rules are weird, but it is realy enjoyable to play with this group.


I'm sure it's beating a dead horse, but if it isn't a big investment, go and play a few games with friends. I agree, wait on major purchases, since that would be a shame to wastw the money if the group sucks and the game isn't your type.

hobojebus wrote:
7th bombed badly and drove alot of people away, 8th was going to be an AoS style reboot but after the disastrous first year of AoS it was scrapped.

What 8th will turn out like no one knows but you may want to hold off it'd be a shame to buy in heavily only to find 8th is not to your liking.

What are the problems with 7th compared to previous editions?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 LiberatedObject wrote:
I haven't played since 4 or 5 (been that long) and just came back. I've been 50/50 about the rules, but most of the fun is the local group. So.e of the old guys (relative term) are still playing, and the new guys are really cool. Some rules are weird, but it is realy enjoyable to play with this group.


I'm sure it's beating a dead horse, but if it isn't a big investment, go and play a few games with friends. I agree, wait on major purchases, since that would be a shame to wastw the money if the group sucks and the game isn't your type.

Getting a group for a game isn't a problem for me, which is why i was thinking about starting again.

It's just i wouldn't want to start again and then find something like AoS happens again, so i was wondering if i'm just assuming the worst when i read the rumours about 8th edition mention simplifying things. Basically, are things currently pretty much the same beyond additions like the allies and psychic phase so the rumours are implying things could become far simpler than the core game that i know of (which would potentially put me off playing when it releases), or were there new, specific things 7th introduced that caused problems, and those things are what need to be simplified and i therefore shouldn't worry?

I've played off and on since 2nd ed. Every edition has had its ups and downs. The one thing that has remained constant through every rules set is that 40k players have consistently bemoaned every single change as it has come along.

I get that it's annoying. I get that it's expensive to retool just in time for a new edition/codex. I get all that. But ultimately it's a game that's supposed to reduce the overall level of stress in your life. If you find that the investment is a strain to your budget, or that the game adds more stress than it subtracts, find another hobby. I have other hobbies and I've taken breaks long enough to miss whole editions in the past. It should just be an excuse to get together with friends and geek out.

Also...fyi. I know of people that like threw their fantasy armies away and set them on fire and all kinds of craziness when AoS came out. Today, nearly everybody at the LGS is playing it and having a good time. Don't believe the vocal minority that hates every change that comes down the pike.

 Mentlegen324 wrote:
I haven't played 40k since about 4th edition, and even then i never learned all the rules fully. I've been wanting to get back into 40k recently but i haven't got the latest rulebook yet. I've been seeing rumours about 8th edition next year, and while they are just rumours, some of the implications about it being simplified have me somewhat worried. Something like the psychic phase being changed i can understand, but when the rumours mention things like "speeding up playtime" or "making it more accessible" that sort of hints that the core gameplay itself could be changed quite a lot, and after seeing some of Age of Sigmar that has me a bit worried.

So basically, as someone who hasn't played in years and hasn't seen the 7th rules yet, am i thinking along the wrong sort of lines? Can someone explain the problems with the current edition that the rumours could be referring to? I'm just a bit concerned about starting 40k again and then suddenly having the next edition do something drastic like remove vehicle armour values or any of the stats, so changing the core gameplay itself rather than just specific rules or something like that. Basically: In what way is 7th more complex/harder to play than previous editions?

Try to play a game in 7th against a tournament level army and a relatively experienced player and you'll realize real quick how steep the learning curve can be. To play War-convocation alone is something like 800 pages of rules. The number of overlapping rules, the number of different books you need, the number of different army building options, just the sheer VOLUME of stuff out their is so much that it can easily overwhelm. That said, there's a TON of freedom in the complexity, you can pretty much build an army to be whatever you want, so pluses and minuses.

There are things in 40k that aren't really necessary with how the game has evolved and some tightening of the rules would make it more digestable. That said, Sigmar is awesome and is currently, on 11/19/2016, a better game than 40k. Sigmar is just as deep of a game, just as tactical, just as fun, it's just much easier to get into. They removed complexity and added depth and it was the right way to go and there are definitely some lessons 40k could learn from that.

hobojebus wrote:7th bombed badly and drove alot of people away, 8th was going to be an AoS style reboot but after the disastrous first year of AoS it was scrapped.

CITATION NEEDED!

This ^. We know little aside from vague rumours published by known click bait sites and echo's of those rumours.

Also note the 7th core rules aren't that bad ( there are some small things that could be fixed ) its the codexes that are guilty of the worst power balance issues and the insane armies.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

ERJAK wrote:

Try to play a game in 7th against a tournament level army and a relatively experienced player and you'll realize real quick how steep the learning curve can be. To play War-convocation alone is something like 800 pages of rules. The number of overlapping rules, the number of different books you need, the number of different army building options, just the sheer VOLUME of stuff out their is so much that it can easily overwhelm. That said, there's a TON of freedom in the complexity, you can pretty much build an army to be whatever you want, so pluses and minuses.

The seer volume of rules isn't the issue, especially if you are playing tournaments. The top 20% armies isn't diverse at all. You can read up on those armies & rules in a few days. Its the insane power creep that is the real issue of 7th. The high rate of fire kill all weapons, the under costed multi wound monsters that should really be vehicles and the hyper point efficient new close combat units together with the free buffs from formations are the issue. Nerf / rebalance those codexes and anyone ( except perhaps some cheese players) will be happy.

The problems with 40k 7th for me are:

Bloated rules; there is too much to keep track of, rules and rolls are constantly being forgotten. Also the rules for any particular is often spread over multiple sections of multiple books.

Balance: there is none, armies that cost the same number of points are usually on entirely different power levels.

Unneeded complexity: There are rules which add very little (and have to be remembered) in a game that takes more time than a wargame needs to play already.

Three big issues with 7th edition outside of codex imbalance (which is a huge issue) imo are.
- Certain psychic powers are way to strong and lead to the dreaded unkillable deathstar syndrome.
- Semi related to that is rerollable saves and the nature of numbers to make 2+ rerollable saves insanely hard to kill.
- Standard vehicle rules are generally bad and are especially terrible for vehicles trying to function as combat vehicles. The damage table means a single penetrating hit almost always makes the vehicle combat ineffective (snap shooting, immobilized, or destroyed). Monstrous creatures, bikes, etc don't suffer from this sort of issue while transports function properly because they aren't usually there to shoot things but instead are designed to go from point A to point B. Super Heavies work as combat vehicles because the ignore the damage table except explodes (just does extra damage) so they continue to be combat effective while they take damage. Vehicles in general also lack saves which makes them incredibly vulnerable to high strength but AP garbage weapons.

hobojebus wrote:
7th bombed badly and drove alot of people away, 8th was going to be an AoS style reboot but after the disastrous first year of AoS it was scrapped.

What 8th will turn out like no one knows but you may want to hold off it'd be a shame to buy in heavily only to find 8th is not to your liking.

A bold statement, with nothing to back it up. Maybe its not as popular at your local level, at my club we have more guys playing week to week now than we ever have. We just have to take more time declaring what style of game we want (competative or fun) because of the complete lack of balance between the armies ofcourse. If your going to point out a decline in sales which is legit as proof of declining popularity, i can also point to the rise of chinese recasters which are wildly popular these days and were vitually nonexistant 3-4 years ago.

I just want Psyker rules to be returned Pre-6th, as it is right now it rewards armies for having multiple, cheap costing psykers to build up warp charges while punishing having one or two.

Also of course dealing with the really strong powers like invisibility.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
I just want Psyker rules to be returned Pre-6th, as it is right now it rewards armies for having multiple, cheap costing psykers to build up warp charges while punishing having one or two.

Also of course dealing with the really strong powers like invisibility.

I would take this even further and say it should go back to when you paid for your psychic powers. At least then you don't have to worry about balancing all the powers on the same level and instead focusing on pricing the more powerful ones higher than the crappy ones.

Yes. Get rid of random powers and make them cost differently. If I am taking a psycher, I want to pick his powers.

To the OP, my problems with 6th/7th are:

1. Super Heavies. These should be reserved for Apoc.
2. Fliers. I preferred the skimmer rules.
3. Random everything. Powers, mysterious objectives, mysterious terrain, warlord powers, etc.
4. The haves and have-nots seem worse than ever. Orks were never "Holy gak, great!" but they were never this bad, either. Not everyone has Decurions, and those that do have varying degrees of power/usefulness.

 Mentlegen324 wrote:

hobojebus wrote:
7th bombed badly and drove alot of people away, 8th was going to be an AoS style reboot but after the disastrous first year of AoS it was scrapped.

What 8th will turn out like no one knows but you may want to hold off it'd be a shame to buy in heavily only to find 8th is not to your liking.

What are the problems with 7th compared to previous editions?

Dramatically increased power bloat, rules spread over many dozens of relases through 4 or 5 different sales channels, absurdly over complicated and counter intuitive rules, and army construction rules that boil down to either "take whatever you want from anywhere" or "take X in Y numbers and get insanely powerful bonuses for it", and basically GW going out of their way to put out garbage instead of fixing existing issues (e.g. GW releasing a CSM formation book thats 90% filler instead of just updating the CSM codex)



No edition has been perfect, they have all had big issues, but 7E is a complete disaster.

My prediction for 8th is we will see a stream line in rules, betting the way MC work in AoS will transfer over to 8th where the get weaker as they loose health.

Hoping we see a good cut in the special rules, since a lot of them can just be rolled together. For example, Slow and purposeful and relentless, no real reason for these two to exist when a combined version of them would be just as fine.

I think we are going to see a similar system to saves. In that no matter what, you are going to get a save throw, but weapons will modify the results. IE, a SM has a 3 up save but if you have a weapon thats AP is equal to the armor value or below it will modify it.

IE if you have Sv4
AP >=5 = save on 4+
AP 4 = save on 5+
AP 3 = save of 6+
AP 2 = save of 7+
AP 1 = save on 8+

then there will be a point increase to compensate for it, so space marines will cost more, but be a lot more durable.

I think we will get a true LoS rules put in, a rework of the pyker phase so its hopefully not awful.

A reworking of cover saves. (I personally hope they made it so if you move a squad into cover, you can order them to take defensive positions giving them +1 to the cover and +1 BS to overwatch, but can not assault, and on the turn they move out from cover, they can not shot or run) making jink a separate save.

Reworking assault to not be awful. I would like to see it more along the lines of, i declare a change and i will automatically make it. I then take a, not sure either leader or imitative test, and i gain the extra attack from the charge or something. or you get a +1 to your imitative when you charge.

hobojebus wrote:
7th bombed badly and drove alot of people away, 8th was going to be an AoS style reboot but after the disastrous first year of AoS it was scrapped.

What 8th will turn out like no one knows but you may want to hold off it'd be a shame to buy in heavily only to find 8th is not to your liking.

Seriously requires some sort of citation.

To say 7th bombed badly is horribly off in my mind. There are absolutely good and bad things about 7th edition but we have seen a TON of new material, models and great things from GW during this time.

Also to say 8th was going to be a AoS style reboot is not correct. In addition AoS had a rocky start (no one is disagreeing there) but seems to be starting to get its legs under it now as more and more people are coming around to it since the Generals Handbook was released.

8th is going to be a cross between 40k as we know it and some things pulled in from AoS. Which makes sense. GW has always done this across both of its systems.

I for one am looking forward to it. I think it's going to be an exciting time to be in this hobby.

Diogenes wrote:
I've played off and on since 2nd ed. Every edition has had its ups and downs. The one thing that has remained constant through every rules set is that 40k players have consistently bemoaned every single change as it has come along.

I get that it's annoying. I get that it's expensive to retool just in time for a new edition/codex. I get all that. But ultimately it's a game that's supposed to reduce the overall level of stress in your life. If you find that the investment is a strain to your budget, or that the game adds more stress than it subtracts, find another hobby. I have other hobbies and I've taken breaks long enough to miss whole editions in the past. It should just be an excuse to get together with friends and geek out.

Also...fyi. I know of people that like threw their fantasy armies away and set them on fire and all kinds of craziness when AoS came out. Today, nearly everybody at the LGS is playing it and having a good time. Don't believe the vocal minority that hates every change that comes down the pike.

Omg this. So much this.

I say this as someone who last played shortly after 4th dropped, and picked up 7th again this year. I'm having a great time with it.

 Nazrak wrote:

Diogenes wrote:
I've played off and on since 2nd ed. Every edition has had its ups and downs. The one thing that has remained constant through every rules set is that 40k players have consistently bemoaned every single change as it has come along.

I get that it's annoying. I get that it's expensive to retool just in time for a new edition/codex. I get all that. But ultimately it's a game that's supposed to reduce the overall level of stress in your life. If you find that the investment is a strain to your budget, or that the game adds more stress than it subtracts, find another hobby. I have other hobbies and I've taken breaks long enough to miss whole editions in the past. It should just be an excuse to get together with friends and geek out.

Also...fyi. I know of people that like threw their fantasy armies away and set them on fire and all kinds of craziness when AoS came out. Today, nearly everybody at the LGS is playing it and having a good time. Don't believe the vocal minority that hates every change that comes down the pike.

Omg this. So much this.

I say this as someone who last played shortly after 4th dropped, and picked up 7th again this year. I'm having a great time with it.

It's amazing how if you use the internet wayback machine and go look at old posts from the old Games Workshop forums - its the EXACT SAME arguments people have today about 40k. It recycles over and over again... like Groundhog Day the movie.

Every edition has had major issues. Nobody is denying that. 40k's rules have always been rather garbage

They have never had problems as big or widespread as they are now however. The extent of the FAQ GW tried just scratched the surface and even that was orders of magnitude larger than previous editons FAQ material.

hobojebus wrote:
7th bombed badly and drove alot of people away, 8th was going to be an AoS style reboot but after the disastrous first year of AoS it was scrapped.

What 8th will turn out like no one knows but you may want to hold off it'd be a shame to buy in heavily only to find 8th is not to your liking.

Please stop spreading those false rumours, they came from cheap clickbait rumour mongers with zero credibility and they've been debunked by both Atia and Sad Panda, both with nearly perfect track record, saying there won't be any sort of 'End Times' or 'AoSification' to 40k.

 oldzoggy wrote:
This ^. We know little aside from vague rumours published by known click bait sites and echo's of those rumours.

Also note the 7th core rules aren't that bad ( there are some small things that could be fixed ) its the codexes that are guilty of the worst power balance issues and the insane armies.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

ERJAK wrote:

Try to play a game in 7th against a tournament level army and a relatively experienced player and you'll realize real quick how steep the learning curve can be. To play War-convocation alone is something like 800 pages of rules. The number of overlapping rules, the number of different books you need, the number of different army building options, just the sheer VOLUME of stuff out their is so much that it can easily overwhelm. That said, there's a TON of freedom in the complexity, you can pretty much build an army to be whatever you want, so pluses and minuses.

The seer volume of rules isn't the issue, especially if you are playing tournaments. The top 20% armies isn't diverse at all. You can read up on those armies & rules in a few days. Its the insane power creep that is the real issue of 7th. The high rate of fire kill all weapons, the under costed multi wound monsters that should really be vehicles and the hyper point efficient new close combat units together with the free buffs from formations are the issue. Nerf / rebalance those codexes and anyone ( except perhaps some cheese players) will be happy.

You are objectively wrong here, the number of competitively powerful lists is actually pretty high. Just look at warzone Atlanta, the top 3 lists are Demons with the most annoying amount of objective camping you could imagine, an anti-fluff monstrosity and Tau. Top 3 at Adepticon were Space Marine Gladius, Eldar, and wolfstar. Yes, Eldar are easily the best faction followed by demons then Space marines(Based on Blood of Kittens GT winners) but they're not the only ones who win.

The top 10 in the ITC are WarCon, Dark Angels, Eldar, Vanilla Marines, Chaos Demons, Chaos Renegades, Tau, and then more demons and guys that play multiple factions.

That said the imbalance issue is very real just not what most people see it as. The issue isn't so much at the top end, though Eldar and Demons are ridiculous, it's the bottom 20% where you feel the imbalance most. Compounded by the fact that ultimately, many people who play in tournaments are hobbyists who should be avoiding GTs or people who aren't as good at the game as they think they are. I've been to a couple of GTs and done a few dozen RTTs and I've had good showings and some truly terrible showings and the only time I've felt like a loss WASN'T my fault are times when I brought Grav against Demons and that's just counter matchup. Sure sometimes you fight lists where you can't KILL anything, like Necrons or certain deathstars, but most games are objective based and you can beat them there.

Honestly, just play kill team. You can get the rulebooks and decent squad for fairly cheap. Easy to follow and takes out a bunch of the confusion because you can only have 2 troops, 1 elite, and 1 fast attack.

 cvtuttle wrote:

 Nazrak wrote:

Diogenes wrote:
I've played off and on since 2nd ed. Every edition has had its ups and downs. The one thing that has remained constant through every rules set is that 40k players have consistently bemoaned every single change as it has come along.

I get that it's annoying. I get that it's expensive to retool just in time for a new edition/codex. I get all that. But ultimately it's a game that's supposed to reduce the overall level of stress in your life. If you find that the investment is a strain to your budget, or that the game adds more stress than it subtracts, find another hobby. I have other hobbies and I've taken breaks long enough to miss whole editions in the past. It should just be an excuse to get together with friends and geek out.

Also...fyi. I know of people that like threw their fantasy armies away and set them on fire and all kinds of craziness when AoS came out. Today, nearly everybody at the LGS is playing it and having a good time. Don't believe the vocal minority that hates every change that comes down the pike.

Omg this. So much this.

I say this as someone who last played shortly after 4th dropped, and picked up 7th again this year. I'm having a great time with it.

It's amazing how if you use the internet wayback machine and go look at old posts from the old Games Workshop forums - its the EXACT SAME arguments people have today about 40k. It recycles over and over again... like Groundhog Day the movie.

Yep, I remember it from the days of 3rd and 4th and, on the occasions I considered dipping a toe back in during the intervening time, 5th and 6th as well. There's a certain contingent that loves a hyperbolic moan. Sure, 40K has its issues (some of which are avoidable, some less so given the scope of a game), but if you genuinely think it's it's such unmitigated dogshit as a vocal minority like to claim, I really don't see why you'd keep playing. Personally, I'm quite happy to overlook the flaws for the most part, because the overall experience I get out of it is a positive one, and there's plenty other relentlessly negative gak going on in the world – related to stuff that actually matters – without adding to it by getting upset over a game of toy spacemen.

I suggest trying to get in a group that's playing herald's of ruin killteam fan made rules. They're pretty popular right now because they're well done and actually written by people who play the games. Plus you need far far fewer models so it's an easy in.