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've been wavering in a state between "it's going to be awesome!" and "ohmyEmperor please don't break it!"

The rules they've mentioned sound fairly good.

But it's also some extrapolation and speculation, and I have to remind myself that.

I'm now worried about what points cost things are going to be.

I anticipated something like these results.
20% is a SUBSTANTIAL loss of enthusiasm given that forum activity should indicate a proclivity to fanboy sentiment.
I had been recommending an investor friend to look at GW for short term given a likely bump for 8th, but now I am sorry that it might not translate into the sort of profit that I had originally anticipated. GW should sell a LOT of new boxes, but after that, if the rules are meh, I expect this to falter a bit, and going forward sales in rulebooks and compendiums will be strong, but if the narrative is poorly handled (Matt Ward) then I expect this also to slide. Anyways, thanks to everyone for participating in this poll. Mille gratis!

You must be new to the internet.

You can find 20% of people to agree with virtually anything. I'm not trying to dismiss the 20% that don't like the new direction, but pretty much any internet community like Dakka will have a significant number of participants who hang around but don't actually play the game, and would pretty much never be happy with the game regardless of what happens. On the contrary, this shows an overwhelming increase in enthusiasm for the new Ed. 80% of people liking the direction of the game is really an overwhelming amount of support for the new Ed. given that communities like this can be really aversive to change.

Consider these polling numbers from Dakkadakka on 2014/05/12 regarding the release of 7th Edition.

Do you like what you have seen so far for 7th edition 40k?
Yes 55% [ 201 ]
No 45% [ 165 ]
Total Votes : 366

The community is overwhelmingly in favor of the new edition compared to the past.

Here's another one that is even more dramatic. 16% said 7th ed made them quit and almost 14% of respondents didn't even play the current 6th Ed of the game at the time of this poll.

My last edition of 40k
Never owned any edition of 40k 1% [ 2 ]
I quit after Rogue Trader. 1% [ 1 ]
2nd edition was the last for me 2% [ 4 ]
3rd edition and then I got out 1% [ 2 ]
4th edition was the end of the line 3% [ 5 ]
5th edition was it 6% [ 12 ]
6th edition finished me, I won't be buying 7th edition 16% [ 31 ]
I might buy 7th depending on reviews, reports, etc 23% [ 44 ]
I plan to buy 7th edition. 40k for life! 47% [ 90 ]
Total Votes : 191

 jeff white wrote:
I anticipated something like these results.
20% is a SUBSTANTIAL loss of enthusiasm given that forum activity should indicate a proclivity to fanboy sentiment.

Oh please. You act as if all of the haters disappeared from the face of the earth..

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 jeff white wrote:
I anticipated something like these results.
20% is a SUBSTANTIAL loss of enthusiasm given that forum activity should indicate a proclivity to fanboy sentiment.

Oh please. You act as if all of the haters disappeared from the face of the earth..

Hmmm... Maybe I am naive.
I wasn't gauging hate just lost enthusiasm...
I was asking about lost excitement and assumed that is what people reported.
Maybe some people just have to be negative.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 rollawaythestone wrote:
You must be new to the internet.

You can find 20% of people to agree with virtually anything. I'm not trying to dismiss the 20% that don't like the new direction, but pretty much any internet community like Dakka will have a significant number of participants who hang around but don't actually play the game, and would pretty much never be happy with the game regardless of what happens. On the contrary, this shows an overwhelming increase in enthusiasm for the new Ed. 80% of people liking the direction of the game is really an overwhelming amount of support for the new Ed. given that communities like this can be really aversive to change.

Consider these polling numbers from Dakkadakka on 2014/05/12 regarding the release of 7th Edition.

Do you like what you have seen so far for 7th edition 40k?
Yes 55% [ 201 ]
No 45% [ 165 ]
Total Votes : 366

The community is overwhelmingly in favor of the new edition compared to the past.

Here's another one that is even more dramatic. 16% said 7th ed made them quit and almost 14% of respondents didn't even play the current 6th Ed of the game at the time of this poll.

My last edition of 40k
Never owned any edition of 40k 1% [ 2 ]
I quit after Rogue Trader. 1% [ 1 ]
2nd edition was the last for me 2% [ 4 ]
3rd edition and then I got out 1% [ 2 ]
4th edition was the end of the line 3% [ 5 ]
5th edition was it 6% [ 12 ]
6th edition finished me, I won't be buying 7th edition 16% [ 31 ]
I might buy 7th depending on reviews, reports, etc 23% [ 44 ]
I plan to buy 7th edition. 40k for life! 47% [ 90 ]
Total Votes : 191

Yeah that overwhelming ness is what I was trying to assess...

Yeah, I didn't really enjoy 40k 6E, and I basically stopped play 40k after 7E hit. The only time I play 40k now is for our group Apocalypse bashes, and then, it's only because of the group. I am far more favorable on 8E being AoS-like than I was on 7E being more of 6E.

I went from unenthusiastic to hopefully optimistic right back to unenthusiastic.

I feel like I'm watching history repeat itself right before my eyes.

I've been playing this game for a very long time and have seen play mechanics come and go. A lot of what is in 8th edition has been done before. It didn't work then and it's unlikely to work now.

Confirmed 8th edition mechanics that were dumped from previous editions because they were problematic:
- Movement stat (created issues in 2nd ed. where really fast armies had a massive advantage over slower ones)
- Armour Save modifiers (these pesky things rendered all armour that wasn't terminator armour completely useless in 2nd ed.)
- Drawing nearby units into combat (a complete nightmare from 3rd & 4th that made for some of the most un-enjoyable games in the history of Warhammer 40,000)
- Independent characters able to be targeted by themselves (congratulations! one of the worst mechanics from 4th ed. is back... character sniping is a thing again)
- Mechanisms that heavily favor MSU (this was more of a problem with codexes in 4th ed. - where there was more incentive to take multiple small units rather than max out unit sizes)
- Wound allocation to models of the controlling players choice (does no one remember the dirty wound allocation shenanigans from 5th ed.?)

It's almost like someone pulled the most epic troll on GW and convinced them to bring back for 8th ed. some of the worst 40K game mechanics that have ever existed.

The last update to 7th Ed is what caused me to drop 40K. Got rid of a decent sized Necron army, and can't get rid of some Assault Crusaders.

I have no faith until I see the stats on Xeno weapons.

I haven't been this excited about 40k since the 90s. So yeah - I'm massively looking forward to it. I'm not interested in static non random tactics and mechanics. The random is what inflates the replayability. Otherwise I get super bored playing the same game over and over again.

I was always excited yet somewhat reserved, so not much has really changed. Still, I doubt 40k will be changed so much that I cannot play anymore.

Well I'm just excited for the possibility that GW is actually going to listen to their customers. Won't buy any NuMarines, but will buy other stuff.

I went from dread to cautiously optimistic back to dread.

Things that I have seen that are good:

-Movement Stat
-Update to weaponry including the rend system
-Monsters getting worse with wounds taken
-Activation of units during combat
-Pistols being able to be used in combat

Things that I have seen that are bad:

-The entirety of the Psychic phase
-The moral system.

Things that have caused me to loose all interest in the game:

-Characters can't join units.

Also, nu marines are the dumbest fething thing I've ever seen.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Yeah, I didn't really enjoy 40k 6E, and I basically stopped play 40k after 7E hit. The only time I play 40k now is for our group Apocalypse bashes, and then, it's only because of the group. I am far more favorable on 8E being AoS-like than I was on 7E being more of 6E.

I am just holding out for 8th to get me on the bus/train the 2 hours to the nearest/only game shop in Seoul.
Still holding out.
Built an ork army with a Morkanaut, and got some new Harlie bikes the last couple years,
got the Imper Agents book and dusted off the Inqu army (what I have of it here, anyways) that I started building ten years ago,
started putting that under the brush (again).
Hoping to use them someday, but if the rules end up bad, well,
I might end up one of the people that GW (used to claim?) claims primarily comprise their customer base,
collectors who don't/no longer play the game.
Frankly, I took the loss of WFB pretty hard, too.
We only have so much time in life to build things before nature tears us down,
and I didn't feel that I needed GW to come out on the side of entropy, there.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 oni wrote:
I went from unenthusiastic to hopefully optimistic right back to unenthusiastic.

I feel like I'm watching history repeat itself right before my eyes.

I've been playing this game for a very long time and have seen play mechanics come and go. A lot of what is in 8th edition has been done before. It didn't work then and it's unlikely to work now.

Confirmed 8th edition mechanics that were dumped from previous editions because they were problematic:
- Movement stat (created issues in 2nd ed. where really fast armies had a massive advantage over slower ones)
- Armour Save modifiers (these pesky things rendered all armour that wasn't terminator armour completely useless in 2nd ed.)
- Drawing nearby units into combat (a complete nightmare from 3rd & 4th that made for some of the most un-enjoyable games in the history of Warhammer 40,000)
- Independent characters able to be targeted by themselves (congratulations! one of the worst mechanics from 4th ed. is back... character sniping is a thing again)
- Mechanisms that heavily favor MSU (this was more of a problem with codexes in 4th ed. - where there was more incentive to take multiple small units rather than max out unit sizes)
- Wound allocation to models of the controlling players choice (does no one remember the dirty wound allocation shenanigans from 5th ed.?)

It's almost like someone pulled the most epic troll on GW and convinced them to bring back for 8th ed. some of the worst 40K game mechanics that have ever existed.

I wonder how GW can stress army comp from a collectors/hobbyists/fan standpoint, rather than from the WAAC list building/3-d deck building perspective that ends up wrecking things?
I mean, I have a lot of models collected over 25 years or so, some if not most lovingly painted and still improving, and when I thought/think about buying a unit I am interested in who/what they are more than what they do on the field synergistically with other models to build deathstar armies of sinner-jism. That attitude is no fun, though it did take me a long time to make peace with the fact that I was often losing.
I just wish that - being a model company and a game company - GW would be able to include in the rules and stress in their literature (WD and so on) the attitude that makes games of all sorts enjoyable, especially this one.
My point here is that I understand and concur with your assessment of the bad rules, and I hope that these are ameliorated during gameplay somehow by way of other rules, but I especially think that the drawing units into nearby combat is a bad idea, and personally the 1" bubble thing seems like it will be a nightmare to sort out, but in the end even these problems can be sorted out with the right mindset on both sides of the table.

I came into this game last year, what made me play it is that it was complex and it had nothing to do with a game like chess and Go where anticipating the other player make all the core of the game.

But rules were too heavy for many and game was very unbalance, as today with moral and close combat rules they are not simplifying it, they are "stupidifying" the system. Many rules or system that are being told that got nothing with strategy, like resolving combat turn by turn and having morale check that makes your model dissapear into thin air. Also with the rumor that has been post today about having independant caracther that cannot joint unit and there is a rules that states that only the closest unit can fire it or any unit within 12 inches. Those makes no sense with wargaming simulation. It's just rules that comes from nowhere and cut reality into the game. Also you can use more command point that your opponent to alter close combat cycling, that also got nothing to do with war simulation. Now your space marines got the same chance to hit a demon prince or a cultist in cc also, where is the logic? True toughness won't be the same, but that does not represent the skill of the confrontation. Don't get me wrong, the game needed change, only thing that can save it now is balance because it is becoming more a boardgame than a wargaming game.

@jeff - by the time GW blew up the Old World, I hadn't played Fantasy in years - thanks to WFB 8E. I'm thinking I'll still play a bit, but definitely, I don't need as much stuff as I have.

The closer to AoS it gets the less I like it. I want to play 40k not AoS in space.

I'm pretty concerned that morale is really going to hurt horde armies, which have typically been the weaker/lower tier armies (Orks, swarm Nids, infantry IG). I personally believe all of the factions will be comparatively more balanced than in the past, but already the weaker armies have a core rule that really hinders them, so I don't really expect to see them rise to the top without some hecka strong codex-level rules and point cost buffs.

 KommissarKiln wrote:
I'm pretty concerned that morale is really going to hurt horde armies, which have typically been the weaker/lower tier armies (Orks, swarm Nids, infantry IG). I personally believe all of the factions will be comparatively more balanced than in the past, but already the weaker armies have a core rule that really hinders them, so I don't really expect to see them rise to the top without some hecka strong codex-level rules and point cost buffs.

I keep seeing this point being made, but I think that it's simply wrong.

Horde armies have directly been buffed by the changes to AP. You are likely going to have to fire a [formerly] AP 3 weapon against a model with a 5+ armor save in order to strip it of its save.

Guardsmen, cultists and orks are now going to get an armor save against boltguns.

Orks with 'eavy armor are likely going to get a save against formerly AP 3 weapons. And if you stick them in cover, they'll still get a save even against formerly AP 2 weapons.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, the changes to templates also directly buff horde armies.

Yes, you are going to take more damage in the battle shock phase of the turn.

But you are probably going to take far less damage in the shooting phase.

 thekingofkings wrote:
The closer to AoS it gets the less I like it. I want to play 40k not AoS in space.

40k started out as WHFB in space, it stands to reason that 41k is going to be AoS in SPACE!* We haven't seen the full picture, but it's looking better than eldar >SM / necrons > tau > the other armies that 7th has going. I think people are flipping out waaay too early (in the most part, not you) and are jumping the gun. I'll admit I'm keen, and this is from selling off the vast majority of my 40k stuff when 7th was new.

*Now with 25% less sodium**
**25% more sodium added as an additional natural*** preservative to maintain flavour****
***all sodium added in this product has been synthetically produced
****flavour in this instance here means 'bland and nondescript'*****
****Just like the Imperial Guard

 thekingofkings wrote:
The closer to AoS it gets the less I like it. I want to play 40k not AoS in space.

... except for the fact that AoS is actually 40k with Fantasy models.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 thekingofkings wrote:
The closer to AoS it gets the less I like it. I want to play 40k not AoS in space.

... except for the fact that AoS is actually 40k with Fantasy models.

It's really not.

I'm as happy to bash AoS as the next guy, but the only similarity between AoS and current 40K is the shape of the bases.

No, mechanically, AoS is far more of a 40k game than any sort of WFB game.

Brutus_Apex wrote:-The moral system.

The moral system hasn't changed. Dark Angels are just as likely to shoot Templars for having information on Fallen as before. Inquisitors are just as likely to call in an Exterminatus for a crazy looking mustache. Tau are just as likely to be causing human worlds to be self-sterilized.

So, yeah, I don't the the moral system has changed at all.

What?

Brutus_Apex wrote:-Characters can't join units.

Has this been confirmed a thing yet, or just a Sigmarizing expectation?

To be honest, most of the arguments till the latest update were how IC's interacted with the units they have joined.

thekingofkings wrote:The closer to AoS it gets the less I like it. I want to play 40k not AoS in space.

Ironic because 40K was WHFB in space for a very long time. Of course, as has been pointed out, AoS is the 40King of WHFB in many ways.

 Charistoph wrote:

Brutus_Apex wrote:-Characters can't join units.

Has this been confirmed a thing yet, or just a Sigmarizing expectation?

To be honest, most of the arguments till the latest update were how IC's interacted with the units they have joined.

It was the way they corrected their wording during the QA, from "joining a unit" to being "near a unit", or there abouts.

 insaniak wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 thekingofkings wrote:
The closer to AoS it gets the less I like it. I want to play 40k not AoS in space.

... except for the fact that AoS is actually 40k with Fantasy models.

It's really not.

I'm as happy to bash AoS as the next guy, but the only similarity between AoS and current 40K is the shape of the bases.

There's connective tissue there, even in 7th. The systems are very different but the feel is similar enough that you can bounce from one to the other relatively smoothly.

The biggest issue is that one game has a ton of tactical depth and interesting combos that take a lot of time and effort to master and that really emphasizes the skill of the player at all points of play...the other is 40k.

I'm very happy with the direction things seem to be going and my excitement for 8th edition has very little to do with any of the individual rule mechanics we have been privy to so far.

The main contributing factor of my optimism is the 'bigger picture' aspect of how GW has been acting as a company. The splendid community outreach, the fact that they are moving away from the static multi-year editions to a more fluid, evolving annual update system which will allow them to more nimbly correct mishaps and react to feedback.

The fact they have injected the lore with change but have still kept the foundations intact. It allows for the fluff to grow and expand without invalidating what has gone before.

The quality of their miniatures just keep getting better and the new creativity shown towards bringing familiar but new factions in AOS to the fore will hopefully inject 40k with much needed new ideas.

A new take on marines rather than just "Releasing an updated kit and calling it a day?" yes please. This is a very exciting time for 40k and GW in general. I first walked through GW's doors nearly 22 years ago and have seen some of the best (and worst) the company has to offer.

I think we are now entering a new golden age. Bring on 8th!

 jeff white wrote:
I anticipated something like these results.
20% is a SUBSTANTIAL loss of enthusiasm given that forum activity should indicate a proclivity to fanboy sentiment.

Uuuh whut? Forums tends to boost "nay" over. Dissatisfied people are generally more vocal. Happy ones generally just play.

I am sure that 8th will prove to be both fun and balanced in some ways.

On the other hand i cant see how they will manage to balance the more extreme end of the spectrum. a save mod of +1 or -1 works well if you have flak, mesh or power armour but what about terminators in cover? Suddenly you can have a complete deathwing army that is immune to every basic weapon. Ork green tides will be very different if the board is covered in ruins instead of an open plain, you cant put points on that surely.

I strongly suspect that every faction will be balanced but very limited with perhaps 2 or 3 ways to build each army, like you must have a certain set of characters to limit battleshock fo example.

I have owned and played nearly every army since my first box of beaky marines but the only army that i still like to build, convert and paint is orks and i fear that they will suffer a great loss in diversity along with a lot of other factions.

Command Points and stratagems are the aspects I'm most excited about. These could turn 40K into an actual game with tactical depth and important decisions players have to take. Right now the most important decisions are happening before the game when building a list, sadly.