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.

No sarcasm here and I started with GW in 87...I ike 7th for what it is, I took a break from 1,2,3 and 4th ed and finally got back into 7th about a year and a half ago and really enjoy it for what it is. For me it has a very beer n chips feel to it but retains ckunky complicated aspects of rt and 2nd ed. It's far from perfect but my group plays for fun anyway. I really enjoyed the return to hard cover book format which has not really been seen since 3rd whfb and rt. I sure hope 8th is not going to be using the art style from the trailers, because that's some of the ugliest non fitting art I've seen GW use....ever, looks like something some kids came up with over on newgrounds.

I blew about $1500 before aos came out and don't regret it for one minute, I stuck with 8th and will continue to. The art alone for AOS turned me off with how crap it is ( khorne bb are awesome count as updated for chaos in 8th though ). And so far 8th is making me feel the same, the rules itself may be ok of course but no way I would blow money on that softcover animu furry monstrosity edition.

GW art of late is definitely...unimpressive for sure. A lot of it looks far more suited to World of Warcraft or League of Legends (and some of the models are following suit), and in general is more and more rote exact duplication of plastic kits.

 Vaktathi wrote:
GW art of late is definitely...unimpressive for sure. A lot of it looks far more suited to World of Warcraft or League of Legends (and some of the models are following suit), and in general is more and more rote exact duplication of plastic kits.

There is a reason for this and while it's technically not to topic I totally agree, i won't claim 7th art is anything amazing vs GW and TSR golden days, but some of it is OK some is good and a whole lot of it is total crap.

To make a long story short, during the late 70s and 80s and early 90s, TSR and GW ( being mostly the two big powerhouses next to fasa ) had money to hire real traditional high end quality artists, GW also happened to snag a number of very high end traditional artists from the uk who were young ( anyone remember the youngartists copyright on the backs of books of GW ?? ), once the early 2000s hit the filthy ugly modern degenerate era of plastic rushed amateur art was applauded and pushed as all the rage. Every kind of fantastic deviant art photoshop fake painting was regurgitated out constantly, and it's remained that way mostly ever since.

Personally I cant stand that art and I noticed it from the day it happened and it's never really had any impact on me other than....stop fing the dog and pull up guys, they are not exactly mail order anymore, if they can do high production books they can hire some young TALENT ( key word ) vs cookie cutter one trick pony fresh out of digi art class types.

Some people will consider this harsh, I don't...art is for the elite and it should impress and the works of masters do impress and last the test of time. The mediocre should never be praised.




Adrian Smith art when GW had some REAL art.

This is where opinions differ I guess. I personally prefer the cleaner style of AoS and the more current artwork over those pieces. They seem busy to me. Also fetishitic but I think that's intended.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
This should be a Poll.

YES - I hate tactics, sticking with 7E
NO - I'm moving to 8E
NO - if I'm doing Oldhammer, I'm playing 3E-5E
NO - if I'm really doing Oldhammer, I'm playing RT/2E
NO! - Ima ragequit and burn my modelz

I'll probably be playing 8E for when we still play 40k.

Not biased poll nope.

I am on board with going back to 5th Edition War Hammer 40'000 if 8th Edition Orks & Grey Knights are no fun.

I had a blast in 5th Edition playing Orks & a Grey Knight/Inquisition Force.

 MagicJuggler wrote:

The last 5e Nova tournament ended with Draigo dying to Jaws of the World Wolf, and Njal single-handedly destroyed most of Dash of Dashofpepper's Venom spam army with a single Chain Lightning. So...yeah.

Not to forget No Retreat rules from that edition, or 50% cover allowing for absurd conga-lines. Thanks for actually making me take off the rose-tinted 5e glasses.

4+ cover save everywhere, diversified wound allocation, horrible messy way IC's worked in close combat...yeah, 5th ed as a ruleset wasn't all what it is made up to be now. And 4th edition grognards whined about it in every turn.

7th Ed. as far as basic rules go would be pretty easy to fix, hopefully somebody will as I sure as heck won't be playing 8th. Alas, the 7th edition Codices are a total mess.

ERJAK wrote:
This is where opinions differ I guess. I personally prefer the cleaner style of AoS and the more current artwork over those pieces. They seem busy to me. Also fetishitic but I think that's intended.

Cleaner is not so much what I would describe aos as, and from what I have seen of the trailers ( this may not be the DESIGN of 8th just amateur slapped together vids ) it's about the most unrelated style of 40k ever. The aos logo itself is quite poor and childish, outright cartoony...and looking back whfb and 40k always were outside of the typical boring americanized childish high fantasy, it was always over the top grimdark and a very gritty setting for both.

It's why I hated the red period so much and seems like the majority of the staff disliked it too once ansell sold it all and it turned into the prim and proper circus it has other than the last year, which is a bit of a good things I would say.

Meh.

My perspective (from my FLGS meta) is that 7th put far too many bonuses to armies that should have been buffed, left others behind (power wise) or simply broke the game by giving ridiculous bonuses or hundreds of extra points for free.

I guess I'm lucky that my FLGS has an unwritten rule: you only cheese if both of you agree to cheese. I'm quietly hopeful that 8th us more streamlined, less bloat, some resemblance of balance and fun. Remember fun?

So yeah, I won't miss 7th, some was good, lots was wrong and some VERY wrong, but I only played 1000pts or less, so I guess I avoided most of the craziness.

morgoth wrote:

Breng77 wrote:
No 7th was my least favorite of all the editions I have played. To the extent where I took almost a 2 year break in playing. The down turn for me started at the end of 6e with more RPS match-ups, deathstars, and uber shooting. I can't wait for 8th. I think the game needs a reset. Will things be perfect right away? no. But they have a much better chance than sticking with 7e. Throw in that I think moving away from the codex model was a much needed change for balance and I will change tomorrow if the edition drops.

7th hasn't been out for two years.
In which alternate timelines do all you 7th-haters live?

From Wikipedia:
Announced in White Dwarf issue 15, pre-orders for May 17 and release date of May 24, 2014.

That's gonna be three years before 8th drops in the timeline I live in. What does it come to in yours?

I can't wait to jump ship to 8th on Day 1, 7th is a load of crap. And I wouldn't go back to an older edition either, there are a lot of core aspects that have been a part of the rules since 3rd that I am very glad they are finally changing for 8th (movement stats, armour modifiers, parity beteen MC's and vehicles, everyone gets split fire etc).

ERJAK wrote:
This is where opinions differ I guess. I personally prefer the cleaner style of AoS and the more current artwork over those pieces. They seem busy to me. Also fetishitic but I think that's intended.

AoS art is just a bland representation of a product. Is the exact opposite of intriguing and expanding, what the old art was. Exceptions are there, but few.
Also, there is some picture that is deviant-art level, as an example the maps. The quality is so low it's insulting. I am amazed people pay all that money for those books.

OP: I don't think I will play extensively, but I will probably give a shot to 8th. Nonetheless, I think I will organise games of 3rd and 5th with the old lads, and perhaps 6th for the FW player.

Generally speaking, I love how the thread devolved into which edition sucked less/more, with hints that we had a general devolution.
FYI, the authors of 8th edition are the same people that gave us all the priceless gems of the post-3rd 40k.

Well who else would write it? I think most of the 4th and earlier writers left.

My little group is sticking with 7th. We don't like the changes GW made with 8th,, are happy enough with 7th, don't really care to learn a brand new game, and above all don't want to spend more money on books when we've collectively invested so much in 7th edition codices and campaign material, all of which will become obsolete.

I think we'd all have at least given 8th a chance if it was backwards compatible with 7th codices.

We're a pretty tight-knit group that only really plays with each other, so we don't have to worry about keeping up with the rules in order to get a game.

I'm curious what my flgs players will do. I think many of the WHFB players didn't upgrade to AoS, so it will be interesting to see if that community upgrades to 8th.

 jasper76 wrote:
My little group is sticking with 7th. We don't like the changes GW made with 8th,, are happy enough with 7th, don't really care to learn a brand new game, and above all don't want to spend more money on books when we've collectively invested so much in codices and campaign material, all of which will become obsolete.

I think we'd all have at least given it a chance if it was backwards compatible with 7th codices.

I can see your thinking, but if they made it backwards compatible it would share all of the issues of the previous editions. Nothing would be rebalanced, things would either be invalidated through rules nerfing them, or become uber powerful through benefiting from the new rules. I'm happier to see some people not move to the new edition than to see the constant build of power creep for through all editions and a retention of the flawed codex model of releasing rules.

I'll be going whole hog 8th edition

No chance I'm sticking with 7th. I'm ready to flush that baby down the drain.

Breng77 wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:
My little group is sticking with 7th. We don't like the changes GW made with 8th,, are happy enough with 7th, don't really care to learn a brand new game, and above all don't want to spend more money on books when we've collectively invested so much in codices and campaign material, all of which will become obsolete.

I think we'd all have at least given it a chance if it was backwards compatible with 7th codices.

I can see your thinking, but if they made it backwards compatible it would share all of the issues of the previous editions. Nothing would be rebalanced, things would either be invalidated through rules nerfing them, or become uber powerful through benefiting from the new rules. I'm happier to see some people not move to the new edition than to see the constant build of power creep for through all editions and a retention of the flawed codex model of releasing rules.

We actually like 7th for the most part. Since we're a small group, we've been able to handle balance issues introduced by the codices by just talking to each other, not repeating mismatches, some basic house rules, etc.

I certainly don't begrudge anyone their decision to upgrade to 8th, I know that 7th is/was unpopular with alot of people on these boards.

Out with the old, in with the new.

Revenant78 wrote:

There is a reason for this and while it's technically not to topic I totally agree, i won't claim 7th art is anything amazing vs GW and TSR golden days, but some of it is OK some is good and a whole lot of it is total crap.

To make a long story short, during the late 70s and 80s and early 90s, TSR and GW ( being mostly the two big powerhouses next to fasa ) had money to hire real traditional high end quality artists, GW also happened to snag a number of very high end traditional artists from the uk who were young ( anyone remember the youngartists copyright on the backs of books of GW ?? ), once the early 2000s hit the filthy ugly modern degenerate era of plastic rushed amateur art was applauded and pushed as all the rage. Every kind of fantastic deviant art photoshop fake painting was regurgitated out constantly, and it's remained that way mostly ever since.

Yeah, huge quality difference, and the deviantart style stuff works for some things, but really feels off for 40k, the old school stuff by Blanche/Smith/England etc was fantastic and really defined the 40k universe, the newer stuff just feels...out of place and unimaginative, very "marketing-ey".

Shadow War and then 8th edition for me... goodbye Deathstars and broken Eldar / Tau ( I hope ).

 Vaktathi wrote:
Yeah, huge quality difference, and the deviantart style stuff works for some things, but really feels off for 40k, the old school stuff by Blanche/Smith/England etc was fantastic and really defined the 40k universe, the newer stuff just feels...out of place and unimaginative, very "marketing-ey".

What, you don't think this took hours of care and devotion to create?

OK, maybe ten minutes of care and devotion.

 n0t_u wrote:
Well who else would write it? I think most of the 4th and earlier writers left.

Fair enough - I just think that expecting quality from the same people is.. well.. delusional.
People say "is not 7th edition". Well that's a quite desperate statement to be honest.
At best, it will be a decent ruleset with few annoying elements, that will be ruined by the codex writing, because of unbalances, incoherence and lack of vision.
At worst, it will be a poor model for a futuristic battle from the get-go.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Luciferian wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
Yeah, huge quality difference, and the deviantart style stuff works for some things, but really feels off for 40k, the old school stuff by Blanche/Smith/England etc was fantastic and really defined the 40k universe, the newer stuff just feels...out of place and unimaginative, very "marketing-ey".

What, you don't think this took hours of care and devotion to create?

OK, maybe ten minutes of care and devotion.

Exactly. Look at the pose and proportions of the marine. And no, the wonkiness is not a conscious stylistic choice.

A major part of the problem is the player base itself. I know in the late 80s early 90s the majority of players I met at the few GW stores that existed, including also conventions that played all manner of rpg and wargames were not of the mindset of today, which mainly got created through the whole win at all costs tournament mentality...and through the constant emphasis on dif 40k forums to build the most hard as nails solid army lists.

I remember once meeting a guy back after the first daemonhunters codex came out for 3rd, and this guy would just not shut up about how powerful and unbeatable his grey knights army was, and the entire time I sat there saying...buddy I would not play you if you paid me, you are the kinds of swine who are doing damage to this game and enticing new players. 40k should be fun, wargames should be fun in general, not some ego tard stroke fest...that mentality would be no dif than trying to play an rts or fps with a semi god mode ability.

Since the start I've always been 100% about themed fun armies, I believe unbound is totally great for that and we already got that in 7th, it's mostly the same in 8th. I realize 7th ( and EVERY edition and I played 2nd a lot it turned into an overwatch snooze fest or with nades ) has it's problems, I realize many people started with this or that edition, but in reality they were all 40k as we have known it at it's core, rick has had little to do with it since 2nd I am pretty sure, but it's remained mostly that same core game with simply variations done to the rules.

Part of the problem is GW itself coming up with rules, not really bothering to playtest them that much, and yes creating some cheese to sell the newest plastic kits.

I think if players worked towards actually trying to have fun and make games friendly with out the @peen ego mentality that let's be honest...nobody gives a f about other than these miserable fks, then the overall attitude towards the game, the atmosphere, all of it would be far better.

You can either have fun or join the people who want to try and break it ( and the fun ) on the first day, in which case just reject them or don't complain.

Revenant78 wrote:
A major part of the problem is the player base itself. I know in the late 80s early 90s the majority of players I met at the few GW stores that existed, including also conventions that played all manner of rpg and wargames were not of the mindset of today, which mainly got created through the whole win at all costs tournament mentality...and through the constant emphasis on dif 40k forums to build the most hard as nails solid army lists.

I remember once meeting a guy back after the first daemonhunters codex came out for 3rd, and this guy would just not shut up about how powerful and unbeatable his grey knights army was, and the entire time I sat there saying...buddy I would not play you if you paid me, you are the kinds of swine who are doing damage to this game and enticing new players. 40k should be fun, wargames should be fun in general, not some ego tard stroke fest...that mentality would be no dif than trying to play an rts or fps with a semi god mode ability.

Since the start I've always been 100% about themed fun armies, I believe unbound is totally great for that and we already got that in 7th, it's mostly the same in 8th. I realize 7th ( and EVERY edition and I played 2nd a lot it turned into an overwatch snooze fest or with nades ) has it's problems, I realize many people started with this or that edition, but in reality they were all 40k as we have known it at it's core, rick has had little to do with it since 2nd I am pretty sure, but it's remained mostly that same core game with simply variations done to the rules.

Part of the problem is GW itself coming up with rules, not really bothering to playtest them that much, and yes creating some cheese to sell the newest plastic kits.

I think if players worked towards actually trying to have fun and make games friendly with out the @peen ego mentality that let's be honest...nobody gives a f about other than these miserable fks, then the overall attitude towards the game, the atmosphere, all of it would be far better.

You can either have fun or join the people who want to try and break it ( and the fun ) on the first day, in which case just reject them or don't complain.

To be fair, if you only ever play Fun, Fluffy, Friendly games (the three F's, as I call them) then you really don't have any idea just how unbalanced this game really is. Also, it's not your place to tell people how they should play or what their aims should be, and the impetus should not be on players to fix the design mistakes of the game's publisher.

Maybe I'm unreasonably optimistic, but I'm encouraged by the fact that GW actually engaged with some high-profile tournament organizers and got the community involved in play testing. I'm looking forward to 8th edition being much more balanced than 7th edition is - not that the bar is set very high by 7th. I'm eager to see how the different FOCs work out, and if they balance well by awarding/withholding Command Points. I'm looking forward to 7th's horrendous psychic shenanigans going away. I'm looking forward to vehicles having wounds and saves, and to heavy weapons that do multiple wounds when they hit. Most of all, I'm looking forward to a game that can be played faster than one can play 7th.

So, no, I'm not sticking with 7th.

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

 n0t_u wrote:
Well who else would write it? I think most of the 4th and earlier writers left.

Fair enough - I just think that expecting quality from the same people is.. well.. delusional.
People say "is not 7th edition". Well that's a quite desperate statement to be honest.
At best, it will be a decent ruleset with few annoying elements, that will be ruined by the codex writing, because of unbalances, incoherence and lack of vision.
At worst, it will be a poor model for a futuristic battle from the get-go.

People are expecting quality based on reported testing by known players in the community.

Also the simultaneous release of codices and seeming lack of them going forward as a way to release new rules is promising as far as balance is concerned.

 Luciferian wrote:
[

To be fair, if you only ever play Fun, Fluffy, Friendly games (the three F's, as I call them) then you really don't have any idea just how unbalanced this game really is. Also, it's not your place to tell people how they should play or what their aims should be, and the impetus should not be on players to fix the design mistakes of the game's publisher.

No you misunderstand the points here, obviously winning and having a challenging game as players get better is fun and enjoyable also. I'm not talking about those sorts of situations, I'm not claiming 40k should be ( or any wargame ) as just a casual FFF 100% of the time, I realize the need for tournaments and that players will develop better tactics etc.

It actually is ALL our places to actually have a good time, to enjoy this game, tabletop wargaming is an in person ( mostly yes there is online programs I know ) social interactive experience. Supporting or applauding the kinds of players who intentionally choose to only make the most broken hard as nails list for pure win at all costs is NOT fun, it is NOT going to get people to want to play those people or have a good experience, and it is that mindset you will almost always see online in terms of army list input. You will almost never see anyone say "yea good choice here good choice there very fluffy list don't worry about putting a few extra melta guns in here and dropping those themed units", if you do it's very rare...even when people make it clear fluffy lists are that you almost always get someone telling them "drop this or that" and only for game advantage/winning %.

This mentality has got to the point that it's questionable WHY gw itself even bothers to put entries in codex books when people will simply say "shelve this use this". That is in fact due to that part of the community who are intentionally looking to make the above kinds of list and do all they can to find every weakness and broken thing in the game. That is not fun to a social interactive game. Competition is fine with me, tactics is fine with me, a mostly balanced ( as much as possible ) game is fine to me. Part of it is GW's fault and much of it is also the play base fault for simply going along with the WAC mentality vs choosing to reject that, if you continue to support that mentality...then you are forever going to face problems that everyone complains about in 7th ( and in other editions ).

Do you honestly think GW itself ( it's rules team ) intentionally wants people to play their games in a way that it's a complete broken mess and encourage everyone to pick the most absurd lists so they can win only ? yes they are in the business of selling models mainly and rules is an afterthought in the business context, but the game itself is meant to have some kind of reasonable balance and not someone bringing 10 of x most expensive kit to just win or make it so that someone is tabled at the start. Yea they have broken stuff with the formations I know but I think that is more to do with themed lists and giving bonus as a reward and selling more kits, many of the formations are in fact themed around some aspects or fluff side of an army, regardless if they are broken...due to lack of playtesting.

8th hopefully will fix a lot of the current problems and I'm fall rules if they are good and keep the spirit of 40k alive ( I have some doubts it will be this long term ) but it's also up to the social community of 40k players to set some examples and environment that promotes fun enjoyable AND challenging games, so that both newcomers and vets can enjoy it at those dif levels. Intentional exploitation and advantages that are simply game rules only and knowing full well that it's broken should simply be rejected for what it is, or come up with some house rules to combat that till GW fixes them... if they ever will or just make a new edition ( after 8 ) is up for debate even so called new gw.

Revenant78 wrote:
I'm not claiming 40k should be ( or any wargame ) as just a casual FFF 100% of the time, I realize the need for tournaments and that players will develop better tactics etc.

40k, as concepted and actually played, is FFF 99% of the time. Tournament play is such a tiny fraction of GW gaming it's not even funny. Talk about tail wagging the dog...

Well when AoS dropped i ignored it existed and kept playing WHFB 8th edition. Because AoS is a totally different game, and a style of game I had no interest in.

People will realize the same about 40k at some point. This isn't a new edition of the game. It's a totally different game that just happens to use the same models. Like playing poker or blackjack. They both use a deck of cards but are a totally different experience.

7th edition has it's problems sure, but when played for fun with friends, ignoring broken formations, it is fun. It also has an advantage over any older versions in that it's complete. Every army has a valid useable codex. If only my skaven had gotten a nice hardback 8th edition codex before fantasy was murdered.