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.

Having ditched 40k after 5th edition, and despite swearing NEVER AGAIN!... I find myself tempted by the new models, etc.

The one question I need answered is this: what are the odds of a blind matchup against a stranger at a FLGS 40k night being balanced/fun, RAW?

To early to tell? About the same as 5th ed? 6th? 7th?

Definitely too early to tell, but there's a chance.

Too soon to tell. However, it looks promising so far. Better than 6e or 7e, I'd say almost without hesitation.

It's certainly all heading in the right direction.

I will hazard a guess and say your chances are better in 8th.

I'd assume better than now and probably pretty fun, if rocky, as things kick off and everyone is still trying to find their favorite units. If they actually keep up with rules updates there's definitely potential. Safe bet would be to wait until the new edition hits, but then you'll be missing that time to build and paint up a force... decisions, decisions

Probably the closest you'll get since early 3rd or RT.

However, GW lacks the ability to turn random strangers in your FLGS pleasant no matter what the rules are like.

Well, any disparity should be lessened somewhat because Formations, the bent ones in particular are gone - as is dubious synergy from mixing Chapters etc.

I expect there'll still be some combinations which do give an advantage, but I don't expect it'll be anywhere near as pronounced.

Then there's the promise that they'll update points and stuff as and when necessary. No, that doesn't help you when your being beaten senseless in a given game - but depending how quick off the mark they are, it may mean a reduction in people simply buying the beardiest stuff they can, on account it may not be beardy for long.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Well, any disparity should be lessened somewhat because Formations, the bent ones in particular are gone - as is dubious synergy from mixing Chapters etc.

I expect there'll still be some combinations which do give an advantage, but I don't expect it'll be anywhere near as pronounced.

Then there's the promise that they'll update points and stuff as and when necessary. No, that doesn't help you when your being beaten senseless in a given game - but depending how quick off the mark they are, it may mean a reduction in people simply buying the beardiest stuff they can, on account it may not be beardy for long.

Uh huh - lets just ignore the bent codexes that made such upgrades a requirement.
"Hey, I got a great idea. Lets take some of the most brutal long range weaponry in the game and strap it to the most powerful melee type unit in the game, and we'll give it the Jump rule just to make it more exciting."
"Sounds like a beast of a unit, I'm guessing it'll cost a fortune to field."
"Nonsense, they shouldn't be more than 200 points a pop."
"Sounds a bit broken to me."
"For 400 points you can meet it's bigger brother, wanna hear about my idea for bikes that can load the entire squad with heavy weapons rather than just one in three?"
"Fast Attack or Heavy Support?"
"Troops my boy, troops."

Ask if your opponent played collectible card games and if he or she liked them and why. And ask if he or she played or plays role playing games. Answers to those questions will be your clues as to how your game will play out. Avoid card players.

Also, the first few months before the internet meta cranks up will be the most likely.

 jeff white wrote:
Ask if your opponent played collectible card games and if he or she liked them and why. And ask if he or she played or plays role playing games. Answers to those questions will be your clues as to how your game will play out. Avoid card players.

Flip it. Roleplayers often want to prebuild their character to level 20 to make sure they take every optimal choice.

Or these games attract a variety of people and you can't tell what an opponent is like just because they also like a certain other category of game. <-- more likely.

 CatPeeler wrote:
Having ditched 40k after 5th edition, and despite swearing NEVER AGAIN!... I find myself tempted by the new models, etc.

The one question I need answered is this: what are the odds of a blind matchup against a stranger at a FLGS 40k night being balanced/fun, RAW?

To early to tell? About the same as 5th ed? 6th? 7th?

Too early to tell. Wait until the full release.

Well it can't be worse than now lol.

Signs are looking positive IMO

 jeff white wrote:
Ask if your opponent played collectible card games and if he or she liked them and why. And ask if he or she played or plays role playing games. Answers to those questions will be your clues as to how your game will play out. Avoid card players.

This is a pretty bad way to work out an opponent. I play card games myself but I like to try to find fun interactions and things like taking cool looking cards or taking the challenge of making a card widely considered garbage to sort of work at least. As for 40k I'll play against anything unless they're a jerk and like to balance looks, lore, and power with my army selections. Also what's strong now will not be strong later as this always seems to shift around as updates come out so I find power chasing to be a bit stupid really.

 jeff white wrote:
Ask if your opponent played collectible card games and if he or she liked them and why. And ask if he or she played or plays role playing games. Answers to those questions will be your clues as to how your game will play out. Avoid card players.

Alas, I have to partially disagree here too. I have been playing roleplaying games for about 32 years now. I, too, have had that powergaming stage where I liked to have the most powerful character om the party, simply for having him or her be the most powerful, with at least half of the stats (number depending on the specific RPG game system rules) being way above average, and having every little equipment advantage I could get. I got past that stage, and then even swung the other way where I tried to build characters who were just a cut above average or even just your average Joe and Jane, to prove these people in a RPG could elevate to a heroic status just as well. I still find other people in roleplaying games with the WAAC mentality applied to their character building regularly, and thus elevate themselves to the level of people who should be shot. With a hammer. Slowly.

On the other hand, I can attest to having met some of the least pleasant people I ever met through card games (this only being topped by the unpleasantness of people at my work as a prison guard). Most of those were at tournaments where a cash prize or full expenses payed trip to the next bigger tournament were at stake. There are pleasant card players (mostly the casually playing ones), but like in roleplaying games, or even board games or video games for that matter, a lot of factors can affect how a player responds in the game. It would seem both Jeff White and I have met our fair share of unpleasant card players. However, there are plenty of unpleasant players in other games too. To simply state to avoid the card players and play exclusively with roleplayers is, to me at least, an inacurate, generalised, statement.