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.
KingCorpus wrote: I love 8th edition. No edition is perfect, but this one is just fun.
7th was getting to a point for me where I was going to do something I never thought I'd do and that's quit 40k.
2++ Re-rolling, Riptide/Surge Spam/ Eldar Jetbike spam/Invis spam. Guard, Tyranids, Grey knight armies all NEVER standing a chance against others. Death stars, D weapons
No thank you. I'll keep my beastly 3++ Shield Dreads, Bjorn having more than 3 bloody hullpoints at the cost of Wulfen and calvary nerfed. Thank you!
Funny thing is nearly all of above is not issue with 7th ed rules but by codex. Ie they could have been fixed by fixing codexes. Just look at 30k. 7th ed rules and hell of a lot more balanced without above being major issues(and now even less) while being less of an alpha strike game.
Guess much depends on how much you love or hate alpha strike games. I despite that so no wonder 8th ed leaves me cold.
I quit 40k during 7th. The free stuff you got from formations really really made me not want to play... and so I didn't.
I can understand the hate for alpha striking. Especially if you want to play a wargame where movement and what not matters and part of the game is pulling off maneuvers.
Alpha striking is bypassing the entire movement phase basically to place your guys wherever you want. It annoys me too, but I have come to realize 40k is basically a board game now and not a wargame. Its been that way for many years.
I've enjoyed 8th, hobby A.D.D. has had me waiver in and out of every edition - this one is no different. I'm back more on AoS and Blood and Plunder, a couple buddies are looking at some post apocalypse gang war type games too... it is all about friends and having fun for me. 8th can do that, if the individuals in your group can do that... but IMO 8th and tournament/competitive play is just not fun.
And, a long standing life lesson - don't dismiss without a solution(s)... you need 30-50% of the board to be 10 inch or taller LoS blocking terrain. This forces maneuver and picking your firing lanes and limits some of the alpha strike abilities. OR play long way, I've played a bunch of the Open War card games and love the long edge table set up... you can still drop that infiltrator squad in to grab the alpha strike but they will probably be unsupported and therefor shot off the board the next turn. These force players to think and maneuver their strengths against opponent weaknesses more (again, my opinion).
All said and done, 40k is a shoot out where you set up and remove models.
Kernbanks
definitely not a monogamer, you got it I'll play it.
One thing to consider when reading through a thread like this the missing perspective. There is an entire contingent of people who dislike 8th edition and have dropped 40K for other interests. They are not going to search out and post into a thread like this in the same numbers as those still engaged. This is an internet forum phenomenon that is particularly interesting during the death throes of a game. Similiar to this, in those situations posters fall into a kind of group think supported by the company that does not take into account the number of people who were dissatisfied and quit. It never fails that a majority of posters have no perspective on this and are therefor blind to the deficits of the system.
In 8th edition you need to bring a Codex powered Alpha Strike list or you are little people. GWs "better communication with players" initiative is another way to cost-up the product. All "listening" does is provide a path for GW to release untested jank that the players test through gaming OP combos and then provide GW feedback that they will use to sell chapter approved books for additional profit.
If you have a playgroup interested in getting into a miniatures game I suggest avoiding GW at all costs.
Paradigm for a happy relationship with Games Workshop: Burn the books and take the models to a different game.
Tokhuah wrote: One thing to consider when reading through a thread like this the missing perspective. There is an entire contingent of people who dislike 8th edition and have dropped 40K for other interests. They are not going to search out and post into a thread like this in the same numbers as those still engaged. This is an internet forum phenomenon that is particularly interesting during the death throes of a game. Similiar to this, in those situations posters fall into a kind of group think supported by the company that does not take into account the number of people who were dissatisfied and quit. It never fails that a majority of posters have no perspective on this and are therefor blind to the deficits of the system.
In my experience, the opposite is true. People who hate the direction a game is going are the most active and vociferous. Even after they quit, they will continue to post on forums and complain. They do so because they love the game and hate seeing what it has become.
Tokhuah wrote: One thing to consider when reading through a thread like this the missing perspective. There is an entire contingent of people who dislike 8th edition and have dropped 40K for other interests. They are not going to search out and post into a thread like this in the same numbers as those still engaged. This is an internet forum phenomenon that is particularly interesting during the death throes of a game. Similiar to this, in those situations posters fall into a kind of group think supported by the company that does not take into account the number of people who were dissatisfied and quit. It never fails that a majority of posters have no perspective on this and are therefor blind to the deficits of the system.
In my experience, the opposite is true. People who hate the direction a game is going are the most active and vociferous. Even after they quit, they will continue to post on forums and complain. They do so because they love the game and hate seeing what it has become.
Yeah, that "Reasonable people has quit, only fanboys remains" is just BS.
For every one that hast jus quit GW all together for 8th, theres other guy that just likes the game but doesn't bother to enter forums. Forums, by their own nature, are only a small, small fraction of the playerbase of a game.
Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.
ERJAK wrote: Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.
KingCorpus wrote: I love 8th edition. No edition is perfect, but this one is just fun.
7th was getting to a point for me where I was going to do something I never thought I'd do and that's quit 40k.
2++ Re-rolling, Riptide/Surge Spam/ Eldar Jetbike spam/Invis spam. Guard, Tyranids, Grey knight armies all NEVER standing a chance against others. Death stars, D weapons
No thank you. I'll keep my beastly 3++ Shield Dreads, Bjorn having more than 3 bloody hullpoints at the cost of Wulfen and calvary nerfed. Thank you!
Funny thing is nearly all of above is not issue with 7th ed rules but by codex. Ie they could have been fixed by fixing codexes.
It wasnt just codex issues, though that was a big part of it. The entire concept of formations and allies just didnt work there, vehicles never measured up (having two overlapping kill mechanics was stupid and pointless), the psychic phase was a mess, summoning was a problem, wound allocation was a mess, etc
Just look at 30k. 7th ed rules and hell of a lot more balanced without above being major issues(and now even less) while being less of an alpha strike game.
to be fair, it also had more restrictions and is mostly marines vs other marines with a tiny bit of weird IG sprinkled in, no Eldar, no Orks, no Tyranids, no Daemons, etc. Mostly all FW is balancing there is Legion traits.
IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.
New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights! The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.
KingCorpus wrote: I love 8th edition. No edition is perfect, but this one is just fun.
7th was getting to a point for me where I was going to do something I never thought I'd do and that's quit 40k.
2++ Re-rolling, Riptide/Surge Spam/ Eldar Jetbike spam/Invis spam. Guard, Tyranids, Grey knight armies all NEVER standing a chance against others. Death stars, D weapons
No thank you. I'll keep my beastly 3++ Shield Dreads, Bjorn having more than 3 bloody hullpoints at the cost of Wulfen and calvary nerfed. Thank you!
Funny thing is nearly all of above is not issue with 7th ed rules but by codex. Ie they could have been fixed by fixing codexes.
It wasnt just codex issues, though that was a big part of it. The entire concept of formations and allies just didnt work there, vehicles never measured up (having two overlapping kill mechanics was stupid and pointless), the psychic phase was a mess, summoning was a problem, wound allocation was a mess, etc
Just look at 30k. 7th ed rules and hell of a lot more balanced without above being major issues(and now even less) while being less of an alpha strike game.
to be fair, it also had more restrictions and is mostly marines vs other marines with a tiny bit of weird IG sprinkled in, no Eldar, no Orks, no Tyranids, no Daemons, etc. Mostly all FW is balancing there is Legion traits.
Again those weren't issue with 30k. Which is basically 7th ed with new codexes. Fix the codex, fix the problems.
Again those weren't issue with 30k. Which is basically 7th ed with new codexes. Fix the codex, fix the problems.
7th had numerous core rule issues. The psychic phase was a total disaster, vehicles were a mess, the details of power weapons were important while giant monsters acted the same regardless of how hurt they were, the combination of model by model rules mixed with squad by squad rules and giant creatures/vehicles lead to a confused game that didn't know if it was a squad based skirmish game or a massive battalion level combat game. All of these are core issues that would have plagued the game regardless of the codex issues compounding them.
That's not going into how morale was largely irrelevant, the game's movement phase was mostly a joke, maelstrom was a random mess, USRs were out of control, and missions were bland and uninspired.
Mordian Iron Guard - Major Overhaul in Progress
+Spaceship Gaming Enthusiast+
Live near Halifax, NS? Ask me about our group, the Ordo Haligonias!
Tokhuah wrote: One thing to consider when reading through a thread like this the missing perspective. There is an entire contingent of people who dislike 8th edition and have dropped 40K for other interests. They are not going to search out and post into a thread like this in the same numbers as those still engaged. This is an internet forum phenomenon that is particularly interesting during the death throes of a game. Similiar to this, in those situations posters fall into a kind of group think supported by the company that does not take into account the number of people who were dissatisfied and quit. It never fails that a majority of posters have no perspective on this and are therefor blind to the deficits of the system.
In my experience, the opposite is true. People who hate the direction a game is going are the most active and vociferous. Even after they quit, they will continue to post on forums and complain. They do so because they love the game and hate seeing what it has become.
Yeah, that "Reasonable people has quit, only fanboys remains" is just BS.
For every one that hast jus quit GW all together for 8th, theres other guy that just likes the game but doesn't bother to enter forums. Forums, by their own nature, are only a small, small fraction of the playerbase of a game.
I remember reading a report that said the WWE investigated WWE forums and they found that about 10% of their audience were dedicated forum goers.
That number feels about right for my experiences with nerd hobbies in general. About 1 in every 10 is active on one or more non-facebook, non-twitter blog or forum.
Again those weren't issue with 30k. Which is basically 7th ed with new codexes. Fix the codex, fix the problems.
7th had numerous core rule issues. The psychic phase was a total disaster, vehicles were a mess, the details of power weapons were important while giant monsters acted the same regardless of how hurt they were, the combination of model by model rules mixed with squad by squad rules and giant creatures/vehicles lead to a confused game that didn't know if it was a squad based skirmish game or a massive battalion level combat game. All of these are core issues that would have plagued the game regardless of the codex issues compounding them.
That's not going into how morale was largely irrelevant, the game's movement phase was mostly a joke, maelstrom was a random mess, USRs were out of control, and missions were bland and uninspired.
Maelstrom still exists (oh, but you can spend CP to redraw "impossible" objectives). Replacing USRs with non-USRs leads to "write everything twice" syndrome. Missions in 8th matter less compared to tabling. Vehicles shoot from their exhaust pipes, and cover means nothing, and the Psychic Phase is "spam Smite."
Again those weren't issue with 30k. Which is basically 7th ed with new codexes. Fix the codex, fix the problems.
7th had numerous core rule issues. The psychic phase was a total disaster, vehicles were a mess, the details of power weapons were important while giant monsters acted the same regardless of how hurt they were, the combination of model by model rules mixed with squad by squad rules and giant creatures/vehicles lead to a confused game that didn't know if it was a squad based skirmish game or a massive battalion level combat game. All of these are core issues that would have plagued the game regardless of the codex issues compounding them.
That's not going into how morale was largely irrelevant, the game's movement phase was mostly a joke, maelstrom was a random mess, USRs were out of control, and missions were bland and uninspired.
Maelstrom still exists (oh, but you can spend CP to redraw "impossible" objectives). Replacing USRs with non-USRs leads to "write everything twice" syndrome. Missions in 8th matter less compared to tabling. Vehicles shoot from their exhaust pipes, and cover means nothing, and the Psychic Phase is "spam Smite."
Not exactly much of an improvement.
Don't get me wrong, I agree completely. The new edition is a perfect example of one step forwards but one step (maybe a step and a half) backwards. As an example, I love that vehicles use the same rules as MCs, but hate how vehicles are super over simplified. There's a lot in this edition that just leaves you scratching your head. I'm simply commenting on some people with a skewed vision of 7th being a perfect core ruleset marred by bad codices, to which its pretty evident the core rules were a serious issue compounded by even worse codices.
Mordian Iron Guard - Major Overhaul in Progress
+Spaceship Gaming Enthusiast+
Live near Halifax, NS? Ask me about our group, the Ordo Haligonias!
To be fair, nobody seemed to care about literally every other unit type in the game being able to do this...
8E has *major* issues. We're unlikely to ever have a perfect or even just solidly good core ruleswt in edition sadly, and 8E doesn't even come close to that standard. That said, I dont miss anything about 7E.
IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.
New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights! The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.
To be fair, nobody seemed to care about literally every other unit type in the game being able to do this...
8E has *major* issues. We're unlikely to ever have a perfect or even just solidly good core ruleswt in edition sadly, and 8E doesn't even come close to that standard. That said, I dont miss anything about 7E.
I'll take 8th over 7th any day of the week. 8th has a *slightly* better vision and execution of what its trying to be. Its just trying to be even more Yahtzee with cool models than before.
Mordian Iron Guard - Major Overhaul in Progress
+Spaceship Gaming Enthusiast+
Live near Halifax, NS? Ask me about our group, the Ordo Haligonias!
To be fair, nobody seemed to care about literally every other unit type in the game being able to do this...
8E has *major* issues. We're unlikely to ever have a perfect or even just solidly good core ruleswt in edition sadly, and 8E doesn't even come close to that standard. That said, I dont miss anything about 7E.
Granted, it was a common complaint that Riptides were not Walkers due to being fluffed as them but being able to foot-bullet with them.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Blacksails wrote: Don't get me wrong, I agree completely. The new edition is a perfect example of one step forwards but one step (maybe a step and a half) backwards. As an example, I love that vehicles use the same rules as MCs, but hate how vehicles are super over simplified. There's a lot in this edition that just leaves you scratching your head. I'm simply commenting on some people with a skewed vision of 7th being a perfect core ruleset marred by bad codices, to which its pretty evident the core rules were a serious issue compounded by even worse codices.
The Internet is a giant distortion chamber. There are and were numerous issues with 7th, but there were also things that 8th "fixed" that didn't need fixing. 8th needed a FAQ to define squad coherency due to bad RAW. The egregious thing was that this came after the big batch of FAQs for 7th so GW *should* have learned which parts were and weren't broken.
Another factor distorting everything is the whole "no model no rule" policy. Granted, this issue came up at the tail end of 6th, but is being put in overdrive now. The fact 8th also has assorted renames, like Eldar->Aeldari or Dark Eldar->Drew Carey also makes GW look like Hasbro regarding IP (see, renaming Soundwave to Soundblast). The whole "index vs codex" item doesn't help, as well as the line that "kitbashing is scary for newcomers." Again, nothing to do with core rules but it also colors views. (My Chaos Lord is Codex-illegal for 8e due to using a Disc of Tzeentch. I had bought 3 Chariots pre-WoM hike for kitbashing)
It is pretty noncontroversial to say that 8e Cover is FUBAR. For me personally, what really kills it is the fact that for shooting, fast-rolling vs slow-rolling can affect your statistical efficiency. "My plasma gun does 2 wound to your Centurion. 1 bolter fires...and one bolter..." Same with Cover and slow-rolling. Same with "not FNP" versus multiwound weapons. By comparison, 7e did "batch by weapons" which was simpler. A middle ground could be: batch by weapons, each weapon class only targets one unit." So you could do "Bolters to infantry, missile launcher to tank" but not split Bolters vs 2 squads.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/11/01 22:34:48
Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.
ERJAK wrote: Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.
The Internet is a giant distortion chamber. There are and were numerous issues with 7th, but there were also things that 8th "fixed" that didn't need fixing. 8th needed a FAQ to define squad coherency due to bad RAW. The egregious thing was that this came after the big batch of FAQs for 7th so GW *should* have learned which parts were and weren't broken.
Another factor distorting everything is the whole "no model no rule" policy. Granted, this issue came up at the tail end of 6th, but is being put in overdrive now. The fact 8th also has assorted renames, like Eldar->Aeldari or Dark Eldar->Drew Carey also makes GW look like Hasbro regarding IP (see, renaming Soundwave to Soundblast). The whole "index vs codex" item doesn't help, as well as the line that "kitbashing is scary for newcomers." Again, nothing to do with core rules but it also colors views. (My Chaos Lord is Codex-illegal for 8e due to using a Disc of Tzeentch. I had bought 3 Chariots pre-WoM hike for kitbashing)
It is pretty noncontroversial to say that 8e Cover is FUBAR. For me personally, what really kills it is the fact that for shooting, fast-rolling vs slow-rolling can affect your statistical efficiency. "My plasma gun does 2 wound to your Centurion. 1 bolter fires...and one bolter..." Same with Cover and slow-rolling. Same with "not FNP" versus multiwound weapons. By comparison, 7e did "batch by weapons" which was simpler. A middle ground could be: batch by weapons, each weapon class only targets one unit." So you could do "Bolters to infantry, missile launcher to tank" but not split Bolters vs 2 squads.
I can't really disagree with any of this. I think 7th was the lowest point in 40k for my experience (I started in 5th), but 8th isn't much better. You raise valid points that I generally agree with.
Mordian Iron Guard - Major Overhaul in Progress
+Spaceship Gaming Enthusiast+
Live near Halifax, NS? Ask me about our group, the Ordo Haligonias!
8th editition's base rules are way worse with how cluncky some of the rules are. Flyers mechanics are laughably bad. The cover system is terrible. Rerolls and modifiers are about as unintuitive as possible.
What made 7th bad was not the edition itself, but the formations, the bad balancing, and the codexes. 7th edition rules were much better in my opinion, but the way they ended up being used in codexes nullified that. I think 7th edition with 8th edition codexes / indexes would be awesome.
I actually liked the core rules of 7th as well, just had problems with the redicilous amount of universal standard rules that often had several that did almost the same thing, but not quite so I would have to constantly check the BRB over and over again each turn. USR's were a good thing; standardizing them did stream line the game to an extent. They just let the USR's get out of control. Also hated that some people could sit out the rules for 2 whole editions with no updates... Overall, if you were to slash the USR list down, and update codices with playtested material, then I believe you'd have a pretty awesome game system. Can't wait for 8.5 edition =D
Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. -Kurt Vonnegut
Tokhuah wrote: One thing to consider when reading through a thread like this the missing perspective. There is an entire contingent of people who dislike 8th edition and have dropped 40K for other interests. They are not going to search out and post into a thread like this in the same numbers as those still engaged. This is an internet forum phenomenon that is particularly interesting during the death throes of a game. Similiar to this, in those situations posters fall into a kind of group think supported by the company that does not take into account the number of people who were dissatisfied and quit. It never fails that a majority of posters have no perspective on this and are therefor blind to the deficits of the system.
In my experience, the opposite is true. People who hate the direction a game is going are the most active and vociferous. Even after they quit, they will continue to post on forums and complain. They do so because they love the game and hate seeing what it has become.
Yeah, that "Reasonable people has quit, only fanboys remains" is just BS.
For every one that hast jus quit GW all together for 8th, theres other guy that just likes the game but doesn't bother to enter forums. Forums, by their own nature, are only a small, small fraction of the playerbase of a game.
Thank you both for providing your perspective as additional evidence that supports our theory. Your responses will be entered into the database being used for the analysis of forum poster behavior patterns.
Paradigm for a happy relationship with Games Workshop: Burn the books and take the models to a different game.
1.) Bad psychic phase execution including base rulebook powers and random selection.
2.) Way to many USRs 3.) Unit types determining how good units were (MC vs vehicle, FMC vs non FMC etc)
5.) Allies - though this is still an issue.
I think it could have been fixed by making a ton of changes, but 8th is another perfectly good way to approach fixing said edition. Probably better in that it invalidated all codices making easier to balance them going forward instead of worrying about past interactions making specific units too powerful.
First of all, I haven't played a single match of 8E, so give my opinion whatever weight you want to. My opinion is based on reading people's feedback, both positive and negative, on several forums, reading up on the index and codex releases myself, and my several years of experience with this game.
My experience with earlier editions, for comparison with how I feel about the current edition.
Spoiler:
I started during 5E with Blood Angels, right about after their codex release, back when they were probably at the height of their power so far. As a beginner I really liked the edition overall, but as I became more experienced, I started to see the flaws in it (wound allocation tricks for death stars, no pre-measuring, randomness of vehicle survival...), but it never really was enough to put me off enough to stop playing. I even went to a few tourneys, taking 2nd place once with a "Descent of the Angels" list, winning myself a Contemptor Dreadnought - funny thing is, I had the highest score from matches, losing 1st place to painting points, but 1st place reward would have been Shadow Spectres, so all in all I felt like the real winner still... All in all, 5E was pretty descent, barring the excess power creep towards the end.
I was excited about the new depth and options 6E brought to the game, but the imbalance of codex releases became very prevalent soon even within my small playing group. Regardless of this, we managed to enjoy the edition, since most of us didn't have access to the really broken stuff, and wanted to keep it casual, and out group's Tau player didn't really get that much games with us due to various reasons... I participated in fewer tourneys, preferring patrol tournaments due to quite extreme powercreep and crazy ally shenanigans, and losing out on codex update with Blood Angels... Overall, my excitement over the new mechanics and fixes to some of the issues in 5E kept me interested enough in the edition, even though the new Lords of War felt quite alarming for the game's future. Psychic phase and vehicle hull points weren't really all that great as they were implemented, among other things.
Arrival of 7E has my hopes up high, with its early codex releases being toned down from the crazy power creep of 6E, although "blanderizing" them in the process as the early codex releases gutted a lot of personality from their armies. Then came the Necrons with their decurion formation, throwing out my hopes for the edition. My enthusiasm plummeted and I played much less than before. I went to one patrol tournament, scoring 1st place and winning the new Blood Angels chaplain, but I mostly steered clear of larger scale battles. All of my armies, Blood Angels, Imperial Guard and Sisters of Battle, were gutted during the early releases of the edition, and never really got back up to speed with the later releases. That change of style in codex production mid-edition is probably my biggest disappointment in GW ever. Rules changes didn't really do all that much to fix things.
I started making plans for a rules edition of my own during 7E, but dropped it soon after the rumors started rolling out about 8E.
I was really excited about the coming of 8E when we started getting rumors of the changes to come, and the release of index army lists for all factions... ON RELEASE! This was tremendous news. Return of movement value, new AP system, concept of command points and strategems, idea of the new cover system and to hit modifiers, and the concept of mortal wounds were good news too for the game in my opinion, as was making vehicles' stats be in line with monsters.
Sadly the good news were not to last, as initiative stat was dumped, mortal wounds started popping up all over the place - at least for some armies, the disparity of Smite between the armies, vehicle facings and firing arcs were made irrelevant, "sigmarification" of statlines, no more templates, no more scatter, no more damage table but a steady degradation of stats - for some units, falling back from melee, solo characters that provide "auras" and can't be shot if they're not the closest, the new morale system...
8E has made many improvements to the game, fixing mistakes from earlier editions and bringing new great features to the game. The game has also been streamlined - but at what cost? To me it doesn't feel like the same game at all anymore with so many things cut out from the rules. I find it terribly sad that the winner of the match is now often decided in 2-3 turns, and wipe-outs within that time frame are more common than ever, making the scenario missions largely irrelevant. The simple mechanics have made the game faster, but the amount of rerolling that's in the game now slows it back down, especially because the game rules heavily favor horde armies - no templates, smite hurts elite troops the most, morale mitigation available for most horde armies.
I really like the additional reflections of fluff in the game rules, in the form of sub-faction specific special rules and strategems, but the faction rules seem to have started repeating themselves already... And to me it feels like the strategems are mostly serving to break the game even further.
If the codex releases stay the way they are now, I guess the game will eventually be fairly balanced. When all armies are OP, no one is OP.
I may try the new edition out at some point, but I don't believe I will be playing it all that much. And no way am I even considering going to tournaments.
I have dug out my notes for making up a new rules edition by myself, mixing features from the editions, for my playing group. We're doing playtest on the basics at the moment, and everyone is happy with the basic rules so far.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/11/03 16:06:49
I didn't play alot of 7th, so I can't really comment on what's been improved of in relation to that, but I did play a bunch of 3rd, 4th, 5th, and a little bit of 6th.
As I understand it, the main goal of 8th was to simplify the game, but with all these command points, stratagems and tactical objectives, I don't really think they succeeded. It takes more time to finish a 2k game now than in 5th.
As someone who uses a lot of tanks, the biggest changes to me was the removal of templates and armor values.
Templates gone:
The good - no more arguments about where a shot really scattered and how many models are covered
The (partially) bad - a battle cannon now feels more like some kind of machinegun? The end result VS a squad is the same though, and more predictable.
The ugly - with the number of shots it can put out, the generalist battle cannon is now better VS tanks than the anti tank specialist Vanquisher cannon, both on average and in the maximum potential of damage inflicted. Flame weapons are also now very good VS single models.
I would have liked to see templates kept in the game, maybe without the scatter mechanic so you instead just roll to either hit or miss, using the model's BS characteristic.
Armor Value replaced with T/W:
The very good - vehicles are now more in line with monsters in terms of survivability. With the (re)-introduction of Damage, weapons that were good at killing tanks can now inflict major damage on monsters too, rather than just causing a single wound.
The kinda bad - While damage tables were very all-or-nothing (and I appreciate that in 8th a single glancing hit won't prevent my tank from shooting the next turn), was rolling to penetrate really that much more complex than rolling to wound? Different armor facings made tanks feel more like tanks, and rewarded flanking around them.
The ugly - unifying these stats means that you can't have weapons that are really good at penetrating armor without also making them really good VS creatures, or vise versa. Not saying no weapon should be good against both (as mentioned above - I like that many weapons now are equally good against both types), but it gives GW fewer parameters to play with when adjusting for balance. You see this in other games too, where on the one hand the developers try to simplify things, but then they find it's hard to balance stuff without going too far in one direction, and then they resort to adding more gimmicks, resulting in something that's more complex than what they started out with.
I would have liked to see tanks have both armor value and wounds. So instead of a Leman Russ being T8/W12/Sv3+, it could be AV14/12/10, and have 12 wounds, losing one (or more, depending on damage) with each penetration. Actual armor values could be adjusted.
I'm fine with the damage table being gone.
Cover:
Why does it add to the targets armor save rather than detract from the shooters ballistic skill? Seems to me a -1 to hit would be the most logical thing to do. Going from 2nd to 3rd, they went from a -1 (or more) to hit, to a straight up cover save, as that was simpler and easier than modifying stats. Now we're back to modifying stats - but why +1 to save rather than -1 to hit? It would make more sense, and not be any more complicated.
Armor saves/armor piercing:
Best change ever.
Command points and stratagems:
I kinda like them, but they do add to complexity and the time it takes to play a game.
Kill points:
I realize that it's not new to 8th, but it's still new enough for me. I don't get it. Why is a 50pt imperial guard squad worth as much as a 300pt squad of terminators in terms of kill points? Just getting the unit's points cost as victory points made a lot more sense. You had to do a bit of simple math after each game, but it's not like everyone doesn't have a calculator on their phone nowadays.
Fewer wargear options:
I get that much of the stuff that's now gone was rarely used anyway, and people will always gravitate towards a few cookiecutter builds, but it was nice to have options.
Formations:
Were these in 7th too? They're new to me anyway. Part of me miss the old Standard FOC and the limits it imposed. I think making a single Battalion formation mandatory, with the option of adding other formations too, would be a huge improvement.
Over all, there are some changes I really like, and some I just don't get why they did.
On a holy crusade to save the Leman Russ Vanquisher
I wax and wane, but I am feeling a bit burnt out - although probably going to have fun collecting a Tyranid Army I have wanted for years but never bothered with.
8th's problem is that damage output is too high and as a result getting the first turn is too decisive.
Instead of certain armies (you know who) having comically good damage output in 7th, it now seems everyone has it. And the counters are these increasingly desperate "everyone in the army automatically has cover, er, and a blanket -1 to hit with options to get more with buffs, psykers etc.... for reasons."
Which serves to tone down the overpowered - but makes the average feel completely useless.
Games between armies of roughly the same "tier" are almost always decided by the end of the player who goes first's second turn. Its a bit different if you get two bad armies but that is a strange way to imply balance.
The player who goes first has a massive advantage since they either get a round of shooting off or get to move much closer to the opponent if they are an assault focused army (and in which case they are probably geared for some turn 1 charges if they have a codex).
Yes missions can sometimes add the illusion of the game being in the balance up to the end - but that is usually a rather unsatisfying "I have nuked your army from orbit but your 1 remaining unit might hold on to the objective and steal the game if we roll to end it this turn". It also a dice game - so sometimes weird things happen - but more and more games go this way.
Basically the first roll to decide who goes first (if you seize etc) is the most important by miles.
I have not started counting it - but gut feel suggests if you go first you have something like an 75-80% chance of winning (again, assuming your army is roughly comparable to your opponents - bad armies are bad). It may well be higher.
I think something needs to be done about that. Not sure what exactly but its a problem. Its not fun to deploy your army only to then take 40%~ of your army off the table because your opponent had the first turn. Its not fun to play for 30 minutes (plus setting up the table, deploying etc) and go "sure, dice could skew it back, but barring a miracle the next hour is just a formality. I've lost."
In the same way its not balanced to say give the player who goes first a big penalty, so the player who goes second just shoots/assaults them off the table. Basically there really needs to be something more to the game than tabling your opponent ASAP. Which I think can only happen if damage output is dramatically lower.
The defensive to-hit modifiers are a real bummer. Otherwise, I am ok with the new edition.
I've played since 5th and have seen my primary faction (orks) steadily fall in power level and tourney competitiveness since then. I play because I like the game. Although I would enjoy it more if that particular rule was gone.
In 7th edition, the formations were bad, but not as frustrating as 2++ re-rollable.
These 2 mechanics (2++ re-rollable and now defensive hit modifiers) have degraded the game from probability and tactics to 100% un-winable games. YMMV.
I'll still play your Ravenguard or Death Guard or Eldar with my Orks, but don't expect for me to think you are some kind of strategic genius because you win though.
What's even worse, is how 8th also now has 2++ saves and hit mods, sometimes on the same unit. Guard Crusaders are a notable example of this.
A fairly common tournament ruling was "Saves which are rerolled are a 4+ at best on the reroll," but IMO a simpler houserule is "Invulnerable Saves that are not explicitly 2+ Invulnerable cannot be improved to better than a 3++."
As for formations, call me cynical, but the 8e detachments, unit rules, and stratagems are almost analogous in terms of locking players into specific units. The 8e Tyranid codex is particularly unsubtle about wanting players to buy dem Zoanthroapes, from giving larger units more Mortal Wounds, to a Stratagem that requires 3x3 Zoanthroape units. There has not been anything full-on Gladius-tier yet, but it's only a matter of time.
That being said, some Formation options were legitimately neat and not actually all that broken. Stuff like the Pinion Demi-Company, Helforged Warpack, etc. Rather than lazily transferring some Formations over to stratagems, a more calculated cleanup of worthwhile bonuses into unit upgrades would have been more ideal. You know, spending points to let a Warpsmith restore Daemonforge to nearby Fiends, spending points for a Scout team to have an enhanced Auspex relay, etc. The fact GW has doubled down on reducing loadout options because "kitbashing is scary," is particularly offensive.
Mordian Iron Guard - Major Overhaul in Progress 
My opinion is based on reading people's feedback, both positive and negative, on several forums, reading up on the index and codex releases myself, and my several years of experience with this game.
All in all, 5E was pretty descent, barring the excess power creep towards the end.
Overall, my excitement over the new mechanics and fixes to some of the issues in 5E kept me interested enough in the edition, even though the new Lords of War felt quite alarming for the game's future. Psychic phase and vehicle hull points weren't really all that great as they were implemented, among other things.
This was tremendous news. Return of movement value, new 
(10,000+) : 9V / 0T / 0L
(2,000+) : 1V / 0T / 0L
(4,000+) : 6V / 2T / 5L 