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.

TeAXIIIT13 wrote:
YPu should post this in the 30k discussion page as well, otherwise the results could be skewed as most people on the 40k page will only want to talk about 8th edition

Nah I put it here on purpose, based on this and the other forums pages it's confirming that it's 40k players who have an issue with 40k 7th and its issues, not actually 30k 7th, also you are correct in that primarily 30k forums are saying "good" to 7th and primarily 40k forums are saying "bad" to 7th.

People it seems can't differentiate between Horus Herrsy 7th and 40k 7th, I'll keep gathering info and see what happens.

 Formosa wrote:

TeAXIIIT13 wrote:
YPu should post this in the 30k discussion page as well, otherwise the results could be skewed as most people on the 40k page will only want to talk about 8th edition

Nah I put it here on purpose, based on this and the other forums pages it's confirming that it's 40k players who have an issue with 40k 7th and its issues, not actually 30k 7th, also you are correct in that primarily 30k forums are saying "good" to 7th and primarily 40k forums are saying "bad" to 7th.

People it seems can't differentiate between Horus Herrsy 7th and 40k 7th, I'll keep gathering info and see what happens.

Yeah, one of the things I've noticed is the people clamoring for 8th edition rules in HH don't always play HH.

HH feels so much more tactical then 8th edition. I appreciate the differences and would like to see it remain the same. Not that I am any great fan of 7th edition rules, it's really just the idea that it's a separate game.

To be fair, I stopped playing 40k 7th not because of the main rules, but because of GWs inability to balance books even slightly.
So I went over to 30k and loved it instead (and still do)


I don't mind the new 40k rules and I like the simplicity, but I feel throwing them at 30k could ruin the entire game.
It lacks the depth in list building which 30k relies on.

I feel an 8th edition 30k could just generate similar lists that have little bearing on actual chapter.

I'm trying not to put my opinion in this thread as I'm just trying to see what everyone else thinks.

But I keep seeing here and other places people use "yeah but 30k is unbalanced too" using essentially book 7 as an example and thudd guns, now here comes the opinion, how often do we actually see these WAAC lists in 30k? I used to see crazy lists in 40k as a matter of course, but 30k seems (to me) to attract almost more of a historical mindset, people play things that look good even if they suck on the tabletop and i rarely saw "this isn't efficient" kind of discussions.

Is this the same as others experiences ?

7th edition had significantly better rules that 8th edition without a doubt. But powercreep is a thing, and always will be. Port to 8th when it gets out of hand a sort of reset on the power levels might do the trick, but honestly, it shouldn't get that far anyways.

 Formosa wrote:
I'm trying not to put my opinion in this thread as I'm just trying to see what everyone else thinks.

But I keep seeing here and other places people use "yeah but 30k is unbalanced too" using essentially book 7 as an example and thudd guns, now here comes the opinion, how often do we actually see these WAAC lists in 30k? I used to see crazy lists in 40k as a matter of course, but 30k seems (to me) to attract almost more of a historical mindset, people play things that look good even if they suck on the tabletop and i rarely saw "this isn't efficient" kind of discussions.

Is this the same as others experiences ?

Not Thudd guns, but Quad Mortars. Those things need... players that use them do not have friends.

There are a lot of issues with Book 7:Inferno. The Thousand Sons can be built in a particular way that is just not fun to play with or against. This has been mitigated in my mind with the recent release of the new Red Rule Book that has taken Invisibility out of the game. Magnus can be made OK, or tooled up OP unkillable, most borken model in the game. It all depends on the player.

Have i seen a lot of these lists? Not really. There is enough balance in 30K between the Legions that a WAAC list can be overcome easily enough by other WAAC lists and the right units. There are options in every army list that will just delete entire units of models. The only list that pisses me off is seeing more than two Quad Mortars with Phospex Shells. That's just being a

The only WAAC lists I've seen always include multiple units of Quad Mortars and artillery. And those players are usually ostracized or not welcome.

My main draw to 30k is that you can take almost any unit in the entire game and it won't hinder your army.

You don't have to run a legion a specific way to make it useable to keep up with other armies.


Yes, quad mortars are insanely strong.
Phosphex being knocked down to AP3 helps alot though straight away.


The issue is, good units will stand out in 30k more so as everything is fairly balanced.
So the second you do get a unit slightly better than normal, it's noticeable.

Also keep in mind that 30k shooting is far more devastating.
Low AP weapons everywhere and in high numbers.




I'll be honest.
I think alot of balance in 30k comes from the sheer lack of psychic powers more than anything.
Until TS got rules, you rarely ever saw them.
There was no spamming invis and rubbish like that.

And TS are strong.
Until they run into a talons list in tournaments.
In which case they pretty much get shut down and face an uphill struggle.
So you can pick a psychic dominant army, but you do risk a hard counter army.

During 7th I really liked heresy. Forge world (until book V or so) Did a really good job of making each legion feel unique, but not over powered. 7th near the end was a contest of who's cheese was mightier. Was it the Gate of infinity buffed Catifracti captain on a bike, who had a 2+ rerollable invulnerably save and 2+ FNP who also granted an entire squad of Grav cannon devastators S&P? Perhaps the pair of wraithknights who got to fire 5 times a turn backed up by a riptide wing? It was a MESS.

8th is better. Just better. Simpler, faster and better balanced. It has it's flaws, but the omission of alot of what people have been calling "tactical complexity" are just things WAAC players used to cheat. (facings, scatter dice, who was REALLY under the blast weapon, stomps ect) Seriously it's not like ether of thees games are meant to be complex. Go back to "The campaign for north Africa" if you need more complexity. I'm just here to have fun.

After 4 years I've abandoned heresy and gone back to 40k. It's just so much better.
All hail the open war cards.

Lots of very interesting points in here people, keep em coming

Voted for 8th, just prefer the rules really.

I can see the point behind completing HH under 7th though so there is a "full set" under those rules, or a slightly modified set of those rules for those who want them - before providing updated lists for the lot to cover what will likely be 9th, or 40th edition of 40k by then.

No one locally plays HH, so wanting to be able to play it under 8th so I can actually find the occasional opponent who is prepared to face some terribly glossy metallic red marines

I mean it seems silly NOT to point out that, unofficially at least, you can play Heresy in 8ed.

We’ve been working on a version of 8ed Heresy since the release of 8ed. It’s had a bit of publicity and a lot of people joining in to tweak, balance and suggest changes.

There’s a general Dakka thread at https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/731421.page but the main forums for the project are on Heresy 30k at http://heresy30k.invisionzone.com/topic/10639-the-8ed-heresy-project-directory/

 ArbitorIan wrote:
I mean it seems silly NOT to point out that, unofficially at least, you can play Heresy in 8ed.

We’ve been working on a version of 8ed Heresy since the release of 8ed. It’s had a bit of publicity and a lot of people joining in to tweak, balance and suggest changes.

There’s a general Dakka thread at https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/731421.page but the main forums for the project are on Heresy 30k at http://heresy30k.invisionzone.com/topic/10639-the-8ed-heresy-project-directory/

This is the list I'm using to build my Thousand Sons, and I seriously thank you for the effort thats gone into a very nice unofficial expansion.

Its perhaps the best way to run it, and the fact its still alive indicates GW are not about to break out the flame thrower just yet.

 Jackal wrote:
My main draw to 30k is that you can take almost any unit in the entire game and it won't hinder your army.

You don't have to run a legion a specific way to make it useable to keep up with other armies.


Yes, quad mortars are insanely strong.
Phosphex being knocked down to AP3 helps alot though straight away.


The issue is, good units will stand out in 30k more so as everything is fairly balanced.
So the second you do get a unit slightly better than normal, it's noticeable.

Also keep in mind that 30k shooting is far more devastating.
Low AP weapons everywhere and in high numbers.




I'll be honest.
I think alot of balance in 30k comes from the sheer lack of psychic powers more than anything.
Until TS got rules, you rarely ever saw them.
There was no spamming invis and rubbish like that.

And TS are strong.
Until they run into a talons list in tournaments.
In which case they pretty much get shut down and face an uphill struggle.
So you can pick a psychic dominant army, but you do risk a hard counter army.

Biggest problem I'm seeing with this post and plenty of others in here is people conflating core rules for army rules and vice versa. 30K gets it's list bilding "depth", and game depth, almost entirely via army rules specifically the Rites of War. It's still 7th ed 40K though, but with a slightly different detachment, no formations, and the RoW mechanic, an extremely small change but one that had a profound effect. Well, that and the fact that it's almost exclusively Marine on Marine action. I see no reason why, should the HH switch to 8th ed rules, FW wont limit you to just a Battalion detachment and adapt the current RoW mechanic to the new system. It'll achieve the same thing, only with a better basic game.

Having played my Raven Guard in 7th, HH, and 8th, my views about it are conflicted.

the change from 7th to 8th was OVERALL a big improvement, especially to play speed. However some things did not translate well or were just flat out broken with the change, that would have a major and probably inordinate impact on playing 8e horus heresy either standalone or vs 40k factions.

Ultimately, the system should eventually port to 8th, because it will make it easier for players that have joined since the launch of 8th to get into, understand with less confusion, and enjoy even if there are a limited number of other heresy players in the area. Some may dislike '30k vs 40k', but in some gaming groups that compatibility was important for making a collection of more specialist stuff viable. I would like to see a complete set of rules for 7th Ed HH before the changeover, not just because it will offer those players who like the current ruleset the choice to keep using it, but because it would also allow the FW writers to consider all the legions and their unique natures when transferring the rules.

so my pov as someone who plays a bodies-heavy Raven Guard force on the biggest teething issues of 8th that need to be sorted before HH can be ported without invalidating major playstyles:

Deepstrike mechanics in 8th have a number of fundamental problems, especially the ease of which entire areas can be denied.

Flame template weapons have been poorly translated, and should be something akin to "d3 hits, +d3 per 5 models, max 4d3" or similar. the current flat d6 hits makes some of the weapon class inordinately strong vs single targets, and crap at the actual intended job of clearing large groups.

Blast template weapons have a similar issue, being far more effective against large targets than in 7th.

Many weapons would need to be redesigned entirely in order to still function in the niche they are supposed to inhabit

Vehicle embark/disembark restrictions also change the way several vehicles and army styles work considerably, and may require new wording to several RoW

 Crimson wrote:
In the future two separate systems will be super confusing to new players.

8e has its flaws, but it has jettisoned a lot of unnecessary baggage that has weighed down the game for ages and overall is the best version of 40K that has ever existed.

What ? These are two different games, how are two different games having different rules confusing ? Are you confused because Deathwatch Overkill and Necromunda have different rules ?
I really feel that the problem are all the non-30k players, who just don't see that these are two different games and want to use their mini in both, like 30k was just a 40k side game, like kill team was, for exemple.

 godardc wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
In the future two separate systems will be super confusing to new players.

8e has its flaws, but it has jettisoned a lot of unnecessary baggage that has weighed down the game for ages and overall is the best version of 40K that has ever existed.

What ? These are two different games, how are two different games having different rules confusing ? Are you confused because Deathwatch Overkill and Necromunda have different rules ?
I really feel that the problem are all the non-30k players, who just don't see that these are two different games and want to use their mini in both, like 30k was just a 40k side game, like kill team was, for exemple.

My area's 30k players mainly used 40k models when I was there. It just helps when 30k models cost the amount they do and Heresy is usually played in larger games than 40k. 40k models let you play as you build the 30k units.

 godardc wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
In the future two separate systems will be super confusing to new players.

8e has its flaws, but it has jettisoned a lot of unnecessary baggage that has weighed down the game for ages and overall is the best version of 40K that has ever existed.

What ? These are two different games, how are two different games having different rules confusing ? Are you confused because Deathwatch Overkill and Necromunda have different rules ?
I really feel that the problem are all the non-30k players, who just don't see that these are two different games and want to use their mini in both, like 30k was just a 40k side game, like kill team was, for exemple.

They're not really different games though, they're just different army sets and one hasn't transitioned to the newest ruleset yet. HH stuff was always built on the core 40k rules and intended to have lots (though obviously not total) crossover with all the other 40k stuff, same game but two different points in time. 40k to HH is not the same thing as 40k to Necromunda or 40k to Deathwatch, which have entirely different mechanics, scales of play, core rules, intended board setups, etc

 Imateria wrote:

Biggest problem I'm seeing with this post and plenty of others in here is people conflating core rules for army rules and vice versa. 30K gets it's list bilding "depth", and game depth, almost entirely via army rules specifically the Rites of War. It's still 7th ed 40K though, but with a slightly different detachment, no formations, and the RoW mechanic, an extremely small change but one that had a profound effect. Well, that and the fact that it's almost exclusively Marine on Marine action. I see no reason why, should the HH switch to 8th ed rules, FW wont limit you to just a Battalion detachment and adapt the current RoW mechanic to the new system. It'll achieve the same thing, only with a better basic game.

Agree with all of this. I was honestly really disappointed that RoW were not a part of 8th with more restrictive detachments.

I like both systems, and am content to have the seperate (though i would love some rules to use my custodes vehicles in 40k).

On a side note, this is a terrible poll, where none of the answers actually directly answer the question, and many of them can be true simultaneously.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 godardc wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
In the future two separate systems will be super confusing to new players.

8e has its flaws, but it has jettisoned a lot of unnecessary baggage that has weighed down the game for ages and overall is the best version of 40K that has ever existed.

What ? These are two different games, how are two different games having different rules confusing ? Are you confused because Deathwatch Overkill and Necromunda have different rules ?
I really feel that the problem are all the non-30k players, who just don't see that these are two different games and want to use their mini in both, like 30k was just a 40k side game, like kill team was, for exemple.

They're not really different games though, they're just different army sets and one hasn't transitioned to the newest ruleset yet. HH stuff was always built on the core 40k rules and intended to have lots (though obviously not total) crossover with all the other 40k stuff, same game but two different points in time. 40k to HH is not the same thing as 40k to Necromunda or 40k to Deathwatch, which have entirely different mechanics, scales of play, core rules, intended board setups, etc

Apologies but the designers notes said that you "could" play crossover games, but it was never designed to and never intended to, they were two different games that shared a rulebook, that it.

I think a lot of people basically treated them as two different settings for one game.

Furthermore the systems being compatible opens up a lot of gaming opportunities, as people with strictly-non-30K armies can participate. Even if there are no rules for Orks or Eldar (I think) in 30K, if the system is compatible you can still play games of your Legion Marines fighting Orks etc.

 Crimson wrote:
I think a lot of people basically treated them as two different settings for one game.

Furthermore the systems being compatible opens up a lot of gaming opportunities, as people with strictly-non-30K armies can participate. Even if there are no rules for Orks or Eldar (I think) in 30K, if the system is compatible you can still play games of your Legion Marines fighting Orks etc.

See this falls down when you consider that these books still exist, nothing is stopping anyone from picking up 7th orks and playing with the legion armies, in fact it would also encourage you to "fix" the ork book for Heresy play, even create some rites for them, it really does come down to which system people prefer, some 8th, some 7th.

 Formosa wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 godardc wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
In the future two separate systems will be super confusing to new players.

8e has its flaws, but it has jettisoned a lot of unnecessary baggage that has weighed down the game for ages and overall is the best version of 40K that has ever existed.

What ? These are two different games, how are two different games having different rules confusing ? Are you confused because Deathwatch Overkill and Necromunda have different rules ?
I really feel that the problem are all the non-30k players, who just don't see that these are two different games and want to use their mini in both, like 30k was just a 40k side game, like kill team was, for exemple.

They're not really different games though, they're just different army sets and one hasn't transitioned to the newest ruleset yet. HH stuff was always built on the core 40k rules and intended to have lots (though obviously not total) crossover with all the other 40k stuff, same game but two different points in time. 40k to HH is not the same thing as 40k to Necromunda or 40k to Deathwatch, which have entirely different mechanics, scales of play, core rules, intended board setups, etc

Apologies but the designers notes said that you "could" play crossover games, but it was never designed to and never intended to, they were two different games that shared a rulebook, that it.

Suret, I'm not saying they intended Solar Auxilia to play against Tau or the like, but they always shared the same core ruleset (we're just looking at a delayed move to the new edition in this case) and game mechanics, and have lots of plastic kits (their best selling core space marine kits primarily) be usable for both settings. All you're really changing is the set of armies you're playing with and some force construction rules, but ultimately you're still playing the same game. If you played 40k, all you needed to do to play HH was learn the new army rules (most of which are based around an expanded concept of the most popular 40k faction anyway), not how to play a new game.

 Formosa wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 godardc wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
In the future two separate systems will be super confusing to new players.

8e has its flaws, but it has jettisoned a lot of unnecessary baggage that has weighed down the game for ages and overall is the best version of 40K that has ever existed.

What ? These are two different games, how are two different games having different rules confusing ? Are you confused because Deathwatch Overkill and Necromunda have different rules ?
I really feel that the problem are all the non-30k players, who just don't see that these are two different games and want to use their mini in both, like 30k was just a 40k side game, like kill team was, for exemple.

They're not really different games though, they're just different army sets and one hasn't transitioned to the newest ruleset yet. HH stuff was always built on the core 40k rules and intended to have lots (though obviously not total) crossover with all the other 40k stuff, same game but two different points in time. 40k to HH is not the same thing as 40k to Necromunda or 40k to Deathwatch, which have entirely different mechanics, scales of play, core rules, intended board setups, etc

Apologies but the designers notes said that you "could" play crossover games, but it was never designed to and never intended to, they were two different games that shared a rulebook, that it.

Sorry but no. That the Horus Heresy is an expansion/supplement (can't remember which but one of those two is the exact word used to describe HH in the red books) that was never intended to be balanced against the core army books of 6th/7th in no way makes it a different game, they use all the same rules with only a few minor changes as mentioned in my previous post. Even the new Age of Darkness book wont change things much. These attempts to argue that they are completely different games are getting laughable, I mean until 6 months ago they used the exact same rule book which guarantees the argument is complete nonsense.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lance845 wrote:

 Imateria wrote:

Biggest problem I'm seeing with this post and plenty of others in here is people conflating core rules for army rules and vice versa. 30K gets it's list bilding "depth", and game depth, almost entirely via army rules specifically the Rites of War. It's still 7th ed 40K though, but with a slightly different detachment, no formations, and the RoW mechanic, an extremely small change but one that had a profound effect. Well, that and the fact that it's almost exclusively Marine on Marine action. I see no reason why, should the HH switch to 8th ed rules, FW wont limit you to just a Battalion detachment and adapt the current RoW mechanic to the new system. It'll achieve the same thing, only with a better basic game.

Agree with all of this. I was honestly really disappointed that RoW were not a part of 8th with more restrictive detachments.

Yeah, Rites of War is a much better mechanic than "Chapter Tactics for everyone", I think it would have worked really nicely for 8th in general.

I voted for 8th mostly because I'd like a reset not just in the HH but in the player base. Almost ever HH player I met I'd consider snooty if I'm being polite and a worse word if I'm not. The game is really interesting to me as I love the lore but the existing player based turned me away.

 Imateria wrote:

 Formosa wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 godardc wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
In the future two separate systems will be super confusing to new players.

8e has its flaws, but it has jettisoned a lot of unnecessary baggage that has weighed down the game for ages and overall is the best version of 40K that has ever existed.

What ? These are two different games, how are two different games having different rules confusing ? Are you confused because Deathwatch Overkill and Necromunda have different rules ?
I really feel that the problem are all the non-30k players, who just don't see that these are two different games and want to use their mini in both, like 30k was just a 40k side game, like kill team was, for exemple.

They're not really different games though, they're just different army sets and one hasn't transitioned to the newest ruleset yet. HH stuff was always built on the core 40k rules and intended to have lots (though obviously not total) crossover with all the other 40k stuff, same game but two different points in time. 40k to HH is not the same thing as 40k to Necromunda or 40k to Deathwatch, which have entirely different mechanics, scales of play, core rules, intended board setups, etc

Apologies but the designers notes said that you "could" play crossover games, but it was never designed to and never intended to, they were two different games that shared a rulebook, that it.

Sorry but no. That the Horus Heresy is an expansion/supplement (can't remember which but one of those two is the exact word used to describe HH in the red books) that was never intended to be balanced against the core army books of 6th/7th in no way makes it a different game, they use all the same rules with only a few minor changes as mentioned in my previous post. Even the new Age of Darkness book wont change things much. These attempts to argue that they are completely different games are getting laughable, I mean until 6 months ago they used the exact same rule book which guarantees the argument is complete nonsense.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lance845 wrote:

 Imateria wrote:

Biggest problem I'm seeing with this post and plenty of others in here is people conflating core rules for army rules and vice versa. 30K gets it's list bilding "depth", and game depth, almost entirely via army rules specifically the Rites of War. It's still 7th ed 40K though, but with a slightly different detachment, no formations, and the RoW mechanic, an extremely small change but one that had a profound effect. Well, that and the fact that it's almost exclusively Marine on Marine action. I see no reason why, should the HH switch to 8th ed rules, FW wont limit you to just a Battalion detachment and adapt the current RoW mechanic to the new system. It'll achieve the same thing, only with a better basic game.

Agree with all of this. I was honestly really disappointed that RoW were not a part of 8th with more restrictive detachments.

Yeah, Rites of War is a much better mechanic than "Chapter Tactics for everyone", I think it would have worked really nicely for 8th in general.

It's a different game that used a common rule set, a rule set that was quite heavily modified when you take into account different allies charts, army comp, lord of war restrictions, weapons rules, unit rules, missions etc.

If we go by your logic then Mordheim is the same game as fantasy 8th, as you know, they share a lot of rules, having different army comp etc. Doesn't matter, logical absurdity I know but so is claiming that HH and 40k were the same game, now it's been officially split up I can understand why some don't like it, but since they were never designed to play together in the first place, I don't really consider that a reason to want it to move to 8th, in the same way I don't want necromunda to be in my 40k games, similar game, not the same game.

7th works great for Horus Heresy, and I want it to stay that way. I barely play 40k right now, almost only Horus Heresy, and mostly because I prefer 7th edition.

Look, I get that 7th was an ungodly mess for 40k, but I don't see the same issues in Horus Heresy. The game is inherently more balanced because of the factions and armies you play. I would say that the main culprit of 40k 7th edition madness were the formations and the overflow of factions and armies to play. Horus Heresy has none of these problems, and the game works great.

Also, I would miss my precious blast templates too much. Feels way too good centering that lovely Medusa pie plate over some unfortunate marines..

Ultimately the point is that swapping army lists and force composition rules does not a whole new game make. HH is a different flavor of 40k, but it's still 40k. It's not like going from 40k to Necromunda or Gorkamorka or BFG or the like. They just haven't updated HH to use 8E rules yet, but that's really not so much a matter of HH being its own game as FW not being on the ball for the release of 8E (which may or may not be their fault).

So over the last day or so the results seem to support that it's primarily 40k players on 40k forums that want the change, I'm seeing the opposite on primarily 30k forums, I'm also speaking to several other people who have done polls on the same subject to merge our results and get a broader picture.

Interestingly I'm also seeing a lot of 30k players ask for 7th to be finished up with every legion and unique unit, so if it moves to 8th it can move as a whole, which is a sentiment I haven't seen even once on dakka, I may update the poll with this option.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

secretForge wrote:
I like both systems, and am content to have the seperate (though i would love some rules to use my custodes vehicles in 40k).

On a side note, this is a terrible poll, where none of the answers actually directly answer the question, and many of them can be true simultaneously.

Come to me with solutions, not with problems, if you have an issue with the poll please suggest how to resolve it, "it's terrible" doesn't help anyone, I'm happy to update it with better questions as I plan on a proper poll for the whole community.

 Formosa wrote:
So over the last day or so the results seem to support that it's primarily 40k players on 40k forums that want the change, I'm seeing the opposite on primarily 30k forums, I'm also speaking to several other people who have done polls on the same subject to merge our results and get a broader picture.

Interestingly I'm also seeing a lot of 30k players ask for 7th to be finished up with every legion and unique unit, so if it moves to 8th it can move as a whole, which is a sentiment I haven't seen even once on dakka, I may update the poll with this option.

That shouldn't be a problem, it makes sense that it should be finished up and then updated. If not I can see that being a problem and messing it up trying to port some things into 8th rather than just doing it when it has been completed.

I will wait either way and just continue to build up my 30k Salamanders and use them for 40k8th.