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.

 MagicJuggler wrote:

 BoomWolf wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 fraser1191 wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
...Wait, you're complaining that GW has figured out that they don't always write things perfectly the first time and are willing to go back and correct glaring errors?

No, I am complaining they didn't bother to write it correctly the first time. In no other game would TWENTY SIX errata documents be needed to play.

Okay I'm sorry but, "write it correct the first time"? What exactly does this entail?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Frankly the fact that these codexes aren't out and we have to deal with whats there for years is enough of a reason to not complain

Do it perfect or don't do it at all from what I can see so far.

Yup, a standard that no product, ever, in the history of mankind, has ever managed to uphold.
Rather silly, isn't it?




Its like these people never played video games. bug, exploits, shenanigans and OPness can be found YEARS after release.
Expecting a perfectly-tested bug-free supurbly-banalced game is absurd, especially one producing an expansion about once a month.

You know why no amount of testing will ever make a flawless game?
Because even if you got a hundred testers who does nothing else but test for a full year-the playerbase will log more data in an day after release.

It's a difference of degrees. As a lazy example, compare Breath of the Wild to any Bethesda product and any bugs in the former are considerably eclipsed by the latter.

Arguably, the relative lack of bugs in Breath of the Wild is due to having a more unified set of moving parts, rather than a lot of discrete one-off bits.

Well i think ill chime in and say Nintendo has much higher standards than Bethesda. Not to say i didn't love fallout 3 at release but man it had some bugs, same concept here

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 Galas wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
Just going through the dark angels codex you can clearly see the issues of the past cropping up, is there any reason I need 6/7 separate rules that allow me to either negate morale or outright ignore it?

No, of course not. GW should simply and completely do away with morale as a game concept.

I actually agree with this. With how 40k's fluff is written, morale doesn't make any kind of sense. 90% of the factions have a fluff in-built reason to ignore morale. This is not Fantasy where even Elfs and Dwarfs and Chaos Warriors could run with enough stress.

Tbh I hate the current moral rule I wish it was just leadership like in 7th, you fail your squad falls back, not loose more models. It really punishes large units. Like my rubic is 20 man squads gets dicked from that bad.

I've always thought morale should be like this too, not a fan of the "lose that many models over dice roll"

I would have liked to have seen if you fail your morale test (keep the same mechanic, roll a D6, add the number slain and compare to LD) then they fall back D6(or 2D6) inches towards your deployment zone, they automatically regroup next turn. If they are locked in assault when they fail their morale test and fall back, they take 1 mortal wound (or maybe even D3 mortal wounds)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DarkStarSabre wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 DarkStarSabre wrote:
-30 foot strawman-

That's a big strawman you made there. Make sure it doesn't fall over!

Never change BCB. Never change. Without you the salt levels in the ocean would drop to such an extent it would destroy the coral reefs.

If he did though, I wouldn't have any humorous reading during my lunch break at work. Keep it up BCB!

RULE #1 IS A REAL THING HERE - AND NEEDS TO BE FOLLOWED AT ALL TIMES.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

Daedalus81 wrote:

 deviantduck wrote:
Why wouldn't you just do IG Detachment, IG Detachment, Imperial Soup Detachment and not penalize yourself on strategems or relics? You could run an entire army of IG with 1 elite custodes unit.

You'll lose doctrines, no? Not that it matters, I guess.

Nope. So long as you have an entirely Guard detachment you've still got regimental doctrines, stratagems, and (as long as your Warlord is Guard) relics.

I think with some adjustment you could get some good soup out of it. Call it the Slabstar or so.

They've only had thirty years to get this right

*faceplams*

 Dysartes wrote:


What is happiness?

BaconCatBug wrote:
To crush your Rules-As-Interpreted types, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of their common sense!

zerosignal wrote:
They've only had thirty years to get this right

*faceplams*

If you could see the face I'm making right now...if only....

I don't think age is something you can use as a factor here. I mean, the US Government's had over 200 years to get things right and still managed to shut itself down earlier this year.

Especially when you consider that 8th is a completely different animal from Rogue Trader.

In fact, the most 'consistent' rule set we've had for 40k was probably from 3rd edition til 7th - but that ended up with a bloated corpse that was looking at us and saying 'Ed.....ward.....' and we just had to put it down.

Plenty of arguments exist in this thread - sheer number of factions, their interactions and the general size of the ruleset, especially compared with others. Now if 8th edition was 30 years old you'd have a point there...but it's not even a year old yet and we've already seen more tweaks and adjustments to it than any other ruleset GW has produced.

That is NOT a bad thing.

8th is 30 years old though, it has the same underlying issues and lack of clear design and scale philosophy, they changed WS and BS and re jiggered a few things, but it's the same game underneath a few consmetic changes.

As 8th goes on they really need to nail down what kind of game it is, if that means splitting it up again into apocalypse, skirmish and standard, personally I like how 3rd did the city fight book, it was a clear break from a lot of 3rds rules and felt like a separate game at times, it made you play very differently, as opposed to cities of death which was just a normal game in a city.

Yes it would cost me more money but if I had
500-1250 skirmish rules
1250-2000 battle rules
2000+apocalypse rules
Each with its own coherent but distinct rules (kind of like how 30k is now) I would be happier

Right now we have 40k trying to be all of these very different game types and not really succeeding at any of them.

Just my 2pence

 Formosa wrote:
8th is 30 years old though, it has the same underlying issues and lack of clear design and scale philosophy, they changed WS and BS and re jiggered a few things, but it's the same game underneath a few consmetic changes.

As 8th goes on they really need to nail down what kind of game it is, if that means splitting it up again into apocalypse, skirmish and standard, personally I like how 3rd did the city fight book, it was a clear break from a lot of 3rds rules and felt like a separate game at times, it made you play very differently, as opposed to cities of death which was just a normal game in a city.

Yes it would cost me more money but if I had
500-1250 skirmish rules
1250-2000 battle rules
2000+apocalypse rules
Each with its own coherent but distinct rules (kind of like how 30k is now) I would be happier

Right now we have 40k trying to be all of these very different game types and not really succeeding at any of them.

Just my 2pence

This is absolutely right. 40k is trying to be every type of game, and as a result failing at any of them. There's a reason games often do not allow for doing skirmish AND company AND brigade level rules at the same time, because they want different things. A skirmish game cares about individual models equipment. A brigade/regiment level game (as well as often being much smaller scale, think Epic size) doesn't care about the model; it doesn't matter if your squad has a plasma gun and a lascannon or a flamer and a heavy bolter, just that it has a special weapon. 40k is still, size-wise, a company/battalion level game (i.e. mainly elements from one force, not many thrown together) that is trying harder and harder to be a brigade level 28mm game, and failing spectacularly as a result.

Bolt Action/Gates of Antares has the 40k size done correct, but GW knows that will not sell the huge models they want, so they try to make the game scalable to larger sizes when larger size games want more abstracted rules.

I actually think it's still a company scale game.

It's only brigade scale for ultra-cheap armies like the Imperial Guard.

This is similar to Flames of War, which was also company scale, but Battalion scale for the Soviets (who were ultra-cheap).

My Question does GW update the digital Codex's and 40K Rules?

40k is a 28mm Company-level game fought at reinforced platoon level as if it were a 15mm Company-level game.

Or...something like that.

I feel like it's a 28mm game obviously intended to be fought at the scale of the music video to Michael Jackson's "Bad".

More or less anyway.

 Dysartes wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
Just going through the dark angels codex you can clearly see the issues of the past cropping up, is there any reason I need 6/7 separate rules that allow me to either negate morale or outright ignore it?

No, of course not. GW should simply and completely do away with morale as a game concept.

Any particular reason, John? Morale issues are a thing in combat, after all.

Admittedly, they're a tricky thing to balance, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't try.

In 40k, morale exists only to punish various non-SM/CSM armies, such as IG & Orks. As implemented, it's an un-fun mechanic. As a result, players either don't play those armies, or they spend a lot of effort to work around morale. In what little competitive play exists, morale doesn't even exist. If it's not fun, and it's not balanced, as a designer, I suggest to do away with it entirely.

Alternatelly, remove ATKSNF and Fearless entirely and force SMs to test morale exactly like IG, and CSM to test morale exactly like Orks. Then it would be fair.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 daedalus wrote:
I feel like it's a 28mm game obviously intended to be fought at the scale of the music video to Michael Jackson's "Bad".

Nope.

 DarkStarSabre wrote:

I don't think age is something you can use as a factor here. I mean, the US Government's had over 200 years to get things right and still managed to shut itself down earlier this year.

Ha. Actually, if you knew a thing or two about the BS that American politics is, government shutdown is actually a strategy that's been being utilized to thwart BS policies from being passed and enacted. Many times policy writers would present a very controversal policies right before the recess, in hopes to make the congress pass the bill in short notice, without putting the necessary amount of considerations for it.

Shutdown happens when proactive congressmen tell the others "eff you. over my dead body."

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

That comic is glorious.

Where is the world is that comic page from?

 Silentz wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:
What is happiness?

BaconCatBug wrote:To crush your Rules-As-Interpreted types, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of their common sense!

I approve this message.

 BrotherTri wrote:
My Question does GW update the digital Codex's and 40K Rules?

As far as I know, only the "enhanced" editions for ipad are. If you bought the epub you're SOL, and that's if you can even read it. I've complained to GW several times about them making errors with their font setup in their epubs and it's fallen on deaf ears.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ChargerIIC wrote:
Where is the world is that comic page from?

I think it's the Damnation Crusade graphic novel. https://www.blacklibrary.com/all-products/damnation-crusade-ebook.html

If you google image search for 'black templars what the feth is wheat' (obviously use the correct f word there ) you'll come across another humorous edited panel. I won't link it due to naughty words.

It's Damnation Crusade (TANKRED ENDURES!).

To claim 8th is the same as other editions is like claiming that apples are the same as pears just because they're fruits with edible skins and a core with seeds.

Yes, 8th has things in common with past editions, but 2nd had things in common with RT and 3rd had things in common with 2nd. Yet they were very different in how they played from each other.

The game is still rolling out and a lot of things we wouldn't notice in development are going to be found as stuff comes out. Combos that wouldn't be noticed, stuff that is overlooked because they've looked at it a thousand times and mentally correct, RAW not following RAI because they know what the RAI so didn't make it clear enough in how it was written...

Basically the more eyes you have on something the more likely it is that problems are going to be found. Even community rumor reactions (the deep strike shenanigans people were planning based on being told that the Daemons Codex was bringing back deep striking daemons) have gotten changes made to the game to reign in unintended combos, something we wouldn't have seen in years.

tl;dr: nothing is perfect, and only through mass feedback can the problems with things be found and corrected. And frankly fixing problems is far better than GW's old stance of pretending there wasn't a problem no matter how many times they got asked about something.

Yes, we do want things to be "perfect" when they come out, but nothing is perfect. Not every loophole can be predicted and closed ahead of time and this is only compounded by a new edition that changes the core of how the game is played.

Basically all this griping about how things should never need fixing is just complaining for the sake of complaining.

Whats that old adage?

When life gives you lemons.

 Desubot wrote:
Whats that old adage?

When life gives you lemons.

You burn its house down.

When life gives you lemons, get pissed off. Lemonade sucks.

 Desubot wrote:
Whats that old adage?

When life gives you lemons.

Make lemonade. Give one to a Jokaero and get a vortex grenade.

Um.. what are you talking about, i love melons, wish life gave me some.

 Desubot wrote:
Whats that old adage?

When life gives you lemons.

Don’t make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back! Get mad! I don’t want your damn lemons, what the hell am I supposed to do with these? Demand to see life’s manager! Make life rue the day it thought it could give Cave Johnson lemons! Do you know who I am? I’m the man who’s gonna burn your house down! With the lemons! I’m gonna get my engineers to invent a combustible lemon that burns your house down!

 Galas wrote:

 Desubot wrote:
Whats that old adage?

When life gives you lemons.

Don’t make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back! Get mad! I don’t want your damn lemons, what the hell am I supposed to do with these? Demand to see life’s manager! Make life rue the day it thought it could give Cave Johnson lemons! Do you know who I am? I’m the man who’s gonna burn your house down! With the lemons! I’m gonna get my engineers to invent a combustible lemon that burns your house down!

Exactly.

More on topic, I had a thought as I was starting at this thread through the magic of modern technology: my several hundred dollar computer that has an OS on it made by a company that likely put millions into it still required a day one update. Heck, it requires CONSTANT updates.

So why would a game that has a development budget in the thousands be exempt from needing refinement?

You guys are crazy. Lemons are fantastic.

 daedalus wrote:
You guys are crazy. Lemons are fantastic.

Yeah, their shaped just right for a comfortable throwing object!

Yeah, their shaped just right for a comfortable throwing object!

Better than an old metal dreadnought thrown at you

 Ratius wrote:

Yeah, their shaped just right for a comfortable throwing object!

Better than an old metal dreadnought thrown at you

I built one of the metal CSM dreads. Still stayed together better than a Penitent Engine (and less dangerous too, those gangly limbs could put out an eye!).