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.

A quick fix for blast weapons might be 6+ rolls to hit generate an extra hit

Personally I am just enjoying all the people saying Melee isn't good so we should all just adjust to that. I haven't had a decent ranged unit in my codex since 4th edition

Also, I think 8th is taking a step in the right direction, but in true GW fashion they are rushing things and doing it halfway instead of dedicating the time and resources necessary.

Case in point are the recent codex releases. Within 1-3 weeks each one receives its own FAQ because they screwed up on some basic things or made things auto-includes by reducing the price too far or vice versa.

Another example would be the fact that they started to use Facebook to release rules without a FAQ or Errata to back it up. I am of course talking about the infamous Deep strike rules where Da Jump still works as well as a couple other tactics.

And for codex creep....yup this is very much still a thing and it is ruining the game in my opinion. Tau right now are all but unbeatable for my army, Chaos with their ability to bring an entire cultist unit back to life and deploy anywhere....the list is pretty extensive honestly.

8th is taking a step towards the promise land but they are rushing and hamfisting things and then using excuses to justify their actions

Melee is actually pretty darn good and one of the most strategic parts of the game.

I'd venture that most people who hate 8th play a wee-bit more on the competitive side than not, or are in an area that does so. 8th edition is fantastic if you aren't playing cheese vs cheese. Despite the decreased defense rules (feel no pain, cover, etc.), games go on for a good bit longer and are more competitive than they were in 7th. Your experience may vary.

 Grumblewartz wrote:
8th edition is fantastic if you aren't playing cheese vs cheese.

IOW, 8th edition is a broken mess and only "works" if you follow self-imposed rules on army construction and voluntarily agree not to exploit any of its flaws.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Galas wrote:
Other people just still lives in 5th edition, as Peregrine, and everything that it is not like how it was, it is just trash.

This is not true at all. 5th edition was a far better edition, and of course I'm going to point out where GW has made the game worse compared to 5th. But it's because the game is worse, not because it isn't 5th. If something diverges from 5th in a way that improves the game then that is a good thing, even though it isn't 5th anymore. For example, 5th edition's wound allocation system was a mess and 8th edition is an improvement there.

5th was the worst edition there were three competitive armies -

GK
IG
SW

It was also the parking lot edition. It was better than 6th and 7th but that’s not really saying anything.

 Primark G wrote:
5th was the worst edition
...
It was better than 6th and 7th

Yep, makes sense to me.

I think if 8th and it's changes / improvements had been modeled after the state of the game at the end of 5th rather than 7th we'd have a much stronger game.

5th was not perfect but any means but 6th was an abomination of randomness and ally insanity. 7th tempered that somewhat, but also expanded things in a chaotic way that led to somewhat incredible power creep in special rules and what was allowed in the game.

I feel like a lot of the ideas that are currently causing issues are remnants of the bad ideas of 6th and 7th that they don't feel like they can simply rewind the clock on since it would be too shocking to too many players of 7th, but makes it much harder to balance even with a mostly complete rewrite of the rules.

 Primark G wrote:
Melee is actually pretty darn good and one of the most strategic parts of the game.

Except its not. Entire armies don't even use Melee at all. Tau, Imperial Guard, Ultramarines. All they do is buff shooting units and kill you from a distance. On the other hand, the pure Melee armies Orkz, Demons and Khorne suffer because they tend to lose too much before they get into CC.

If we're talking about best edition, the answer is only ever 3rd.

Everything was viable there, and the rules were golden on all fronts.

fe40k wrote:
If we're talking about best edition, the answer is only ever 3rd.

Everything was viable there, and the rules were golden on all fronts.

LOTR and Warhammer Fantasy 6th edition during Ravening Hordes.

Everything else is just crap.

For all that 8th lacks compared to 7th, I can honestly say I don't mind it because I was sick of flipping through 3-4 books.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
For all that 8th lacks compared to 7th, I can honestly say I don't mind it because I was sick of flipping through 3-4 books.

I'm not really sure why you think this changed with 8th. You still need 3-4 books for your soup army, various FAQs, and chapter approved book or two for your correct point costs and rules errata. Add another book or two if you want to include any FW units.

I have a lot of issues with 8th which I don't really want to dive into too much but the really big issues for me is

1. Terrain and Cover rules are terrible and barely contribute to the game compared to before. Unless its huge LOS blockers or massive area terrain then its basically useless except for board decoration.

2. Some fairly terrible transitions from 7th to 8th in regard to weapons and their properties. No USR and a lot of copy+paste results in weird situations where certain weapons on a vehicle get -1 to hit when moving because 3-4 editions ago it was needed for it to be a heavy weapon but now its just an arbitrary carry over with no though out reasoning for it. The lack of a relentless USR with so much copy+paste is sloppy and idiotic.

3. To hit modifiers is the single most game balance breaking mechanic in 8th and GW has been really uneven with distributing them and offers little to no way around them. The game gets really wobbly when you have a lot of hit modifiers and it extremely punishing to certain armies.

Honorable Mention: The new fluff is garbage and its hard to look at 8th as a game (with its primaris poster boys) and not associate it with some absolutely terrible writing.

But ultimately all of the above would be forgivable if the game as a whole was fun but to me its not. I just do not find games of 8th edition to be enjoyable (win or lose). After a year of trying 8th and also playing some 7th, I always find myself having a blast with 7th (as long as the lists involved aren't extremely lopsided in balance) while I tend to find 8th just boring and often feel like I'm just going through the motions instead of having some exciting tactical battle.

I like 8th, but then I also liked the way AoS plays (not sure what's changed since I haven't since a bit after the release of Sylvaneth). It's good for quick pick up games and feels better than 7th did (although I haven't had the chance to play much yet), but like 7th it relies too heavily on needing like minded opponents which is fine but at the same time it's more like its leaning a bit too heavily on self imposed balancing by the players which I can see causing a fair few issues in more competitive settings. List building was annoying at first but is more of a throw back to before everything started getting streamlined around 4th-5th; missed the customisation not the complexity however and feel we only got the latter with the system but it's alright after a bit.

It's not the fun of 5th or 6th, but at least its not 7th.

You said a lot without saying much at all. Could you elaborate on specifics?

Certainly.

Let me preface this by saying that I think that 8th is subjectively more fun to play than 7th was.

But for all the good things they added, the probably added one or two bad things.

I guess I'll start with Cover. I feel like most people who enjoy 8th agree that the cover system is flawed and in need of a change. Basically, you can't get cover unless you're infantry, and you can't get cover hiding behind large tanks etc...Really the whole terrain thing needs to be covered more extensively.

The psychic phase is abysmal. It's just point and click, no thought necessary. This has lead to the need for janky quick fixes for things like smite. If there was a risk/reward system in place like the use of power/dispel dice like old Fantasy used to have, with graduated levels of difficulty for spells I think this would clear up much of the abuse that the psychic phase has. Although, it is an improvement over 7th edition psychic phase which made my eyes bleed.

The random shots mechanic is too...random. Templates didn't slow the game down that much to be removed IMO.

The removal of the Independent Character rule. Why can't characters join units anymore? I assume they wanted to remove the super friends death star issues. But here's the thing, by creating auras and not allowing characters to join units they've exacerbated the issue. Now instead of one unit benefiting from the character, you have multiple units benefiting from it. So now you have multiple death star units instead of just one (see Guilliman for details). All they needed to do was just say "this character can only join units with this key word", and the problem would have been fixed. But now we have to deal with these ridiculous targeting restrictions on characters, that have been made even stranger through the faq. Not to mention small (but severely annoying) issues like not being able to teleport a necron lord out of a night sythe with his unit. I know theres a strategem for that now, but why does there even need to be? This shouldn't have even been a thing to begin with.

Flyers should have had their own rules in the main rulebook. Every single flyer in the game has the same rules tacked onto their data sheet. Why? Its a ubiquitous enough unit type to have it's own rules in the core book.

Which leads me to my next point. Why remove USR's? It makes no sense. USR's are a clean, organized way of making the game work. There is no need for giant paragraphs on the unit card with USR's.

I guess it's because whoever works at GW doesn't know how to organize a rulebook properly. Have you read this thing? It's borderline insane, the rules are scattered all over the place, I have to flip between 3 or 4 different sections (and now FAQ's) to simply find a rule that should have been in the main rules to begin with.

The way that modifiers are generated in 8th is crazy. It's so needlessly complicated. Why not just make it like it used to be? If I have a 3+ BS and theres a negative 1 modifier, now I need a 4. simple. easy. 1 always fails and 6 always succeeds. None of this, well you rolled a 3 which gets modified to a 4, but it's night fight and my guy has a stealth cloak and now your plasma gun over heated because its night time and you're dead. It's ridiculous. I thought they wanted to streamline the game, now I have to spend additional time calculating what I actually rolled. God forbid there's re-rolls and modifiers at the same time. Things like the suicide rhino as a tactic shouldn't exist.

Deep striking within 9" actually made some units viable again (especially for assault). Now with the FAQ, thats going to change because someone was upset that their gakky tau gunline can't win games. This issue was solved by taking infiltrators or chaff anyway, so why ruin deepstriking even more? It already had a hard counter.

We're still stuck in the past with the IGOUGO system. GW needs to get with the times and make alternating phases a thing. It would resolve a lot of balance issues.

8th is more popular.

Popular equals fun.

Fun equals good.

Because this is a hobby, not a professional scene, and we're here to have fun, not make money.

Good = fulfills purpose
Fun = the purpose
Popular = it's fun.

Therefore, if it's popular, it's fun, and if it's fun, it's good, therefore, since it's popular, it's good.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
8th is more popular.

More popular than what? I'm sure it's more popular than the worst days of 7th, but is it more popular than a hypothetical version of 40k that doesn't have the flaws of 8th? This breaks your whole argument. You may prove that 8th is the least-bad recent edition, but that doesn't mean that any of them are good.

Popular equals fun.

Not necessarily. The most popular game can be more popular than more fun games because of things like marketing, availability in stores, etc. Seeing lots of people playing a game doesn't mean that they couldn't be having more fun playing a better game.

Fun equals good.

That's an incredibly low bar to set, assuming that if fun is had at all then the game must be good. By that standard virtually any game is good, including 7th edition 40k at its most unbalanced, because people did have fun with it.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
8th is more popular.

Popular equals fun.

Fun equals good.

Because this is a hobby, not a professional scene, and we're here to have fun, not make money.

Good = fulfills purpose
Fun = the purpose
Popular = it's fun.

Therefore, if it's popular, it's fun, and if it's fun, it's good, therefore, since it's popular, it's good.

Taco Bell was voted the "most cherished Mexican Restaurant" in the US and Bud Light is the most popular in the US but would any beer drinker or fan of Mexican food consider bud light to be an actual good beer or Taco Bell to actually be proper Mexican Food? Sometimes the simple, easy, and available options are the most popular because it takes less effort to consume and enjoy them.

SemperMortis wrote:

 Primark G wrote:
Melee is actually pretty darn good and one of the most strategic parts of the game.

Except its not. Entire armies don't even use Melee at all. Tau, Imperial Guard, Ultramarines. All they do is buff shooting units and kill you from a distance. On the other hand, the pure Melee armies Orkz, Demons and Khorne suffer because they tend to lose too much before they get into CC.

I don’t see how pointing out that armies designed to lose if they get in melee don’t attempt to get into melee means melee itself is bad?

 Brutus_Apex wrote:
Certainly.

Let me preface this by saying that I think that 8th is subjectively more fun to play than 7th was.

But for all the good things they added, the probably added one or two bad things.

That's a given, you can't really make sweeping changes without making a few bad ones, as you have to compormise on choices. full depth and simplicity are mutually exclusive to a degree, helping one hurts the other.

 Brutus_Apex wrote:
I guess I'll start with Cover. I feel like most people who enjoy 8th agree that the cover system is flawed and in need of a change. Basically, you can't get cover unless you're infantry, and you can't get cover hiding behind large tanks etc...Really the whole terrain thing needs to be covered more extensively.

That's...not true. anyone can gain cover from a ruin given that they are 50% obscured.
You can't get cover behind large tanks because you either are visible or not.
Cover in 8th works on the premise of you actually taking cover, bracing yourself against a wall or hiding in a ditch-and as such more likely to avoid harm-rather than being harder to hit.
If anything, 7th and before cover made no sense being an alternate save. being in cover was meaningless if you had an invul? marines gain nothing from being behind a wall unless the enemy gun was strong enough to punch through their armor? (the faulty cover system was dragged down by the idiotic AP system, but still)
It aint perfect, but its still a large step up.

 Brutus_Apex wrote:
The psychic phase is abysmal. It's just point and click, no thought necessary. This has lead to the need for janky quick fixes for things like smite. If there was a risk/reward system in place like the use of power/dispel dice like old Fantasy used to have, with graduated levels of difficulty for spells I think this would clear up much of the abuse that the psychic phase has. Although, it is an improvement over 7th edition psychic phase which made my eyes bleed.

As a TS player, its very much NOT point and click with no thought necessary.
You need to pick what spells you give who, you need to position properly (as quite a few spells are NON targetable, you automatically hit the nearest target), and you need to cast in the right order, because it matter a LOT. then you need to decide if the spell is even worth the peril risk-because sometimes its really not.
Sure, its mindless if you got a single psyker who knows one or two spells, but anyone who dedicates even a bit into it, it becomes deep enough. even with the "simplified" version, its by far my longest phase in a turn. adding power/dispel dice would only drag it futher (I remember 7th "fondly" where a single psyker phase for me could take half an hour...)
Its basically like saying the assault phase is mindless when you are tau (who I also am to be honest), or shooting phase is mindless when you play khorne.

The fix for smite was only janky in the sense they forgot about tzeentch daemons with the exceptions to the new norm. but the gradually harder smite rule works, it makes smite spamming an akward path and sticks psykers as tactical toolboxes they are meant to be.

 Brutus_Apex wrote:
The random shots mechanic is too...random. Templates didn't slow the game down that much to be removed IMO.

I see you never played against a pie spam list?
Sure a scatter takes about a half a minute, but when you got dozens-on top of other normal shooting-they just get the game stuck.
And they are so VERY flimsy and subjective. mistakes are common, and its an easy path for cheats to steal a minor nudge for great benefit unnoticed.
Flamer template didnt cause nearly as much issues as scatter, but keeping just it would be weird.
Again, the solution here too wasn't perfect, but what existed before wasn't very good either.

 Brutus_Apex wrote:
The removal of the Independent Character rule. Why can't characters join units anymore? I assume they wanted to remove the super friends death star issues. But here's the thing, by creating auras and not allowing characters to join units they've exacerbated the issue. Now instead of one unit benefiting from the character, you have multiple units benefiting from it. So now you have multiple death star units instead of just one (see Guilliman for details). All they needed to do was just say "this character can only join units with this key word", and the problem would have been fixed. But now we have to deal with these ridiculous targeting restrictions on characters, that have been made even stranger through the faq. Not to mention small (but severely annoying) issues like not being able to teleport a necron lord out of a night sythe with his unit. I know theres a strategem for that now, but why does there even need to be? This shouldn't have even been a thing to begin with.

Except it causes an odd case of unit jumping that makes no sense at all with the old rule.
all your chars jumping from one squad to the other, despite said squads being practically at the same place, and transferring the "command abilities" when they make the arbitrary change made no sense.
Guys that should be great leaders are now actually leading their army, rather than a random squad-and with wider effects the game allows less powerful buffs to still mean something.
Its far from perfect, but its better than 7th. and you dont get "multiple deathstars", you apperantly don't quite grasp the code identity of a deathstar-a unit that wrecks everything and can't be killed due to stacking absurd bonuses (and your precious USRs) who were "fair because it effects just one unit". these just dont happen in 8th.

 Brutus_Apex wrote:
Flyers should have had their own rules in the main rulebook. Every single flyer in the game has the same rules tacked onto their data sheet. Why? Its a ubiquitous enough unit type to have it's own rules in the core book.

Which leads me to my next point. Why remove USR's? It makes no sense. USR's are a clean, organized way of making the game work. There is no need for giant paragraphs on the unit card with USR's.

Not every flyer has the same rules, and its call future-proofing. they now CAN do flyers that are similar yet not identical.
Same goes for USRs. the fact each unit has their "own version" means they can (and at some point probably will) have units that have not-quite-identical rules, like how many units got different range "scout moves", or the possibility of different-range "infiltrate" etc.
It also removes the need for having a dictionary of rules around when everything you need is spelled out on the unit itself-its FAR better than USRs, because eventually you get to the same situation like 7th where you had dozens of them, some USRs giving OTHER USRs, some being real similar while others being an utter waste of time that nobody remembers how they work (soul blaze...) or being defined "USRs" despite appearing once or twice the entire game.
Sure, you may have a "giant paragraph" on the unit card-but so what? the point of the card is to tell you what that unit does, and it delivers. no need to EVER look at another page when you got the full rule stated on the unit card.
USRs are very much NOT a "clean, organized way of making the game work.", because of two major flaws-the need for page hopping, and the fact they stop you from having variations of the same rule without creating even more USRs and thus bloat (or an additional rule for the unit to modify the USR and thus messy)

 Brutus_Apex wrote:
I guess it's because whoever works at GW doesn't know how to organize a rulebook properly. Have you read this thing? It's borderline insane, the rules are scattered all over the place, I have to flip between 3 or 4 different sections (and now FAQ's) to simply find a rule that should have been in the main rules to begin with.

That part is rather accurate. though I expect the next ruelbook to be done better.

 Brutus_Apex wrote:
The way that modifiers are generated in 8th is crazy. It's so needlessly complicated. Why not just make it like it used to be? If I have a 3+ BS and theres a negative 1 modifier, now I need a 4. simple. easy. 1 always fails and 6 always succeeds. None of this, well you rolled a 3 which gets modified to a 4, but it's night fight and my guy has a stealth cloak and now your plasma gun over heated because its night time and you're dead. It's ridiculous. I thought they wanted to streamline the game, now I have to spend additional time calculating what I actually rolled. God forbid there's re-rolls and modifiers at the same time. Things like the suicide rhino as a tactic shouldn't exist.

They are...really simple?
Roll a dice->reroll if needed->1 is a fail->apply modifiers. hardly rocket science.

Also, suicide rhino is related to it how?

 Brutus_Apex wrote:
Deep striking within 9" actually made some units viable again (especially for assault). Now with the FAQ, thats going to change because someone was upset that their gakky tau gunline can't win games. This issue was solved by taking infiltrators or chaff anyway, so why ruin deepstriking even more? It already had a hard counter.

What on earth does tau have to do with it?
Heck, tau are equally punished by it, they have some powerful DS options.
The DS rule changes prevents turn 1 game ending moves, no more, no less. its not "ruining DS", its just making it not a non-brainer, because before it there was practically no reason ever NOT to DS anything and everything that could.
And not every army even HAS that hard counter, or was the fact every single one was forced to take a chaff horde healthy for the game.

 Brutus_Apex wrote:
We're still stuck in the past with the IGOUGO system. GW needs to get with the times and make alternating phases a thing. It would resolve a lot of balance issues.

That would require yet another major overhaul of the game, as doing IGOUGO on phases would mean player 2 would be overpowering (just move things out of range/sight after player 1 committed his moves) and doing it per unit doesn't really work when you have insane varaity of army compositions ranging from 5 or less units to 25 or more units as viable option in the same matchup.

 Vankraken wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
8th is more popular.

Popular equals fun.

Fun equals good.

Because this is a hobby, not a professional scene, and we're here to have fun, not make money.

Good = fulfills purpose
Fun = the purpose
Popular = it's fun.

Therefore, if it's popular, it's fun, and if it's fun, it's good, therefore, since it's popular, it's good.

Taco Bell was voted the "most cherished Mexican Restaurant" in the US and Bud Light is the most popular in the US but would any beer drinker or fan of Mexican food consider bud light to be an actual good beer or Taco Bell to actually be proper Mexican Food? Sometimes the simple, easy, and available options are the most popular because it takes less effort to consume and enjoy them.

i think you hit the nail on the head there. 8th is more "fun" because it takes less effort to play. it's a strong trend in gaming right now, to make easy to play games to appeal to an audience accustomed to Twitter, Facebook and so forth, where things happen quickly and easily. But depth, decision making and the satisfaction of overcoming challenges- things that often are what make games truly great to play, are incompatible with this mindset.

I see no reason to shut down criticism of GW. The only way they are ever going to get better is if we tell them how. And the only way they'll actually listen is if we moan loud enough to wake the primordial demon of discord and greed they keep locked in the forbidden sublevels of their headquarters.

Index stage was good, but sadly some armies got a too hard swing with the nerfhammer, blast weps was over nerfed, and ofc there is the soup issue in matched.

Codex stage is a complete disaster, as the balance is completely all over the place and mono codex are allways weaker then soup.
Dosent help that the codex as printed only has a lifetime of a few months before they invalidated by FAQ and other sources.

The ONLY good thing 8th did was make the game easier to understand and play but the price to pay for that is way too high.
9th cant come soon enugh!

The soup issue was just as bad in index as it is in codex.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
8th is more popular.

Popular equals fun.

Fun equals good.

Because this is a hobby, not a professional scene, and we're here to have fun, not make money.

Good = fulfills purpose
Fun = the purpose
Popular = it's fun.

Therefore, if it's popular, it's fun, and if it's fun, it's good, therefore, since it's popular, it's good.

*

This has to be the worst possible reasoning. Something that is popular is not necessarly because its good. Are you going to tell me that kebabs and Mc Donalds are healthy? Well, it's pretty damn popular in quite a few countries. Now if the game's drastically toned down it will get popular because the main issue with wargames is that it is hard to learn the rules. But that they are easier to play, it does not imply by itself that they are better, not in any possible imaginable way.

This reasonning is NOT a response to people moaning because they feel cheated by GW, disappointed by GW, or bored by GW's rules.

And by the way the use of syllogism is not adviced. Wrong+wrong= true, true+wrong=wrong, true+true=true. So now it's so substanceless and simplist that you cn say absolutly anything with that: Dogs breathe, humans breathe, therefore dogs are humans.

 Maréchal des Logis Walter wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
8th is more popular.

Popular equals fun.

Fun equals good.

Because this is a hobby, not a professional scene, and we're here to have fun, not make money.

Good = fulfills purpose
Fun = the purpose
Popular = it's fun.

Therefore, if it's popular, it's fun, and if it's fun, it's good, therefore, since it's popular, it's good.

*

This has to be the worst possible reasoning. Something that is popular is not necessarly because its good. Are you going to tell me that kebabs and Mc Donalds are healthy? Well, it's pretty damn popular in quite a few countries. Now if the game's drastically toned down it will get popular because the main issue with wargames is that it is hard to learn the rules. But that they are easier to play, it does not imply by itself that they are better, not in any possible imaginable way.

This reasonning is NOT a response to people moaning because they feel cheated by GW, disappointed by GW, or bored by GW's rules.

And by the way the use of syllogism is not adviced. Wrong+wrong= true, true+wrong=wrong, true+true=true. So now it's so substanceless and simplist that you cn say absolutly anything with that: Dogs breathe, humans breathe, therefore dogs are humans.

except I think it's safe to say if the game is selling well it proably is because folks are having fun with it. and 8th edition is selling well. "fun" "the best" "the worst" are all very subjective (horror flicks do nothing for me but I know some people who love em) right now the FACTS are that GW has posted a record profit for this year. apparently DOUBLING their profits from last year. thus we can conclude that lots of people are buying into 40k (and AOS) does that mean the game is perfect and flawless? no, but clearly the game is working for GW right now.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Maréchal des Logis Walter wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
8th is more popular.

Popular equals fun.

Fun equals good.

Because this is a hobby, not a professional scene, and we're here to have fun, not make money.

Good = fulfills purpose
Fun = the purpose
Popular = it's fun.

Therefore, if it's popular, it's fun, and if it's fun, it's good, therefore, since it's popular, it's good.

*

This has to be the worst possible reasoning. Something that is popular is not necessarly because its good. Are you going to tell me that kebabs and Mc Donalds are healthy? Well, it's pretty damn popular in quite a few countries. Now if the game's drastically toned down it will get popular because the main issue with wargames is that it is hard to learn the rules. But that they are easier to play, it does not imply by itself that they are better, not in any possible imaginable way.

This reasonning is NOT a response to people moaning because they feel cheated by GW, disappointed by GW, or bored by GW's rules.

And by the way the use of syllogism is not adviced. Wrong+wrong= true, true+wrong=wrong, true+true=true. So now it's so substanceless and simplist that you cn say absolutly anything with that: Dogs breathe, humans breathe, therefore dogs are humans.

except I think it's safe to say if the game is selling well it proably is because folks are having fun with it. and 8th edition is selling well. "fun" "the best" "the worst" are all very subjective (horror flicks do nothing for me but I know some people who love em) right now the FACTS are that GW has posted a record profit for this year. apparently DOUBLING their profits from last year. thus we can conclude that lots of people are buying into 40k (and AOS) does that mean the game is perfect and flawless? no, but clearly the game is working for GW right now.

Yes the game woks better for them: that's mere fact and undeniable. But fun is basically any edition, since even small grups of people played it. As you point out yourself, the game is not necessarely flawless, and moreover, fun is not the best criteria because it is way to subjective. The above quoted reasonning on the contrary reduces it to the only criteria with once again the candid thought that since he deems it to be fun, everyone should do so and that he's reasonning is a 100% proof. It is not, and whereas the op moans about moaners, it could be as relevant to moan about that kind of as substanceless posts that are maybe positiv, but as useless as the attitude denounced by the OP. The only difference is they go on the way of the unquestionning support instead of unquestionning hate.

 FrozenDwarf wrote:
Index stage was good, but sadly some armies got a too hard swing with the nerfhammer, blast weps was over nerfed, and ofc there is the soup issue in matched.

Codex stage is a complete disaster, as the balance is completely all over the place and mono codex are allways weaker then soup.
Dosent help that the codex as printed only has a lifetime of a few months before they invalidated by FAQ and other sources.

The ONLY good thing 8th did was make the game easier to understand and play but the price to pay for that is way too high.
9th cant come soon enugh!

Index stage was incredibly boring and FAQs and presumably you're refering to Chapter Approved (an annual publication we've seen only released once this edition so far) don't invalidate anything. A few points changed, saying codexes are invalidated is incredibly hyperbolic.

Also I still don't understand why people are holding up Soup as an exclusively 8th problem. Everyone is so quick to forget Taudar?

 Sim-Life wrote:

 FrozenDwarf wrote:
Index stage was good, but sadly some armies got a too hard swing with the nerfhammer, blast weps was over nerfed, and ofc there is the soup issue in matched.

Codex stage is a complete disaster, as the balance is completely all over the place and mono codex are allways weaker then soup.
Dosent help that the codex as printed only has a lifetime of a few months before they invalidated by FAQ and other sources.

The ONLY good thing 8th did was make the game easier to understand and play but the price to pay for that is way too high.
9th cant come soon enugh!

Index stage was incredibly boring and FAQs and presumably you're refering to Chapter Approved (an annual publication we've seen only released once this edition so far) don't invalidate anything. A few points changed, saying codexes are invalidated is incredibly hyperbolic.

He's maybe thinking about the huge blow the grey knights are said to have suffered with several nerfs directly infringing on their playstyle (deep strike and magic if I remember well.)