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.

Hey there everyone, I played this game quite a bit a few years ago 2-3, and have been possibly considering coming back into the hobby. What is the game like now a days. I was here towards the midst- maybe coming closer to the release of 8th and was playing GK. What does the game play like? What are the most predominant factions? What have been some of the new releases? Perhaps some major game changing rulings? What point size are normal games played at now a-days? These are quite some extensive questions, and I'd appreciate the person who took time out out, to really be able to answer them because I'd imagine it may take a while. Thanks in advance, cheers.

The game's probably in the best state it's been since 5th. Alpha strike is still a problem, and shooting has the edge over melee. Units don't fall back anymore, they suffer additional casualties if they fail morale. This has prompted people to take minimum strength units over large mobs (some exceptions, of course). Unit organization is more variable, and is largely used to generate as many Command Points as possible. Command points fuel stratagems, which lets units do special things. WS and BS are now straight success values - so a WS 4+ hits on a 4+. Wound rolls are a little less complex, and high STR weapons don't wound on a 2+ as much as they used to. Weapons have an AP value that reduces the armor save of the target. All weapons can move and shoot, though with a penalty for heavy weapons.

Dominant armies at the moment are Imperial soup (often Guard + Blood Angels or Imperial Knights), though Dark Eldar and Eldar are still quite good. Grey Knights are garbage tier right now.

GW seems to be making an effort to annually re-balance the points of armies, so this is subject to change. A new Chapter Approved will drop at the end of 2018 with points changes, so the meta may well shift.

Tournament play seems to center around 1800-2000 points. I've found 1000 points to be good for pick-up play.

Depends do you like gun lines? If yes it's great, if you don't keep walking past.

Game is streamlined - but not in a good way. All the rules that make a game, well, a game; are gone - cover is extremely simplified, firing arcs and facings are gone, "Is the tiniest bit of the model sticking out anywhere? Ok, I have full LOS on him", melee is garbage [Fall Back rules favor shooting armies by a crap ton], and screening/ranged is king. Shooting gets 1-2 full rounds of guns on you, and melee armies need to wait until round2 to even deep strike - then have to make charge rolls, fight screens (which will just fall back), then get shot up in return.

Honestly, the game's not in a good state - is it in a better state then previous editions? Sure - but let's not pretend its a good game.

Imperial models are king; they can all soup together with no downsides. GK are largely trash tier this edition, so you'll need to change armies - but you can just buy the Custodes codex and bam; your models are good to go, no changes necessary.

From what I have been told about GK in 7th edition, the state of the game for them did not change in 8th.

but you can just buy the Custodes codex and bam; your models are good to go, no changes necessary.

That is not true, they have different weapon load outs. You can't use GK as custodes, plus the good custodes units are on jetbikes and GK don't have any jetbikes. Maybe they had them in 7th, but then I would wonder why GW removed them form the codex and index.

It's great, balance is very fine at everything other than top table at grand tournaments, gameplay is enjoyable, community involved and growing, good variety in missions, game is rebalanced every 6 months, lots and lots of new releases.

Ignore the whine coming from some on this forum, the game is in its golden age.

Depends entirely who you talk to and how you like to play.

Those who like to roll dice and have fun and remember its just a game: its fun and easy to jump in to. It has some quirks but nothing that cant be sorted on the fly between chill players.

To those who try to play competitive and take everything way too seriously: *insert screeching and foaming at the mouth*

8th has been quite the shake up. Armies with lots of bodies are in a pretty good place with low number elite armies needing to play like they do in the fluff (completing their objective aka playing the mission, as opposed to killing everything in sight).
Point sizes are more ot less what they always have been but 2k maybe being the most common.
8th is much more killy and things die a lot faster than they used to.

The basic core rules are available on the GW website as a free pdf, so you can easily see for yourself the core changes that have come about.

The game is much simplified, with some negative quirks from that but it's mostly a positive change compared to how much unintuitive nonsense there was in 7th. The biggest change is that GW makes a genuine effort at balancing the top end of the game; if something is extremely oppressive you can expect it to be nerfed to some degree during one of the quarterly balance adjustments. They haven't done as much for the books that are too weak, though we'll see what happens in the December changes.

 Giantwalkingchair wrote:
Depends entirely who you talk to and how you like to play.

Those who like to roll dice and have fun and remember its just a game: its fun and easy to jump in to. It has some quirks but nothing that cant be sorted on the fly between chill players.

To those who try to play competitive and take everything way too seriously: *insert screeching and foaming at the mouth*

8th has been quite the shake up. Armies with lots of bodies are in a pretty good place with low number elite armies needing to play like they do in the fluff (completing their objective aka playing the mission, as opposed to killing everything in sight).
Point sizes are more ot less what they always have been but 2k maybe being the most common.
8th is much more killy and things die a lot faster than they used to.

The basic core rules are available on the GW website as a free pdf, so you can easily see for yourself the core changes that have come about.

I'm casual and only play with friends and I hate 8th.

It's not just comp players by a long shot.

The game is better and the community is worse.

 Crimson Devil wrote:
The game is better and the community is worse.

100%

Personally I find 8th to be really boring. A lot of the core mechanics have been simplified or outright removed making the game easier to learn but also lacking in depth. If you like simplified/streamlined gameplay then 8th is probably an improvement. If you like a lot of rules/mechanics that add complexity then 8th is rather bare bones. I tend to prefer a game with more rules, details, and variables that make the game less about theoretical results and more about adapting to the battlefield. 8th in a lot of ways tends to be very mathhammery while the battlefield plays less of an impact on the game than it did in past few editions.

Also it's rather disappointing that people throw out the whole "ignore the haters" mess right away when somebody asks for opinions on the current state of the game.

 Vankraken wrote:
Personally I find 8th to be really boring. A lot of the core mechanics have been simplified or outright removed making the game easier to learn but also lacking in depth. If you like simplified/streamlined gameplay then 8th is probably an improvement. If you like a lot of rules/mechanics that add complexity then 8th is rather bare bones. I tend to prefer a game with more rules, details, and variables that make the game less about theoretical results and more about adapting to the battlefield. 8th in a lot of ways tends to be very mathhammery while the battlefield plays less of an impact on the game than it did in past few editions.

Also it's rather disappointing that people throw out the whole "ignore the haters" mess right away when somebody asks for opinions on the current state of the game.

This is the position that I find most consistently represented.

 jeff white wrote:

 Vankraken wrote:
Personally I find 8th to be really boring. A lot of the core mechanics have been simplified or outright removed making the game easier to learn but also lacking in depth. If you like simplified/streamlined gameplay then 8th is probably an improvement. If you like a lot of rules/mechanics that add complexity then 8th is rather bare bones. I tend to prefer a game with more rules, details, and variables that make the game less about theoretical results and more about adapting to the battlefield. 8th in a lot of ways tends to be very mathhammery while the battlefield plays less of an impact on the game than it did in past few editions.

Also it's rather disappointing that people throw out the whole "ignore the haters" mess right away when somebody asks for opinions on the current state of the game.

This is the position that I find most consistently represented.

That & there's too &%^& many re-rolls. And rolls to see how many rolls to make.

ccs wrote:

 jeff white wrote:

 Vankraken wrote:
Personally I find 8th to be really boring. A lot of the core mechanics have been simplified or outright removed making the game easier to learn but also lacking in depth. If you like simplified/streamlined gameplay then 8th is probably an improvement. If you like a lot of rules/mechanics that add complexity then 8th is rather bare bones. I tend to prefer a game with more rules, details, and variables that make the game less about theoretical results and more about adapting to the battlefield. 8th in a lot of ways tends to be very mathhammery while the battlefield plays less of an impact on the game than it did in past few editions.

Also it's rather disappointing that people throw out the whole "ignore the haters" mess right away when somebody asks for opinions on the current state of the game.

This is the position that I find most consistently represented.

That & there's too &%^& many re-rolls. And rolls to see how many rolls to make.

Yeah and they destroy the supposed stream lining of the game, 30k games play faster.

It is, more or less, broadly exactly the same as it has been since at least 1996, as far as I can see.

 Billagio wrote:

 Crimson Devil wrote:
The game is better and the community is worse.

100%

The Game is worse and the community is worse, the internet was the worst thing to ever happen to Games Workshop games

8th is fun and forums are salty. Play with friends and tread lightly online!

It's better than 7th, it's less of a mess than 3rd, it's not yet showing the rampant codex creep of 5th, and the objective cards have potential. The games are neither quicker nor simpler than early editions due to universal mechanics being replaced by a mass of unique unit rules, auras, psychic powers, rerolls, traits, relics, and faction bonuses, and things like templates being replaced with MOAR DICE!
But the gap between factions is much smaller now than in the days of gladius, taudar, etc.

-The Eldar and Chaos books seem to have the most punch at the moment both as allied forces and fielded alone.
-The Imperials are represented by the 'soup' - typically a few cherry picked units being fuelled by guardsmen to perform far beyond their single codex potential. Relatively little success against the top books solo.
-The secondary xenos factions have mixed success. The nids have their moments, the orks are new and untested, the tau and crons are less common.
-The secondary imperial factions are mostly either outdated or sidelined, the current GK falling into the latter category while those factions still in the index are fundamentally underpowered and limited. The custodes probably have the best of it but they are beholden to their jetbikes and could be facing a very ugly chapter approved.

Ruleswise - no blasts or templates, no cover for intervening models or terrain, no characters in units, no initiative (charging units hit first), no unit facing, and armour values are gone. The core rules have been squeezed down to four pages and everything has their own rules on top - which GW keeps naming differently for each and every instance of the same rule just to help confuse things.

We've found 2000pts takes too long to play and 1000pts isn't quite enough to field a decent army, so we stick around 1500pts.

 Excommunicatus wrote:
It is, more or less, broadly exactly the same as it has been since at least 1996, as far as I can see.

I would say the two big changes from the earlier editions would be listhammer and early game build-up.

Pre-5e books and FoC gave a fairly restricted amount of rock, paper, and scissors you could bring to each game and you didn't have 'megascissors' units that took 50 rocks to knock over.

8e also has much faster pace and much much more in the way of firepower, with relatively little benefit to thoughtful unit movement or positioning beyond screening characters with chaff and -where available- LoS blocking. Everything seems to be either barrelling forwards or trying to annihilate the opponent before they move... which to be fair is how earlier editions also worked, it just took several turns to play out during which the players could actually respond to one anothers actions.

The biggest departure from previous editions is that it’s now a living game. Every half year or so there’s a mass “red-rover” game where a bunch of people on the salty side and a bunch of people on the happy side switch places.

So watch a couple batreps for your army and if you don’t like what you see, check back around in 6 months.

I miss 3rd. I was sold the idea of a faster simpler game in 8th but what I bought was a game that involves very little thought and more dice rolling than ever.

Stratagems were something I thought made a lot of sense but at this point the “take whatever you want” game design vs the old FOC seems like broken garbage, and stratagems are basically impossible to balance. Re-roll auras and modifiers make for even more rolls and slower resolutions. Shooting is heavily favoured

Our group has taken to agreeing to lists beforehand and modifying mission rules so we can have the semblance of a balanced game that isn’t decided before opening model cases based on how many fearless horde models get sat on objectives.

I find that this board is much more negative about 8E than people out there in shops and clubs actively playing the game.

meleti wrote:
I find that this board is much more negative about 8E than people out there in shops and clubs actively playing the game.

That is to be expected though isn't it?
You aren't going to find the people who have walked away from the game playing in the clubs.

What's 40k like now adays? Salty. So fecking salty your doctor might change your diet to fix it.

Seriously though, GW has a larger involvement in how the meta changes compared to past editions, we're seeing a better attempt at balancing the game and the only part of the streamlining that really hurt the game (in my less than humble opinion) is the lack of more in depth rules for terrain/cover. We have some, but not enough to make anything other than LoS blocking terrain and ruins be the most common things on most people's tables.

The game has shifted a lot from alpha strike focused, to being more beta strike heavy like past editions (and without Marines getting the only exception to that rule) and unless you know someone who is playing a Castellan and 32 Guardsmen the game is pretty balanced (and most of us expect to see some changes to said Castellan list in CA to help fix that too).

A.T. wrote:

meleti wrote:
I find that this board is much more negative about 8E than people out there in shops and clubs actively playing the game.

That is to be expected though isn't it?
You aren't going to find the people who have walked away from the game playing in the clubs.

Yeah bit of a daft statement really.

But rightly so that it should be negative. 8th is the worst thing to happen to 40k...apart from 7th but we ignore that wreckage.

It's still fun and epic! Has even bigger stompy robots too.
If you like 40k and enjoyed 7th, it's fething fantastic. Same experience with less hassel. Core rules are free, so try it if you want to.
If you didn't like 7th and/or got fed up with GW's gak though: the rules are less of a pain and they have good PR now. The stuff that made you shelf 40k with the hope that 8th would fix things and you would enjoy 40k again are still there. I'm selling my daemons, because I it's clear to me that GW has no intention of making the game I hoped they would.

grouchoben wrote:It's great, balance is very fine at everything other than top table at grand tournaments, gameplay is enjoyable...

Balance is alright, for a GW game. If you are at all accustomed to games from other companies, the balance is still a joke.

Vankraken wrote:Personally I find 8th to be really boring. A lot of the core mechanics have been simplified or outright removed making the game easier to learn but also lacking in depth. If you like simplified/streamlined gameplay then 8th is probably an improvement. If you like a lot of rules/mechanics that add complexity then 8th is rather bare bones. I tend to prefer a game with more rules, details, and variables that make the game less about theoretical results and more about adapting to the battlefield.

Sounds like Infinity would be a better fit for you.

 DarkBlack wrote:

Vankraken wrote:Personally I find 8th to be really boring. A lot of the core mechanics have been simplified or outright removed making the game easier to learn but also lacking in depth. If you like simplified/streamlined gameplay then 8th is probably an improvement. If you like a lot of rules/mechanics that add complexity then 8th is rather bare bones. I tend to prefer a game with more rules, details, and variables that make the game less about theoretical results and more about adapting to the battlefield.

Sounds like Infinity would be a better fit for you.

40k lore matters a lot to me so infinity wouldn't really fit the bill. 6th and 7th edition 40k was where I found and continue to find enjoyment.

TeAXIIIT13 wrote:

 Billagio wrote:

 Crimson Devil wrote:
The game is better and the community is worse.

100%

The Game is worse and the community is worse, the internet was the worst thing to ever happen to Games Workshop games

God I remember jumping on the AOL chat rooms to talk to the Devs when they did their monthly thing. I think I was too young to recognize how truly awful people were being in those chats.

 ClockworkZion wrote:


The game has shifted a lot from alpha strike focused, to being more beta strike heavy like past editions (and without Marines getting the only exception to that rule) and unless you know someone who is playing a Castellan and 32 Guardsmen the game is pretty balanced (and most of us expect to see some changes to said Castellan list in CA to help fix that too).

He said he played GK. The rules of 8th and being balance do not apply here.

No idea how 7th was, am assuming it must have been horrible. But from little stuff I do know, stuff like balance is not part of w40k, and maybe never was. If I had to start over and had unlimited cash, I would say to always go after eldar. They seem to always be good, people playing them have a ton of fun, and never seem to be forced in to 2-3 models armies. What is even better, even if GW decides to nerf them, unlike with other factions, as soon as the nerf happens one of two things come to the light. Either the nerf was a nerf light and the unit or way of playing is still viable, or people find out that in the eldar codex there is some other unit that is very good, it just wasn't taken because the nerfed stuff was much better.

So if your starting, and have the money pick eldar. If your starting with GK, I don't know what advice can be given, other then rethink starting 8th ed with them.

The other piece of advice for GK is to stick to playing casual games with people that not donkey-caves.