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.

Zustiur wrote:
Flyers and Lords of war should never have been made in 40k scale.
The 3rd edition force org chart was better than what we have now.
Tau should not have suits bigger than crisis
Jervis Johnson is a great rules writer

Actually I agree with all but the last one.

The Newman wrote:

 Graysparrow wrote:
Special Characters / Named Characters need to go back to being 'with opponents permission only' in (matched) games.

That's not just fact, it's cold hard opinion.

They already are. Unless you live somewhere with some really crazy and quite specific legal ordinances.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

And the kicker:
Power Level is preferable to points.

Peregrine should be along any minute now to derail the thread and eat your liver.

Na I got this.

The Emperor should never have been rewritten to be an uncaring force of nature about the fates of his created sons.

In doing so they took a flawed character that was understandably flawed as a human and remolded it into a character that makes the dumbest mistakes a human can make that fly in the face of the logical being he was rewritten as.

You don't get the hubris of a human without the whole package. You don't get a logic driven machine who doesn't see Angron as a liability.

Easy to assemble minitures are 'easy to assemble' and have enhanced my hobby experience ten fold.

I am sorry, I can't even keep a straight face typeing that gak.

 Crimson Devil wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

And the kicker:
Power Level is preferable to points.

Peregrine should be along any minute now to derail the thread and eat your liver.

Nah, this is the unpopular opinions thread. Posting an opinion here is already enough of a concession that it's an absurd minority.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Crimson Devil wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

And the kicker:
Power Level is preferable to points.

Peregrine should be along any minute now to derail the thread and eat your liver.

Nah, this is the unpopular opinions thread. Posting an opinion here is already enough of a concession that it's an absurd minority.

But you are going to eat his liver?

Games-Workshop are better at writing rules than any of the legions of whiny hypocrites who complain incessantly rather than actually going out and writing something better.

Marine players need to stop whining that their models are bad, compared to the utter gak Dark Eldar were forced to put up with for EDITIONS and my own beloved Chaos Daemons being mostly useless for a long time (2 waves, deep striking with no option of being on the board and 5th ed mishap tables being brutal!), what Marines are going through now is paltry in comparison and you marine players need to suck it up and enjoy the hobby and stop complaining you need to really play well to win.

Also Games Workshop make great rules, you all approach them in the wrong mindset.

People who use this thread to be mad about 8th edition are no fun at parties.

And now that we've got the facts out of the way, time for an opinion: the Zerg are a better demonstration of the concept than the Tyranids.

Space Marines are competitive. Always have been and always will be. Many SM players just want to auto-win with no efforts their games.

LoWs shouldn't be legal in games under 3000 points game.

Factions with just a few entries (Harlequins...) or basically just the repetition of the same model (Imperial Knights...) shouldn't be independent armies but part of other codexes.

OK got one more to add..

GW are amazing, wonderful and have given me years of fun in my life.

People bitch on about them and there are other alternatives out there, but when it comes down to it, GW have been on the top of the game for a long time, their products are generally all bloody good. I have models and even paints that are over 20 years old and still going strong. Not a lot in life can say the same.

1. 8th edition is boring, far too bare bones, and a major step in the wrong direction for the hobby.

2. 7th edition despite all its horrible balance issues was at its core a much better game and GW did a major diservice by scrapping all the good qualities of the edition.

3. 8th edition is going to go down the same path as past editions where GW throws in more rules bloat (not depth of mechanics but just layering on bonuses on top of bonuses) resulting in the game becoming more unwieldy.

4. Primaris are a marketing ploy to invalidate old models and get the large space marine player base to eventually rebuy their entire army again.

5. The lore of the Tau is good for the 40k setting

6. The core gameplay style of Tau is bad for 40k

7. The entire Gathering Storm plot was a dumpster fire of horrible writing decisions and 40k has been permanently worsened by its publication.

8. The years of GW being pants on head stupid about community interaction and zero marketing has made a lot of the user base extremely susceptible to actual marketing and hype.

9. The 40k meme focused lore is better than the actual lore because GW takes whats suppose to be a semi satirical and silly setting way too seriously.

10. Duncan seems like a nice enough person but his notoriety and the whole two thin coats meme is a overdone at this point.

 Irbis wrote:

ccs wrote:
See what I mean? There's people who can't even handle drawing a straight line down the side of their tank & realizing that it'd indeed be silly to try and claim that the left side sponson could shoot out the right side of the tank.... Or agreeing that a gun in an obviously front only facing mount (ex: a vindicators main gun) can't fire out the rear of the tank.
I mean, I'm not asking you to do rocket science or micro-calculations or anything here.

Let me guess, you also tell your opponent he can't fire his SM at the target right in front of them because they clearly point their guns to the side?

I like how there are people who can't even notice they are OK with 90% of the models on the table being perfectly able to fire out of their butts but suddenly become anal about the remaining 10%...

Actually no.
I admit that I'd like facing rules for all models. But I know the majority of current players (including 3/5 that I play with) wouldn't be able to handle that, so that's not what I'm wishing for. Just the most simplistic of fire arcs for vehicles, 1 baby step above this current lv of absurd abstraction.

There's nothing inherently wrong with soup, either from a game balance or fluff perspective. Fluff-accurate Imperial armies should usually be soup armies. The Imperium should have more options than any other faction, with Chaos as a close second. The game should be balanced around that assumption. In other words, xenos factions should have access to more powerful units to balance their relative lack of options and synergy. If that means that Imperial armies that limit themselves to a single 'subfaction' end up uncompetitive, then that's a feature, not a bug.

 Ginjitzu wrote:
Games-Workshop are better at writing rules than any of the legions of whiny hypocrites who complain incessantly rather than actually going out and writing something better.

One does not need to eat dog gak to know it tastes bad.
Fwiw I'm a fan of 8th, but this fallacy needs to be put to rest. I don't need to write rules to complain about them.

 Grimtuff wrote:

 Ginjitzu wrote:
Games-Workshop are better at writing rules than any of the legions of whiny hypocrites who complain incessantly rather than actually going out and writing something better.

One does not need to eat dog gak to know it tastes bad.
Fwiw I'm a fan of 8th, but this fallacy needs to be put to rest. I don't need to write rules to complain about them.

No. But for those people who complain unceasingly to the extent that they can seemingly find no redeeming value whatsoever in the rules that Games-Workshop produce, then perhaps those rules aren't for them. And if they put as much time and effort into creating an alternative as they do complaining, then I'll happily eat the metaphorical dog gak that is my own words if it means I get to play a better game.

GW writes good rules? Damn, now that’s a hot take.

You may like GW rules, but that doesn’t mean they’re good, so we should really drop the act here.

At the bare minimum rules for a game should be clear, concise and organized in a logistical manner making it easy for people to find and use correctly.

8th Ed. Fails all of these parameters. Have you guys even tried to read the core rule book? Only someone with schizophrenia would organize a book like that.

Don't get me wrong: I don't love Games-Workshop's rules. In fact, at one point in time, I thought they had such shortcomings, that I had a stab at writing a set myself. It turned out to be much harder than I had anticipated. I just wonder if any of the chronic moaners out there have at least attempted to write some rules like I did. An exercise like that can really put these things into perspective and give one the opportunity to realize that their miniature plastic toy soldiers are no less valuable regardless of the amount of strength points the dudes who sell them say they have.

 Brutus_Apex wrote:


You may like GW rules, but that doesn’t mean they’re good, so we should really drop the act here.

Well you may don't like GW rules but that doesn't mean they're bad.

 Ginjitzu wrote:
Don't get me wrong: I don't love Games-Workshop's rules. In fact, at one point in time, I thought they had such shortcomings, that I had a stab at writing a set myself. It turned out to be much harder than I had anticipated. I just wonder if any of the chronic moaners out there have at least attempted to write some rules like I did. An exercise like that can really put these things into perspective and give one the opportunity to realize that their miniature plastic toy soldiers are no less valuable regardless of the amount of strength points the dudes who sell them say they have.

Which isn't an excuse because you're just an unprofessional individual with ridiculously limited resources. GW is a company, a company with a lot of resources. They have precisely zero excuse to put forth anything but well balanced and well refined rules. The only reason they don't is due to a mixture of greed, laziness, and incompetence.

4++ should be rare, and 3++super rare!

Both Tau and Tyranids are examples of bad writing by GW. Sure they work in settings, but not in a business that GW wants to continue.

Tau is too small to continue forever, they're already split down the middle, how long does GW want us to believe they can survive? How much plot armour can one empire have?
Also, the focus on huge suits is really uncool, GW should really focus on the idea of a union of race, and more small suits. The Tau dont counter titans with their own suits, they use mantas.

Tyranids are also bad but on the opposite side. An unending threat that's going to eventually wipe out the galaxy? The current forces are only scouts? Yeah, so now they have to give plot armour to everyone else to avoid Tyranids nomming everything, bad writing.

To be clear, I like both Tau and Tyranids, I simply wish they were better written.

Oh, another unpopular opinion maybe?: GW is ruining Chaos. Undivided daemons and undivided Marks should make a return, undivided should be more of its own thing than worshipping all the gods.

And finally, bring back Malice. As much as people like to meme about it, I actually think Malice was a cool story point (Even if it has to be done under another name for copyright shiz). Malice could be something akin to the Tau's warp entity they accidently made.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ginjitzu wrote:
Don't get me wrong: I don't love Games-Workshop's rules. In fact, at one point in time, I thought they had such shortcomings, that I had a stab at writing a set myself. It turned out to be much harder than I had anticipated. I just wonder if any of the chronic moaners out there have at least attempted to write some rules like I did. An exercise like that can really put these things into perspective and give one the opportunity to realize that their miniature plastic toy soldiers are no less valuable regardless of the amount of strength points the dudes who sell them say they have.

I can say I am attempting to make my own ruleset, and I completely agree. I've spent a good chunk of time on it, and the balance is definitely worse than GW's, but its a work in progress.

Scatter dice should be applied to all shots fired by ranged weapons in the game.

The current detatchment system is completely broken.
We were better off with the old CAD
Knights as their own army is a huge mistake, and very unbalanced.

 Wyzilla wrote:

 Irbis wrote:

ccs wrote:
See what I mean? There's people who can't even handle drawing a straight line down the side of their tank & realizing that it'd indeed be silly to try and claim that the left side sponson could shoot out the right side of the tank.... Or agreeing that a gun in an obviously front only facing mount (ex: a vindicators main gun) can't fire out the rear of the tank.
I mean, I'm not asking you to do rocket science or micro-calculations or anything here.

Let me guess, you also tell your opponent he can't fire his SM at the target right in front of them because they clearly point their guns to the side?

I like how there are people who can't even notice they are OK with 90% of the models on the table being perfectly able to fire out of their butts but suddenly become anal about the remaining 10%...

It takes roughly a second or two for infantry to turn around and fire their weapon, possibly even less. Even a monster could probably whip around and fire off shots easily. A tank however has to either traverse the gun (which can take a while) or physically turn the tank around on its treads into a new facing. Both of which takes a lot longer than to simply turn around on your heel, take aim, and fire. Which also takes long enough that it should justify that it takes to turn around.

There is also no excuse at all for aircraft firing out of their arse. Aircraft should only be able to shoot at anything visible from the front of their initial starting space and their ending space in the movement phase. They shouldn't be able to shoot at infantry that is directly behind them and they never even flew over.

Which is why they're shooting while they move. And while some might stay still on the table it doesn't mean that they model wasn't moving around to shoot it's guns "in real life".

Do you envision Blood Angels that move, shoot, and then charge to say, "Alright lads! Stand perfectly still while you shoot those guns and no pivoting!"? Or might they actually be all one fluid motion and we just break it up for game purposes?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 Aaranis wrote:
ITC ruleset is not Warhammer 40,000.

Thats not an opinion its a fact, ITC is a different game with warhammer models.

So if I came up with a different mission I'm no longer playing Warhammer even though the book encourages that? Cool.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 Aaranis wrote:
ITC ruleset is not Warhammer 40,000.

Thats not an opinion its a fact, ITC is a different game with warhammer models.

So if I came up with a different mission I'm no longer playing Warhammer even though the book encourages that? Cool.

The fact ITC changes the game so much that it has its own completely different meta to non-ITC missions indicates that it's a completely deviated game.

Okay, this goes very against the grain for me but good "therapy":


Boys before toys! (troop choices before the other stuff in case you have any different ideas...)

Space marines suck in all things (I play them and it "hurts" to use them)

Mastery in airbrush is FAR superior to hairy brush skills (I am far more skilled in brush than airbrush but that gap is closing fast).

40k models are "embarrassing". (My Bolt Action stuff seems to be much better received as "awesome looking" by the uninitiated than my better painted 40k stuff).

The vast majority of wargamers are social misfits (I cannot seem to find a single person that is not on mental corrective meds, has strong personal body odour / halitosis, no concept of persona space or has the entirety of their social circle within the gaming group... I cannot fully exclude myself from this)

Magic the Gathering seems more "respectable" than wargaming. (Seems well organized and the community is still thriving).

Vehicles in 40k seem to be the "odd man out" when it comes to painting them to a good finish. (Historical models can be the finest examples of model painting out there (airplanes, tanks) yet we always see some 40k model with the clear cockpit painted over, lighting glow effects, ugly flyiing bases, very little photo-etch parts (none standard for sure), the vehicles feel more like an "icon" of the vehicle than anything realistically realized "making a silk purse out of a sow's ear".)

Miniatures generally as gaming pieces are garbage. (Pick up a chess piece. Feel the heft, the feel of it. We play with plastic. It is as heavy as plastic. I put fender washers in the base of every single miniature I own because they feel "cheap" otherwise. You would think they would put out a line of weighted bases)

Gaming rule books suck. (I write procedures for part of my living. Logical flow and having ALL the information available for each element of a process is "standard". Squirreling away tidbits along margins and tables in the back of a book leads to needless page flipping and "process" delays).

I actually dislike that Chapterhouse sued GW, now every codex is made with the rule "if we do not have the model, we are not making the rules for one".

I think psychic phase is unnecessary.


Thare.

That is out of my system.

The chain of my tank can see the chain of your tank and so I can shoot you - rubbish!

40k models are "embarrassing". (My Bolt Action stuff seems to be much better received as "awesome looking" by the uninitiated than my better painted 40k stuff).

I think that's your own psyche imposing on other people's expectations.

The vast majority of wargamers are social misfits (I cannot seem to find a single person that is not on mental corrective meds, has strong personal body odour / halitosis, no concept of persona space or has the entirety of their social circle within the gaming group... I cannot fully exclude myself from this)

For those aged 12 to 25, probably. This is more pronounced for MTG in my area and less for Warhammer.

Magic the Gathering seems more "respectable" than wargaming. (Seems well organized and the community is still thriving).

Easier to get into - that's about it. The odor when MTG tournaments are on are unbearable. Again, I think this is your psyche imposing the belief that playing with toy soldiers is less respectable than a card game.

Vehicles in 40k seem to be the "odd man out" when it comes to painting them to a good finish. (Historical models can be the finest examples of model painting out there (airplanes, tanks) yet we always see some 40k model with the clear cockpit painted over, lighting glow effects, ugly flyiing bases, very little photo-etch parts (none standard for sure), the vehicles feel more like an "icon" of the vehicle than anything realistically realized "making a silk purse out of a sow's ear".)

Historical players have an older age bracket who are more patient and experienced.