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.

like gangs around turf (which is another strangely apt comparison as the "communities" around different game stores seem to have or even encourage store rivalries rather than foster a large and diverse gaming community in the town)

Its like you liive here in my city too lol. That is exactly what happens here and has for over twenty years.

auticus wrote:

like gangs around turf (which is another strangely apt comparison as the "communities" around different game stores seem to have or even encourage store rivalries rather than foster a large and diverse gaming community in the town)

Its like you liive here in my city too lol. That is exactly what happens here and has for over twenty years.

Same here in Tampa. I've seen several game stores that have fierce rivalries (usually over something stupid as saying another store is "stealing their customers" by having their own events) when it boggles my mind, they should be having a community in the city rather than rival gangs (game stores) all trying to prove dominance.

It revolves around wanting to be daddy. Each store has its own way of running events.

The Wild West lives on in the modern gaming store inter-store rivalry?!

More like heavy clique culture. Gang is another appropriate term, simply because the game store is the "turf" and you stick to your own "turf" and way of doing things.

The other gangs playing on their own "turf" are rivals that are doing things wrong and are a detriment to gaming as a whole, while one's own tribe and gang are doing it purely and are leading the local community in the right direction.

Its pretty absurd. I got caught up in this for several years as well. And I admit I was pretty absurd.

That's precisely why I use "gang" ("Tribe" might also be appropriate and have less violent connotations). That's exactly what I've seen, although it's generally not that others are "doing things wrong" but that they are basically infringing into your territory.

I once saw a game store that became actively hostile just because someone mentioned that another store was having a tournament in 2 weeks if anyone was interested. The response shifted immediately to "It's really rude to suggest people go to a different store" even though it was for an event, not "This store sucks go to X instead".

@ Wayniac and Auticus: it looks like you could try to introduce LARP version of Necromunda in your towns

Jokes aside, it is quite different here in Poland, as we don't solely rely on gaming stores, but instead we have three kinds of "dens" that somewhat complement eachother: multigame stores with tables available (those usually hold gaming nights for various popular miniature games, card games and board games), gaming clubs in community centers and publicly available hobby clubs (subscription based hobby workshops, providing anyone with all the tools and paints necessary, airbrush stations included). In result you see a lot of cross pollination and decidedly more focus on the hobby aspects and the possibility of introducing board game geeks into miniature systems.

However, one interesting observation from various conventions and "store photo streams": there was not a single convention I can recall with a quality 40K or AOS table, but plenty of great historical tables, with WWII, medieval, ancient or "time universal" themes. I have played on fully painted MicroArtStudio Wolsung tables, I have observed a game of Battletech on a beautiful, custom built wooden gaming table with 3D hexagonal landscape, but all games of 40K or AOS I saw in public had a rudimentary setup of cloth or mat plus few, mostly unpainted ruins and a hill or two. I have never saw a fully 3D modular tiled 40K table "in person" until I made one myself. And it was the same story during my times of 2nd and 3rd - in my experience GW players here in Poland have always neglected terrain and the whole "visual spectacle" aspect of the game and instead focused solely on perfecting their armies and very little else. I've actually raised my little narrative 40K group based on board game players with RPG inclinations, who wanted something with more "real feel" to it than printed tokens and an occasional soft plastic miniature in Zombiecide, not on people already invested in 40K...

 LunarSol wrote:
I certainly understand. I've got the "gaming community" dream myself and I've had a little luck, but I'm not sure it'll stick by any means. I think the core of any gaming community is just 2 people showing up consistently to play. Some of my personally progress has been a willingness to try anything as much as I try to introduce things. Over time I've found whenever someone in the 40k crowd is curious about a new game, they come to me and ask if I'll try because they know I'm open to new games. I got into a state where I'd play Infinity with this guy and Malifaux with that guy and so on and that's started to grow into a little more cross pollination and a larger group of general game gamers. I'm not sure if I'll ever build anything resembling a large meta, but I can play different things with friends and that's kind of the whole point.

That's how you do it.

My community started back in '94 with me and another guy playing Space Hulk in the back of Comics Utah. We invited anyone that wanted to play to join and slowly built a community over time playing GW games. Dozens of people have come and gone over the years, but the community has survived moving stores (x3) and absorbing smaller groups as we go. All you really need to develop a community is patience, stability, and being open to new people. I have plenty of gaming buddies, acquaintances, and real friends in my group.

But I see from some of the responses in this thread, people seem to treat their hobby like a Glory Hole and only get that level of joy out of it. If you want a community you have to invest in it.

I've played 6th and 7th eds... and I DON'T want to go back.

My only pet peeve is that HH remained in 7th.

 Ginjitzu wrote:

tl;dr: This isn't about whether a new edition is better or worse - there's quite enough of that elsewhere on the forum - but rather, why do you find it so hard to let go?

I had a much harder time letting go of 40k than any other game, because of the investment in time involved. I cannot stand the new version.

My wife went back to college about the time I started playing 40k, and the nights she had class, I painted. And when she did homework, I painted. I had, before selling some of them, over 100,000 points worth of painted models, done to a competition-winning level standard. That's a level of dedication that you don't get with monopoly... Thousands of hours of work - it's really hard to walk away from that.

And, you asked, why not play the older version - but the answer is, you need other people who want to play the older versions in order to do that, and the new models don't have rules in the older versions...
The group I played with, we used to get together every Friday night. But the new rules turned them off, one by one. Someone who spent $1000 for an army, who took a hundred hours to paint it, only to find it left entirely without rules in an edition change - that's a rough sell, why should they risk that again?

What's worse is the money spent - which I'm sure I could recoup by selling all my armies, but knowing how long it took to assemble and paint them. If I were to sell them off, I'd pretty much seal the door on ever playing again, I no longer have the time to invest in projects like that.

Even a game like M:tG, which is expensive to play competitively, you can sell your cards, and if you decide to play again, just buy more cards. There's not this huge time commitment as well.

 Redbeard wrote:

 Ginjitzu wrote:

tl;dr: This isn't about whether a new edition is better or worse - there's quite enough of that elsewhere on the forum - but rather, why do you find it so hard to let go?

I had a much harder time letting go of 40k than any other game, because of the investment in time involved. I cannot stand the new version.

My wife went back to college about the time I started playing 40k, and the nights she had class, I painted. And when she did homework, I painted. I had, before selling some of them, over 100,000 points worth of painted models, done to a competition-winning level standard. That's a level of dedication that you don't get with monopoly... Thousands of hours of work - it's really hard to walk away from that.

And, you asked, why not play the older version - but the answer is, you need other people who want to play the older versions in order to do that, and the new models don't have rules in the older versions...
The group I played with, we used to get together every Friday night. But the new rules turned them off, one by one. Someone who spent $1000 for an army, who took a hundred hours to paint it, only to find it left entirely without rules in an edition change - that's a rough sell, why should they risk that again?

What's worse is the money spent - which I'm sure I could recoup by selling all my armies, but knowing how long it took to assemble and paint them. If I were to sell them off, I'd pretty much seal the door on ever playing again, I no longer have the time to invest in projects like that.

Even a game like M:tG, which is expensive to play competitively, you can sell your cards, and if you decide to play again, just buy more cards. There's not this huge time commitment as well.

Since there were few of you who felt the same way about 8th and all of you walked away from 40K, why not play previous edition with those people? Rules for new models are very easy to translate into previous systems, there is a tonne of comparable material to establish statlines and costs... I still play 7th(ish)ed with the same people I played with before 8th dropped. Ultimately you only really need one opponent to stay in the game, especially if you have 100.000 pts of models, you will never be bored by repetitive nature of your games against one person with those numbers.

Voss wrote:
Got to agree with Mango and Wayne. Getting games aren't that easy, and time and money prevents the endless cycle of other games (let alone painting stuff for other games).


As to the thread itself, it's interesting to see who turns up for a rousing round of dumping on people who don't like the things they like. And especially with several people commenting on 'the small minority,' they obviously have specific targets in mind.

Hang around here for a bit, and it becomes very obvious who keeps crashing into discussions and sucking all the air out of the room under a veneer of "just tellin' it like it is", while staying juuuuuust within the letter of the law. I think it's much more damaging to the community than a random troll who wanders in, flames out and then gets banned.

It's not usually not so much "people not liking what I like" and more "people who don't like what I like and who won't ever let it drop". Complain all you want about echo chambers, but I'd rather have unproductive positive discussion than unproductive whinging and bleating. They both make the same amount of difference (none), but the former is a lot more pleasant to read.

Eventually, it's like--okay. We get it. Really, we get it. Nobody on the forum is in any doubt about your opinion. Now that we've established beyond all possible doubt what your opinion is, maybe you could pass up just one opportunity to trumpet it from the rooftops? No? We're going to do this same dance yet again? If I had access to the accounts of certain posters, I could reproduce their responses on certain topics so well that nobody could tell them apart from the originals, because they've been repeating the same things over and over for years.

 Elemental wrote:

Voss wrote:
Got to agree with Mango and Wayne. Getting games aren't that easy, and time and money prevents the endless cycle of other games (let alone painting stuff for other games).


As to the thread itself, it's interesting to see who turns up for a rousing round of dumping on people who don't like the things they like. And especially with several people commenting on 'the small minority,' they obviously have specific targets in mind.

Hang around here for a bit, and it becomes very obvious who keeps crashing into discussions and sucking all the air out of the room under a veneer of "just tellin' it like it is", while staying juuuuuust within the letter of the law. I think it's much more damaging to the community than a random troll who wanders in, flames out and then gets banned.

It's not usually not so much "people not liking what I like" and more "people who don't like what I like and who won't ever let it drop". Complain all you want about echo chambers, but I'd rather have unproductive positive discussion than unproductive whinging and bleating. They both make the same amount of difference (none), but the former is a lot more pleasant to read.

Eventually, it's like--okay. We get it. Really, we get it. Nobody on the forum is in any doubt about your opinion. Now that we've established beyond all possible doubt what your opinion is, maybe you could pass up just one opportunity to trumpet it from the rooftops? No? We're going to do this same dance yet again? If I had access to the accounts of certain posters, I could reproduce their responses on certain topics so well that nobody could tell them apart from the originals, because they've been repeating the same things over and over for years.

Maybe that indicates a real problem, instead of the usual people saying "Everything is great and fine, anyone who doesn't think so is a hater". Just saying since I think I might be one of those people you're referring to....

nou wrote:

Since there were few of you who felt the same way about 8th and all of you walked away from 40K, why not play previous edition with those people?

Because not everyone left at the same time, and many sold their models when they were done. It comes down to a critical mass issue. When you have, say, eight regular players, you can assume four will be available at any given time, scheduling and such. When two sell their models, three want to play 8th, and three don't want to play 8th, you lost your critical mass to keep a regular game night going.

For whatever it’s worth, I see far fewer people with stereotypical fanboy responses than the opposite. At the same time, it seems like most people can acknowledge things are flawed or that they don’t like something without being consistently miserable. It’s a semi-consistent few that just have that personality, I suppose, and they perhaps stand out more. Like, I’ll see their name and immediately assume the tone of their forthcoming post. I’m not always right, in fairness. I assume everyone is a human being on the other side of the screen after all.

 Redbeard wrote:

nou wrote:

Since there were few of you who felt the same way about 8th and all of you walked away from 40K, why not play previous edition with those people?

Because not everyone left at the same time, and many sold their models when they were done. It comes down to a critical mass issue. When you have, say, eight regular players, you can assume four will be available at any given time, scheduling and such. When two sell their models, three want to play 8th, and three don't want to play 8th, you lost your critical mass to keep a regular game night going.

I know this is a "spilled milk" situation now, but I honestly don't see a reason why, if only you were openly communicating your preferences to stay behind with 7th, to not organize with those two or three that wanted the same thing. It is not that they vanished overnight without a trace... But I suppose this just another example of this whole "the way things are in America" situation discussed above.

 Wolf_in_Human_Shape wrote:
For whatever it’s worth, I see far fewer people...

A lot of people see what they want to see.

Wayniac wrote:

 Elemental wrote:

Voss wrote:
Got to agree with Mango and Wayne. Getting games aren't that easy, and time and money prevents the endless cycle of other games (let alone painting stuff for other games).


As to the thread itself, it's interesting to see who turns up for a rousing round of dumping on people who don't like the things they like. And especially with several people commenting on 'the small minority,' they obviously have specific targets in mind.

Hang around here for a bit, and it becomes very obvious who keeps crashing into discussions and sucking all the air out of the room under a veneer of "just tellin' it like it is", while staying juuuuuust within the letter of the law. I think it's much more damaging to the community than a random troll who wanders in, flames out and then gets banned.

It's not usually not so much "people not liking what I like" and more "people who don't like what I like and who won't ever let it drop". Complain all you want about echo chambers, but I'd rather have unproductive positive discussion than unproductive whinging and bleating. They both make the same amount of difference (none), but the former is a lot more pleasant to read.

Eventually, it's like--okay. We get it. Really, we get it. Nobody on the forum is in any doubt about your opinion. Now that we've established beyond all possible doubt what your opinion is, maybe you could pass up just one opportunity to trumpet it from the rooftops? No? We're going to do this same dance yet again? If I had access to the accounts of certain posters, I could reproduce their responses on certain topics so well that nobody could tell them apart from the originals, because they've been repeating the same things over and over for years.

Maybe that indicates a real problem, instead of the usual people saying "Everything is great and fine, anyone who doesn't think so is a hater". Just saying since I think I might be one of those people you're referring to....

Yup, go on. Name names. I'm a big boy- I'll bet someone is referring to me.

Wayniac wrote:

Maybe that indicates a real problem, instead of the usual people saying "Everything is great and fine, anyone who doesn't think so is a hater". Just saying since I think I might be one of those people you're referring to....

I'm not commenting on how legitimate the points are, just the way they're pursued. Negativity is often pursued with a fervour that makes me think that complaining is the end, rather than any sort of means.

 Elemental wrote:

I'm not commenting on how legitimate the points are, just the way they're pursued. Negativity is often pursued with a fervour that makes me think that complaining is the end, rather than any sort of means.

The thing is, when someone complains about something, the reaction to that complaint has a fairly big impact. If I (a generic 'I', not me specifically) say 'This thing: I hates it because 'blah!'' and you respond with 'No, that thing is fine' then I'm going to continue to point out just why that thing is bad, because you clearly don't get it.

One of the biggest life lessons I've learnt from having children is that what people complaining about something are generally looking for is acknowledgement. Pointing out reasons that you think their complaint is invalid is just pouring petrol on the fire, because it makes them feel like they're not being heard, or you're not understanding the problem.

 Grimtuff wrote:

Yup, go on. Name names. I'm a big boy- I'll bet someone is referring to me.

Heh, I remember back in the day when someone would have been referring to me in threads like this. Sic transit gloria mundi, and all that. :-P

Warhammer 40k is 75% whining about the game, and 25% fluctuating between hobbying and playing.

Of that percent that's whining, it's a combination of whining about things they don't even play, have no interest in using, and then sometimes whining that their army is underperforming. Double the whining about underperforming when it is absolutely not doing that.

I don't play games I don't enjoy.

I don't play with people that make a game suck.

I don't play in establishments where the game environment is toxic or otherwise irritating.

If you want more serious percentages, I'd say about 75% of enjoying a game is the people you game with. Find people like yourself and make your own group, and recruit people like you and make it clear what you're looking for.

 Elemental wrote:
It's not usually not so much "people not liking what I like" and more "people who don't like what I like and who won't ever let it drop". Complain all you want about echo chambers, but I'd rather have unproductive positive discussion than unproductive whinging and bleating. They both make the same amount of difference (none), but the former is a lot more pleasant to read.

I see, so the people having the discussion that you prefer have no obligation to "let it drop" even once they've made their point, but the people saying things you don't like need to say it once and then stop challenging the people who share your opinion? Definitely a reasonable and unbiased position...

It's also the most negative possible reading of what he actually said, which was essentially just that positive discussion is more pleasant to read.

Unfortunately, he couched that opinion in negative language, which just perpetuates the cycle.

OP, there's also a thing with geeks. And actually, beyond geeks.

People like to complain about new things. Being bitter and complaining sometimes gives people the impression that they seem smarter, more clever about something that the 'stupid masses' haven't figured out yet.

The old joke for 40k is that there are dudes lurking around that "haven't played since 3rd" complaining about the game now. But either that's true and they're a sad person desperate for validation, or it's a lie and they're still a sad person desperate for validation.

Yes, 40k has its flaws. Kill Team is lacking in some ways. There are tons of things about the game that can improve, and it is far from perfect. But if the game were -ever- perfect, everyone would have played it and they wouldn't have changed a thing.

The best thing you can do about 'validation complainers' is ignore them. Giving them attention is giving them a stage and a spotlight to do their little performance where they pretend to be a higher-tier player than us lowly plebeians that monkey about with this 8th Edition garbage.

Meanwhile, we're having fun with a game, and they're standing in a corner with their pouty lips and folded arms, buttmad because people are enjoying a thing they don't like. And not paying attention to them.

Enjoy your games and turn your back to anyone who's trying to piss on that.

EDIT: As a good practice, when I complain about things- I try not to say "this sucks" and leave it at that. I try to say, "I think this could be improved if we instead did X, Y, and Z." The difference between a whinge and constructive critique is adding one idea to a complaint.

 AegisGrimm wrote:
Hating the last edition is like hating Ultramarines. It's to be part of the cool group

I Hate for Hate's sake...

 Agamemnon2 wrote:

 Grimtuff wrote:

Yup, go on. Name names. I'm a big boy- I'll bet someone is referring to me.

Heh, I remember back in the day when someone would have been referring to me in threads like this. Sic transit gloria mundi, and all that. :-P

I've been a called a "hater" so many time over the years it's not funny. Unless you think GW farts rainbows and gaks gold you're a "hater" in some parts. Some people just cannot take criticism or the idea that something is not "perfect".

Just yesterday at my FLGS I had to indirectly defend Achilles (AKA Ash from Guerilla Miniature Games) on here as I referenced a ruling he and Owen agreed between themselves in a AoS batrep (We were looking through the new Goblin book) I was watching and this set off another person to go into a rant about how certain people want to ruin "their" game by bending the rules. I asked them if they knew who Ash was and his channel and how he is the last person in the world to be described that way or as a TFG and how two opponents coming to a mutual ruling that they might not use in future games is not "bending the rules", but this set off all of their "GW is being besmirched!" alarms and they went full white knight.

 Ginjitzu wrote:
As I understand it, a new addition doesn't invalidate any old edition and you're free to keep playing the one you love, or am I missing something that says you can't? I know that new additions mean the old ones are no longer in print, but isn't that only an issue for newcomers whom, by definition wouldn't have any investment in the old editions anyway?

There is your issue right here.

You're 110% right that newer editions do not validate older ones However You would be lucky to get a game on the fly. It takes a very close friend or group that you have known throughout the editions to play that specific game and there are dozens of variables on why that game won't take place, distance? old friends selling off their collections, etc. Then all you're really left with is sunk cost fallacy as you have to play the edition you don't like in order to get any use out of your minis, unless you can beat your cycle.

I myself, just don't really play 40k just because my NL have been dumped on a considerable amount of faeces on them, both lore and game play wise by GW. I enjoy my Orks but it's still not enough for me to really invest or even play with as I enjoy other games more. I guess I'm lucky I found a gaming group that play exclusively Indie games with GW Specialist/ME:SBG.

I guess it depends.

For some, it’s a more significant investment of time and money. Me? I’m ok with both. No kids, good job, more than enough income to roll with the changes, whatever they may be. So having an army no longer be fieldable as it was is at best a minor irritation.

But for others in a different position? That’s not so acceptable. And fair enough. Yes, some people do go overboard (on BoLS, there was a poster who, mysteriously, only ever played the exact army that just got ‘nerfed’ - despite in other threads constantly banging on and on and on and on about how long it is since they last played, and how long it’s been since they last bought something from GW.

There’s also the culture of the game. I was put off Warmachine back in the early days because of my first experiences. Basically, the guys I was playing against were power gaming WAAC, who, for me, were just no fun to play against. So I sold my bits and bobs and ever went back. Is that a fair reflection of the game? Especially after 16 years? Almost certainly not. It’s only a reflection of bad luck on my behalf. Yet that experience has left an sour taste I’ve not been able to shake,

Look at some of the complaints about 40k, and you’ll soon see many are in fact about their local community. Sad gits only out to ROFLstomp newcomers. People demanding that everyone only ever play to their preference, whatever that might be. Like my experience with Warmachine, that is by no means representative of the game, nor the wider community. Just toxic pockets of it.

For instance, I’m making an effort to get active in the hobby again, after several fallow years. If the opponents I line up all only ever play Smash Captain, Knights and Loyal 32 Soup, that’s going to sap my resolve faster than if I get a wider variety of play styles and army lists. In that regard, I’m lucky that my town has a thriving club, most members of which I know from my days as a GW till monkey. So it’ll be less of a drag in terms of ‘man, I need to be able to match That One List’. And I dare venture said variety will make me a more competent player, and thus opponent. So when it comes time for my first Tournament, I’ll at least be a memorable opponent they’d be happy to play again.

And yes, I will be wanting to try some games against That One List. Because there’s no point in trying to avoid it at all costs. And who knows, perhaps my haphazard ‘Wing it, and hope for the best’ approach might see me come out on top. If not, I hope to at least get to the stage where I can give them a bloody nose!

People who complain all the time about the current edition, other peoples' armies and preferences, their own....

...and they're very often people who 'don't play the game any more'...

...I might be jumping to conclusions here, but I'm thinking that if all you do is piss and moan about the game and other players, you might be sort of... shunned and unable to play the game, not necessarily a 'quitter'.