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.

Hello everybody,

after playing the game from the release of the 3rd edition starter box until the start of 7th, I came finally back to the hobby and to this forum (always a watcher in the dark, never posting myself).
My memories are most likely tinted by time and nostalgia, but I can't remember to notice so much negativity back in the day just about everything.

When I take a look around, we - as a community - are better off than ever before:

- Every main faction got a Codex from the same edition (for the first time since 3rd edition!)
GW sits at 9 Codex releases per year with 8th edition. Compare this to the ~2 releases per year in 4th and 5th edition, where it wasn't even guaranteed that your faction would get up to date rules within the edition's life time.

- The model range is fantastic!
Back in the day we always hoped for but never dreamed of certain factions/models coming to life. Custodes, Genestealer, Nurglekin, Primarchs, AdMech, Deathwatch, Tzeentch, 30k, ...

- Social Media
Painting tutorials from fans and GW on Youtube, weekly streams on Twitch, high quality battle reports, Warhammer Community, GW themselves spreading rumours HOLY COW.
Listening to their Twitch stream while cracking open a fresh pot of paint and working on my models with people having a chat feels like I'm part of a community. It gives me a good feeling, because even though I have no nearby living friends who play the game, I do feel connected.

- Contrast and Texture paints, along with the design of model kits make the hobby super accessable. Personally, Contrast was the seller for me to return to the hobby.

- I know very well that GW is really hit or miss with their balancing, but the situation is better than it ever was before. The last Space Marine Codex got 6 supplements and at least as much playable, fun army lists out of it.
I don't want to hear that they are too strong relative to other factions like Grey Knights. I don't want to hear that people should only be allowed to play with the rules for which Chapter you painted your toy soldiers.
We got 6 Chapters promoting different units and Marine players are free to switch between them so they do not have to play the same mono list for the next 5 years. Great for them and I hope that all factions get a similar treatment in the future, because it will be healthy for the game and good for us players.

- Iron Hands have been regulated within WEEKS of their release. In recent editions you had to live with a broken codex until the next edition would alter the basic rules enough to neuter it or until the army would get a new codex. That's great.

- Sister of Battles are getting a complete relaunch. I can't believe it. The miniatures so far look great and even though I've never been fan enough to pick them up because metal, I really consider buying the Christmas box.
The army has been on life support since 3rd edition and it never really was a good time to start them. Metal, expensive, harder to convert and customise. Yet, people are stating their disappointment that the new range won't be available until next year.
Guys, come on! We get a very flavourful army back after more than a decade of neglecting them. Thank you GW for giving an army that must be at the bottom of sales a chance to come back.


Does the game have problems? Absolutely.
- Some models are legally allowed to drink alcohol in the US by now.
- Not all factions are equally powerful or have multiple, interesting builds available.
- Prices are only getting higher, for models and rules likewise.
- We lost Warseer along the way.
- Some models are only available in starter boxes.
- If you are not a loyalist Space Marine, you are lucky to get a new model every few years.


But despite all that, I would like everyone to take a more relaxed approach to the hobby. Some things are good, some are bad. Maybe for you personally more things are bad than they are good. I can totally understand that Grey Knight players are left in the dust since 5th edition. No release apart from that one Gathering Storm guy and mediocre to bad rules.
Trust me, we all would want it to be a better situation. But each of us personally can't change Games Workshop. What we can change, however, is how we are.

- If your army is having weak rules, ask your fellow players to not bring three immortal Leviathan Dreadnoughts. After all you both want to have fun.
- If your army is not getting much model support, consider picking up another army or another miniature game to keep things fresh. "What a great advice, pick up another army" I hear you say, but again: You can only change yourself, not GW. Nobody is happier at the end of the day if you stick with your Sisters of Battle since 3rd and start a complain thread everyday. You won't be happier doing that, so let it go and look for what would make you happier.
- Obviously, my advice does little for you if you are a die hard tournament player. I'm sorry to say this, but Warhammer 40k is a poor tournament game and always has been. Could it be a good one? Of course, but we are not there at the moment. So there is no use in complaining about poor playtesting or calling armies "trash tier" because they are not as broken as the current thing that is very broken.


At the end of the day we all want to have fun with our toy soldiers. And I feel we could improve the community if everybody would be a little bit less doom and gloom and drastic in their choice of words.


I, for one, look forward to grow my new collection in a time where Warhammer - with all it's flaws - is in a better state than it ever was before.



Thank you for reading the wall of text, I needed to get this off my chest

I had fun playing 6th and 7th. 8th came out and I gave it a fair shake but the game stopped being fun because of the design choices GW made. Hundreds of hours of work and thousands of dollars of models became in part wasted because it has become 10x harder to find a game of 7th as everyone else has moved on to 8th. Frankly it sucks to have a game I loved get tossed aside and trampled while this mess of a game (8th) is being proclaimed as some golden age of GW or whatever. So what exactly is there to be positive about when the game I started with got completely rewritten and removed most of the aspects that I found enjoyable?

 Vankraken wrote:
I had fun playing 6th and 7th. 8th came out and I gave it a fair shake but the game stopped being fun because of the design choices GW made. Hundreds of hours of work and thousands of dollars of models became in part wasted because it has become 10x harder to find a game of 7th as everyone else has moved on to 8th. Frankly it sucks to have a game I loved get tossed aside and trampled while this mess of a game (8th) is being proclaimed as some golden age of GW or whatever. So what exactly is there to be positive about when the game I started with got completely rewritten and removed most of the aspects that I found enjoyable?

Which aspects of 7th are missing that make the game totally unplayable for you?

I miss facings and somewhat templates (without them + auras blob armies became too prevalent; and flamers became weaker). I also liked some of the moving and shooting rules better before I guess.

I do not miss all the instant death rules, whole units running from a failed morale check, and only few factions having ability to charge from transports. Also that godawful psychic phase with dice pool and random powers.

I actually signed back in to say thanks op, a nice refreshing post.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Vankraken wrote:
I had fun playing 6th and 7th. 8th came out and I gave it a fair shake but the game stopped being fun because of the design choices GW made. Hundreds of hours of work and thousands of dollars of models became in part wasted because it has become 10x harder to find a game of 7th as everyone else has moved on to 8th. Frankly it sucks to have a game I loved get tossed aside and trampled while this mess of a game (8th) is being proclaimed as some golden age of GW or whatever. So what exactly is there to be positive about when the game I started with got completely rewritten and removed most of the aspects that I found enjoyable?

Which aspects of 7th are missing that make the game totally unplayable for you?

In general the tactical gameplay of using terrain, blast weapons having proper area of effect, AV system so you don't have pulse rifle spam being the most effective form of anti tank, special rules and mechanics built into units. Directional casualties suck for an Ork player but I like how it gives the shooter some decision making in inflicting casualties. The risk/reward of deep strikes is another major thing where taking the risk of a danger close deep strike to melta a tank or get in firing range of some backfield artillery units. I also find myself strongly disliking stratagems as they feel a bit too MTG like and don't cater to redundant units or MSU play styles. Also dislike the +1 and -1 to hit garbage as it isn't well implemented (-1 to hit hoses Orks but only an annoyance to space marines). Weapon profiles and their roles are far too bland and similar due to the lack of true cover mechanics, no blasts, the AP changes, no AV, and general reduction of mechanics and special rules.

The game is less unplayable and more along the lines of being boring as watching paint dry.

 Shadenuat wrote:
I miss facings and somewhat templates (without them + auras blob armies became too prevalent; and flamers became weaker). I also liked some of the moving and shooting rules better before I guess.

I do not miss all the instant death rules, whole units running from a failed morale check, and only few factions having ability to charge from transports. Also that godawful psychic phase with dice pool and random powers.

Facings and templates were fun for armies capable of exploiting them. For everyone else? Not so much. It'd be nice if flamers were better at taking on hordes and a couple other minor things, but I can't for the life of me imagine it would ruin the enjoyment of the game by not having them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vankraken wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Vankraken wrote:
I had fun playing 6th and 7th. 8th came out and I gave it a fair shake but the game stopped being fun because of the design choices GW made. Hundreds of hours of work and thousands of dollars of models became in part wasted because it has become 10x harder to find a game of 7th as everyone else has moved on to 8th. Frankly it sucks to have a game I loved get tossed aside and trampled while this mess of a game (8th) is being proclaimed as some golden age of GW or whatever. So what exactly is there to be positive about when the game I started with got completely rewritten and removed most of the aspects that I found enjoyable?

Which aspects of 7th are missing that make the game totally unplayable for you?

In general the tactical gameplay of using terrain, blast weapons having proper area of effect, AV system so you don't have pulse rifle spam being the most effective form of anti tank, special rules and mechanics built into units. Directional casualties suck for an Ork player but I like how it gives the shooter some decision making in inflicting casualties. The risk/reward of deep strikes is another major thing where taking the risk of a danger close deep strike to melta a tank or get in firing range of some backfield artillery units. I also find myself strongly disliking stratagems as they feel a bit too MTG like and don't cater to redundant units or MSU play styles. Also dislike the +1 and -1 to hit garbage as it isn't well implemented (-1 to hit hoses Orks but only an annoyance to space marines). Weapon profiles and their roles are far too bland and similar due to the lack of true cover mechanics, no blasts, the AP changes, no AV, and general reduction of mechanics and special rules.

The game is less unplayable and more along the lines of being boring as watching paint dry.

Thanks for taking the time to elaborate. I get the feeling you've missed out on the bigger changes since the inception of this edition. When is the last time you played?

- I'll commensurate with you on terrain. I play ITC more, because terrain is often too easy to ignore.

- Blast weapons -- for me -- I can do without. Think of it this way : it prevented blobbing, but that did that really do? It just slowed the game down as people maximized their 2". The random shots now represents the variability of the templates.

- Pulse rifle spam is hardly good AV. It's good AV in a pinch, but that's about it, which is not any stronger than those S5 glancing AV11. It wasn't always easy to keep the sides of a predator away from them. Mathematically 10 shots then was about 0.84 glances or 25% of a vehicle's hull points. 10 shots now comes to 0.6 wounds, which is 5% of a vehicle's wounds. Obviously they would never have taken down AV12 or better, but for perspective these days it takes 36 fire warriors the entire game (at long range) to kill a tank.

- Directional casualties were cool, but again...for shooting armies and really tended to slow the game down.

- Deep striking mishaps were thematically cool, but really just aggravating. Even when you weren't near enemies you can land in terrain and die. What's even the point of using it other than random clutch drops that MIGHT kill something useful?

- Stratagems add so much for me. I think GW has become FAR better at making them than the earlier days. Have you seen the new marine ones?

- Orks get around modifiers ok these days (they don't even care about -2 or worse, anyway) - have you seen their new rules?

I'm generally positive about the state of GW today, and this year I've had a lot of fun with Age of Sigmar. I can work around most of GW's worst impulses (like $40-50 CAD character models I can easily convert out of $6 models and spare bits).

I grouse about the prices and the rules, but still (bafflingly) buy the models. What I have played of 8E I have enjoyed, but I find that my mindset about what I would play in the first place is so contrary to what everyone seems to want to do.

So much self-hate when it comes to this game, I wish I could sit back, relax and enjoy it - but I just can’t. I feel like my eyes have been opened too much to the flaws of heaven that I feel forced to dwell in hell.

 Vankraken wrote:
I had fun playing 6th and 7th. 8th came out and I gave it a fair shake but the game stopped being fun because of the design choices GW made. Hundreds of hours of work and thousands of dollars of models became in part wasted because it has become 10x harder to find a game of 7th as everyone else has moved on to 8th. Frankly it sucks to have a game I loved get tossed aside and trampled while this mess of a game (8th) is being proclaimed as some golden age of GW or whatever. So what exactly is there to be positive about when the game I started with got completely rewritten and removed most of the aspects that I found enjoyable?

I'm sorry to read that the current rule set does not suit you. I remember reading rumours for 4th edition saying that Power Fists would not gain a bonus attack anymore for having a Bolt Pistol equipped and not being able to consolidate into a new close combat. How were my footslogging BTemplars supposed to fight my friends Carnifexes?

I liked 4th less than 3rd. Fifth was really good if your army got a Codex. Sixth was...okay I guess and with 7th I lost interest totally. Still got a complete Grey Knight and Imperial Guard army (beautifully painted by a paid artist) sitting at home. I feel you, really.

And I hope you can either have another look at the rules and see if they are more to your liking by now or that the next edition will spark your interest again. Take some time away from the hobby if it is not for you. GW got a track record for changing rules between editions enough to have the game feel very different with each iteration.

Your models will still be there when 9th rolls around or whever you give the hobby another chance.

a_typical_hero wrote:

 Vankraken wrote:
I had fun playing 6th and 7th. 8th came out and I gave it a fair shake but the game stopped being fun because of the design choices GW made. Hundreds of hours of work and thousands of dollars of models became in part wasted because it has become 10x harder to find a game of 7th as everyone else has moved on to 8th. Frankly it sucks to have a game I loved get tossed aside and trampled while this mess of a game (8th) is being proclaimed as some golden age of GW or whatever. So what exactly is there to be positive about when the game I started with got completely rewritten and removed most of the aspects that I found enjoyable?

I'm sorry to read that the current rule set does not suit you. I remember reading rumours for 4th edition saying that Power Fists would not gain a bonus attack anymore for having a Bolt Pistol equipped and not being able to consolidate into a new close combat. How were my footslogging BTemplars supposed to fight my friends Carnifexes?

I liked 4th less than 3rd. Fifth was really good if your army got a Codex. Sixth was...okay I guess and with 7th I lost interest totally. Still got a complete Grey Knight and Imperial Guard army (beautifully painted by a paid artist) sitting at home. I feel you, really.

And I hope you can either have another look at the rules and see if they are more to your liking by now or that the next edition will spark your interest again. Take some time away from the hobby if it is not for you. GW got a track record for changing rules between editions enough to have the game feel very different with each iteration.

Your models will still be there when 9th rolls around or whever you give the hobby another chance.

That is if GW ever decides to make a 9th and fix the system in the first place, sofar we got nothing.

There are many things that I like about 8th, core rules wise. My only major gripe with early 8th was a lack of decent terrain rules.

I find the reliance on d6 shots to be unfun. I can live with it, but rolling to see how many rolls you get to roll is tedious.

But then, the “extras” started piling on. Buy the rulebook, Buy the Index, now buy the codex, now buy the supplement, now buy Chapter Approved, now buy the supplement, now buy the revised codex, now buy the expansion, now buy the next Chapter Approved, now buy the next Chapter Approved... in what, 3 years? Over $400 for rules? No thanks.

All these added factions? Good for them. I’m not personally interested in any of them, but huzzah for other people, I guess.

I’ve enjoyed some of the painting tutorials. I think the hobby outreach has been fantastic, particularly for low-effort hobbyists... like me.

It’s not really the best it’s ever been. Not for everyone. For some, yes. I’m glad you’re enthused about the hobby.

In other words, only be positive or leave?

No. There are bad core mechanics (IGOUGO, morale being pointless, etc.) and there are core issues with internal and external balance. To say "no don't use your models so I can play fairly" is purely the same as "don't use your Tactical Marines because I don't like them" and we should not be doing the game designer's job.

8th improves a LOT if you just play with Cities of Death (Or whatever is called the expansion terrain based rules of the basic rulebook). Just use them without the stratagems. Grenades and Flamers become for example much better when they auto max-hit agaisnt units that have fortified their positions (For a +2 cover save)


Also threat destroyed vehicles as ruins and don't remove them from the table.

 Galas wrote:
8th improves a LOT if you just play with Cities of Death (Or whatever is called the expansion terrain based rules of the basic rulebook). Just use them without the stratagems. Grenades and Flamers become for example much better when they auto max-hit agaisnt units that have fortified their positions (For a +2 cover save)


Also threat destroyed vehicles as ruins and don't remove them from the table.

Here's the issue, BRB has 1, one, page of terrain rules for a wargame.
That ain't working, so what does gw? Throw out another book with pricetag.
That is probably what irks me the most.

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Galas wrote:
8th improves a LOT if you just play with Cities of Death (Or whatever is called the expansion terrain based rules of the basic rulebook). Just use them without the stratagems. Grenades and Flamers become for example much better when they auto max-hit agaisnt units that have fortified their positions (For a +2 cover save)


Also threat destroyed vehicles as ruins and don't remove them from the table.

Here's the issue, BRB has 1, one, page of terrain rules for a wargame.
That ain't working, so what does gw? Throw out another book with pricetag.
That is probably what irks me the most.

Cities of Death rules are in the BRB

 Galas wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Galas wrote:
8th improves a LOT if you just play with Cities of Death (Or whatever is called the expansion terrain based rules of the basic rulebook). Just use them without the stratagems. Grenades and Flamers become for example much better when they auto max-hit agaisnt units that have fortified their positions (For a +2 cover save)


Also threat destroyed vehicles as ruins and don't remove them from the table.

Here's the issue, BRB has 1, one, page of terrain rules for a wargame.
That ain't working, so what does gw? Throw out another book with pricetag.
That is probably what irks me the most.

Cities of Death rules are in the BRB

Meh, still annoying
But in my defense there are soooooo maaaaaaaannnnmnyyyyyy bloooooooodddddyyyy boooooooks now out there

a_typical_hero wrote:
But each of us personally can't change Games Workshop ... You can only change yourself, not GW.

Virtually all of the high points that you've talked about in 8th are things that have been steady, major complaints from players for years. I seriously doubt we, as a group, wouldn't be where we are today if players took the approach you want. Telling people to just be quiet cheerleaders and buy more models is absurd.

Focus on improving the community by getting people to stop trashing different play styles or respecting each other better in disagreements, because that's the rep that haunts the 40k scene at most shops I've been to. No one cares about complaining with a little too much hyperbole on the internet about bad rules and slow model releases, that's par for the course in just about every hobby in existence these days.

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Galas wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Galas wrote:
8th improves a LOT if you just play with Cities of Death (Or whatever is called the expansion terrain based rules of the basic rulebook). Just use them without the stratagems. Grenades and Flamers become for example much better when they auto max-hit agaisnt units that have fortified their positions (For a +2 cover save)


Also threat destroyed vehicles as ruins and don't remove them from the table.

Here's the issue, BRB has 1, one, page of terrain rules for a wargame.
That ain't working, so what does gw? Throw out another book with pricetag.
That is probably what irks me the most.

Cities of Death rules are in the BRB

Meh, still annoying
But in my defense there are soooooo maaaaaaaannnnmnyyyyyy bloooooooodddddyyyy boooooooks now out there

But I'll reitereate how much the tactical play of the game improves when vertical height has bonuses and maluses (Yeah reivers with graplink hooks become actually... quite ... ok they are still meh but much more usefull), when you have to decide between moving or remaining stationary to gain a substantial bonus for cover, using weapons that remove cover, the risk you have with flamers if you fortifie your units, etc...

Not Online!!! wrote:

a_typical_hero wrote:

 Vankraken wrote:
I had fun playing 6th and 7th. 8th came out and I gave it a fair shake but the game stopped being fun because of the design choices GW made. Hundreds of hours of work and thousands of dollars of models became in part wasted because it has become 10x harder to find a game of 7th as everyone else has moved on to 8th. Frankly it sucks to have a game I loved get tossed aside and trampled while this mess of a game (8th) is being proclaimed as some golden age of GW or whatever. So what exactly is there to be positive about when the game I started with got completely rewritten and removed most of the aspects that I found enjoyable?

I'm sorry to read that the current rule set does not suit you. I remember reading rumours for 4th edition saying that Power Fists would not gain a bonus attack anymore for having a Bolt Pistol equipped and not being able to consolidate into a new close combat. How were my footslogging BTemplars supposed to fight my friends Carnifexes?

I liked 4th less than 3rd. Fifth was really good if your army got a Codex. Sixth was...okay I guess and with 7th I lost interest totally. Still got a complete Grey Knight and Imperial Guard army (beautifully painted by a paid artist) sitting at home. I feel you, really.

And I hope you can either have another look at the rules and see if they are more to your liking by now or that the next edition will spark your interest again. Take some time away from the hobby if it is not for you. GW got a track record for changing rules between editions enough to have the game feel very different with each iteration.

Your models will still be there when 9th rolls around or whever you give the hobby another chance.

That is if GW ever decides to make a 9th and fix the system in the first place, sofar we got nothing.

Oh GW will eventually make a 9th edition.
Fixing the system though.? Come on, you know how this story plays out. They'll "fix" ABC, break XYZ, and change everything else.

Editions are just there to sell you new books and to monetize the veteran players. Atleast for gw.
Change my mind.

But I'll reitereate how much the tactical play of the game improves when vertical height has bonuses and maluses (Yeah reivers with graplink hooks become actually... quite ... ok they are still meh but much more usefull), when you have to decide between moving or remaining stationary to gain a substantial bonus for cover, using weapons that remove cover, the risk you have with flamers if you fortifie your units, etc...

I mean yeah obviously, but I ask you a question, shouldn't that be the base terrain rules? Instead of the measely 1 page ones?

I mean call me daft but in a wargame on a board terrain imo is kinda relevant?

Not Online!!! wrote:
Editions are just there to sell you new books and to monetize the veteran players. Atleast for gw.
Change my mind.

But I'll reitereate how much the tactical play of the game improves when vertical height has bonuses and maluses (Yeah reivers with graplink hooks become actually... quite ... ok they are still meh but much more usefull), when you have to decide between moving or remaining stationary to gain a substantial bonus for cover, using weapons that remove cover, the risk you have with flamers if you fortifie your units, etc...

I mean yeah obviously, but I ask you a question, shouldn't that be the base terrain rules? Instead of the measely 1 page ones?

I mean call me daft but in a wargame on a board terrain imo is kinda relevant?

I can see why they didn't put them in the base rules, when they wanted to make them as thin as possible. At the same time, for me it speaks volumes how many people is agaisnt of using a couple extra rules that add so much to the game, and are even in the basic rulebook, just because they are "advanced rules".

So for me, many times the "I hate 8th terrain rules!" falls a little flat because many, many times I have seen people in my group that didn't wanted to use the advanced rules because they weren't "matched play", even after complaining about the lackluster basic terrain rules.
I always say that the "rule of three" and the detachment limit are also advanced rules, for tournaments, and aren't in the basic 12 pages of rules but alas... people is just so adverse to a little deviation from the norm.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
- Blast weapons -- for me -- I can do without. Think of it this way : it prevented blobbing, but that did that really do?

Punished deepstrike. Hard. Super-hard. I remember killing like 3 or 4 Grey Knight terminators (when those were still scary stuff) with a simple dominion unit with 4 flamethrowers, was epic!

a_typical_hero wrote:

I'm sorry to read that the current rule set does not suit you. I remember reading rumours for 4th edition saying that Power Fists would not gain a bonus attack anymore for having a Bolt Pistol equipped and not being able to consolidate into a new close combat. How were my footslogging BTemplars supposed to fight my friends Carnifexes?

I liked 4th less than 3rd. Fifth was really good if your army got a Codex. Sixth was...okay I guess and with 7th I lost interest totally. Still got a complete Grey Knight and Imperial Guard army (beautifully painted by a paid artist) sitting at home. I feel you, really.

And I hope you can either have another look at the rules and see if they are more to your liking by now or that the next edition will spark your interest again. Take some time away from the hobby if it is not for you. GW got a track record for changing rules between editions enough to have the game feel very different with each iteration.

Your models will still be there when 9th rolls around or whever you give the hobby another chance.

I heard this pep talk first time when 6th edition Tau codex came out and I hated the changes. "But it has so much new stuff, read the rules, try it out and maybe you'll like it". Well, I read the rules, played it few times and hated it. And still do and haven't played Tau since, and probably never will again as GW won't obviously roll back the clock and make the army back to my liking. If some people like it, good for them, but I don't and nobody can convince me otherwise.
It was very disappointing but I of course always knew that it could happen.
Oh well, I still have Space Hulk and BFG.

8th Edition 40K will be as fun as the friends you play it with.

The problem is the human condition where everybody wants to win, and win at all cost.

8th can be treated as a guideline but people push the boundaries to the nth degree.

Just watch battle reports on youtube. Most present the game as it should be played, two friends having a great time with good lists and good attitudes.

8th edition and warhammer in general should not be defined by competitive play.

 Smirrors wrote:
8th Edition 40K will be as fun as the friends you play it with.

The problem is the human condition where everybody wants to win, and win at all cost.

8th can be treated as a guideline but people push the boundaries to the nth degree.

Just watch battle reports on youtube. Most present the game as it should be played, two friends having a great time with good lists and good attitudes.

8th edition and warhammer in general should not be defined by competitive play.

This whole "the rules are a guide line" needs to fething stop.

We are not supposed to do the job of the designers. Period. We should NOT have to self relegate and feel bad if we want to bring three of a cool looking unit because they're good or bad.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Smirrors wrote:
8th Edition 40K will be as fun as the friends you play it with.

The problem is the human condition where everybody wants to win, and win at all cost.

8th can be treated as a guideline but people push the boundaries to the nth degree.

Just watch battle reports on youtube. Most present the game as it should be played, two friends having a great time with good lists and good attitudes.

8th edition and warhammer in general should not be defined by competitive play.

This whole "the rules are a guide line" needs to fething stop.

We are not supposed to do the job of the designers. Period. We should NOT have to self relegate and feel bad if we want to bring three of a cool looking unit because they're good or bad.

dude, Rule Zero predates warhammer 40k. You HAVE heard of it yes?

BrianDavion wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Smirrors wrote:
8th Edition 40K will be as fun as the friends you play it with.

The problem is the human condition where everybody wants to win, and win at all cost.

8th can be treated as a guideline but people push the boundaries to the nth degree.

Just watch battle reports on youtube. Most present the game as it should be played, two friends having a great time with good lists and good attitudes.

8th edition and warhammer in general should not be defined by competitive play.

This whole "the rules are a guide line" needs to fething stop.

We are not supposed to do the job of the designers. Period. We should NOT have to self relegate and feel bad if we want to bring three of a cool looking unit because they're good or bad.

dude, Rule Zero predates warhammer 40k. You HAVE heard of it yes?

Rule Zero is for games like D&D or Fate, where everyone is working together and there's a singular arbiter of rules (or at least someone who's invested with authority to have the final say on rules).

In addition, both D&D and Fate work out of the box, no mods needed. Can you change them? Sure. Can you change 40k to suit your tastes? Sure. But that's NOT an excuse to give a faulty product-ESPECIALLY in a competitive game.

I think there's a big difference between having legitimate criticisms about a product and being negative for the sake of negativity. And I've seen both on this site. You don't have to love everything about the game, or even most of the things. But you can frame your complaints in a way that doesn't come across as a toddler throwing a tantrum.

BrianDavion wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Smirrors wrote:
8th Edition 40K will be as fun as the friends you play it with.

The problem is the human condition where everybody wants to win, and win at all cost.

8th can be treated as a guideline but people push the boundaries to the nth degree.

Just watch battle reports on youtube. Most present the game as it should be played, two friends having a great time with good lists and good attitudes.

8th edition and warhammer in general should not be defined by competitive play.

This whole "the rules are a guide line" needs to fething stop.

We are not supposed to do the job of the designers. Period. We should NOT have to self relegate and feel bad if we want to bring three of a cool looking unit because they're good or bad.

dude, Rule Zero predates warhammer 40k. You HAVE heard of it yes?

Which applies to RPGs, which 40k is NOT at all.