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.

Very Negative.

Fiddly rules: Weird coherency (over 5 models you can randomly lose models if you didn't perfectly align them within 2'' of two other models. If they wanted to stop daisy chaining they could've taken a page out of warmachine and had coherency based on diameter of the entire squad or radius from a sgt model.) <core> tag is clunky, if you want buffs to only effect certain units they could've used keywords that already existed. Too many secondary objectives and the secondary objectives aren't balanced across factions. I also wish the game had alternating activations. It's 2021 FFS.

Stratagems: There are way too many stratagems and they have lost focus of what they were meant to be. The list either needs to be very small or very generic. Stratagems shouldn't be a replacement for special rules on a unit. Units had some of their rules gutted and transferred into stratagems. Stratagems should be about simplistic "command" style orders, that you as the general give to your army. They should not be powerful generic bonuses or weird situational special rules. There are just entirely too many of them and it also leads to gotcha moments.

Lethality: The board is smaller, everything is deadlier. Tanks don't feel like tanks, they feel like they are made of paper, and melt if anything looks at them funny.

Faction Unbalance: It's been almost a year since 9th came out and we still have CSM and GK with 1 wound. Eldar, GSC, and Tau feel incredibly weak. They really should've released an index at the start of 9th. Necrons already feel like they are already getting power crept by the newer releases.

Outrageous Prices: GW is back at it again...

 addnid wrote:

Spoiler:

I have been playing since end of 4th edition, and I don’t understand how groups can play an old version of 40k. Do you use house rules for the new kits that were released after ? If so does everyone in the playgroup get to vote on them ? Does the group leader kind of « impose » the rules, unless a vivid opposition arises ? Do you not use them at all ? Does everyone grown and moan « I won’t buy any new GW stuff until they do rules exactly the way I want them to be » ?

I am genuinely curious as to how that works.

Spoiler:

I have been playing a lot of 9th (unlike some folks here I suspect, like guys, if you use cover well, the game ain’t so lethal. Unlike 8th which was very lethal indeed. I main orks I should know, they are not durable) and it is ok (flawed by gak like the drukhari codex but ok) for

me

Besides as the Lord inquisitor has pointed out, no big things that don’t belong there, another nice thing is that flying tanks are land raiders or chimeras etc, restartes are marines and so on... does the work of retconning GW idiocy with one simple change.

I think I voted Very Negative. I couldn't be bothered explaining my reasons at the time but I may as well.

Rules bloat: I was on board for most of 8th. You had a codex and it was cool. Then they just kept releasing more and more supplements and scattering rules all over the place and I couldn't keep up any more and just gave up trying.

Book Keeping: So I liked 40k as a beer-and-pretzels game. I liked that you could throw an army on the table and go and only worry about universal army rules which applied to everything. Now you need to remember faction specific rules and some other "battle forged" special rule most armies have which is often a random effect. Then there's also secondaries, strategems (including faction specific ones), warlord traits etc not to mention how all these things interact and exceptions to rules within the rules themselves. It's just too much effort for one game. I consider myself pretty good at keeping rules in my head but I don't think I've played a game of 40k where I've haven't realised that I've forgotten multiple rules after the game.

Release schedule: It's far too fast. The meta barely gets time to settle before something comes along to screw it up. I was hoping that with the release of 9th and all the 8th codexes updated they would slow down the codex churn but no. We waited how long for a Sisters dex and it was only 2 years old before they announced a new one. I'm genuinly shocked that there wasn't more outrage over Space Marines having LESS THAN A YEAR between two of theirs.

Models: The only thing I'm fairly okay about. Aside from their massive boner for baby-carrier walkers the sculpts have mostly been okay. Far too many people carting around huge chunks of rock to stand on or pointless details to pump up the cost on centrepiece models. Did the Silent King really need a gigantic throne, his two besties and some floating plastic slabs? Why couldn't have have just been a Guilliman/Abaddon/Swarmlord scale necron and cost half as much? And this relates to a big problem I have, the prices are out of control. I simply cannot justify the prices GW are asking any more. I'll get maybe one game a month and spending 50 euro on a few plastic models just isn't worth it when I can buy a board game at a similar price that I'll play three times as much and will give me a better sense of value.

Gameplay: Every game of 40k I've seen has been an game of two people setting up a lovely board full of cool hand made terrain, setting up lovingly painted armies and then spending the next 3-4 hours using RNG to decide what order they're put away in. Or at least whatever player goes second does. And it's not even like the first player has any difficult decisions to make. They just declare what they're shooting at and then spends turn 2-3 collecting secondaries.

 Sim-Life wrote:
Book Keeping: So I liked 40k as a beer-and-pretzels game. I liked that you could throw an army on the table and go and only worry about universal army rules which applied to everything.

^ This.

I always considered 40k the beer and pretzels game where I could just slap an army on the table, push my toy soldiers forward, and roll dice for some bolters and lascannons. If I wanted a complex system I would be playing Infinity or Necromunda. I played 40k specifically because it was casual and easy to pick up and play. I don't know if it is these days.

Now I play my Necrons and I have to pick protocols pre-game, make sure my units are within range of auras and targeted buffs, remember dozens of stratagems, keep track of secondaries, manage my CP, and know every stratagem and secondary my opponent could possibly use so I don't get caught with my pants down.

Negative.

I think the rules are pretty good. I wish we could move away from big centerpiece models and treating characters as walking auras.

I absolutely despise the state of the lore, I feel like 40k is undergoing the same degeneration that has claimed so many cherished nerd franchises in recent years, where what originally made them special is eroded away for the sake of mass market appeal. Primaris are the poster boys of this process.

I think the new models look "good" but a lot of them seem to have been made by someone who doesn't actually understand the faction.

I think the Necron and initial SoB model ranges are great.

The Primaris range abandoned the gothic ostentatiousness of the original space marines for sleek and tacticool (some of the more recent Primaris releases have done better in this regard).

The Death Guard range is pretty good but it can be a little bit cartoony with all the sculpted on smoke effects and goofy nurglings everywhere.

 Blackhair Duckshape wrote:
Negative.

I think the rules are pretty good. I wish we could move away from big centerpiece models and treating characters as walking auras.

I absolutely despise the state of the lore, I feel like 40k is undergoing the same degenerate that has claimed so many cherished nerd franchises in recent years, where what originally made them special is eroded away for the sake of mass market appeal. Primaris are the poster boys of this process.

I think the new models look "good" but a lot of them seem to have been made by someone who doesn't actually understand the faction.

I think the Necron and initial SoB model ranges are great.

The Primaris range abandoned the gothic ostentatiousness of the original space marines for sleek and tacticool (some of the more recent Primaris releases have done better in this regard).

The Death Guard range is pretty good but it can be a little bit cartoony with all the sculpted on smoke effects and goofy nurglings everywhere.

IMO: The gothic ostentatiousness is really only like DA and BT. Space Marines, and the first wave of Primaris Marines, were formerly an extremely blank canvas, this whole things with "abandoned the gothic ostentatiousness" is flat out wrong; they have more gothic fetishes than they did before, and it's actually the thing I like least about the latest round of guys, because they all come molded with it on and require a lot of careful cutting to take it out.

But, take a look at the "classic" space marine line, like the tactical marines, rhinos, land raiders, and predators. There isn't any gothic tat there, lots of smooth surfaces with the classic sci-fi segmented layered armor on the tanks.


I, personally, also really like the tacticool Space Marines. They're basically what I always wanted in space marines, and I love how ridiculously over the top tacticool they are. I like the tacticool aesthetic enough that my Shadowspear marines basically only got the Space Wolves headswaps [which works out fine anyway: SoF beards!] and a little bit of conversion effort for loadouts, while I did a lot of work on my Indomitus marines to make them Huskarlar instead of Crusaders.

If only guard could be tacticool and not 20+ years old with pig lipstick.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
IMO: The gothic ostentatiousness is really only like DA and BT. Space Marines, and the first wave of Primaris Marines, were formerly an extremely blank canvas, this whole things with "abandoned the gothic ostentatiousness" is flat out wrong; they have more gothic fetishes than they did before, and it's actually the thing I like least about the latest round of guys, because they all come molded with it on and require a lot of careful cutting to take it out.

But, take a look at the "classic" space marine line, like the tactical marines, rhinos, land raiders, and predators. There isn't any gothic tat there, lots of smooth surfaces with the classic sci-fi segmented layered armor on the tanks.

You're probably referring to the more recent wave of Primaris, I mentioned that I liked the increased "gothicness".

They've also done away with that "boxy" aesthetic the vehicles had, like they had been pulled straight out of WW2. Now everything has to float, have all sorts of antennas everywhere, have guns out the wahzoo (can't leave leave home without a tacked on stubber can we?) and has to have this long, sleek prow.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
I, personally, also really like the tacticool Space Marines.

I envy you.

A bazilion books being turned over.. these going out of date as fast as they are printed. Really archaic way of doing rules resulting in HIGE bloat and FAQs needing FAQs

Models languishing in garabge finecast and old ass sculpts.

Game play really reliant around combo wombo startegem+relic+trait stacking STILL looking to leverage dice to decide victory rather than manouvering.

Overall - Not good..

Negative, in comparison to Age of Sigmar.

40K is too focused on tournament league tables while AoS seems to be a jack of all trades, with better support and having more fun.

 Blackhair Duckshape wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
IMO: The gothic ostentatiousness is really only like DA and BT. Space Marines, and the first wave of Primaris Marines, were formerly an extremely blank canvas, this whole things with "abandoned the gothic ostentatiousness" is flat out wrong; they have more gothic fetishes than they did before, and it's actually the thing I like least about the latest round of guys, because they all come molded with it on and require a lot of careful cutting to take it out.

But, take a look at the "classic" space marine line, like the tactical marines, rhinos, land raiders, and predators. There isn't any gothic tat there, lots of smooth surfaces with the classic sci-fi segmented layered armor on the tanks.

You're probably referring to the more recent wave of Primaris, I mentioned that I liked the increased "gothicness".

They've also done away with that "boxy" aesthetic the vehicles had, like they had been pulled straight out of WW2. Now everything has to float, have all sorts of antennas everywhere, have guns out the wahzoo (can't leave leave home without a tacked on stubber can we?) and has to have this long, sleek prow.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
I, personally, also really like the tacticool Space Marines.

I envy you.

No, I'm saying that oldmarines weren't covered with all the little fetishes and things, so the complaints about having "lost the gothic aesthetic" are factually unfounded.

Also, what do you mean long, sleek prow? The Repsulor is exactly as boxy as the Rhino, and definitely doesn't have a long, sleek prow by any construction of the term. It's not sleek, it's not long, and it doesn't have a prow, because it's big and flat across the front. In fact, it's even more boxy; the Rhino has protruding track horns and the sloped down parts on the return, the Repulsor is actually a brick.

The first wave primaris basically went exactly right down to the T on the oldmarine aethetic, then the Shadowspear marines did tacticool, then the Indomitus marines did knightly.



There's things to complain about, sure, since I answered that I'm overwhelming unsatisfied with 9e, but "lost gothic fetishes", "no longer boxy", and "failed to carry the oldmarine aesthetics" aren't any of them.

The devil is in the detail, if you can't see it, you can't see it.

They're more like WW1 tanks

Space Marines are Space Knights, always have been. It's obvious Primaris are an attempt to move away from the gothic, knightly aesthetic and straight into Halo Spartans or Terran from Starcraft.

Indomitus was a return to form, which was a large reason why I bought it. Everyone else already does tacticool(and does it better). It's boring.

What "Space Knight" aesthetic do say, RTB-01 marines have that Primaris do not?

Because I see this stuff

And I say "yup! That's a knight in space! Heraldry, frilly kneecaps, little shoulder plates, huge shoulder pads, knightly looking helms, trinkets and purity seals.
it's all there.

edit: Unless... did I mistakenly put a picture of a firstborn squad up there? Very hard to tell.

 Blackhair Duckshape wrote:
The devil is in the detail, if you can't see it, you can't see it.

The Repulsor is inarguably a trapezoidal box to an even more extreme degree than the rhino, and I can assure you that none of the new tanks have a prow that is either long or sleek [or have a prow at all], and the whole model is very angular and geometric. I'm certain there isn't anything that I'm not seeing.

Rihgu wrote:
What "Space Knight" aesthetic do say, RTB-01 marines have that Primaris do not?

Because I see this stuff

Spoiler:

And I say "yup! That's a knight in space! Heraldry, frilly kneecaps, little shoulder plates, huge shoulder pads, knightly looking helms, trinkets and purity seals.
it's all there.

edit: Unless... did I mistakenly put a picture of a firstborn squad up there? Very hard to tell.

Intercessors are probably the best of Primaris range simply because the niche they're filling is so simple that it's hard to go wrong (although I do think the removal of the exposed cables and vox grille of Mk.7 is a downgrade).

It's stuff like the Incursor marines who look straight out of a Call of Duty game, the Gravis marines who look somehow manage to simultaneously look too sleek/agile and comically bulky, or the vehicles that eschew the iconic tracked metal box aesthetic in favour of a much longer, sleeker, flying form, covered in all sorts of extraneous armour panels, bulbous sponsons and other miscellaneous doodads that smooth out the vehicle's profile that are the major problems.

Primaris just look way too clean and "futuristic" for a setting that was supposed to be about a dying empire with a medieval aesthetic on the ass end of 10000 years of technological stagnation.

 Blackhair Duckshape wrote:
Primaris just look way too clean and "futuristic" for a setting that was supposed to be about a dying empire with a medieval aesthetic on the ass end of 10000 years of technological stagnation.

Here's the thing: oldmarines, with the exception of BT and DA, never had a medieval aesthetic. And actually, neither did the Imperial Guard. Or the Admech. Really, only the Sisters of Battle.

The Repulsor is the almost exactly the same dimensions as a Land Raider, so it's not longer, and I'm still not sure how it's sleeker considering it is basically entirely made out of geometric blocks with not a spline in sight.


This is literally one of my pet peeves here.

Easy fix is to give them MKIII helmets, makes them look better along with different pauldrons.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

 Blackhair Duckshape wrote:
Primaris just look way too clean and "futuristic" for a setting that was supposed to be about a dying empire with a medieval aesthetic on the ass end of 10000 years of technological stagnation.

Here's the thing: oldmarines, with the exception of BT and DA, never had a medieval aesthetic.

They literally walk around in suits of armour and wield swords and shields.

I can understand you not being able to see how the all the extra gak they've slapped on Primaris and their vehicles dilutes the aesthetic but come on.

An Astraeus is long, and I guess you could argue that it has a prow, but I don't know about "sleek". The rest are just floating metal boxes. And the Heresy pattern tanks make them look like junk. A 360 PPM Achilles will absolutely trash a 365 PPM Repulsor Executioner, and Sicarans move faster on treads than any of the floaty primaris tanks.

Only alternating activation can save the 40k tabletop experience. Else GW will let the board game languish and use the models as merchandising for their expanding video game and animated series IP.

Well, I don't play 40k anymore and have not seen anything that makes me inclined to return. I very much think that 40k needs a proper rewrite.

Mostly, I find he present incarnation terrible boring. Also sloppy.

IMO, the game struggles because the core mechanics are too simple and shallow. Every edition tinkers around the edges but fails to address this. There aren't enough meaningful choices to make. Special rules, formations, chapter tactics, etc., can only do so much, and are almost universally rerolls, or modifiers to attack and defense. The entire game is rolling to hit, rolling to wound, and rolling saves.

40k could be so much better if GW broadened its concept of what a war game is.

Blastaar wrote:
Well, I don't play 40k anymore and have not seen anything that makes me inclined to return. I very much think that 40k needs a proper rewrite.

Mostly, I find he present incarnation terrible boring. Also sloppy.

IMO, the game struggles because the core mechanics are too simple and shallow. Every edition tinkers around the edges but fails to address this. There aren't enough meaningful choices to make. Special rules, formations, chapter tactics, etc., can only do so much, and are almost universally rerolls, or modifiers to attack and defense. The entire game is rolling to hit, rolling to wound, and rolling saves.

40k could be so much better if GW broadened its concept of what a war game is.

I don't see how you can call it sloppy given the way they've tightened standards on how rules are written and have done away with (I think) all of BaconCatBug's list of issues with RAW. Objectives do broaden what you want to achieve in a game, I'm not sure what you want? Beer-chugging contests or beard-measuring contests?

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

 Blackhair Duckshape wrote:
Primaris just look way too clean and "futuristic" for a setting that was supposed to be about a dying empire with a medieval aesthetic on the ass end of 10000 years of technological stagnation.

Here's the thing: oldmarines, with the exception of BT and DA, never had a medieval aesthetic. And actually, neither did the Imperial Guard. Or the Admech. Really, only the Sisters of Battle.

The Repulsor is the almost exactly the same dimensions as a Land Raider, so it's not longer, and I'm still not sure how it's sleeker considering it is basically entirely made out of geometric blocks with not a spline in sight.


This is literally one of my pet peeves here.

Boxy? Yes. But the details are all more future-ey COD tacticool-ish. Also far more guns than it ostensibly has crewmen. No treads. The OG Marine vehicles are pretty simple designs in comparisson.

 Blackhair Duckshape wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

 Blackhair Duckshape wrote:
Primaris just look way too clean and "futuristic" for a setting that was supposed to be about a dying empire with a medieval aesthetic on the ass end of 10000 years of technological stagnation.

Here's the thing: oldmarines, with the exception of BT and DA, never had a medieval aesthetic.

They literally walk around in suits of armour and wield swords and shields.

I can understand you not being able to see how the all the extra gak they've slapped on Primaris and their vehicles dilutes the aesthetic but come on.

Only bladeguard [a primaris unit] and assault terminators have shields and swords.

Classic marine units like rhinos, tacticals, devastators, predator, vindicator, land raider, assault marines, etc. aren't medieval in the least.

This is also all missing the fact that the over-the-top ostentatiousness of Marine designs really only started in 4th edition onwards, so saying the Primaris range is turning its back on the roots of the faction is, uh, not true. (and as others have mentioned, Intercessors are basically the same as Tacticals details-wise anyway)

The increasing levels of bling on the models and especially the artwork from 4th onwards is what initially turned me off from Marines. I played BA in 3rd and outside of Dante and a few characters, the faction was basically similar to your Imperial Fists or Ultramarines (then) in being lots of smooth, flat surfaces and not going insane with detail. The period of the mid-00's to the mid-10's is when 40k and Fantasy entered its "Grimderp" period, with increasing amounts of models and artwork that cranked up the "dark" nature of the settings to a level that only just made it look comical instead. The 7th ed Empire releases for Fantasy and the general tone and vibe of them were especially glaring with this.

If anything the Primaris range is GW returning to the actual roots of the faction and allowing people to customize the look of their army as they see fit by providing more of a blank canvas with which to work from. Mostly. Some of the new Crusade-themed stuff goes back on that a little bit.

Plus, I think people look at Sternguard or Vanguard veterans and just think that's the entire faction for some reason. Have you looked at a Predator or a Vindicator recently? How about Scouts with all their tacticool sniper rifles and googles? Where are the medieval influences there?

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:


Only bladeguard [a primaris unit] and assault terminators have shields and swords.

Classic marine units like rhinos, tacticals, devastators, predator, vindicator, land raider, assault marines, etc. aren't medieval in the least.

There's also lots of SW units, including some walkers, that have a viking look, which is totally medieval aesthetics. Litterally any infantry firstborn SW unit can have at least a dude with sword and shield.

I find the general 9e rules to be better in every regard to any previous edition I've played (since 6th).

However, the terrain rules are too convoluted. My group got some new players and they basically ignore anything other than +1 to armour save

Been enjoying the game more than at any point in the last five or six years that I’ve been back playing.

I think the crusade system is great fun, our group of players are loving it. Most of us agree that the ninth edition rules are a decent improvement on what was already a good version of the game in 8th edition.

None of us play super competitive lists, so we couldn’t really care less about the swings in the meta etc.

Sure there are some tweaks I’d make, but I like things how they currently are.

Awful. The release schedule is the main reason for me.

The classic old "one codex at a time" release schedule doesn't work as it creates unbalance. Power creep and all that.

40K has always been this way so it's not a new issue.
The thing is that in 8th everyone got a hard reset and within 12 months 90% of the factions received their codex.
Between the castellan nerf and the SM 2.0 codex + supplements the game was in it's best shape ever, at least from a balance perspective. Now it's a complete mess.

The basic rules of 9th aren't bad, but without balance a game can't be considered to be in a good state imho.