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.

Warhammer 40k is dead at my shop, and everyone has moved on to Blood Bowl or Star War Legion.

I asked my friend, who used to run tournaments at our shop, and he said there were too many "gotcha" moments and cheap units that could do extreme amounts of damage. It feels bad to spend money and time on a knight only to have it get blown off the board in a single charge of vanguard veteran or a single round of shooting from Retributors.

Does anyone feel this way, and what caused it? I'm wondering if it's legitimate concern, or if we just need to wait for everyone to get a codex.

This is a pretty legitimate concern; 40k's been getting progressively more and more lethal at least since the firepower creep started in 5e, and GW's decided to compensate by making Reserves easier (thus making guaranteeing an alpha strike easier) and making everything move faster (so you have less time to kill melee units before they hit melee and wipe something) rather than trying to back off on the stat creep.

GW's gone way overboard in increasing offensive power. And rerolls. And layers of special rules (auras, doctrines, chapter tactics (or equivalents), strats, etc)

Defenses largely haven't kept up. And can be mitigated entirely in certain cases. Cover is also far weaker than it used to be.

In a world of 2 shot melta weapons, null zone psychic power (no invulnerable saves), devastator doctrine (additional -1 AP), reroll 1s, reroll failed wounds, d6+2 damage and etc... There isn't much that can last long.

There are all sorts of upgrades for various types of targets. With number of shots and rerolls for each stage, you can seriously toss 100+ dice for one unit's attacks, with rerolls propping up the damage curve. Its just easy to have a lot.

Or you can have the opposite problem, like I do, and your entire army can't lay down meaningful damage while units are getting blown away by the handfuls.

It took 6 melta shots, 2 of which from a unit with +1 to wound and re-rolling all hits AND in melta-range, to do 11 wounds to an armiger. a combi-bolter did the last wound.

People talk about how lethal 40k is but why doesn't it at least go both ways

I get the sense that the posters so far haven't played 9th edition books. The rerolls are way down and durability is up.

I just played T'au with a mountain of rerolls and still survived long enough to score well with Necrons.

Maybe the sentiment is correct for 8th, but not so much for 9th.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Rihgu wrote:
Or you can have the opposite problem, like I do, and your entire army can't lay down meaningful damage while units are getting blown away by the handfuls.

It took 6 melta shots, 2 of which from a unit with +1 to wound and re-rolling all hits AND in melta-range, to do 11 wounds to an armiger. a combi-bolter did the last wound.

People talk about how lethal 40k is but why doesn't it at least go both ways

The odds of that happening are a little under 1 in 3.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
I get the sense that the posters so far haven't played 9th edition books. The rerolls are way down and durability is up.

I just played T'au with a mountain of rerolls and still survived long enough to score well with Necrons.

Maybe the sentiment is correct for 8th, but not so much for 9th...

The damage creep has been toned back slightly from 8th to 9th, yes. It's still way out of control by comparison to any other game I know of, unless you're playing Infinity with no terrain to make some kind of point or some very specific X-Wing matchups.

Yes. Clunky, ad hoc, and juvenile.

Yeah, I agree with Daedalus the new 9th AdMech codex looks like it's nerfing our stacking buffs and double-shooting hard. It's still going to be a good book generally, and there may be an insane combo hiding in there, but to do well it seems like you'll have to manage and combine a lot of different effects. There are a lot more ways to increase defenses compared to our 8th ed book, too. It seems like power is more evenly distributed, and there's a lot more skill lining up different rotating buffs to get power spikes.

I've found it much easier to play 40k in 8th/9th style of game than in previous editions. I'm not sitting for hours on end trying to make lists because the Power system exists and I can get games done in a shorter space of time which helps with my work/life schedule. Don't get me wrong I still love 30k/Bolt Action but to get a good game it's requires more planning and a bigger time slot.

 AnomanderRake wrote:


The damage creep has been toned back slightly from 8th to 9th, yes. It's still way out of control by comparison to any other game I know of, unless you're playing Infinity with no terrain to make some kind of point or some very specific X-Wing matchups.

That very much depends on the army. Marines got a lot less killy and lost a fair chunk of their aura re-rolls in the transition from 8th to 9th, but there are still armies that have a very high ceiling of damage, and by that I mean avarge. 10 hellblasters or 10 devastators with 8 lascannons can potentialy do a lot of damage too.

Plus most vehicles being rather bad, ment the meta went to infantry focused armies, which then again spawned a meta where the basic weapon has to be good at killing 2W marines. This creates high damage situation in certain match ups, while in others, like the DG, can end up with one players having a feeling they throw a sponge at a wall.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
I get the sense that the posters so far haven't played 9th edition books. The rerolls are way down and durability is up.

I just played T'au with a mountain of rerolls and still survived long enough to score well with Necrons.

Maybe the sentiment is correct for 8th, but not so much for 9th.

I agree 9th is an overall slight improvement over 8th. Re-rolls have been toned down a bit but are still extremely plentiful. There have been some increases to durability and the increased points per model in 9th means there is a bit less stuff is on the board.

On the flip side melta damage output is now off the charts. Multi-meltas in particular have just gone too far for the numbers some armies can take them in. With Marines having 2 to 3 wounds and armies getting more multi-damage weaponry to deal with them I'm finding that multi-wound units in other armies are feeling extremely fragile as they get focused by all the anti-marine weaponry. With my Necrons I'm looking at dropping my Skorpekh destroyers because they are too much of a glass hammer.

Single wound stuff and ultra-resilient units are doing fine, but I'm getting the impression there is a lot of stuff in the middle that might get left behind.

cjmate8 wrote:
Warhammer 40k is dead at my shop, and everyone has moved on to Blood Bowl or Star War Legion.

I asked my friend, who used to run tournaments at our shop, and he said there were too many "gotcha" moments and cheap units that could do extreme amounts of damage. It feels bad to spend money and time on a knight only to have it get blown off the board in a single charge of vanguard veteran or a single round of shooting from Retributors.

Does anyone feel this way, and what caused it? I'm wondering if it's legitimate concern, or if we just need to wait for everyone to get a codex.

Gotcha moments are a natural consequence of having 20+ different factions. People can't possibly know every rule of any unit in the game. I don't really see how gotcha moments are an issue though, people should learn from experience and the next time they'll avoid those moments.

 Blackie wrote:

cjmate8 wrote:
Warhammer 40k is dead at my shop, and everyone has moved on to Blood Bowl or Star War Legion.

I asked my friend, who used to run tournaments at our shop, and he said there were too many "gotcha" moments and cheap units that could do extreme amounts of damage. It feels bad to spend money and time on a knight only to have it get blown off the board in a single charge of vanguard veteran or a single round of shooting from Retributors.

Does anyone feel this way, and what caused it? I'm wondering if it's legitimate concern, or if we just need to wait for everyone to get a codex.

Gotcha moments are a natural consequence of having 20+ different factions. People can't possibly know every rule of any unit in the game. I don't really see how gotcha moments are an issue though, people should learn from experience and the next time they'll avoid those moments.

Thats exactly why people don't like them. Its a gak experience not born from skill or tactics of your opponent where they earn a good play from setting up and executing a plan. Its just a gak moment that preys on your ignorance and isn't earned in any way.

 Blackie wrote:

cjmate8 wrote:
Warhammer 40k is dead at my shop, and everyone has moved on to Blood Bowl or Star War Legion.

I asked my friend, who used to run tournaments at our shop, and he said there were too many "gotcha" moments and cheap units that could do extreme amounts of damage. It feels bad to spend money and time on a knight only to have it get blown off the board in a single charge of vanguard veteran or a single round of shooting from Retributors.

Does anyone feel this way, and what caused it? I'm wondering if it's legitimate concern, or if we just need to wait for everyone to get a codex.

Gotcha moments are a natural consequence of having 20+ different factions. People can't possibly know every rule of any unit in the game. I don't really see how gotcha moments are an issue though, people should learn from experience and the next time they'll avoid those moments.

From what I've seen here (and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong), it seems like there's a bit of a qualitative difference between the "gotcha" moments of 8e/9e and previous editions. In the past, it was usually one or two things interacting to bring on the "gotcha" (ie. "Oh, that unit has Big Choppas, so you only get a 4+ armor save for that Tac squad"), whereas nowadays the "gotcha" comes from the interaction of multiple rules (potentially from multiple sources - ie. "This custom trait from PA means that this character's aura now covers that unit which means that they get 72 S7 AP-4 D3 rerollable attacks in CC if I pop this Strategem").

I don't play against the same armies regularly enough to want to write off a game as just a learning experience.

It might be the only game I play that month, and it's ruined because I didn't know [some obscure interaction and got rolled]. I might not play that same army combination again, ever, so it often doesn't end up as much of an education.
It's pretty gak game design.

I could in 4th/5th read up on a codex any gotchas in a few minutes and most likely remember most of them during a game. I usually asked if I could have their codex or armybook if in wfb next to me so I could open up the summary page in the back instead of asking questions all the time. 90% of all the information needed could usually be found on that page alone. The other 10% were usually a max of 3 pages of items and psychic powers and would only take seconds to look up.

Now you probably need to spend 30+ min just to read through it all and see some of the most simpler combinations that could surprise you. Most likely its going to take a few hours of reading, testing and playing to learn most of those of a single list good enough to remember them for later. But what about the other half of the book you didnt face in that afternoon during that practice game you had? You still only know them vaguely and would probably need one more game or quite a few hours reading and discussing it to get that too. And that is until an FAQ, a campaign book or a point update totally changes how lists are built and rules are interacting for that faction. 0 useful summary anywhere if you need a quick checkup on the rules. You have to look at multiple different sections, sometimes from multiple books even, and there is stupid crusade stuff in the middle between the normal rules to make it even more cumbersome.

I spend at least an evening before a tournament now just looking up what kind of lists are being played so I know what to read up on on wahapedia. Usually lots of lists that use factions or units my normal opponents dont field and there is 0 chance I will have time to learn all the gotchas at the table so it has to be done before or I might lose the game at any moment without knowing why if facing an unfamiliar list. Sometimes I even have to correct my opponents on their rules even though I havent even faced it before just because I read up on it the night before and they had not read all of them lately and just assumed they knew the rules.

cjmate8 wrote:
Warhammer 40k is dead at my shop, and everyone has moved on to Blood Bowl or Star War Legion.

I asked my friend, who used to run tournaments at our shop, and he said there were too many "gotcha" moments and cheap units that could do extreme amounts of damage. It feels bad to spend money and time on a knight only to have it get blown off the board in a single charge of vanguard veteran or a single round of shooting from Retributors.

Does anyone feel this way, and what caused it? I'm wondering if it's legitimate concern, or if we just need to wait for everyone to get a codex.

What caused it? Codex creep with so many additional layers of rules that just add to the lethality of the game. The core 8th/9th rules are decent for a beer and pretzels game and worked well when we just had the 8th Indexes. But add in the increasing layers of rules, especially starting from about the 8th Space Marine 2.0 Codex and subsequent supplements and codexes, and you get to the state of the game today. I was looking at a (digital) copy of the 9th Space Marine codex and was just overwhelmed with all of the doctrines, subdoctrines, stratagems, etc. that come into play, and that is just one faction.

While it is a legitimate concern that I share as well, I fear that we are in the minority. GW is doing better than ever financially with their current business model and rules/books sales for 40k. As long as those sales continue I don't see them changing course. As a result, I too prefer Blood Bowl. When it comes to my 40k armies, I greatly prefer the new Apocalypse, older editions (4th/5th), and Index-only 8th edition.

I've played or watched a LOT of 9th. Probably 100+ games among my regular group who do not fall into the Tournament style play, but fit somewhere between fluff and tournament. We build what we like/have, but play our best on the table.
(before it's said: We use a LOT of terrain of all types. Look in my gallery to see our tables, we spread objectives out, we build TAC style armies)
9th has a much better scoring system that makes movement and planning important on the table, but very few games need turn 5, less than half get to turn 4 with the game in the balance, and turn 3 usually involves one side ending any hope the other side has of winning (usually the side that went first finishes the one who went second)

Going by my tables, my local FLGs, and the dozens of battle reports my group has looked at;
My answer is yes. The game has become extra killy.
This is GW's plan IMO. They want you to have armies of lots of models on the table (so they sell stuff, they are a model company trying to sell models) but are trying to speed up the game so they can draw the younger generations used to video game PVP and CCG style of many faster games in a few hours.

My feeling is it results in a poorer play experience. Alpha strike on turn 2 AND 3 remains extremely powerful. (Most players would have better results by actually saving one unit for a later drop. Yes, losing a unit's firepower for 2 turns sucks, but...) Units appear, delete units, repeat. Too many units in the game now can earn back 75% + of their points value in one round of shooting or charging (and there are enough strats etc to guarantee Deep Strike or turn 1 or 2 charges for at least 1 unit a turn and usually 2. Obviously YMMV depending on codex)
It has amazed me no one has mentioned the new Dark Eldar abilities for monstrous damage.

So yes, lethality and sudden MASSIVE destruction (generally described as Gotcha moments) is the norm and probably staying although I do agree with the 9th codices have subtly lessened some of it.

(edited for clarity)

 Unknown_Lifeform wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
I get the sense that the posters so far haven't played 9th edition books. The rerolls are way down and durability is up.

I just played T'au with a mountain of rerolls and still survived long enough to score well with Necrons.

Maybe the sentiment is correct for 8th, but not so much for 9th.

I agree 9th is an overall slight improvement over 8th. Re-rolls have been toned down a bit but are still extremely plentiful. There have been some increases to durability and the increased points per model in 9th means there is a bit less stuff is on the board.

On the flip side melta damage output is now off the charts. Multi-meltas in particular have just gone too far for the numbers some armies can take them in. With Marines having 2 to 3 wounds and armies getting more multi-damage weaponry to deal with them I'm finding that multi-wound units in other armies are feeling extremely fragile as they get focused by all the anti-marine weaponry. With my Necrons I'm looking at dropping my Skorpekh destroyers because they are too much of a glass hammer.

Single wound stuff and ultra-resilient units are doing fine, but I'm getting the impression there is a lot of stuff in the middle that might get left behind.

My warriors survive as well as they do, because they have 1) orb, 2) rezzer, 3) chrono, and 4) reanimator. Skorpekhs if run with any intent should be dragging a chrono. That coupled with -1 to wound should make it pretty hard for meltas to run through them. And since Skorpekhs can move through buildings they should be able to make good use of los blocking.

Don't give up on them yet.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sim-Life wrote:
Thats exactly why people don't like them. Its a gak experience not born from skill or tactics of your opponent where they earn a good play from setting up and executing a plan. Its just a gak moment that preys on your ignorance and isn't earned in any way.

I feel like there's a pretty simple solution : "Do you have anything that can do X / Y / Z?"

Sim-Life wrote:

 Blackie wrote:

cjmate8 wrote:
Warhammer 40k is dead at my shop, and everyone has moved on to Blood Bowl or Star War Legion.

I asked my friend, who used to run tournaments at our shop, and he said there were too many "gotcha" moments and cheap units that could do extreme amounts of damage. It feels bad to spend money and time on a knight only to have it get blown off the board in a single charge of vanguard veteran or a single round of shooting from Retributors.

Does anyone feel this way, and what caused it? I'm wondering if it's legitimate concern, or if we just need to wait for everyone to get a codex.

Gotcha moments are a natural consequence of having 20+ different factions. People can't possibly know every rule of any unit in the game. I don't really see how gotcha moments are an issue though, people should learn from experience and the next time they'll avoid those moments.

Thats exactly why people don't like them. Its a gak experience not born from skill or tactics of your opponent where they earn a good play from setting up and executing a plan. Its just a gak moment that preys on your ignorance and isn't earned in any way.

Yup, far too much emphasis is placed on it rather than smart tactical gameplay. Too many "things" change stats one way or the other.

Would a public community driven set of rules and datasheets be considered IP infringement ?

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sim-Life wrote:
Thats exactly why people don't like them. Its a gak experience not born from skill or tactics of your opponent where they earn a good play from setting up and executing a plan. Its just a gak moment that preys on your ignorance and isn't earned in any way.

I feel like there's a pretty simple solution : "Do you have anything that can do X / Y / Z?"

Isn't that the problem, though? In earlier editions, the answer would usually be "yes" or "no". With the advent of all the different strats/auras/traits/etc, the answer becomes a little more murky unless the question is uselessly broad.

Also, that requires that you know that a specific action is possible. If I don't know that, say, move-shoot-move is a thing, I'm not going to know to ask my opponent "Hey, do you have anything that can move-shoot-move?". I'd wager that's why its referred to as "preying on ignorance".

 waefre_1 wrote:

Spoiler:

 Blackie wrote:

cjmate8 wrote:
Warhammer 40k is dead at my shop, and everyone has moved on to Blood Bowl or Star War Legion.

I asked my friend, who used to run tournaments at our shop, and he said there were too many "gotcha" moments and cheap units that could do extreme amounts of damage. It feels bad to spend money and time on a knight only to have it get blown off the board in a single charge of vanguard veteran or a single round of shooting from Retributors.

Does anyone feel this way, and what caused it? I'm wondering if it's legitimate concern, or if we just need to wait for everyone to get a codex.

Gotcha moments are a natural consequence of having 20+ different factions. People can't possibly know every rule of any unit in the game. I don't really see how gotcha moments are an issue though, people should learn from experience and the next time they'll avoid those moments.

From what I've seen here (and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong), it seems like there's a bit of a qualitative difference between the "gotcha" moments of 8e/9e and previous editions. In the past, it was usually one or two things interacting to bring on the "gotcha" (ie. "Oh, that unit has Big Choppas, so you only get a 4+ armor save for that Tac squad"), whereas nowadays the "gotcha" comes from the interaction of multiple rules (potentially from multiple sources - ie. "This custom trait from PA means that this character's aura now covers that unit which means that they get 72 S7 AP-4 D3 rerollable attacks in CC if I pop this Strategem").

74.

 jeff white wrote:

 waefre_1 wrote:

Spoiler:

 Blackie wrote:

cjmate8 wrote:
Warhammer 40k is dead at my shop, and everyone has moved on to Blood Bowl or Star War Legion.

I asked my friend, who used to run tournaments at our shop, and he said there were too many "gotcha" moments and cheap units that could do extreme amounts of damage. It feels bad to spend money and time on a knight only to have it get blown off the board in a single charge of vanguard veteran or a single round of shooting from Retributors.

Does anyone feel this way, and what caused it? I'm wondering if it's legitimate concern, or if we just need to wait for everyone to get a codex.

Gotcha moments are a natural consequence of having 20+ different factions. People can't possibly know every rule of any unit in the game. I don't really see how gotcha moments are an issue though, people should learn from experience and the next time they'll avoid those moments.

From what I've seen here (and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong), it seems like there's a bit of a qualitative difference between the "gotcha" moments of 8e/9e and previous editions. In the past, it was usually one or two things interacting to bring on the "gotcha" (ie. "Oh, that unit has Big Choppas, so you only get a 4+ armor save for that Tac squad"), whereas nowadays the "gotcha" comes from the interaction of multiple rules (potentially from multiple sources - ie. "This custom trait from PA means that this character's aura now covers that unit which means that they get 72 S7 AP-4 D3 rerollable attacks in CC if I pop this Strategem").

74.

Ah, right - forgot the exploding 6s for the SuperDuper Doctrinarius because we're fighting on a Tuesday. Thanks for reminding me.

Siegfriedfr wrote:
Would a public community driven set of rules and datasheets be considered IP infringement ?

Depends on jurisdiction. If you change all the proper nouns and don't charge any money for it you'll probably be okay. A bigger problem would be getting people to play it; there are a number of "rewritten 40k" projects people have posted in Proposed Rules and they're mostly run by small communities for their own use rather than on any kind of large scale.

 Blackie wrote:

cjmate8 wrote:
Warhammer 40k is dead at my shop, and everyone has moved on to Blood Bowl or Star War Legion.

I asked my friend, who used to run tournaments at our shop, and he said there were too many "gotcha" moments and cheap units that could do extreme amounts of damage. It feels bad to spend money and time on a knight only to have it get blown off the board in a single charge of vanguard veteran or a single round of shooting from Retributors.

Does anyone feel this way, and what caused it? I'm wondering if it's legitimate concern, or if we just need to wait for everyone to get a codex.

Gotcha moments are a natural consequence of having 20+ different factions. People can't possibly know every rule of any unit in the game. I don't really see how gotcha moments are an issue though, people should learn from experience and the next time they'll avoid those moments.

The problem isn't faction based, but rather stratagem and/or subfaction -based: You could face the exact same unit multiple times, but it can have radically different abilities depending on what colour it is painted, or if your opponent spends command points on it.

 Lord Damocles wrote:
The problem isn't faction based, but rather stratagem and/or subfaction -based: You could face the exact same unit multiple times, but it can have radically different abilities depending on what colour it is painted, or if your opponent spends command points on it.

Exactly.

You can take something as simple as an Ork Boy. Slap a black paint job on it and suddenly it has Skarboyz (1CP +1 Strength), No Mukkin' About (6s generate additional hit rolls in melee), Ghazghkull Thraka giving them Great Waaagh!(advance and charge and +1 to attacks) and Goffs is da Best(reroll hit rolls of 1 in melee), Makari giving them Ghazghkull's Waaagh! Banner(6+++ FNP), and a Nob With Waaagh! Banner giving them Waaagh! Banner(+1 to hit rolls in the fight phase.) and after they are done eviscerating you in melee, if you're still alive, BOOM! here comes Get Stuck In, Ladz! (3CP Fight again if you have already fought this phase.)


One week you are fighting someone playing Bad Moonz, the next you are fighting Goffs and your expectations of what an Ork Boy is is drastically different from what you are going to face this time. You can no longer look at a codex entry and parse what a unit is capable of these days. There are so many stacking buffs, auras, psychic powers, warlord traits and stratagems that it requires a lot of effort just to understand what each unit can do. It doesn't help that GW is spreading rules between many different books these days. Certain stratagems and unit entries only available in campaign books.

As an AdMech player, the one thing I am not looking forward to with the new codex is trying to explain all the rules interactions to my opponents, they seem to have stacked rule after rule...

If you haven't played against 7th (or was it 6th?) edition summoning spam you cannot really comment on how awful GW game design can be. "Do you want one or two rolls on three different tables to go with your summoned unit?" "Extra lesser boon please".

Siegfriedfr wrote:
Would a public community driven set of rules and datasheets be considered IP infringement ?

Yes, anything more than that and less than rewriting the names is IP infringement. Copying any of GW's rules like SM stats or the specific wording of abilities or relics is copyright infringement.



Get rid of the stats and then it becomes hard to switch, get rid of the names and you're not really playing in the same universe which is a huge part of the appeal to me. Lots of people complain about Astra Militarum, an in-world high gothic name for the force, but Undying Machines or Robot Legions? That's just not what I'm here to play. Not to mention the fractured community, part of what's great about 40k is the size of the community. GW just needs to get their act together.

 The Forgemaster wrote:
As an AdMech player, the one thing I am not looking forward to with the new codex is trying to explain all the rules interactions to my opponents, they seem to have stacked rule after rule...

Bloat for the bloat god. I am sure GW could create missions with all these rules in them, make an AdMech mission with doctrinas and canticles, a Necron mission with Command Protocols... Or hide away the rules in specialist detachments, new players would not have the extra rules forced on them if that was the case.

When I say mission I don't mean one just giving all these rules for free to one side so they can easily win the game, it could be through Stratagems or by achieving certain conditions in the mission, like awakening an Overlord for Necrons, destroying him could be part of the mission objective or something. With the new way Detachments function soup is inherently a negative unlike in 8th so GW doesn't need to layer rules together to make mono-faction and mono-sub-faction armies more competitive, they can just up the cost of detachments if soup becomes more prevalent than they want.

For Drukhari they made PFP conditional on mono-factioning, I'm okay with this, but adding extra rules like Combat Doctrines or Command Protocols I am not. Command Protocols could have been a relic or a series of relics and I would have been fine with that.

Is the game over-the-top, simple answer is yes.