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.

 kirotheavenger wrote:

It is not easy to sell an army for what you paid for it, especially if you also include all the time that took. Not even close.

It's flat out impossible, unless it's a mid sized collection of optimized 2000-3000 points and painted on a pro level. Getting back 40-50% of the investment is quite realistic though, and not a bad deal considering the amount of time that the hobby entertained the seller.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sim-Life wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
This thread seems to have drifted drastically from its original intent, and we just have people ridiculing anyone who thinks 40k is too complex/bloated/unwieldy/whatever.

I feel like people are trying to gaslight me into thinking that 40k being bad is my fault.

People have their own opinions and those must be respected. It's totally fine to completely dislike 40k.

But I think people who posted here have a very different idea about their hobby: you seem to be a wargamer, someone who doesn't care about brands but only cares to have fun playing board/tabletop games. Other posters don't necessarily aim to play games at any cost, and the expectations of their favorite (only?) wargame are much lower. For example to me it's like I'm playing 40k as long as I enjoy it, and when I'm not I'm doing something different as I have other hobbies. I don't have to play other wargames if I quit 40k, in fact I'm in the hobby since late 90s, only played 40k and WHFB, and took several breaks. While on those breaks I never even had the idea of trying another game, I didn't feel the need. Someone who really loves playing games could have definitely tried another game instead.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Everything can be made a flow chart. That's why AI exists.

I shoot my Panzerfaust at tanks! OMG flow chart! I shoot my MGs to pin you! AHHH! When will the simple uneventful rolls stop?!

Why can't I just play a game where I use my big brain to deftly outmaneuver everyone and then declare their units dead - not with dice, but by my cunning prowess! Silly plebs.

You can. Just not with us.

 Sim-Life wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
This thread seems to have drifted drastically from its original intent, and we just have people ridiculing anyone who thinks 40k is too complex/bloated/unwieldy/whatever.

I feel like people are trying to gaslight me into thinking that 40k being bad is my fault.

Meanwhile, you are telling everyone that they should hate 40k as much a you do and that enjoying it is wrong.

 Jidmah wrote:

 Sim-Life wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
This thread seems to have drifted drastically from its original intent, and we just have people ridiculing anyone who thinks 40k is too complex/bloated/unwieldy/whatever.

I feel like people are trying to gaslight me into thinking that 40k being bad is my fault.

Meanwhile, you are telling everyone that they should hate 40k as much a you do and that enjoying it is wrong.

Where have I done that? I argue that the game is bad but I don't tell anyone that they're having fun wrong. On the other hand I've been told that I've just not found the right 40k, if I just talked about it then they're sure we could work out a way for me to like 40k, that I'm dumb for finding the rules convoluted and tedious and that I'm the reason my friends don't enjoy 40k.

 Sim-Life wrote:
Where have I done that? I argue that the game is bad but I don't tell anyone that they're having fun wrong. On the other hand I've been told that I've just not found the right 40k, if I just talked about it then they're sure we could work out a way for me to like 40k, that I'm dumb for finding the rules convoluted and tedious and that I'm the reason my friends don't enjoy 40k.

Why do you frame the bolded part as negativ? You claim that one guy who you are not even playing with, is unhappy about the game because the rules suck. Asking the person what the actual problem is and seeing if there is a way to accomodate for it is somehow the wrong thing? And an example of people gaslighting you?

I think you don't want to have a discussion, you want to state your opinion. Sorry, I have mistaken your intent.

Today I played a SW Legion tournament (a game in which Im a noob unlike with 40K)... if I compared this weekend experience with the previous weekend 40K tournament I attend is like comparing eating Dog Food under a bridge (40K IE; a bloated and clumpsy mess almost unplayable) with eating a beef bourguignon at a nice Bistro (SW Legion IE an enjoyable commercial tabletop wargame).

This is just IMHO.

Okay so I don't like 40k all that much but some of this is outright mean. I still do play it, and while the game in general is somewhat complex and boring, there are still flashes of epic moments (a Keeper of Secrets dueling a Hive Tyrant, a Baneblade running down Intercessors, etc).

I want it to improve, not die in a ditch or to upset everyone that plays it

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Okay so I don't like 40k all that much but some of this is outright mean. I still do play it, and while the game in general is somewhat complex and boring, there are still flashes of epic moments (a Keeper of Secrets dueling a Hive Tyrant, a Baneblade running down Intercessors, etc).

I want it to improve, not die in a ditch or to upset everyone that plays it

If enjoyment is your goal, there are many things you can to to crumble that perceived complexity of 9th edition to the small simple game it actually is.

There actually were some posters giving advice in that direction in this thread, but those have been ignored or verbally attacked. It has become clear that most people here are not interested in solutions, but in proclaiming their opinion as undeniable truth.

I saw some great suggestions to play without stratagems, do core rules only, or just don't bother trying to learn your opponent's rules and accept that you'll be blindsided from time to time.

While those may be practical solutions, they don't really demonstrate that the complexity is merely perceived rather than an actual and substantial obstacle to play.

Being blindsided once every 20+ games doesn't look like an issue to be honest.

 Jidmah wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Okay so I don't like 40k all that much but some of this is outright mean. I still do play it, and while the game in general is somewhat complex and boring, there are still flashes of epic moments (a Keeper of Secrets dueling a Hive Tyrant, a Baneblade running down Intercessors, etc).

I want it to improve, not die in a ditch or to upset everyone that plays it

If enjoyment is your goal, there are many things you can to to crumble that perceived complexity of 9th edition to the small simple game it actually is.

There actually were some posters giving advice in that direction in this thread, but those have been ignored or verbally attacked. It has become clear that most people here are not interested in solutions, but in proclaiming their opinion as undeniable truth.

And you ignored the response that for a lot of people their group is "9th as printed or nothing".

catbarf wrote:I saw some great suggestions to play without stratagems, do core rules only, or just don't bother trying to learn your opponent's rules and accept that you'll be blindsided from time to time.

While those may be practical solutions, they don't really demonstrate that the complexity is merely perceived rather than an actual and substantial obstacle to play.

Sim-Life wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Okay so I don't like 40k all that much but some of this is outright mean. I still do play it, and while the game in general is somewhat complex and boring, there are still flashes of epic moments (a Keeper of Secrets dueling a Hive Tyrant, a Baneblade running down Intercessors, etc).

I want it to improve, not die in a ditch or to upset everyone that plays it

If enjoyment is your goal, there are many things you can to to crumble that perceived complexity of 9th edition to the small simple game it actually is.

There actually were some posters giving advice in that direction in this thread, but those have been ignored or verbally attacked. It has become clear that most people here are not interested in solutions, but in proclaiming their opinion as undeniable truth.

And you ignored the response that for a lot of people their group is "9th as printed or nothing".

See, this is what I am talking about. It IS iMPosSIble tO lEArn 9th! iTs ToO CoMpLEx To leARN!

You don't have to change a single thing about 9th to play it as the simple game it is, and doing so takes a lot less effort than writing your average list, painting miniatures or even packaging your army to go play somewhere.

Instead of doing an hour or two of research and making a list of the few gotchas each codex has (or just taking one of the many lists that already exist!) people prefer to spend weeks worth of their time whining on dakka about stratagems.

But you aren't interested in solutions, you want the world to change to accommodate you.

Only making a list doesn't take an hour or two. If the anwser to the question of , what am I suppose to do with my army when it is not fun to play, because of rules changes in a codex, is buy multiple boxs or buggies, flyers to replace your infantry army, then the whole thing can take months if not longer. And by the time you do have it, there is no garentee that with other codex droping, the army you just bought is going to be fun to play.

Plus the solutions are only valid when the opposing side okeys them. If you go ask someone who is happy with how their army functions, the chance that you can convince them to make their armies worse hinges on some outside of game factors, like people being your family or your friends, and being willing to spend time and money, just so you cna have fun at their cost.

The solution is to avoid skew lists. Orks greentide were strong with the 8th codex but nerfing one unit means nerfing the entire army so they were never an option to me. I mean I had the models to play it but I would have never suggested anyone interested in starting orks to go for that build. Or to spam mek gunz as another example: get 3-6 if you really like them, not 10+. Take a bit of everything instead. Do you like vehicles? Instead of buying 10+ buggies get a few of them, then a BW, dreads and planes with the same budget. This way you'll never be able to field the flavour of the month but you'll never be trash either.

I basically field the same ork list (lots of vehicles of different kind, small amount of infantries) I played in 8th now, with just a few tweaks to suit the new codex better. No way I'm going to add new snagga units to my collection regardless of how competitive they are, as I don't like the models.

Everyone should do that, unless we're talking about people insterested in owning collections worthy of several thousands of points who would have bought multiples of the same units anyway.

No one would play the flavour of the month, no one would be trash tier either. Win win for everyone.

Okey. I was playing a non skew ork list in 8th ed, then?
Because I can tell you that I played a non skew, list in 8th. Litterally took the opposit of what was good aside for 2 HQs. Then under PA my dudes got better, but I didn't get to play much because of covid. And now the new codex reverted all the changes that made my army fun, and the army that was good at the start of 8th is again the top build for my faction. That is 4 years, to get a codex which makes your army bad and not very fun to play.

As far as the limiting the number of models you buy, I am not sure it is always an option. I guess you could buy less of support stuff, but how is a DE army suppose to work without 4-6 raiders? a GK army started from scratch begins with buying of 5 boxs of strikes and 4 boxs of NDKs. You don't have middle options. stuff like dreads went up in points, but is way weaker then a NDK.

I am not even sure if marines have multiple builds, because they all seem to run the same type of units, with only the support stuff being changed depending on the chapter. I don't think many people are not going to take a bike or jump pack apothecary, just because they are a meta choice. And in case of some armies like custodes or harlis, am not sure they even can not take the meta option and not get a borderline unplayable list. But maybe I am wrong, besides GK, I don't really a lot about some armies, as they are not played here at all. No idea what a tau player does nowadays to have fun.

I don't know how to telly you, a DE army works perfectly with 1-2 raiders or even with none of them.

Average collections of marines made from starters kit are already a solid base.

Not sure about GK but I don't think their current optimized lists are much different than what they used to bring 10 years ago.

Custodes and harlequins play the same stuff since their release as standalone armies. Especially with these factions that have limited options getting a bit of everything is always a good thing. If you build a list based on 18+ bikes (or 5 riptides just to make a tau example), because in that moment they were OP, without having the models to eventually change it and then it suddenly turns out unplayable that's on you.

 Jidmah wrote:

catbarf wrote:I saw some great suggestions to play without stratagems, do core rules only, or just don't bother trying to learn your opponent's rules and accept that you'll be blindsided from time to time.

While those may be practical solutions, they don't really demonstrate that the complexity is merely perceived rather than an actual and substantial obstacle to play.

Sim-Life wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Okay so I don't like 40k all that much but some of this is outright mean. I still do play it, and while the game in general is somewhat complex and boring, there are still flashes of epic moments (a Keeper of Secrets dueling a Hive Tyrant, a Baneblade running down Intercessors, etc).

I want it to improve, not die in a ditch or to upset everyone that plays it

If enjoyment is your goal, there are many things you can to to crumble that perceived complexity of 9th edition to the small simple game it actually is.

There actually were some posters giving advice in that direction in this thread, but those have been ignored or verbally attacked. It has become clear that most people here are not interested in solutions, but in proclaiming their opinion as undeniable truth.

And you ignored the response that for a lot of people their group is "9th as printed or nothing".

See, this is what I am talking about. It IS iMPosSIble tO lEArn 9th! iTs ToO CoMpLEx To leARN!

You don't have to change a single thing about 9th to play it as the simple game it is, and doing so takes a lot less effort than writing your average list, painting miniatures or even packaging your army to go play somewhere.

Instead of doing an hour or two of research and making a list of the few gotchas each codex has (or just taking one of the many lists that already exist!) people prefer to spend weeks worth of their time whining on dakka about stratagems.

But you aren't interested in solutions, you want the world to change to accommodate you.

Firstly, again you've said people are saying its too complex when a majority of people have said that the issue is not complexity, its bloat and rules spread over too many sources. Please stop beating that strawman.

Secondly I am interested in a solution. The solution is for GW to write a better game that has meaningful decisions to make during the game that doesn't require homework or foreknowledge of every rules combo of every faction to play a fun game.

You already don't need foreknowledge of every rules combo of every faction to play a fun game, just a very specific and limited selection of those.

 Sim-Life wrote:

Spoiler:

 Jidmah wrote:

catbarf wrote:I saw some great suggestions to play without stratagems, do core rules only, or just don't bother trying to learn your opponent's rules and accept that you'll be blindsided from time to time.

While those may be practical solutions, they don't really demonstrate that the complexity is merely perceived rather than an actual and substantial obstacle to play.

Sim-Life wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Okay so I don't like 40k all that much but some of this is outright mean. I still do play it, and while the game in general is somewhat complex and boring, there are still flashes of epic moments (a Keeper of Secrets dueling a Hive Tyrant, a Baneblade running down Intercessors, etc).

I want it to improve, not die in a ditch or to upset everyone that plays it

If enjoyment is your goal, there are many things you can to to crumble that perceived complexity of 9th edition to the small simple game it actually is.

There actually were some posters giving advice in that direction in this thread, but those have been ignored or verbally attacked. It has become clear that most people here are not interested in solutions, but in proclaiming their opinion as undeniable truth.

And you ignored the response that for a lot of people their group is "9th as printed or nothing".

See, this is what I am talking about. It IS iMPosSIble tO lEArn 9th! iTs ToO CoMpLEx To leARN!

You don't have to change a single thing about 9th to play it as the simple game it is, and doing so takes a lot less effort than writing your average list, painting miniatures or even packaging your army to go play somewhere.

Instead of doing an hour or two of research and making a list of the few gotchas each codex has (or just taking one of the many lists that already exist!) people prefer to spend weeks worth of their time whining on dakka about stratagems.

But you aren't interested in solutions, you want the world to change to accommodate you.

Firstly, again you've said people are saying its too complex when a majority of people have said that the issue is not complexity, its bloat and rules spread over too many sources. Please stop beating that strawman.

Secondly I am interested in a solution. The solution is for GW to write a better game that has meaningful decisions to make during the game that doesn't require homework or foreknowledge of every rules combo of every faction to play a fun game.

Complex:
1. consisting of many different and connected parts.

Stratagems constitute those many different and connected parts, Stratagems are complex, bloat is overcomplication.

A complicated form might need you to fill out 20 different things, filling out your name, birth date, HS graduation date, employment history etc. might all be pretty simple, but a form requiring 20 different things is a complex form. No game is going to require quadratic equations on the fly, if that's your bar for a complicated game then no mass market game is going to reach that.

 Blackie wrote:
You already don't need foreknowledge of every rules combo of every faction to play a fun game, just a very specific and limited selection of those.

You don't know what you don't know, hobbies should not require homework. GW should just make a set of universal Stratagems and balance the game around those instead of having a shooty Stratagem for Skitarii Vanguard and another shooty Stratagem for Skitarii Rangers, which is basically the same unit with a different weapon.

 vict0988 wrote:

 Blackie wrote:
You already don't need foreknowledge of every rules combo of every faction to play a fun game, just a very specific and limited selection of those.

You don't know what you don't know, hobbies should not require homework. GW should just make a set of universal Stratagems and balance the game around those instead of having a shooty Stratagem for Skitarii Vanguard and another shooty Stratagem for Skitarii Rangers, which is basically the same unit with a different weapon.

I don't disagree that GW could do a lot more with making more elements generally universal and improve the communication of their game. Heck in AoS Slaanesh there's two units that have the same ability with different names for that ability and that's just within one book. GW could very much lose a touch of their "fluffy" aspect to rules and have more generic stats and abilities and achieve what they want.


That said the idea that hobbies "should not require homework" is flawed. All hobbies require a level of investment in time and learning; and the more you want to "up your game" within that hobby the more of that work is required. If you want to get a camera and point-shoot happy snaps you can do that. If you want to make really fantastic photos then you're like as not going to have to spend time learning; reading books, practicing, talking to others etc... in order to advance your understanding of what you're doing and how you might best achieve what you want.

40K is no different, its just that the rules change every few years and the way GW writes them makes it counter-productive for easy learning.

 vict0988 wrote:

You don't know what you don't know, hobbies should not require homework. GW should just make a set of universal Stratagems and balance the game around those instead of having a shooty Stratagem for Skitarii Vanguard and another shooty Stratagem for Skitarii Rangers, which is basically the same unit with a different weapon.

Lol, reading opponents' codexes is already homework, and also a heavy one which involves paying for a lot of money for stuff you don't play. Why is it ok to read all possibile opponents' codexes but not a review about best combos in the game? It would also be much faster, don't you think? Stratagems are not the only thing to consider but also chapter traits, warlord traits, relics, psychic powers, auras, units datasheets, etc...

The problem for me WRT 9th is less so "being blindsided" (at this point I just accept my suffering in that arena), but rather the amount of time it takes to explain everything.

Like my example provided earlier, explaining the difference between those two Keepers of Secrets is kind of a long conversation, especially if my opponent asks how to counter them or what is meaningful about them. Even the poster who claimed to know a lot didn't really understand the significance there. Compound this a whole lot for every unit in my army (for example, the differences in ways that Friends and the Contorted Epitome prevent fall back and the different methods of countering them), and it starts to kind of be a slog.

For things like 9th edition AdMech, it is even a slog during battle reports, where players are on their best behavior and are trying to remember things sometimes with a cameraman/stream runner to help.

There are no rules in photography, look at Chess. You read the rules and you can play, you can study how best to operate within those rules by studying common moves, but a knight is a knight whether it is black or white, your opponent cannot sacrifice a pawn to move more than 3 spaces using a chess supplement out last week.

 Blackie wrote:

 vict0988 wrote:

You don't know what you don't know, hobbies should not require homework. GW should just make a set of universal Stratagems and balance the game around those instead of having a shooty Stratagem for Skitarii Vanguard and another shooty Stratagem for Skitarii Rangers, which is basically the same unit with a different weapon.

Lol, reading opponents' codexes is already homework, and also a heavy one which involves paying for a lot of money for stuff you don't play. Why is it ok to read all possibile opponents' codexes but not a review about best combos in the game? It would also be much faster, don't you think? Stratagems are not the only thing to consider but also chapter traits, warlord traits, relics, psychic powers, auras, units datasheets, etc...

Your army list (which you must provide to your opponent) lists what WL traits, Relics and psychic powers you have, your opponent can then ask what each of those di and can ask what the stats and abilities of the units in your list are. Just knowing the stats and points costs is not enough to know what to target anyway, that requires knowing damage to durability ratios between your units and your opponent's units. That leaves summonable units and stratagems, only the latter gets used so Stratagems are 40k's biggest source of hobby homework, followed by errata to Stratagems.

The friendly way of handing Stratagems is warning your opponent of what Stratagems you might use and reminding them before they decide to plonk something in range of an auspex scan, then there's the competitive guess who method of asking questions that force your opponent to reveal their Stratagems like "can you use any Stratagems that increase your melee unit's threat range" and finally there is "Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Gotcha".

Chess is a game using mirror "factions", 40k is a game involving completely different factions. Is there someone who really wants identical factions just for the sake of balance and to avoid "homework?".

To avoid gotchas just read a dedicated article, it's way faster than explaining stuff from the opponent and fast enough to be considered. Take the new ork codex for example: what do you really need to know to avoid gotchas? Maybe how the kill rig works and the Ramming Speed stratagem, that's it.

What about the infamous Drukhari codex? Keep in mind that Strife models fight first, Incubi can make you fight last, and that hellions/reavers have a stratagem to inflict mortal wounds just by flying over a model. Done. It really isn't hard to avoid gotchas, there are so few of them possible with 9th codexes.

 Blackie wrote:
Chess is a game using mirror "factions", 40k is a game involving completely different factions. Is there someone who really wants identical factions just for the sake of balance and to avoid "homework?".

To avoid gotchas just read a dedicated article, it's way faster than explaining stuff from the opponent and fast enough to be considered. Take the new ork codex for example: what do you really need to know to avoid gotchas? Maybe how the kill rig works and the Ramming Speed stratagem, that's it.

What about the infamous Drukhari codex? Keep in mind that Strife models fight first, Incubi can make you fight last, and that hellions/reavers have a stratagem to inflict mortal wounds just by flying over a model. Done. It really isn't hard to avoid gotchas, there are so few of them possible with 9th codexes.

I suppose the standout for me is that 40k is the only game where this sort of homework is "required" (if I want to avoid gotchas) despite the existence of many other games that also have diverse and distinct factions.

The homework might be fast, easy, fun even, but it's still a requirement I don't think anyone is denying - and that sets it apart from other games in a way that some people didn't sign up for and would prefer not exist.

For a lot of people the "homework" is the game.

As always the important thing to remember is this: all kinds of people play 40k for all kinds of different reasons. There is no simple way of making an objective judgement on the quality of a game without first understanding the specific type of player playing it, and more importantly, what they want out of it.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Blackie wrote:
Chess is a game using mirror "factions", 40k is a game involving completely different factions. Is there someone who really wants identical factions just for the sake of balance and to avoid "homework?".

To avoid gotchas just read a dedicated article, it's way faster than explaining stuff from the opponent and fast enough to be considered. Take the new ork codex for example: what do you really need to know to avoid gotchas? Maybe how the kill rig works and the Ramming Speed stratagem, that's it.

What about the infamous Drukhari codex? Keep in mind that Strife models fight first, Incubi can make you fight last, and that hellions/reavers have a stratagem to inflict mortal wounds just by flying over a model. Done. It really isn't hard to avoid gotchas, there are so few of them possible with 9th codexes.

I suppose the standout for me is that 40k is the only game where this sort of homework is "required" (if I want to avoid gotchas) despite the existence of many other games that also have diverse and distinct factions.

The homework might be fast, easy, fun even, but it's still a requirement I don't think anyone is denying - and that sets it apart from other games in a way that some people didn't sign up for and would prefer not exist.

Exactly. Why is homework of this kind a good thing? Why are people defending it? It doesn't lead to a more tactically engaging game or increase meaningful decision making. Many other games manage to have diverse factions and units without resorting to byzantine collections of disparate systems to do so.

The Slaanesh example earlier shows how bad GW are at writing their rules. One of Slaanesh's defining traits in 40k is denying Fall Back, which is fine. A couple of their units can do it but both do it in different ways. Why? Not only does that approach require more work from GW, it increases the possibility of a feels-bad gotcha because an opponent may get the two abilities mixed up even if they remember they exist. I cannot figure out why people would think this is a desirable trait in a game.

 slave.entity wrote:
For a lot of people the "homework" is the game.

As always the important thing to remember is this: all kinds of people play 40k for all kinds of different reasons. There is no simple way of making an objective judgement on the quality of a game without first understanding the specific type of player playing it, and more importantly, what they want out of it.

Well, in this regard, I play Tabletop Wargaming, not "sit at home and read so I can prepare for the tabletop, at which point I execute a series of simple and pre-programmed instructions developed earlier" wargaming. Other people may find that fun, but 40k has never had that to the degree it seems to now. (And when it did, it was rightly criticized, e.g 7th Edition formations).

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 slave.entity wrote:
For a lot of people the "homework" is the game.

As always the important thing to remember is this: all kinds of people play 40k for all kinds of different reasons. There is no simple way of making an objective judgement on the quality of a game without first understanding the specific type of player playing it, and more importantly, what they want out of it.

Well, in this regard, I play Tabletop Wargaming, not "sit at home and read so I can prepare for the tabletop, at which point I execute a series of simple and pre-programmed instructions developed earlier" wargaming. Other people may find that fun, but 40k has never had that to the degree it seems to now. (And when it did, it was rightly criticized, e.g 7th Edition formations).

Which is perfectly OK! I suspect most people prefer to play it that way. I know I do. But I also know a lot of people who love the research, list building, and theorycrafting. For them the "game" starts long before any dice are rolled, and the actual dice rolling is more of a final experiment that tests the validity of their list building skills. You'll see lots of examples of these kinds of players among the competitive crowd.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I suppose the standout for me is that 40k is the only game where this sort of homework is "required" (if I want to avoid gotchas) despite the existence of many other games that also have diverse and distinct factions.

The homework might be fast, easy, fun even, but it's still a requirement I don't think anyone is denying - and that sets it apart from other games in a way that some people didn't sign up for and would prefer not exist.

Then you haven't played a lot of games then. WarmaHordes is replete with this. X-Wing pretty much requires you to know what possible cards your opponent MAY be able to use so you can have cards to exploit or counter them. Most games that have seen regular growth for a decade or more have this concept as the developers add new things to be keep them fresh. Heck, even Battletech has this if one allows certain tech areas to be explored. That doesn't even consider the other Warhammer games of Fantasy and Age of Sigmar.