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.

Good decision imo. If it bothers you this much, it's better to not engage with it. You'll save some nerves and a good chunk of cash.

They don’t read this forum.

Most of the places I've seen discussing this change have been overall positive. Heck its actually rolled things back to how they were - one player one army. Rather than what they had which was one player multiple different divisions because of course you'd min-max taking the close combat subfaction with your close combat units and the ranged subfaction with your ranged units.

Cutting things back is overall making you have actual choices to make instead of just min-maxing.


I'm with the others that you're having a very large overreaction especially as you've bought and painted zero models. So its not as if you've money on the shelf that you can't use or have to change. You've played games yes, you've practiced and you've learned and won games with those simulated armies. Now the board has changed and you evolve your game to match that change and advance on and chances are all you've learned in the previous games will help you continue to win matches and such.


Heck GW changed how units work in AoS in a FAR more drastic way by cutting down the number of units you can take in forces and shifting things form big infantry to minimum units; it messes with forces I'd physically bought and, whilst I'm not a fan of it, I'm not getting bent out of shape with it. Partly because I know its GW and next edition they might turn things around entirely on their head; and partly because I enjoy the act of building models so its not a waste.


I think if you feel that playing games in a meta and rules system that will change is a waste, then you want to shift to a different type of competitive game system.

 Overread wrote:
Most of the places I've seen discussing this change have been overall positive. Heck its actually rolled things back to how they were - one player one army. Rather than what they had which was one player multiple different divisions because of course you'd min-max taking the close combat subfaction with your close combat units and the ranged subfaction with your ranged units.

Cutting things back is overall making you have actual choices to make instead of just min-maxing.


I'm with the others that you're having a very large overreaction especially as you've bought and painted zero models. So its not as if you've money on the shelf that you can't use or have to change. You've played games yes, you've practiced and you've learned and won games with those simulated armies. Now the board has changed and you evolve your game to match that change and advance on and chances are all you've learned in the previous games will help you continue to win matches and such.


Heck GW changed how units work in AoS in a FAR more drastic way by cutting down the number of units you can take in forces and shifting things form big infantry to minimum units; it messes with forces I'd physically bought and, whilst I'm not a fan of it, I'm not getting bent out of shape with it. Partly because I know its GW and next edition they might turn things around entirely on their head; and partly because I enjoy the act of building models so its not a waste.


I think if you feel that playing games in a meta and rules system that will change is a waste, then you want to shift to a different type of competitive game system.

When I say I had been holding this nut for 10 years, I hope you understand what I mean.

Before I post this I just want to note that I haven't yet bought all my models in physical form, so GW will personally be losing hundreds of currency units. F__k them for such a careless change.

Hahahahahaha.

Best shitpost of 2022 so far. Thank you very much ! For once, something on Dakkadakka made me laugh out loud.

Selfcontrol wrote:

Before I post this I just want to note that I haven't yet bought all my models in physical form, so GW will personally be losing hundreds of currency units. F__k them for such a careless change.

Hahahahahaha.

Best shitpost of 2022 so far. Thank you very much ! For once, something on Dakkadakka made me laugh out loud.

You're welcome bro. I'm glad someone is having a good time.

 _SeeD_ wrote:

 Overread wrote:
Most of the places I've seen discussing this change have been overall positive. Heck its actually rolled things back to how they were - one player one army. Rather than what they had which was one player multiple different divisions because of course you'd min-max taking the close combat subfaction with your close combat units and the ranged subfaction with your ranged units.

Cutting things back is overall making you have actual choices to make instead of just min-maxing.


I'm with the others that you're having a very large overreaction especially as you've bought and painted zero models. So its not as if you've money on the shelf that you can't use or have to change. You've played games yes, you've practiced and you've learned and won games with those simulated armies. Now the board has changed and you evolve your game to match that change and advance on and chances are all you've learned in the previous games will help you continue to win matches and such.


Heck GW changed how units work in AoS in a FAR more drastic way by cutting down the number of units you can take in forces and shifting things form big infantry to minimum units; it messes with forces I'd physically bought and, whilst I'm not a fan of it, I'm not getting bent out of shape with it. Partly because I know its GW and next edition they might turn things around entirely on their head; and partly because I enjoy the act of building models so its not a waste.


I think if you feel that playing games in a meta and rules system that will change is a waste, then you want to shift to a different type of competitive game system.

When I say I had been holding this nut for 10 years, I hope you understand what I mean.

10 years is a long time never to change your tactics/army design/composition. It's honestly also a really long time to have never bought a model in.

Just seems kinda strange for me that if you're approaching a point where you can afford to start buying models, why would you let a tiny thing stop you;

 Overread wrote:

 _SeeD_ wrote:

 Overread wrote:
Most of the places I've seen discussing this change have been overall positive. Heck its actually rolled things back to how they were - one player one army. Rather than what they had which was one player multiple different divisions because of course you'd min-max taking the close combat subfaction with your close combat units and the ranged subfaction with your ranged units.

Cutting things back is overall making you have actual choices to make instead of just min-maxing.


I'm with the others that you're having a very large overreaction especially as you've bought and painted zero models. So its not as if you've money on the shelf that you can't use or have to change. You've played games yes, you've practiced and you've learned and won games with those simulated armies. Now the board has changed and you evolve your game to match that change and advance on and chances are all you've learned in the previous games will help you continue to win matches and such.


Heck GW changed how units work in AoS in a FAR more drastic way by cutting down the number of units you can take in forces and shifting things form big infantry to minimum units; it messes with forces I'd physically bought and, whilst I'm not a fan of it, I'm not getting bent out of shape with it. Partly because I know its GW and next edition they might turn things around entirely on their head; and partly because I enjoy the act of building models so its not a waste.


I think if you feel that playing games in a meta and rules system that will change is a waste, then you want to shift to a different type of competitive game system.

When I say I had been holding this nut for 10 years, I hope you understand what I mean.

10 years is a long time never to change your tactics/army design/composition. It's honestly also a really long time to have never bought a model in.

Just seems kinda strange for me that if you're approaching a point where you can afford to start buying models, why would you let a tiny thing stop you;

10 years spans multiple editions and codices.
And this was that demoralizing. You probably missed the post where I described my inability to manage the logistics of using 1 Battalion or 2 Patrols without incurring unseen penalties. More unintended consequences from a broad change of the core rules. Mine is a unique case, but that doesn't make it hurt any less.

 _SeeD_ wrote:

 Overread wrote:
Most of the places I've seen discussing this change have been overall positive. Heck its actually rolled things back to how they were - one player one army. Rather than what they had which was one player multiple different divisions because of course you'd min-max taking the close combat subfaction with your close combat units and the ranged subfaction with your ranged units.

Cutting things back is overall making you have actual choices to make instead of just min-maxing.


I'm with the others that you're having a very large overreaction especially as you've bought and painted zero models. So its not as if you've money on the shelf that you can't use or have to change. You've played games yes, you've practiced and you've learned and won games with those simulated armies. Now the board has changed and you evolve your game to match that change and advance on and chances are all you've learned in the previous games will help you continue to win matches and such.


Heck GW changed how units work in AoS in a FAR more drastic way by cutting down the number of units you can take in forces and shifting things form big infantry to minimum units; it messes with forces I'd physically bought and, whilst I'm not a fan of it, I'm not getting bent out of shape with it. Partly because I know its GW and next edition they might turn things around entirely on their head; and partly because I enjoy the act of building models so its not a waste.


I think if you feel that playing games in a meta and rules system that will change is a waste, then you want to shift to a different type of competitive game system.

When I say I had been holding this nut for 10 years, I hope you understand what I mean.

I praise your foresight in knowing, at least 5 years in advance, that Dreadknight HQs would pop into existence in 8th edition.

Fans are made by fluff and models, not rules and lists.

An army list might be competitive for a single edition if you're LUCKY. If this is your reaction to shifts in meta then you'd never last in the competitive scene.

TableTop Simulator does people a disservice, wargaming is more work than just moving models around on a computer screen and polishing your army list.

I suggest you buy yourself a single squad of Grey Knights Terminators (or just some power armor dudes) and build/paint them up and see if you enjoy that side of the hobby before you even think about building an army of Grey Knights, let alone walking into the competitive scene. I've seen way too many people get hooked on the idea of tournament play only to burn out just building the army, let alone painting it.

Honestly if you've waited ten years for this you owe yourself that much.

 John Prins wrote:
Fans are made by fluff and models, not rules and lists.

An army list might be competitive for a single edition if you're LUCKY. If this is your reaction to shifts in meta then you'd never last in the competitive scene.

TableTop Simulator does people a disservice, wargaming is more work than just moving models around on a computer screen and polishing your army list.
I disagree with this and I kind of hope you'll explain

I suggest you buy yourself a single squad of Grey Knights Terminators (or just some power armor dudes) and build/paint them up and see if you enjoy that side of the hobby before you even think about building an army of Grey Knights, let alone walking into the competitive scene. I've seen way too many people get hooked on the idea of tournament play only to burn out just building the army, let alone painting it.
I already have 2 term boxes and have been doing this

Honestly if you've waited ten years for this you owe yourself that much.
this isn't the end, just the foreseeable future. I strict myself to comp play unless personally requested otherwise. I'll just put my competitive focus somewhere else for now.

Let me translate this to another gaming analogy: I too once spent a long time playing a driving simulator winning many races and when they lowered the speed limit on the A road between two villages near me I got so angry about the obvious incoming change I won't buy that F1 car I don't have.

If you consider this antagonistic it might help highlight to you why other people are having a hard time dealing with your post.

If you're actually mad, go post on the GW facebook page and stop bothering people here.

But honestly, this is par for the course for GW.

Dudeface wrote:
Let me translate this to another gaming analogy: I too once spent a long time playing a driving simulator winning many races and when they lowered the speed limit on the A road between two villages near me I got so angry about the obvious incoming change I won't buy that F1 car I don't have.

If you consider this antagonistic it might help highlight to you why other people are having a hard time dealing with your post.

Nah this isn't a personal attack. It's just a bad analogy.
TTS uses all the same metrics and is actually superior in many regards.

 _SeeD_ wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
Let me translate this to another gaming analogy: I too once spent a long time playing a driving simulator winning many races and when they lowered the speed limit on the A road between two villages near me I got so angry about the obvious incoming change I won't buy that F1 car I don't have.

If you consider this antagonistic it might help highlight to you why other people are having a hard time dealing with your post.

Nah this isn't a personal attack. It's just a bad analogy.
TTS uses all the same metrics and is actually superior in many regards.

And driving simulator don't use accurate replicas of cars on replica tracks?

Moreover, why not just stick to TTS given the 0 cost investment? There's other quirky armies and lists you can try, honestly the list refining process is the bulk of the work and enjoyment, they've just encouraged you to get excited trying something new.

Dudeface wrote:

 _SeeD_ wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
Let me translate this to another gaming analogy: I too once spent a long time playing a driving simulator winning many races and when they lowered the speed limit on the A road between two villages near me I got so angry about the obvious incoming change I won't buy that F1 car I don't have.

If you consider this antagonistic it might help highlight to you why other people are having a hard time dealing with your post.

Nah this isn't a personal attack. It's just a bad analogy.
TTS uses all the same metrics and is actually superior in many regards.

And driving simulator don't use accurate replicas of cars on replica tracks?
Another gakky analogy. Just stop.

Moreover, why not just stick to TTS given the 0 cost investment? There's other quirky armies and lists you can try, honestly the list refining process is the bulk of the work and enjoyment, they've just encouraged you to get excited trying something new.
Because I want to play IRL. TTS is just training.

Why the hell are you conplaining here? Nobody here had anything to do with this. Go bother GW.

Hecaton wrote:
Why the hell are you conplaining here? Nobody here had anything to do with this. Go bother GW.

I'm strictly reacting to criticism at this point.

Ok, look at it this way. I used to play TTS 40k on a regular basis, because I hadn't discovered a good FLGS. I was even in the same Discord you were, until I noticed they were unironically posting Stone Toss. That and BCB's legendary rules takes were the last straw.

TTS is not the same as the holistic IRL 40k experience. IRL, only a minority of people play 40k without painting their minis, assembling them, etc. Those things are integral parts of the hobby that you won't get just playing on TTS. Do you see what I mean?

 RaptorusRex wrote:
Ok, look at it this way. I used to play TTS 40k on a regular basis, because I hadn't discovered a good FLGS. I was even in the same Discord you were, until I noticed they were unironically posting Stone Toss. That and BCB's legendary rules takes were the last straw.

TTS is not the same as the holistic IRL 40k experience. IRL, only a minority of people play 40k without painting their minis, assembling them, etc. Those things are integral parts of the hobby that you won't get just playing on TTS. Do you see what I mean?

Yea I get it. TTS is not the point of emphasis here though. I want to play IRL and TTS is my only claim to gameplay exp. People would take me even less seriously if I had none.

Hecaton wrote:
Why the hell are you conplaining here? Nobody here had anything to do with this. Go bother GW.

It's one of those rare instances where everyone who is usually willing to lock horns over ideals and thoughts about the hobby, lay down their problems and are able to agree for one thread.

Honestly it might be worth the mods just locking this, as it's a bait thread and since the OP is intent on just acting offended and (ironically) antagonistic to being challenged about something with no physical impact to their life.

Heaven forbid they'd planned a renegades and heretics list for 10 years.

Dudeface wrote:

Hecaton wrote:
Why the hell are you conplaining here? Nobody here had anything to do with this. Go bother GW.

It's one of those rare instances where everyone who is usually willing to lock horns over ideals and thoughts about the hobby, lay down their problems and are able to agree for one thread.

Honestly it might be worth the mods just locking this, as it's a bait thread and since the OP is intent on just acting offended and (ironically) antagonistic to being challenged about something with no physical impact to their life.

Heaven forbid they'd planned a renegades and heretics list for 10 years.

Funny considering most of the comments here are just people calling me a Tryhard, WAAC, Powergamer, or some other ignorant derogatory.
And for what? Because this type of thing is pathetic to you? I'm so sorry for bothering you to the point where you actively try to make me feel bad, when I'm not even attacking anyone here personally. Everyone here who insulted me out of the gate just for complaining needs to recalibrate, because I don't deserve this.

 RaptorusRex wrote:
Ok, look at it this way. I used to play TTS 40k on a regular basis, because I hadn't discovered a good FLGS. I was even in the same Discord you were, until I noticed they were unironically posting Stone Toss. That and BCB's legendary rules takes were the last straw.

Yeah that guy is irredeemable on a rules-nonsense front, and also on a being-a-trash-human-being front.

 _SeeD_ wrote:

 RaptorusRex wrote:
Ok, look at it this way. I used to play TTS 40k on a regular basis, because I hadn't discovered a good FLGS. I was even in the same Discord you were, until I noticed they were unironically posting Stone Toss. That and BCB's legendary rules takes were the last straw.

TTS is not the same as the holistic IRL 40k experience. IRL, only a minority of people play 40k without painting their minis, assembling them, etc. Those things are integral parts of the hobby that you won't get just playing on TTS. Do you see what I mean?

Yea I get it. TTS is not the point of emphasis here though. I want to play IRL and TTS is my only claim to gameplay exp. People would take me even less seriously if I had none.

Oh, no. Claiming TTS as 'gameplay experience' makes it easier to discard what you're saying.

If you were in the process of building and painting your first army and got taken off guard by the changes, people would actually respect your rage-quite more.
Not much more, since the changes affect the models you can field very little, but some.

 _SeeD_ wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

Hecaton wrote:
Why the hell are you conplaining here? Nobody here had anything to do with this. Go bother GW.

It's one of those rare instances where everyone who is usually willing to lock horns over ideals and thoughts about the hobby, lay down their problems and are able to agree for one thread.

Honestly it might be worth the mods just locking this, as it's a bait thread and since the OP is intent on just acting offended and (ironically) antagonistic to being challenged about something with no physical impact to their life.

Heaven forbid they'd planned a renegades and heretics list for 10 years.

Funny considering most of the comments here are just people calling me a Tryhard, WAAC, Powergamer, or some other ignorant derogatory.
And for what? Because this type of thing is pathetic to you? I'm so sorry for bothering you to the point where you actively try to make me feel bad, when I'm not even attacking anyone here personally. Everyone here who insulted me out of the gate just for complaining needs to recalibrate, because I don't deserve this.

I'm not actively trying to make you feel bad nobody is, what they're trying to do is illuminate you as to why this much energy being wasted isn't worth it.

You've come to a forum, for people playing a tabletop game, to tell them you're not playing the tabletop game and never have, because of a routine rules change that invalidates a competitive list spamming a good unit.

Honestly I don't think it's a reasonable reason to quit, it's even less reasonable to air the subjective grievance and not expect some pushback.

Dudeface wrote:

 _SeeD_ wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

Hecaton wrote:
Why the hell are you conplaining here? Nobody here had anything to do with this. Go bother GW.

It's one of those rare instances where everyone who is usually willing to lock horns over ideals and thoughts about the hobby, lay down their problems and are able to agree for one thread.

Honestly it might be worth the mods just locking this, as it's a bait thread and since the OP is intent on just acting offended and (ironically) antagonistic to being challenged about something with no physical impact to their life.

Heaven forbid they'd planned a renegades and heretics list for 10 years.

Funny considering most of the comments here are just people calling me a Tryhard, WAAC, Powergamer, or some other ignorant derogatory.
And for what? Because this type of thing is pathetic to you? I'm so sorry for bothering you to the point where you actively try to make me feel bad, when I'm not even attacking anyone here personally. Everyone here who insulted me out of the gate just for complaining needs to recalibrate, because I don't deserve this.

I'm not actively trying to make you feel bad nobody is, what they're trying to do is illuminate you as to why this much energy being wasted isn't worth it.

You've come to a forum, for people playing a tabletop game, to tell them you're not playing the tabletop game and never have, because of a routine rules change that invalidates a competitive list spamming a good unit.

Honestly I don't think it's a reasonable reason to quit, it's even less reasonable to air the subjective grievance and not expect some pushback.

 vict0988 wrote:
I don't care. Oh, you "only" use 5 NDK, what god damn gentleman /sarcasm. You know what I do care, I think your posts in this thread are annoying. The HQ NDK was a mistake in the first place and the 4th should not even be possible. Feth NDK, they are ugly and stupid.

@sim no, people know that just isn't true, there are Dreadnoughts, Flyers and (original do not steal) Devastators. On the other hand, people know that NDK are super competitive at the moment and see someone whining about not being able to bring 5.

Oof. I'm sorry Dudeface, I ruined your point haha. He probably has me blocked or something. I don't want you to feel terrible OP, I'm just clowning because your posts were hard to take seriously and a community that doesn't discourage people from making "look at me posts" will get more of them. Imagine if every Dakka poster made a big deal out of it whenever they stopped playing 40k, we'd need a board just for that.

I praise the title of your thread, bad thread titles annoy me to no end. Ideally, you feel amazing doing whatever it is you love doing that isn't posting "I quit" threads.

There is already Soup for the Soul or whatever the thread is called, you could have just made a post there that this change annoyed you and made you cancel your plans to get a GK army. Nobody would have batted an eye.

Given the incredibly emotional response you appear to have relating to this change, I think your decision to quit is a healthy one for you.

I also think the change you described is fine for balance and game health and is one of many small tweaks to the game which help foster a functional system for everyone.

If you cannot find any sufficient joy from this game unless you can run these particular models in the exact quantities you wish to, or cast all the spells you want in every game, then quitting is a reasonable decision for you.

 _SeeD_ wrote:

 John Prins wrote:

TableTop Simulator does people a disservice, wargaming is more work than just moving models around on a computer screen and polishing your army list.

I disagree with this and I kind of hope you'll explain

Well, there's the work involved in collecting the army. This can be as easy as buying it straight of GW or some other online retailer, but often there are stock issues and you have to do more hunting. Or you buy stuff off eBay, competing for bargains. Trust me when I say in the current pandemic, getting what you want isn't guaranteed when operating over the short term. I'm sure people have had to field sub-optimal lists because of a shortage of this or that as the meta changes.

Then there's building the army, which is a job all of its own - and if you bought second hand, unless you like the paint job there's the stripping and cleaning the army. For a 2000pt list this can be as much as a month or two all on its own, depending on how OCD you want to be about it.

Then there's painting the army, which arguably the bulk of the effort. While it can be done in a few weeks for a 2000pt list if you just want the bare minimum, if you want your dudes looking half decent that's another several months of work.

Finally you have to have some means of transporting and/or storing the army - from a cardboard box to a figure case. Maybe 2 depending on how big your army/models are. And you have to carry your books and other crap as well. I've gone to tournaments carrying hard GW 3 figure cases and a backpack to have all the stuff I needed.

And maybe you want a display board if you want to display your army if the tournament has a 'best painted' competition or awards tournament points for quality of paintjob. Usually that's a minor concern but it could tip the scales on your placing in a tournament and if you go competitive you might as well hit the bare minimum to not lose out. Not every tournament is the same or runs under ITC rules.

Then maybe you decide to go to a tournament that's more than a couple hour drive away and you're arranging hotel stays because tournaments are often two or three day affairs. Suddenly tournament play costs more than buying the army in the first place.

And then you get do deal with playing on an actual table top, where dice get cocked and people are sloppy with measuring and people walk up while you're trying to concentrate and they pick up your minis without permission for a closer look and it's illegal to bash their skull in for doing so. Stuff they can't really do in TTS. And these days you might end up on somebody's web stream if you're doing well. Will that throw off your game? Poker played in person with an audience is a different experience to poker played on line.

Then you realize that the dice you use are trash because they're too small to see and scatter everywhere or are too big and keep knocking crap over or they're just so badly cast/balanced they're rolling 1 a good 30% of the time. Have you even considered the best dice to use? How about measuring? Do you use templates or whappy sticks or hard measuring tapes or soft ones? Or tracking the various crap that TTS does for you (turn/CP/VP counters).

Now you go through all these stages and you find yourself getting attached to your little dudes for all the time/effort you put into them and the experiences you have with them, and less so the list they're in. Trust me when I say you might like painting your first NDK but by the 3rd you might reconsider having 5 in your army because you're already sick of them, but you might love painting Terminators.

The only thing TTS got you attached to was your army list, because that was the only thing that was real/relevant in TTS.

Not having been a player/painter since 4th and having a little read through stuff like this really doesn't make me want to get back playing. If 40k has become a constant meta chase then I don't blame you for not wanting to play it anymore.

I'm coming back to it as I miss the painting and modeling aspect. Maybe one day I'll get a game going but until then I'll be working on my many Guard units that I never finished. I'll buy something shiny and new if it looks cool. There's more to 40k than just the games!