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.

Tiberias wrote:

 auticus wrote:

Tiberias wrote:

 auticus wrote:

Or you know, talk to people and maybe work something out like your gaming partner not bringing the most competitive list or using 100p less than you. I'm not saying things are all fine and dandy, but selling off an army you like to play the new hotness is never the answer...never has been.

This doesn't work with many stores in the US. I note that most people that say to do this are from Europe. Vastly different pool of player personalities over there

Well fair enough, but I find it hard to believe that people playing this game in the US are somehow generally more unreasonable and not willing to make the gaming experience fun for both parties.

I can write an entire book on the last 20 years of me running public narrative campaigns for stores... from being screamed at, having our facebook group hacked, to a guy wanting to fight me in the parking lot because we were using warhammer world scenarios that weren't tournament-standard.

Find it hard to believe all you want but the cooperative experience you are pushing would be great but is just simply not the environment in a lot of regions over here.

Genuinely sorry to hear that, sounds awful honestly. Gotta open your own store with blackjack and hookers and better player culture

Its legitimately unfortunate, but 40k in USA for the most part is generally fething horribly competitive and rough.
You either come ready to swing, or get hit.

Genuinely sorry to hear that, sounds awful honestly. Gotta open your own store with blackjack and hookers and better player culture

I can't argue with that you are absolutely 100% right on that one!

Since moving the region I am in now (the southwest) is still pretty competitive but a lot of the players are a bit more chill.

I've come in contact with a couple of guys that enjoy the more european approach of make sure the guy across from you is also having fun so we may as a small collective try for a club like that. Can't say for sure it will involve 40k but finding like minded people is a good part of the puzzle.

 Ordana wrote:
No, DE were not the correct approach. They should absolutely not have been allowed to run roughshod over the competitive meta for 9? months only to now be crowded out not because they got brought in line but because there is even more ridiculous gak out there.

There's a lot more than changed than just a couple new books, you know. I'm not positive they were crowded out solely by getting beat down.

This is the WR of DE from 1/1 to 2/10 compared to that of 2/11 through now. This shows that even IG are performing at 50% against DE who are supposed to be too good to be casually beaten.

Tiberias wrote:

 auticus wrote:

Or you know, talk to people and maybe work something out like your gaming partner not bringing the most competitive list or using 100p less than you. I'm not saying things are all fine and dandy, but selling off an army you like to play the new hotness is never the answer...never has been.

This doesn't work with many stores in the US. I note that most people that say to do this are from Europe. Vastly different pool of player personalities over there

Well fair enough, but I find it hard to believe that people playing this game in the US are somehow generally more unreasonable and not willing to make the gaming experience fun for both parties.

It's just an overly aggressively competitive mindset that goes with Keeping up with the Jones'.

I hate it as an American.

Racerguy180 wrote:

Tiberias wrote:

 auticus wrote:

Or you know, talk to people and maybe work something out like your gaming partner not bringing the most competitive list or using 100p less than you. I'm not saying things are all fine and dandy, but selling off an army you like to play the new hotness is never the answer...never has been.

This doesn't work with many stores in the US. I note that most people that say to do this are from Europe. Vastly different pool of player personalities over there

Well fair enough, but I find it hard to believe that people playing this game in the US are somehow generally more unreasonable and not willing to make the gaming experience fun for both parties.

It's just an overly aggressively competitive mindset that goes with Keeping up with the Jones'.

I hate it as an American.

Worst part of it is trying to wean people off of it and get them to look at the game in a less competitive light. I mean we have people locally we feel the need to cheese Crusade just because they need to win harder, not because it tells a good or interesting story.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Racerguy180 wrote:

Tiberias wrote:

 auticus wrote:

Or you know, talk to people and maybe work something out like your gaming partner not bringing the most competitive list or using 100p less than you. I'm not saying things are all fine and dandy, but selling off an army you like to play the new hotness is never the answer...never has been.

This doesn't work with many stores in the US. I note that most people that say to do this are from Europe. Vastly different pool of player personalities over there

Well fair enough, but I find it hard to believe that people playing this game in the US are somehow generally more unreasonable and not willing to make the gaming experience fun for both parties.

It's just an overly aggressively competitive mindset that goes with Keeping up with the Jones'.

I hate it as an American.

Worst part of it is trying to wean people off of it and get them to look at the game in a less competitive light. I mean we have people locally we feel the need to cheese Crusade just because they need to win harder, not because it tells a good or interesting story.

Scuse me but that needs some explaining, like , you literally are forced to name squads, advance them like in an RPG, how can one miss that the story is the focal point and not the winning?

Not Online!!! wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Racerguy180 wrote:

Tiberias wrote:

 auticus wrote:

Or you know, talk to people and maybe work something out like your gaming partner not bringing the most competitive list or using 100p less than you. I'm not saying things are all fine and dandy, but selling off an army you like to play the new hotness is never the answer...never has been.

This doesn't work with many stores in the US. I note that most people that say to do this are from Europe. Vastly different pool of player personalities over there

Well fair enough, but I find it hard to believe that people playing this game in the US are somehow generally more unreasonable and not willing to make the gaming experience fun for both parties.

It's just an overly aggressively competitive mindset that goes with Keeping up with the Jones'.

I hate it as an American.

Worst part of it is trying to wean people off of it and get them to look at the game in a less competitive light. I mean we have people locally we feel the need to cheese Crusade just because they need to win harder, not because it tells a good or interesting story.

Scuse me but that needs some explaining, like , you literally are forced to name squads, advance them like in an RPG, how can one miss that the story is the focal point and not the winning?

I wish I could explain it myself but basically they went for the strongest options and combinations. One player even defended his choices with the excuse that "it doesn't say that I can't."

This sounds familiar...

Sim-Life wrote:
Okay so you nerf Custodes and they're no longer busted. Then the Tyranids book comes out and THEY'RE busted. So they get nerfed. Then the Guard codex comes out and THAT is busted. And round and round it goes forever and ever until the players get sick of it, leave and then GW goes "11th Ed is the MOST PLAYTESTED EDITION EVER FOR REAL THIS TIME (buy these 2 €59 books and subscribe to the monthly payment app and thess bi-annual rules updates and 4 supplements to find out how!" and everyone comes running back and the cycle starts over again.

Daedalus's letter would probably be better if it included a withdrawal of financial support, rather than just asking politely. Money is the only thing GW cares about after all.

Not everyone though comes back though.
GW games are still so ubiquitous and visible that they're still where a lot wargamers start though, so the games still grow.
As long as the games grow GW's current buisness practices are viable.

Canadian 5th wrote:I have a decent chunk of DA models that I could repair and paint, but I just can't imagine myself ever coming back to 40k at this stage. I came back to these forums around 8th after playing a few casual games with the new system. I followed the change to 9th and the tournament scene, but I just can't see how this game as it stands is enjoyable.

It feels like it's time to sell the models as a lot and jump ship to Battletech.

Good for you.
Do note that One Page Rules has rules that you can use 40k models for though.

For Sci-Fi games also check out Stargrave Infinity and Deadzone

ClockworkZion wrote:I do love how the thread started as raising constructive feedback to GW in regards to people's concerns about game balance only for it to devolve into doompilling 40k, selling stuff off to play Battletech and immediately saying that GW will only do this stuff again.

Is this stuff bad? Yes. But god the game has been so much worse in the past and this is nothing like invisible unkillable deathstars from 7th or equally nonsense things we saw in the past.

Disillusionment makes salt.
We used to think about constructive feedback (not that GW used to listen), we hoped that the next FAQ/codex/edition would fix things and we heard the reasons that 40k was a mess "right now". GW "get their act together".
Every FAQ/codex/edition disappointed though.
GW had opportunities to fix things, but didn't.
Eventually it becomes clear that the fix isn't coming. GW never had any intention to balance their games.
GW does have their act together, they know what they're doing; but their priority is their shareholders, not the community.

 tauist wrote:
I'm telling you, "Nerfing your army on purpose" is a thing. Try it, you might like it

Another thread poster, sadly I cannot recall who but a real hero imho, suggested that list matching is a skill. The idea here was that one says ok, I know that you have this limited collection or that you want to use X and Y, so I will use Z and S because the matchup should begin and interesting… instead of saying ok, how can I out game the game and meta my list to crush that other dudes stuff flat in two turns.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Racerguy180 wrote:

Tiberias wrote:

 auticus wrote:

Or you know, talk to people and maybe work something out like your gaming partner not bringing the most competitive list or using 100p less than you. I'm not saying things are all fine and dandy, but selling off an army you like to play the new hotness is never the answer...never has been.

This doesn't work with many stores in the US. I note that most people that say to do this are from Europe. Vastly different pool of player personalities over there

Well fair enough, but I find it hard to believe that people playing this game in the US are somehow generally more unreasonable and not willing to make the gaming experience fun for both parties.

It's just an overly aggressively competitive mindset that goes with Keeping up with the Jones'.

I hate it as an American.

I left the US for a lot of reasons, that was one of them.
What I have found in Europe is a different weird for me pride in normalcy.
More polite tho, and can actually have a different opinion and trade reasons and not end up hating each other in a fight.
One thing in common tho is endemic corruption, tho in Europe it is more covert.

I never really play outside of my direct friend group, so I can't really comment on how they play, but my local game store seems really friendly. I've heard them playing Kill Team and they do the occasional 500 point 40k "tournament" there. There's one guy that plays Infinity, and was excited that me and my friend learned it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh, I play in Florida, so all our crazy people are probably not playing 40k, so that might help.

heh I played in Tampa a few years ago... they were as friendly as any place and that was good, but they for sure had a hard cluster of super competitive types that made it clear if you were using houserules or non traditional formats that you weren't playing real 40k.

The AOS group there was also pretty hard line when it came to the games played in public being very meta.

Again, in my experience Euro/UK players are just as toxic about competition, it's just considered uncivil to bring it up or call someone out for cheating.

Daed.
On DE winrates, do you have any evidence thats due to "top players" (somehow calculated) moving on to other factions? With a probable swing in the win percentage as a result?

I thought it was a suspect argument in 8th but I think the evidence is more compelling now. How you'd weight that is hard to say.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Ordana wrote:
No, DE were not the correct approach. They should absolutely not have been allowed to run roughshod over the competitive meta for 9? months only to now be crowded out not because they got brought in line but because there is even more ridiculous gak out there.

There's a lot more than changed than just a couple new books, you know. I'm not positive they were crowded out solely by getting beat down.

This is the WR of DE from 1/1 to 2/10 compared to that of 2/11 through now. This shows that even IG are performing at 50% against DE who are supposed to be too good to be casually beaten.

are you trying to imply matchup percentages from a 7 game sample size?
Really?

The facts are simple, nothing has changed about DE since the balance dataslate in November. Drukhari has since been pushed off their repeated podium spots somewhat by the new Crushing Swarm list and now Custodes and Tau.
They have not been 'fixed'. Just surpassed by newer more broken armies.

 Daedalus81 wrote:


Just my thoughts. I do hope you take the time to consider this as I've had lots of fun, but I fear that could be placed in jeopardy with the loss of confidence in the releases.

Sincerely,

A concerned decades long customer

Hecaton wrote:
Again, in my experience Euro/UK players are just as toxic about competition, it's just considered uncivil to bring it up or call someone out for cheating.

I think the difference is that Europa generally has a pretty healthy mix of narrative, casual and competitive players. Of course some clubs and areas skew one way or another, but generally if I want to swing one way or another that evening I'm not going to have too much trouble finding a group/game - even if I have to attend a different venue that's a little further out.

By contrast, the US seems to be almost exclusively dominated by the assumption you'll be playing competitively. Even if you're not attending tournaments and casually playing among friends, you're still putting your best netlist/skewlist forward with whatever the winning combination is that season and toeing the GW party line because that's what The Season is. Obviously I'm generalising a great deal here, but rule of thumb seems to be that competitive-minded play is 'the norm' in the US whilst in Europe/UK you're more likely to find somebody in another camp.

I have noticed the UK competitive scene becoming much more prominent though, which is often pushed by a local 'personality' who's got a Youtube following he wants to make a living off.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
What now?

Wait and see?

But seriously, the Eldar book'll be out in a fortnight and it'll shake things up again. I don't think it's worth worrying about.

 Ordana wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Ordana wrote:
No, DE were not the correct approach. They should absolutely not have been allowed to run roughshod over the competitive meta for 9? months only to now be crowded out not because they got brought in line but because there is even more ridiculous gak out there.

There's a lot more than changed than just a couple new books, you know. I'm not positive they were crowded out solely by getting beat down.

This is the WR of DE from 1/1 to 2/10 compared to that of 2/11 through now. This shows that even IG are performing at 50% against DE who are supposed to be too good to be casually beaten.

are you trying to imply matchup percentages from a 7 game sample size?
Really?

The facts are simple, nothing has changed about DE since the balance dataslate in November. Drukhari has since been pushed off their repeated podium spots somewhat by the new Crushing Swarm list and now Custodes and Tau.
They have not been 'fixed'. Just surpassed by newer more broken armies.

Yes, it's a small sample size, but the large majority of armies improved against DE and many had quite a few games.

Here's another data point to consider. DE averaged 71.5 points from 1/1 to 2/10. From 2/11 forward they average 68.1 points without Tau and Custodes in the mix. With Tau and Custodes it is 66.6.

 Arbitrator wrote:

Hecaton wrote:
Again, in my experience Euro/UK players are just as toxic about competition, it's just considered uncivil to bring it up or call someone out for cheating.

I think the difference is that Europa generally has a pretty healthy mix of narrative, casual and competitive players. Of course some clubs and areas skew one way or another, but generally if I want to swing one way or another that evening I'm not going to have too much trouble finding a group/game - even if I have to attend a different venue that's a little further out.

By contrast, the US seems to be almost exclusively dominated by the assumption you'll be playing competitively. Even if you're not attending tournaments and casually playing among friends, you're still putting your best netlist/skewlist forward with whatever the winning combination is that season and toeing the GW party line because that's what The Season is. Obviously I'm generalising a great deal here, but rule of thumb seems to be that competitive-minded play is 'the norm' in the US whilst in Europe/UK you're more likely to find somebody in another camp.

I have noticed the UK competitive scene becoming much more prominent though, which is often pushed by a local 'personality' who's got a Youtube following he wants to make a living off.

There's multiple Crusade leagues going on in the mid-sized city I live in right now in the US, based around different shops. There's also about 1 good tournament a month. So it seems to be split about 50/50, with some overlap.

The main thing is that US players are less likely to use "just play narrative" as an excuse for poor rules writing (though it does happen).

Hecaton wrote:

 Arbitrator wrote:

Hecaton wrote:
Again, in my experience Euro/UK players are just as toxic about competition, it's just considered uncivil to bring it up or call someone out for cheating.

I think the difference is that Europa generally has a pretty healthy mix of narrative, casual and competitive players. Of course some clubs and areas skew one way or another, but generally if I want to swing one way or another that evening I'm not going to have too much trouble finding a group/game - even if I have to attend a different venue that's a little further out.

By contrast, the US seems to be almost exclusively dominated by the assumption you'll be playing competitively. Even if you're not attending tournaments and casually playing among friends, you're still putting your best netlist/skewlist forward with whatever the winning combination is that season and toeing the GW party line because that's what The Season is. Obviously I'm generalising a great deal here, but rule of thumb seems to be that competitive-minded play is 'the norm' in the US whilst in Europe/UK you're more likely to find somebody in another camp.

I have noticed the UK competitive scene becoming much more prominent though, which is often pushed by a local 'personality' who's got a Youtube following he wants to make a living off.

There's multiple Crusade leagues going on in the mid-sized city I live in right now in the US, based around different shops. There's also about 1 good tournament a month. So it seems to be split about 50/50, with some overlap.

The main thing is that US players are less likely to use "just play narrative" as an excuse for poor rules writing (though it does happen).

I wouldn't argue that "just play narrative" is an excuse but rather a different approach where you take the game as a sandbox and tweak it as you see fit to create interesting stories. It's more free to make changes when things don't work.

Less tweaking is necessary though if the rules aren't crap though.

Sure it's fun to do lopsided games where you run 2000 points of Marines vs 3000 points of Tyranids. Wouldn't it be better though if that weren't equal footing to begin with though because GW overtuned one army and the other one sucked?

 Daedalus81 wrote:
This is the WR of DE from 1/1 to 2/10 compared to that of 2/11 through now. This shows that even IG are performing at 50% against DE who are supposed to be too good to be casually beaten.

Data quality question again, Daed - how're the IG managing a 50% win rate... from an odd number of games?

Every game I play is narrative even if I'm playing matched play.

 Backspacehacker wrote:

Tiberias wrote:

 auticus wrote:

Tiberias wrote:

 auticus wrote:

Or you know, talk to people and maybe work something out like your gaming partner not bringing the most competitive list or using 100p less than you. I'm not saying things are all fine and dandy, but selling off an army you like to play the new hotness is never the answer...never has been.

This doesn't work with many stores in the US. I note that most people that say to do this are from Europe. Vastly different pool of player personalities over there

Well fair enough, but I find it hard to believe that people playing this game in the US are somehow generally more unreasonable and not willing to make the gaming experience fun for both parties.

I can write an entire book on the last 20 years of me running public narrative campaigns for stores... from being screamed at, having our facebook group hacked, to a guy wanting to fight me in the parking lot because we were using warhammer world scenarios that weren't tournament-standard.

Find it hard to believe all you want but the cooperative experience you are pushing would be great but is just simply not the environment in a lot of regions over here.

Genuinely sorry to hear that, sounds awful honestly. Gotta open your own store with blackjack and hookers and better player culture

Its legitimately unfortunate, but 40k in USA for the most part is generally fething horribly competitive and rough.
You either come ready to swing, or get hit.

Which is funny in a game that's 100% impossible to play competively. Can't play competively non-competive game.

Wat

 Sim-Life wrote:
Wat

Loose translation is that because 40k is too dysfunctional and unbalanced, you can't actually have a competitive skill based game.

 Dysartes wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
This is the WR of DE from 1/1 to 2/10 compared to that of 2/11 through now. This shows that even IG are performing at 50% against DE who are supposed to be too good to be casually beaten.

Data quality question again, Daed - how're the IG managing a 50% win rate... from an odd number of games?

Possibly one game was a draw?

Tourney play dominates in the local London club. The ruleset is so complicated (not complex) that the tourney streamlining is handy and the 40k players might attend 2-3 tournies a year. So they want to practice for them as they will only get to play once a fortnight on average.

It's easier to nerf OP armies than buff UP armies because tournament players will gravitate towards the OP factions and OP units within those OP factions. Whether a unit is the worst unit in the game or just a slightly underwhelming unit is next to impossible to tell from tournament data. The only reason to release something UP instead of OP is because the changes are more well-received, you'd have to be a real git to disapprove of pts reductions to an underperforming faction, but if you've just gone out and gotten 18 Battybuggies then it really sucks when GW nerfs them even if you know that they deserve it and some people will tell themselves that the unit they just maxed out isn't OP.

 Sim-Life wrote:
Nah, balance for 40k has never been better. Have you tried playing with more terrain? You're probably not using enough terrain.

You might be playing with too much terrain, you need to follow GW's exact tournament terrain specifications with only two different setups using the exact same 10 pieces of terrain every game or the game balance goes belly up /sarcasm.