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.

Yes, owning exactly the amount of models required to play a specific format, insisting to play that specific format and refusing to expand the collection further, is an issue. Always have been. Especially if such collections are somehow skew.

That's why I've always recommended new players to play only in formats that involve bringing half of their collections at most. And to avoid building skew lists, unless there's also the intention of getting a massive collection of models.

Codex creep is not so much a problem for top tournament players.
They can invest their competition profit (win) immediately into a new army and so have a chance to stay always on top.

How about a poll?

 Blackie wrote:
That's why I've always recommended new players to play only in formats that involve bringing half of their collections at most. And to avoid building skew lists, unless there's also the intention of getting a massive collection of models.

40k is supremely expensive, as a new player you can't really afford to be buying a 4000pt army to be playing the common 2000pt format.
Even my 1000pt army was about as much money as I'm comfortable spending outright at the moment - that's not a large army even fielding 100% of everything.

 kirotheavenger wrote:

 Blackie wrote:
That's why I've always recommended new players to play only in formats that involve bringing half of their collections at most. And to avoid building skew lists, unless there's also the intention of getting a massive collection of models.

40k is supremely expensive, as a new player you can't really afford to be buying a 4000pt army to be playing the common 2000pt format.
Even my 1000pt army was about as much money as I'm comfortable spending outright at the moment - that's not a large army even fielding 100% of everything.

As a new player I started playing the common format (1500 points during 3rd and 4th editions) after 3 years into the hobby, basically. I don't expect people to start the hobby and be prepared to play the standard format within days, weeks or even months. They should get there after a while.

Enjoy the hobby, learn how to play, how to play that faction, and paint the models properly. For the majority of people getting 1000 points of a faction, painting it all and mastering their rules takes several months at least. As you said the hobby is quite expensive and time consuming, demanding everything now is not healthy.

 Blackie wrote:

 kirotheavenger wrote:

 Blackie wrote:
That's why I've always recommended new players to play only in formats that involve bringing half of their collections at most. And to avoid building skew lists, unless there's also the intention of getting a massive collection of models.

40k is supremely expensive, as a new player you can't really afford to be buying a 4000pt army to be playing the common 2000pt format.
Even my 1000pt army was about as much money as I'm comfortable spending outright at the moment - that's not a large army even fielding 100% of everything.

As a new player I started playing the common format (1500 points during 3rd and 4th editions) after 3 years into the hobby, basically. I don't expect people to start the hobby and be prepared to play the standard format within days, weeks or even months. They should get there after a while.

Enjoy the hobby, learn how to play, how to play that faction, and paint the models properly. For the majority of people getting 1000 points of a faction, painting it all and mastering their rules takes several months at least. As you said the hobby is quite expensive and time consuming, demanding everything now is not healthy.

I agree with that statement - but it seems to run counter to your suggestion to only bring half your army.
Collecting 1000pts of a faction would mean you're only playing 500pts, and there's not much to 500pt games.

I play in local tournaments, roughly one every two months. As such, I am voluntary swimming in waters that can have some sharks. Having said that, we are fairly chill and our tourneys do not contribute towards ITC standings so there is little reason for big sharks to spend a weekend in our little lagoon.

The effect of the metagame on me is more or less determined by Codex Roulette. There are about 40 players locally who play in our tourneys and attend our 40K gaming days (not always 40 at the same time mind you). Most of us have multiple armies. I think that the majority started in 6th or 7th Ed. We have about seven folks who had Tau armies, but there was only one Tau army at our 2021 Club Championships. By contrast, at our 2022 event we had five Tau armies. We have several Custodes players, so when they spike in power we all feel it. Ditto Drukhari. We don't seem to have any AdMech players, so that storm passed us by. We have several Harlie players and Eldar players (the former from 8th/early 9th and the latter from 6th through mid-8th) so their impact is certainly been felt.

At non-tourney games on a given Saturday most are trying out a new army unless their opponent has asked for a teaching game or a narrative game. So for the most part, I do feel changes in power levels of armies. This is moderated, though, by the more or less chill approach that most bring to our games.

The meta does not enter into my games of basement hammer which are primarily narrative in nature. Different setting.

Reading the forums, I do think that there are some folks whose interaction with the game seems to consist of watching battle reports and reading articles. They seem quite affected by the metagame, since they are only seeing the top tables. They seem to get quite worked up about the state of the game for...reasons?

 Blackie wrote:
Yes, owning exactly the amount of models required to play a specific format, is an issue.

My 2k list is about $1,000 and will take me around 6 months to fully paint. You're saying you expect me to spend $2,000 and a year painting before we can play casual games? And it's the competitive players that are ruining the game?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
They seem to get quite worked up about the state of the game for...reasons?

You can't understand why some people would be upset about spending months and hundreds of dollars on an army, then flying halfway across the country with it, only to get stomped into the ground by the 4 new codexes that have come out since they started their army, through no fault of their own? Yea I can't imagine why that would leave a bad taste in anyone's mouth...

 Blackie wrote:
Yes, owning exactly the amount of models required to play a specific format, insisting to play that specific format and refusing to expand the collection further, is an issue. Always have been. Especially if such collections are somehow skew.

That's why I've always recommended new players to play only in formats that involve bringing half of their collections at most. And to avoid building skew lists, unless there's also the intention of getting a massive collection of models.

Okey. A new GK player buys 4 or 5 NDKs, 30 interceptors and the 10-15 strikes he needs for the normal GK army. How would you advice him to expend his army if there is nothing else in the codex worth taking, if he wants a working list. And at the same time his army is on the way down, power wise as he is facing armies like tau or eldar who just blow him off the table, with him not being able to do anything with the best and most optimal list he can build?

And this exercise can be done for any other mid to low tier army in the meta right now. You think if runs 1 or 2NDKs , starts taking termintors and termintor characters his gaming expiriance is going to improve?

the playing half the points is an even stranger advice. How is someone suppose to downgrade a knight army to 1k pts without making the lists even worse then it is at 2k pts? Play chaos with wardogs rebuying the entire faction? What about armies where the basic troop option is 200+pts and work horse units cost 300+pts. Those people are suppose to play non skew lists with 4 units when their opponents can cram 6 voids in to 540pts or run the same suit death star only with fewer troops?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Toofast 804379 11339007 wrote:

My 2k list is about $1,000 and will take me around 6 months to fully paint. You're saying you expect me to spend $2,000 and a year painting before we can play casual games? And it's the competitive players that are ruining the game?
.

Well at least it costs less, then having to buy a house or a flat just to play w40k as a prerequisit to play the game at fun level.

You can play a 1k game, you know.

Karol wrote:

PenitentJake 804379 11337866 wrote:

If I played in public, I'd probably be closer to seeing it the way you do, but I feel like so many people who post on Dakka feel like playing in stores with strangers is the only way to play the game and it just isn't. It may be the easiest; it may be the most convenient and for some people I'll concede that the alternatives may be difficult enough that it FEELS like that's your only option. But it really isn't.

Like I said in the beginning- there might be something you could say to change my mind- I'm genuinely trying to understand the POV... But I just can't see it.

So the initial buy in to playing w40k has to start with either buying a flat or house with sole intent to play w40k there, followed by getting friend to play with there ?

When you aren't locked into playing 2k matched, you can play a decent game on a coffee table in about an hour because 25PL games are an option.

Karol wrote:

Yeah comparing to playing at the store or club, it very much does sound less easier. Basing the game around the less easier is not a good thing.
Because it starts to sound like Blackies description of how to get balanced and fun games in 9th. Play with a good codex, vs non meta game lists, not play against stuff that can't not be meta gamed . It is clearly possible to do to have fun, but it comes with so many ifs that it is not very realistic to expect to happen.

I get this- I genuinely do; I even acknowledge it in the post you're quoting. I know that 2k Matched is the default standard for pick-up games.

My argument is that it is unfair to call a game "The tournament edition" just because enough people choose to play 2k matched that everyone else feels else like that's the only thing that's in the actual book. You can't judge the edition as if Crusade doesn't exist just because it isn't the default mode of play. GW has provided as much product support to non-tournament formats in this edition as they have for 2K Matched; there are more printed resources for Crusade than there are for Matched. They have done their part to provide viable alternatives for people- whether or not people choose to use those alternatives is beyond their control.

TangoTwoBravo wrote:

Reading the forums, I do think that there are some folks whose interaction with the game seems to consist of watching battle reports and reading articles. They seem quite affected by the metagame, since they are only seeing the top tables. They seem to get quite worked up about the state of the game for...reasons?

Honestly, that's pretty dismissive, and based solely on an assumption you've made about a wide swath of people.

Toofast wrote:

 Blackie wrote:
Yes, owning exactly the amount of models required to play a specific format, is an issue.

My 2k list is about $1,000 and will take me around 6 months to fully paint. You're saying you expect me to spend $2,000 and a year painting before we can play casual games? And it's the competitive players that are ruining the game?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
They seem to get quite worked up about the state of the game for...reasons?

You can't understand why some people would be upset about spending months and hundreds of dollars on an army, then flying halfway across the country with it, only to get stomped into the ground by the 4 new codexes that have come out since they started their army, through no fault of their own? Yea I can't imagine why that would leave a bad taste in anyone's mouth...

I'm talking about people who do not play but get worked up about the state of the metagame.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Voss wrote:

TangoTwoBravo wrote:

Reading the forums, I do think that there are some folks whose interaction with the game seems to consist of watching battle reports and reading articles. They seem quite affected by the metagame, since they are only seeing the top tables. They seem to get quite worked up about the state of the game for...reasons?

Honestly, that's pretty dismissive, and based solely on an assumption you've made about a wide swath of people.

You're right.

You're all touching on exactly why the meta tournament environment has such a stranglehold on everything outside of it.

40k is grotesquely expensive for most people.

So when people get involved, they buy only what they absolutely need.

Most of the people I've butted heads with over the past 15 - 20 years wanting to run their tournament slag list in a for fun campaign setting is simply they do not have any other army BUT their skew list and aren't interested in buying armies to use in campaigns when the main event is tournament play. (of course the problem is they should also own that and realize that while thats fine, if others want to play other versions of the game and the individual doesn't want to purchase models for that type of game, that they should reasonably excuse themselves from also trying to participate in those other events)

I can't play casual games with my infantry Harlequins because every time I win it's because of my broken models and not because I outplayed my opponent. When they win obviously everything is fine.

Toofast wrote:


My 2k list is about $1,000 and will take me around 6 months to fully paint. You're saying you expect me to spend $2,000 and a year painting before we can play casual games? And it's the competitive players that are ruining the game?

Certainly not. I'm saying that 2000 points is a very high format, it doesn't matter if that's also the most popular. Smaller games are possible and do exist. Actually they're highly recommended for people who are new to the hobby.

I'm expecting people to have a full painted 2000 points army and spend 1k in much more than 6 months. I'm expecting people who start the hobby to be ready for competitive games after years.

And yes, it's the competitive players that are ruining the game because only a competitive player would demand EVERYTHING NOW!!!! Today's mentality is that a dude watches a youtube channel about 40k games, where all games are 2000 points, all tables are full of amazing terrain, all players do know the game and multiple armies very well, and thinks that he can immediately do the same stuff. 6 months is a very short time to be there.

Now if you really have the interest and the cash go for it, but I don't expect the average hobbist to get a 2000 points army ready in such rush. In my experience people who do so are the first ones to leave.

Hecaton wrote:
I can't play casual games with my infantry Harlequins because every time I win it's because of my broken models and not because I outplayed my opponent. When they win obviously everything is fine.

Well, I don't play casual games with tier 1 armies. GK were top tier for a while as are Harlies now. Similarly for Drukhari.
My opponents are pissed off if I run such an army which is better suited for competitive play or tourneys.
For casual play, I'm more into BA or Ultramarines and also the Eldar/CW which at least in my book are not top tier.

Well, my current group is being smashed by our resident Tau, Custode, and Eldar players. Lol.

Hecaton wrote:
I can't play casual games with my infantry Harlequins because every time I win it's because of my broken models and not because I outplayed my opponent. When they win obviously everything is fine.

What are the usual OpFor options in your group, Hecaton?

If everyone else is playing the likes of Guard, Daemons and Orks, I could kinda see their POV.

 wuestenfux wrote:

Hecaton wrote:
I can't play casual games with my infantry Harlequins because every time I win it's because of my broken models and not because I outplayed my opponent. When they win obviously everything is fine.

Well, I don't play casual games with tier 1 armies. GK were top tier for a while as are Harlies now. Similarly for Drukhari.
My opponents are pissed off if I run such an army which is better suited for competitive play or tourneys.
For casual play, I'm more into BA or Ultramarines and also the Eldar/CW which at least in my book are not top tier.

Craftworlds are in the top four factions along with T'au and Custodes plus the craziness that is top tier Harlequins.

Personally, the current meta is affecting me by way of a huge explosion in popularity of Age of Sigmar or WHFB as an alternative to 40k in my store, which I am massively enjoying because its mostly just "people digging out their ancient old WHFB armies or doing zany conversion work and throwing down"

My GSG army is my 40k grots army with a few of the more fun and zany AOS units thrown in there (Love me a boingrot bounder...I was already using them as Stormboyz for 40k), I've got one buddy with a 15 year old almost all metal lizardman army, one with a chaos army, one with a skaven army, one guy going for Stormcast out of the new starter box and one guy with fairly new skeleton horde guys.

It's a fantastic time, basically 0 on a 1-10 competitiveness scale, and we're all having a blast.

In terms of 40k games: you can basically predict who's going to win with 100% accuracy based on which player has a more recent codex. Tau vs marines? Tau wins. Eldar vs GSC? Eldar wins. Admech vs Space Wolves? Admech wins. the games feel like foregone conclusions every time, and on average 40k has dipped down below 2 games being played per week with about 3 regular and 6-8 occasional players.

It doesnt really seem to matter that the armies being played are not tournament tier competitive armies. The tau player who is now utterly unstoppable is just playing a random mix of stuff, no big blobs of crisis suits or 5 broadsides or whatever.

 the_scotsman wrote:
Personally, the current meta is affecting me by way of a huge explosion in popularity of Age of Sigmar or WHFB as an alternative to 40k in my store, which I am massively enjoying because its mostly just "people digging out their ancient old WHFB armies or doing zany conversion work and throwing down"

Around me, Heresy is taking off, particularly with new rules on the horizon, and I've had impetus to get my Mechanicum painted up.

I would love to say that the competitive scene doesn't affect local metas, but everyone is plugged in to social media, everyone is at least dimly aware of meta shifts, broken units/armies, and general imbalance, and everyone is experiencing firsthand the lopsided nature of some of the codices. I don't build competitive armies but I've had two curbstomps now with the new Tyranids against my buddy's Death Guard, and it hasn't been fun.

I really don't mean to sound salty, but a new codex to my favorite faction catapulting them from a perpetual underdog to a front-runner (with lots of fun and flavorful options, no less) should have me excited, but... I'm just not.

My main army is Death Guard and I love to play with them, regardless of the meta. If they are weak compared to other armies (like now or most of 8th edition) I specifically ask for friendly or casual opponents at my club.

My alt is Ad Mech. I started collecting them in 7th because they had cool models and cool interesting rules. Their 8th edition codex was so bland that I quickly got bored and stopped playing them. I was still collecting them though because cool plastic is cool plastic. The 9th ediiton codex seems good but was also stupidly complex. I wasn't interested in playing their broken combos (didn't have the models anyway) and was having enough fun with my DG that I put off buying it. Now their rules have changed so much since the codex came out that it puts me off ever trying them.

 the_scotsman wrote:
Personally, the current meta is affecting me by way of a huge explosion in popularity of Age of Sigmar or WHFB as an alternative to 40k in my store, which I am massively enjoying because its mostly just "people digging out their ancient old WHFB armies or doing zany conversion work and throwing down"

Basically the exact same thing happened, but it started here with Psychic Awakening, got a small bump in players for 9th, but quickly diminished to nil.

LGS is all Sigmar, Star Wars, or Infinity now, with the occasional blood bowl, underworlds, or Necromunda. Even 5th-7th games and HH are poping in more often because the game is more fun.

Power creep is inevitable with a release cycle the way GW writes, but when your power creep is primarily in the form of rules that ignore other rules that ignore other rules ad infinitum it's no wonder the players have abandoned the rules system in favor of those that are perceived as more fair. Chaotic imbalance of 7th was more fun than the structured imbalanced that 9th currently is.

By catering to the tournament expectations GW have optimized the fun out of their game.

Tittliewinks22 wrote:

By catering to the tournament expectations GW have optimized the fun out of their game.

That's just it, GW hasn't catered to the tournament scene, GW has made the tournament scene into a marketing scam, the ITC team just hasn't realized the amount of egg on their faces because the entire tournament scene is just a bad joke right now.

I started Playing Tau when they were first released, mainly because i think Battlesuits are the coolest unit ever.

Shortly after that I had enough Crisis suits to field the full allowed 15 of them plus 2 Shas'o's the rest being filled in with whatever i wanted to play at the time. I've branched out to other armies, but Tau have always been my go to, mostly for the aesthetics and playstyle.
8th was rough as losing the jetpacks rule (move shoot move) really seriously hurt the playstyle of the army, but i soldiered through, consistently fielding as many crisis teams as i could get away with, with mixed to poor results.

When it comes to the current Meta with Tau, well, Crisis suits are awesome now, the best unit in the codex by a mile. they perform amazingly on the battlefield, and fielding lots of units of them is suddenly the 'meta' thing to do.

The choice is between playing a crisis heavy army and crushing all before me, OR playing other units more heavily which i don't want to do because I like the idea of crisis teams, if not the current execution.

Despite having played crisis heavy lists for 20 years, now i get accused of chasing the meta. I mean, seriously???

 auticus wrote:
Where I came from the tournament meta was also your casual meta.

You couldn't escape it.

This, 40k is pretty awful to play in my neck of the woods.

It affects me in the sense that I kind of just don't want to play. Custodes and Harlequins are two of my favorite factions. My boyfriend's favorite faction is between Sisters of Battle and Dark Angels. I'd like to play those two armies, but it wouldn't really be fair, would it? So we just do other things.

Doesn't really affect me any. I only play against a couple of friends and my son, very casually. We don't really chase the meta any - hell, I'm still working on the same Chaos Marines army that I started with the 6th edition starter set, and finally just finished painting some CSM termies that I think I built about 7 or 8 years ago...

The last time we really had an 'oh wow bloody hell' meta moment was when my mate built himself an eldar wraith host / jetbike army around 7th, when scatter lasers and D weapons were the thing. First game with it, he absolutely devastated me beyond all chance of recovery in turn 1 and tabled me turn 2. He was as shocked as I was, I think.

He's been through a good dozen armies since then though. I'm the slow collector and painter in our little group.

I played custodes in 4 games and trivially demolished 4 people. Like I didn't even have to try.

So I went and bought eldar, it's has more levers to tinker with to modulate its strength then custodes do (especially when limiting forgewrold purchases).

The lethality and complexity of the game have been amplified to what I feel is an unhealthy degree. It doesn't seem to favor casual engagement and participation anymore.