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.

Apple fox wrote:
True Wargamer is anyone who wants to be part of the war gaming hobby, if just playing 40K or lots of other games.
I don’t think it makes someone less legitimate within the hobby.

But I do think 40K and GW itself being so dominant in the hobby is a big detriment as a whole.

Eh. It is what it is. Sure, 40k draws a lot of the attention. And if you let it it'll seem to be the only thing played.
But that's why it's important to play other, non-GW stuff, at the shops. Even if it starts out small with just you & one friend playing BTech, or some WWII game, or MCP etc every few weeks.
You've got to be seen playing & having fun with non-40k/GW in order to attract more players.

I don't think it's a detriment to the hobby overall, but it certainly is a double-edged sword. I think their size means that very few other games can gain purchase or enough of a market share to force GW to compete, and as a result those smaller games can be crippled by one or two big mistake (look at where Warmachine and X-Wing are now). GW, on the other hand, is big enough (now) to weather the occasional flop, and even when they weren't, things that might have killed them (Gorkamorka) still didn't, and they pulled through. They do force the industry to compete, even if the reverse isn't true. How many not-Contrast paint lines are there now? GW found a market to exploit, and other groups lined up to follow them. That, in turn, gives the rest of us a greater choice.

As for the main thrust of this thread, yes, Internet forums are old hat. I've been posting on them since... what... '96? '97? And before forums it was Guestbooks, because that was the rudimentary systems we had. People are more moving to things like Discord, but Discord is a useful tool to me, not a primary means of communication. I have never liked live chat, even from when I first started using the internet. It's linier. Analogue. It's one continuous stream without any real structure, unlike a forum that has specific topics that you can check up on and leave alone and come back to. I mean, my user name is what it is specifically because of what we had before forums, and before separate threads for topics of even separate sub-forums.

I don't think they'll go away specifically - I mean Redditt is huge and that's basically a forum, even if it is a different style - and forums still exist heavily for information gathering (technical support and whatnot). What it means for places like Dakka? I dunno. I've been here a long time, seen many people come and go, and I've never noticed any particular dead times (certainly dead sub-forums). I maintain that a lull in activity now might because of the new edition, the fact that it was a complete reset, and the fact that because most armies don't have their new Codices that they have been "solved" from a efficiency and competitive standpoint, so there's not much more to discuss. I think this will change.

I certainly don't think this place is any more negative. If anything there are far fewer multi-page arguments. Ah... for the days where we had 3 massive threads in a row on whether Siren worked on Grey Knights. Those were the days!

 Da Boss wrote:
Don't pull your punches, because you come across as really well rounded and not at all bitter cheering for the death of the website.

For the record, Jid was precisely the type of person I was referring to in this post. In fact, I knew that eventually he'd show up in this thread to give us another morose diatribe gaking all over Dakka. It was, in a lot of ways, inevitable.

Basically the most negative people here seem to always be the ones complaining about how negative everything is. It's like screaming about how much you hate the colour red whilst throwing buckets of red paint at everything around you.

Yeah, this place is by no means 4chan-level bad.

 vipoid wrote:
Pardon?

Unless you're referring to racism against Xenos, I think I'm going to have to ask for some evidence for that one.

Absolutely, and let us not ignore the implication that the mods are too lazy/complicit to ban those people.

It's been about a year since I've been here and I've enjoyed it immensely. I will point out that the OP was about 40k, not the site in general.

I like following "current" 40k, but there are several robust discussions of Oldhammer that have spurred renewed interest on my part.

And a shout-out to the good folks who turned me onto Bolt Action! Love it! First new hobby in decades and my friends are getting into it as well.

So yes, the 40k portion is a bit subdued (with good reason) but other portions seem to be going like gangbusters (as the saying goes).

I see a lot of people here talking about how 10th killed their interesting 40k, and I want to know why that is, because I can't believe it was any great love for the top-heavy nightmare that was 9th edition.

Is it is because of the reset, and that if you don't know any of the 4 armies that have received books yet you really don't have much to play with right now? Or is it something else?

10th rejuvenated my interest in 40k, after skipping out most of 8th (pandemic) and finding myself unwilling to deal with the mess of 9th. I'm itching to play the game, even if I'm only really concentrating on 'Nids and Marines. Plus it gives me an excuse to use all the damned terrain I've accumulated/built over the years.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I see a lot of people here talking about how 10th killed their interesting 40k, and I want to know why that is, because I can't believe it was any great love for the top-heavy nightmare that was 9th edition.

Is it is because of the reset, and that if you don't know any of the 4 armies that have received books yet you really don't have much to play with right now? Or is it something else?

10th rejuvenated my interest in 40k, after skipping out most of 8th (pandemic) and finding myself unwilling to deal with the mess of 9th. I'm itching to play the game, even if I'm only really concentrating on 'Nids and Marines. Plus it gives me an excuse to use all the damned terrain I've accumulated/built over the years.

The thread about 10th killing interest ran for pages and pages. Some was posting on it!

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I see a lot of people here talking about how 10th killed their interesting 40k, and I want to know why that is, because I can't believe it was any great love for the top-heavy nightmare that was 9th edition.

Is it is because of the reset, and that if you don't know any of the 4 armies that have received books yet you really don't have much to play with right now? Or is it something else?

10th rejuvenated my interest in 40k, after skipping out most of 8th (pandemic) and finding myself unwilling to deal with the mess of 9th. I'm itching to play the game, even if I'm only really concentrating on 'Nids and Marines. Plus it gives me an excuse to use all the damned terrain I've accumulated/built over the years.

I could see Marine fans mad that their non-Primaris options are getting pushed out to pasture. I know that makes me even less likely to play than I already have been.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I see a lot of people here talking about how 10th killed their interesting 40k, and I want to know why that is, because I can't believe it was any great love for the top-heavy nightmare that was 9th edition.

10th is the first edition I haven't bought the BRB and SM book upon release. 9th was a grind and I only played a bit in the beginning phases, but I came into it with some hope after 8th. I actually enjoyed a good bit of 8th, rocky as it was.

10th makes it incredibly clear that the game is going in directions too far from my tastes for me to invest more in it beyond the inertia I have of continuing to paint the models I already have. Between the legending of classic units, the removal of points for upgrades, combined with fatigue regarding GW practices, plus a number of other things, I'm basically sitting this one out. I have one game of 10th loosely scheduled to play, but then I'll be doing older editions, OPR, or experimenting with custom alternatives. All GW purchases have stopped, and locally I no longer advocate for their products and instead advocate for alternatives.

I've only been on here a few years, joining when I got back into 40K with 8th Ed. I had played from 2nd to 6th Ed inclusive. I thought Dakka was a fun alternative and a good place to see news and exchange ideas as I re-entered the game. Since then, though, I have felt that the number of posters who actually play the current edition has been reducing. The content of those who do not play the current edition has risen, which makes it not seem like a great place to exchange about the game. I see little reason for a new player of 10th Ed to join Dakka - do they want to read the same ten posters complaining about 10th Ed when its fairly evident that those posters do not play? The Tactics threads get less doomer content, but there are other ways for players to get tips.

We can go to Auspex Tactics on Youtube to get news very quickly without having to wade through comments, unless of course we want to read Youtube comments. We can get comprehensive Codex reviews and tactics ideas from actual players as early as two weeks before Codex release. I do miss being able to interact with fellow players, though, since Youtube comments are kinda pointless.

So I don't think that 10th Ed has killed 40K. Locally, we have had three sold-out tourneys at our FLGS since the Edition dropped, and another FLGS just had its first tourney that also sold out. Lots of people are playing, and many of them are new or returning players. I'm playing every weekend, less those when I have work/family obligations. Interestingly, our local forum is going strong and I can exchange ideas on 10th Ed with fellow players that I know there.

Perhaps Dakka will have an increasingly Oldhammer focus, which is fine! People can go elsewhere for current Edition content. I'll hang around, for what its worth, because I still enjoy many of the conversations.

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
... The content of those who do not play the current edition has risen, which makes it not seem like a great place to exchange about the game. I see little reason for a new player of 10th Ed to join Dakka - do they want to read the same ten posters complaining about 10th Ed when its fairly evident that those posters do not play? ...

I feel like there were numerous threads discussing 10th besides the ones lamenting it. Maybe newcomers would be surprised to see how much we're divided on it but we're only divided, not united against it.

Also, thanks for the tip on switching my theme off of the mobile/lite version!

It's an unfortunate side effect of the way our brains work that we tend to see what we expect to see.

I remember back when the Dakka Facebook page was regularly posting links to forum threads, seeing fairly common comments over there that 'everything' posted on Dakka was so negative. I went back over several months worth of those Facebook feed links, and it worked out to around 1 in 10 was actually a 'negative' topic. The rest were just general discussion, or gallery pictures, or news posts. But because people had this impression that Dakka is a negative place, they only remembered seeing the negative posts.

The same thing happens here, it's just a little harder to quantify easily because the forum overall is spread over multiple sections... but I very strongly suspect that if one were to go through the boards counting the threads that are nothing but complaints, and those discussing things favourably, they might be surprised by the result.



That's not to say there aren't issues with negativity at times. There's always been a tendency amongst some posters when they dislike something to put a lot of effort into convincing everyone else that the thing is bad, rather than just saying their piece and moving on, which can make it difficult for those wanting to talk about the thing they like to feel like they're getting value out of the discussion.

Perhaps a clearer focus on the topic when a positive discussion is wanted might help there... or perhaps not.

But it is maybe worth taking a moment, if you're convinced that the board is nothing but toxic negativity, to stop and take a look around to see if that's actually true.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I see a lot of people here talking about how 10th killed their interesting 40k, and I want to know why that is, because I can't believe it was any great love for the top-heavy nightmare that was 9th edition.

Of course, you know I'm the exception that proves the rule- I LOVED that top heavy mess, and if I had my way, it would be two campaign cycles heavier by now instead of blown up and empty. Until the at least two of the Sisters, GSC and Drukhari dexes are released and we confirm that their Crusade content is at least as good as 9th's, this is a hollow husk of a game.

That being said, I am willing to give the edition a chance, once the edition actually includes the content I need to play it. If the Crusade content for either of those three dexes is worse than 9th, then for me, no matter how good the rest of the edition is, it will still be worse than 9th.

I CAN port 9th ed Crusade content to 10th easily enough... But there won't be much point. Why bother replacing an editions defective Crusade content with good stuff when it's going into an edition where subfaction is nothing but a paint job and all psykers of the same type must have identical psychic powers.

So far, Nids and Admech Crusade content is no worse than what we had in 9th, and Marines and 'Crons are better than 9th. If the pattern holds, this edition could be okay. If it doesn't hold the edition could be saved by house-ruling, but why bother when 9th was perfect for what I wanted from a game.

Discord is a different animal, it requires near to real time attention and frankly people are boring. Forums you can post and check back later, no need to respond with any immediacy. Although I think a fair bit of tactics discussions happen in the comments now on You Tube videos instead of these forums. Often people will try to distract you from their gakky behaviour by claiming it's being done by others, same thing here with the obhorrent views we hold.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I see a lot of people here talking about how 10th killed their interesting 40k, and I want to know why that is, because I can't believe it was any great love for the top-heavy nightmare that was 9th edition.

Is it is because of the reset, and that if you don't know any of the 4 armies that have received books yet you really don't have much to play with right now? Or is it something else?

10th rejuvenated my interest in 40k, after skipping out most of 8th (pandemic) and finding myself unwilling to deal with the mess of 9th. I'm itching to play the game, even if I'm only really concentrating on 'Nids and Marines. Plus it gives me an excuse to use all the damned terrain I've accumulated/built over the years.

Can’t speak for others, but for me it’s the army creation rules that I find soulless and demoralising.

The actual game itself is pretty fun from the few games I’ve played.

 vipoid wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

Thinly veiled personal attacks, gaslighting, arguments in bad faith and rampant racism have driving out pretty much all people generating worthwhile content, as well as many others. Real discussions have disappeared from dakka years ago.

Pardon?

Unless you're referring to racism against Xenos, I think I'm going to have to ask for some evidence for that one.

Claiming people just don't understand properly based on the flag next to their name is a common tool used by many people in this very thread regularly to deflect counter-arguments.
I myself have been accused of being a war criminal by inheritance, of being anti-semitic and a nazi because I have a German flag next to my name. Those people are still allowed to post on dakka, some even contributed to this very thread.
And let's not forget the people expressing unreasonable amount of hatred towards dark skinned models, which have also not been removed from this board.

Eventually, these posts gathered enough reports for some mod from another part of the forum to respond to them, but the slow reaction speed means that those racist posts remained readable for many hours, some even for days, to be read by hundreds of people.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Da Boss wrote:
Don't pull your punches, because you come across as really well rounded and not at all bitter cheering for the death of the website.

For the record, Jid was precisely the type of person I was referring to in this post. In fact, I knew that eventually he'd show up in this thread to give us another morose diatribe gaking all over Dakka. It was, in a lot of ways, inevitable.

Basically the most negative people here seem to always be the ones complaining about how negative everything is. It's like screaming about how much you hate the colour red whilst throwing buckets of red paint at everything around you.

I guess someone felt called out, huh?

The thread asked where everyone is, I told them, and there are many people agreeing with me.

It's ironic that a person who wastes hundreds of hours a month telling everyone how terrible GW and 40k is complains about someone writing a single posts a month about how gakky dakka is.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 insaniak wrote:
But it is maybe worth taking a moment, if you're convinced that the board is nothing but toxic negativity, to stop and take a look around to see if that's actually true.

To be fair, I don't care about any of dakka's parts but the 40k game related parts (general, tactics, news, YMDC, lists). Other areas might absolutely be less negative, but the parts I visit are all plagued by the same problems.

I did take that step back, asked myself if maybe I was the problem, stopped posting. While lurking, I witness the people who used to pile on me pile on the next person who wasn't joining the "GW bad, 40k bad" chorus until they left. And the next. And the next. I started posting again, and people, especially H.B.M.C. immediately resumed their personal attacks, irrespective of topic and arguments. See his last post for evidence - out of twenty people posting their negative experiences with dakka, he felt the need to call me out specifically again.

Even after taking a step back and exploring every other possible option, I have come to the conclusion that dakka actually is driven into the ground by a small toxic group of highly active and people, killing off the community one by one while contributing nothing or next to nothing themselves. Dropping dakka in favor of other 40k communities has immensely improved my enjoyment of the (40k) hobby.

So no, (40k) dakka is very much as negative as it's reputation implies, giving /tg/ a run for its money.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ccs wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

Congratulations, denizens of dakka, you killed your own hobby.

Only if your hobby is bitching about a game you don't play....

MY hobby? Is playing miniatures games. I don't need Dakka for that.

That kind of was my point. And to be clear, none of that was referring to you.

I pretty much disagree with every other posts you write and roll my eyes when you relentlessly try to convince everyone how your grot army his supposedly highly competitive.
You are essentially dakka's grot revolution leader, which makes you PITA for any ork around

BUT. That's what forums used to be for. A place for discussions, for disagreements. You actually write about the hobby, you add content to the page worth reading, you read and respond to what people are writing and tell what you like and don't like. Most people on here used to be like that, but the vast majority has been driven away or been infected by the constant negativity and toxicity. Nowadays having a different opinion is treated as a personal attack an will be retaliated against as such.

 Jidmah wrote:

To be fair, I don't care about any of dakka's parts but the 40k game related parts (general, tactics, news, YMDC, lists). Other areas might absolutely be less negative, but the parts I visit are all plagued by the same problems.

I did take that step back, asked myself if maybe I was the problem, stopped posting. While lurking, I witness the people who used to pile on me pile on the next person who wasn't joining the "GW bad, 40k bad" chorus until they left. And the next. And the next. I started posting again, and people, especially H.B.M.C. immediately resumed their personal attacks, irrespective of topic and arguments. See his last post for evidence - out of twenty people posting their negative experiences with dakka, he felt the need to call me out specifically again.

Even after taking a step back and exploring every other possible option, I have come to the conclusion that dakka actually is driven into the ground by a small toxic group of highly active and people, killing off the community one by one while contributing nothing or next to nothing themselves. Dropping dakka in favor of other 40k communities has immensely improved my enjoyment of the (40k) hobby.

So no, (40k) dakka is very much as negative as it's reputation implies, giving /tg/ a run for its money..

In the interests of science, since I don't spend as much time in the 40K sections of the site as I used to, I just scanned through the first dozen threads in 40K General. Aside from a single post from HBMC mentioning that he wasn't a fan of 9th edition, the only negativity I came across in any of those threads was from the people in this thread complaining about all the negativity on Dakka, and the others complaining about those complaining about the negativity.

YMDC has always been a bit of a shark pit, although it's considerably better behaved these days than it was when I first joined Dakka back in mumblemumble, and we do try to keep it somewhat reined in and less focused on argument just for the sake of argument. Elsewhere, there are individual threads that get heated, and certain posters who need to learn when to just let it go... but I don't think your perception is actually at all representative of the site overall.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I see a lot of people here talking about how 10th killed their interesting 40k, and I want to know why that is, because I can't believe it was any great love for the top-heavy nightmare that was 9th edition.

Is it is because of the reset, and that if you don't know any of the 4 armies that have received books yet you really don't have much to play with right now? Or is it something else?

I'll start by saying I had a lot of issues with 9th. The core rules were still a nothing-burger and most of the books were stupidly bloated, especially towards the end. There was also the general trend of removing and/or limiting wargear. Plus there was the trend away from properly costing items and instead inching ever closer towards pseudo power-level.

The sad thing, though, was that a lot of these issues could have been fixed very easily: Remove the 'loyalty' bonuses as 9th's army-building rules already punished you for taking allies. Remove stratagems outright and turn the relevant ones back into wargear. Make artefacts (and WLTs) cost points and, if absolutely necessary, just limit the maximum number of each by game size. Replace Auras with Command abilities like in AoS. Cost wargear properly - they even had 8th as a strong starting guide for this.

I'm sure the game would have benefited from other improvements, of course, but these in particular would have drastically removed the level of bloat and made things play more smoothly, whilst still keeping a lot of the good stuff from 9th (such as it was).

Instead, what we got was:

- Character rules that read like they were designed by Hitler from beyond the grave. Gone are separate characters who could move about freely from units (unless they're lucky enough to be a Lone Operative). Gone, too, are Characters that could freely join and leave units during the game. Now what we get instead is Characters who must choose a unit to be locked into for the entire game. They're not allowed to leave the unit. Nor are they allowed to join a new unit even if their old unit is completely wiped out. In fact, so strong was their attachment to their dead comrades that their wargear ceases to work for the rest of the game out of solidarity. Oh and the crowning turd on this river of sewage masquerading as rules is that Characters are only allowed to join very specific units. So if you happened to like some less conventional pairings then you get to sit on GW's middle finger.

- While we're on the subject of Characters, say a hearty farewell to customisation. Remember when one of the great things about 40k was 'Your Dudes'? Well now all that has been thrown in the bin. The wargear selection for my favourite army in particular had been going downhill for a while, but 10th's solution was to remove it entirely. Not only that, but it also removed artefacts and warlord traits - the last remaining bastions of customisation. Instead, we get Enhancements. A unit can only have 1 (so already customisation has been halved even before regular wargear is factored in), there are only 4 to choose from and most of them are locked so that a given Character gets a choice of maybe 2 at most. Though while there used to be some fun WLTs and artefacts, the same absoutely cannot be said for Enhancements, which are about as dismal and flavourless as they come.

Given that character and customisation are big things for me, can you maybe see why I'm not all that into 10th?

Adding to that:

- Psychic powers are just gone now. No more spell selection, you're just stuck with whatever your character comes with (usually not a lot). And your spell selection is determined by your wargear and whether you're a Special Characters. Because of course it is.

- Know what isn't gone, though? Stratagems! Yes, the worst edition 8th edition brought to the game has of course survived the alleged reduction in bloat. Boy it feels great knowing that so much wargear was stripped away so that we could keep these bastards.

- Points have been replaced by Power Level in all but name. I didn't like that 9th was heading in this direction so I like it even less now that the train has reached its final destination.

- Added to that, there's the whole mess of fixed unit sizes, wargear options strictly locked to what's in the box etc. that army-building is just a miserable experience. For all of 9th's faults, I still used to build far more lists than I'd ever have time to play. In contrast, I don't think I've managed to finish a single 10th edition list because it's just so dreary and uninspiring.

- There isn't even the hope that the codex (whenever GW finish pulling it from their backside for release) will actually fix any of these issues. In 8th we at least saw that GW were willing to shake armies up quite a bit relative to their indices. But with 10th it's painfully clear that your codex will just be your index with some extra detachments taped on. So if your units are dismal now then they are absolutely going to remain dismal even when you get your codex.

This is by no means an exhaustive list but hopefully I've explained myself. I'll reiterate, too, that this is not to say that 8th or 9th were amazing editions. I had no end of issues with them as I'm certain you're well aware. The thing is, while the flaws in those editions were extremely frustrating, they were also things I felt I could work around. I could generally build an army I would enjoy playing even if it wasn't great. With 10th, though, I just feel wholly uninspired because the only lists I am permitted to build are ones that I have absolutely no attachment to, nor any desire to actually play.

 insaniak wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

To be fair, I don't care about any of dakka's parts but the 40k game related parts (general, tactics, news, YMDC, lists). Other areas might absolutely be less negative, but the parts I visit are all plagued by the same problems.

I did take that step back, asked myself if maybe I was the problem, stopped posting. While lurking, I witness the people who used to pile on me pile on the next person who wasn't joining the "GW bad, 40k bad" chorus until they left. And the next. And the next. I started posting again, and people, especially H.B.M.C. immediately resumed their personal attacks, irrespective of topic and arguments. See his last post for evidence - out of twenty people posting their negative experiences with dakka, he felt the need to call me out specifically again.

Even after taking a step back and exploring every other possible option, I have come to the conclusion that dakka actually is driven into the ground by a small toxic group of highly active and people, killing off the community one by one while contributing nothing or next to nothing themselves. Dropping dakka in favor of other 40k communities has immensely improved my enjoyment of the (40k) hobby.

So no, (40k) dakka is very much as negative as it's reputation implies, giving /tg/ a run for its money..

In the interests of science, since I don't spend as much time in the 40K sections of the site as I used to, I just scanned through the first dozen threads in 40K General. Aside from a single post from HBMC mentioning that he wasn't a fan of 9th edition, the only negativity I came across in any of those threads was from the people in this thread complaining about all the negativity on Dakka, and the others complaining about those complaining about the negativity.

YMDC has always been a bit of a shark pit, although it's considerably better behaved these days than it was when I first joined Dakka back in mumblemumble, and we do try to keep it somewhat reined in and less focused on argument just for the sake of argument. Elsewhere, there are individual threads that get heated, and certain posters who need to learn when to just let it go... but I don't think your perception is actually at all representative of the site overall.

There is the problem of what you define negative to mean in this instance, because I feel you're referencing direct complaints/whining/hostility which doesn't feel entirely reflective of the whole scope.

There's certainly people with valid criticisms of the game and there are people with valid criticisms of the company, there are people who complain about either irrespective of the topic and those of course who do not share either. When those criticisms (valid or not) are repeated frequently enough, that is an air of negativity and people with similar opinions are drawn to reinforce and share that, which in turn leads to making it a welcome space for those who are less happy with their hobby to come and vent.

Ironically there are people in here commenting how other places due to moderation or like systems become echo chambers - Dakka is an echo chamber largely as well but it gets more heated due to the lesser moderation (that's not a knock by the way). When this happens those with a negative perception (valid or otherwise) are almost certainly in the majority on here, with anyone who defends their feelings otherwise just get heckled.

There are examples of people in here who do engage with the hobby where possible, they're passionate about their projects and largely want to have fun. But simultaneously I think it's fair to say do not have a positive perception of the company, nor the professional quality of the rules often, which is quite vocally, if respectfully, stated on most topics.

This results in the impression of a person who can be perceived as net negative, which when that reflects most people, is the reflection of the general feel of the board in my opinion. You can definitely track back that there are fewer and fewer rumours and content creators coming here, because of that atmosphere and general negative echo chamber, which can be a bit harsh sometimes due to the way moderation happens.

I don't think the forum is dying due to negativity, it is dying due to the forum structure as a whole becoming antiquated.

I'm not denying the reputation of negativity (though I think it ignores the many good posters here), I'm just not sure it is what is stopping new blood signing up.

After all people sign up for Twitter and that is just basically signing up to receive abusive replies whatever the subject

As others have mentioned, forums have certain advantages over "algorithmic" social media which I think will allow the medium to persist long-term at a maintenance level. The permanence of forum posts and threads being a big part of that. I don't know if forums on the whole have hit that maintenance floor yet, but I think they will hit a floor rather than shriveling entirely (of course that means entire forums will continue to disappear, I mean this effect will appear on-the-whole).

This is aided by "algorithmic" social media becoming... less good as time passes.

 insaniak wrote:
In the interests of science, since I don't spend as much time in the 40K sections of the site as I used to, I just scanned through the first dozen threads in 40K General.

So you scanned 12 threads? That's by no means scientific. The forum already has become a ghost town, that's why this thread was created, no?
If you want an example of negativity, try to find out why so many regulars with 10k+ posts stopped posting completely over the course of this year. Remember when we created the big tactica threads for the first time, because the tactics forum was moving so fast that many threads of less popular armies would disappear from the first page before anyone could respond? You can see threads all the way back to September now, and half of them have been started by the same person.

The mod practice of deleting dozens of posts whenever gak goes down somewhere also doesn't particularly help to provide data, but maybe there is an archive of deleted posts you have access to.

That, or you can just pretending that everything is well. As pointed out, I don't particularly care anymore. I just wanted to respond to your post, as I thought you would care.

Lord Zarkov wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I see a lot of people here talking about how 10th killed their interesting 40k, and I want to know why that is, because I can't believe it was any great love for the top-heavy nightmare that was 9th edition.

Is it is because of the reset, and that if you don't know any of the 4 armies that have received books yet you really don't have much to play with right now? Or is it something else?

10th rejuvenated my interest in 40k, after skipping out most of 8th (pandemic) and finding myself unwilling to deal with the mess of 9th. I'm itching to play the game, even if I'm only really concentrating on 'Nids and Marines. Plus it gives me an excuse to use all the damned terrain I've accumulated/built over the years.

Can’t speak for others, but for me it’s the army creation rules that I find soulless and demoralising.

The actual game itself is pretty fun from the few games I’ve played.

Same - I enjoy tinkering in battlescribe, and 40k removed most of that tinkering - building a list for marines is actually painful now to me, seeing how half my collection is in Legends now, and the restrictions on characters don't help either.

The game on the table is fine, but the other stuff made me quit playing as the list building / model selection completely taints the experience to me.

nekooni wrote:

Lord Zarkov wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I see a lot of people here talking about how 10th killed their interesting 40k, and I want to know why that is, because I can't believe it was any great love for the top-heavy nightmare that was 9th edition.

Is it is because of the reset, and that if you don't know any of the 4 armies that have received books yet you really don't have much to play with right now? Or is it something else?

10th rejuvenated my interest in 40k, after skipping out most of 8th (pandemic) and finding myself unwilling to deal with the mess of 9th. I'm itching to play the game, even if I'm only really concentrating on 'Nids and Marines. Plus it gives me an excuse to use all the damned terrain I've accumulated/built over the years.

Can’t speak for others, but for me it’s the army creation rules that I find soulless and demoralising.

The actual game itself is pretty fun from the few games I’ve played.

Same - I enjoy tinkering in battlescribe, and 40k removed most of that tinkering - building a list for marines is actually painful now to me, seeing how half my collection is in Legends now, and the restrictions on characters don't help either.

The game on the table is fine, but the other stuff made me quit playing as the list building / model selection completely taints the experience to me.

This is probably my core issue, granted i switched over to HH and currently are in the final steps of my masters degree so my p&m blog is collecting dust for a bit but it is hardly unfair to criticise story and buisness of 40k and gw with the handling of either. Estrangement is a issue for many 40k players that played over an edition aswell.

And whilest as pointed out, the game currently plays well enough (certainly for gw standards) it is hardly inspiring when whole armies are banished to the shadow realm that is legends.

As for those wishing for heavier moderation, or recommending other communities, sure but it would do you well to understand who said "gaiety is the most outstanding feature of the soviet Union", why toxic positivity is a thing and why you only exchange a percieved echo chamber with a real one, especially if you switch to an algorithmic based plattform.

An outside perspective:

I don’t follow 40k. I mostly come to Dakka for non-GW miniatures, lore and games (and Geek Media). This means I mostly stick to News and Rumors as that is where the most non-GW action happens.

A year or two ago, all the threads I’d wanted to read were being crowded out by 40k junk. Now I see more threads for non-GW games and minis cropping back up, although not to the highs of the Kirby era. Looks to me like interest in 40k is waning again, but non-40k Dakka is doing alright, but not great.

There is increasing toxicity and negativity everywhere in society these days. Algorithmic social networking sites make it worse. It’s noticeably spilling over to Dakka, but that’s a symptom not a cause of growing negativity.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
An outside perspective:

I don’t follow 40k. I mostly come to Dakka for non-GW miniatures, lore and games (and Geek Media). This means I mostly stick to News and Rumors as that is where the most non-GW action happens.

A year or two ago, all the threads I’d wanted to read were being crowded out by 40k junk. Now I see more threads for non-GW games and minis cropping back up, although not to the highs of the Kirby era. Looks to me like interest in 40k is waning again, but non-40k Dakka is doing alright, but not great.

There is increasing toxicity and negativity everywhere in society these days. Algorithmic social networking sites make it worse. It’s noticeably spilling over to Dakka, but that’s a symptom not a cause of growing negativity.

This is interesting, you're stating the opposite of everyone else I think.

Most of the people mentioning toxicity isn't that it's coming in. People (admittedly mostly people you'd associate with being negative to some degree) are saying don't look to other places as they're full of over moderated toxic positivity, dakka is better because you can complain.

So in this case to compare with your comments, it likely means only negative minded people are left generally, dakka is slowly approaching life support for 40k or that the game is struggling. All.metrics suggest the latter to be false atm, so logically its one of the other two?

The reason a lot of other groups have to be moderated so heavily is that the negativity is so pervasive in the wider culture. If people stick to tiny little niche echo chambers, it’s often because they are aware of how much rampant douchery is happening in the mainstream. If you post in a “safe” FB group, for example, the algorithm will ‘helpfully’ bombard you with outrage-bait from all the other non-safe groups periodically to keep you engaged on its terms. Dakka doesn’t have all the walled gardens, but it also doesn’t deliberately shiv your calm for ad money. People here disagree, but we are all in the same spaces and interact instead of hating on an other we only see through algorithmic trolling. When people say something hateful to you on Dakka, you can report them or reply at your leisure. When someone says something hateful in real life or on FB (where your contact info is available), you have to either risk drama overspill into RL, or swallow any reply and die a little inside, or vacate yet another aspect of your social life.

Dakka has some pretty vile stuff sometimes. But it’s usually cleaned up or called out rather than festering for clicks.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I see a lot of people here talking about how 10th killed their interesting 40k, and I want to know why that is, because I can't believe it was any great love for the top-heavy nightmare that was 9th edition.

10th killed my interest because it was the death-knell for 40k as a wargame.

I hated 9th and was lukewarm about 8th; the over complication of tracking rules through a myriad of books and FAQs was horrific design, and I'll eat my shorts in surprise if it doesn't return in 10th. Also the silliness of vehicles unload their payloads through tires and being shot via atennas, the inability to generate competent terrain rules, so on and so forth.

But I was still more favorable towards those editions because they maintained "your dudes" as a concept. 10th has all the flaws of the previous NU40K editions whilst removing the one thing that kept the game, in my mind, personal. Now every army is the same list with the same over-designed models built around the same center piece (btw there's only one of those in the entire galaxy!11!!) playing the same map with the same L-shaped ruins and the same load outs.

I can get more variety and customization out of a game of League of Legends (or any number of excellent board games) than a game of 40k; none of which will cost hundreds of dollars and dozens of hours before I settle in to the actual playing part.

Which is why 30k is where all my interest currently lay, and why I exclusively use 3d printed models from 3rd party sources.

ccs wrote:

Apple fox wrote:
True Wargamer is anyone who wants to be part of the war gaming hobby, if just playing 40K or lots of other games.
I don’t think it makes someone less legitimate within the hobby.

But I do think 40K and GW itself being so dominant in the hobby is a big detriment as a whole.

Eh. It is what it is. Sure, 40k draws a lot of the attention. And if you let it it'll seem to be the only thing played.
But that's why it's important to play other, non-GW stuff, at the shops. Even if it starts out small with just you & one friend playing BTech, or some WWII game, or MCP etc every few weeks.
You've got to be seen playing & having fun with non-40k/GW in order to attract more players.

Very true. it has taken loads of effort but we have built such a place at our FLGS. to the point people make effort to stay in the area or drive out of their way to come to our store. Sure 40K is still played both new and old editions, but between the regular weekend group we play just about every other game out there. People will be less invested in the hobby if they do not think they will have opportunities to play.


Just off the top of my head- somebody in the regular crowd plays and has armies for-
.flames of war
.team yankee
.victory at sea
.blood red skies
.specter operations
.bolt action
.DUST 1947
.forces of valor battle tactics
.marvel crisis protocol
.star wars X-wing
.star wars legion
.B5 wars
.aeronautica imperialis
.battlefleet gothic
.40K (epic, 10th and house 5th)
.blood bowl
.warmachine
.monster apocalypse
.infinity
.castles in the sky
.AOS
.WHFB
.classic battle tech
.battle tech alpha strike

That's not counting the odd player that comes in and plays something less regular like song of ice and fire.

Seeing people play and having good looking tables draws attention as does a welcoming community that gives demo games.

I think the people saying Dakka skews negative have a point to be honest. It does! I just don't really see that as a huge problem.

I think when you're really into something you develop strong opinions about it. I love 40K and have loved it since I was a little kid. It means a lot to me, dumb as that might be.

If I'm totally happy with it, then I've not got much to say except "oh wow, this is great!"

Likewise, if I didn't like it at all, I'd just not be interested enough to talk about it or think about it.

But when you're a bit disappointed with something you like, or want to like, then you have a lot more thoughts about it and how it might be improved, ways you could make it fit what you like, and yeah, the things that annoy you about how it's being done at the moment.

And that generates more discussion, people want to feel heard about these things because not many people in their day to day are gonna care about something as incredibly niche as 40K.

So I think that inevitably skews discussion negatively unless there's a strong push for positivity. Dakka has always been relatively lightly moderated, and so there's not much of a push in any direction, so grumbling came to dominate.

Totally get why that's frustrating to people who are happy with the game, but I dunno how you can avoid it really. I'm not playing 40K because I have Opinions about the stuff they're doing with it, and instead I'm working on quite a lot of hobby projects and getting games in with my miniatures in the 40K setting using rules I prefer and with the miniatures I want to use. I've painted 5 large 40K armies in the past 3-4 years, some of them dream armies from my childhood, and I have more on the table for the upcoming period. But no one really cares about another guy doing old editions or OPR and doing "good enough for tabletop" paintjobs and photographing them kinda badly! We're all doing similar stuff. So we come here and chat about whatever the topic is, but sometimes yeah, we do circle the drain a bit with whatever is bugging us.

I have to say, and I posted about this recently, I find the RPG scene a lot more healthy there. The alternatives to the "big games" are all a lot more established and there's more of an idea that you're gonna have to organise things yourself as you like them built into RPGs vs. wargames, where the pick up game is still an influential idea even if you mostly play with people you know.

I think the RPG scene tends to be a bit more positive and focused on the cool stuff people are doing. I'll try to be a bit more like that here and repeat myself less.

As humble and insignificant as they might be, i think our crappy photographed subpar tabletop paintjobs and overly common hobby projects are equally the raison d'etre of such a forum.

They are but more aspects we can share and chat about, just as much as rulesets and tactics or stuff. Wargaming is a hobby, it is unnecessary and pointless by itself, and so are any chat about it. If only for us to have a good time. Sharing stories, battlereps, paintjobs, etc help build a good time.