PDA

View Full Version : Are we having fun yet?



lousydiceroller
12-05-2009, 06:36
5th edition has been around for some time now. It is my opinion that I am having more fun playing 40K in this edition than I did when I started playing 3rd and then 4th editions.

The main reason for this is the players in my area have naturally added more troops to their armies which eventually take points away from so many elites and heavy supports which can dominate a game.

For example when I play an Eldar player I no longer think “I’m going to be fighting three wraith lords and a avatar,” I think, “How am I going to get all those guardians off the objectives!”

Has anyone else had this experience?

On the flip side I have had people complement my army because it is fun to fight against. I have a Word Bearers army. The core of troops that is all ways on the table is two units of marines, one unit of thousand sons, and two units of lesser daemons.

Griffin
12-05-2009, 07:51
I've always enjoyed 40K, but I'm a rather layed back fluff player. I do however prefer 5th to 4th myself. Good decisions by GW.

freelancer
12-05-2009, 07:52
I find 5th edition fantastic! It turned my Black Templars from a combat preferred army to a combat specialists, which made them more competitive with other combat specialists and combat oriented armies. TLOS is rarely an issue for my shooting because most of it is pistols and my tactics didn't change from 4th to 5th. It went from kill everything to kill everything, simple easy and very effective.

5th edition is better then 4th imho.

Freelancer

blameless
12-05-2009, 07:58
totally! 5th is definitely a lot of fun to play! iv only played 4th+5th but 5th has a better feel to it for sure... troops only scoring and the new combat resolution are ace.

mughi3
12-05-2009, 08:05
Out of all the editions so far i think 5th is a big improvement.
in fact there are only 2 vehicle rules
.defensive weapons being S4
.hitting rear armor in CC
which i think are total garbage.



The main reason for this is the players in my area have naturally added more troops to their armies which eventually take points away from so many elites and heavy supports which can dominate a game.

For example when I play an Eldar player I no longer think “I’m going to be fighting three wraith lords and a avatar,” I think, “How am I going to get all those guardians off the objectives!”

A couple points here.

In most cases the true killing power of a force is in the elite and heavy slots. tac marines for example are generalists who are "ok" at a bit of everything while the other units excel at specific jobs, the same is only magnified with other armies like eldar.

What i think your forgetting that is even in 5th any unit can contest, so it often becomes a battle over one or two objectives rather than four or five. and in KP games troops become far less important.

It really depends on the player, but most people i have see usually run with about 3 troop slots filled. myself i have always run with 2 in every force outside my deathwing and i still do just fine with them.

When it comes to fun, the attitude of the person your playing against factors in far more than what every army list they bring to the table, no matter the game your playing.

Nicha11
12-05-2009, 08:11
5th edition has been good to me so far.

BaloOrk
12-05-2009, 08:11
Well 5th is far better than 4th.
For me personally, i had more fun when i was younger and played 3:rd edition, not better rules maybe, but more players around, which meant more fun.
(hmm.... i wonder how 6th will be)


When it comes to fun, the attitude of the person your playing against factors in far more than what every army list they bring to the table, no matter the game your playing.

Very very true.

Escaflowne_Z
12-05-2009, 11:07
I very much like 5th edition and the codexes designed for it. Having troops be the only claiming units was the single best change. Gets rid of the static, single lascannon/lance troops choices almost completely. Planetstrike will give people back their overloaded HS and Elites.

Helicon_One
12-05-2009, 12:30
A definite step up from 4th Ed (although I felt 4th Ed was a step down from the 3.5 ruleset we had towards the end of 3rd), yes. A bit of weirdness and the occasional glitch, but otherwise its a solid ruleset.

Captain Micha
12-05-2009, 13:11
Over all it's an improvement.

Ditch Run, and Wound Allocation and you'd have the perfect 40k edition in my opinion.

Master Stark
12-05-2009, 13:23
It's the best edition of 40K yet, but it has a long way to go before it finally 'grows up'.

Cane
12-05-2009, 13:29
I too jumped from third edition to fifth and I agree that its been a great improvement. Having tanks finally being able to move and shoot their ordnance weapons was a godsend for my Imperial Guard, especially with the new Lumbering Behemoth rule.

CplHicks
12-05-2009, 13:37
Well, 5ed made me play again after my utter dissatisfation with 3rd and 4ed and a resulting play gap of about 8 years. What's more to say? :-)

Btw run was one of the changes making me want to play again. No kidding, I always said that if they bring a similar mechanic back into the game I'd at least try it out. But as always ymmv.

rossatdi
12-05-2009, 13:39
Personally I like the new rules but think maybe the consolidate into combat nerf was a bit mean. I play Guard so I'm not that bothered by it, especially when my first game had an Eldar player's badass attack squad wipe out a 90 point vet squad then stand there as everyone blazed away at them!

Moving Ordnance makes my newly tough Leman Russes cry tears of MEG-vaporizing joy.

the1stpip
12-05-2009, 14:07
5th ed is better for one reason. You now have to decide how many troops choice you need in your army, rather than how many Elites / Fast Attack / Heavy Support I can fit in.

Not too happy with TLOS and no consolidating, but thats cos I play Dark Eldar, and it has affected my play style. But its still better.

Vepr
12-05-2009, 14:10
I like 5th edition even though my nids are suffering a little because nid troop choices are not at all designed around holding something and the fact that all but stealers need a synapse baby sitter to even claim anything makes it even tougher. Hopefully a codex update will take care of that though.

I have mixed feeling about the consolidation rules. It is odd actually wishing that my stealers would not decimate a squad in the first round of CC for once lol.

I also have mixed feelings about the rear armor rule also for CC with vehicles. In some respects I understand it because if you are in CC with a tank you are going to be going after the top armor rather than the sides or front which in general on even modern tanks is not nearly as thick as your front and sides. But it does feel wrong in some cases for CC to be able to take out a tank so easily in some circumstances. Then again even today it takes combined arms with infantry etc to keep tanks from being taken out in tight confines by improvised det packs, firebombs, and other such devices.

Mojaco
12-05-2009, 14:52
Wound allocation is an annoying exploit, but other then that I can't think of too many issues I have with the system.

Ranger S2H
12-05-2009, 16:47
I play 5th with 4th victory points, and I'm really happy about it.
the TLOS change didnt affect me that much, I came into the game at the end of 4th, and I now realise I was already using TLOS^^.
I like the scoring troops change, IMO it makes an army look better. dont know exactly why though.
I dont have much experience with problems with wound allocation.
running is great!
the only problem I initially had with 5th was the defensive weapon change. I play IG and I thought it was weird that a huge piece of metal like a leman russ couldnt move and fire all its guns. but this got fixed in 5th IG ^^.

laudarkul
12-05-2009, 16:52
I begin 40k in the last month of the 4th edition so the transition to the 5th was easy. But the running thing and wound allocation are perfect (I can spear some IG if I'm lucky with the dices :) ). Despite the fact that HB are offensive weapons in the 5th.
But it's the same sensation of fun;).

d0dgeuk
12-05-2009, 16:52
I kind of missed 3rd and most of 4th. Started playing at its very tail end so I have gone from 2nd to 5th and the game has changed greatly for the better. Smoother flow of play, I like the troop choices scoring and TLOS definitely. Seems more fun than 2nd to me.

xinsanityx
12-05-2009, 17:03
5th and 4th are pretty much equal in my book. 5th got rid of a bunch of problems that 4th had but it created a whole set of new problems.

Wound allocation abuse, kill points, random game length for EVERY game, vehicles are now too powerful, ramming is clumsy and just wasn't thought out well, and there are way too many cover saves.

I do like the new missions with the exception of kill points, i think that mission should be victory points and should not have a random game length, it should just be a set 6 turns. Run was also a good addition, but only because they got rid of the ability to consolidate into a different unit. The change to rending was good, they just need to update the tyanid codex. I also like the change to FNP and deep strike. Outflanking was also a good addition to the game.

All in all I'm still of the opinion that they rushed 5th edition, and if they had waited a year and gotten some opinions from the community it would have been an awesome game. Because of this they've left a bitter taste in my mouth and I'm not playing 40k as much as I used to. Really I'm not playing any GW games as much as I used to. Hopefully they'll get it right with the 8th edition of fantasy and stop it from being the monster bash that it is currently.

kendaop
12-05-2009, 17:44
Over all it's an improvement.

Ditch Run, and Wound Allocation and you'd have the perfect 40k edition in my opinion.

Funny, those are some of the best changes from 4th to 5th, along with TLOS.

Captain Micha
12-05-2009, 18:12
it makes Foot Slogging too fast maybe and I mean maybe if run had been a d3 it would have been okay. (why should they be as fast potentially as most transports exactly?)

Wound Allocation is terrible because of the abuse that comes with it (More shots kills less models? WTF).

Ubermensch Commander
12-05-2009, 18:14
5th edition is great. Having a blast...even when being blasted.

lanrak
12-05-2009, 18:41
HI all.
I agree the basic game play of 5th ed 40k is better than 3rd-4th ed.

Now all we need is the rules to be written to maximise game play NOT marketing.
So the rules are as striaght forward as the game play.

TTFN
Lanrak.

mughi3
13-05-2009, 08:25
I also have mixed feelings about the rear armor rule also for CC with vehicles. In some respects I understand it because if you are in CC with a tank you are going to be going after the top armor rather than the sides or front which in general on even modern tanks is not nearly as thick as your front and sides. But it does feel wrong in some cases for CC to be able to take out a tank so easily in some circumstances. Then again even today it takes combined arms with infantry etc to keep tanks from being taken out in tight confines by improvised det packs, firebombs, and other such devices.

Full stop!
please leave the real world at the door. this is a game with rules, rules meant to give some semblance of balance. the game is still a tactical game as such the facing of a vehicles armor is just as important as what guns it can carry, even in CC. as it is now there are only a couple vehicles in the entire game that are not rear AV 10 which means even a marine can walk up and put his fist through it. and most MCs/walkers straight up pen without even having to roll for it. this creates an imbalance and a loss of tactical flexability for people who want to run vehicles.

Its a bad rule that needs to go away because of the way it alters game mechanics/tactics.

Mojaco
13-05-2009, 08:43
Pff. Vehicles became a lot harder at range thanks to the new damage table. Not only did everything move up a notch, but penetrating shots no longer means stunned as well. Their fragile nature at close range is a nice compensation for that.

Inach
13-05-2009, 08:46
With CSM and Daemons I'll keep playing for a while, 5th made them fun to play!

However, my main army (NOT any more) is due to the 5th edition complete crap. Necrons got the hardest blow from 5th edition. Playstyle was already very boring, without a complete revamp they'll keep collecting more dust because I wont play them any more.

Master Stark
13-05-2009, 09:39
it makes Foot Slogging too fast maybe and I mean maybe if run had been a d3 it would have been okay. (why should they be as fast potentially as most transports exactly?)

It's a problem with the poor movement rules in 40K. The best way to fix it would have been to re-introduce movement rates, and get rid of the idea that vehicles have to trade movement for firepower.

maze ironheart
13-05-2009, 09:50
I've always enjoyed 40K, but I'm a rather layed back fluff player. I do however prefer 5th to 4th myself. Good decisions by GW.

It gives us a nice challange cause we build a list and don't know what mission we are playing or our set up and their won't be oh I have a list to crush you in anniallation.

Lord Wasa
13-05-2009, 10:06
It's a problem with the poor movement rules in 40K. The best way to fix it would have been to re-introduce movement rates, and get rid of the idea that vehicles have to trade movement for firepower.

Hear hear. Bring in movement stats and give vehicles lower bs on weapon if moving instead of only being able to fire some.

Other than thet 5th is gold if you houserule the wound allocation.

blackcherry
13-05-2009, 10:19
Whilst I do have a few gripes about this version, I still find it a hell of a lot more fun to play than the previous edition. If nothing else, the emphasis on the troop choice has been a god send for playing, competitive or not.

The people I play just seem to be more relaxed about it now. That many 'cheezy' units aren't as important anymore, as they are selections other than troops, seems to have killed off most of the ultra competitive people in my part of the UK, and just left players who have a bit of fun.

The Clairvoyant
13-05-2009, 11:15
i jumped from 2nd to 5th and am loving the new rules. I hadn't played 40k for 10 years so digging out my old ork boyz for my first game was pure bliss!
Some rules seem a little odd, especially when compared with 2nd ed - an as example, heavy weapons could shoot at a different target to the rest of their squad, whereas now they have to shoot at the same target. And sponson mounted weapons seems entirely pointless now that every weapon on the tank has to shoot at the same target.
But i do like the simplification of armour penetration.
The run rule which although nice, seems strange seeing as a trooper could move (walk) 6" in the movement phase and then assault 6" in the assault phase, but if they run, they only move 6" + D6". How is running slower than assaulting?
Minor gripes though. I love 5th ed 40k. Its a game of rolling lots of dice and blowing things up. If i want a tactical game, i play WFB. 40k is purely for fun.

shin'keiro
13-05-2009, 11:22
Are we having fun yet?


Yes we are!

Oguleth
13-05-2009, 14:50
Compared to 3rd and 4th, I like it a lot (never played RT or 2nd, so can't compare to them).

I'd rather have regular Victory Points over Kill Points, but that's about it.

I found the running and close combat bits to the best improvements/changes.

The SkaerKrow
13-05-2009, 15:29
5th edition is great. Having a blast...even when being blasted.I think that you hit the nail on the head with that statement. The current edition of 40K may be the best wargame that I've ever played, let alone the best edition of 40K. Coming over from Warhammer Fantasy Battles, where I would actually enjoy about one out of every four of the games that I played, 40K has been a great time. While my Win/Loss percentage hasn't changed that much, the enjoyment that I get out of the game is infinitely greater. I found the 4th edition of 40K to be tedious and pedestrian, but 5th edition has turned it to my go-to game for fun.

nightgant98c
13-05-2009, 22:36
I'm a little on the fence still. I don't get to play alot, but it seems every time I play, I find something else I don't like very well. I don't hate 5th, but I'm not sure I like it.

Jayden63
13-05-2009, 23:06
I'm having a really hard time liking 5th ed. There are many things about it that just rub me the wrong way. I'd much rather continue 4th ed with a few tweaks then the massive overhaul pendulum swing that 5th did to many things.

Angelwing
13-05-2009, 23:38
Yes, I'm having fun. I'd like to convince my local group to dump the 5th ed missions (and KP's with them) for the 3rd ed missions though.

Vaktathi
13-05-2009, 23:41
I don't really have any more fun with 5th than I did with 4th, except with the new IG codex :D

I think 5th made some wonderful and amazing changes, in addition to some ridiculous, terrible, bad, and poorly thought out changes. In the end, it's different, but not really better overall, just different.

If we ditched KP's altogether, replaced the cover save with a BS modifier system, brought defensive weapons back to S5 or 6, added in some more mission variety, and ditched the horrific wound allocation system (which causes far more problems than it solved) I think the game would be far better than it currently is.

self biased
14-05-2009, 00:06
i agree, Vaktathi. it's a little of column 'A,' a little of column 'B' for me. the cover save mechanic is weak, blast markers always scattering is weak (unless one loads up on blast markers), ordnance got a nice bump up, vehicles are more of what they were; impenetrable fortresses of death or piles of rubble, though marginally more survivable.

am i having fun? yes. i like assembling and painting toy soldiers while socializing with other likeminded people. do i think the current edition of the game is "tEH BEST EVaR?" no. i think some poor decisions were made for otherwise honorable reasons, like the aforementioned wound allocation system.

brgerkng
15-05-2009, 00:23
I played a few games in my brief stint back in 3rd and got back into the game last july/august, so I got the tail-end of 4th and most of my experience is of 5th edition. I have a lot of fun playing the game, building and painting the models, and socializing with people in the hobby. I do see a lot of the problems people have with the rules and whatnot and for the most part agree with them. My judgments are based on what I see in the game as it is now, not by comparing it to the previous editions. To be honest, when the people in my local game group start going "oh, this was so much better in x edition of the game" I tend to go "yea..." and zone out a little bit.

Axis
15-05-2009, 00:56
I am having a lot of fun with 5th. It is a bit of a mental shift playing 5th after 4th. I think people really should look at it as completely different games. That might be just in my area. Some people are saying how dumb 5th is because their 4th edition lists are getting creamed.

I don't think wound allocation is the best system. I've played some games but often we just fall back into the habit of what we used to do which works fine.

I like run, i like TLOS, i especially like the new vehicle rules. It sometimes irritates me when i can't kill someones tank.. but i know they will be feeling the same about mine :)

freddieyu
15-05-2009, 01:04
It's fun! Not perfect, but nevertheless fun!

Imperius
15-05-2009, 01:39
The 'Sprint' rule makes Orks a notch above the other classes

A Mob of 30 FEARLESS Orks roll a 6 on their sprint roll, and have furious charge+waaahg, give them transports and you easily move 30 Inches if you wish to close combat.

Also wound allocation.
As a side note: Im not an Ork hater, infact I have a small force gradually growing that's sitting at 700 points.

___________________

5th Ed is great over 4th, with a few minor WTFS, and a couple weird FAQs.

Axis
15-05-2009, 02:36
Except you can only fit 20 orks into one transport.. and you can't assault out of that.

12 Orks in a trukk move exceptionally fast but there are only 12 of them. Sure, they are dangerous but 12 Orks don't stay fearless for long.