PDA

View Full Version : Your 40k thoughts to end the year



Ghungo
22-12-2014, 15:19
1) Honestly I don't think csm will ever get chapter tactics but I fully expect 4 different focs and warlord traits and relics to represent each faction. That's the new format and better represents chaos then chapter tactics which single army wide rule that will likely not make mono armies viable considering 90% of the space marine tactics are rubbish. I don't know why csm players want that. It won't make much difference. What you should be asking for is faction specific foc(aka detachment) and formations with faction specific warlord traits and relic tables and possible a unique psychic table.

2) we've had a fairly stable rule set between 6th and 7th with slight tweaks to psychic powers. Army codexs have been well balanced lately with many unique outliers coming from formations and that's been a great way to force balance. I know many aren't use to it still but come LVO when necrons are updated every army will be updated to 6th/7th edition. Not saying every book is perfect they are just more viable and comparable then I've ever seen as a whole.

3) most models are quickly converting over to plastic. New dataslates ( or codex entries) are coming intermittently and generally armies look better now then ever before.

Bottom line is 40k is on the right track and the future looks better then it has In quite a while.

HelloKitty
22-12-2014, 15:34
I agree with you. Our campaign is about to start and its the first one using 7th edition. I am optimistic.

Spiney Norman
22-12-2014, 15:51
If I might offer a contrary opinion

I'm done with 40k for the time being, the balance between books is at least as bad as any point since I've started playing the game, unbound allies and LoW make this a ton worse by allowing a new depth of abusive maximising using multiple books and no troops choices which I am just not into. More than any time in the game's history I cannot play the themed lists I want to play and have any hope of a good game. GW has comprehensively ruined the game for me with 7th edition, telling the truth I was already disillusioned with 6th and then everything I didn't like got made worse.

I've finally taken the step of throwing a whole lot of money at forgeworld and starting a heresy era army in the hope that a balanced game might actually be possible undere the framework they have created.

AngryAngel
22-12-2014, 16:04
I think 40k keeps taking 3 steps forward and 2 steps back. Until they have the 6th ed books seen to again, and rebalanced, balance will still be an issue. I'd be more thrilled with their balance if we didn't have the loosest FoC set ups in history, also with capability for LoW and unbound hanging out with tacked on formations. It is like they press towards balance, then add in things to break that balance anyway.

I suppose it is simply GW being consistent at being inconsistent.

Question will just be how long they will ride this out before shifting focus once more as we've all seen many times in the past ( If we've played for that long however ).

Ironbone
22-12-2014, 16:29
Well, this ceartainly was very busy year. I personaly was juge on two major Tournaments ( one realy big ), picked up first "real" job, and may, or may not meet my first Girlfriend (that is yet to be decided in new year ):p.

ekhem, but enough with personal stuff....

For 40k it was very busy year. Edition shift, and then just in 8 months 5 new codiecies, and 5 campain books ( 3 sanctus reach and 2 on shield of baal ). Not to mention some last 6th ed books, and lots of minor stuff, like WD.

7th ed. Yeah, fastest edition shift in GW history. Well, true name should be "6th ed with some nice changes, yet tons of issues still unanswered, and more ways to go gangbang on your opponet than ever before".

7th ed books. I must admit, this new style have some decent good sides, but overall I feel it's inferior to 6th ed style. Codex now looks more like seeling booklet for models. Ceartainly much pleasing for GW way of thinking "we sell models not game", but not for their customers.

State of game - oh, that's where wired thing happens. On one hand, for casual playing, it's never been so good time. Basicly any army you can imagine fluffwise you can field, and, provided opponet do the same, you can still have a nice game. On the other hand, game get even more overpacked with options without even any hope of balace between them. In past you used only you codex. Now you use your codex ( with multiple diffrent detachments aviable ), your alies codiecies ( and now you can ally with everyone, even nids ), formations, dataslates, forgeworld, campain books and I still probably missing something. I have memory good enough to cover all of these, but I guess, not everyone is so happy.

Oh, and GW pricing still haven't moved an inch from beeing welded between "stupidly overpriced" and "wallet rape" :shifty::mad:...

Ghungo
22-12-2014, 17:44
I think 40k keeps taking 3 steps forward and 2 steps back. Until they have the 6th ed books seen to again, and rebalanced, balance will still be an issue. I'd be more thrilled with their balance if we didn't have the loosest FoC set ups in history, also with capability for LoW and unbound hanging out with tacked on formations. It is like they press towards balance, then add in things to break that balance anyway.

I suppose it is simply GW being consistent at being inconsistent.

Question will just be how long they will ride this out before shifting focus once more as we've all seen many times in the past ( If we've played for that long however ).

I keep hearing about unbound being the big bad boogey man ruining 40k.
I havent seen or played a single game of unbound in any tournament or club game EVER in two years (since 6th dropped).
Its an OPTION that no one plays or cares to play.
It litterally has NO effect on any balance discussion since NO ONE PLAYS it.
The only people complaining about unbound are people who simply complain about it, as if it is being forced on them to play. YET that never happens.

LOW are similarly a non issue. They were legal at the last LVO and hasnt made a lick of difference. Many people enjoy playing with them. Yes LOW options between armies and even within thier books are not very balanced and i personally beleive LOW options should be limited to 1850+ games. However Ive never been forced to play with LOW in a casual game and nearly everyone i met is cool with the fact if i say to hold off with the LOW for another day when i am ready to play it. Honestly I want to pick up a stompa for my orks now. It may not be the best LOW option but it looks fun to build and play and i doubt most people will care if i "ask" them to play with it. LOW will once again be legal in LVO and I am positive it will make just as much a difference this year as it did last. Which means it wont be a competitive choice.

When tournaments are fairly balanced and casual play is fairly balanced what exactly is your complaint. When the options you keep complaining about just dont have the meta changing effect you keep theorizing about and it doesnt actually occur or affect games in real life. Your complaints just dont exist. If you want to complain abotu broken wave serpents sure go for it thats a legit actual occurance. If you want to complain about dark angels and CSM being slightly outdated and not really competitve sure thats certainly debately. But sitting here and claiming unbound is ruining tournaments and casual games is a red herring argument since it DOESNT exist.

Konovalev
22-12-2014, 18:03
I keep hearing about unbound being the big bad boogey man ruining 40k.
I havent seen or played a single game of unbound in any tournament or club game EVER in two years (since 6th dropped).
Its an OPTION that no one plays or cares to play.
It litterally has NO effect on any balance discussion since NO ONE PLAYS it.
The only people complaining about unbound are people who simply complain about it, as if it is being forced on them to play. YET that never happens.

LOW are similarly a non issue.

My experience has been the same. Everyone in my group is quick to bemoan titans in the LOW slot, and anti-fun unbound lists, yet no one has actually ever experienced it first hand.

Similarly I might find a bad apple when I to the grocery, though so far I haven't. But I suppose merely the potential for a bad apple ruins the bunch for some people.

HelloKitty
22-12-2014, 18:06
We have not had anyone attempt to use those either barring special scenarios that we run where you know they are coming. The random games though have never seen an unbound or giant titan in a normal game yet.

Its that it CAN happen and that by RAW its legal that bothers people.

tneva82
22-12-2014, 18:26
My experience has been the same. Everyone in my group is quick to bemoan titans in the LOW slot, and anti-fun unbound lists, yet no one has actually ever experienced it first hand.


And if they WOULD try out they would quickly find out they are more of overhyped. There's two LOW that are problematic but then again there's lot more than 2 broken non-LOW thingies...

LOW's...You want to fix issues there's better things than LOW's to fix that would do lot more to the game balance.

R.D.
22-12-2014, 18:41
Yeah, for all the crying about Unbound I've only like had it twice for very casual silly games that weren't taken seriously (like, a mob of Dreadnaughts vs a bunch of Tyranid monsters).

Overall...I'm not too big on the model pics instead of codex unit art (though what new art there is generally is pretty nice), GW was kind enough to let me finally get Space Hulk since being that for them is for once immensely cheaper than third parties, and it does at least seem that model second waves are coming back along with various expansions that may be able to mix things up while of course making some nice cash for them. So...it's been interesting. I guess if you have nobody to play with but super-competitive beardy types then it may be a different story, but it's certainly no dull times.

Ghungo
22-12-2014, 19:25
We have not had anyone attempt to use those either barring special scenarios that we run where you know they are coming. The random games though have never seen an unbound or giant titan in a normal game yet.

Its that it CAN happen and that by RAW its legal that bothers people.
You know what else can happen?
Apocalypse
City fight
Stronghold assault
The stupid flyer aces rules
forgeworld models
Forgeworld campaigns
Gw campaigns
1001 different gw missions
Someone playing 20 detachments
Ezekiel riding the back of a greater demon of korne summoning list while high fiving an eldar auturch and a tau ethereal.

You know what all the above have in common?
No one forces you to play them and yet all of them can happen and all of the above is legal.

Chivs
22-12-2014, 19:31
2014 is the year I finally said enough is enough with 40k and took a break, having started in 1995. 6th edition just wasn't fun, with one player dominating the other and the game being decided by turn 2. 7th ed didn't change the things I felt needed changing, and made a whole load of other things worse. £50 for that? F off GW.
So I keep buying second hand models to expand my Lord of the Rings army, and have moved on to X-wing which is vastly superior to 40k. And I've found a group of people who prefer older editions, and so will switch back to 5th edition 40k, which was the last time I really enjoyed the game.

Humanoid
22-12-2014, 20:35
I feel like the runt of the litter whose own mother has denied me sustenance to live. That's what GW has done to me with the current 40K. Undaunted. I continue writing rules for play for the 40K miniatures that I have and the type of game that I would like. I was hoping to have my rules finished for release during the holidays. But, there is still much to write, and real life keeps intruding, and ideas and problems pop into my head when they decide and not when I am ready for them.

To anyone else who is writing a ruleset, keep going. I look foreward to reading yours to see how it plays.

daveNYC
22-12-2014, 20:40
Not particularly good thoughts for me. Between the quick turnaround between 6th and 7th, and the current trend of 'meh' codexes being followed by more interesting/fluffy supplemental books, the current 40k situation is one I can't really get excited by. If, for example, there was someone who thought that Space Elves was the best thing ever, and that Space Elves that use their dead to drive giant battle robots was even better, they'd have to drop $100 on the Eldar and Iyanden books, plus somewhere between $30 and $85 for the main rules. That's a big chunk of change, especially when all that comes before even picking up a single model (hi there $115 Wraithknight!).

That's not to say that nobody out there will ever start up a new army or look to start playing the 40k game, but you do have to admit that that's a difficult proposition to sell to most people.

There's also the long standing issue that the main rules just don't seem to be getting better. Some people might like the rules in 7th or 6th or 5th better (or not so much), but I don't think anyone can really look at the different editions (especially when comparing 7th and 6th) and say, "Damn, this one section of the game just flows so much better and everything is much clearer than in the last edition." Shenanigans in various areas didn't get removed, they simply were replaced with other shenanigans that the rule changes put in place to remove the first shenanigans suddenly allowed.

There are a lot of other tabletop wargames out there competing for the unfortunately thin wallets of the gaming community, and GW seems more intent on milking it's current top dog status for all the money it can rather than working to ensure that it does remain top dog.

Hrw-Amen
22-12-2014, 20:53
Consider I am not a gamer but a modeller.

This year has seen at long last a few models from GW I have wanted to buy, Imperial knight being the main one, also finally getting around to catching up with IG tank releases. Most of what they have put out recently this last year included seems to computer designed and not sculpted, it just looks wrong, seems to be the way they are going though. Nevermind a few models is better than last year and the one before.

FW on the other hand, Mechanicum, and the whole (By and large.) HH series, fantastic models and most I guess could be used in W40K as well if you want. Also seems that the prices are now much more comparable. I know where most of my money is going next year! (Unless they bring out some new plastic SOBs of course.)

insectum7
22-12-2014, 21:06
Right now I'm really enjoying the game. It's possible that my codex/mini collection has allowed me to weather some of the recent changes better than other armies, but overall I'm pretty comfortable with the vast majority of my 7th Ed. experiences. There are some things I would look to change/improve, but overall I'm feeling hopeful-positive about the current paradigm.

I feel less positive about White Dwarf and GW's gung-ho paper publishing trend, and the bar for entry to 40K seems awfully high right now. I question the long-term validity of their current strategy, but I'm hoping that this is a sort of short-term trend in a period of transition and they will stabilize into something a little more sensible over the next year or two.

Sephillion
22-12-2014, 21:15
I think this year has shown how schizophrenic they are. The big news of course for the year was 7th edition. A new edition that pushed thematic, narrative builds via increased freedom thanks to loose FOC rules, including or not Unbound, and the inclusion of superheavies. Such a loose scheme seems to throw balance out the window in favor of a more narrative, cinematic approach.

Yet at the same time, they start releasing Codex-lite. Less characters (as the “no model no rules” rule is strictly enforced, gutting many characters from the DE codex), less special rules (Logan Grimnar losing some of his tactical rules and the replacement of many unique rules by universal ones) and little addition to any range. We see a move towards balance at the cost of character and uniqueness, that goes counter to the free-for-all, take-anything-you-want approach of the main book.

Another example is how they proceed to simplify the game. We are talking about a game where you need to roll for the objective, then for the deployment, then for night fighting, then for who deploys first, then for seizing the initiative, for selecting psychic powers AND for selecting warlord traits; where movement is divided into three phases; where you need to check a table to see if you hit or wound. 6th added rolls such as overwatch and Look out sir! adding levels of complexities to the game. 7th added a new phase on top of that and judging by the multiple comments on the net, detachments, formations, dataslates, supplements, etc. isn’t exactly the clearest. Yet they still simplify the codices. I’m a bit baffled, if they wanted to de-bloat the game, it surely would have been more efficient to simplify the basic rules, instead of gutting the rather simple rules for special characters. What we end up is a product that is neither balanced nor characterful nor simpler. It lacks focus and vision.

It’s a weird end product that came too soon and cost too much. Followed by a string of codices that brought little new to the game.

druchii
22-12-2014, 21:32
For me 40k just keeps getting better.

I'm one of those players who inhabits the murky region of loving tournaments, models, painting, the hobby aspect of the game, RAW and fluff. I love supplements. The models alone have been some of the best GW has released. Ever. The rules, while controversial make the game very scalable; want tighter restrictions? A single combined arms detachment still exists. Want crazy stuff? Unbound. And you still have access to everything else in between.

The monetary issue is a big deal, I will admit. But fortunately I've been playing the game long enough now that the considerable buy-in only exists if I want to start a whole other stand-alone army. I mean I can drop $50 here and there for one of the cool new books that catches my eye (I mean YOU, Shield of Baal!).

To me, this is still the best edition of 40k. Tac Objectives make the games much more interesting and dynamic, while the new supplements and models make variety a lot more profound.

d

A.T.
22-12-2014, 21:41
I bought a knight titan and the last shield of baal book, and i'm sending the book back - rules for 'all four armies' my ass. As for the knight it sits on my shelf because it dominates games, but I bought it as a hobby project anyway so that's ok.

That's about the as much enthusiam as I can generate for 40k at the moment.

Spiney Norman
22-12-2014, 22:25
I keep hearing about unbound being the big bad boogey man ruining 40k.
I havent seen or played a single game of unbound in any tournament or club game EVER in two years (since 6th dropped).
Its an OPTION that no one plays or cares to play.

Thanks for your opinion, but your experience isn't necessarily normative. Unbound armies are fairly common in my neck of the woods because it is the most competitive way to play currently (I don't g to tournements as a rule, all my games are club games). I'm not sure what you mean about it being an 'option', it's true that I have the option to use an unbound army or not, but I don't get to chose what kind of a list my opponent brings. It doesn't bother me that the unbound option exists as long s I never have to play a game against an unbound army. Unfortunately the only 'option' I have in that kind of situation is not to play 40k, which is pretty much what I've been doing.


LOW are similarly a non issue. They were legal at the last LVO and hasnt made a lick of difference. Many people enjoy playing with them. Yes LOW options between armies and even within thier books are not very balanced and i personally beleive LOW options should be limited to 1850+ games. However Ive never been forced to play with LOW in a casual game and nearly everyone i met is cool with the fact if i say to hold off with the LOW for another day when i am ready to play it. Honestly I want to pick up a stompa for my orks now. It may not be the best LOW option but it looks fun to build and play and i doubt most people will care if i "ask" them to play with it. LOW will once again be legal in LVO and I am positive it will make just as much a difference this year as it did last. Which means it wont be a competitive choice.

The problem with LoW is that it is now possible to field the really powerful ones in small to regular-size games. There is no longer any compulsory HQ or Troops so you can literally field an army containing only a LoW, like a reaver titan in a 1500pt game. The reason it's competitive is because the vast majority of lists simply can't deal with it without tailoring. The same is true of Imperial knight armies or any extreme spam list which is he bread and butter of 40k.



When tournaments are fairly balanced and casual play is fairly balanced what exactly is your complaint. When the options you keep complaining about just dont have the meta changing effect you keep theorizing about and it doesnt actually occur or affect games in real life. Your complaints just dont exist. If you want to complain abotu broken wave serpents sure go for it thats a legit actual occurance. If you want to complain about dark angels and CSM being slightly outdated and not really competitve sure thats certainly debately. But sitting here and claiming unbound is ruining tournaments and casual games is a red herring argument since it DOESNT exist.

I never said anything about tournements because I don't go to tournements, in any case it's easy enough for a Tournement rules pack to ban outlying stuff like unbound lists, allies and imperial Knights. Don't assume that because you havent come across something it never gets played.

Basically unless you're willing to abuse the army construction rules to the max you're not going to win a game of 40k this edition


I bought a knight titan and the last shield of baal book, and i'm sending the book back - rules for 'all four armies' my ass. As for the knight it sits on my shelf because it dominates games, but I bought it as a hobby project anyway so that's ok.

That's about the as much enthusiam as I can generate for 40k at the moment.

I've actually enjoyed using my imperial knight (just one) in the two games I have used him (back in 6th edition), I don't get many complaints because the rest of the army is so unutterably useless (Adepta Sororitas).

Inquisitor Kallus
22-12-2014, 22:39
Thanks for your opinion, but your experience isn't necessarily normative. Unbound armies are fairly common in my neck of the woods because it is the most competitive way to play currently (I don't g to tournements as a rule, all my games are club games). I'm not sure what you mean about it being an 'option', it's true that I have the option to use an unbound army or not, but I don't get to chose what kind of a list my opponent brings. It doesn't bother me that the unbound option exists as long s I never have to play a game against an unbound army. Unfortunately the only 'option' I have in that kind of situation is not to play 40k, which is pretty much what I've been doing.





"Hey Jim, can we play a bound 1 FOC, non LOW game on thursday?"
"Sure."

Spiney Norman
22-12-2014, 22:58
"Hey Jim, can we play a bound 1 FOC, non LOW game on thursday?"
"But I really wanted to play with my 5 imperial Knights/phantom titan/Craftworld allies, if the rule book says its legal I should be allowed to use it".

In some ways I can't blame 'Jim' for wanting to use his models, he paid enough for them, and the brb told him they were a balanced and acceptable way to play, I just can't find the kind of 40k games I enjoy any more, so instead of beating my opponents around the head with restrictions that will infringe their enjoyment of the game I could just find a different game to play, which at the moment for me means jumping on the Wfb end times band wagon and having an absolute blast with my greenskins and their new-found ability to summon undead things.

Ghungo
22-12-2014, 23:10
"But I really wanted to play with my 5 imperial Knights/phantom titan/Craftworld allies, if the rule book says its legal I should be allowed to use it".

In some ways I can't blame 'Jim' for wanting to use his models, he paid enough for them, and the brb told him they were a balanced and acceptable way to play, I just can't find the kind of 40k games I enjoy any more, so instead of beating my opponents around the head with restrictions that will infringe their enjoyment of the game I could just find a different game to play, which at the moment for me means jumping on the Wfb end times band wagon and having an absolute blast with my greenskins and their new-found ability to summon undead things.
You must live in that lone corner of the world where people love and force you to play unbound because I travel a fair amount for work (Chicago, New York, Connecticut, Tampa, Miami, Los Angelos, San Diego) and tend to hit up game clubs all over the US and no where have I met anyone not just forcing but even to ask to play unbound. Even those I talk to from the uk have stated that unbound is not a problem. Not only do I not even hear people playing it. I don't even see people discussing lists or discussing options or discussing battle reports about unbound games either on this site or dakka dakka. LVO, adepticon, nova, connecticon, etc, none of the major tournaments here even entertain the idea of unbound. It literally is a non existent issue.

but hey as I said before unbound is about as forced and legal as apocolypse, planet strike, city fight, death from the sky flyer aces rules, forgeworld, the hundreds of missions and campaigns gw and forgeworld write, stronghold assault and every other supplement gw writes. It's all legal and official and has been that way since I've been playing since 2nd edition when people were complaining about playing with special characters and alternate lists such as speed freaks, feral orks, etc.

Spiney Norman
22-12-2014, 23:22
You must live in that lone corner of the world where people love and force you to play unbound because I travel a fair amount for work (Chicago, New York, Connecticut, Tampa, Miami, Los Angelos, San Diego) and tend to hit up game clubs all over the US and no where have I met anyone not just forcing but even to ask to play unbound. Even those I talk to from the uk have stated that unbound is not a problem. Not only do I not even hear people playing it. I don't even see people discussing lists or discussing options or discussing battle reports about unbound games either on this site or dakka dakka. LVO, adepticon, nova, connecticon, etc, none of the major tournaments here even entertain the idea of unbound. It literally is a non existent issue.

No-one forces anyone to do anything, which is why I've largely given up on the game, if I can't get the kind of games I enjoy without twisting someone's arm behind their back its time to take a break IMHO. Everyone is entitled to play the game how they want to provided they can find an opponent to fit their style, all the 40k players in my area are younger teens who like to break the game as hard as they can because everyone over 18 that used to play 40k has ditched it for wfb or warmachine (which I dislike even more than 40k) or has moved on to playing 30k games only (mainly to avoid the younger teens). I decided that since I can afford it, it's probably time to join them.

The dark Eldar book was something of a disappointment to me and my Adepta sororitas haven't been competitive for almost a decade, the way 7th edition works is pushing me down any one of a selection of narrow avenues to compete, none of which i really like the idea of, either craftworld allies or unbound LoW so if I'm going to have to dump that much money on 40k I may as well dump it on something I know I will enjoy painting & playing - a horus heresy legion.

I'm not going to throw serious money at models I don't want just because 7th edition is screwed hard towards those quarters, if I had any interest in the models/background of craftworld Eldar I'd have started an army years ago.

AngryAngel
22-12-2014, 23:23
I keep hearing about unbound being the big bad boogey man ruining 40k.
I havent seen or played a single game of unbound in any tournament or club game EVER in two years (since 6th dropped).
Its an OPTION that no one plays or cares to play.
It litterally has NO effect on any balance discussion since NO ONE PLAYS it.
The only people complaining about unbound are people who simply complain about it, as if it is being forced on them to play. YET that never happens.

LOW are similarly a non issue. They were legal at the last LVO and hasnt made a lick of difference. Many people enjoy playing with them. Yes LOW options between armies and even within thier books are not very balanced and i personally beleive LOW options should be limited to 1850+ games. However Ive never been forced to play with LOW in a casual game and nearly everyone i met is cool with the fact if i say to hold off with the LOW for another day when i am ready to play it. Honestly I want to pick up a stompa for my orks now. It may not be the best LOW option but it looks fun to build and play and i doubt most people will care if i "ask" them to play with it. LOW will once again be legal in LVO and I am positive it will make just as much a difference this year as it did last. Which means it wont be a competitive choice.

When tournaments are fairly balanced and casual play is fairly balanced what exactly is your complaint. When the options you keep complaining about just dont have the meta changing effect you keep theorizing about and it doesnt actually occur or affect games in real life. Your complaints just dont exist. If you want to complain abotu broken wave serpents sure go for it thats a legit actual occurance. If you want to complain about dark angels and CSM being slightly outdated and not really competitve sure thats certainly debately. But sitting here and claiming unbound is ruining tournaments and casual games is a red herring argument since it DOESNT exist.

How about we turn that rant train right around shall we ? I was not debating or even arguing anything here. I don't recall in my statement saying anything about unbound ruining tournaments at all.

I gave my word, as to the OP and my thoughts of the year. You are jumping up to white knight GW once more, but this time for no real reason other then twisted jimmies it might seem. So if you want to go round and round on GW, balance and all the things we talked over a million times before, be my guest, but this is a debate you are starting.

I will also say, just because LoW and unbound are not an issue for you, doesn't mean it isn't else where in the world unless your so arrogant as to believe " I Am GW !! ".

We all get it you love GW long time.

Now let me go forward to educate you some, I've not seen unbound in really any tournaments ( As anyone with half a brain knows how unbalanced that is ), I've said multiple times in multiple many threads in a gaming club that enforces play policy, that this edition can be fine. There was also no unbound until 7th edition, though I am glad it didn't come back to the future and make you play it all through 6th edition !!

Many people don't enjoy LoW, so my saying it is a point of contention with some is just that, with some, not with all. What you personally believe doesn't change at all what the actual rules are for LoW so how about we stick with that, shall we ? I will say again, you play in a club which both sides have said fixes a lot of the issues with this edtion, so if we're going to go on and on about your club and how sweet it is, I'm afraid your preaching to the choir so I'll move on. The LVO also has all its own limitations that change up what will be competitive, in open environment play I stand by they are highly unbalanced.

Tournaments have to be fairly balanced don't they ? However they also have to very much alter standard play to find that balance and even then the current 6th ed books need work till we have true army balance or as close to that as possible in this game. Casual play is highly not balanced with rules as printed and if you play pick up games it is down right poop, and that is my complaint and has been for awhile now.

I will state again, just because this stuff has no impact on " YOU " doesn't mean it doesn't effect "OTHERS". You have this strange view of the world where only you seem to know the truth, perhaps as we've gone through both sides have merit. You could also keep insisting your anecdotes are complete 40k truth, I'm afraid however that just isn't so.

My complaints do exist, at least more then your ability of reading comprehension.

Chumbalaya
23-12-2014, 03:07
This is the year I quit 40k, sadly. Between the absurdly quick turnaround on a new edition, Funbound, summoning, randumb missions, superheavies crammed down everyone's throats, rushing out a bunch of half-assed books, splitting Codices into various supplements, dataslates and still somehow removing options, the evisceration of my Ork armies and general pricing absurdity, this game doesn't resemble even the mess we were stuck with last year.

But hey, X-Wing and Malifaux are pretty awesome, so things are great for me.

Knifeparty
23-12-2014, 03:29
Surprisingly, I just got caught the 40K bug again. I got a little burned out from fantasy and wanted to try my luck at 7th...and I didn't hate it. It helped that the guy I was playing had a good list and I actually won for the first time since 5th edition. (only had 6 games of 6th).

I'm kinda liking it so far, then again I haven't played against tau or elder this edition yet so we'll see. The guys in my area (all fantasy guys) are taking the plunge into 40K 7th ed and we're all making 1000 point armies for an escalation league for fun (whats that?).

So far I just want to see where my Black Legion and Dark Eldar take me.

Exorcist
23-12-2014, 07:13
Had a great Year. Lots of fun games with the 7th edition books and some scenarios from the Altar of War series. Many new possibilities to play 40k.

I picked up Tyranids and continued my Space Marines. We played a campaign. Superheavies are fine in my book. They really cost alot of points for what they do. (Speaking of Baneblades and Knights mostly). And they give extra victory points if you damage or kill them.

Hope 2015 will be as fun as 2014.

tneva82
23-12-2014, 07:37
"But I really wanted to play with my 5 imperial Knights/phantom titan/Craftworld allies, if the rule book says its legal I should be allowed to use it".

And I would reply: "Sure". Then again I'm not affraid of challenge and actually have to think counter strategy. It's not like that's even unbeatable list. Or worse.

But guess if you just want victory in silver plate that might be tough army to face. After all standard tactics won't cut it so you need to rethink new one.

Spiney Norman
23-12-2014, 08:54
And I would reply: "Sure". Then again I'm not affraid of challenge and actually have to think counter strategy. It's not like that's even unbeatable list. Or worse.

But guess if you just want victory in silver plate that might be tough army to face. After all standard tactics won't cut it so you need to rethink new one.

I've been doing that for the last 8 months and since I don't see it changing in the next 8 I think I'm done. There is something about the maximising options in 7th that brings out the worst in players too, it's not just the army per se, its the bad attitude behind it.

But hey if you can find a way to beat an imperial knight list using Sisters of battle or Dark Eldar with no allies or Superheavies of your own then good luck to you, I have so far lucked out.

Kegslayer
23-12-2014, 10:00
A lot of whining in this thread. No one in particular this is aimed at but maybe you just cant play the game. 40k isn't necessarily for thinking and tactics but this year gw has made the game vaguely go that way. God forbid you'd have to think tactically about what you need to do. As for above dark eldar can trash knights easily. Dark lances work and that's without even having to think.

40k this year has went back and forth and has made people actually have to think about what they do instead of just sticking stuff down and auto winning. Essentially 40k is about tactically thinking. If that's too hard for folks to play or to win, you're in the wrong game

Spoik
23-12-2014, 10:35
I like the current edition. As an evolution of the previous edition, it allows for oodles of choice, and lets me and my gaming group play the narrative-driven games we like to play "straight out of the box" ie without having to faff around making up rules and scenarios if we don't want to (we often do). GW are producing some fantastic models right now - what they can do with plastic kits nowadays is astonishing to an old-timer like myself. There are things I'd change, but that's to be expected - it is unrealistic to expect the game meet my subjective wants exactly perfectly. Also, I'm not a big fan of the current run of codexes - especially the prohibitive cost - but overall, I'm enjoying the game right now.

Personally, I shall remember this year as the year in which our group conducted a substantial campaign that was tons of fun, in which the disreputable rabble that is my 129th Microzadan Dragoons showed entirely unexpected tenacity in driving the forces of Chaos from the benighted world of Selepa.

I shall also remember this year as the time I was finally - FINALLY - able to use Imperial Knights in a 40K game. Having had an irrational obsession with Knights since I first saw them in WD126 twenty-odd years ago, having fielded whole households in Epic games, having daydreamed about how to make one, and how they would work on the battlefield... GW absolutely nailed the model, and made a long-standing Hobby Dream come true for me.

Spiney Norman
23-12-2014, 10:40
A lot of whining in this thread. No one in particular this is aimed at but maybe you just cant play the game. 40k isn't necessarily for thinking and tactics but this year gw has made the game vaguely go that way. God forbid you'd have to think tactically about what you need to do. As for above dark eldar can trash knights easily. Dark lances work and that's without even having to think.

Not a dark Eldar player I take it? Dark lances aren't even our best weapon against super-heavies (that would be Haywire blasters). My dark Eldar can usually deal with one or two Knights in the course of a game, but not the 4-5 which are typical in a 1500-1750pt game. Losing haywire grenades on Wyches not only buried Wyches as a viable unit but also severely curtailed our ability to deal with enemy vehicles saturation in general, and super-heavy ones in particular.


40k this year has went back and forth and has made people actually have to think about what they do instead of just sticking stuff down and auto winning. Essentially 40k is about tactically thinking. If that's too hard for folks to play or to win, you're in the wrong game

No offense, but thinking tactically is the part of the game I used to enjoy the most, there is none of that in games of 40k now, the only 'tactical' decisions (if you can call them that) in the modern game are which overpowered units from which armies should I bring to this game. The restrictions of the FOC used to force tough tactical in-game decisions, there is none of that now, it's even impossible to plan when you could end up facing anything from a Leman Russ armoured colomn to a tau-far cheese fest, to a lone reaver titan, it's harder to make a balanced all-comers list than it has ever been.

Vipoid
23-12-2014, 11:00
Don't be silly, Spiny, the game is far more tactical now.

See - Tactical Objectives have 'Tactical' in their name, can't argue with that.

And, they do make the game much more tactical. Like when you draw 'capture objective 6' (which your opponent is holding) and he also draws 'capture objective 6. See, you were just completely outplayed - he knew that objective 6 would be vital and so deployed his army onto it. Why didn't you have the foresight to deploy something on objective 6, in your opponent's deployment zone?

I guess you just can't handle the level of strategy involved today. :rolleyes:

Exorcist
23-12-2014, 11:24
So far i have to play the game of maelstrom missions that isnt insanely close (1-3 points difference in the end) We didnt change the rules at all and i never had more fun plaing 40k, because even if your whole army gets blown to bits you still have a chance. Sometimes bringing a superheavy can even be the reason you lose. Ive blown up my opponents knight in our last game and those 2 Victory points were what gave me the victory.

I think many people here just complain and moan about a game they never actually played but just read the rules and made up their mind. I played enough 7th edition now that i can say its the most fun i had with 40k in years.

Chivs
23-12-2014, 11:36
Granted I don't read all that many threads here in 40k general, but most tactics discussions that I tend to see or strategies on how to counter particular units are of the "Take some of these/more of this... in your army." Not ideas on how to take units on whilst 'in the field' with what you've got, but how to adapt your army before the game starts. That's not a tactical game. That's settling the game before you've even started. It's why I moved on.

Spiney Norman
23-12-2014, 11:43
Granted I don't read all that many threads here in 40k general, but most tactics discussions that I tend to see or strategies on how to counter particular units are of the "Take some of these/more of this... in your army." Not ideas on how to take units on whilst 'in the field' with what you've got, but how to adapt your army before the game starts. That's not a tactical game. That's settling the game before you've even started. It's why I moved on.

That is part of the problem yes, it's easy to pick apart a game afterwards and say things like "ah yes, if I had taken an army composed entirely of marines with Meltaguns in drop pods, those imperial Knights wouldn't have been a problem", but since you didn't know you'd be playing against imperial Knights until your opponent showed up for the game that's not exactly 'tactical advice'.

I fully understand why GW has gradually turned 40k into an army building game rather than a tactical wargame, because it forces players to buy more models, but that means it is drifting further and further away from a game that I want to play. 40k has now become about keeping up with e cross-faction combos and that's not something I can afford or want to engage in.

Vipoid
23-12-2014, 11:44
Granted I don't read all that many threads here in 40k general, but most tactics discussions that I tend to see or strategies on how to counter particular units are of the "Take some of these/more of this... in your army." Not ideas on how to take units on whilst 'in the field' with what you've got, but how to adapt your army before the game starts. That's not a tactical game. That's settling the game before you've even started. It's why I moved on.

A month or so ago, I posted an IG list in the Army Lists section and asked for advice with it.

The only response I got was someone giving me a list of the most broken units in the IG book, and advising me to scrap everything else and just spam those.

Tastyfish
23-12-2014, 12:22
Granted I don't read all that many threads here in 40k general, but most tactics discussions that I tend to see or strategies on how to counter particular units are of the "Take some of these/more of this... in your army." Not ideas on how to take units on whilst 'in the field' with what you've got, but how to adapt your army before the game starts. That's not a tactical game. That's settling the game before you've even started. It's why I moved on.

Occasionally you see threads (ATT has a couple that pop up every so often) that go more into tactics, but it's generally very hard to actually talk about tactics in on an internet forum without the rest of the details to put it into context.
List building is an easy thing to talk about because you're talking about it at the actual stage when you'd be doing it - before the battle. Placement of terrain, distance from the enemy etc is all irrelevant at this point.

That said I think it'd be great if the WD had a feature a bit like the chess puzzles you get in newspapers - you set up a scenario set mid or late game where a force seems to be in a bad situation and pose the question of how can they get out of it. It'd be a nice way to do more advanced tacticas to teach new players the importance of blocking LOS, sacrificing units and focusing on the objective rather than just killing things (rather than the fairly basic one you get in the codexes that generally come down to shoot with the shooty stuff etc). Pitting two unoptimised (but fairly balanced) armies against each other would also potentially interest vets as it might make the puzzle a little more difficult if there's not an obvious tool for each job - plus, if the series took off you might even see a few extra sales if the vet players find that they're just missing one of the units from the scenario.

Plays straight into the narrative aspect as the first part is the story and then you're flung straight into the action.

Vipoid
23-12-2014, 12:25
Occasionally you see threads (ATT has a couple that pop up every so often) that go more into tactics, but it's generally very hard to actually talk about tactics in on an internet forum without the rest of the details to put it into context.
List building is an easy thing to talk about because you're talking about it at the actual stage when you'd be doing it - before the battle. Placement of terrain, distance from the enemy etc is all irrelevant at this point.

That said I think it'd be great if the WD had a feature a bit like the chess puzzles you get in newspapers - you set up a scenario set mid or late game where a force seems to be in a bad situation and pose the question of how can they get out of it. It'd be a nice way to do more advanced tacticas to teach new players the importance of blocking LOS, sacrificing units and focusing on the objective rather than just killing things (rather than the fairly basic one you get in the codexes that generally come down to shoot with the shooty stuff etc). Pitting two unoptimised (but fairly balanced) armies against each other would also potentially interest vets as it might make the puzzle a little more difficult if there's not an obvious tool for each job - plus, if the series took off you might even see a few extra sales if the vet players find that they're just missing one of the units from the scenario.

Plays straight into the narrative aspect as the first part is the story and then you're flung straight into the action.

The trouble is, I'm not sure you could do that kind of puzzle with 40k because of all the chance involved.

Kakapo42
23-12-2014, 12:27
I have mixed thoughts on 40k at the close of this year, but overall things are starting to look up for me on the 40k front.

As always in this day and age my first thought regarding 40k is fear. Overall more often than not I find GW's modern offerings disappointing at best and horrifically awful at worst. Prior to about 2008 or so there was not a single model in the entire GW range that I could say I didn't like. But since then I haven't liked the overwhelming majority of new releases (aside from a few notable exceptions like the Pathfinders, Riptide and Imperial Knights). Something that has been especially heartbreaking to me is seeing all the old(ish) models I grew up admiring and wishing to have some day vanish into the night, to the point where I wrote a post about it in my blog (http://metalhobby.blogspot.co.nz/2014/04/nothing-left.html).

Which brings me to another disturbing trend I've noticed with GW. They're restricting choices in some areas of their model line. More any more with any given GW model range there is one, and only one model for any given unit or option. This is particularly noticeable and damning when it comes to generic characters. Yes, there's plenty of plastic bits around for conversions, but it's still nice to have a variety of different variant character models, or any models really, to choose from. Y'know, because not everyone likes kitbashing and converting, and sometimes you just want to roll with an official model for whatever reason (maybe you don't want to worry about all that fiddly modification and just want to get straight to painting), but don't want the same one over and over again (or you just don't like the one official model to start with). But then maybe that's just me being the aging late 3rd edition 40k early 2000s Silver Age GW dinosaur I am at heart.

And then there's the codexes and the release schedule. I'm not impressed with the latest codexes. They seem to me to be missing a lot of the 'spice' or spark of the older ones. And the rate that GW is burning through releases has me terrified that that the old Sisters of Battle range that I've always admired from a distance might be mutated into a thing of horror before I'm able to get a piece of it. It also has me terrified I might never get to use the nice shiny new Tau codex I just bought, and I'd like to get at least a few games in with it before it becomes unofficial.

And that's where the good starts coming in. Because that nice shiny new Tau codex, the latest one, has actually made me happy about the hobby again. Say what you will about it's external balance, but the book itself has thoroughly impressed me (which is rare indeed these days - almost every other book GW has released in recent times has left me thinking 'ho-hum'). Every single option in it has a use. There's all kinds of combinations and tactics with it that I'm itching to try out. I'm looking forward to spending long nights poring over it plotting out army lists (army lists! I usually hate thinking about army lists! It's definitely got to be good if it's gotten me excited about army lists). Yes, there are some.... odd decisions (No vehicle multi-trackers? Really? And were Kroot really that much of a ferocious unit that they needed to loose a point in strength?), and the background had me unimpressed at several points and was sadly, I felt, the book's weakest part, but said background is still close enough to the 3rd edition codex's that I can keep sticking to that without raising too many questions, and overall it has me really looking forward to using it and has me excited for 40k in a way that I haven't felt since reading the original 3rd edition Tau codex (still my favourite). When I look through it I see a glimmer of that old GW magic I haven't seen in a long time.

Every faction deserves to have a codex like the latest Tau one. Or the latest Space Marine one. I hear that's a pretty good one too.

And it's just as well too, since between my general lack of interest for the Lord of the Rings, the End Times series utterly destroying my enthusiasm for Fantasy and the plight of the Specialist Games, I don't really have anywhere else left to go in the world of GW games. Yes, there's plenty of non-GW games out there, and I'll probably get into some of them one day, but I'd like to keep up with at least one GW game. Y'know, for old time's sake.

It's odd, you know, but right now I seem to be having the exact opposite reaction to the rest of the Warhammer community. Whereas everyone else seems to be thrilled with Warhammer Fantasy and full of despair with 40k, I have nothing but despair for Warhammer Fantasy now but am rather excited, if a little terrified, to be getting back into 40k soon. Fantasy may be burning for me, but it's a bright new horizon for 40k for me. For now at least - knowing my luck GW will probably do something to ruin my enjoyment of that too before I can fully get into it again.

duffybear1988
23-12-2014, 12:29
Roll a D3 -

1) It's the best edition yet.
2) It's ok but could be better.
3) It's the worst edition I've ever seen.

The game's random so my response might as well be...

ehlijen
23-12-2014, 12:31
A lot of whining in this thread. No one in particular this is aimed at but maybe you just cant play the game. 40k isn't necessarily for thinking and tactics but this year gw has made the game vaguely go that way. God forbid you'd have to think tactically about what you need to do. As for above dark eldar can trash knights easily. Dark lances work and that's without even having to think.

40k this year has went back and forth and has made people actually have to think about what they do instead of just sticking stuff down and auto winning. Essentially 40k is about tactically thinking. If that's too hard for folks to play or to win, you're in the wrong game

7th did make me think. And the more I thought I realised how little the rules writers had thought before writing this edition.

Rock-Paper-Scissors army list writing is at an all time high. We have complex rules for dealing with the least significant but potentially most numerous units (infantry) and incredibly abstract and streamlined rules for dealing with the most potent and rarest ones (superheavies). We have random victory conditions that make staying in the lead easier than catching up. And unbound is splitting the player base.
'learn2play' is not going to make all these problems go away; they are rooted deep in the basic game design at this point.

2014 is the year 40k ended for me. Maybe 8th will call me back, but I don't think so based on current evidence.

Kakapo42
23-12-2014, 12:36
Roll a D3 -

1) It's the best edition yet.
2) It's ok but could be better.
3) It's the worst edition I've ever seen.

The game's random so my response might as well be...

You forgot to include rolling 3D6 on either the 'reasons it's a fantastic edition' table or the 'reasons it's an awful edition' table, or both if you end up rolling a 2 on the D3. :p

Tastyfish
23-12-2014, 12:46
The trouble is, I'm not sure you could do that kind of puzzle with 40k because of all the chance involved.

It's why you'd have to phrase it as 'giving the best chance for success' - plus there's a few situations that you could work out where it's not a case of chance, if you're doing a lesson on maneuvers - so it's all about where to position your three units so that there's no chance that the first blocking unit gets wiped out by shooting, which means that they're in a position, which combined with the second blocking unit, prevents the enemies Ob Sec troops charging your elites holding the objective.

If you start to play a little looser and there's an element of the historical refight, so once you've seen the result - give it a go yourself and see if it works, or if you can work out a way around it from the other side.

Ghungo
23-12-2014, 13:16
Honestly I think spiney is completely exaggerating. However I haven't played in the uk but from the battlereps and friends I talk to what he keeps claiming just doesn't add up. I can't even tell you what's the strongest unbound list is because not only haven't I seen anyone playing it beyond friendly games where someone just doesn't own enough models (and in that situation I ley the kid play with the cad rules regardless) but people don't even discuss tactics lists or battle reps online about it. But the really kicker that makes me feel he's trolling is that he claims to me he can't get a game because all anyone plays is unbound, then he goes and argues with someone else saying all he plays are Knights and admatium lance. Something doesn't add up. I know the scene in the uk is different. Heck the east and west coast are different but what he says and the battle reps I read don't add up.

Anyway hope 2015 keeps the status quo brings sisters into plastic, continues the campaign trail, releases updated DA, CSM, and eldar codexs and has a few dataslates model waves like they had given Tyranids with other Dexs.

Kakapo42
23-12-2014, 13:31
Honestly I think spiney is completely exaggerating. However I haven't played in the uk but from the battlereps and friends I talk to what he keeps claiming just doesn't add up. I can't even tell you what's the strongest unbound list is because not only haven't I seen anyone playing it beyond friendly games where someone just doesn't own enough models (and in that situation I ley the kid play with the cad rules regardless) but people don't even discuss tactics lists or battle reps online about it. But the really kicker that makes me feel he's trolling is that he claims to me he can't get a game because all anyone plays is unbound, then he goes and argues with someone else saying all he plays are Knights and admatium lance. Something doesn't add up. I know the scene in the uk is different. Heck the east and west coast are different but what he says and the battle reps I read don't add up. .

Is it possible that your research is focused primarily on tournaments and in-store games? As I understand it, and if I recall correctly, Spiney primarily plays in a club environment, which would presumably be based around a dedicated core of players who meet regularly and thus somewhat disconnected from 'mainstream' environments such as stores and tournaments and the like, which could be where the discrepancy is coming from.

duffybear1988
23-12-2014, 13:39
Honestly I think spiney is completely exaggerating. However I haven't played in the uk but from the battlereps and friends I talk to what he keeps claiming just doesn't add up. I can't even tell you what's the strongest unbound list is because not only haven't I seen anyone playing it beyond friendly games where someone just doesn't own enough models (and in that situation I ley the kid play with the cad rules regardless) but people don't even discuss tactics lists or battle reps online about it. But the really kicker that makes me feel he's trolling is that he claims to me he can't get a game because all anyone plays is unbound, then he goes and argues with someone else saying all he plays are Knights and admatium lance. Something doesn't add up. I know the scene in the uk is different. Heck the east and west coast are different but what he says and the battle reps I read don't add up.

Anyway hope 2015 keeps the status quo brings sisters into plastic, continues the campaign trail, releases updated DA, CSM, and eldar codexs and has a few dataslates model waves like they had given Tyranids with other Dexs.

Before 40K died off in my gaming club I was usually in the same situation as Spiney.

Dominoris
23-12-2014, 13:58
How many people have been playing since 2nd edition if not Rogue Trader days? In all that time one thing has remained constant. It's not the grimdark, it's not the gothic distopia, it's that this is the year that killed 40K.

duffybear1988
23-12-2014, 14:05
How many people have been playing since 2nd edition if not Rogue Trader days? In all that time one thing has remained constant. It's not the grimdark, it's not the gothic distopia, it's that this is the year that killed 40K.

I've played it all and to be honest I think 40K has only really started to die off dramatically in the last few years, which is probably due to competition and GW not being able to understand what they are doing wrong (no market research). When you look at what we can glean from the snippets of info made available we know that the sales are down, we know that less people are buying the product, whilst at the same time other companies games are flourishing. Sure it's death by a thousand cuts, but at the end of the day, without plugging the wounds it'll still result in death.

HelloKitty
23-12-2014, 15:22
I think had the gaming scene of today with the options today existed 10-15 years ago we would have seen the same thing.

GWs only real failure is that they live in their bubble and won't look outside of it to compete with the other companies.

insectum7
23-12-2014, 15:44
How many people have been playing since 2nd edition if not Rogue Trader days? In all that time one thing has remained constant. It's not the grimdark, it's not the gothic distopia, it's that this is the year that killed 40K.

I've been playing since early 2nd, and I'm still having fun. In fact I'm enjoying 40K more than I have been over the last five years. Your statement does not apply to me.

Poseidal
23-12-2014, 15:59
Far fewer thoughts than before. I don't even put to mind things to correct or improve it ó the passion is gone.

Khornies & milk
23-12-2014, 16:49
My Gaming group drew a line in the sand GW - wise a couple of years ago, and for basically the usual reasons I'm sure everyone knows about as it/they get discussed ad nauseum on every Forum on the 'net. So Rules-wise we didn't move on beyond
5th Ed 40K and also started playing Warmachine/Hordes, which opened us up to other company's games as well.

Not much that GW has done since has changed our stance, so we continue to have a blast playing a lot of games and spending bucket loads of money - just not much of it on the latest 40K product on offer.

aprilmanha
23-12-2014, 17:00
started playing Warmachine/Hordes, which opened us up to other company's games as well.


I just can't believe it took me til I was 29 to realize there were other (non realworld) model companies out there.
Still GW does seem to want to pump out the expansions this year, not seen one I want yet as they don't apply to my armies, but who knows! They may release one for my armies some day :)

Till then, I got Warmahordes and giving Infinity a try now to!

Our local club started a Tale of x gamers, with a limit of £150 for the first 3 months. (books not included)
My Tau army maxes out at about 600pts if I go insane with upgrades!
We now have a limit of £30 a month from the new year though not sure I can add anything I want for only £30 :D

Konovalev
23-12-2014, 17:48
I will also say, just because LoW and unbound are not an issue for you, doesn't mean it isn't else where in the world unless your so arrogant as to believe " I Am GW !! ".


You say that but then immediately launch into a rant complaining on behalf of people suffering from LoW/unbound abuse... I don't think anyone is saying you aren't entitled to your opinion, or that the rules can't be abused but this social justice warrior thing is strange. Are some people really so binary that they can't take a moment before a game begins to reach an agreement on what is being fielded? And if you don't agree and the game doesn't get played there's nothing wrong with that, your models don't melt in their case. I don't understand how people can take it so personally.

Spiney Norman
23-12-2014, 18:22
I just can't believe it took me til I was 29 to realize there were other (non realworld) model companies out there.
Still GW does seem to want to pump out the expansions this year, not seen one I want yet as they don't apply to my armies, but who knows! They may release one for my armies some day :)

Till then, I got Warmahordes and giving Infinity a try now to!

Our local club started a Tale of x gamers, with a limit of £150 for the first 3 months. (books not included)
My Tau army maxes out at about 600pts if I go insane with upgrades!
We now have a limit of £30 a month from the new year though not sure I can add anything I want for only £30 :D

Warmachine is very popular where I am from, lots of people started after 40k 7th edition came out from sheer exasperation. I had a sniff around but it doesn't float my boat at all, it's miniature quality is pretty weak as is the backstory setting, ironically the two things that Gw still does really well. There is little doubt that as a game Warmahordes is far more balanced and playable than 40k.

aprilmanha
23-12-2014, 18:30
Warmachine is very popular where I am from, lots of people started after 40k 7th edition came out from sheer exasperation. I had a sniff around but it doesn't float my boat at all, it's miniature quality is pretty weak as is the backstory setting, ironically the two things that Gw still does really well. There is little doubt that as a game Warmahordes is far more balanced and playable than 40k.
I'm finding the Backgrounds to be quite fun myself, but that could be just because its refreshing to not be so grimdark after 19 years :D
Don't argue with the model quality though, while they have a few models that I feel put GW to shame (Harbringer, I'm looking at you) alot of them are only around the same quality as W40Ks 2nd-3rd edition models.

Still not to get off topic to much, My other thought is worry about how fast the new "Current" expansions will last before they are invalidated again, like the 6th ed ones were.
That was one of my main gripes was that I dropped £90 on extra books to play super heavies in 3K+ games and to play them fairly in sub-3K games, only for those books to be thrown away by GW less then 6 months after I got them.

daveNYC
23-12-2014, 18:33
You say that but then immediately launch into a rant complaining on behalf of people suffering from LoW/unbound abuse... I don't think anyone is saying you aren't entitled to your opinion, or that the rules can't be abused but this social justice warrior thing is strange. Are some people really so binary that they can't take a moment before a game begins to reach an agreement on what is being fielded? And if you don't agree and the game doesn't get played there's nothing wrong with that, your models don't melt in their case. I don't understand how people can take it so personally.

Some of that depends on the effort needed to just get into a position where they might be able to have a game.
Are they close to the club/gaming store? Can they walk there, do they have to take public transportation, or do they need to drive?
How big is their army. Even a low model count army like the GK isn't the smallest thing to transport around.

If someone packed up 1500 points of IG and then drove 30 minutes to their FLGS/club, then I can see being rather annoyed if they can't get a game in.

And when we're talking about the local gaming scene, it's important to remember that there are huge differences at both the micro (Club A vs. Club B) and the macro level (country/region). I have heard, that for regions of continental Europe, the scene is very competitive, like all leafblower all the time competitive. The reason I have heard for this is that the pricing of GW models relative to the local income is such that there's a huge incentive to only spend money on what's effective on the table.

So when some people say they're only facing min-maxed cheese lists, that's quite probably the case, and it's also quite probable that they're not likely to find fluffier players to go up against. Wargaming is a niche hobby, and Warhammer is a niche within that niche. The expectation that some have put forth (mostly in other threads on this subject) that players should just find new people to play with, is rather optimistic.

Spiney Norman
23-12-2014, 18:50
The reason I have heard for this is that the pricing of GW models relative to the local income is such that there's a huge incentive to only spend money on what's effective on the table.


This is an important point actually, I quite often find that your average Warseer member who boasts of 5-6 different armies each running at 10,000pts or more to be pretty rare. Most members at my local club build their armies to a playable points level and start another. I personally have around 1500pts of sisters of battle (I can boost it up to around 2500 if I include my Knight and Inquisitorial allies) and just over 1500pts of Dark Eldar (several units of which have recently been nerfed into uselessness: Wyche, baron and Hellios). It's not like I have a great deal of wiggle room to tailor an army to beat a Knight household for example, and the guy who has the Knights probably doesn't either.

Kurisu313
23-12-2014, 18:52
In 2014, I didn't play a single game of Warhammer 40k, which saddened me greatly.

I fell in love with the 5th Edition Dark Eldar codex, citing it as a high for the hobby. Since then, it's been a sharp decline. 6th nerfed them hard. Watching Wyches die inside their transports was disheartening. The Champions of Chaos rule was so bad, it removed all the fun from my Chaos army. That was my death knell. Since then, it's only gotten worse and worse. The cash-grabbing storm trooper codex. The renamed Guard. The Mob rule. The new Dark Eldar codex.

Sure, the knight was great - a fantastic model I bought simply to paint, but to those who don't see LoWs in normal games, I see it all the time. It ruins the game.

But the real thing for me was starting to play Dystopian Wars in 2013. For the first time, I saw how a good game was made. Simple rules that made for dynamic and engaging gameplay. Skill actually mattered rather than just rolling dice. And it was cheap! In 2014 I started Warmachine and fell in love with the game. It's also massively engaging from a simple core ruleset, though it has many more model based rules. If I wanted to get back into 40k, it would be for small scale games... but Warmachine does them infinitely better, which segues into Infinity.

40k is dead to me. It's sad, and I hope things change, but the game is an awful, broken mess with no fun, engagement or entertainment.

Sephillion
23-12-2014, 19:29
I'm finding the Backgrounds to be quite fun myself, but that could be just because its refreshing to not be so grimdark after 19 years file:///C:\Users\Soludoc\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\0 1\clip_image001.png


Iím playing the associated Iron Kingdoms RPG, and the background book (Kings, Nations and Gods) is one of the best Iíve read, there is a lot of fluff in there. What you find in the wargame is more akin to a comic book series, itís flashy and full of fan service, but the background of the setting I find really good. The thing that holds it back is that they donít want to definitely kill off main characters.

That said, GWís settings are very good too. Even if they are heavy on the grimdark and it doesnít really progress, it has some good novels and itís just so incredibly massive.


It's also massively engaging from a simple core ruleset, though it has many more model based rules.

Thatís one of the things I think GW is doing wrong. With 40K, itís the other way around.

Angelwing
23-12-2014, 19:55
The release of 7th killed our group dead. Not because of the rules themselves, but because it was released way too early. One of our group had bought the hardback 6th ed rules only 6 months before. A couple of us have continued with 6th for a few games, but that has petered out. I haven't played at all in over 2 months.
The game itself has turned into a bit of a mess with the changed army selection rules, making me reluctant to go to the local game club, but I might still go and try it out.
The very fast release of codexes coupled with me owning 7 armies has obliged me to skip buying all bar one, leaving my options to take to the club at two armies, of which one (necrons) will be replaced soon. Speaking of which, I took a gamble buying the current 5th ed book on release, read it once and put it on the shelf. I have never played a game with it. Not GW's fault, I just haven't had the inclination to bring out the army.

On the other hand, my main army, tyranids, got a load of new stuff, getting me excited about the army again. I also picked up a cheap as possible small softback of the 7th ed rules. Very glad I didn't spend more, concidering the amount of copy paste from the last edition.

So then: 2014 was a disastrous year for 40k, with a glimmer of a new dawn on the horizon for the new year.

Kegslayer
23-12-2014, 20:03
Not a dark Eldar player I take it? Dark lances aren't even our best weapon against super-heavies (that would be Haywire blasters). My dark Eldar can usually deal with one or two Knights in the course of a game, but not the 4-5 which are typical in a 1500-1750pt game. Losing haywire grenades on Wyches not only buried Wyches as a viable unit but also severely curtailed our ability to deal with enemy vehicles saturation in general, and super-heavy ones in particular.


No offense, but thinking tactically is the part of the game I used to enjoy the most, there is none of that in games of 40k now, the only 'tactical' decisions (if you can call them that) in the modern game are which overpowered units from which armies should I bring to this game. The restrictions of the FOC used to force tough tactical in-game decisions, there is none of that now, it's even impossible to plan when you could end up facing anything from a Leman Russ armoured colomn to a tau-far cheese fest, to a lone reaver titan, it's harder to make a balanced all-comers list than it has ever been.


Since 3rd edition I have been actually. My wych cult army is fine. Yes they lost haywire but so....
Haywire blasters are alright I as are dark lances.

Maybe the game has just moved. Some folks like it some don't. Its been like that since it started and for as ling as gw is in business 40k will continue to be like marmite

Cheeslord
23-12-2014, 23:58
6th killed 40k for my group due to dissatisfaction with some core rules and the difficulty on compromising on house rules.
7th, and a number of mediocre codices failed to fix the problems we had with 6th.
I would still like to start playing again, but will wait and see what happens with 8th edition, or maybe we will start playing regular Warmachine games instead... part of the problem is lack of time and other commitments anyway.

Have a great Christmas everyone anyway, regardless... maybe the Haters and the Fanboys can come up out of the trenches for just one day for a celebratory game... then back to sniping on forums...

Mark.

AngryAngel
24-12-2014, 00:50
You say that but then immediately launch into a rant complaining on behalf of people suffering from LoW/unbound abuse... I don't think anyone is saying you aren't entitled to your opinion, or that the rules can't be abused but this social justice warrior thing is strange. Are some people really so binary that they can't take a moment before a game begins to reach an agreement on what is being fielded? And if you don't agree and the game doesn't get played there's nothing wrong with that, your models don't melt in their case. I don't understand how people can take it so personally.

I simply was saying he claims no one has issues with those things and I was saying people have and do. Though to be honest, what you are viewing as complaint was more explanation of why I was saying what I did. This whole thread was merely a " What are your thoughts on 40k at the end of the year ? " I gave my thoughts, was jumped on for them, so I jumped back. If that is complaining, then complaining I was doing. I never gave absolutes like this all ruined things for everyone, it has for some, plenty have even chimed in on this thread. I still love warhammer and haven't forsaken it, even if it does disappoint me greatly at the moment. I want it better but that love of warhammer doesn't blind me to the issues, so I speak of them. Surely you have seen and know some people can't take any kind of view point in a discussion. There just happens to be plenty to be negative of in 40k.


6th killed 40k for my group due to dissatisfaction with some core rules and the difficulty on compromising on house rules.
7th, and a number of mediocre codices failed to fix the problems we had with 6th.
I would still like to start playing again, but will wait and see what happens with 8th edition, or maybe we will start playing regular Warmachine games instead... part of the problem is lack of time and other commitments anyway.

Have a great Christmas everyone anyway, regardless... maybe the Haters and the Fanboys can come up out of the trenches for just one day for a celebratory game... then back to sniping on forums...

Mark.

I don't think the haters and the fan boys will ever come up for peace, though the less radical members from either opposing front have from time to time and will probably once more come together for peace, share a drink, a smoke and play a game perhaps, before crawling back into the trenches, at least I like to think so.

Merry Christmas to you as well, and to all those on here I might call comrade or dire foe.

Scribe of Khorne
24-12-2014, 05:50
PROS
Formations I think, and alternate detachments have a world of design depth. Will GW even recognize and try to utilize it? Who can say, they dont talk to us.
Some good models.
Potential for the whole set of armies to be done in a coherent batch due to release speed.
Cool supplements.

Con
To call the player base fragmented at this point, misses by orders of magnitude.
Lords of War in the 'normal' game.
Rule book bloat. There are many many rules out there now.

#1 Win - Detachment/Formations
#1 Loss - 7th after 2 years

Thats my quick and short thoughts. :p

Losing Command
24-12-2014, 07:24
The recent army-specific FOC are really nice, and way better than special characters and such changing the FOC designation of units around. The reduciont of codex-specific rules, and more of those rules in the MRB is also an improvement, as it reduces the chance of suprises or people abusing the lack of knowledge of their opponent to 'make' rules even better than they are.

What I personally dislike the most is the recent trend of turning HQ special character into LoW for no real reason. If said characters whould have been buffed to justify it I might have been ok with it, but there are often hardly any adjustments made :shifty:

Scribe of Khorne
24-12-2014, 07:27
They did it in my opinion to force feed the LoW slot to us. So more gamers open up to super heavies in their 1500 point games...

duffybear1988
24-12-2014, 08:30
They did it in my opinion to force feed the LoW slot to us. So more gamers open up to super heavies in their 1500 point games...

That's what annoys me the most about this edition. If I want to take Seth (who is woefully pathetic in the LoW slot) then I cannot deny my opponent the option of taking a LoW choice as well. Unfortunately he will always take a knight titan or something similarly overpowered that my normal everyday lists cannot beat. Having the heroes as Lords of War just feels forced.

Szalik
24-12-2014, 09:02
That was the first year since 2007 without any game of 40k. 7th disappointed me, though I cannot say that it was unexpected. GW repaired a few minor problems but the major ones remained and are not treated as a problems at all.

I have not moved away from 40k lore and miniatures though.

I managed to make an Escher gang from second hand miniatures, I played a few games but practically abandoned it too. If the game takes too much time and is not really that good, then why waste your time on it. The miniatures...or should I say THE MINIATURES on the other hand are brilliant and were worth the price.

I also painted a few models and still got some more to paint. Modelwise I am content, I have nearly everything that I always wanted to have, and still have some modelling ideas that can be solved with the current range.

It looks like the circle is complete. I started my adventure with 40k because of miniatures and I end it with miniatures looking great on a shelf.

Main aim for the next year - paint and convert as much as possible.

Ozendorph
24-12-2014, 09:45
Still painting models but not doing much buying. Couple gifts, couple White Dwarfs. Didn't run any tournaments, nor did I play in any. Still working on a new rule set, putting in some hours on that...jumping the tracks and not looking back :)

Spiney Norman
24-12-2014, 12:30
They did it in my opinion to force feed the LoW slot to us. So more gamers open up to super heavies in their 1500 point games...

Quite the reverse actually, by having key named characters occupy the LoW slot means that you won't have that slot available for actual superheavies which are currently the most powerful units in the game. This creates quite a high tax on the special character, especially if they're not 'that good'.

It's the same dilemma as deciding whether or not to take a Primarch in a HH army (because it means you can't also take that glaive), the difference being of course that Ghazkull is no primarch...

If GW had followed FW's lead in limiting LoW units to 25% and never in games below 2K they wouldn't have mattered so much, but when you see Reaver Titans stomping around in games of 1500pts something has gone badly wrong.

Snake Tortoise
24-12-2014, 14:03
This year: Horror at the prospect of increasingly big, scary units that I don't think belong in the game, followed by pleasant surprise when I realised tactical objectives actually limit the effectiveness of super heavies, deathstars and flyers.

Hicks
24-12-2014, 17:48
My gaming group is deader than ever on the GW side of things, but I kinda took interrest again in the lore for a while. I almost started a small DA army seeing as the starter models are very good and cheap. Then reality hit me. Everything else is ubber expensive and even at that price you STILL don't get every options in the box. I watched a couple battle reports and I quickly decided that investing in 40K would be a bad idea.

Visually, I don't like how things are now either, way too many big models. When was it that nids got a small based unit for the last time again? This is nonsense at the 28mm scale in my opinion. Marines just don't look heroic either when they are getting stomped on by huge robots.


And the rules... I wouldn't be surpised if next year's big thing is that they get rid of the points system and let you field all of your collection. 40K is by far the worst ruleset on the market right now as far as I'm concerned.

Vipoid
24-12-2014, 17:55
Visually, I don't like how things are now either, way too many big models. When was it that nids got a small based unit for the last time again? This is nonsense at the 28mm scale in my opinion. Marines just don't look heroic either when they are getting stomped on by huge robots.

Yeah, I feel the same way.

Things like fliers, riptides and wraith knights just look... wrong next to other 40k stuff. The latter in particular looks like my opponent is proxying something from their Power Rangers collection. :eyebrows:


On a more cheerful note, have a good Christmas, everyone. :)

Ozendorph
24-12-2014, 18:26
Yeah, I feel the same way.

Things like fliers, riptides and wraith knights just look... wrong next to other 40k stuff. The latter in particular looks like my opponent is proxying something from their Power Rangers collection. :eyebrows:


On a more cheerful note, have a good Christmas, everyone. :)

Merry Christmas :)

Personally I like using the big kits, and I like how they look relative to infantry (I'm a big Apoc guy). That said, the only way they appear as the absurdly huge death machines they're supposed to be, is if they are rare and surrounded by more conventional units. Last time I poked my head in at a local tourny, each table looked like a few Eldar guardians or Chaos Marines wandered into the middle of a Godzilla vs. Mecha Godzilla vs. Rodan vs. Monster X showdown, and all they could think to do was hide out among the ruins. Not a good look, and I'd rather they were left to Apoc

Killgore
24-12-2014, 18:42
2014 has been a year of painting, with a little bit of gaming.

These past 12 months I have painted a vast number of Iron Warriors, a 2000 point Tau army, nearly finished a Ultramarines battle company and painted a Ork horde.


Gaming-wise, I have enjoyed playing 7th edition. The changes to the psychic phase as well as tactical objectives and formations has given the game a new lease of life. I still play Killpoints occasionally, but only when we have beer.


As for 2015, I eagerly await the potential for new units like we saw for the Tyranids, for other codexs as well as more supplements/ mini codexs and campaign books.

Scribe of Khorne
24-12-2014, 19:21
Had a larger (for us) 2k game the other day. No LoW, playing one of the HH missions/deployments. Was very fun trying to break out of an ambush with my Warpsmith led stompy robots list.

The game is still fun, the lore and setting is still fun. Honestly its all in how you limit the greatest abuses of the game. GW went too far, but its still salvageable. :]

Vaktathi
24-12-2014, 19:36
I keep hearing about unbound being the big bad boogey man ruining 40k.
I havent seen or played a single game of unbound in any tournament or club game EVER in two years (since 6th dropped). Unbound wasn't around two years ago...it wasn't an option in 6th. Likewise, it's almost universally banned in tournaments, so not having seen it in them isn't surprising. :p

There were a spurt of events at local levels allowing Unbound in the first couple months after 7th. They all seem to have stopped that real quick.



LOW are similarly a non issue. They were legal at the last LVO and hasnt made a lick of difference. The LVO also has a very specific list of exactly which Lords of War are available, banning any with ignores cover weapons and larger things like Reaver and Phantom titans, and also uses the Escalation expansion Lord of War opponent bonuses which the core rulebook missions do not. They've also somewhat nerfed Invisibility as well so people can't run around with invisible Brass Scorpions and be completely immune to blast weapons.

Overall, my experiences are thus.

The 40k playerbase is more fragmented, polarize, and confused than ever. While GW's old release cycle was abominable, the new cycle of releasing stuff through four or five different sales channels on a weekly basis, with codex books being twice what they were three years ago and with other releases being often being $2-$16 each, it's become effectively impossible to stay up on everything for the overwhelmingly vast majority of players. Just to own all the current rules for the game (not counting Forgeworld or Expansions like Apocalypse or Planetstrike) would cost you ~$2,000, up from about $350 in 5th edition.

The actual construction of armies is something that has gotten completely out of control and which many players still haven't grasped. Between multiple detachments, individual army detachments, and formations (not even getting into Unbound here), has led to countless confusing situations, and tons of abusability. Formations are probably the worst offenders, essentially ignoring anything about the traditional FoC (while still allowing you to take one) and giving you a whole bunch of special free rules without having to pay any additional points for them (but for an additional $2.99-16.99 each of course...). In many respects Unbound is unnecessary because you can effectively get the nearly the exact same thing through formations and a rump FoC but with extra special rules.

Armies are becoming increasingly unrecognizable and the heavier and heavier emphasis on gigantic models is really throwing any sense of scale out of the game.

The game also typically takes longer to play with significantly more random rolling than it did a few years ago. There's just so much rolling before even starting a game, in a recent game with a Daemon player I just started making note of each random roll before the game and during the first turn that wasn't specifically unit actions. There was mission, number of objectives, who deploys objectives first, deployment type, deployment zones, deployment, warlord traits and rerolling warlord traits, daemonic gifts for half a dozen characters, psychic powers for 5 models, night fight, seize the initiative, mysterious objectives, and warp storm table.

That wasn't even getting into Maelstrom missions. I find these typically to usually be clearly decided by turn 3 or 4, someone gets a good turn of draws and rockets ahead and that's that. I don't think I've seen a single one of these that has been a close game yet and I've only seen a couple where it wasn't clear before the last turn who was going to win. There's a ton of luck involved. On top of that, there's lots of either "auto-achieve" (oh, cast a psychic power, great, I'm running a Daemon army with four Psykers!) or "impossible" (kill a flyer...oh there's no flyers) objectives, and some "functionally impossible" ones (Tau probably aren't going to defeat anything in close combat on their turn against Tyranids for example).

The game has never been this expensive, the playerbase more divided along what they like and don't like and confused/ill-informed (as to rules, as the cost and effort of maintaining them is so much higher), the sense of scale so abused, and the ruleset so confused as to what it wants to be as 7th edition. The rules support and FAQ/Errata done by GW I don't think has been this sparse...ever.

Spiney Norman
24-12-2014, 19:59
On a more cheerful note, have a good Christmas, everyone. :)

Yes indeed, nearly time for a Christmas day truce, where lovers and haters of 7th edition can fraternise together, and perhaps even play Dreadfleet with one another before getting back to the endless hostilities.

Time for a Christmas avatar methinks, welcome Orky Claws!

duffybear1988
24-12-2014, 20:21
Merry Christmas. I'll see you all tomorrow in no man's land. It's the only day we all manage to agree to stop disagreeing. :)

Kakapo42
24-12-2014, 23:55
Merry Christmas everyone! Who's up for some Battlefleet Gothic and 4th edition 40k? :D

AngryAngel
25-12-2014, 02:22
Merry Christmas everyone, see you all in no mans land and I'd love a game of 4th Edition !! Though I never played battle fleet gothic but would be up to try.

HelloKitty
25-12-2014, 02:47
Had a larger (for us) 2k game the other day. No LoW, playing one of the HH missions/deployments. Was very fun trying to break out of an ambush with my Warpsmith led stompy robots list.

The game is still fun, the lore and setting is still fun. Honestly its all in how you limit the greatest abuses of the game. GW went too far, but its still salvageable. :]

This is exactly how we do it here and my thoughts exactly.

Scribe of Khorne
25-12-2014, 05:45
And a Merry Christmas (or Happy Island Adventures) to you and yours. ;)

Grand Master Raziel
25-12-2014, 05:59
The end of 2014 has found me in an unexpectedly enviable position: able to build a 40K group from the ground up. A number of my friends from my Pathfinder group expressed an interest in trying 40K. What's more, I suddenly came into a bunch of armies to give them, as some other friends simply gave me their 40K stuff. In addition to that, I had a bunch of stuff kicking around I was never going to use, so I'm able to provide functional armies to at least 4 people, and could probably equip 6-7 without stretching.

So, since I'm the gray-beard vet introducing 40K to a bunch of newbies, I'm instituting house rules to get them started off in a balanced fashion in order to keep the game fun for the players with limited collections (which is essentially everybody but me and whoever picks up Tau - "inherited" a massive amount of Tau stuff). It's early yet, but the house rules seem to be having the intended effect.

In case you're interested in what the house rules are, see below.
1: Armies should be 40% Troops
I've got some ideas about how to keep the game reasonably well balanced and this is one of them. I think units from the Troops categories of various factions are reasonably well balanced against each other, so if lists are mostly Troops, it should help with balanced games.


2: As much as possible within the limits of the available collections, no spamming units outside of the Troops category
For the foreseeable future, this rule mostly just affects me, because I'm the only one with a deep enough collection to field multiples of any particular unit. I'm self-imposing this restriction so other people don't feel like they have to sink money into their armies. Also, what I've got for Chaos is extremely limited, so you'll be seeing me fielding 2 Helbrutes.

3: No multiple detachment/ally shenanigans
Again, for balance purposes, because the rules for using allies and multiple detachments are very open to abuse. I'm making one small exception for the Sisters of Battle army up for grabs - at 1500pts I'm planning on throwing in a VIndicare Assassin, because the available collection is weak in anti-tank and the Vindicare helps with that.

4: No superheavy vehicles or gargantuan monstrous creatures

5: No flyers
Flyers won't be restricted forever. I just don't want to overwhelm the new people with too much at once. Plus, the availability of flyers is limited and flyer defense available to our various players varies widely. I'll get around to putting together the quad-gun on my Aegis Defense Line and make that available for people to use. Then we can start easing in flyers, but we'll probably restrict flyers to one per army.

6: Force Organization Chart swapping - no more than 1 unit per army
Explanation: Some armies have the ability to take specific characters and unlock the ability to take non-Troops unit as Troops. Of the armies available to the players at CC40K, only the Dark Angels have this ability, so again this is mostly a self-restriction, though I suppose when Jess gets around to getting all that stuff assembled, she might be able to as well. Again, I don't want to overwhelm new players by going "Here's my all Bikes and Terminators army!" Again, I may relax this as people get more comfortable and competent with their armies.

7: Psykers can only use their own power dice and those generated by the random roll at the beginning of the turn. They cannot use another psyker's power dice. Also, the opposing side can only generate dispel dice with the power dice from their most powerful psyker.

MajorWesJanson
25-12-2014, 07:07
My thought to end the year:

Fire Raptors are bloody hard to build. I've had to tear it apart and start over after getting a few of the main hull pieces assembled, and while it is much better this try, I will need to do more hot water bending and a lot of gap filling to get everything to line up in the end. I like the model, but it's about as bad a build as the old metal LR crusader.

WarsmithGarathor94
25-12-2014, 07:22
My thoughts are
6 noise marines in a rhino with a blast master is a great troop choice and i cant wait to get my copy of imperial armour 13

HelloKitty
25-12-2014, 15:22
And a Merry Christmas (or Happy Island Adventures) to you and yours. ;)

The island adventures are breath taking! :D same to you - i hope that the holidays brought you many disciples of the blood god.

Slowpoke
25-12-2014, 16:42
My thoughts about 40k towards the end of the year have been positive.




1) My Orks got a new dex. It had some bits that disappointed me but overall "jobs a good 'un."

2) New dex renewed my interest in orks and I finally got around to start painting them!

3) The 7th edition of 40k has been fun to play and with some house rules we've managed to make it even better.

4) Our small group has managed to recruit some new players so we don't have to play against the same armies over and over again!



Overall it has been a good year for me. Eager to see what's around the corner for next year!

insectum7
26-12-2014, 02:23
The end of 2014 has found me in an unexpectedly enviable position: able to build a 40K group from the ground up. A number of my friends from my Pathfinder group expressed an interest in trying 40K. What's more, I suddenly came into a bunch of armies to give them, as some other friends simply gave me their 40K stuff. In addition to that, I had a bunch of stuff kicking around I was never going to use, so I'm able to provide functional armies to at least 4 people, and could probably equip 6-7 without stretching.

So, since I'm the gray-beard vet introducing 40K to a bunch of newbies, I'm instituting house rules . . .

*house rules*

Good luck with that, it sounds like a promising situation. I like your house rules too. Are you guys doing standard missions or maelstrom? (or something else?) Some time in the next week or so I'm likely to play some more relaxed games as well, and I'm really looking forward to it. I do think 40K is more fun with some of the extreme stuff pulled out.

Merry Xmas y'all.

Grand Master Raziel
26-12-2014, 14:33
Good luck with that, it sounds like a promising situation. I like your house rules too. Are you guys doing standard missions or maelstrom? (or something else?) Some time in the next week or so I'm likely to play some more relaxed games as well, and I'm really looking forward to it. I do think 40K is more fun with some of the extreme stuff pulled out.

Merry Xmas y'all.

So far, I've been having them play standard missions. I don't want to overwhelm them with too much at once, and 40K has a lot of rules to absorb. When everyone is comfortable with the basic rules and how their armies work, then we can start trying the Maelstrom missions.