8th edition blues

[civsmitty]

 

 

Why do people who dislike the new edition face such ridicule from people in this thread?

The same reason people will vehemently defend their choice of gaming platform. If a person complains or has concerns about what you like, they may be right. And that means you may be wrong. So people will attack the messenger and try to dismiss them as "haters" rather than admit their choice may not be perfect.

 

 

When people call rules 'insultingly simple' or reference lack of attention spans, then other people get defensive.

 

No, they don't. People get defensive when their opinions are disagreed with, and will entrench into their beliefs when presented with differing opinions or facts. The "backfire effect". I could present a point by point list of why 8ed shouldn't exist, is an inferior system, and how 7ed could have been fixed, and if you were inclined to enjoy 8ed you would disagree with me. Regardless of the validity of my argument.

[Closet Skeleton]

No, they don't. People get defensive when their opinions are disagreed with, and will entrench into their beliefs when presented with differing opinions or facts. The "backfire effect". I could present a point by point list of why 8ed shouldn't exist, is an inferior system, and how 7ed could have been fixed, and if you were inclined to enjoy 8ed you would disagree with me. Regardless of the validity of my argument.

 

 

If your argument is as hyperbolic as '8th ed shouldn't exist' then its not valid no matter how many good individual points you try to over-whelm your opponent with.

 

Sure, ultimately if people enjoy their games of 8th and have mostly bad memories of 7th they aren't going to be convinced by arguments about the benefits of 7th but if you're going to be so cynical about peoples abilities to have a discussion then why bother posting? You're basically saying that you might as well be rude because no one will listen to reason anyway.

 

Can't people just talk about their experiences without the need to be in camps or 'be right'. If people can't be convinced anyway, then we should be trying to understand each other's points of view, not using other people's bad behavior as an excuse for acting badly ourselves.

 

7th ed could have been fixed and 8th ed still needs to be fixed, but 7th only existed because 6th ed needed fixing and 6th ed was basically unnecessary shake up of 5th ed that needed fixing but 6th didn't do it, in a cycle going back to 3rd ed that was a dumbed down overhaul of 2nd ed. I think a lot of the pro-8th ed players aren't thinking of 8th ed vs 7th ed, they're thinking about 40k's rule set as a thing that has evolved over a long period of time. While defenders of 7th ed are basically forced to turn the argument into 8th vs 7th because nobody is defending 4th-6th ed.

[Ishagu]

Same thing happens with everything. People hate sequels to movies, games, etc.

 

Some get set in their ways and stop accepting new things. Some people aren't even happy with new models lol

[Captain_Krash]

I liked 3rd edition. If it was up to me the rules would have stopped there along with army books.

 

Curious was the added "Flyer" phase a good decision to add to a already bloated system in 7th?

 

Krash

[Garreck]

 

No, they don't. People get defensive when their opinions are disagreed with, and will entrench into their beliefs when presented with differing opinions or facts. The "backfire effect". I could present a point by point list of why 8ed shouldn't exist, is an inferior system, and how 7ed could have been fixed, and if you were inclined to enjoy 8ed you would disagree with me. Regardless of the validity of my argument.

 

 

For me, civsmitty, any discussion about what could have been done to fix 7th is OBE.  When we talk about 7th as it existed and 8th as it does exist, I find (and I think many find) that 8th is better.  That doesn't mean 8th is as good as a list of proposed fixes to 7th could've yielded. It means that (to those of us who believe so) 8th is better than 7th was in its existing form.

 

I think "a list of proposed fixes to 7th as a better alternative to 8th" is a different discussion than "is 8th good/enjoyable" or "is 8th an improvement to 7th."

 

Point of order:  there are differing opinions.  There are no differing facts. 

[Jagus Kumkani]

People are literally, never happy about anything. New edition, new models, Primarchs, etc. We have to remember 8th ed was a community initiative to get the things WE wanted in the new edition. So the most diehard fans and players told GW what they think the game needed. Then we had 8th.

 

I don't care what edition you play, that's on you. If you want to play 7th, fine. But getting on here to complain as to why you don't like 8th, "its no fun" or "I like long games"

Well then go play a different version.

The 40k community likes 8th edition, nothing wrong with that.

 

I started playing 40k at the tail end of 7th, I thought that game had too many elements and it wasn't very fun for me personally. What I disliked about 7th was

1. Games were entirely too long, I didn't have 5-6 hours to play a 2000 point game

2. Special rule and abilities were plain ridiculous and hard to remember

3. Forces like Tau were over-powered

 

With 8th edition, it feels fluid and moves along nicely, everything is managable. It feels 40k to me because things seem balanced (I know its not perfect) Terminators are tough, Eldar are fast, and things die like I think they would in an actual battle. Its very cinematic to me in 8th. You want your surviving Tactical Marine to charge that Stormsurge? Sure.

That Stormraven was just blasted with lascannon shots, crashes and destroys the enemy units surrounding the relic? You got it.

I feel a lot more is happening in this edition than it was in the previous one.

 

Like I said, if you want to play the way you like, go ahead.

[Ishagu]

The fact that in 7th you can make a unit that cannot be killed means it's outright inferior. Simple as that

[Arkangilos]

 

 

 

Why do people who dislike the new edition face such ridicule from people in this thread?

The same reason people will vehemently defend their choice of gaming platform. If a person complains or has concerns about what you like, they may be right. And that means you may be wrong. So people will attack the messenger and try to dismiss them as "haters" rather than admit their choice may not be perfect.

When people call rules 'insultingly simple' or reference lack of attention spans, then other people get defensive.

No, they don't. People get defensive when their opinions are disagreed with, and will entrench into their beliefs when presented with differing opinions or facts. The "backfire effect". I could present a point by point list of why 8ed shouldn't exist, is an inferior system, and how 7ed could have been fixed, and if you were inclined to enjoy 8ed you would disagree with me. Regardless of the validity of my argument.

Bull:cuss. People get defensive because they are insulted by terms like, "childish" "stupid" "cartoonish" etc. The exact same people who come onto every thread with the exact same statements are getting the same responses they have always got.

 

It boils down to you all calling what people like stupid, which is insulting to them. That's why people get defensive. If you posted constructively without insulting the game, chances are most of them would have a reasonable discussion with you.

[Lord Ragnarok]

Some of the posts are getting a little personal and too testy. Please keep the discussion clinical and without insults, or derogatory comments.

[Slave to Darkness]

 

Another here for the cant stand 8th crew.

Ok, why?

 

Because I cant stand it, don't like the rules, the games don't interest me, it doesn't excite me. 

[Honda]

MOD VOICE: Soooo, let's tone down the rhetoric, like right now.

 

I think this thread will be interesting as a snapshot of a point in time as we continue our 8th journey. 90 days from now, 180 days and  one year in will also be important check points.

 

Keep in mind that the game does not reflect on people, just the opposite. If you are happy how you play, great, keep doing that. Find something that you like better? Go for it. Be happy wherever you are.

 

HOWEVER DO NOT INSULT OTHERS BECAUSE OF HOW THEY PLAY A GAME.

 

You won't like what happens if you do.

 

Now go outside and play nice together.

[Warhead01]

 

 

I could present a point by point list of why 8ed shouldn't exist, is an inferior system, and how 7ed could have been fixed, and if you were inclined to enjoy 8ed you would disagree with me. Regardless of the validity of my argument.

A point by point list would be meaningless, 8th edition does exist and it is an assumption to say GW was trying to make a superior product.

They simply make products, cross their fingers and hope for the best. (I've seen no proof they were attempting a superior product.)

 

 The problem with fixing an edition is getting people out side of your group to adopt the changes.  

I was talking with my group about a fan made codex for Orks a year ago and they were extremely resistant to the idea due, if I understood them correctly, the vast number of options for ever unit and units they weren't familiar with. 8th edition comes out and one of them who doesn't like 8th has tole me "we can just fix your(My) Ork codex.".

My answer is why should I, it's too much work I don't care to do to only use it in a small group. Especially now that 8th has put Orks, my army collected and player for nearly 20 years now (Maybe more like 18 years) is no long bad  as it had been for the last 3 edition. (upon reflection owing 23,000 points was a bit of a bad decisions...)

All I'm really saying is if it's important to you and worth your time then do it. It's your hobby do what you want.  

 

[totgeboren]

Played a game yesterday, CSM vs Eldar, 1750 pts. Rather balanced armies, mix of stuff since we both are still trying stuff out.

I got turn 1, deep struck with 5 termies, a Lord and a Sorcerer. They killed a Fire Prism and tied up some Warwalkers. My Heldrake killed a squad of Rangers, my cultists and CSM killed a full squad of Dire Avengers.

So then it was the Eldar players turn, starting down by like 500 pts. In his turn he killed a squad of cultists.

After my second turn, the game was over.

 

Dunno, the game left both players with a bad taste, since it was pretty normal armies, but there was never any real tactics involved.

I just placed my dudes in the most favorable spot, ran the other stuff full tilt forwards and rolled some dice.

 

Turn one alpha strikes need something done about them, and Flanking needs to be a thing.

 

'smart tactics' often make little sense, like tieing up a LR with a Rhino and so on.

Perhaps need to play a few more games, but so far I'm getting less and less enthusiastic about 8ed. The game takes too long to set up for it to be finished quickly. The rules need to produce at least 5 turn games. The previous complaints about the game taking too long makes little sense, since setting up terrain and deployment takes at least an hour. Having a 1 hour game after all that isn't enough for it to be worth it.

[Azekai]

The fact that 8th got rid of D strength weapons is enough for me to prefer it, warts and all. Seriously, screw that and the horse it rode in on.

[M@verik115]

My 2c.

I have played every edition of 40k since 3rd. 

7th wasn't terrible by a long shot. The rules were mostly solid (some were not needed), but overall it was decent. The problem with 7th was that there was such a huge power divide between armies and codexes. Hence why I played 30K mostly for 7th instead of 40K. 

8th so far has been good. I have yet to play a game where I feel either me or my opponent clearly have the better army. The games tend to be much closer to call and much faster (In 7th you could tell who would win by the start of the 3rd turn latest so why carry on playing?). What I enjoy about 8th is that I can literally pick any army I own and any units I own and have a good game. 
In 7th you have to stick to your meta codex list otherwise you would auto lose. Simple as that. 

So RULES-WISE, both have their pro's and con's, but due to the codex abuse of 5th-7th, I would much rather play 8th. 

STORY-WISE is where it gets interesting. 40K has had a pretty poor storyline for a while now and 8th just made it worse. Did it destroy it? No, because it was terrible as is. 
However I do find 8th missing something, mainly flavour. Its hard to pin point and it might go away as we get more proper codexes, but its there. 
The only thing I really dont like about 8th is the lack of support for 30K, which is the setting I love the most. 

 

Either way, 7th isn't bad and with the coming 30K HH rewrite, I will play it again, but for 40K 8th > 4th > 7th as far as im concerned. 

[Claws and Effect]

Full disclosure, I have not actually had a chance to play a game since 4th or 5th edition. Early 2008 or so. 

 

I have been greatly enjoying diving back into it in terms of building and painting models and reading novels (and some really good fanfiction). 

 

But from the talk I've seen, 7th edition play seemed to be mostly taking place during list building, when you could construct an army that had basically no chance of losing unless it was facing an equally broken list. That doesn't sound like much fun. 

 

I want to put together a general all around list and pop into a game store and be assured that I will win or lose because of my tactics and strategy, and not assume I'm going to get stomped because my opponent brought an unassailable gun line or an unkillable deathstar. 

 

The other main selling point of 8th for me is that the games are shorter. I work 2 jobs and am extremely busy most of the time. I do my painting in the last hour or so of my day before I head to bed. I simply don't have time to play a game that takes up to 4 hours for a 1850 point game. 

[Frater Cornelius]

Not trying to attack anyone. I just find it a shame that many people close themselves to new stuff and drift down a spiral of negativity. Life is wonderful, hence why I urge people to look on the bright side and not cling to memories of the past. It ain't easy, but it is worth it. This is not a stab at people who dislike 8th. This is a general issue with new stuff. Some people just close themselves :(

[Honda]

But from the talk I've seen, 7th edition play seemed to be mostly taking place during list building, when you could construct an army that had basically no chance of losing unless it was facing an equally broken list. That doesn't sound like much fun.

 

 

I know that it would be easy to get that impression, especially on the tournament front, but I think a lot of the list abuse came from allowing ridiculous combinations of codexes.

 

Our group is strongly oriented around narrative play and especially Apocalypse. We loved 7th edition and thought it was the best to date. It did have more detail to it which tended to manifest in longer games. That's Ok, we were willing to make the commitment.

 

So we didn't have a beef with 7th except with the proliferation of D weapons as previously mentioned.

 

We are still just getting our feet wet with 8th and eagerly look forward to 8th Apoc level games. But first we have to get the mechanics under our belts and then see the codex situation stabilize.

 

We are very encouraged by what we see in 8th even though some things seem a little silly like no firing arcs. However, I do think those are very simple things to change should GW decide to want to move in that direction.

 

So we just keep plugging away until we see where we are six months from now.

[Ordo Machinum]

 

HOWEVER DO NOT INSULT OTHERS BECAUSE OF HOW THEY PLAY A GAME.

 

You won't like what happens if you do.

 

Now go outside and play nice together.

 

This should be written on a wall plaque. 

 

Some post they like X better than Y and if others feel the same.

Some reply they like Y better than X and others take offense.

For some reason it gets personal and feelings get stepped on.

 

X and Y are both enjoyable and do not care who likes them or not. They're games. They get played. It's what they're for. 

 

Asking someone for their opinion and not hearing it is the same as yours doesn't make either person right or wrong. It is a matter for the individual's perspective to which they are entitled. 

 

I wonder sometimes if the B&C is going to need to add Care Wards for each edition of players so everyone can have their special place. 

 

This is part of what disheartens me about the gaming community at large. 

[Claws and Effect]

The firing arcs thing sort of makes sense.

 

I mean, we don't assume a Space Marine Sergeant has his chainsword held over his head for an entire battle. The models we're using are in static positions, but it seems silly to me to assume that what they are representing is equally static. A Stormraven doesn't stop in midair during the other players turn. It is still moving, but the model physically can't.

 

It's a case where being an abstraction is a valid explanation.

 

As far as flamers being used as anti-air? I would change that so anything that falls into the Flyer category of the FOC is not a valid target unless the firing model has the Fly keyword. I agree that is dumb that an aircraft that is at minimum hundreds of feet in the air can be shot down by a tank with a flamethrower.

[Damo1701]

The really odd thing is that I wanted to like 8th edition/1st edition AoG, despite how awful some of the announcements sounded, and the way the stats and vehicles were said to have worked.

 

However, when pre-orders went up, I ordered Dark Imperium, all the Index books, the Objectives, maelstrom cards, wound trackers... and the Forge World Index.

 

Since release, I've played as many games as possible. And they've always ended in a similar way. At the end of either the first or second game-round.

 

Flyers knocked out of the sky by flame weapons, a Landraider wrecked by conscript shooting, and other ridiculous things that have never happened in a game before this edition/incarnation.

 

None of this has remotely made the game interesting, fun, or even enjoyable.

 

I went all out with an open mind, yet fears have been confirmed with every game. What is a player supposed to do when the very system is set up to suck the enjoyment from the very thing that is supposed to provide it?

[Claws and Effect]

Near as I can tell, the "anything can hurt anything" change occurred so the person who brings tanks doesn't auto win because their opponent can't kill them.

 

A Land Raider getting shot to death by 80 conscripts with lasguns can't be more frustrating than watching it get blown up Turn 1 by a Guardsman with a melta gun.

 

At least with the conscripts you get a couple turns out of it.

[Claws and Effect]

Near as I can tell, the "anything can hurt anything" change occurred so the person who brings tanks doesn't auto win because their opponent can't kill them.

 

A Land Raider getting shot to death by 80 conscripts with lasguns can't be more frustrating than watching it get blown up Turn 1 by a Guardsman with a melta gun.

 

At least with the conscripts you get a couple turns out of it.

 

And from what you've told us in the RG subforum, it sounds a lot like your usual opponent is tailoring his list against you as well as skewing the rules for his stuff because he knows you don't know them that well.

 

You might have a better experience when you start playing people who didn't build their list specifically to destroy everything they know you have.

[MoK]

Not trying to attack anyone. I just find it a shame that many people close themselves to new stuff and drift down a spiral of negativity. Life is wonderful, hence why I urge people to look on the bright side and not cling to memories of the past. It ain't easy, but it is worth it. This is not a stab at people who dislike 8th. This is a general issue with new stuff. Some people just close themselves :(

 

New stuff isn't a problem. I love new stuff. I just don't like 8th ed. I'm bored already. I've never been a power gamer, I wouldn't know how to build a Deathstar if I tried. I'm a narrative player. But it's hard to be a narrative player, when tne narrative is so crap. Previously, I felt like I was part of the universe, when I played, but now it's just like playing MTG, quick game, done. I'm not a competative gamer, so quick games hold zero interest. As has been said previously, I do t want to spend an hour setting up, for the game to be over in an hour, only to spend an hour packing away. I can understand why some people want quick games, coz they only have limited time to play. But when I do manage to get a day away from Work, the family etc, I want to devote a day playing. More actual gaming than admin before and after. You can have your quick games and even get two or three into an evening, but that is not how I want to play. Sadly, I don't have anyone near me willing to play 7th or HH. They are all tournament players and only. Hold and play tournament practicing games, 1850pts is their thing now. That does not interest me. So because of this move to quick games, the twenty or so that I have had to give it a try, I won't be playing anymore. Sad really, since I have been playing since 1989. For me 7th just needed tidying up to be almost spot on. 8th just feels like I'm wasting my time.

[Corsovitt]

I can state quite happily that not everyone is gonna like the new edition, as a historical wargamer in a four man 'club' which has about 50 different periods we use about 12 different rules sets and even those individual sets have various campaign - sub period rules which change the base set to some degree, some of those sets have had more than one edition, we often disagree on rules interpretation and sometimes because the base sets are similar in structure we use the incorrect period rules, each of us enjoys one or more sets to different degrees and hates some sets with equal gusto.

 

Not all systems/sets/editions fulfil an individual players imagination/complexity/interpretation or expectations, some rules sets allow for ahistorical outcomes - infantry charging cavalry, artillery advancing without support.

 

As a group we could argue which rules set is better, entrench ourselves in rhetoric and become embittered, this would just end in frustration, unhappiness and a much much smaller group, instead we try and discuss and take a moment to understand why a particular rules mechanic is unsatisfying to us and if necessary we try to check any FAQ's to see if we've been playing the rules correctly.

 

These threads no matter the initial purpose always degenerate into these constant back and forth arguments until a moderator shuts them down. I like 7th Edition, I like 8th Edition they are two different interpretations of the same period and I say this as someone who has played no fewer than five rules sets/systems for the crusades in three different scales and about eight different rules sets for Napoleonics.

 

If I am solo playing or playing with a like minded player who isnt running alpha strike/death star or spam lists i'd probably stick with 7th edition. However when it comes to the three non GW historical gamers in the club, I fully intend to run 8th edition (possibly just using the index lists)

 

I think that when it comes to threads which are pro 7th edition or pro 8th edition then those who disagree on either side need to take a second before posting something which is going to lead to the inevitable death of the thread. If this is a thread where those who dislike 8th want to gather and chat about why they dislike it, why turn it into an argument by saying they are wrong to dislike it. Equally if this was a pro 8th discussion why turn it into an argument why they are wrong to be pro GW or 8th.

 

We all love 40k, be it any of the editions, any period of the fluff or whichever of the many factions. The problem is believing what ever we facet of 40k we love/hate, everyone else must love/hate or they are guilty of being stupid/fan boy/hater etc etc.

 

October is my 30th anniversary in the GW hobby so lets just try and be a little more understanding and not turn this site into another site of intolerance and bitter feuding over which version is the best.

 

My two cents...