Is 8th edition tactical and strategic?

[Maschinenpriester]

Just dropping in my Thoughts. I have read most of the Posts before.

 

I think the main question: Is 8th a tactical edition? - Is not so easy to answer. It depends on how you and your opponents play the game. If you encounter an army whose list is kida balanced to your list - So lets say the armies are kida balanced against each other, this is a good step to having a tactical game.

Next important step: Line of sight blocking terrain and lots of cover. This leads to the need of moving around on the board, so the game does not end up as some stand and shooting game.

 

So even causal games with no optimized list can be tactical.

 

In my Opinion 8th is more tactical then 7th because armies in general are more balanced against each other than before. There are still stronger armies, but I feel it not beeing as bad as before.

 

I miss all the wargear and special rules from 7th but I think the simplification of rules is better for the game. It is faster and i dont need to check rules so often.

It just saves lots of time to not having to check the orientation of each vehicle when moving for example.

What I dislike is the way cover works. I personally still play with a housrule that cover works like in 7th (Partly covered units get a +1 modifier instead of if they just stand on a base). It does not increase the complexity of the rules too much and makes it more realistic and tactical in my opinion.

 

I think if the game would use alternating movements and shooting between the players the tactial depth would increas a lot.

This is the main problem 7th and 8th ed have. One player starts, and blows away half the enemy army - if you play on planet bowlingball. But even if not. The starting player has a huuuge advantage. And if one player has a huge advantage out of nothing that is the opposite of beeing a tactical game.

[Panzer]

 

I most assuredly wouldn't play am edition that's even more simplified.

 

 

 

You don't even play this edition despite people keep telling you you have a kinda screwed view on how the game is currently played lol

[Azekai]

I am ok with my ‘pleb version’ of 40k. I also think it is hilariously misguided to think that 7th ed represented some sort of strategic masterpiece. Invisible teleporting deathstars and D strength weapons were lame, and using them took all the tactical acumen of an uno game. Good riddance, l say.

 

Now can we stop prancing about complaining that low IQ commoners are ruining 40k? People who say stuff like that ruin 40k.

[allfatherstudios]

 

I most assuredly wouldn't play am edition that's even more simplified.

 

 

You don't even play this edition despite people keep telling you you have a kinda screwed view on how the game is currently played lol

That doesn't seem fair. I've watched battle reports. I don't have to enjoy something. There's alot of other people that don't like 8th. But that's a bit off topic. I was actually asking about the tactical differences. I also would say that you're just as set in your ways if you think that I'm screwed up for stating only 4 points about my dislike of the current system. Screwed? No. Not interested so far. Yes.

[Rik Lightstar]

40k doesn't need gatekeeping. It should be welcoming and inclusive to new people, as should all hobbies, regardless of people's other hobbies and interests, their gender, sexuality or level of education. The sooner the last few pockets of resistance to this disappear the better. Some arbitrary "intellectual barrier" to entry is also unnecessary.

 

For a more "Tactical" feel from a current GW system, I'd suggest trying either Necromunda or ShadeSpire where all of your individual moves and decisions can be pivotal and swing the entire course of the game*.

 

There isn't really much current from GW that works at a more "Strategic" level, as mentioned by others, both Epic: Armaggedon and Battlefleet: Gothic were fine examples of strategic play where coordination of your forces was more important than any single individual piece's actions.

 

40k 8th Edition offers a decent balance between the two.

 

*It's worth mentioning that ShadeSpire has an incredibly simple rule set yet is probably the most balanced and demanding game GW currently publish and I can't recommend it highly enough.

 

Rik

[Lysere]

Someones personal belief on the average person do not have any part in a discussion about the tactical/strategic qualities of a game.

 

So long as the game is fun and allows me to use the models and armies that I want to work on and play a decently even game against somebody else then they can make it as simple as they want. Of course make it too simple and it stops being Warhammer 40k. 8th ed has added more character to the various armies while actively trying to keep the game better balanced.

 

Removing rules that do nothing but add complexity while making the units in question worse (vehicle rules in 6th and 7th) and streamlining several stats so you no longer need to consult various tables for no reason are both huge steps in the right direction as it allows people to focus on the game. The more accessible the rules, the easier it is to see your potential strategies, the easier it is to actually make strategic choices.

[allfatherstudios]

I am ok with my ‘pleb version’ of 40k. I also think it is hilariously misguided to think that 7th ed represented some sort of strategic masterpiece. Invisible teleporting deathstars and D strength weapons were lame, and using them took all the tactical acumen of an uno game. Good riddance, l say.

Now can we stop prancing about complaining that low IQ commoners are ruining 40k? People who say stuff like that ruin 40k.

Well no. So please don't lie, it's not responsible or respectful. I said that I preferred older editions of the game. I'm not going to defend against character attacks for asking for the difference between older editions regarding tactics and stating that like others here I dislike this simplified version.

 

I understand that you think the above is personally attacking you. But you should probably know that's it not.

 

I'm going to call a mod here. To close the thread. As I feel mature discussion has ended. And emotionally charged parties are diverting the post as well as wrongfully interpreting intent, and context.

 

To clarify there are multiple people in this thread that openly disgree with you without getting emotionally charged about it. Are you really so closed minded that you dismissed all of the thousands of people that dropped out of 8th for being 8th being to simple for their taste.

 

By definition a simplified version would mean less than before. Now you can claim, that's it still tactical. But to what degree was it simplified. It's right there in the language. Simplified = less.

[Azekai]

I think mature discussion has ended, yes. On that we can agree.

[allfatherstudios]

I think mature discussion has ended, yes. On that we can agree.

Well yes that happens when people start to lie.

[DuskRaider]

Pot, meet kettle.

[Iron Father Ferrum]

That's quite enough of that.