Hate of 9th: Playing your Way

[Schlitzaf]

And Horus Heresy exists as a supported system

[MegaVolt87]

And Horus Heresy exists as a supported system

 

And who is paying + playing for that if the locals all only play current edition 40k matched + tourny? Again your choice is already made by the majority if you actually want to play the GW game. A relatively balanced edition is not an unreasonable or selfish want. 

[Slave to Darkness]

And Horus Heresy exists as a supported system

Not everybody plays HH games. I dont see Eldar or Orks ripping up the tables... HH is only good if you play Marines or Marines with a different colour. Sure it shares 7th ed rules so you can play Nids vs Sons of Horus if you wish, but try that in a GW store and you have no chance.

[Schlitzaf]

 

 

And Horus Heresy exists as a supported system

Not everybody plays HH games. I dont see Eldar or Orks ripping up the tables... HH is only good if you play Marines or Marines with a different colour. Sure it shares 7th ed rules so you can play Nids vs Sons of Horus if you wish, but try that in a GW store and you have no chance.

???? My local GW would have no problem if someone did that

[Slave to Darkness]

 

 

And Horus Heresy exists as a supported system

Not everybody plays HH games. I dont see Eldar or Orks ripping up the tables... HH is only good if you play Marines or Marines with a different colour. Sure it shares 7th ed rules so you can play Nids vs Sons of Horus if you wish, but try that in a GW store and you have no chance.

???? My local GW would have no problem if someone did that

 

Your the lucky one then, also GW should talk to your manager about that, they are only supposed to push the new thing and ignore past editions, push sales of the core rules and the latest releases, push sales of expensive faction kits (hey kid you say you play Guard, this Baneblade is just what you need) then badger them to buy additional brushes and paints at the till. God I loved the GW 10 commandments when I worked there, money first fun later. I hated GW retail, I felt like such an arse diving down the customers throats before they were even through the door. 

[Schlitzaf]

Horus Heresy 2nd Edition is a modern edition of a the game.

[Scribe]

Horus Heresy 2nd Edition is a modern edition of a the game.

 

Where do I buy that?

[LemanPuss]

I like 9th edition.

If you find some aspects too complicated, just don't use them.

My brother and I avoid some necromunda rules for that reason.
 

Edited January 19, 2022 by Xenith
double post

[Lord Marshal]

I don't enjoy 9th so I just play another game(s). That's it. 

 

Part of why GW has the stranglehold they do, and why they can get away with such shoddy writing, it's because the overwhelming majority of people staunchly refuse to look at any game that isn't from the GW eco-sphere.

[Cpt_Reaper]

I would never want to see 40k return to any prior edition. When I look back, 8th and 9th have been the most fun I have had since I started in 4th Edition. The amount of customisation available right now is awesome. I think stratagems are a great addition to the game, and are in no way similar to the formations of 6th/7th. Hell, even these Armies of Renown are barely similar to the old Formations. With stratagems I, as the commander, can influence the battle and potentially counter horrifically bad rolls and limit how much sway luck or lack thereof has on my game.

 

40k is in a good place. All GW needs to do is ACTUALLY MAKE CHAPTER APPROVED USEFUL in that it is a collection of any updates the game receives rather than paid points updates and mission updates. GW doesn't have a stranglehold on anything. 40k is a damn good game, and I say that having tried other systems. I've tried WarmaHordes, X-Wing, Legion...I play Armada because I like Star Destroyers. Not a single one has made me say "wow, this game does X better than 40k!" they all made me wish I was playing 40k by the end of it.

[Schlitzaf]

 

 

Horus Heresy 2nd Edition is a modern edition of a the game.

Where do I buy that?

FW where they sell the Horus Heresy rulebook?

[Tawnis]

Is smokescreen and transhuman question rhetorical or genuine btw?

 

Also tangential aside it should be noted the “upgrades” aren’t free in PL (long and short cheapest/most expensige ujit variajt is averaged togethor to make a unit power level. Rounding up to higher power level. If a a midway point. And certain ujits (elite cool nelee armed squads) tend to be actually cost PL = most expensige gear option taken).

 

And agreed on Soup issue. I thijk genuinely goijg back to 8th detachment system + factional purity bonus. Be enough to make soup reasonable.

 

Scribe but removinf atrategems you remove units abilities manu tjay were in olden days just unit abilities. But made units op nerf pls. Thunderfires being a very easy example of this

Yes it was rhetorical. Putting aside the fact that always being Transhuman as it currently is would be busted, something of that flavour should be baseline. 

 

Somewhat. I've played most armies in Crusade and some units seem to be calculated pretty well based on their upgrades and some really seem like they are not. For example something like Space Marine Scouts (putting aside their actual viability for the moment) 10 models gets you 8PL which is the equivalent of about 160 points. Basline 10 scouts are 140 points, so taking a standard squad is even worse than normal. If you give them all camo cloaks and sniper rifles, that would bump them up to 180, toss in a missile launcher and you're at 193, so you're a bit ahead at that point. But those are wildly different units for the same cost. If you had an equipment cost, there would then be reason to take either version of this unit and anything in between rather than just the best version.

 

Yeah, as I said above, would much rather a lot of this stuff be baseline rather than strats. 

Edited January 19, 2022 by Tawnis

[Schlitzaf]

Yeah and what 190+140? 330/2 = 165. So because closer to 160 then 180 you get 8 power power level. And it should be noted here Snipers + Cloaks aren’t “really” best way to run. Knife/Bolter/Shotgun scouts generally considered better due to sniper unreliably. But that a tangential aside.

 

A unit PL for most or atleast sigificant number is there (“cheapest” + “most expensive” variant)/40

 

Exceptions mostly occur when empyrically always upgrade (Devies and VangVet Upgrades.$

Edited January 19, 2022 by Schlitzaf

[Valkyrion]

Saying 'if you don't like 9th then play something else' is the least helpful response if you actually want to play 40k.

I'm lucky that my little group is happy with the way we play, which isn't 9th, but i couldn't take my 2k Crimson Fists army to a local GW and have a pick up game and be able to play the game as intended.  I could in 4th, 5th, 6th. 

 

it's not because it's too complicated - the core rules are simple - it's that I couldn't possibly remember everything that we are both doing. 

I would have absolutely no idea how to play this game with a stranger. 

[Lord Marshal]

Saying 'if you don't like 9th then play something else' is the least helpful response if you actually want to play 40k.

I'm lucky that my little group is happy with the way we play, which isn't 9th, but i couldn't take my 2k Crimson Fists army to a local GW and have a pick up game and be able to play the game as intended.  I could in 4th, 5th, 6th. 

 

it's not because it's too complicated - the core rules are simple - it's that I couldn't possibly remember everything that we are both doing. 

I would have absolutely no idea how to play this game with a stranger. 

 

The problem is that arguably THE reason GW get away with such shoddy writing is because they know the amount of people who are actually going to 'play something else' is very minimal, because ultimately people would rather play a bad edition of 40k than get into another game with a much smaller community.

 

There's plenty of Not!40k games out there like the often touted One Page Rules. It's just that people have a crippling fear of touching anything outside of the GW echosphere that as someone who plays a lot of historical games, finds utterly baffling. If a company puts out a crappy edition of their latest WW2, Napoleonic or American Civil War game, what do people do? They just go and grab another system, using the same models, and maybe circle back into their old favourites if things improve or if they just get bored and want to try a different ruleset.

 

If the sci-fi/fantasy wargaming community realised that's something they could do as well, GW might actually have to do a half-decent job if they want to keep selling rulebooks. 

 

Obviously if you only play at Games Workshop stores that's not an option, but I'm willing to bet at least 95% of people here either game at a LFGS, a club, or at home.

Edited January 20, 2022 by Lord Marshal

[Jorin Helm-splitter]

So first to avoid further thread derailment on other threads (Goonhammer). One thing consistently (suprising?) intrigues me. Is that people by all appearances hate 9th Edition Warhammer 40,000 as written by Games Workshop studio because absurdly large amount of rules. Strategems, being the case point.

 

And the notUSR Special Rules. Like how we have 80 differenr ways saying “Deepstrike/Infilitrate/Advance&Chsrge” or Plethora of Gear options. Now don’t ger me wrong sometimes is frustrates me too. But if core basis of 9th edition, strategems, not USR, subfaction rules, factional purity of rules, et all.

 

You DON’T have to play 9th. The way matched play defines it. In fact GW Tells you to play way you want too. And broadly speaking has 3 formats to enable that. But beyond that. This is the secrer hidden 4th format. No CP, no Strategem, USR, even fabled blast templates snd scattered dice is used.

 

Horus Heresy. Like why play 9th? And strategem bloat. Like unless GT grinder. All concerned about is your rules. Look I love reading snd learning other armies. 40 dollar codexes stopped that. But same token you don’t need too. /shrug.

 

I just want to know what would replace strategem bloat with? And avoid MSU Spam (and lesser extent nerfing abilities) also with Factional Purity Bonus. Its a Factional Purity Bonus. The stuff entire community clambered for and wanted as well takijg soup to the back and shooting it. So I guess, I want to know whay do you do you want that GW doesn’t provide?

 

1) I don't hate 9th edition, but as the price to play the game goes up, I get picky.  GW is expecting me to buy my 3rd chapter approved, and apparently if some of the rumors are correct my second SM codex, and yet a lot of units suck. You could probably make the argument that I'm fortunate, some people have bought two chapter approved that left their army in the bottom tiers. I try to only discuss it in threads like these to not spread negativity, but I think criticism is warranted.

 

2) I don't mind the USRs having different names I do think it speeds things up but for the most part that isn't necessary.

 

3) Not having to play 40k is different from not wanting too. I also really like primaris and they don't fit into HH. I will say the best change 40k made in 8th was getting rid of templates, most games they were fine but then you ran into that guy.

 

4) I'd replace stratagems with unit specific abilities and get rid of the damage/toughness spikes.

 

5) How does 10th avoid MSU? I can understand the argument that stratagems have a bigger effect on large squads, but a lot of the good ones have variable cost, and blast is more effective against big squads. That said I wouldn't mind seeing a discount similar to AoS if you take the max size.

 

6) Fraction bonusses are fine. I don't like subfraction soup but that's based on poor experiences from 8th.

 

For me if I'm being brutally honest, I want better internal balance which I think Stratagems make more difficult, and I want the game to play faster. I really think stratagems add a lot of time to the game. I wouldn't mind if the game went down in scale (1500 points) but I don't know how likely that is with knights.  

[Evil Eye]

Lord Marshall's hit the nail on the head re: people refusing to play anything other than the most modern version of the "official" ruleset (and even then, only Matched Play, but that's a whole other kettle of fish). If people as a whole said "No, this edition sucks, I'm going to play this edition/these homebrew rules instead" GW would have to put some serious effort into winning people back.

 

Of course, that in and of itself presents its own raft of problems. For one thing, exactly what people want from the system seems to vary tremendously from person to person. GW could spend years developing a thematic, well-crafted ruleset that harkens back to second edition in its ability to marry fluff with crunch and customizability (seriously, I've been reading my 2E Tyranid Codex and that thing is glorious), which combined with the larger range of factions and models nowadays would theoretically allow for a near-infinite sandbox of potential armies...and then the whole thing could flop hard because people demand slimmed-down rulesets focused on competitive play where balance is everything, and the wide range of themed armies are to them a minefield of potential meta-breakers. Likewise, GW could try and produce the ultimate competitive wargame with perfect balancing, and in the process alienate their consumer base by turning the game into a soulless number-crunching exercise where any fluffy features are excised in the name of balance.

 

To expand on the above, I've heard people clamour for a return to the "glory days" of 5th. I got into the hobby in 5th edition, and unless you were a very particular kind of gamer, it wasn't all it was cracked up to be. There were vast disparities between codices, with some factions being saddled with 3rd edition 'dexes (and in the case of Dark Eldar, ancient models) and some 5th edition books being arguable sidegrades from the books that preceded them (notably the 5th edition Tyranid Codex, which added lots of cool stuff whilst also taking a lot away, and which was responsible for the Chapterhouse debacle and by extension the "no model, no rules" stance GW has). And some factions never even got 5th edition books, having to wait until the cursed 6th edition for updates! In short, "No!". Of course these are the same people who would rather that instead of bolters and shootas we just had "medium projectile weapons", so...

[Lexington]

To expand on the above, I've heard people clamour for a return to the "glory days" of 5th. I got into the hobby in 5th edition, and unless you were a very particular kind of gamer, it wasn't all it was cracked up to be. There were vast disparities between codices, with some factions being saddled with 3rd edition 'dexes (and in the case of Dark Eldar, ancient models) and some 5th edition books being arguable sidegrades from the books that preceded them (notably the 5th edition Tyranid Codex, which added lots of cool stuff whilst also taking a lot away, and which was responsible for the Chapterhouse debacle and by extension the "no model, no rules" stance GW has). And some factions never even got 5th edition books, having to wait until the cursed 6th edition for updates! In short, "No!".

 

Eh, I don't think that's an incredibly fair way to describe what people are talking about when the mythical Golden Age of 5th. Sure, the actual experience of 5th often didn't feel great, due to the issues you've brought up as well as some other issues with both the core rules and the Codexes, but 5th was a strong core system that was definitely the best refinement of the 3rd Ed game engine. It's the concept people liked, as well as much of the execution.

 

More importantly to this topic, tho, it's maybe also the last time 40K felt manageable. The rules themselves were simple enough, and between that and a Codex, you could feel like you understood the flow of the game no matter what hit the other side of the table. Nowadays, that's just not true. The core rules are, at best, a minor baseline for the truly bewildering array of stratagems, warlord traits, secondary objectives, subfactions, progressive special rules, relics and other weird individualisms that current Codexes are lined with, and that's before the FAQ's and Chapter Approved books that end up re-writing half of those things when they inevitably break the game. It's too much, by far, and it breeds nostalgia for a simpler time when the table wasn't littered with Codexes, expansions and play aides.

 

Infinity got a mention earlier, and I think that's a useful comparison. Infinity's learning curve is infamously steep, and one caveat I try to give to people who are curious about it is that it's a lifestyle game. You have to think about it a lot when you're away from the table so that you meaningfully compete in actual games. It's a big commitment, but what you get in return for that dedication is a truly incredible game experience that delivers on multiple levels like nothing else I've ever played. Part of the problem, at least as I see it, is that the design studio is trying to bring 40K into that same premium investment/reward space. It's a nice thought, but the resulting game is still Warhammer 40,000, the gaming equivalent of a McDonald's hamburger. It's not a good game, just a complex one that rewards weird, non-narrative rules combos, and where army building remains - and is maybe increasingly - the most important phase of the game. This isn't a knock on the studio's talent (as actual game design competence goes, I'd say it's the most impressive iteration of the team thus far), but just the facts of a game whose rules are carved out as much or more by business demands, sales strategies and legacy cruft as they are by actual demands for quality.

 

I don't know what there is to do about it, especially since 40K still seems to be making incredible bank with little signs of slowing down. Maybe that'll change - I hear a lot about people being truly exhausted with 9th, even though actual games have been much rarer due to world events - but I don't think that anyone can count on that happening anytime soon. 'Till then, when the idea of playing 9th comes up, I'm going to see about playing it raw. Take most of those extra systems mentioned above and jettison them. 9th Ed is a very solid core system. It'd be cool to to play it sometime.

Edited January 20, 2022 by Lexington

[Redcomet]

 

 

To expand on the above, I've heard people clamour for a return to the "glory days" of 5th. I got into the hobby in 5th edition, and unless you were a very particular kind of gamer, it wasn't all it was cracked up to be. There were vast disparities between codices, with some factions being saddled with 3rd edition 'dexes (and in the case of Dark Eldar, ancient models) and some 5th edition books being arguable sidegrades from the books that preceded them (notably the 5th edition Tyranid Codex, which added lots of cool stuff whilst also taking a lot away, and which was responsible for the Chapterhouse debacle and by extension the "no model, no rules" stance GW has). And some factions never even got 5th edition books, having to wait until the cursed 6th edition for updates! In short, "No!".

Eh, I don't think that's an incredibly fair way to describe what people are talking about when the mythical Golden Age of 5th. Sure, the actual experience of 5th often didn't feel great, due to the issues you've brought up as well as some other issues with both the core rules and the Codexes, but 5th was a strong core system that was definitely the best refinement of the 3rd Ed game engine. It's the concept people liked, as well as much of the execution.

 

More importantly to this topic, tho, it's maybe also the last time 40K felt manageable. The rules themselves were simple enough, and between that and a Codex, you could feel like you understood the flow of the game no matter what hit the other side of the table. Nowadays, that's just not true. The core rules are, at best, a minor baseline for the truly bewildering array of stratagems, warlord traits, secondary objectives, subfactions, progressive special rules, relics and other weird individualisms that current Codexes are lined with, and that's before the FAQ's and Chapter Approved books that end up re-writing half of those things when they inevitably break the game. It's too much, by far, and it breeds nostalgia for a simpler time when the table wasn't littered with Codexes, expansions and play aides.

 

Infinity got a mention earlier, and I think that's a useful comparison. Infinity's learning curve is infamously steep, and one caveat I try to give to people who are curious about it is that it's a lifestyle game. You have to think about it a lot when you're away from the table so that you meaningfully compete in actual games. It's a big commitment, but what you get in return for that dedication is a truly incredible game experience that delivers on multiple levels like nothing else I've ever played. Part of the problem, at least as I see it, is that the design studio is trying to bring 40K into that same premium investment/reward space. It's a nice thought, but the resulting game is still Warhammer 40,000, the gaming equivalent of a McDonald's hamburger. It's not a good game, just a complex one that rewards weird, non-narrative rules combos, and where army building remains - and is maybe increasingly - the most important phase of the game. This isn't a knock on the studio's talent (as actual game design competence goes, I'd say it's the most impressive iteration of the team thus far), but just the facts of a game whose rules are carved out as much or more by business demands, sales strategies and legacy cruft as they are by actual demands for quality.

 

I don't know what there is to do about it, especially since 40K still seems to be making incredible bank with little signs of slowing down. Maybe that'll change - I hear a lot about people being truly exhausted with 9th, even though actual games have been much rarer due to world events - but I don't think that anyone can count on that happening anytime soon. 'Till then, when the idea of playing 9th comes up, I'm going to see about playing it raw. Take most of those extra systems mentioned above and jettison them. 9th Ed is a very solid core system. It'd be cool to to play it sometime.

Have you considered that people are exhausted with 40k because they haven’t played very many games? That if people had the usual frequency of games they would have gotten used to the system?

 

I play Infinity and had a hard time with learning the rules until I had a couple of weeks with a handful of games, gradually adding rules to the game, before it clicked.

[Lexington]

Have you considered that people are exhausted with 40k because they haven’t played very many games? That if people had the usual frequency of games they would have gotten used to the system?

I play Infinity and had a hard time with learning the rules until I had a couple of weeks with a handful of games, gradually adding rules to the game, before it clicked.

 

Repetition's always going to be a good teacher, sure, but this gets back to that investment/reward trade-off - 9th Ed 40K just doesn't give a good enough game experience for most people, I'd guess, to be worth the time. And it's a lot of time. Even with a lot of regular play, in fact, I'm not sure your average player wouldn't find full Matched Play 40K to be too much of a memory load. There's so, so much to the game these days, and it keeps growing, Blob-like, with every new Codex and Warzone.

 

There's also just the fact that even with repetition, you're going to have huge blind spots unless you play against every other army on the regular. An individual Codex in 9th just has so much in the way of material. I think someone noted that there's over a thousand combinations to be had within the Kata, or whatever they're calling the Custodes' progressive rule addition. That's why I don't think Infinity's a great comparison in this case, because Infinity leans so much on its base rules, rather than giving each individual faction its own bespoke set of special systems. There's no Infinity equivalent of having to remember what another army's set of rules does on turn three specifically, and how that can combine with a faction-specific stratagem, and how that will let them complete a faction-specific secondary objective, etc., etc.

 

At the end of the day, I just don't think there's any combination of ramp-up and regular practice that's going to make 9th's overstuffed Codexes not feel like an overwhelming knowledge burden for quite a lot of players.

[Kenzaburo]

I fully agree with Lexington. When I played Infinity in N3 it became clear pretty fast that the rules system was quite good. IT was just...a lot. I had fun playing the game, but it required a lot of learning on my side, and as Lexington said, you need to invest time in it in a lifestyle way, that I wasn't willing to give to ONE of my hobbies.

 

Instead I decided to go back to 40k, because I wanted the easier, less taxing experience, with less complexity and more focus on the really cool looking models on a cool looking table and going "CHOOOM!" and "Ka-boom!". :D Because in Infinity I had a beautiful looking army, cool looking Cyberpunk terrain, but was focussed on flipping through the myriad of equipment rules half of the time and considering my orders the other half. My minis could have been markers, I wouldn't have realized, because the game was a mental exercise first and foremost. And that wasn't what I wanted. 

 

I wanted to hang with my mates, focus on fluff and Grimdarkness and wanted my game to be full of fun, short interactions with the models and my friendly opponents. I had that in 4th and 5th because I could easily gauge what was going on with my army and my opponents at a few glances. My games of 9th I spent buried in the codex, the rulebook, checking my army list and flipping through strat cards. And when I was using my models I kept on wondering if I was forgetting some rule, strat or whatnot. 

 

And when that was the case I felt like I could be playing with almost anything, the models, or the spectacle, as I said somewhere else, wasn't the focus anymore. Talking to my mates wasn't. It was just getting to grips with the rules. And I feel like I could've played a video game then instead, because if rules end up being such a priority, being so much in the foreground of the overall experience, why play with minis on a board then? That's of course just my own take, I don't know if a lot of others would feel that way. 

 

And since Hate of 9th is the topic - hate is way too strong a word. Again, I'd agree with Lexington. 9th at it's core is quite good. I like the wording and presentation of the rules. But everything else is too much. 

 

And I could go even farther: 9th ed rulebook is the first one, where there's no more handcrafted tables and scenery in there. It's just playmats and the standard terrain they sell. No more elaborate gaming vistas. And that's in line with how it feels to play in 9th. It's rendered down to rules and those simplified tourney maps, but the spectacle of playing a game of 40k is gone. 

[Schlitzaf]

I should change the title: Point kf topic, “Hating 9th: Why do you still play it (and not other ways)”

[ThePenitentOne]

 

 

I wanted to hang with my mates, focus on fluff and Grimdarkness and wanted my game to be full of fun, short interactions with the models and my friendly opponents. I had that in 4th and 5th because I could easily gauge what was going on with my army and my opponents at a few glances. My games of 9th I spent buried in the codex, the rulebook, checking my army list and flipping through strat cards. And when I was using my models I kept on wondering if I was forgetting some rule, strat or whatnot. 

 

. 

 

It sounds like you just perfectly described Open play.

 

I think what OP wants to know is "Why didn't you play that?"

 

Why did you opt for Matched when it is clearly out of synch with your needs?

 

(In case you don't know this: In open, the only strats that exist are the ones in the BRB. Only Battleforged armies can use Codex strats, and only Matched play requires armies to be battleforged.)

 

Note: This is an honest question, not a barb, and not a "Play different!" ultimatum. You may have genuinely legitimate reasons for choosing Matched (many people do)- I'm just curious, because you said you wanted to play with "Your Mates" - seems to me that this might imply you have a group where you CAN play other versions of the game.

Edited January 21, 2022 by ThePenitentOne

[Schlitzaf]

 

 

 

 

I wanted to hang with my mates, focus on fluff and Grimdarkness and wanted my game to be full of fun, short interactions with the models and my friendly opponents. I had that in 4th and 5th because I could easily gauge what was going on with my army and my opponents at a few glances. My games of 9th I spent buried in the codex, the rulebook, checking my army list and flipping through strat cards. And when I was using my models I kept on wondering if I was forgetting some rule, strat or whatnot.

 

.

It sounds like you just perfectly described Open play.

 

I think what OP wants to know is "Why didn't you play that?"

 

Why did you opt for Matched when it is clearly out of synch with your needs?

 

(In case you don't know this: In open, the only strats that exist are the ones in the BRB. Only Battleforged armies can use Codex strats, and only Matched play requires armies to be battleforged.)

 

Note: This is an honest question, not a barb, and not a "Play different!" ultimatum. You may have genuinely legitimate reasons for choosing Matched (many people do)- I'm just curious, because you said you wanted to play with "Your Mates" - seems to me that this might imply you have a group where you CAN play other versions of the game.

Pentient exactly this is the question of the thread.

[Jorin Helm-splitter]

I should change the title: Point kf topic, “Hating 9th: Why do you still play it (and not other ways)”

 

I think it's important to keep in mind that there is a social contract involved when you play the game. I have some friends who approach the game from a more competitive mindset than I do. Typically, they will tone down their lists a bit so I can still run the models I like but I'll play the mission the way they want so we both get a good experience. This is just a normal part of 40k for most people, that I said while I'm willing to make that compromise with my friends I still want my opinions known.

 

I can understand being frustrated by the negativity in the scene right now, but I think with the cost of the game increasing you're going to see people try and take ownership. That doesn't mean that my opinion is more valid than yours I just owe it to myself to try and maximize my fun.

 

Personally, the main reason I don't play open as a default is because the current batch of codex feel like they're intended* to be balanced around stratagems, fraction rules, and relics. While I think it would speed up the game I don't think it would make balance better, so there isn't an easy solution. 

 

 

 

 

*we've consistently had armies with high 60-70% win rates so it's tough to say balanced atm though I hope that gets better.