Anyone less excited for 10th than they were?

[The Spitehorde]

6 hours ago, Captain Idaho said:

I must say, the amount of mistakes in the Index books just surrounding Space Marines, requiring FAQ and errata fixes, alongside things like damage reduction NOT stipulating a minimum of 1 or a cap, as well as little things like a Neurotyrant joining a Neurogaunt unit and getting nuked at T3, just makes it clear the game is going to be bogged down within weeks.

 

These cards were championed as super great for cleaning up the game but they'll all be incorrect and already printed OR different to the digitals we just downloaded.

 

Just a hot mess.

 

 

 

Donning the tin foil hat for a moment....

 

Maybe GW only did a small print run of the cards to hand out to the usual influencers/YouTube reviewer types. They punted out the PDF's so we, the players, could do their debugging for them before they do full print runs. 

 

[Scribe]

14 minutes ago, The Spitehorde said:

Maybe GW only did a small print run of the cards to hand out to the usual influencers/YouTube reviewer types. They punted out the PDF's so we, the players, could do their debugging for them before they do full print runs. 

 

Why proof/debug/edit, when you can get unpaid labour to do it?

[ZeroWolf]

Biggest issue here is that the datacards have already been at the printers already. Right now I'd wager they're in shipping crates. It exactly why I warned people against hoping that GW changed things in the SM codex. That book is already done and dusted and printed off. 

[spessmarine]

Amour of Contempt is one command point whereas Spiky Armour of Contempt (Infernal Rites) is two

[Mandragola]

Seeing the indexes start to appear is pretty disappointing, though not surprising. GW had written loads about how they were fixing the game with a baseline for balance and so on. Clearly, that hasn't been achieved. The indexes aren't balanced.

 

I'm not too concerned by the few mechanical issues that have emerged as I do expect a FAQ to fix them fairly soon. Balance is a bigger issue for me though. Some of the issues are just so glaringly obvious it's strange that they made it into print at all. The issues might well get fixed before too long with a balance dataslate but then we are back in the same 9e territory of churn, with units on a constant rollercoaster of power level. I'm really not up for that.

 

GW were implying that they'd undergone a bit of a culture shift and ma new way of working but there's very little evidence of that. This stuff doesn't look well playtested and some of the issues should have been spotted without requiring testing.

[siegfriedfr]

As per usual, there is an abysmal difference between the quality of the core rules, and the poorly balanced factions and units.

 

i'm still very hyped for the models, but not for the rules.

 

 

[appiah4]

My observations: Streamlining is a lie.  Solid core rules is a lie.  Faction balance is a lie.  40K 10e is a total cluster:cuss:.

[Brother Christopher]

9 hours ago, appiah4 said:

My observations: Streamlining is a lie.  Solid core rules is a lie.  Faction balance is a lie.  40K 10e is a total cluster:cuss:.

 

I mean, it's not out yet and we don't have the full picture but I can't shake the feeling that you're right. Seeing the quality of the Indexes, regrettably, I agree with you, particularly with regard to streamlining and balance (?). The core rules seem to be fine.

 

I will eventually get over the further culling of Firstborn (but the treatment Veterans got and the limited use for Razorback surely stings) but the Space Marine data sheets are an unintuitive mess, especially when it comes to limitation/options: who in which unit can take what piece of wargear, which unit can join which squad and which can take which transport is a nuisance akin to reading through an act of law.

[Emperor Ming]

11 hours ago, appiah4 said:

My observations: Streamlining is a lie.  Solid core rules is a lie.  Faction balance is a lie.  40K 10e is a total cluster:cuss:.

Its certainly looking somewhat that way

[Plaguecaster]

The multitude of poorly written rules even after the claim of it being balanced and streamlined plus other stupid things like this showing they didn't even care or even proofread any of it before release. 

[Rain]

Someone in another thread pointed out that under RAW Tzeentch lesser demons cannot use their own shooting attacks because they are not psykers. So I guess currently Flamers are more properly described as just -ers. 

[Evil Eye]

13 hours ago, appiah4 said:

My observations: Streamlining is a lie.  Solid core rules is a lie.  Faction balance is a lie.  40K 10e is a total cluster:cuss:.

Spot on there, Avitus.

 

But yeah. 10th is looking like a bit of a disaster, and my initial thoughts of "It might be fun even if it's too gamey/streamlined to be truly satisfying" have been replaced with "This is gonna suck and I genuinely reckon the edition won't last long". It'll be 6th all over again- grand fanfare for its release, falls apart almost immediately and a slightly better version is rushed out the door afterwards.

[spessmarine]

18 hours ago, Mandragola said:

Seeing the indexes start to appear is pretty disappointing, though not surprising. GW had written loads about how they were fixing the game with a baseline for balance and so on. Clearly, that hasn't been achieved. The indexes aren't balanced.

 

I'm not too concerned by the few mechanical issues that have emerged as I do expect a FAQ to fix them fairly soon. Balance is a bigger issue for me though. Some of the issues are just so glaringly obvious it's strange that they made it into print at all. The issues might well get fixed before too long with a balance dataslate but then we are back in the same 9e territory of churn, with units on a constant rollercoaster of power level. I'm really not up for that.

 

GW were implying that they'd undergone a bit of a culture shift and ma new way of working but there's very little evidence of that. This stuff doesn't look well playtested and some of the issues should have been spotted without requiring testing.

 

Either get your stuff together GW, acknowledge a three-year edition cycle is something you cannot keep up, or give up your physical obsession and shift to a digital rules set without the need to nickel-and-dime rules. At least with the latter you have one location that can quickly be updated rather than cards that have been made obsolete before ever reaching customers.

 

3 hours ago, Plaguecaster said:

The multitude of poorly written rules even after the claim of it being balanced and streamlined plus other stupid things like this showing they didn't even care or even proofread any of it before release. 

 

It pays to be Macragge Blue (or to smell bad)

Edited June 15, 2023 by spessmarine

[Sea Creature]

GW already fixed an error in the Deathwatch codex without a FAQ. That’s an advantage of finally going digital. *Shrugs 

[Nagashsnee]

Honestly despite it all this is the most excited i have been for 40k since 6th. Free core rules i dont have to pretend to have bought online, free day one faction rules and a collection large enough that it means i can cover any small changes to my faction (Primary Mech) without having to spend 1 euro.

 

They have publicly stated that books are taking a back pedal rules wise as things official start shifting to digital being the primary delivery method so if they do want to work on things they can. 

 

Plus the cards and other edition bling are all optional, we all know they wont be good, they wont last and they will be overpriced, so anyone who buys fools gold well...

 

So overall so far its all free and a step over 9th in design philosophy.  Worse case my faction isnt very good but honestly anyone who plays 40k primarily to test their skill at a strategy game deserves all the pain GW can give them.  As long as its semi balanced i will be happy and if its not i will just paint and read with a beer and pretzel game here and there like i did the last 2 editions.

 

On the lore side i dont give 2 hoots about the lion, but if they manage to flesh out a full on tyranic war that's not centered around 3 special characters but is instead a WAR i will be very happy. 

 

So many +++++ few ----.  

[Zoatibix]

I think the core rules are okay.

 

But as the indexes have come out it’s clear that GW haven’t really learned the lessons from previous editions or AOS.

The hunger to slap special rules on every card, ease of making powerful combos, overuse of things like Devastating Wounds or Lethal Hits, amount of re-rolls or Mortal Wounds seems way too high already.

 

 

[Mandragola]

6 hours ago, Nagashsnee said:

Honestly despite it all this is the most excited i have been for 40k since 6th. Free core rules i dont have to pretend to have bought online, free day one faction rules and a collection large enough that it means i can cover any small changes to my faction (Primary Mech) without having to spend 1 euro.

 

They have publicly stated that books are taking a back pedal rules wise as things official start shifting to digital being the primary delivery method so if they do want to work on things they can. 

 

Plus the cards and other edition bling are all optional, we all know they wont be good, they wont last and they will be overpriced, so anyone who buys fools gold well...

 

So overall so far its all free and a step over 9th in design philosophy.  Worse case my faction isnt very good but honestly anyone who plays 40k primarily to test their skill at a strategy game deserves all the pain GW can give them.  As long as its semi balanced i will be happy and if its not i will just paint and read with a beer and pretzel game here and there like i did the last 2 editions.

 

On the lore side i dont give 2 hoots about the lion, but if they manage to flesh out a full on tyranic war that's not centered around 3 special characters but is instead a WAR i will be very happy. 

 

So many +++++ few ----.  

I'm torn between this view and disappointment. 

 

Ultimately, 10th is better than 9th. It isn't perfect but it is an improvement. It isn't balanced but neither was 9th. It isn't totally straightforward but it's vastly easier to understand than 9th. 

[Brother Christopher]

With the caveat that 10th isn't out yet and I'm reserving final judgement till that happens, speaking of 'improvements' in the context of 10th edition rules is just unjustified from a customer's perspective. This is exactly what really makes me less and less excited. Naively, I've been waiting for the #new40k to be a successful reset. Judging by the quality of the Indexes, this just might not be the case.

 

At this stage, 10th edition must fix the game. There's no room for just being an improvement. After all, how much time does a financially successful company need to make a game that's not defective? OnePageRules somehow managed to make a relatively balanced and streamlined game (basically being a shadow game to 40k, with a similar number of factions and units) with a fraction of GW's budget.

 

Considering the prices of miniatures, hobby supplies and rules, we -- as hobbyists -- should be expecting, nay, demanding, only excellence (i.e., the highest quality of products). Instead, year after year, edition after edition, we are being sold subpar products for premium prices. Arguably, GW makes great improvements with regard to models, but the experience of the game was quite problematic for many who don't hold a degree in GW Studies. 9th edition has been a mess and we, as a community, should not be endorsing their actions (a sentiment I voiced many a time). Regrettably, GW are good at marketing and know how to target and exploit their target groups (after all, who doesn't want bigger space marines, right?!). 10th edition has a relatively rough start - a fact that doesn't bode well for its future as it suggests that #new40k isn't new.

[Mandragola]

Yeah there's none of that I can argue with, to be honest. The incredibly tiny amount of GW's budget that they seem to spend on their games design and the very bad job they consistently do as a result, sucks. We do not get what we pay for.

 

A reset that's done to try and fix the game, but which doesn't do that, is clearly a failure. Maybe they can do that with updates now everything is digital, though apparently they intend to give out these cards as physical things. If they're already out of date by the time they get to people, that'll be a bit rubbish.

 

And yet despite all this, I quite look forward to playing a game or two, with my Marines and/or Knights. They both feel like they're roughly where they ought to be. All the units do something. I don't know if their points are right but we'll see. 

 

Some of the problematic-looking factions might not be too bad if they get the points right - either initially or eventually. Guard looking like a leafblower list, for example, could be remedied if artillery is expensive and tanks are cheap, for example.

 

Others will be harder to fix. Eldar are mechanically just devastating, while Tau and Votann are on the opposite end of the scale. It's harder for GW to change the numbers on cards they've printed and sold to us - though I guess they never minded doing that with Codexes.

[Doghouse]

I know it's tinfoil hat territory but it's possible it's by design. Release shoddy rules, patch them and then run them into the ground in time for the next edition. We know they are already planning 11th because it was announced it releases tided to the new Eisenhorn series. It feels like constant splash releases these days. 

 

Three years feels like too short a window for an edition on their release schedule. With this new electronic format I can't really see the need for new editions when they can just update the rules indefinitely like MMO seasons. 

 

1 hour ago, Mandragola said:

A reset that's done to try and fix the game, but which doesn't do that, is clearly a failure. Maybe they can do that with updates now everything is digital, though apparently they intend to give out these cards as physical things. If they're already out of date by the time they get to people, that'll be a bit rubbish.

 

That's the frustrating part for me, why make us give up all the codexes for this especially when a few are less than a year old.

 

3 hours ago, Brother Christopher said:

With the caveat that 10th isn't out yet and I'm reserving final judgement till that happens, speaking of 'improvements' in the context of 10th edition rules is just unjustified from a customer's perspective. This is exactly what really makes me less and less excited. Naively, I've been waiting for the #new40k to be a successful reset. Judging by the quality of the Indexes, this just might not be the case.

 

At this stage, 10th edition must fix the game. There's no room for just being an improvement. After all, how much time does a financially successful company need to make a game that's not defective? OnePageRules somehow managed to make a relatively balanced and streamlined game (basically being a shadow game to 40k, with a similar number of factions and units) with a fraction of GW's budget.

 

At this point it could be as simple a reason as they know they can get away with it. Like I say it's possibly all by design. I think their IP is more important to them these days than anything else.

 

Edited June 15, 2023 by Doghouse

[Mechanicus Tech-Support]

two words: Admech Index 

 

It's just lazy and obviously so, other indexs get their units listed in a sane order generally big leaders first, admech tho? oh its alphabetically with our flyer first, then cawl then electro priests. Makes the whole thing a pain in the ass to read.

 

Completely ignoring that admech get 6+ servitors instead of 4+ like spacemarines for..reasons, no firing deck ont he OPEN TOPPED transport and honestly I could go on but its just ranting at that point  

[Oxydo]

Been quite looking forward to 10th and I've generally liked how the indexes ended up overall. Quite a lot of factions have had a lot of interactions ans synergy between units and decent flavour.

 

And then came the Tau index. It feels like they spent time on setting up the Markerlight/FtGG faction trait and I like it and expected that the rest of the rules would be of a similiar quality. Alas, that was not to be.

 

It seems like they just didnt give toss about the units and the rest of the rules, because it's random, full of (probable)errors, slaphazardous changes, weird restrictions and little to no synergy outside of FtGG, leader+unit combo and Breachers in a Fish.

 

Whiny rant below.

Spoiler

But most importantly, it doesn't feel like Tau whatsoever.

 

Ethereals would seem like the typical leader that would interact with Battleshock both aiding in preventing it and causing it on death, but nope, they straight up don't outside of Space Pope's +1 aura.

 

Why does the Devlish transport 12 people when you can only have 10+1 sized squads?

 

The sole interaction with Overwatch is Strike teams getting a bargin bin version of the Heavy Weapon Team's Covering Fire ability.

 

 

 

Lost mobility due to utter lack of Assault on everything except twin carbines, Breachers and Vespid.

 

Why does crisis suit get automatic 6 advance yet don't have access to a single assault weapon, except by attaching a Coldstar.

 

In general, the weapons have pretty much no abilities outside of the occasional RF, Hazardous and Dev Wounds on 3 Rails.

 

Blast, there is by my count 4 weapons with that, two of which belong to the Stormsurge and the third is the Airburst. What about precision, 3 (Aun'shi in melee, Farstalkers vs 1 taget).

 

Complete and utter lack of ok anti-X (Pathfinder EMP and farstalkers tribalast have anti vehicle). The so called Anti-Air Sky ray doesnt even get anti-fly.  Farsight's abilities doesn't work when he deepstrikes because it's limited to within 9.

 

And making suits vehicles would have been fine, if they actually remembered to increase their toughness to vehicle levels instead of being squishy as a rhino at best.

 

Still going to get wiped from the board by Anti-fly 4+ Stubbers/*insert weapon* present everywhere, except in Tau.

 

 

All in all, the Tau index feels as an extremely low effort creation made with no love nor knowledge about the faction. Most units don't interact with each other.

 

I suspect they decided on Kauyon providing sustained hits early on and then that lead to the idea that no other weapon could have that. Same for Lethal hits and Montka.

 

But hey, at least DE and DG can't splinter and plaguespew the suits as easily as before!

 

 

[Aarik]

Now that the indexes have come out, does anyone else feel like the game has not gotten that much simpler?  GW did prune back some of the most egregious bloat (the proliferation of strategems, warlord traits/relics, etc.; and dial back the worst complicated faction rules like with ad mech and the thousand sons psychic phase), but beyond that there doesn't seem to be that much reduction.  Most units seem to have gotten some sort of special rule on their datasheets, which even changes between datasheets for similar models within a faction (e.g., daemon prince with and w/o wings) and between factions.  Having the rules directly on the datasheet does make it easier to keep track of, but that's still a decent amount of information people have to remember.  And while re-roll auras have been reduced, they've just been replaced by the proliferation of exploding effects (sustained hits, devastating wounds, etc.).  CSM, for example, with dark pacts are going to have each of their units making leadership tests in at least one, if not multiple, phases per turn, then choosing an exploding ability which is likely also going to be modified by a chaos mark.  That's still pretty bloated and a lot to keep track of. 

 

All of that is to say that to my far less than expert POV, it seems like GW has made sweeping changes to comparatively little effect.  It seems to be more change for change's sake.  I'm happy that the bloat that has been reduced was reduced, and to see a wider range of toughness values, for example.  But if GW is changing 90% of the rules, forcing us to re-learn them, for only like a 5-10% marginal increase in the quality of the game, is it really worth it?  It seems a bit like rearranging deck chairs on the titanic.  I don't mean to be doom and gloom, and i was genuinely excited for the simplified game that was advertised.  But the constant edition churn after everyone's codexes are finally released and everything has been relatively balanced by the various patches, only to start all over again with half- indexes and many factions waiting a year or years for their codexes, is frustrating.  I just want GW to get something right the first time, rather than keep making the same mistakes over and over again.  Sweeping changes should lead to sweeping improvement of the game, not just marginal improvement. 

 

And as someone who is not able to get many games in, its frustrating to have units' value swing so wildly.  I don't want to spend my limited time building and painting units that will likely not see the tabletop if I want to have a decent chance of winning, and without some more stability that's hard to do.  For example, if I spent a bunch of time painting a bunch of skitarii last edition because they were good, now that they have been gutted in the new index, a lot of that effort has been wasted.  [Or to take a real example, I spent a bunch of time on vanguard vets during lockdown, and now they seem to have been nerfed pretty hard.]  And it's harder to get excited to hop on the new edition train knowing that the same cycle will repeat itself.  Why (beyond general hobby enjoyment, which I'm not discounting) would I be excited to buy, build, and paint some new models when I know that by the time I actually get them finished they'll likely have gotten nerfed and I should have spent that time on something else instead?  It's much harder to plan projects when the game is so unstable.  And I think that also goes to a larger problem (in my opinion) that it seems so easy to lose the game in the list building phase before you even get to the table.  After spending so much effort to build an army that won't put me at an immediate disadvantage, it's frustrating to have the ground shift so drastically under me.

 

Now, the obvious counter to that is "don't chase the meta, build and paint what you think is cool."  And that's not wrong, and is basically where I'm at now.  The hobby is basically my only hobby, and I enjoy it a lot.  But I also enjoy being able to tell myself that my efforts have a larger purpose -- being able to play this cool game with my models -- rather than just resulting in some stuff that sits on my shelf and I like to look at.  Without that larger purpose, it's harder for me to get excited about hobbying.

 

If you've made it this far, I guess my larger point is that I really wish GW would do a better job putting out a good initial product that only needs gentle refinement, rather than rebuilding things from the ground up every three years and making the same mistakes again and again.  Do a better job proofreading and playtesting so that you don't release rules that everyone is the community realizes are broken as soon as they come out.  [I recognize that this doesn't happen all the time, but it happens more often than it should IMO.]  It's frustrating to see such a big company seemingly hamstrung by the need to hire another literal handful of relatively low-paid rules writers.  And all of this has really taken the wind out of my sails regarding 10th Edition.  I still like the hobby.  The models are great for the most part.  Painting is still fun.  But it's hard to get excited for 10th when it seems to be the same ride that we've been on before with 8th and 9th.

 

And who knows?  Maybe once we get the points and people start playing the game, everything will make sense, we'll find the rules to be balanced, and all will be right with the world.  I'd certainly love if that was the case.  But with GW's track record, and from what we've seen so far, I have my doubts.

 

Edit: It looks like several people made similar comments above while I was typing all this out 

Edited June 15, 2023 by Aarik

[Petitioner's City]

18 hours ago, Plaguecaster said:

The multitude of poorly written rules even after the claim of it being balanced and streamlined plus other stupid things like this showing they didn't even care or even proofread any of it before release. 

 

"(...) any of it (...)". Well that's a choleric exaggeration.... 

 

Editing and proofreading is tough, trust me, and it's hard work to catch everything. Things like tracking changes through iterations mean that files often get a bit messy, esoeiclat as different teams and individuals will be involved. Projects are hard, they are so hard - nevermind a project with 1000s (actually tens of thousands) of individual bits of text to be checked. 

 

God, "didn't even care". Can we avoid such pointless exaggerations, accept that actually this is hard work, not easy, ever.

Edited June 15, 2023 by Petitioner's City

[NovemberIX]

I thought after skipping 9th, 10th might bring me back in, but at this point, I think I'd rather just use the heresy rules 'cause at least I can slot in 7th era rules, and if I gotta fix a bunch of stuff with house rules, might as well not waste the money on stuff that'll immediately be outdated.