Back to 0 Faith ...

[Helias_Tancred]

... in GW to do the various faction rules right, after seeing what is emerging for the Dark Angels. 

 

Wanting to curb codex creep is a golden goal, but needlessly nerfing the [censored] out of factions that don't need it is very troubling. The pattern of inconsistency and very questionable decision-making skills is still the alpha pattern with GW.

 

I'm sure this will get locked (sorry Admins) but the leaked Dark Angel codex is so shockingly bad in terms of the number and depth of the nerfs that I had to say something here. 

[crimsondave]

17 minutes ago, Helias_Tancred said:

... in GW to do the various faction rules right, after seeing what is emerging for the Dark Angels. 

 

Wanting to curb codex creep is a golden goal, but needlessly nerfing the [censored] out of factions that don't need it is very troubling. The pattern of inconsistency and very questionable decision-making skills is still the alpha pattern with GW.

 

I'm sure this will get locked (sorry Admins) but the leaked Dark Angel codex is so shockingly bad in terms of the number and depth of the nerfs that I had to say something here. 

 

 

 

 

 

This is not me trying to argue with you because I'm with you.  I don't get it either but whatever.  Here's my attempt at presenting the silver lining.

 

I'd say the chances of these points values not being modified are slim and none.  They've adjusted every single new codex right off the bat unless I am mistaken.  The models look great.  Rules can (and will) be changed often.  Idk why they nerfed what they did but just use the index cards if your not playing tournaments.  I'm still using my Talonmasters.  The lore in the book sounds really cool and really fitting for our paranoid boys in green, black, and bone.  I wish they'd have just increased Lion's points instead of nerfing him.  Yeah, he's obnoxious, especially in friendly games but he's supposed to be obnoxious.  He's freakin Lion El'Jonson.  I'm using his index card.  Nobody I play with will care and I'll even offer up a points increase for him.

 

Hey, at least we got a chance to buy it.

[Scribe]

To have faith in GW rules writing for 40K, after the wealth of evidence from 10th alone (forget 6th to  9th!) is...well, more grace than I am willing or able to give GW by far.

[TrawlingCleaner]

They've released points updates every time a codex has dropped, I think the Admech and Necron ones were the week after release? I think a lot of the issues with the codex is fixed with points updates, Deathwing knights especially are too expensive.

GW have also shown they're willing to majorly rework factions if needed like Death Guard or buff them like Votann. The balance dataslate is due this coming week supposedly, I'm not sure if DA get anything in there just yet

 

I do think the Deathwing Detachment is actually pretty good, it's got a good few tricks up it's sleeve and plenty of ways to get the Knights or terminators doing a lot of damage

 

Not to yuck people's yums but supplements to codexes have always had the problem that they're just better than the base codex. That said, there's still a balance to hold in that people still want their supplement faction to be good etc

 

I do think GW worried about Codex Creep to the point of being a little too cautious but if this is the trend they hold, I'm good with that personally.

 

Edited January 20 by TrawlingCleaner

[Bryan Blaire]

It isn’t just about poor rules or nerfing/overcosting units - GW is also slowly sucking the lifeblood/soul out of long standing units and formations.  Deathwing can’t mix and match CCW and shooting units anymore why?  Because GW can’t balance it right and/or produce a model upgrade to allow it?  Because they are afraid of 3rd party producers and 3D printing?

 

I stopped playing DA with new edition rules when 8th came out and they moved past the “end point” narrative I had with my Unforgiven, but that still doesn’t leave a good taste.  Good on the folks that are finally just deciding to leave GW’s poor rules decisions behind and play what they and their friends agree to.

Edited January 28 by Bryan Blaire

[Valkyrion]

I think it largely depends on what you want out of the game; be it fun, narrative, campaign, competitive or whatever.

 

For instance, I played a game recently of Primaris Imperial Fists (not mine) vs 30k era World Eaters (mine) using 30k rules, and it wasn't as immersion breaking as I thought it would be.

We played redemptors as leviathans, hellblasters as HSS with plasma cannons, aggressors as terminators with combi bolters and power fists....it was easy enough to see past the 40k into the 30k. Not that we needed an excuse, but for all we know Dorn had issued that battalion with experimental equipment - boom, narrative problem solved, it was also fun, and if we were in a campaign then we'd have been happy counting it towards it. 

 

I appreciate that it won't always be possible depending on the who, why and where you play your games, but if you want to play a fun game, then you need to be around fun gamers and if you want to play competitively you must accept that the rules change and you either change accordingly or accept the new challenge. 

 

If you want competitive then you have to accept that things change - in sports you have teams taken over by billionaires, in computer games you have patches to take away the nuke everything button, and it's no different in tabletop wargames - so if your Dark Angels are suddenly good and then suddenly bad but you persist with them then I feel for you, because you are a Dark Angel player. But if you have built an army just to win because it is the best, then it is no longer the best, then I don't feel for you. 

[phandaal]

1 hour ago, Bryan Blaire said:

Deathwing can’t mix and match CCW and shooting units anymore why?

 

And just straight up deleting classic units because... well, because we say so that's why. I wrote this edition off at launch, but it still stings to see something I have been a fan and collector of for the better part of three decades being treated so disrespectfully.

 

1 hour ago, Bryan Blaire said:

Good on the folks that are finally just deciding to leave GW’s poor rules decisions behind and play what they are their friends agree.

 

100% this. Why let people who clearly do not care about your time and energy dictate how you enjoy the hobby? The best answer to :cuss:ty rules is "nope."

[Kastor Krieg]

3 hours ago, Scribe said:

To have faith in GW rules writing for 40K, after the wealth of evidence from 10th alone (forget 6th to  9th!) is...well, more grace than I am willing or able to give GW by far.

Well, they did right by us, Templars. And it only took them 6 editions! :D

[Helias_Tancred]

4 hours ago, crimsondave said:

 

This is not me trying to argue with you because I'm with you.  I don't get it either but whatever.  Here's my attempt at presenting the silver lining.

 

I'd say the chances of these points values not being modified are slim and none.  They've adjusted every single new codex right off the bat unless I am mistaken.  The models look great.  Rules can (and will) be changed often.  Idk why they nerfed what they did but just use the index cards if your not playing tournaments.  I'm still using my Talonmasters.  The lore in the book sounds really cool and really fitting for our paranoid boys in green, black, and bone.  I wish they'd have just increased Lion's points instead of nerfing him.  Yeah, he's obnoxious, especially in friendly games but he's supposed to be obnoxious.  He's freakin Lion El'Jonson.  I'm using his index card.  Nobody I play with will care and I'll even offer up a points increase for him.

 

Hey, at least we got a chance to buy it.

 

/respect.

 

[Helias_Tancred]

1 hour ago, phandaal said:

 

 

100% this. Why let people who clearly do not care about your time and energy dictate how you enjoy the hobby? The best answer to :cuss:ty rules is "nope."

 

I've always wondered why with 40k there seems this strong driven manifesto that you must play the latest edition and house rules are heresy? I've been a very avid D&D'er since 1982, and through all the time since then myself and my friends still stick to AD&D 1st edition, because for us its the most fun. I always looked at 40k through those lenses in regards to my first statement. As long as you have the older rules and wanna do some house ruling you can play any prior edition of 40k, and if you have a set group of friends you play with well then its simple solution. 

 

If their faction rules and updates are so inconsistent I predict what you said will become more common. 

[Helias_Tancred]

On 1/20/2024 at 1:56 PM, Scribe said:

To have faith in GW rules writing for 40K, after the wealth of evidence from 10th alone (forget 6th to  9th!) is...well, more grace than I am willing or able to give GW by far.

 

IMO the core rules they developed are successful overall and good. It's the factions that gets hit with the inexplainable inconsistencies. 

Edited January 21 by Helias_Tancred

[roryokane]

4 hours ago, Bryan Blaire said:

It isn’t just about poor rules or nerfing/overcosting units - GW is also slowly sucking the lifeblood/soul out of long standing units and formations.  Deathwing can’t mix and match CCW and shooting units anymore why?  Because GW can’t balance it right and/or produce a model upgrade to allow it?  Because they are afraid of 3rd party producers and 3D printing?

 

I stopped playing DA with new edition rules when 8th came out and they moved past the “end point” narrative I had with my Unforgiven, but that still doesn’t leave a good taste.  Good on the folks that are finally just deciding to leave GW’s poor rules decisions behind and play what they are their friends agree.

Sums up a lot of my feelings, and I don't even collect DA. "BuT iT's NoT iN oNe BoX" is not an argument - the Hobby (yes, capital H) was built on conversion and swapping of bitz between kits. It's one of the reasons I'm so sore about Primaris and the new Mk VI kits (probably the new Mk IIIs though I've not assembled any of mine yet) is that they're not compatible with the morass of firstborn kits that for AGES were all completely interchangeable INCLUDING the original Mk III and IV plastic kits) - and this narrows everything down SO much in terms of modelling and just the overall feel of the range. 
This removal of DA stuff and even options for simple weapon swaps just further reinforces that. *grumble grumble mutter grumble* - which is particularly galling when they've done so well with weapon options for HH stuff like contemptors, leviathans, predators, and soon to be Leman Russ, along with the various heavy weapon kits for footslogging marines. Why not do this for 40k, instead of narrowing and removing options? It boggles the mind.

[Marshal Rohr]

Points will be changed within a few hours of them selling out the cards with the points printed on them, don’t you worry!

[Marshal Reinhard]

11 hours ago, Kastor Krieg said:

Well, they did right by us, Templars. And it only took them 6 editions! :D

Just don't expect it to last.

 

14 hours ago, Bryan Blaire said:

 Deathwing can’t mix and match CCW and shooting units anymore why?

Because the Nu-scale Assault Terminator kit hasn't been done/isn't out yet. Come again next edition.

[MARK0SIAN]

Specifically in regard to trying to prevent codex creep, I think they’re doing the right thing by being cautious, even producing underpowered codexes. It’s easier to buff an underperforming codex than it is to claw back in a game breakingly overpowered one. We all remember the dumpster fire that was 9th edition with some codexes being so over the top they needed multiple rounds of nerfs to bring them even somewhat in line. 
 

This is not to diminish the frustration of players who get shafted by a weak/nerfed codex. I k ow from experience it’s awful to be in that situation. However, a weak codex is a problem for less people than an overpowered one as lots more people have to be on the receiving end of a codex than have to use one.

 

Hopefull they’ll buff it soon.

[Bryan Blaire]

5 hours ago, Marshal Reinhard said:

Because the Nu-scale Assault Terminator kit hasn't been done/isn't out yet. Come again next edition.

Which is exactly what I said - Because GW can’t balance it right and/or produce a model upgrade to allow it and they are afraid of 3rd party producers and 3D printing.

 

They should have made a better decision to preserve the unit capabilities and wait to release (they have plenty of other factions to choose from) than make players suffer for their poor planning or lack of ability.

 

At this rate, I won’t have a reason to come back for any edition because they’ll do the same dumb  for the Space Wolves and I’ll never bother, I’ll just be painting and playing old Editions or other games - which isn’t what I wanted to do.

Edited January 21 by Bryan Blaire

[Kallas]

16 hours ago, Helias_Tancred said:

I've always wondered why with 40k there seems this strong driven manifesto that you must play the latest edition and house rules are heresy?

 

It will depend on group, basically. If you're in an area with a large group (eg, based around an LGS or LGC), you're probably going to be more centred the latest rules because it's far simpler to follow what's "current" rather than explaining what's currently current out of a possible bunch of house rules and making sure that everyone who's playing is on board with all of the various changes being made; if you're only playing with a couple of friends, it's much easier to set a few tweaks even on an ad hoc basis because you're not trying to convey it to many people.

 

For all of its faults, the "official" way to play gives people a benchmark, a set of rules that everyone has access to across any gaming arena (be it at home, LGC or a(n inter)national tournament) they're the same at their core. House rules can vary wildly between two groups as people will determine different things to be problematic for various reasons, and their measures to account for such will also vary wildly - some might just change points, some might tweak rules, some might just make agreements to not use certain units; and all of those options come with drawbacks: changing points means you might rock up with an army having forgotten about a change; rules might make a unit just underpowered to the point they're not fun; not using units isn't great if someone likes a particular unit for whatever reason - and while these can then be changed further to accomodate everyone...it's more and more effort to fix something that is difficult to agree on as people view everything differently. 

 

So yeah, house rules work great when people agree, but when you're not dealing with that kind of situation it becomes murky very quickly, and not even because anyone is being a problem about it, it's just because coming to an agreement on what will work can be time consuming, especially when people just want to play a game; and it's just harder whenever more people are added to the equation - so the standard rules become the norm, because then nobody has to futz about working out if their stuff fits with the changes that they may or may not be aware of (hell, some of this even applies to GW changes, depending on how up-to-date people are with the Balance Dataslates and MFMs).

[Rain]

58 minutes ago, Bryan Blaire said:

Which is exactly what I said - Because GW can’t balance it right and/or produce a model upgrade to allow it and they are afraid of 3rd party producers and 3D printing.

 

They should have made a better decision to preserve the unit capabilities and wait to release (they have plenty of other factions to choose from) than make players suffer for their poor planning or lack of ability.

 

At this rate, I won’t have a reason to come back for any edition because they’ll do the same dumb  for the Space Wolves and I’ll never bother, I’ll just be painting and playing old Editions or other games - which isn’t what I wanted to do.

The models-first approach really sucks. Contrary to popular goodthink it was not always like this either, which is what makes it even more galling.
 

The 5th ed Dark Eldar codex was full or characters that had no model, and inspired conversions. It included the Voidraven bomber which didn’t get a model for years, if memory serves. I think even the Venom took a little while to get a model, but it still had rules immediately in case people wanted to convert Vypers or whatever.

 

I think the lack of Red Butcher Terminators for World Eaters is due to similar “logic” in that they couldn’t make rules without specific models, and they couldn’t give traitors nuscale Terminators before loyalists because loyalists need to be the golden children at all times. Really kills one’s passion for the game to see the creative part of the hobby treated with active scorn.

[Doghouse]

I think the problem is that the new environment of the living rule book and constantly changing the game based on tournament feedback is something that print can't keep up with because of the delay in getting books printed.

 

I don't think Tournaments are bad thing at all, I just personally don't like that we have crept away from the days of Jervis Johnson talking about how catering to Tournaments wasn't a great idea while cycling to work to where we are now with metrics driven 10.2 edition and day one patches on release.

 

For casuals I think that the best environment is the local club or basement gaming buddies where you can find like minded people to tailor the rules to suit you or play older editions. So I'd ask myself the following if I were still gaming, how open to playing older editions are my local gaming group and can I get people interested? 

 

I think the only areas where things have to be current edition are if you are going to a tournie or event with lots of people you've never played before or going to a GW store.

 

I personally would love to see people throw off the shackles of current edition and accept all the older editions more openly so it's no longer a case of people stuck with the latest version but having freedom of choice. I'd love to see that mindset adopted by more people beyond seeing it as retrogaming.

 

Miniatures tend to keep value or increase in value in the second hand market but second hand older edition codexes are normally pretty cheap.

 

 

[Dr. Clock]

5 hours ago, Marshal Reinhard said:

Because the Nu-scale Assault Terminator kit hasn't been done/isn't out yet. Come again next edition.

Counterpoint: using rule of 3 as the only meaningful restriction on numbers of terminator units means that adding datasheets to parachute heavy weapons into assault squads just causes everyone 'clever' playing a terminators theme to build their list as Dark Angels, and we never see a thunderhammer unit without the rando missile launcher thrown in.

 

15 hours ago, roryokane said:

this narrows everything down SO much in terms of modelling and just the overall feel of the range. 

 

Does it, though? The reverse is also true: limiting the nature and extent of wargear differences between squad members means you arguably have more latitude on some conversions because it doesn't matter what combi-weapon a sternguard is armed with or if some hellblasters have plasma cannons and some plasma guns. It took me a hot minute (just 2 editions lol) to commit to converting oldmarine versions of Primaris units, but it's fun as heck (Infernus and Hellblasters both for Salamanders).

 

The 'no points for wargear' paradigm is here, and it's honestly refreshing not to feel like I'm converting only for what's in the game, but for what is the coolest representation of the unit I can get from my bitz box.

 

I love converting for diversity's sake, but when the game lets us take too much diversity inside units most often that still results in uniformity on pure efficiency and adds a perverse incentive to buy more kits and bits than come in a single offering. This is much less about 3d printing anxiety IMO and more about user experience at the level of individual kits. Finding out that the unit you bought would be good if they all had weapons that are technically allowed but are not included in the kit is terrible user experience, especially for new players/modelers.

 

18 hours ago, phandaal said:

Why let people who clearly do not care about your time and energy dictate how you enjoy the hobby? The best answer to :cuss:ty rules is "nope."

 

Amen. To my eye for DA there are a few general profiles that seem under-cooked, the specialist detachments don't stand head and shoulders above the main offering, and the bespoke speeders were made obsolete. The points as printed are meaningless.

 

Going forward, if it's important to you to have the cutting edge stats or strats you can always proxy one sword guy for a different sword guy among friends. If you like the core book detachments more than niche ones, congratulations on being a Space Marines player I guess and just don't buy this book.

 

The obsolete models tends to be the biggest pain, and I appreciate everyone who feels like their collection was chopped in half. I am personally very happy to use any Index cards and Legends so that people can keep playing with the toys they love (and I can too)... The closer we get to casting off the 'pure efficiency and current rules only' mindset, the easier it is to have fun.

 

Cheers,

 

The Good Doctor.

[Marshal Reinhard]

2 hours ago, Dr. Clock said:

Counterpoint: using rule of 3 as the only meaningful restriction on numbers of terminator units means that adding datasheets to parachute heavy weapons into assault squads just causes everyone 'clever' playing a terminators theme to build their list as Dark Angels, and we never see a thunderhammer unit without the rando missile launcher thrown in.

Fair enough points, but I'm not convinced this was the reason the options are gone.

[Waaagh?]

On 1/20/2024 at 6:56 PM, Scribe said:

To have faith in GW rules writing for 40K, after the wealth of evidence from 10th alone (forget 6th to  9th!) is...well, more grace than I am willing or able to give GW by far.

 

It's especially hilarious when their specialist teams generally write great rules.

[MegaVolt87]

This is really old news. GW has always been about keeping a tight hand on the wheel for 40k codex creep, then as the edition progresses, they shut their eyes, take their hands off and let the Emperor take the wheel for direction. The last codexes in the cycle are the most powerful + balanced but the downside is, you are lucky to get at least a year out of them before the edition changes and we start the circus all over again. The core rules are mostly fine each edition, the issue is when the factions subvert a lot of them making the core rules far less impactful. 

 

I think I finally understand the HH and 40k difference. I read a reddit thread recently, a new HH player basically had a breakdown over the contemptor dread they bought because it has so many options. Went about as you would expect- OOP got an answer they didn't like, lashed out rudely to those trying to help, OOP then downvoted to oblivion. People like that OOP exist in our hobby space, 40k being "dumbed down" is to make a space for this sort of customer. GW is keen on range separation, they are clearly no longer satisfied with cross selling, they want to create entirely new markets. A 40k MEQ player is different to a 30k MEQ player now for example. GW isn't making "dumb decisions" about things like the primaris jump marines vs the HH ones (5 vs 10 man box), 40k primaris work just fine for MSU, MSU gives variety of choice at the same time as giving the illusion of choice. GW's decisions are now far more market based, for better or worse. (better in my opinion)

 

Old 40k has essentially been time capsuled in HH.  We have HH, now old world. Just wait there will be an old 40k set post HH right to the beginning of the 13th black crusade, or broken up into separate era's with a core rule set etc at some point. I would say there is a market for "old world 40k", as GW have been 2/2 so far with HH and old world. Old world as the offshoot market of AoS, but 40k is special, it needs 30k and "old world 40k" to better define the playerbase and keep them in the GW ecosystem instead of leaving entirely. 

Edited January 22 by MegaVolt87

[gideon stargreave]

Coming from 2nd Ed and remembering the change to 3rd, when for both, there were models available that had no rules, (rough rider commissars, navigators, etc), I’m pretty fine with the new state of things. The dataslate paradigm mean you can use more or less any miniature in a squad and just show your opponent what they represent. You can still use yours heavy weapon in an assault squad, same as how you’d use a unit filler in fantasy. Or just ask your opponent if they mind an experimental rule. Things like citadel journal were full of stuff like this back in 1996. I’d love for GW to bring it back more fully (they have done it to an extent with the exemplary battles or whatever it’s called in HH)

[phandaal]

11 hours ago, MegaVolt87 said:

Old world as the offshoot market of AoS, but 40k is special, it needs 30k and "old world 40k" to better define the playerbase and keep them in the GW ecosystem instead of leaving entirely.

 

Agreed, but I think it may be a little too late for keeping people in the ecosystem. Just like other games captured a large portion of the audience for "rank and flank" after WFB got mothballed. There are now alternatives popping up to catch people who want the feel of older 40k (or even newer players who just like that kind of game).

 

7 hours ago, gideon stargreave said:

Things like citadel journal were full of stuff like this back in 1996.

 

Citadel Journal was awesome back in the day. Nowadays that kind of stuff seems more likely to go into a supplement or campaign book.