Warhammer 40k Forum and Wargaming Forums banner
1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,323 Posts
Fliers cost too much? eBay. I really don't know why people hate 6th so hard, and if you do then play 5th, or whatever edition you like, within your gaming group. Organize tournaments using whatever rules or variations on the rules that you like.

Are there any other reasons why someone would choose to suffer under the yoke that is 6th edition 40k? Other than raw fanboism, no.
Big ol' sack of meh.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,685 Posts
The only thing I think is that GW is trying to entice more 12 year olds to start in 40K rather than give the adult players what they need.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
272 Posts
Just sounds like another angry 40k guy, and there are lots of those. There are other wargames out there, but I chose this one because of the sheer mass of its fan base, the sweet models/army choices, and the grim dark fluff. It isn't super balanced, but that can be changed. Don't like 6th? As said before, go back to an edition as early as you want.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,376 Posts
I don't think it is ruined as it states. I haven't played many games in 6th but that has more to do with work schedule and lack of people to play against. It has some problem areas but every edition does so that is nothing new. It really does sound like an angry player more than anything. I also am not a big fan of flyers but they add a new dimension to the game.
 

·
So be it.
Joined
·
1,901 Posts
Yeah lots of things really bite about 6th, but it's still a damned fun game, and if people don't try to make their lists overpowered than it is still strategically fascinating. I agree that it doesn't work for major tournaments, but it's good for standard play.
 

·
Closet Dictator
Joined
·
3,431 Posts
I think the guy has some valid points, particularly what he said about actual "wargaming" with the advent of flyers and lords of war, there is an element of the tactical side of the game kind of made redundant with the abundance of large pie/flame plate death and rapid fire oblivion. I do not think the game has been ruined but I do think G.W has been getting lazy because of the success of 40k and needs to be careful not to collapse under the weight of its own glory, transient 12 year olds will not keep a gaming community going. And has been said before on Heresy, 40k turning into apocalyse lite, were you need a truck to transport your army actually makes it harder to get out and game
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,359 Posts
Poor article is poor. And very biased. For some reason he takes "the fact" that 6th is a crappy edition for granted, instead of pointing out what makes it so and to whom.

I, for instance, is having good fun with 6th edition, even though there are many parts of it's rules I despise. This is not because, as the articles author would have you believe, I can't face reality (which apparently is that 40k is no fun), but because I love the game, or at least it's essentials, and because my gaming group have found a way to make it fun in spite of the game's flaws.

All that article really says is: "I like competitive wargames, and because 40k does not lend itself well to that it sucks, and therefore you people are all fooling yourselves if you think you like it and you should all play something else."

The only interesting thing about that article is how it states it isn't being polemic on purpose, in spite of the author's single-minded view of 40k and it's players. It's almost like he doesn't understand the meaning of the words he writes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,094 Posts
These discussions and debates always cover the same arguments and counter-arguments:

1. The rules suck and it's unbalanced vs. Homebrew your own rules

2. But I shouldn't have to homebrew as I am paying good money for the game vs. Well GW make it clear they aren't interested in balance by not supporting tournaments and pointing out the 6th edition rulebook is a guide and 'forging a narrative' is the most important thing...They are not interested in balance and are not promoting and marketing the game as such. So why expect that?

3. It's expensive vs. Look at the other gaming systems out there, they are priced exactly the same and some are even more expensive (look at Infinity and Malifaux box sets). Also, if you really cannot afford it (like me) then buy from ebay or the 1/3 off websites. Learn how to paint strip etc. Makes it pretty affordable.

4. But you need so many more models for 40k than other systems vs. Well yeah, 40k has always been like this so what did you expect? I'd argue that the amount of choice you have now in 40k for lists and factions is the highest bar none. The FOC is nuts now with the amount of detachments/supplements you can take, yet people complain about it.

5. But you can still have a balanced game even for fun games - This is about the only point I haven't seen a decent counter-argument against. But again, GW are clearly encouraging you to homebrew when you read through the rulebook. They are not spoon feeding people rigid rules that must be adhered to at all times, and point out you should be making your own missions and the FAQ's are not even set in stone they are "just our interpretation within our meta." (I seem to remember an email response from GW clearly stating something this)...
Yet a vocal minority of people still play it as if their rules are set in stone and refuse to come up with their own missions (at least try the Crusade of Fire missions), and wonder why they are so frustrated with the game...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,094 Posts
Poor article is poor. And very biased. For some reason he takes "the fact" that 6th is a crappy edition for granted, instead of pointing out what makes it so and to whom.

I, for instance, is having good fun with 6th edition, even though there are many parts of it's rules I despise. This is not because, as the articles author would have you believe, I can't face reality (which apparently is that 40k is no fun), but because I love the game, or at least it's essentials, and because my gaming group have found a way to make it fun in spite of the game's flaws.

All that article really says is: "I like competitive wargames, and because 40k does not lend itself well to that it sucks, and therefore you people are all fooling yourselves if you think you like it and you should all play something else."

The only interesting thing about that article is how it states it isn't being polemic on purpose, in spite of the author's single-minded view of 40k and it's players. It's almost like he doesn't understand the words the meaning of the words he writes.
Yes I completely agree with you.

It's a piss poor article. Doesn't actually say anything and is more just a rant. He doesn't explain why it sucks, just says it sucks and fliers are overpriced and the rules suck. And you are probably a total fan boy if you still like 40k. Well, how incredibly insightful. I cannot stand the pretentious attitude some people have when it comes to wargaming. "Oh you still play 40k. Pft. We play Bolt Action and Warmachine, it's so much better." ... No, they are different, not 'better'.

I am still amazed how people like him are really approaching 40k entirely the wrong way.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,182 Posts
Its basically another unhappy gamer venting because his army is no longer competitive. As has been discussed numerous times over the last few months the general trend of GW has been to move back to its roots of being a fun game between friends and not a tournament game.

That being said it is perfectly possible to make the game tournament friendly if you want. Restrict allies, do not allow certain fortifications or LoW or Knights. House rule that certain units can only be taken as 0-1 or 0-2. It is upto organizers to make the game competitive not GW who do not appear to be making a tournament fit rule set.

Personally this is one of the best editions they have made. It is true there are less sneaky tactics that can be used, but a good player can still get the best of his troops unless faced with something they are not designed to face. That's why an army should have a myriad of different unit types to counter different possible threats.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,694 Posts
Personally this is one of the best editions they have made. It is true there are less sneaky tactics that can be used, but a good player can still get the best of his troops unless faced with something they are not designed to face. That's why an army should have a myriad of different unit types to counter different possible threats.
This.
Also, the internet says 6th is bad. Gaming groups of REAL people around me says its great. Stop the rant.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,999 Posts
I prefer blogs to be unbiased or to attempt to see other points as opposed to whiney, irritating and crap.
I may not agree with GW on a lot of counts but if they get rid of snivelling little bitches like this then game on!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,359 Posts
It is upto organizers to make the game competitive not GW who do not appear to be making a tournament fit rule set.
This is exactly the solution, but that being said I can relate to the blogs author on 1 point. It is a feeble excuse for GW to not make balanced rules because they don't care about that. Guess who does? A considerably sized segment of your customer base does. As such, GW should care too. Anything else is just a retarded business strategy IMO.
I sincerely believe a more competitive minded version of 40k would be better for everyone. Those who care about that would love, those who don't would love that their fluffy armies could actually stand up to the more tournament oriented ones and GW could cash really cash in on their IP with such a quality upgrade of their rules.

That is a dream scenario however, and as things are now, it is up to the player base to fix GW's wrongs. But it isn't really all that hard, all you have to do is stop whining and start figuring out what you want 40k to be.
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top