Why is this not enough anymore?
Why does everything have to roll 12 dice and do d6 Damage, Mortal Wounds and whatever the frick else?
What changed in 40k players brains that made the power level explode?
Why is this not enough anymore?
Why is this not enough anymore?
Why does everything have to roll 12 dice and do d6 Damage, Mortal Wounds and whatever the frick else?
What changed in 40k players brains that made the power level explode?
capeshit
Unironically this.
HQ stopped being a slightly above par guy that you ultimately need to protect, and started being textbooks of rules and defenses that warp the rest of the game to be able to hit them. Everything else thus exists in the wake of the decay into Characterhammer
Instead they should've moved to a command activation system and HQ units should've increased your orders.
HQ's should be tied directly to the types of units that can be fielded in the army.
Ancient relics and chapter elites aren't going to be entrusted to a basic lieutenant nobody.
You implying that a basic destructor was ever a good option.
>meta
shut the frick up
>inb4 not meta
"good option"
Miss me with that gay shit
That was the first thing I noticed coming into the newer editions after a hiatus. The primaris vehicles in particular had an enormous number of guns and threw buckets of dice. I guess they wanted to make them more attractive to purchase? Vehicles used to be fast, tough but not deal very much damage compared to infantry. One of those things is no longer true.
They kicked ass in 5th ed. Perfect combination of being cheap, able to flatten tough infantry and not quite dangerous enough to warrant the amount of effort it would take to focus one down. Build a whole army like that and you basically hit your opponents with decision paralysis as they had to choose between a shitload of small, somewhat dangerous units that could absorb a lot of damage.
I realise it's a game but armoured vehicles being less deadly than infantry makes zero sense. Tanks are meant to draw fire from infantry, that's why they're armoured. Shots into your tanks aren't shots into infantry playing objectives. If anything they should reduce the points cost of armour so losing one isn't going to break your list.
Well yeah, that's broadly how it worked in 5e when the vehicles had fewer shots. Sure it can blitz one thing with a single railgun shell, but it's not as damaging for the points as four lads with lascannons. Now though the vehicles get multiple attacks for no clear reason. Just feels like a weird 'more, more, more' philosophy that makes the gap between the best units and the worst units wider.
I'm not sure what you two are talking about. A predator with a twin las turret and las sponsons has almost always been cheaper than 5 devastators with 4 laz cannons, and a vindicator could simply delete squads back when it had and actual blast template, or 1 shot any tank.
Point for point, tanks designed to destroy shit have typically always been more effective than infantry. Tanks were more focused in their role so were naturally more efficient. The trade off was always that they were always vulnerable to being one-shotted and couldn't capture objectives.
Modern tanks have more guns to appeal to little timmy, but this makes them less focused in what their role is. This is entirely due to split fire being reintroduced to the game.
5th edition was when the game started turning into parking lots of boxes. Predators were okay then as a spammy vehicle, but so were 'leafblower' guard lists full of Chimera chassis etc.
It was though.
It's sad because a fast autocannon with a good enough caliber should frick up almost anything in the battlefield except the hardest armour
Chadly in the hands of a WarThunder player is a sight to behold.
>players
Why do you think it's a bottom-up change and not a top-down change?
No, really, in what fricking world do you think this shit was asked for by players, particularly given this is GW, a company notoriously resistant to player feedback, rather than continually pushed on them over time because of the marketing directives to make new units ever more powerful and special when they release them so they sell more and then they can sell units that then beat said units with more convoluted abilities, treating the entire set-up like an incompetently managed CCG?
>Why do you think it's a bottom-up change and not a top-down change?
Because the premise is moronic. GW sells and continues to produce giant centerpiece plastic kits because they sell a frickton. It started with the plastic Baneblade and will continue until GW goes defunct.
>why is this not enough?
>why does everything need to roll 12 dice and do d6 damage?
>posts a vehicle that has more than 12 shots and whose main gun does better than d6 damage
Truly you should go back to the general and be stupid there.
The destructor has 2 shots with its autocannon and 3 with each heavy bolter assuming you can line them both up on the target, and maybe another 2 with the stormbolter if you chose to equip one.
Dunno which fake and gay game has it firing 12+ shots out of the corner of its hull, sounds like a bunch if bullshit to me
because you didn't buy the new thing fast enough. that's it. that's the whole answer. gw rules are not games, they're advertising. they exist to make you buy models.
what they actually sell you on is the idea of a game. the game is a carrot on a string that they dangle to keep you shopping.
because you don't buy models when you're playing a lot, or when you're happy with your finished army. you buy models when you're *planning* to play. you're preparing for fun you will have in the future. you map out your army, you tally up your list points, you go out and you buy models. you're reading tactics articles about what's good this edition, you go out and buy models. and then yeah, maybe you build and paint some of them. you get some games. perhaps something in your list doesn't perform as well as expected. better buy the other new thing to cover that gap.
and then when you start to get in a groove well, here comes the new codex, the new edition, the new release. better buy more models. shit's changing again. if you never get as many games in as you'd like, oh well. as long as you're shopping.
You literally don't have to buy anything. You can keep playing whatever edition you feel you like best, there are plenty of resources online that will allow you to do so. You're b***hing about a for profit company wanting to make a profit perhaps the dumbest complaint you can level against GW.
>You literally don't have to buy anything. You can keep playing whatever edition you feel you like best, there are plenty of resources online that will allow you to do so.
Good luck finding a game. GW has somehow convinced its moronic customer base that only the latest edition exists.
>'finding' a game
What you need to do when you don't have the social resources to cultivate and play with a proper local group.
That is, literally, the process of finding games.
He's explain why GW makes the decisions it makes because OP asked, moron.
Pretty much this
When I started the hobby in 5th i played usually about 6 games a weekend. It dropped to 2 or 3 a fortnight by the time 7th came around. 8th it dropped again and then i didnt even play 9th despite buying codex's. So i missed a whole edition and the game sucks now anyway.
The models are still cool though.
They were never enough to begin with. They had anemic firepower since 3rd edition onwards and most people used Predator Annihilators if at all. Both variants are actually pretty good at the moment in 10th edition. Plus, it actually has a lot of guns compared to a realistic tank already. Excessive guns is the 40k aesthetic.
If you don't like rolling dice equip all of your dudes with plasma. It's a statistical game due to dice rolls, volume of rolls will ALWAYS be better unless you want a squad of 5 to only have 5 attacks that hit on a 3+, so you hit 2.5 times then wound probably not even once. Games would go for way longer than they do now. So you can roll more dice or play a 10 hour game, your choice.
It started with primaris marines having 2w as far as I can tell. Then Custodes went to 3 in 8th. I think it was 9th when they made manlets 2w and termies 3. 10e they made changed toughness no longer cap at 9 ish, and increased a few wounds on vehicles as well as anti tank strength. You can also blame 8th more directly because vehicles got a lot more wounds to compensate for being toughness based.
No, idiot, it started when they dropped apocalypse at the end of 4th, and then moved flyers and superheavies into the main game.
>What changed in 40k players brains that made the power level explode?
The need for more money its why the game has scaled outta control.
Primaris
Primaris marines, Primaris tanks, Primaris characters, Primaris orkz, Primaris monsters, etc
Because the Baneblade is fricking cool and that shitbox is not.
GW realized a long time ago that if they just continue to power-creep the game with expensive new shit the WAACgays will always buy it and discard their old shit because they have to always have the shiniest strongest units for their pretend toy soldier game.
Hey I’m actually working on a predator right now. Didn’t come with any heavy bolters so I had to borrow some from the jet bike kit.
Forgot pic
Because their customer base is no longer dudes brought to wargaming by a fascination with WW2 history, but pimply 13 year-olds raised on marvel movies.
It was literally never enough. At least not since that specific model came out. Maybe in 2ed when it was half metal and could split fire there was a use but 3ed onwards it was always trash.
2 str 7 AP 4 shots meant it was relegated to shooting at vehicles with armor 11 & 10 to have any real chance at scoring a pen. Or for irrc 20 points more you could take the annihilator, and pretty much guarantee a pen on anything outside of a land raider or equivalent.
But oh boy it wounded marines on twos...so they could turn around and still take their armor save, mathematically making the heavy bolters a better option for shooting MEQ anyway.
It was a dumb attempt at trying to make a jack of all trades in an edition that didn't have split fire and restricted shooting based on movement. There is a reason it was the least taken of the 3 predator variants.
I remember a game of 7e where someone showed up with a parking lot of autocannon Predators. They set up across from me, boasting about how they were going to shoot my tanks to pieces. I remember the heartbreak on his face when I told him Leman Russes had front armour 14, and therefore immune to S7.
APC but with bigger gun on top for a tank has always kind of sucked. You just get these huge, boxy tanks with a goofy looking turret on top when you do that. Predator's always sucked a little bit for it. Razorbacks look neat, that's about as far as you can take it.
Seems alright to me
That's because it's on the squatlist so it doesn't get the damage pump newer tanks do.
I have a feeling they're gonna get rid of a lot of units in the next edition. Not that I'lll buy it or care or stop using my models. I'll sooner stop playing 40k than stop using my models
I think it's because the game changed at a few different levels. Competitive stuff is incredibly popular and oftentimes it's what newer players see presented to them alongside the universe itself. Now everything is trending towards balancing for this style of play which is why the game is an abstract, boring boardgame that's kind of lost its way and identity. It's not much of a wargame anymore.
40K isn’t a wargame anymore, it’s a tabletop video game
You roll dice yes, but the game is designed with as many insurances as possible that you will always roll slightly better than average
Everyone has access to rerolls, +1 effects, exploding effects etc. There is no randomness in modern 40K, but it is not just this that makes it a video game.
Look at the modern scenarios. Fighting over critical objectives to hold at the end has been replaced with a turn by turn score counter, much like an RTS game and wholly removed from any sort of reality. There are whole units dedicated to being “secondary monkeys” where they sit in corners, behind ruins, and teleport around the board to get small amounts of bonus points. 40K does not simulate battes, in fact it’s become more gamey than most video games like StarCraft (make an army, destroy your enemy).
This wouldn’t be a problem if the entire ruleset wasn’t built around this assumption. Try to play 40K on anything but a tiny cramped board filled with L shaped imperial ruins and the game falls apart. It goes from boring MOBA slop with “Lanes” to a heavily imbalanced slugfest where whichever army needs higher sales at the moment auto wins.
There is no strategy or tactical depth. Build your “deck” and execute combos to secure lanes until you win.
Even OPR (pic related) has more depth than modern 40K. Abandon the GW mill
That's another thing I dislike about it is the fact that they've been shedding wargame styled rules that treat the game like a simulation where your models and their equipment can interact with the table and vice-versa. Sure, things like scatter, templates, and other rules like that were a little clunky but they also went a very long way in treating the board like a proper battlefield. Weapon ranges and other stats also reflected this.
Other rules like vehicle facings, special terrain (Roads, mines, etc.), and other things really helped this out as well. To be fair, if they want broad appeal, rules like these just won't cut it because they're for wargamers which is a pretty narrow group as-is.
It's because terran and board rules don't sell models, so they put all the "interesting" rules into the models.
The fact of the matter is marines and herohammer sell, so much so that people will buy multiple marine armies just to paint a different colour. Because of this, GW insentivises people to continue this so we get more and more rules to differential the red marine from the blue marine, when in reality they should all die just the same to a land mine.
40k was never a "serious" wargame to begin with, in 2nd edition it was very silly and from 3rd onwards it was a vastly simplified and basic game. The existence of secondary objectives for cheap units to perform has given them a reason to exist in the game, rather than just maxing out on units with pay-for-themselves damage output. The notion that contemporary 40k lacks tactics and strategy doesn't logically follow from anything you said. It's a sophisticated game nowadays and mechanically better than ever.
No customization, no strategy, no tactics. Every game is the exact same battle for lanes. The game literally artificially forces theme lists with detachments.
You’re exactly right, the modern warhammer fan is either too moronic or too enamored with rigid, non random “competitive” systems
Hell, they might not even be stupid, it might just not be their cup of tea. Some people enjoy the streamlined tournament style game whereas others prefer a game that sits in that middleground between what it is now and something like D&D.
For that other anon, I don't think the game is mechanically better than ever but I also don't think that it's a complete and total disaster. Certain armies have been completely fricked by the new rules while others have benefitted to the point of completely dominating the meta. Getting rid of the wargear system was just an awful decision. Furthermore, the way the game works now encourages people to take units that have obscene damage outputs in spades. Look at what happens to armies that don't have good damage dealing units like Votaan and Ad Mech where all they can do is flood the table and hope that it's enough to choke the enemy for a win.
>why would I ever take a unit that is not points cost return maximized?
Warhammer is made for you and that's why it's shit.
Been with 40k since 2nd onwards and the community has contained a variety of players throughout every edition because people have different temperaments. People were playing tournament in 3rd edition and people are playing narrative campaigns in 10th. There has never been some imaginary time when the game was full of players who all exclusively agreed with your particular interests. Post models.
>narrative campaigns in 10th
Crusade isn’t a narrative campaign system by the way newbie
Nobody mentioned crusade. People can make up their own narrative campaigns in any way they like. Post models.
Did at the beginning of the reply chain
Which ones are yours? I hope it's the Necrons at least
They are, and thank you
>People can make up their own
Oh well I guess we can't criticize gw, we just have to make our own fun. And if the models are expensive and shitty, well we can make our own models. And rules? Well we're making them too. Now we get to have to make up our own lore as well. How kind of gw to offer us so much.
What the frick are those, hover john deeres?
Dont be silly, if they were John Deeres there would be Green and Yellow.
>narrative campaigns in 10th
Yeah, in spite of the games design. There's armies with troops where their special rules simply assume you're playing pie plate objectives. It's a one gametype game now. There was never an imaginary time, there was a real time, and it's gone. Post your mom.
Because Forgeworld showed there was a market for 40K scale baneblades, meaning every army could and eventually SHOULD have a giant 73 attacks a round monstrosity that could bypass invulnerable saves and utterly break the game.
because tabletop gaming is competing on price and other barriers to entry with video games, which have very fast gameplay loops and encourage instant gratification by rewarding trivial behaviors, presented with false senses of risk
there's no actual risk to any of it but it gets players excited, and it doesn't cost hundreds to get into (other than the hardware to run games on...) or require painting or gluing or any real skill
so what you have in 40k to compete for that audience - the audience that has lots of disposable income - is short gameplay loops with lots of not!maths exceptions to the traditional means of dealing imaginary damage, where special rules break the system the game operates on because it encourages that risky behavior to get players to think they can win
but in order to do that, they need to buy the think that has the exception, and to stop the game becoming 4 identical giant tanks on each side because META, each unit has to have looks to sell it and a near-unique combo of rulebreaker rules to encourage low-skill players to think they can sequence break and win with it, which means sales
it's not dumb at all, but it's cynical
then again that's how the world is, everything is competing for that same audience now
You mean you're not swooning at the prospect of owning Hovertard 9000 and all its little hoverspawn?
looks p cool
I have my issues with space marine tanks, even now, but making their tanks hover was a uniformly good idea.
It was always a little weird how they took the galaxies superest cool guys and then stuck them in crappy shitboxes with worse armor than they had on. They'd be better off equipping them with heelies.
>the galaxies superest cool guys
This is a moronic view held by children. Even within the emperium there are plenty of heavyweights above space marines.
And Delta Force operators are much higher tier 'heavyweights' than Army Rangers, but that doesn't mean they shove Army Rangers in a church van with sheet metal nailed to the sides.
I'm saying it in a tongue in cheek way, but yeah they're blatantly the main dick swingers of the franchise. Even the imperial dudes above them look like they're just compensating for not really being space marines.
And they still have sucky transports. I like land raiders though. Land raiders and drop pods, that'll do for me.
I think the issue is that rhinos and razorback are very clearly just transports, but share a chassis with the "main line battle tank" predator, and also the vindicator. If the Sicaran chassis had been the go to battle tank for marines, thrn the distinction that rhinos and razorbacks are just light transport (a glorified truck) would be clearer.
The game used to be that vehicles were decent at countering vehicles but pretty garbage against mass infantry other than a few specific platforms. An old box dread would have 1 multi-melta shot and a storm bolter. A modern Redemptor dread has a rocket pod, two storm bolters, an underslung gatling canon and a heavy onslaught gatling canon for up to 27 shots at varying strength that can wipe out a 10 man squad of guardsmen. Power creep used to just be giving a weapon type an extra attack, strength or AP but now they just give you a replacement model with a silly name and a dozen guns slapped on.
The reason games felt more fun back in the day was that every unit in your army would take a lot to take down so they always had a good chance of getting something done in-game. Now everyone has their entire deployment zone packed to the brim and a quarter of it is gone on turn 1. Increased lethality is just another way they try to force you to buy more models.
>An old box dread would have 1 multi-melta shot and a storm bolter. A modern Redemptor dread has a rocket pod, two storm bolters, an underslung gatling canon and a heavy onslaught gatling canon for up to 27 shots at varying strength that can wipe out a 10 man squad of guardsmen.
Its like the difference between playing 3025 Battletech and 3085 Battletech.
Because GW has basically buttfricked their customers for the last couple of decades, and the rules are just a mechanism to drive the sale of models to the customer...
...and those customers thank them for it, and then bend over and offer their buttholes for another thorough butt-fricking. They'll go on the internet and complain and scream and swear they're done and gonna boycott and that they haven't played since third edition... but they'll line up to buy more product again and again, their buttholes already lubed up for GW to use.
To be honest, 'fan rulesets' should have been the norm well over 10 years ago. The entire system should be redone from the ground up- not based on a system made around 40 years ago when 40k was a couple of squads and maybe a tank and a HQ.
A game with chainsaw swords- but the most absurd thing about it is: Entire tank squads, aircraft, giant mechs/monsters, and full-blown companies of futuristic soldiers are fighting on a battlefield that is smaller than the average Wal-Mart parking lot....
...because when GW showed the big shiny toy that wins and costs more than a month of groceries, when they 'lowered points' to make you buy more models, when they invalidated chunks of your army so you'd have to get new stuff- the buttfricked b***h consoomer came running with a greased butthole and a fistfull of cash.
GW fricks you because you let them. You b***h, you whine, you mewl, you whimper, you seethe, you rage- but you bend the frick over and let them prolapse you and thank them for it. They have absolutely ZERO incentive to do any different.
Don't forget the re-rolls. Truly the most obnoxious thing about modern 40k. Just reroll everything to the point that rolling dice at all was a completely pointless exercise. Top tier game design GW, truly top tier.
>Why is this not enough anymore?
It is
Me and my friends still play 2nd edition
They got rid of instant death.
Like half my issues with 8th and 9th were flow on effects from that.
they gave marines 2W
Play online using TTS and you'll see why.
I love this guy and I’ll be getting one soon. What should I name it?
>Why does everything have to roll 12 dice
I believe 8ed had some Leman Russ variant with minigun like cannons rollin something like 40 dice, dunno if after or befor doubling it with some doctrine rule ore some shit
In 10th it maxes out at 30.
dont shit talk the punisher, its been around for a while and it was peak fun because all it could do was rain down fire on you