Jump to content

8th Edition, 1st Month Thoughts


Schlitzaf

Recommended Posts

So simple question before the first codex drops, how has 8th Edition been for everyone?

I got to say, after a month. I am in love with 40K again. Period. Full Stop. No Questions. I am in love with the game that I felt abandoned me almost 6 years ago. It's not perfect. Clearly the game has some issues. But after playing 2-3 times every week. Against a massive variety of lists from 25 to 100 power. 1000 points to 2000 points. And more. While I have yet to face a Super Heavy. I've faced a Green Tide to a Deathstar Storm Raven, alongside an Imperial Gaurd Parking Lot to a force of Necron Destroyers. A classic Marine list to a Rounded Dark Elder. And more.

 

Not once did I play and not enjoy a game. Every game felt different. My army unique. I'm lucky my store has a very good representation of every faction in the game. Every Army with rules has at least one regular player for them. The flow and game, has brought me back to what I love. And most importantly, no more "ANYONE HAVE A SCATTER OR TEMPLATE."

My only real complaints is the 6 Eternal War Missions leave a lot to be desired. I'd have bump up objective count to 5. Personally. And remove Big Guns.

I'd have change the missions to be

1:Kill Points

2:Bases

3-4: 5 Objectives. The 5th Objective is worth 3 always in center. And objectives 1-4 are worth 2.

5:Relic

6:Weighted Kill Points. (Troops/Dedicated = 1 pt, Non-Troops = 2. Slay Warlord = +1 (so killing warlord is 4pts).

Deployments are mostly fine. I'd have added a 5th Ed Style Dawn of War. Somehow.

For sake for example

1:Corners

2:ShortEdge Triangle

3-4: Standard 12

5:LongEdge Triangle

6: Dawn of War. Pick Two Non-Vehicle/Monsters Units of Same Slot Type and 1 Character. These units may deploy 24 inches up from long edge. Otherwise 8" for rest of army from long edge.

But that qualm aside this has been the most fun I've had playing 40k sense mid 5th Edition what about everyone else? All that said I know personanally if the codexes break the game I intend to play index only games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Thanks for making this thread.  Been playing and observing, then thinking about this, before replying, thus the delay.  Either later today or tomorrow I'll be looking at the new loyalist Space Marines codex, so I'm jotting down my thoughts as a memorandum of this very exciting period.  A few key observations:

 

 

1. Our meta went from talking about 30k to exclusively 8th ed

 

 

Just weeks ago, our pretty 30k-centric meta kept on saying "don't worry, we'll still have 30k (to fall back on)", as there was so much skepticism around 8th ed.  Maybe you heard the same things, as it wasn't just our meta that said this; I've seen similar posts here.  I've been pretty neutral, being neither very enthused or pessimistic, just cautious, but from just scrolling down our WhatsApp group chats I could see this gradual yet complete swing in attitudes in favour of 8th ed locally.

 

This attitude shift was a very interesting way to gauge the success so far of 8th, because it was gradual, but quite complete now.  It might swing back in the future, but just considering we're not all hopping over to 30k is a great sign IMHO, because there's always a resistance to change.

 

 

2. And Forgeworld managed to have the cake and eat it, too

 

 

During that attitude shift from 30k to 8th ed, I did think to myself "great, what am I going to do with this Leviathan Dreadnought and Cortus Contemptors I bought".  Then they Warhammer Community gave a preview of the Leviathan Dreadnought, answering that exact question.

 

Forgeworld's decision to continue supporting 7th ed in 30k proper while also providing Imperial Armour books for 8th was a clever way to hedge their bets imho.  Whatever the reaction to 8th, they had their bases covered.  Whichever system you want to play, they provide reasons for you to buy their Forgeworld minis.

 

Sure, if you have 30k specific infantry units, you might have to approximate their rules with the Chaos Space Marine index/coming codex.  For example, I can't use the Recon Marines...or maybe I can use them as Deathwatch with Stalker pattern boltguns.  I'm a Mechanicum player so I'm affected, too, but I'm pretty confident their coming books will allow me to field my Thallaxes and Myrmidons soon.

 

 

3. The best nitpick I heard was the removal of firing arcs for Tanks in particular

 

 

People have raised a lot of good points about weird 8th ed rules (i.e. Flamers can hit Flyers), in this age of abstraction over simulation.  I don't mind most of those, because almost every single time it streamlines the game (i.e. as you pointed out, at least we don't need to borrow other people's templates anymore).

 

The one exception, mentioned by an Imperial Guard player, a total treadhead, was removing firing arcs for Vehicles.  Firing arcs weren't complicated, it's not something that players argued about, but they got rid of it.  This tank player pointed out that it was actually less fun for him as there is less strategy about tank warfare.

 

Considering he was the benefactor there, as it meant he could fire/overwatch with all weapons, I thought it was a really good point.  He once compared tanks as "basically Imperial Carnifaxes now", in that they act like Monstrous Creatures rather than as vehicles, losing its flavor.

 

It's not really a big deal, just something that stuck out, as I'm jotting down my memories of this early 8th ed era.

 

 

4.  Finally, an ongoing concern is the quality of the ongoing 40k storyline

 

 

I have no problem with the plot moving forward.  I have a slight problem with bad plot moving forward.

 

It was the Gathering Storm that initially gave me pause.  It really wasn't very good, even before comparing it to the excellence that was 30k.  Then we saw how the Primaris Marines were introduced and I see I'm not the only one who aren't sold on them, even though I think they're awesome models.

 

The best explanation imho for Primaris Marines didn't come from GW, it came from one of the Fraters here, Brother Four Arms, who came up with a piece of headcanon that Cawl continued experimenting on data gained from the Cursed Founding without permission to make the Primaris breakthrough, which would explain why the rest of the Imperium or Fabius Bile couldn't do something similar.  When a fan has an explanation more palatable than the official source on a major product, it is imho a legitimate concern.  I don't think I'm alone in this.

 

I'm writing this deliberately before reading the new Space Marine codex, which I genuinely hope will prove me wrong with some excellent background on Primaris Marines.  I also don't feel this necessarily detracts from 8th ed the game, it's just that this thread is about initial impressions and these were mine.

 

 

+++

 

 

We've been enjoying playing 8th ed a lot more.  I spent more time explaining the very minor shortcomings, precisely because I want them to be measured, so please don't misconstrue the length of my impressions for the strength of those impressions.  It was just harder to explain them as they are indeed minor.

 

Going to play against a Marine army tomorrow because my friend wants to test out the new codex, will see it then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Loving it so far. Not perfect but a vast improvement. Much smoother gameplay, feels like there are more tactical decisions to make. A good army doesn't just play itself, and an army just made up of good units isn't necessarily good itself. Not really had many one sided games either, the only one I can think of was when I totally screwed up in writing my list, and my opponent had really good luck first turn. Still has a laugh with that one, though perhaps maybe it's just the excitement of learning all the new stuff.

 

One thing I'm not too keen on are the cover rules. Having different effects for different types of terrain seems mostly arbitrary and doesn't fit the new approach. Also it feels like there should still be cover for intervening units or terrain - this is the biggest thing that won't get out of my brain. Its intuitive that you would want to protect your valuable units with terrain or other units, but it is very hard to get a benefit from this except for backfield camping infantry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Much smoother gameplay, 

 

This. I loathed flicking backwards and forwards through 3 + codex's, the arguments when we couldn't find a particular rule, each match would basically last 8 hours and it would never end because I'd get too bored...Now it's super quick fire and easier to remember what does what. Also I've noticed on a lot of my guys that the Salvo rule has gone? So happy about that one...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had all but given up on 40K. Hadn't bought anything in more than a year, not played in about as long, and I was contemplating selling my models and washing my hands of GW entirely. 

 

But 8th edition is such a refreshing change. I mean, I've been hurt by GW before so I'm being cautious, I'm only building three new armies at once, lol. I don't like the Primaris fluff, they're FAR too Mary Sue, but in my headcanon they're all failing and dying in droves, with an active life expectancy of only a handful of years, because Cawl has refined but not perfected the Cursed Founding geneseed. And as soon as the Inquisition catches wind of what he's done and what he and Guilliman are covering up (the failed, corrupted nature of the Primaris) there'll be hell to pay.

 

But as written by GW, they suck.

 

The gameplay though, so far, is brilliant. So much cleaner and simpler without losing the flavour that I really loved way back in 3rd edition. I just hope GW doesn't screw the pooch by letting the Codexes run away from them with more and more overpowered units, with more exotic special rules and core rules exemptions. If they can keep the codexes balanced, then I think we're in for a golden age of 40K and I'm looking forward to it :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Armies and units that are good in 8th changed, and the nerf of the psychic phase is something that most people feel. But in general I do not see a big game play difference between 8th and 7th. Optimizes lists already run index+codex, and for some faction FW units are an auto include to make them valid [not the same armies that required FW in 7th, but the over all feel is the same].   Detachments and stratagem feel just the way old formations did, if the army is optimized [you get to use CP X times to make your army "unfair", and the CP are free as detachments are flexible enough to load up on stuff which is powerful]. What is a nice change, comparing to 7th,  is that now more then 2-3 armies get access to them, and the sooner everyone gets them to better.

Super friends are very much alive, the friends just changed, so first it was flyers [nerfed] and now it is FMC and brimstone horrors. Models and factions changed, but the game play is the same.

Spam is alive, just as always. But style wise horde armies are a valid way to play, which is a nice change comparing to 7th. This could be the other difference, along side the psychic power phase change that makes 8th different. For how long? who knows, GW killed flyer lists in 3 weeks. Will nids or orcs be valid after they books come out? a lot depends on the detachments and "unfair" stuff they get.

 

Another important thing is the link of models and rules GW always had. Armies with more updates, will get a bigger pool of models to make lists from, making the chance of getting a new one higher. The interaction between some Imperial stuff is very powerful [mostlly re-rolls, as those are king in 8th], so other faction books are going to have to be really tailor made to not end up bad.

 

Extra scenarios or extra rules for existing models would be really nice[vide chapter master NDK].

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to say that, so far, I am extremely unimpressed.

 

In a nutshell, there is far too much stupidity rolling around in 8th edition than any previous edition.  Vehicles no longer behave like vehicles, showing strengths and weaknesses that actually made you think about what you were fielding.

 

The rules need some major work to balance the game properly, and get weapons acting the way they should be, and firing against their intended targets.  Flame weapons, I'm looking at you mostly!!

 

GW need to speed up their codex release schedule, as there are plenty of armies out there that need a codex, even if it's just to balance the rubbish in the index books.

 

As a Marine player, I am utterly sick and tired of the Primaris releases now, and want to see some awesome new models for other factions.  If I am not interested in the Primaris range, I would at least like to see nice new models for my opponents.

 

Basically, I've seen that there is very little skill required to win, far worse than it ever was in 7th.  At least the 7th ed formations looked fluffy when you could actually think about them.  The list optimisation options out there are far too boring, and take far too much away from the characters of armies that, and I am surprised considering how GW touted this edition, there is never a sense of story anymore.  It's always "Take XXXXX it's the shiz!" even when taking whatever in the suggested numbers goes against how the army is supposed to perform.

 

I don't know, it feels like GW drew out giving us a very rushed, poorly thought out ruleset, with far more holes in it than any previous edition at release...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So far i'm impressed, games are fun again, i played from 3rd edition to 6th, and my group gave up after that as the rules got out of hand and every new release smashed the last.

 

But now with the indexes we are back to regular gaming, yes we come across the occasional rule or design element that seems off but overall its a good eidition.

 

So far i have tried to test as many of my old units as possible and none of them have been no hopers, yes this may change in different metas but when your group plays a mixture of fluffy yet powerful lists it works well.

 

Looking forward to codexes for some variation in strategems but thats not much to complain about, as i remember a time where colour was the only difference in chapter, so i like it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After more than 5 years away from 40k, 8th ed has made me very glad that I didn't sell all my models!

 

I originally got out because it felt like GW wasn't letting me play the game the way I wanted to play it - namely to take models that I liked and play with them without feeling like I was being punished for using something that wasn't the current flavour of the month. I liked my Chaos Dreads, liked my Aspect Warriors, and liked my Terminators - all units that felt like they came with a big * after their entry telling you that you could only use them a very ​specific ​way.

 

8th feels like that curse has finally been lifted. Sure, some units are still potent or naturally good against others, but I feel that the game has gone back to the players and that I can play my army the way I want to. The battle forged army system and power-levels are all excellent additions, I think!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Emperor this thread explode in like 12 hours. Just to build on something, I have never see a fandom, that was personally in or otherwise that was as receptive for the kind of massive change that was 8th edition. Normally bile and moans everywhere in communities when something like this happens. But bar some of the flavor and Primaris this edition has been received in open arms but like everyone I know happily with at best minor grumbles.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Emperor this thread explode in like 12 hours. Just to build on something, I have never see a fandom, that was personally in or otherwise that was as receptive for the kind of massive change that was 8th edition. Normally bile and moans everywhere in communities when something like this happens. But bar some of the flavor and Primaris this edition has been received in open arms but like everyone I know happily with at best minor grumbles.

Seems accurate, i've seen a couple of complaints as i've been flicking around threads but most have been happy with most changes.

 

I forgot to say before i actually like the added psychic phase aswell and that casting has returned to a fashion similar to older editions.

 

Primaris marines are easy to take or leave as they are specialised, and for the most part i'm not interested in them, they look good as models but as i already own the better half of 2nd company ultramarines i really dont mind, although i can see me getting some aggressors in the near future as i like the models.

 

Also the fact that gw is actively engaging with the community again is awesome, and the regular faqs are nice especially when they answer a question you've submitted.

 

On a final note this is the most active i've been in the hobby since 4th ed going into 5th, playing atleast once a week and painting inbetween, so all i can say is i'm happy to have one of my major hobbies back as some models have sat too long half finished and unused

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll get a game in one of these months, and maybe I'll have some thoughts.

 

From what I've been reading so far, it SOUNDS promising at least.

 

And yay, my favorite faction actually ended up being both good and exactly the way I want them to play. I can't recall a time that has happened after a major change to any game I've played.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me the single biggest change and positive indicator has been how difficult it is to build a list! There's too much choice between viable units. I'm in the position of having to leave out units that I want to take because I've taken other stuff that I wanted MORE. 

My only complaint so far is that I can't take my drop pod army any more - I spent years building up a full complement of pods on a student budget with everything including tactical and devastator squads coming down in pods. Made that change in 5th edition after playing an all-infiltrator force in 4th ("See, but remain unseen" for everyone!) 

 

Small price to pay though, as I really enjoy the thought I have to put into my list design, and am looking forward to getting some games in!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The list optimisation options out there are far too boring, and take far too much away from the characters of armies that, and I am surprised considering how GW touted this edition, there is never a sense of story anymore.  It's always "Take XXXXX it's the shiz!" even when taking whatever in the suggested numbers goes against how the army is supposed to perform.

 

Whole armies have had that problem for decades at a time. If this is somehow new to you then you were in some very odd meta.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So many improvements.   It's just a far better game experience than it used to be. 

  • Rebalance of units so far more things are viable
  • DO NOT miss Initiative at all - the new fight system is far better, although it can get fiddly with the pile in/consolidates in a big melee. 
  • I'm more engaged on the opponent's turn
  • The balance between stuff dying too fast or too slow feels "right" in most games.   Top tier tourney lists aside, maybe.  E.g. a stormraven is a legit threat but can be destroyed in 2 turns even by armies without much dedicated anti-tank.   It doesn't feel like either an unkillable monster, or a waste of points.  A big horde of dudes is similar. 

My negatives are really only on some of the units I own which don't yet have a codex, but I am patient and look forward to seeing the game develop. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I stopped playing 40k at the end of 8th edition I started playing Magic the gathering, and I think I've been spoiled. GW rules can't hold a candle to how well written MTG is in regards to templating, consistency, and thoroughness.

 

I think there are some glaring omissions made in the quest to simplify the rules. Firing arcs were mentioned, and I agree. Without firing arcs, outmaneuvering your opponent seems less impactful, less rewarding. I also miss the initiative stat. I think it was an important knob to be able to tune for unit balance, and I we're already seeing rules that kind of invalidate the new system anyway. (Emperor's Children "always go first in close combat.) I'm willing to bet a bunch more factions are going to get the same type of rule, which is just going to make it bland for everyone involved. Also the complete absence of special rules feels wrong. I understand that they went too far, with "universal" rules that in fact only ever applied to one unit, but having none whatsoever I think complicates rather than simplifies. It was never that big a problem in 5th ed. Also we're already seeing a pretty big shift toward what I'd call 'abuse' of the detachment rules. I really miss the simple, uncomplicated force org charts of 5th.

 

Combine all of that with how low-brow the Primaris lore is along with the way they were released, the severe mishandling of the factions I want to play, and GW's new anti-kitbashing stance and I'm actually really regretting that I bought into the hype and gave Games Workshop another shot. I enjoy painting and converting, but I can't really see myself getting involved in serious play. If I do it'll be heavily house ruled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Detachments cant really be abused as they are limited by your points, up to 1000pts = 2 detachments, 1001-2000 = 3 detachments, and then 1 detachment added for every 1000 pts, so its actually difficult to abuse, if a guard army turns up with hundreds of detachments of a lord commisar and a sentinel for 3 fast attack slots repeated until 2000pts the army doesnt meet the layout gw have stated in the rulebook, plus armies that can take brigades at 2000pts generally could do with a few rerolls due to bad ws bs or str, so for them to compete on a level field a couple of extra rerolls a turn isnt an issue.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only issues I have with 8th are lack of firing arcs, flamers hitting fliers and vehicles being stuck in close combat (im sure all of these will be redone). 
Otherwise, the rule set is solid, quick and fun. 
I could go listing the positives, but its just simpler and quicker to list the negatives. 

Over all I have had as much games of 8th in 1 month as 7th in 1 year, so that should say something... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me so far it's mainly just the abstract nature of the vehicle rules and the initial flicking back and forth list building for matched points. I think once we get a look at what is in Chapter Approved and all the codexs are out it'll be easier for me to decide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've enjoyed 3 games so far this edition, and while some of the rules seem weird like others have mentioned (no firing-arcs on vehicles being the main one for me) I'm very exited to be playing again. I haven't played a game since early 2015, 7th was terrible IMO.

 

The thing I'm looking forward to most is the flexibility I see for constructing armies I never could before - I play an Ultras successor, and now I can field a list containing 4 Dreads! I'm looking forward to getting a LOT more mileage out of my entire collection, it feels to me like Christmas in August.

 

I'm in agreement with those who state that the fluff behind to story-advancement is not great, but playing fun games with friends is a thing again.

 

Pleasantly surprised so far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.