The PROBLEMS with Warhammer 40K 10th Edition? Criticisms + Positives of the Game

[@auspextactics]

Now let's pretend I did the typo in the first slide 'ironically'...

[@RedMinotaur808]

HERETIC! Jk 😅

[@grapetonenatches186]

I pretend that with all of your typos.

[@buttemountain]

@@grapetonenatches186I always thought it was a game he played with us. Try to spot the typo, like those Where’s Waldo books

[@livingdaybyday3469]

Not to be that guy but if the community could actually read we wouldn’t need someone to spoon feed us rules and general strategy so wouldn’t worry about it too much.

[@XSpamDragonX]

@@auspextactics typos arent mistakes, theyre comment bait to help with the algorithm

[@Ghislain82]

How Games Workshop DISTRIBUTES their rules is the problem. Double pay walling their rules in an app is anti consumer. A free app with an army builder, datacards, and army rules should be seen as a sales tool, not something to gouge customers with.

[@grapetonenatches186]

Especially considering how impermanent the rules are.

[@wyatt864]

So they make all their money on kits. Free rules DOES mean more kits sold BUT they have had a terrible time scaling production. Monetizing the rules is the only way they can squeeze more cash out of the same production capacity without raising prices

[@KneeCapHill]

The shareholders said its best this way

[@R-YR29]

Idk man Idiots paying for multiple codex every few years may make up for it

[@R-YR29]

​@@wyatt864you really think they'd HAVE to raise prices? Lol they do it as is

[@teaman1275]

It's crazy to me half these problems could be fixed with a good set of free online rules. I got into Warhammer in 9th edition. Bought the Codex for Votann and Core book but once I found Wahapedia I just ended up discarding them. Not only is the delivery and organization of rules far superior (even having questions from the FAQ at the top of army rules) but having online rules be free and easy to access makes getting into the game and playing it significantly easier for new players not wanting to spend a fortune.

[@dickkickem4238]

I agree with your sentiment but you and most people focus on the "free" part, Where as what is actually needed is the "good" part of good free online rules. If the rules were bad (worse than they are currently) but free, I wouldn't play 40k. If they were good (fun) I'd happily spend money on them.

[@reginlief1]

I’d rather the current rules distribution than the current design ethos. Why do none of my kin have ANY special interactions with judgement tokens?

[@mathiasschulze6148]

Wahapedia is your friend. Core rules are free, Wahapedia provides you with the army rules and or free apps like Battle Scripe

[@JasonRobards2]

That site is just amazing. Not just the content, but also on a technical level. Especially since the developer isn't a front end engineer, but a database man.

[@ryanrhodes3169]

BattleScribe is free

[@bennettgrimm2618]

The fun part about fixed unit sizes and wargear is that everytime they do a points update you get to throw your list in the trash

[@Callmemrshank]

This made me spit out my coke. Idk you but I can taste your sarcasm. Lmao

[@botpenn4672]

as someone who started with 10th, and as someone who's played counter strike 1.6 (where you have to buy reserve ammo for your gun), i also want wargear to cost points again. don't make me choose between a terminator captain and a scout squad when having both puts me 5 points over

[@Jonontoast]

​@@Callmemrshankthat's meant to go in your nose

[@georgeflecknell]

.... and buy more models.

[@SneakyZaku]

The loss of wargear point costs meant that units were solely balanced on their most powerfull meta weapon choices - before if a weapon overperformed on a specific squad, you could make that weapon cost more for that squad. now its all or nothing.

[@supershot9729]

Alsomthis is a weird thing to me, the complaint against 9th was that there was no reason not to take the best loadouts if you just want to win, but completely taking the option away essentially through this balancing is just as bad if not worse

[@GeneralJerrard101]

Yeah, so? I don't want to run a msu of acolytes, I want them all to have power saws. Why would I want to build 7 plague marines with boltguns when I can give them the coolest weapons? Most of the weapon choices are about choices anyway, like if you want flamers or better melee weapons. And now you have a reason to bring banners, isn't that great?

[@davido6628]

​@@GeneralJerrard101YOU don't want to run units with no cool kit, but many others do. I loved my MSU skitarii vanguard squads with no upgrades at all. Simple and quick to roll dice for

[@sebastianrubin7476]

@@davido6628 Thing is, Genestealer Cults - of all factions - show that it's possible to balance. Acolyte Hybrids can move after shooting; if you upgrade their pistols to hand flamers, they scoot D6", but if you keep them as pistols, it's a flat 6". Small side-grades like that would make for actually interesting strategic choices when building your force. It would also really help if they balanced various special weapons - or, for units like Carnifexes, different loadouts - against one another. As long as they avoid the 9th Ed Plasma Gun problem - of making the jack-of-all-trades the best choice in every situation - then we could actually have choices again. Rather than the current; "Shoot myself in the foot, or my opponent in the head? Decisions, decisions..."

[@Neothunder240]

@@GeneralJerrard101 You could have always taken all the upgrades under the old system, nothing was stopping you. Removing the ability of choosing changes nothing to you but takes away the fun for others.

[@CriticalComplainer]

My biggest NEW complaint is just how homogenized all the units are. In pursuit of making the game more accessible, the game feels too watered down.

[@vander34th]

This was a major problem in 7th Edition as well. I want to play with Deathwing Terminators and all the special rules and wargear that comes with it. Not Space Marine Terminators with the Deathwing keyword.

[@redpandaseven]

My fundamental problem with 10e is that they stealth got rid of points by making Power Level the new points. I'll admit I'm from the older editions but part of the fun for me was list buildings and making strategic compromises, in 10e I feel like everybody just runs the same armies with little variety to them at all. I want to have choice in my army composition and I just don't feel like it exists in 10e if I want a competitive army. There are tiny things of choosing not to give a squad an upgrade in order to have the points to fit in another body in a different unit has been one of the trade-offs I miss with the new edition.

[@VoskahMarkhov]

I think most complaints would be silenced if the following three things were to happen: 1) Editions last five years instead of three 2) All rules available up to date, digitally, without purchases of physical books 3) GW Slowing down the brand new army churn to actually finish neglected factions such as Votann, World Eaters, and Deathwatch, along with completing range updates for ancient ranges like Eldar/Drukhari. None of this will actually happen though since their numbers seem fine despite amount of negativity in online communities.

[@FlyingNinjaish]

Nah, that wouldn't make the current version any less bland or a board game.

[@basteala525]

Can the 5 year editions start at 11th? I want off this ride.

[@VoskahMarkhov]

@@basteala525 I agree that as it stands 10th edition can't be redeemed. 9th edition could have easily lived another couple years which is why I suggested it as a solution. At this point though I expect them to double down on the bad decisions in 10th in the 11th and continue the endless cycle of codex churn.

[@michaelgwartney2672]

@@basteala525 Yeah i'd rather they just throw 10th in the bin and release 11th now because 10th sucks and is god awful boring.

[@clamus68]

Help me understand your points. How is 10th bland? I've been playing since 2nd Edition. This edition plays almost EXACTLY like 3rd Edition in terms of rule simplification. There wasn't a Psychic Phase. Wargear was minimized, there wasn't much choice. You played pretty much to table your opponent and not much else. There weren't rule delivery issues because Codex books came out whenever they came out and you might not get a Codex book for multiple editions. I liked 9th a lot as it corrected a lot of the mess that was 8th Edition. But you guys on this thread make me laugh because in 9th Edition, people were constantly saying that 9th was rubbish and that they missed 8th. Too much power creep, Too much catering to power gamers/competitive players. In 10th you actually can't win in the list building phase. You actually have to be able to be a good player. No overtuned lists nor 7 layers of rules to hide behind. I didn't mind the complexity of 9th but fuck all, the biggest complaint midway through 9th to the end was that it was too damned complicated with some armies having 40 to 60 Strategems on top of unique army rules on top of seasonal rules. People hated that shit, yet this thread MISSES this? Help me understand how a game that requires you to be a better player than your opponent is boring unlike in 9th where you just had to have the power combos/flavor of the month to win.

[@PatrickSlingshotGuy]

My main issue with 10th is how they stripped a lot of customization. When I made a 9th list I had a lot of options. I had to look at points, warlord traits, how many I want in each unit, subfaction, equipment, all that. In 10th I feel like you have much less freedom to customize. THe game being simplified is great for newer players to hope in and play and im happy for them. But I much prefer a more complex wargame where every tiny decision could make a difference.

[@CuriousLumenwood]

The worst part is that list building was never the problem. They gutted it for no real reason, the only excuses I can think of are completely arbitrary. And regardless of why, list building in 10th is an objective downgrade

[@bennettgrimm2618]

@PatrickSlingshotGuy the brightside is wysiwyg is just not a thing any more, but yeah my sniper rifles, shotguns and rocket launchers all having the same weapon profile just feels wrong

[@R-YR29]

​@@CuriousLumenwoodits so that they can phase out weapon options and make you field units with specific load outs so you'll buy more. Think Tau crisis suits

[@darko-man8549]

@@R-YR29exactly; they need to put fewer options in boxes when fewer are available. They need to do less work balancing when there’s less to balance

[@peepeefart]

@@bennettgrimm2618 wysiwyg is still very much a thing, even if wargear doesn't have a points cost anymore. You still have to be able to tell which model has which weapon(s)

[@timmytheevil]

10th edition completely obliterating character building was maybe the best example of the "sand off the edges" mentality that really pushed me away. I would really like if they brought back more customization, or even just had generic variations for character unit cards. Make a "Chapter Master" card that lets you add abilities to a captain and maybe buff their ballistic skill.

[@iskavanthefated6066]

All that was removed so they could prevent customization and 3rd party bits as much as possible. Therefore we get monopose models everywhere. Started coming about after the Chapter House lawsuit years ago.

[@Dragonage2ftw]

Character building? You mean Warlord traits and Relics?

[@shocker1209081]

Finally someone else said it. TwT I loved the idea of taking indomnitus armor for the 2+ sv and pairing it with a combi-melta and relic blade but nope. Now captains can't take combi-weapons, and even if they could it's just "wounds infantry on a 4+?" It's so lame...

[@longmeaderulez]

Yeah not allowing players to decide where to invest their points takes a lot of the fun out of the game for many people. It's insane that GW doesn't understand this. "Free" wargear and cookie cutter characters are so so so boring.

[@mrcaterpillow9926]

I don't know what you mean by buff their ballistic skill as all Captains hit on a 2+ but you are absolutely right. I miss Herohammer, I know a lot of people complained about it and stuff but that's when shit was fun as hell.

[@suleimansufianov5702]

A lot of people wanted 9.5th with a lot of customisations and polished corners. Instead 10th is almost a completely different game.

[@Spacefrisian]

10nth is rather lackluster and seems to be made for dumb people in mind, eg toned down wargear options or just throw in all wargear that is on the sprue, GW doesnt care.

[@michaelgwartney2672]

@@suleimansufianov5702 I think they could have just cut down the stratagems bloat and bake the rules into the units and kept 90% of the 9th rules, but of course they went over board and threw out the baby with the bathwater. Now there's no flavor, no customization, no force org charts, no subfaction traits, no wargear/relics/warlord traits, no points cost for different weapons, and fixed squad sizes. And terrain is even worse this edition it's just boring L shaped ruins spam even more than 9th and objectives feel like a board game and drawing random objective cards feels like a card game. They also moved a bunch of cool units and brand new plastic forgeworld kits to legends, taking away even more interesting cool options. So boring

[@ismael9914]

The thing I HATED from 9th ed was the ~35 stratagems with every codex it mean A lot of shit to remember, with feel bads when you miss that one niche strat Time loss looking for that one strat when the opponent wants to check the wording Lots of units being blank states, as all their things where related to exclusive stratagems Army building was mostly about trying to save CP more than having a well rounded army 10th has Lots of problems but the detachment/6 strats is something I freaking love and hope they keep for 11 th

[@UltraMeanMarines]

They didn’t. 9th was BAD. Awful balancing, far too many strats and gotchas. It was pish.

[@PeterSnores]

It’s really the fact that you have to buy the codex, then you have to pay a monthly fee to use the app that adds a quality of life change. Granted you can make your list then cancel the membership but pretty money grubbing for something that is supposed to simplify the list building process

[@BrotherVoidBomber]

My grips -Flyers -Psychic -point costs back -Paying for outdated rules when digital rules exist. -Detachments don't add enough to army playstyle. (See space marine) -Codex rule writing is inconsistent. -Transition from 9th to 10th was painful and effects are still being felt (Deathguard, Admech, Chaos Deamons.)

[@drunkenastarte5243]

...add to that list that World Eaters are unplayable if you don't take Angron. Eightbound spam only carries so far, and is pants-on-head boring

[@BlueBasuk]

@@drunkenastarte5243 On the flip side, Mortarion is damn near unplayable. He's either a severely overcosted buff to your PBCs who had their mortars nerfed into the ground, or he takes 2+ full combats to kill a unit of 10 intercessors

[@WardenOfTerra]

@@drunkenastarte5243 - That's because the army is trash. GW fucked up the entire release by not having an entire army with every role filled.

[@ryanrhodes3169]

BattleScribe is free

[@BrotherVoidBomber]

@WardenOfTerra What's funny to me is that world eaters were fine before their separation, yes you didn't have a primarch but alteast you had scorpions and a whole ass other army to field. I know it would be 2 massive codexes but keeping all SM and CSM things together would do alot to cut down on army bloat. Fuck it once Fulgrim comes out have it be where you can run 4 Chaos Primarchs at once at roughly 1400-1700 points with some support troops for objectives.

[@jw7500]

You forgot to mention that many people, myself included are annoyed that there are no granular unit sizes. Because of this, even after enhancements, you are often stuck with 30-40 points you cannot spend anywhere.

[@Chris-jl6vp]

- Digital rules done wrong. Confining things to subscriptions - The psychic phase is straight up gone. Psykers are gutted, stuck with one irreplaceable spell. - Cost-effective vs fully armed wargear choices are gone, there is no downside to taking special weapons because the model costs the same with or without them. - Points drop balance changes over actually changing units so people have to buy even more models per army. - Balancing for the most part is actually kind of good but armies have lost so much of their personality. - Despite how much people hate forge world resin they keep fucking making things in forge world resin. - Flyers are worthless. Soon, flyers will be mandatory in order to rotate the FOMO buy now models.

[@uwesca6263]

Besides mid and end 7 edition when where flyers op? Not just good but literally must haves?

[@Chris-jl6vp]

@@uwesca6263 Supposedly GW is planning to make flyers must-take levels of better and will be making more flying + jumppack units for the future. We've seen this with the new scions and vespids killteam.

[@BAZIUM666]

Psychic phase - I cast bolter.

[@TheKiroshi]

Physic phase was trash. I don't know a single person who liked it use. We also have a good few units with more uses. The full cost-per-unit for wargear does have me irked, i would like an option for this system or have a "base" version of units that have no upgrade for cheaper, versus all avaiable wargear for higher. Points drop = more buys does feel bad. Grey knights used to feel like a few powerhouses, and now i fit in another 2 units just to make capacity. Its not game changing, but if anyone is planning on a new army, it does suck

[@mattkerr5536]

Psychic phase was a mistake, but giving pskyers only one cast is also a mistake. Two spells, or bring back the old force rule or something.

[@Autechltd]

In general the main problem is that the stuff GW said would happen, didn't happened. And the issues fans said would happen, happened.

[@Dragonage2ftw]

But things they said would happen largely did happen. There are less rerolls and the edition is less kill-y.

[@solid-snake7336]

​@@Dragonage2ftw Lol less killy my ass. There are so many units in this game that just stomp your units in a round of shooting. Sure nothing is crazy AP3 or 4 as much anymore but now its just volume of AP2 weaponry and sheer melee attacks.

[@thanksskeletor4812]

@@Dragonage2ftwthere are more re rolls than ever being played with. There might be less overall but if you look at the top lists or even semi casual ones people build around re rolls. The game is also just as Kill-y as 9th. Go ahead and play without 100% L shaped ruins and see how the game goes.

[@MissZencefil]

@@Dragonage2ftwless re-rolls? yeah kinda. But let’s see, when u re playing Heretic Astartes you roll dark pact > on a fail, re-roll it as you prolly have an icon, if you still fail resolve d3 mw. This ability alone adds 1-3 rolls into EVERY attack. And then still, there are ways to get re-rolls. Which, each adds more rolls. This shows the nature of this edition. It is all a charade of “less-killy” and fewer re-rolls. 10th edition is tiresome.

[@ruslanhoncharenko2179]

But power creep is indeed finally gone? And edition is really the most balanced game ever been.

[@Majere613]

My #1 bugbear is still the melee rules. Too many combats boil down to who charges who, rather than using melee units intelligently to lock down threats. It's also far too easy to run away. I'd love a return to the old opposed WS system, which wasn't even complicated, it was basically the same as the Strength vs Toughness chart. The 'free' wargear thing is still a big issue. It makes it far too hard to tweak lists when a balance update puts you over the points, and far too many options (and hence models) are almost useless. This wouldn't be so bad if GW improved the 'bad' options, particularly Heavy Bolters which are almost never seen on anything that can take anything else instead. (E.g. Predators, Leman Russ, Retributors, Devastators, Paragons.) Fun fact- did you know the twin Heavy Bolter option on the Immolator gets Sustained Hits 2? Neither does practically everyone else, because absolutely no-one looks twice at it.

[@BigHatMatt]

I can say as someone who has just started in 10th edition, I'm growing to dislike it. Could be the army I chose in Death Guard, but games just feel unfun atm. I don't mind losing, but I do mind losing games I didn't have fun in. Rules changes leave me having to relearn stuff I'm trying to master and getting confused in the process. I've loved Warhammer lore and other media for years, but... I guess this just may not be the game for me. Which really sucks.

[@duskworker8469]

i first played back in 5th edition? played a tiny bit in 7th and 8th. jumped back into 10th and its like a totally different game. a bad one

[@peeledapples4176]

Honestly, if I take off my rose-tinted glasses, GW games just aren't generally well designed. There are far better rulesets out there.

[@hannaelia6279]

@@peeledapples4176 As someone who plays a lot of different wargames both from fantasy games, to sci-fi and historicals, in a variety of different scales I don't agree. I absolutely hate 10th edition, it is overly simplified (in a bad way) and lacks much of the depth and flavor that makes playing and collecting a miniature wargame fun. That being said I love the new version of Kill Team, and I still actively play and enjoy 5th, 7th and occasionally 9th edition. It's hard to find a game that has as much gameplay variety between factions as those older editions. Is any edition of 40k my favorite wargame? No probably not, but are they good games and fun to play. Yes, at least I think so.

[@aeaaea8113]

Playing Death guard may play a big part of it. I mean the army is a textbook of badly designed faction since 9th ed (since the change of the faction rule to the debuff aura). Since it, the army either hardcounter your opponent army (and right now there really are few faction in 10 ed in this list) or is hard countered by your opponent army. Basically whatever happen you will be frustrated as playing again someone you hardcounter is no fun (there nothing challenging to play when the player in front of you cant do shit) and being hardcounter is also no fun at all. Add to it, that a lot of change bring by the 10th ed are actually dice dependant ( sustain/lethal/deva need to do 6) and you can really feel like the game is not about wits and strategy but more about pure luck and which faction you play against (which has always been the case to some extent in prior version but i feel its really push to the limit in this edition)

[@dernde1419]

Try playing grimdark future with 40k minis

[@chronovac]

One issue I have noticed after taking AOS 4.0 for a spin, there is the lack of interactivity during your opponent's turn embedded in the core rules, so it's a lot of sitting around waiting for your opponent to be done with their turn. You'll overwatch, you'll pop an armor of contempt, and maaaaybe heroically intervene, but that's about it.

[@tommywilliams9497]

I think that's one of the things they learned from 10th when writing 4th edition rules. I vaguely remember the design team talking about 10th having more interaction in your opponents' turn, but they clearly didn't go far enough.

[@johngalt200]

GW has a long history of testing rules in one setting before moving them to the other. When 11th is inevitably released, you can expect to see a lot of 4th edition AOS rules included.

[@GallantLee]

I disagree. If anything 10th has more interaction due to forcing close range and combat engagement distances. A lot of units have inherent reactionary actions, like repulsors allowing a free embark, eldar wraith dudes shooting back, custodes wardens FNP ability, hellbrute return fire/fight back… charge rules allowing non-target units to be charged…

[@pitmatix1457]

To be honest I just want to be making my saves, fighting close combat and mentally planning my moves for next turn.

[@chronovac]

@@GallantLee The issue is that leaves armies that just...don't have those rules.

[@Pedro1136]

Given that each edition is 3 years, they should have all the codexes released by the end of the second year of the edition. Then run a campaign for the final year. That way everyone gets at least a year out of their codex. Honestly though the codex is an outdated mode of rules release

[@ExhaustedWombat]

Honestly? I would say all codexes done at 18 months if you’re paying for them. If you have to play more than half the life of an edition without army rules designed for that edition the last they could do is let you have the codex for free

[@notknightbean]

My issues is my iron hands don’t feel like iron hands. If I want durability I play them as black templars, but now I am paying even more for my tanks. It leaves me feeling unsatisfied. On top of this the free wargear simplifies things but it also just leans into meta loadout shining through. Heavy bolters just aren’t as good as multimeltas. And finally, yes the new models do feel lazy and they lack that spice that made warhammer feel so good. The new sang guard and inquisitor cotiaz are perfect examples of the laziness. And finally the locked loadouts are so bs. What do you mean my captain in terminator armor can’t use a thunder hammer or lightning claws? Or my captain with a storm shield can’t have a power fist? Why can’t my chaplain take a jump pack? Why don’t apothicaries have chain swords? It isn’t just annoying but destroys so many kit bashing opportunities for fun. Least I have heresy fir the kit bashing fun.

[@peters6345]

Yeah customization took a big hit. I find list building boring, in 9th I enjoyed thinking and experimenting with loadouts

[@DeusExMachina10001]

HH>>>40k, and 2nd ed HH isn't even particularly good.

[@drunkenastarte5243]

*Cries in Death Guard now being one of the squishiest MEQ armies

[@Hunterofstealth]

I feel you on the Iron Hands aspect. I've also been running as "Black Templars" for the entire edition and after the update to Champions of Russ, now I get to play as "Space Wolves" too, but it becomes a question of whether I want to not run my librarian or my apothecary that game... but then I can't run Feirros in either one... There's no winning as an IH player this edition

[@mrcaterpillow9926]

Chaplains can still take a Jump Pack however everything else here is pretty on the point. I think they really need to come back to letting the models be more expressive least for the Space Marine line. Xeno races have been eating GREAT this edition for their models.

[@nofuxgivens2797]

My problem is not with the game rules. Its the Factions and army creation. I got Effed twice via Deathwatch and Orks. If I was going to change anything before anything else is I would make points adjustments to units based on the Faction/detachment rules. Nerfing units based on their performance in just 1 of available detachment is such a lazy way of rules balance.

[@bennettgrimm2618]

I think they just need to stop focusing on the rules all together. The rules are bad and the team they have can't fix them. They should just put they're effort into models, more models for more factions

[@drunkenastarte5243]

I'd had so much fun building & kitbashing a Blood Axe army in 9th, and now it's 100% unplayable in 10th... Kommandos & Tankbustas are hot garbage. No more sneaky & kunnin' tactikks. Not even a crappy detachment! And because I don't want to ally in Wardogs & hide all my Plaguemarines in Rhinos, my DG are a dumpster fire because they've suddenly for some stupid reason become one of the squishiest MEQ armies?! 10th sucks

[@uncleheal2445]

My thoughts in TLDR form: Old 40k: Wargame 10th edition 40k: Tabletop game Previously, especially before 8th, every rule, every stat was somewhat linked to the lore of your army. Humans and humanoids had T3, tough and bulky creatures, like space marines and orks had T4. Power armor gave you 3+ save, no matter who wears it. Eldar are faster than space marines, who are faster than humans, having Initiative stat 5/4/3 respectively, with only dark eldar witches and harlequins being even faster with I6. You could look at enemy models and guess their stats, if you understood this in-game logic. Same for special rules: "Hatred", "Fleet", "Night Vision", damn there was even an "Amphibious" rule for Chimeras, that allowed them to cross rivers(!). Now every stat in datacard don't really mean anything and every special rule is a variation of "get letal hits if you're holding an objective".

[@Majere613]

I strongly agree on the whole thing about looking at models and being able to guess the rules. You used to be able to look at a Bolter and know what it did, now it has something like five different profiles depending on who's holding it. These days, some armies stats feel almost random, particularly Custodes who seem to have had some of their stats decided with a game of spin-the-bottle.

[@VengefulJan]

This, straight this. Wargame vs Tabletop is very much my current problem.

[@grapetonenatches186]

Its fun to play a game in which the rules constantly change, especially if it costs more.

[@ColonelHoganStalag13]

They appear to steer rule/point changes to drive sales. I get they're a business but at some point, somebody is going to come along with rules they don't need constant changes and will work to cover any army. One Page Rules is gaining traction.

[@ryanrhodes3169]

BattleScribe is free

[@gregtso7505]

​@@ryanrhodes3169don't use battlescribe. New recruit is the new hotness (and properly supported).

[@demigurlxd5781]

So Im a new player to 10th and my biggest criticism was I was trying to prepare for a match and I wanted to build my friends army in the app so I could see all the specific rules I was going against in one place and I couldn't cause I needed space marine codex its like how am I supposed to learn if you hide everything from me.

[@sneakybeak4032]

Overly simplistic faction rules vs overly complicated core rule erratas, also no psychic phase, a massive flavour fail and couldve easily been rolled into the movement phase similiar to other games. 43% of the vote were neutral or no. By most metrics used to define success, a 57% positive approval rating in the business world would still be considered a failure.

[@albertosanchez5384]

Also you have to take count of the survivor bias, many of the grumpy old school players no longer give a fuck and don't interact. They know the good old days will never come back and fade away.

[@DRaven-of2lv]

​@@albertosanchez5384 nailed it

[@ramsayferguson528]

Personally I'd say it would make more sense to have rolled the psychic phase into the command phase.

[@sneakybeak4032]

@@ramsayferguson528 yeah, or that, marginal differences but instead they just deleted it.

[@Neothunder240]

@@albertosanchez5384 Also, the game might not be bad enough for me to drop it but I sure as hell don't think 10th is among the best editions. I might sound like a grog but I've found that most people that say they think 10th is the best only started in 8th or 9th in which case, sure it might be better than those, but that's not a high bar to clear.

[@markmatthews9102]

No single source of updated rules is inexcusable in my mind. They HAVE to redo the pdfs FFS.

[@timiddrake]

Can't imagine that only 10% dislike 10th. But I guess many have also left completely and don't vote anymore. I am more and more becoming one of those as well. I haven't bought a kit in half a year when before I bought GW stuff for 300-500$ per month. Fuck 10th.

[@Colston3]

Removing the fundamental design choices like force organisation was a mistake.

[@ruslanhoncharenko2179]

Nah, I always hated force orgs.

[@doctor8bricks]

I'd welcome a return to a classic FO, but where your mandatory Battleline units are determined by your choice of detachment.

[@banishedpest115]

​@@ruslanhoncharenko2179is just 3 of every meta unit you have any better? If anything lists are more predictable now, with the added downside of they don't look like armies.

[@Neothunder240]

@@doctor8bricks That's pretty much how it worked in 3rd. A basic FOG and then your armylist might change the battlefield roles of certain units.

[@Neothunder240]

@@banishedpest115 It's worse than that, Right now I can have 9 or 12 Heavy Support options instead of 3. Lists are completely skewed.

[@QisforQadim]

Main thing I don't care for is the emphasis shifting from the statline and base rules to focusing on the special rules and playing card auxiliary missions. Makes the game feel less like an attempt at recreating combat and more gamified.

[@mobisev]

GW shifting the game to a more competitive focus should have been the main issue in this video of what's wrong with 10th

[@xOBulletOx]

I have a lot of fun playing 10th but I tend to only play against my brothers in casual crusade games. I’ve tried joining the community at my flgs, but people were unwelcoming and made games unpleasant with a WAAC play style or being unreasonably aggressive because they had a series of bad rolls. Locking away rules after codex releases has been frustrating as well, especially when codexes are made out of date very quickly, but being unable to learn and examine certain other faction rules has lead to some bad experiences with players misinterpreting or misrepresenting their faction rules and having to borrow that persons phone in order to make sure you aren’t being cheated or allowing mistake is uncomfortable to me… my personal take is GW should allow us to see rules & profiles for free if their codex launches will be so poor, doing so will also really help uplift the quality of games being played, and the quality of the communities involved in the game will improve along with it.

[@CuriousLumenwood]

GW’s insistence to shift the game to a more competitive focus is completely asinine. I’m playing make believe with my friends using little plastic soldiers I painted in a colour scheme I think looks nice. I don’t give a fuck about going to a tournament.

[@mattgroditski3547]

This comment isn't getting the attention that it deserves

[@jonih1794]

I'd be happy if GW gave 40k the Old World treatment. Release a ruleset that's more similar to earlier versions of the game with wackier rules and tons of customisation with less of an emphasis on balance. Then, keep the regular editions more focused on balances and tournaments so both playerbases are happy. Never EVER going to happen though. GW is almost completely devoid of SOVL these days.

[@L0ken-i2x]

The 40k grew much bigger in the period GW started focusing on the competitive side. So no wonder they keep catering to their side. Now look any time they release stuff for Crusade and Narrative, engagement is suddenly way lower because and it hurts to admit, the "casual" are often looking more at competitive and matched play as well, just with their own tweaks. That's why Legends units that people can still use are suddenly regarded as dead by the same "casual" players. There is some hypocrisy going on that part of the community doesn't want to admit.

[@OptimusMonk01]

@@jonih1794 you can still play 7th if you want you know. the good news is that the rules are stable!

[@Kenneth-k3b]

​@@OptimusMonk01The problem with this mentality is whether or not the people you game with want to play older editions. Several of the people at my local store have outright said, or implied, that they don't play older editions, only the new ones

[@pillowchicken]

Absolutely mandatory to me to come back: - Psychic (Will come back anyway imo. The fact that AoS 4 kept it is indicator enough to me.) - Force Org - Points for Wargear Optional: - Every Datasheet having a "special boy" ability just adds negatively to the memory game. A unit is special for what it simply does (Firedragons, Snipers etc.). Sure some may need that "extra" bit, but that should be exceptions. Every single Leman russ having a different special rule is ridiculous. - Character Wargear. (Lt. with "Combi-Weapon"..). - Faction specific Stratagems still to this day go agains the "Streamline". AOS universal and the somewhat reactionary purpose of the Stratagems there work a bit better. Allows more for the "engagement", that the people who have trouble with attention keep talking about.

[@n.nnamkcurts3024]

You speak from my soul…

[@VegtamTheWonderer]

I really only have 3 real complaints about this edition. 1. the Terrain Rules are janky. 2. Way too many units being introduced/deleted. 3. The Codices being drip fed is creating major balance issues.

[@Ezcendant]

The update cadence is a new school vs old school issue in my experience. A lot of the more recent players tend to come from gaming backgrounds where patches are expected in multiplayer games the moment a clear imbalance or exploit is found. The imperial rhino, for example, can still legally transport any imperial agents model, including other imperial rhinos. That would be fixed immediately in a pc game, but the codex has been out for almost two months and it's still there. Veterans of older editions just consider this kind of thing par for the course, and having units, or even whole armies, that are unplayable due to balance or terrible design for a year or even longer is the norm. The three month big update is good, that's the normal seasonal competitive standard these days. The main issue is that the app isn't free and the way it updates is terrible. If that were fixed update speed wouldn't be an issue for less engaged players.

[@Alex-yj4jt]

The issue isn't the "patchs" the issue is the "sequals" every 2 years. Free rules helps, but a video game still has a computer running all the rules and maths for you. When a patch changes things, it just happens I don't need to remember it.

[@Ezcendant]

@@Alex-yj4jt I've been playing since seventh, and I feel like GW are trying to get away from the edition sequel feel. 8th to 9th wasn't a big change (as far as my terrible memory goes, lol) and 9th to 10th was "eh, they killed some wargear and the psychic phase". It honestly would not surprise me if 11th is just 10th 2.0, or if they just say "screw it, this is warhammer now" and give up on editions entirely.

[@Alex-yj4jt]

@@Ezcendant yeh, been playing since 2nd, this is their entire model. They ain't stopping it.

[@jarjared3522]

While the simplified rules are nice it feels pointless picking a Space Marine chapter if they're all going to play the same. Especially as more and more of the chapter specific units get sent into Legends. I have a feeling that by 12th edition all the chapters will play as just Ultramarines in different colors. Edit: Another big gripe is the new combat patrols decreasing in value by opting to not include a vehicle of some kind like previous editions or providing a line up that is very haphazardly put together (the Dark Angel combat patrol comes to mind. The Space Marine combat patrol that includes both a Captain and Librarian in Termiantor Armor, but only one Terminator Squad.)

[@_Morph1ne_]

GW really wrote themselves into a corner with the codex. It honestly sucks for everyone involved.

[@BlueBasuk]

Custodes stay winning with their combat patrol, though there's too few plastic units in that codex for them to really fumble it

[@jarjared3522]

@@_Morph1ne_ There has to be a way to keep the simplified rules simplified and keep each of the major chapters of Space Marine unique in gameplay.

[@jarjared3522]

​@@BlueBasukMeanwhile the Dark Angels combat patrol gets a Captain in Gravis Armor that can't be attached to any of the other units included.

[@Spec0psGrunt]

18:34 I don’t think warhammer has to entirely remove “I go, you go” from the game, just make the shooting phase have alternating activations like the fight phase does. It could lead to an interesting way to rewrite overwatch as a thing that a unit can do in response to an action the active turn player did in the movement phase, maybe giving them something akin to “shoots first”.

[@equos5060]

This game was never supposed to ba a tournament game. It was supposed to be an epic cinematic-like event created by two players.

[@michaelgwartney2672]

@@equos5060 they need to learn a lesson from The Old World. That game makes you really feel like you are having battle lines duke it out and are simulating a battle. 10th feels like a simplistic board game and all the flavor was sucked out of it

[@brothercaptainmundo]

I agree. I played in a GT this past weekend and it was not the same experience as I remembered back in 4th edition. Yes there a good players. Seems the meta lists is killing the fun. Taking only 1 or no battleline in a list for the sake of winning is hardly flavorful. I think for tournament play, 3 battleline unit should be required. Realistically, the other units should be fewer in number. I liked the force organization chart. I might be off base looking at the game as a whole.

[@Axiom_Dominus]

That absolute worst thing about 10 edition was the fact that they took the psychic phase and yeeted it into the warp.

[@falloutboy9993]

10th killed my local play group. We would have 3 to 4 tables of 40K every Wednesday. Now, no 40K. Everyone moved to BattleTech or Imperialis.

[@BigAlLGator]

Any time a new faction gets rules, it feels like there was a coin toss to see if they'll be fluffy but underwhelming or unfun to play against. Combine that with the game just gets killier with each strong codex, the game gets so boring unless it's fluff vs fluff.

[@coleevans2487]

10 is the opposite of everything that made 40K great over the past 35-plus years. If they had started with 10th it would have never become as popular.

[@shuchuang6547]

40k 10E just a dnd 4E. Simplified and deleted all the customizations that players liked. Turned an excellent battlefield simulation game into a boring competitive game that can be found everywhere on Steam which no one will cares about after few months of release. They might as well start selling Go again.

[@memnarch129]

THE biggest issue with 10th, imho, is they removed depth from one area, that being modifying loadouts and those loadouts costing points, meanwhile they neglected to add depth and customization in a area that would have counter balanced this. When they first announced the removing of roles and detachments emphasizing certain army styles, like tau having one the emphasized suits, Orks having one emphasizing Speed Freaks, and so on I thought "GREAT they will limit certain unit choices while increasing the allowed number of others". Yeah no, Speed Freak can be applied to ANY ork army, and those Speed Freak units are still stuck with the rule of 3. To put it another way detachments are icing but the cake underneath is always vanilla. The army has to change NOTHING in what it brings and it just gets different rules. IF it had been X units are now considered Battleline then you would get some SPICY and cool armies, Crusher Stampede with 6 2 man units of fexes, 4 Screamer Killers and lets say 3 Hive Tyrants? Yes please, I dont know the points just using numbers as a EXAMPLE.

[@garbagecan755]

Honestly the biggest lesson I hope GW learns from this edition is that the biggest contributor to game length is the number of times you require players to roll dice. They kind of understood that when they "reduced" re-rolls but every time I have to stop my game, use grenades, roll 6 dice, deal 2 mortals, continue the game it adds time. And you do it multiple times a turn. These guys charge, we need to stop for a second 4+ mortal wounds. Okay did 1 moving on. It's nonsense, it usually doesn't impact the game, the abilities never "feel" fun or powerful, they just waste time.

[@christopherschwab6525]

If I can't have Age of Sigmar's new edition focus on clarity and simplicity, the one thing I thought would be a shoo-in is taking Spearhead mode and stapling that onto 40K. *Kitchen-table or lunchbreak 40K is a thing that should exist,* and Combat Patrol isn't it? It was an early attempt, but Spearhead really perfected the formula. 11th edition needs an onramp for non-competitive, non-2000 point play.

[@teaman1275]

On the topic of the Psychic Phase, I have no idea why they didn't just change it to work in the same way as Age of Sigmar. Simply have each Psyker unit show their Psychic discipline options on their datasheet. Have a section in core rules that show the discipline powers like universal stratagems. Then have them be able to choose a psychic power to manifest during the command phase.

[@larkhainan]

That'll probably show up in 11th, and 10th is basically just unfinished

[@dmitrykhvostik5975]

Main Problem with free wargrear is the fact the different options aren't equally effective for purposes you take them usually. Not even speaking about bringing default wargear squad. Make all loadouts equally valiable for its respected purposes and give some bonus rule for the units that pick its default wargrear.

[@sharky0355]

I think for Thousand Sons players it’s painful how stripped down psychic is as a whole. It’s like any other datasheet ability or a shooting attack countered by random things made to counter psykers in previous editions. Other things that have personally bothered me is that list building for TSons is so based around cabal points it gets a bit dull as it’s the only way to really have cool psychic powers now. Worst of all is the clunky way rules are presented, I think all digital free rules would both be better for the consumer and bring even more people in for more profits.

[@ironwarriorhonsou9303]

I started in 3rd and have been frustrated with a good bit of 10th, i find the over simplification of rules pretty sad. I miss the chaotic and fun things that had no general care for competitive but are there for fun, like the old Shock Attack Gun or characters like Colonel Chenkov. Was it unpredicitble and wild? Yes, but it was also fun for that chaos.

[@soerenkepler]

I´d dare GW to relaunch 2nd edition rules and models, and watch it outperform 10th with its flavour-less rules and soulless miniatures.

[@Triptides77]

One thing i was greatly looking forward to is reduced lethality in the game. They talked this point up a lot in the leadup. Then Codices started hitting and it seems like that went out the window. The other major problem i have with the edition is how almost every army is borderline becoming a horde. They added so many new levers to play with power like the universal keywords, moving BS/WS to the weapon stats. But instead, theyve vastly been balancing via points. Almost everything is a solid 20% cheaper than it should be.

[@TheEmpiricalGuy]

After seeing someone online mention this, I did some tests and found that if you write list for 9th, and then take that same list in 10th, depending on the faction it can work out anywhere from 15-40% cheaper. Having an extra 40% of stuff is insane.

[@drianfrost2712]

I really like the fact that they update the game more regularly ... As a tau player I hate the free wargear and the disappearance of drones.. and r'varna/y'varha. And as a Blood angel player, trust me I've 3d printed wings for my new sanguinary guards / Dante Game is more balanced and easier to get to play than it was in 9. Less complexity is not necessarily better

[@maxwellvonrichthofen]

My biggest issue with 10th is how Tau’s faction rule punishes them for split firing. When they were the faction that introduced split firing to the game and were designed around it.

[@peterlepper5199]

As a Thousand Sons diehard, pros and cons... Pros: - Our army is actually good now? - Magnus is really good now! Cons: - No Psychic phase any more - Can't customize our characters by loading them out with different powers, which makes our tiny model range much more of an issue (previously I didn't mind the tiny model range because every character could be unique and we had so many powers to choose from, but now every Exalted Sorcerer is identical to every other) - Magnus is basically mandatory in games above 1,000 points - Ahriman went from a flying death wizard to a purely utility character with a Psychic gun weaker than a standard Militarum Psyker's - The Psychic keyword is basically a *penalty* due to how many things can counter or resist it - Certain armies hard-counter us (Black Templars spring to mind) - Where TF is our codex?

[@lawaern3474]

Hey, atleast you have psychic-esque abilities still. Least your not Gray Knights.

[@Callmemrshank]

​@@lawaern3474 Or eldar, but I guess we made out better than your poor knights . . .

[@lawaern3474]

@@Callmemrshank Oh no, I'm an ork player sitting pretty this edition. But as any good ork player, I try to make you guys see the positive side.

[@keymaster16]

like I'm ok with the Psychic phase going away and Psychic powers do their thing in the relevant phase, but thousand sons was the only army to get a ritual list and i would really like THAT to get expanded along with enhancements in 11th. since now every other psyker army just has a keyword that you may have ONE enhancement for, otherwise the Psychic keyword is more relevant TO YOUR OPPONENT with their anti-psyker weapons then your own army.

[@mattkerr5536]

Oh no thousand sons lost their solo mini-game where you just got to sit there and watch your army die with no interaction /s

[@jonathanmiller5387]

I have to say, I'm quite surprised at the results of the polling! Very surprised. To me, the game has never been more boring! I started "playing" in 8th. Had the best time ever! Flyer spam was a bit much but I felt a few little rules tweaks could fix it. 9th edition came and I was in love!! The melee support was awesome! The brutality and the possibilities! But GW did their usual nonsense of unnecessary over complicating rules and power creep mess. 10th without a doubt has the best overall structure and design. Army organization, simplicity in rules (too simple imo), and the focus on leaders in units is fun. BUT BUT BUt.... They literally REMOVED the psychic phase and consequently the various psychic attacks that helped make the game more colorful! And the while it may have made warhammer games as long as they are even longer... I've had some of the best memories and wild fun having psychic test fights! They were really fun imo. They also effectively destroyed FLY imo. It was great in previous editions just needed a few tweaks nothing more. They killed damage throughout the game... not a fan primarily because while there are fun ways to win, the threat of getting tabled was a very real concern and gave a few armies a "punchers" chance in the end. Much of the fun individual customizations are stripped away too.... for boring simplicity...! Ugh! Much of the lore side of the game seems very limited to dam near nonexistent. More of the colorfullness is stripped away further making it BORING. With all of the good this edition has, it was an overdone heavy handed one imo that killed its flair. I'll say this... 8th got me into the game. If I had started and it was 10th edition I'd have thought the game fun too.... not knowing what it could be. But I'd have been bored in a couple of months to be honest. Just my opinion and experiences. But to each their own.

[@The_Penguin_8964]

I think the biggest problem in 10th is, GW is WAY too focus only on the main game+KT, but completely forget crusade and almost forget boarding action🤦🏻‍♂️this makes everyone just become more competitive, and start changing from "Oh I'm gonna play a fun list" to "Ok so what's the meta now", it's killing the game🤦🏻‍♂️ And I feel like GW doesn't really... understand how to deal with serval factions, like they always just keep them half-baked (Admech especially🤦🏻‍♂️) and it makes me really worry when they say EC is coming next year🤦🏻‍♂️I hope they'll be good as their heresy friends, but at the same time, half-baked faction are also in greater pressure🤦🏻‍♂️

[@dickkickem4238]

Yeah, it's like GW kind of forgot what "fun" is this editon. Honestly, I think that can sum up my problems with 10th as a whole. It's simply not fun.

[@Lordiisback]

the "meta" thing effs me up the most Love my Necrons but i have no choice than to play meta or die while not having fun.

[@The_Penguin_8964]

​@@Lordiisback Necron in lore is like "OK things get really nasty, let's release a C'tan" but now on tabletop is "Curse it, just use as much as we can"🤦🏻‍♂️and that's all because of they laziness of GW that don't even care of making sense, they just see it's a good state, then leave it like it's no problem🤷🏻‍♂️ Btw at least Necron still have things like C'tan, look at my Admech...🤦🏻‍♂️🤦🏻‍♂️🤦🏻‍♂️

[@Skitch213]

Admech being half-baked is pretty accurate considering they've actually been "Codex: Skitarii" for the last 3 editions. The Cult Mechanicus side has largely been irrevelent, with the exception of Kataphrons when their rules don't suck. We really need far more automatons and experimental vehicles with really outlandish weaponry. Cawl needs to open up some archeovaults or something and give us some cool 30k tech.

[@EdBurke37]

If psychic being something not every army interacts with then the answer is to give people ways to interact, not just gut it.

[@mattf967]

The reason why most armies are able to compete at roughly the same levels is because this is the least different they've ever been. Funnily enough when you strip away much of the out there shit that makes a faction unique and dumb it down to one or two rules, they just get painfully samey.

[@michaelgwartney2672]

Every faction is just rerolls, lethal hits, sustained hits, and dev wounds. You just pick whatever the best units are and spam 3 of them. Every battlefield is the same boring layout of L shaped ruins and cardboard objective circles. There's no flavor, no theme, no uniqueness to anything now. 10th is a boring pile of grey goo

[@amaagumo1036]

dropped 10th ed and playing the old rules and fantasy since I can slow burn the hobby again. Anything that's not mainline 40k plays better and 'feels' better since I have more cinematic moments even when we are grinding it out competitively. Thank you everyone else that pays gw's spacemarine sub service that lets us play their secondary games lol. Also whenever this comes up in irl convos I just say that it feeeeels reaaaaly similar to halo 2+halo 3 era vs post bungie halo. OG halo were solid games, full package experience that grew a comp scene naturally. Modern Halo falls in line with the whole ESPORTS READY comp grind where its too hands on trying, forcing it to be a competitive game. The core gameplay loop is flawed or boring or not providing a complete or satisfying experience all in the effort of trying to design a game from the start to be an 'esport'. Im finding 40k to be in a similar spot.

[@OptimusMonk01]

Auspex here doing the market research GW can't be bothered to do

[@guyperson7487]

I started in 10th, but I’ve learned that I really dislike no wargear costs and fixed unit sizes. I don’t like points costs needing to be balanced for the best loadout anything has, so everyone only ever uses the best loadout because it’s too many points to not use the best one.

[@conormcgregorwasnevermyfri1984]

This man doesn’t rest

[@sockMonster241]

In addition to removing the psychic phase, having the psychic keyword is just a flat debuff. The rules that interact with psychic are devastating. Grey Knights have a 27% win rate against black templars for example, who can just decide at the start of the game to buff themselves against psykers... tough choice.

[@LittleIAO]

Yeah I didn't get to vote in your polls. Not sure how many failed to catch it as well that are as checked out of 10th now as I am. I really don't like 10th. It's not that I think it's the worst edition either but I HATE what's been done to list building, datasheets, and options so much that it really spoils the whole thing for me. Some other gripes too. Pricing and trying to keep up with matched play updates are also major. I have multiple armies so that does make keeping up a lot harder. Single army players probably don't care so much. I do like the Pariah deck and I like the terrain for matched but GW has absolutely nearly abandoned promoting the imaginative and casual side of the hobby in favor of selling next thing and helping out the competitive scene to generate hype.

[@supershot9729]

I went through my 4th edition codex recently and it's nuts how much they spend in pages about the actual hobby side of things, there's even a guide on how to kitbash a squad of mutants from ork and guard or spacemarine parts

[@ruslanhoncharenko2179]

Considering how much time they spend on narrative and casual things like Crusade and White Dwarf, I don't think GW is really that neglecting to casual side.

[@d.s.dathaniel7552]

I came into the hobby without understanding of how expensive it could be, and I chose BoS as my first army which costs me a bit less than 2k to get a roster of 3500 points, codex, paints and tools I need. This hobby is a lifestyle.

[@samthompson2980]

Also, not asking people who have stopped playing the game!

[@milliman4]

Infinity has it's own company made free app that lets you build your armies, has ALL the profiles in it without you having to buy the model, and lets you save and export your armies. It's completely free, and it shows how good things can actually be when the company behind it isn't trying to squeeze every cent out of you.

[@Twenty2Degrees]

More negatives than positives with 10th, I’m afraid.

[@Bifstak]

Everything seems pretty decent except the fact that GW straight up removed or relegated models and rules to Legends, even as a Red Scorpions player I was disappointed to discover Carab Culln the Risen was the only character from the Badab War to have rules (and get relegated to legends no less!)

[@Melchiah3]

Just a note: When you ask viewers if they enjoy the edition for a game they follow the content for... guess what the majority is going to say (between a plain yes/no ratio). People who don't like the edition most likely don't play it and even less care to follow news and content about it. It's fine if you want to run the statistics regardless just know they don't really mean much due to the sample.

[@lefisgalanis1633]

god...i scrolled almost all comments down to find the obvious...

[@DMXKonCur]

I honestly really miss all the specific customization I could do in 8th and 9th, from warlord traits, relics, wargear, faction tactics, all of it. The granularity was really attractive to me, because it gave me ideas for the actual model making. I spent like 6 months kitbashing a Smash-Chaplain model because the basic Chaplain didn't feel right. Was it less approachable? Sure, maybe, but there was so much more depth and character you could achieve with units.

[@Callmemrshank]

I voted neutral in the pole. 10th as the edition that is easy to play and therefore bring in new people to the hobby, knocked it out of the park. And that's honestly probably what the game needed. That being said, I'm not a fan of every army feeling so samey. I miss the variety and depth other editions afforded. I'm not intimidated by complexity especially in the name of flavor/fluff. I may be in the minority though, I admit.

[@yugiMOWS]

I preferred 9th just because I liked the extra complexity because it made the different factions and specific models feel more unique but I get that simpler is better for getting people into the game

[@supershot9729]

The oversimplification of the ruleset and strict focus on competition play were big issues i had with 10th, 9th had its issues that needed fixing for sure, but it really feels like a huge over correction. And dont get me started on how theyve siphoned the flavour out of the game

[@bosscrloy]

I'd be very interested to see how genuine a lot of these answers actually are. Most of the biggest fans of 10th I've seen are people who didn't really play any previous editions, including 8th or 9th, and from my experience every 8th and 9th player I know dislikes 10th substantially more than those previous eds. The reason I bring that up is that despite 10th being this supposedly most played edition ever, online activity surrounding the game has massively shrunk ever since June 2023. I'm in several of the biggest 40k dicord servers and they've all seen gigantic drops in activity, oftentimes down to a 1/3rd or 1/5th (!!!) of what they used to be. Several youtubers have also stated that they're getting way less views than they were a year and a half ago (mainly batrep channels here) and while I try and avoid it, a lot of the facebook groups I'm a part of have also dropped off. If there are more people playing this edition then they're not engaging in discussions about the game online for whatever reason that might be.

[@ddurden322]

10th made me quit (for now), there is no immersion, no depth, no granularity, no singularity, no relevance with armies' background (F**k yea lets put 5 Warboss in my Ork Army!) Problems cannot be fixed, only shifted because of the power level system. Rember when EVERYONE hated Power Level? None used it in previous editions. Well How comes that 58% of ppl now like it? Its good only for tournament because of how flat and streamlined rules are. A less dispersive end of 9th was the best spot to be.

[@StilleR666]

What i miss is lack of customization od character at least. Like in Old World.

[@michaelgwartney2672]

Old World really shows how far 40k has gone. In Old World you have a plethora of magic items, standards, spells, weapons, mounts and other things to give characters and they are truly customizable. Units as well have much more robust universal special rules. In 40k a unit has like 1 or 2 special rules and for the most part it's always the same few good ones repeated over and over. In The Old World units often have like 6+ on a single sheet and it really feels like each special rule is tailored to how the unit should be in the lore instead of just generic nebulous shit like lethal hits, sustained hits, dev wounds in 40k, the only 3 special rules you ever really see.

[@tonycarew3057]

10th is far to focused on competitive play and by doing so it makes it very dull to non competitive players.

[@dwhawthorne5615]

Based on your poll 10th edition has a -42 NPS. That's actually really bad.

[@No_nameOG]

Brought in new players with free rule sets, drove out old players with simplicity of data cards and the forced lack of weapon choice.

[@LittleIAO]

And unit sizes. I can't stand that they forced the game onto Power Level and fixed sizes.

[@OptimusMonk01]

Where are these 'free rule sets' you speak of?

[@banishedpest115]

​@@OptimusMonk01the core rules are free. You can't play with those, as they are outdated and don't include army rules, but it's something they use to sell the edition in the shops, proving they are aware it's a good idea and yet still aren't doing it properly.

[@No_nameOG]

@@OptimusMonk01 indexes on the downloads in the community tab. Slowly getting removed to upsell players to buy the codexes.

[@paulsummerfield6534]

What is wrong with the simplified datacards? How does adding more complexity with visually not helping players with what dice rolls they need add more depth and fun,?

[@zandosdwarf-king]

I just wanna say, crusade is the most fun I've had playing 40k. And they should definitevely have the same scoring in matched play as in crusade: instead of each player scoring at the end of their turn, they both score and the end of battleround, so going second can actually be advantageous

[@georgefagan1351]

From a game design perspective, I think the biggest problem with 10th is the leader system. It shoehorns most characters into being buff pieces, and prevents them from giving normal, unnamed characters anything actually cool to do themselves. I've pretty much moved over to AoS at this point, and I much prefer how character models in AoS are their own unit, not just an extra keyword for some infantry block.

[@GeneralJerrard101]

The bit I dislike about leaders is that they mostly only go with the basic default battleline unit. So that's really fun for Death Guard where the basic dudes are all you get, and the ten leaders let you customize a squad for a task, but Eldar have a bunch of cool units and the Farseer is stuck with the most boring one.

[@michaelgwartney2672]

I absolutely hate characters in this edition. They do nothing other than just slap a buff on a unit. What happened to them having interesting wargear, relics, traits, and other things so you could make custom characters that are individually useful instead of just slapping them in a squad for [Lethal Hits]. 10th is so boring

[@stephenneal23]

I'm upset the consolidated the Harlequins into Aeldar and took all their uniqueness away. beside that, free gear does remove the motivation to make models unique.

[@equos5060]

10th ed has been defined by tournament bros. I refuse to play this game when its skewed towards 5% of the community. Not to mention playing with basically power levels. I wants gralunarity in points.

[@georgethearle7612]

The free wargear change was all I needed to know I wouldn’t be playing 10th edition.

[@kronksstronkstonks6360]

Very surprised the points system wasn't a prominent talking point - unless everyone changed their minds about it when I wasn't looking. Generally a badly received change - especially since it incentivises optimal loadouts since there is literally zero reason not to, and you can easily end up tens of points more or less than the points limit due to the lack of small points costs outside of cheap characters/chaff units that not every army has access to.

[@dickkickem4238]

He didn't really mention it much in the video but the comments are a flood with that criticism

[@austinseippel909]

I only played 2 or 3 games an edition since 5th, but for some reason chose to dive into 10th and have played close to 30 games this time around. One of the main problems I keep coming across the more I play 10th edition is the Blurred and undefined line between competitive and Casual, and a lot of this boils down to intent of play within the communities. Im finding myself split between games i enjoyed where i communicated with my opponent on intent of play so everything felt clear, and games i did not enjoy where my opponent practically rushed through the game and avoided allowing me to process any decision making.

[@chrisporter4993]

A lot of folks really don't get that all these problems are symptoms of one larger issue. The team in charge of the 40K ruleset and development is, to put it mildly, incredibly dysfunctional and headed by the author of some of the worst codices of all time. While the AoS team is creating some of the best rules GW has ever put out, the 40K team are desperately clinging to anachronisms like the strength v toughness system on one hand, and changing the rules almost constantly on the other because they're so insecure about their own ability to make a balanced game.... And they should be. Honestly, I feel like if more people in the community knew who Robin Cruddace is and that he's the guy leading the 40K rules team, they'd have a much better understanding of where these problems are coming from and how they've been around since 5th edition.

[@robbiepeacocke2465]

S v T is good though? Avoids needing huge numbers of anti keywords

[@mikoajpietrych6168]

I think that large problem associated with the rules simplification is that a lot of units, effects, etc. lost their flavour. The politic of one rule per (regular) unit they decided on coupled with separating diffrent loadouts into diffrent units and giving them some arbitrary role rules so they perform better, forced a lot of flavour out of the game I think. And it's the same for army rules and such as well. And to add an insult to the injury, the codexes made the matters worse. So I belive a lot of that conciously or not annoyed a lot players.

[@Demonarrows1]

Way too much dice fkery. 1+ saves and 2+ invuln with a 6+ fnp and a strat that lets you reroll all saves. Every army rerolls hits and wounds or uses fate dice or has -100ap or 6s do a thousand mortal wounds and I can reroll every 1 and every missed wound until I get a 6... Oh and my army has a special rule that on the 3rd wednesday of the month I can get 200VP for free and actually just win the game. Theres no game anymore its just a list of ways to reroll dice to get what you want.

[@joshberk8093]

I think this has definitely been the greed edition and them pushing and seeing how far they can. I also think this has been the over nerfing and anything that’s remotely cool or fun just gets nerfed to oblivion and then you just have to wait for the next rules change to play again.

[@Trinine9]

2:46 I am one of the people who thinks 9th was a better edition and when they released 10th it was a step backwards

[@Haloister]

You are not.

[@Trinine9]

@@Haloister I am not one of those people? Ok how am I not?

[@bloodgiant6596]

Love the shoutout to Titans Terrain! I bought into the first Kickstarter, been following Tabletop Titans since late 8th. There are definitely weaknesses to the set, since angles can sometimes be too easy, but it is by far the cheapest and easiest way to get a good table put together. Amazing stuff.

[@juultoo]

The lack of wargear options (I play Blood Angels so the wound is fresh) is really what irks me. I'm sure it's been brought up but I've had conversations with friends about reaching a middleground with wargear in a sort of "unit-wide enhancement" way, where for example you would pay an extra 30 points to give 5 Death Company power fists and inferno pistols instead of the usual loadout, but they all had to take them and couldn't mix-and-match per-model. With fixed unit sizes I think it could work and add some much-needed granularity back into the system without bogging it down with individual options and bloat.

[@Chasemcloud5745]

And it’s going to get worse next week my guy. That random powerfists DC get will be going and yes, YES the price for DC will be going up to 150 for 5

[@juultoo]

@@Chasemcloud5745 nice bait

[@Chasemcloud5745]

@@juultoo just dropping my truth my dude

[@juultoo]

@@Chasemcloud5745 they were 140 for 5 when they could all take inferno pistols and power fists.

[@Chasemcloud5745]

@@juultoo I know but GW want to make them a super elite choice and for you to only Taking 1 or max 2 x5s with astorath or lemartes. You will lose the random powerfists because the jump marine box only comes with 1 powerfist and they only want you arming a unit with what comes with the box. Your new meta will be multiple x6 squads of blade guard with chaplains or judiciars in impulsors

[@gerythionargarys7848]

I couldn't have given your poll an answer. I stopped playing modern 40k just before Arks of Omen.

[@mathiasschulze6148]

The best are the ppl thats say 10th edition is not complicated enough. Games that "eazy" to learn but deep in termes of tactic and strategy are the best. There is a reason why Chess is so popular.

[@paulsummerfield6534]

Agreed

[@andrewsan1997]

I'm one of these people but what I mean when I say this is models used to have rules that flavorful represented them from the lore in their codex now they are just boltgun with another name farm lethal hits.

[@mathiasschulze6148]

@@andrewsan1997 well lethal hits are to powerful I agree with that. Lieutenants should grant LH to the squad so they are more powerful than the captains. Maybe ones per game? But this one ability don't break the game.

[@poxjaw8429]

If GW made chess you’d have 6 knights, 3 pawns and the king would buff other pieces 😅 Before they updated…

[@mathiasschulze6148]

@@poxjaw8429 don't tell me this didn't sounds like fun to you too xD

[@biornr.4031]

I haven't played 10th, and I honestly don't know if I will. It launched at a time when I was moving, so I didn't have much time and most of my army was packed anyway, but having seen the rules, it failed to interest me, and I very much disagree with some of the core changes (like binning psychic, gutting CP, and largely removing the customisation of homebrew subfactions). Yes, 9th was bloated, but the solution shouldn't be to strip it till only 10% is left (yes yes, hyperbole). Seeing a lot of the flavour and the customisation of 9th gone has meant I haven't bothered getting my homebrew chapter out, and instead I have been playing kill team (and I am also a bit weary of 3rd, seeing some of the same issues such as low CP already)

[@konatelassina5301]

I miss 4th edition!

[@robertsegui2784]

4th/5th was peak 40K