Why I think 7th is the worst yet; and what it forgot (a negative view of 7th ed 40k)

[World Of Pain]

First of all - I have been, I am and I will be a huge fan of the WH40K. I love and enjoy all the aspects of this hobby, including playing the game by the rules and I have done so since the 1st edition (yeah, Im that old!).

When I write from this topic I do give a lot of credit to the history of the WH40K rules and there actualy is the biggest problem of the 7th edition. Most of the (I would still say that at least 98%) rules go back to the older editions so the 7th edition really can´t take too much credit out of them. I do give them nice A+ from changing rules like challenge and psychic phase to much different direction and making them (in most of the case) much better and enjoyable.

Problem is NOT in the things they did better but in all those things they decided to leave out from the rules and in some of the rules that they clearly have not test played at all or enough to immediately understand that they are just simply bad, bad, bad. We all know these rules. Here are some of them: 1) LEVELS. What kind of terrain did they use during the test play of this edition? 2) BUILDINGS. Why do I want to go in to the building when in most of the time Im more safe in ruins? 3) TEMPLATE WEAPONS Really? Have you ever tried to use these weapons by RAW? If not please place a unit of anything on a table, then place a model with flamer 1" away from the enemy and try using your weapon by following rules as written. Tell me how you did.

And this list goes on and on... we all know this. So why is this happening? 7th edition came out really fast after the 6th and it had all the necessery data and test play to fix all these problems but instead they decided not to do it. Sure, they added missions and fancy card game that needs so much house rules and modifications to make it work that its nothing like the missions they wrote on the BRB. I had played only 2-3 of the maelstrom missions when I allready noted that it was just a fancy add on to sell some card decks to us and really did not add anything good to this game without us fixing it a lot.

Money is not a problem for me. I have enough of it to have a hobby like WH40K. Spending my money on bad product is a problem for me. I can buy a really nice car if I want to but still I will be disapointed and mad if it does not fufill my expectations for the money I put into it. 7th editon is not fuffilling those expectations. I just updated my Grey Knight army rules. I had to buy Codex Grey Knights, Codex Inquisition and Assassins suplement to get 95% of the same rules and units as I allready had in my old GK codex. This update was 133% more expensive that my old Grey Knight codex. I didn´t get any new units, I lost many of my converted models that I had build with tons of working hours. I got a feeling that they sold me "my old car with new paint" and made me spend lot of money to get it.

Codex BA is coming out soon. I think that first time in my long history of WH40 I will not buy it. I will just keep on playing with my old BA codex (I have over 10,000 point army of them) and by doing so put out a word that GW really need to put more effort to their product in the future. Hope that my fellow gamers in my club support me in this crusade and if I can make one player to join it with this message then I feel like it was worth it.

[Charistoph]

Biggest mistake they made, aside from the level rules (that I'll include the template weapons on), is how the Shooting Phase was changed.

Each weapon name is fired and resolved separately. However, when you get situations where multiple targets may be had (Power of the Machine Spirit, Super-Heavies) or the firing of one weapon affects another (Ordnance, I'm looking at you), nothing was put in to recognize or take advantage of it.

Too much gosh-darn copying-and-pasting without proper editorial review is the biggest problem with 7th. As much as people complain about super-heavies and Unbound (those can be addressed on a per-person basis), this is the real problem. As much got cleared up from 6th, even more was messed up by the changes they made.

[Eldar_Atog]

7th is not my favorite edition but I can't say it's the worst I've played. I started playing in 3rd and I think of it as the worst edition. The codices and armies just had so very little flavor to them. The rules were adequate but you had to pick up the 2nd edition book if you wanted to understand the motivations of the army.

[40kGamer]

7th is not my favorite edition but I can't say it's the worst I've played. I started playing in 3rd and I think of it as the worst edition. The codices and armies just had so very little flavor to them. The rules were adequate but you had to pick up the 2nd edition book if you wanted to understand the motivations of the army.

I started with 1st,2nd then left during 3rd, skipped 4th and returned with 5th-7th. I'm also planning to step out with 8th unless it's a huge improvement over 7th. The rules have somehow manged to become over complicated and bland at the same time.

[DarkLink]

It's a marked improvement on 6th. It still has plenty of balance issues, and the editing is par for the course for GW.

[GrauGeist]

I started in 2nd, and really played a lot of 3E / 4E.

I hate the fiddliness of 6E / 7E - it slows the game down so much, in such unrealistic (implausible) ways. I have not bought any of the 7E stuff, and probably won't.

If 8E brings things back to how nicely streamlined 3E and 4E were, I'd be on board with that.

[World Of Pain]

It's a marked improvement on 6th. It still has plenty of balance issues, and the editing is par for the course for GW.

Balance issues are hard to argue in WH40K so I don´t want to go there too much. My opinion is that rules in 7th are written poorly, most of the possibilties to improve the game from the 6th edition´s lessons learned were wasted and it´s rules have not seen enough (if any at all) test play to even notice simple problems that appear when you play your first game with it. Writers also removed few aspects and sections of the rules that are now causing much debate and confusion during games - more than I have ever encountered during my years of playing. It should not be like that. 7th edition had the best set up to really notice most of the problems in rules and in game play and fix them - it did not. That is why I call this topic.

I do admit that 3rd edition was lacking fluff stuff but still it had good solid rule writing. And we must not compare the complexity or "realism" aspects of these editions because WH40K - like all games - has envolved during many years. It would be like saying that "Final Fantasy 3 had really simple rules compared to FF 7" - yeah sure, but at that time it was a really nice game and most of the stuff in the new one is just things build up from the prequels.

[GrauGeist]

I do admit that 3rd edition was lacking fluff stuff but still it had good solid rule writing.

Exactly. 3rd was very playable, because it was deliberately designed toward simpler, smoother play. If 8E turned back the clock on rules complexity but kept the artwork, fluff and production values, that would be close to perfection. Simple rules and stats that everyone could keep track of, with all of the background information that immerses the player in the game world, and a clear understanding of exactly which little items are truly characterful and emblematic of a particular army or faction.

[Arkhan Land]

I think 3e was a little too streamlined. 1st/2nd was overly complex, and i think 3rd was a much much less nuanced reaction to that, i think 5th/6th/7th have slowly been turning up the complexity people will tolerate in this game but that were reaching the tipping point

[Eldar_Atog]

I do admit that 3rd edition was lacking fluff stuff but still it had good solid rule writing..

Yeah, I'm not knocking the rule writing for 3rd. It's the lack of flavor that always bothered me about 3rd. Being more of a fluff player, that was very hard to deal with.