My recent 40k Sebatical

Be warned: This blog entry is fairly narcissistic and it’s audience is myself as much as it is anyone else.  

Note: This might seem like a furious anti-GW rant, but I assure you it is not. I assume GW is trying to make the best games they can and appeal to the largest consumer base they can.

  

It would be hard for me to have animosity for a company that has brought me so much joy over the years.

While it is not a comforting thought for me, I assume that much of my issues are due to me not being a key demographic in the customer base they are striving for.

Prologue

Many of my friends know that Warhammer 40,000 has been one of my greatest loves.  I have been playing it since its inception in the late 80’s and my fascination with the hobby has always grown steadily.  This is not to say there haven’t been little uglies along the way or that there were parts I wasn’t fond of.  

Honestly, I can say there have always been major properties that didn’t suit me personally.  I tend toward wanting more of a combat simulation game focused on maneuver and combat psychology over raw destruction.  I have always been forgiving in this respect, as at its closest, 40k has hasn’t presented itself as a combat simulation game of a real sort since 2^nd edition.  And even there, it delves into areas (such as psychic powers) and a grim future aesthetic that really push a cratered, destroyed universe where a single human life means nothing.

Despite this, the game has always been a canvas for my imagination that I’ve been nigh-addicted to. I have an embarassing story where I caught myself thinking about 40k armies while I attended a family funeral.











I’ve always loved the general philosophy of the old school Dev Studio where the game praised making the game your own, brewing up house rules and cool model conversions.

The games we usually dynamic and interesting, with a 6 turn game that heavily followed the pace of a narrative 3 act structure:  the first 2 turns set up what the geometries and conflict of the games, Turns 3-4 convey the rising action as the battle climbs to it’s eventual climax, and by turn 5-6 the game provides a fulfilling resolution. 

                                      
This format yields itself to being great at spinning narrative stories while pushing little plastic men around the table top.  It has been a great canvas to narrative gameplay and being that, I could not see a future where I gave it up.  

The end of the beginning of the end (but hopefully not the end)

When 40k 8^th edition came out in June 2017.  I immediately had concerns, which is the first edition of the game where I was not immediately optimistic about.  I gave it my best go, hoping that substantial playing would prove my concerns wrong.  By the end of 2017, I had largely stopped playing 40k altogether. It has brought me NO joy to stop playing and I do not encourage players to stop playing if they still get a steady measure of enjoyment from the game.

There are a number of reasons for my decline.

1.Streamlined rules

I found the streamlined rules and general modelling of the game to “dumb it down”, especially for one who wants more combat simulation than game.  I know that term is a trigger word for many and I apologize for using it.  Changes like the lessening of terrain effects, the loss of facing and vehicle armor values are just some of the design changes that makes 40k now feel more like a flat Real-time strategy video game than the immersive social event table top games are for me.

2. The Irony of Narrative play

The new edition’s “Narrative Play”, I initially found this to be its greatest asset.  Purchasing an army based on a units general power level to be a great way to speed up the army building process, knowing that (in the past), the details of what is purchased in a unit probably did not create so much of a difference that the individual purchases of weapons and equipment needed to be accounted for. 

To me, I expected that this would invariably result in players fielding units which didn’t flatten down to 1 or 2 key builds.  My example of this was the marine tactical squad. I had made some really cool conversions of Heavy bolter marines, and I thought it would be really cool to field these in games, compared to other more traditionally valuable and expensive weapons like lascannons.   I figured that we’re playing the “Narrative” form of the game, this type of philosophy would show itself to be the dominant form of army design.  I think my thoughts on this were naive and that given the option to take "the best" option a unit had to offer, the average gamer is inclined to always take the best if there isn't a hint of cost to each upgrade.

I was wrong about Power Level army building and it has led me to think I am out of touch with the common gamer, even some of my closer friends in the hobby.  I began to detect certain trends in “friendly play” where the armies were even more heavily sculpted than they ever were in the past. 

This is partially due to the loss of the armor value system and also due to my darling Power Level Army building system.  The version “Min-Max” took on a whole new definition in 8^th edition; the goal being to take a minimum number of super powered units (to maximize the ability to go first) with the best options always taken (generally to maximize the ability to inflict the greatest number of wounds).  This was a very rapidly growing menace, the effect being that I feel players were losing their previous concepts of building a “fair and balanced” army.   

I had even constructed a spreadsheet analyzing 6 games and logging key elements in both mine and my opponent’s armies, and these factors (the one I most commonly reference is “’Lascannon-ish’ volume”) nearly doubled over a month and a half.  The game was retraining the players themselves (myself included) to be worse “beer and pretzels” players.  More now than ever, the game was being won and lost in the Army building phase.

3. Game Pacing

The last main feature that led to my 40k sabbatical was the pacing of the game. Weaponry is now so potent that a game is often (more or less) decided in the first 2 turns of the game.  It makes it hard to construct a narrative when the game is only a one act play, and 4 turns of epilogue.

Where do I go from here?

It has been a very depressing time in my gaming life and, devoid of children or other distractions, has sent me into an existential quandary.  I am still hopeful though.

1. Down but not out?

I still have hope that 40k might turn itself around, but I feel it is a long time (possibly years) off.  Barring that, I assume that I still will restart playing 40k 8^th edition again and try and find some way to enjoy it.  There are still things to like about it and it still retains some feel of it's former self.

Also, the recent Tau codex gave me a HINT of aspiration to play the game again, presuming that they play so different traditionally, it might conceal the many grievances I have with the current game.   They already tended to focus on heavier/special firepower that might not feel like such a compromise of my feelings towards army aesthetics.  They retain an innate fragility, either with non-elite troops or tough, but extremely pricy battlesuits.  Provide you don’t take the Dal’yth sept, they have a strong emphasis on mobility (which at least casts the illusion that maneuver is important).

2. Horus Heresy

I am finally constructing my 30k Space wolves army which plays in a version of 7^th edition rules which can still be good fun. I have 30 of my core troops put together and imagine I can be playing the army by summer.

3. Necromunda and other skirmish games

If you’ve talked to me as of late, you know I am playing A LOT of Necromunda.  Necromunda (new or old) have always been fantastic games and I find the game design to be well constructed and entertaining.  The nature of skirmish play also puts focus on the individual model, conveying a strong narrative feel and an easier ability to tell stories on the tabletop.

I’ve also began some attempts at making my own skirmish games. Generally, these have not gotten very far, but I think the Necromunda ruleset has a sturdy enough base that I can quickly build some trial games using a modified version of those rules that can be used in a variety of skirmish style game genres.