I've been here bemoaning GeeDubs for years now, particularly during the dark days of 2013. Yet since Kirby got the boot as CEO, I've noticed that GW has gotten a bit better recently.
On the gameplay/codex front, I think they've done a good job introducing new armies. Mechanicus (despite being unnecessarily split up into 2 codex's), Genestealer Cult, and Deathwatch codex's have all been solid releases.
On the modelling front, I think they've also improved in the last year. The new models for stuff like Skitarii and Genestealers fit their themes quite well and get the job done without being overly complicated. It's a far cry from disasters like the Taurox. They're also giving fans what they want with regards to models: minis like Primarchs and plastic sisters. The "made to order" concept has fans quite happy, though of course cautious about the limitations of it.
GW has finally made its presence known on social media in the last year, making them feel like a far less bitter, backwards, and impersonal company. The recent announcement of plastic sisters on facebook is a good example of modern marketing from GW.
On the lore front, GW has finally acceded to fan demands and started progressing the story. Though the actual events have been lackluster, I think there's a sense that gak is finally going down in 999999.M41.
On the literary front, I find "events" filling in the gaps of lore between the Heresy and 999.M41 to be a great idea. I've enjoyed the Beast Arises series, despite it being unnecessarily drawn out (again, in true GW fashion). I hope GW repeats The Beast arises with things like the Nova Terra Interregnum, Occlusiad, Age of Apostasy, and Macharian Heresy.
GW has made several good decisions with its IP in the last few years. Warhammer Total War and Dawn of War 3 being the best examples. 40K comics by a third party are also returning, indicating they're a bit less paranoid about what is published in their name now. GW is also no longer attacking smaller companies with petty copyright claims, instead renaming their own mini's. While this is still juvenile overly paranoid protection of their IP, I think it's a step in the right direction.
Of course they haven't been perfect. I find Age of Sigmar to be awful. The prices are still too high. Thus if GW's gak level was 9,000 in 2013, it would be 8,990 today. Nonetheless, I am cautiously optimistic about the future of Games Workshop
On the gameplay/codex front, I think they've done a good job introducing new armies. Mechanicus (despite being unnecessarily split up into 2 codex's), Genestealer Cult, and Deathwatch codex's have all been solid releases.
Whilst on the flip side both Angels Blade and Kill Team have been lazy re-hashes.
I think a lot of people are waiting on 8th ed 40K before judging 'new' GW.
Better? Yes. But there was also no place to go but up from what they were doing before. However the proof will be in the pudding of how they actually want to fix things and they've shown zero desire so far to actually fix the mess that 40K is in, in fact they seem to want to do the opposite by putting out more and more stuff to increase the bloat and make it that much harder to fix later.
I'd be pretty impressed if they managed to somehow move further down the spiral of poor decisions. As it is, there wasn't much room to go except up and most of the changes are only moving them into line with some bare minimum, 2016 level expectations customers have.
The new releases have been cool, but the rules are still a mess, the prices way too high (or value too low, as the case may be), and we're still waiting on some of the bigger changes to actually happen and be executed properly. When Specialist Games is up and running with most of its old catalog (done correctly), 8th 40k is actually an improvement, and we see timely and effective FAQ/Erratas, I'll start giving GW the thumbs up. Until then, I'm cautiously optimistic, but not willing to part my money their way yet.
Last week I went into GW Harajuku. First time in a few years I had been to a GW store. A number of things caught my attention.
- The releases of the past few years are of unparalleled quality. Even the packaging looks much better.
- White dwarf was the saddest joke of the sad comedy the was GW...but not anymore. It seems vastly improved from the trash I remember. Its kinda reminiscent of what I remember from around 2000.
- To my astonishment, GW are offering a number of bundles and cheaper options for hobbyists.
auticus wrote: GW won't get any credit until the following things occur:
* the price for a standard sized army (standard being whatever the community's default tournament size is) is roughly $250 or so.
* GW actively starts fixing their very bad balanced points.
* GW's new edition of 40k is more conducive of a static tournament game and less a narrative random dice roll game.
* GW continues to actively support tournaments (this has begun again)
Those are the things that I read pretty much on a regular basis.
I'm not sure I would hold out for any of those. GW is obviously not interested in tournament gaming as their primary focus. In the October White Dwarf, they even played a game of 40k without points. And tournament sized games with 30-50 models and large vehicles/monsters for $250 seems unrealistic.
Oh I'm not holding out for those either. But really until any of those things start happening, I wouldn't expect the online community to drop any of its vitriol towards them.
$250 is the current average cost of most systems to get a tournament-ready force, or seems to be anyway about the ceiling of what most people are willing to drop on a tabletop game before they start complaining about price. (its not really about the cost of a box or the cost of a model so much as the sum of the cost of all models needed to play a "standard" game)
I'd argue that the getting started bundles are offering a chance to get battle ready armies, at least for AoS, for relatively cheap. I can build a solid 2000pt Flesh Eater Court army for $369 without any discounts. So around $300 for most people.
Now super competitive armies are probably going to cost more but you can get playable armies for much more reasonable prices than you could a year ago.
But I honestly feel like GW has done an immeasurably better job in the last year than in the last 6 at least.
Expecting prices for a whole 40k army to come down to the same level as a whole army in a skirmish-scale game is simply not reasonable, at all. 40k is never going to be that cheap because it has a much higher model count.
No they have not gotten any better, considering the insane prices, the less than stellar rules and their whole skulls on skulls on wolfes with skulls policy
AesSedai wrote: - The releases of the past few years are of unparalleled quality. Even the packaging looks much better.
Sometimes it's worth to have a look outside the bubble.
In regards to the main topic, I've said this thing many times before and some other posters have already said it here so let's keep it simple: rules are still a mess (actually getting more and more bloated with every new supplement) and prices are still insane (actually getting even worse with every new release).
If someone told me we'd get Deathwatch and Genestealer Cult codices this year, I would have been extremely skeptical. Plastic second founding shoulder pads? No way. Plastic Errant Armor? Come on man, your killin' me. Plastic Sisters? Now Im listening and not doubting it.
They've been really solid: Coming out with great NEW codices and packaging models with games (get a discount on models and a boardgame!).
But, they're Gdub and I'm me. Unfortunately, number one, I'm an Ork player. I've seen what they didn't do for Orks recently, but gave the Genestealer Cult. Ok... I was around when 2nd ed was scraped for 3rd. Its not unlike what they did to Fantasy when they introduced AoS. Most people didnt play then, and there was no internet to complain on. It was a big deal. Really. It was. 40k had its AoS already once.
I'm holding my breath about this rumored new 40k edition.
Well they killed WHFB just over a year ago, so it's going to take more than 1 year of incremental improvements before they ever see my money again.
Add to that...
- Prices are higher than ever, especially if, like me, you live in Australia (and say a prayer for those poor bastards in New Zealand).
- 40k is still a bloated mess of a game.
- They've reintroduced board games, but they still haven't brought back any specialist games which to me added a lot of flavour to GW's range back in the day. (Necromunda, GorkaMorka, Epic, Mordheim).
So GW have improved, just not in any way that I find significant.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Peregrine wrote: Expecting prices for a whole 40k army to come down to the same level as a whole army in a skirmish-scale game is simply not reasonable, at all. 40k is never going to be that cheap because it has a much higher model count.
Well they could significantly close the gap if they desired, Perry sells human sized plastic infantry for about a third the price as GW sells human sized plastic infantry.
Perry's boxes are similar price or even slightly more expensive, but contain 3 or 4 times as many models, which is far more practical for a game that expects a high model count.
Hell, even the Perry metals are cheaper than GW's plastics
Bolt actions also much cheaper their 1k armies are £85.
People forget 40k is a skirmish game they just lowered the points costs on us, it's still designed for low model counts which is why it's such a fething mess.
I used to bring 30 minis to the store get several games in and leave happy, now I'm bringing 70 odd plus tanks and it takes so long to play if I finish one game before home time it's a rare occasion.
And it's not fun it's a borefest where you just roll dice, gone is the fast paced action of my youth.
Until they fix rules and prices they'll get none of my custom.
I like the look of their models, but their games and their prices are still off-putting. I don't think 8th edition is going to fix either, and instead I expect it to exasperate the problem even further.
Part of the problem is GW has put itself in a corner in both areas, and they can't institute the fix for either without gutting 40K and/or themselves; it's a no-win situation for them.
AesSedai wrote: - The releases of the past few years are of unparalleled quality. Even the packaging looks much better.
Sometimes it's worth to have a look outside the bubble.
In regards to the main topic, I've said this thing many times before and some other posters have already said it here so let's keep it simple: rules are still a mess (actually getting more and more bloated with every new supplement) and prices are still insane (actually getting even worse with every new release).
Okay... I'll bite. Which manufacturer offers (highclass) SciFi and (High-Fantasy) in plastic for a game with mini counts in the same area like WH40k or Aos?
Not only have they gotten better, I feel like we've entered a new GW golden age. The minis are amazing, they are listening to their fans, they continue to release boxed sets with huge discounts, concepts of old are making huge comebacks, and AoS has gotten me as excited as I've ever been about the gaming side of the hobby (as opposed to the painting and building, which has always been my main focus). The only thing I'm missing from GW at the moment is a cleaned up, significantly simplified 40k ruleset in the vein of AoS but not as pared down as that. Strange times indeed! At the same time we're spoilt for choice of games with so many high-quality products aimed at different types of gamers (X-Wing, Darklands, Dropfleet, Bolt Action, Song of Blades and Heroes just to mention some standouts). Truly an amazing time, both to be a GW fan and a gamer and hobbyist.
Perry's boxes are similar price or even slightly more expensive, but contain 3 or 4 times as many models, which is far more practical for a game that expects a high model count.
Hell, even the Perry metals are cheaper than GW's plastics
Historical minis have always been cheaper than fantasy minis.
GW have been doing good stuff in the last year, I purchased a White Dwarf, which is something I have not done in 10 years.
I just recently got the Silver Tower card pack, I wish GW would shift their printing away from China. Wizards of the Coast can print in Belgium, so I expect GW could do that as well.
Perry's boxes are similar price or even slightly more expensive, but contain 3 or 4 times as many models, which is far more practical for a game that expects a high model count.
Hell, even the Perry metals are cheaper than GW's plastics
Historical minis have always been cheaper than fantasy minis.
Yeah but it shows if you build a game around large numbers of models, you can sell them more cheaply if you want.
Many fantasy games are skirmish rather than horde so the models are priced higher. A game like Kings of War is based around hordes and so Mantic sell them cheaper (even though I'm not a fan of the aesthetics, they are just injection moulded plastic kits which incur the same production costs as any other).
Miniatures prices should scale with the number of models you are expected to buy to build a force, not necessarily linearly, but most definitely if you only need 10 models to play a game they should be more expensive per model than if you need 100. Most historics revolve around larger numbers of models so it's natural they'd tend to be cheaper per model the same as Kings of War.
GW miniatures are priced as if it were a skirmish game, but they encourage players to buy hordes.
I'm not sure GW was ever as bad as some people think, but I think they've shown some signs of improvement. The people that like AOS really enjoy it, and by all accounts its a fun game. People also enjoy the board games. 40k is still, well, a mess. They've started doing some bundles and boxed games with pretty significant discounts, and they've started reaching out a bit on social media.
GW's long term health depends on if it can keep 40k a game that people are excited to play. The models are fine, even if I don't care as much for the new aesthetic, they are technically amazing.
hobojebus wrote: X-wing you need 3-8 models max to play a 100/6 game so at £10 an expansion I'm fine with that.
But when you're talking about £500-700 for a entry level army in 40k that's an insane investment just to start playing.
£100 is what your intro force costs in most systems and that's the point where most gamers are comfortable.
It's one of several things that killed WHFB. They dropped boxes from 20 to 10 on many models, raised the price per model and then released an edition that encouraged unit sizes of 30+
How the hell do convince a mate to buy in to a game like that?
Harriticus wrote:I've been here bemoaning GeeDubs for years now, particularly during the dark days of 2013. Yet since Kirby got the boot as CEO, I've noticed that GW has gotten a bit better recently.
Better yes, but now I believe GW is still the same old same old. It's all smoke and mirrors. It's the illusion that they have changed but they are still the same.
On the gameplay/codex front, I think they've done a good job introducing new armies. Mechanicus (despite being unnecessarily split up into 2 codex's), Genestealer Cult, and Deathwatch codex's have all been solid releases.
Here is proof. How do you put in a negative when praising for something good they did? Right there the Mechanicus being split up is showing GW hasn't changed.
On the modelling front, I think they've also improved in the last year. The new models for stuff like Skitarii and Genestealers fit their themes quite well and get the job done without being overly complicated. It's a far cry from disasters like the Taurox. They're also giving fans what they want with regards to models: minis like Primarchs and plastic sisters. The "made to order" concept has fans quite happy, though of course cautious about the limitations of it.
Minis were always improving even under GW of old. As for Primarchs, plastic sisters and "made to order" it's a bit premature with that. Wait till it actually happens. Saying something how good something is before it happens is not a good debate.
GW has finally made its presence known on social media in the last year, making them feel like a far less bitter, backwards, and impersonal company. The recent announcement of plastic sisters on facebook is a good example of modern marketing from GW.
This is where the smoke and mirrors come in. The illusion of change. So now that GW embraces social media it shows GW has changed. A Mugger can use social media. Does that make them a good person after stealing your money?
On the lore front, GW has finally acceded to fan demands and started progressing the story. Though the actual events have been lackluster, I think there's a sense that gak is finally going down in 999999.M41.
GW has made several good decisions with its IP in the last few years. Warhammer Total War and Dawn of War 3 being the best examples. 40K comics by a third party are also returning, indicating they're a bit less paranoid about what is published in their name now. GW is also no longer attacking smaller companies with petty copyright claims, instead renaming their own mini's. While this is still juvenile overly paranoid protection of their IP, I think it's a step in the right direction.
You are forgetting 40K Plant vs Zomibes. For every good IP decisions there are many poor ones. Funny you don't talk about them. Leaving out facts doesn't make GW any better, just your argument false.
Of course they haven't been perfect. I find Age of Sigmar to be awful. The prices are still too high. Thus if GW's gak level was 9,000 in 2013, it would be 8,990 today. Nonetheless, I am cautiously optimistic about the future of Games Workshop
So you find Age of Sigmar to be awful prices to high should show you that GW hasn't changed at all then. So your are proving yourself wrong in your debate.
With that said, 2016 has been the most I have spent money on GW. I haven't spent this much on GW in a few years so this smoke and mirrors approach is working at least on me. Will it last? I don't think so. I see GW of old creeping back in. To keep playing GW is just the same. Prices are even getting higher. Only one buzz saw in a pack for genestealers cult sprues when the rules can have 2 in a unit? So it's back to same old GW where placing only one bit in a box but rules tell you can use a many.
Wayniac wrote:Better? Yes. But there was also no place to go but up from what they were doing before. However the proof will be in the pudding of how they actually want to fix things and they've shown zero desire so far to actually fix the mess that 40K is in, in fact they seem to want to do the opposite by putting out more and more stuff to increase the bloat and make it that much harder to fix later.
I agree. It will be the new 40K edition to see if GW has changed at all or not. Sadly still under a year away. Why wait? Right there should raise up RED FLAGS. Why wait over a year to fix their mess?
Bartali wrote:
On the gameplay/codex front, I think they've done a good job introducing new armies. Mechanicus (despite being unnecessarily split up into 2 codex's), Genestealer Cult, and Deathwatch codex's have all been solid releases.
Whilst on the flip side both Angels Blade and Kill Team have been lazy re-hashes.
I think a lot of people are waiting on 8th ed 40K before judging 'new' GW.
See perfect response right here. GW had a chance to fix the game but yet still does old GW tactics.
So while I Like the illusion that GW is putting out, it's all smoke and mirrors and GW is really the same old same old.
Joyboozer wrote:When those warhammer tv videos make a joke about the price they're charging for Kharn the Betrayer I'll agree with you.
I think GW has improved. I believe the disastrous launch of Age of Sigmar in 2015 was the wakeup call they needed, but GW is a big boat and it takes time to turn around.
I agree with most of you here, in particular Polonius, so far in the last year, they've mostly been doing things I approve of. They've made AoS into a playable skirmish game that people I know enjoy, their board games get rave reviews on BoardGameGeek, and 40k remains a Byzantine mess.
If I had my way, I would attempt a rewrite of 40k which would result in two separate rule sets. I would create a game intended for small armies and skirmishes, which would retain much of what is 40k today, with a recommended max points ceiling, and I would replace the main game with a much simpler, platoon level rule set. Both games would make use of the same models, but the skirmish game would treat special rules differently and emphasise infantry.
Comparing whatever GW is doing to X-Wing, is like comparing apples and oranges. They're both fruits, and sometimes you don't want to bother peeling the orange, so you take the apple, but then there are those of us who only eat oranges and find the peeling rewarding. And if you don't want either, you can have orange juice.
Herzlos wrote: You mean 40K and Apocalypse, or more like Kill Team and 40K?
I'm not really familiar with Kill Team, but from what I've read it doesn't allow vehicles and models act as separate units, and that's not entirely what I had in mind either.
What 40k really needs is a fundamental rewrite, and I don't know what that should involve, except I would have liked the game to move away from the "I go, you go" structure, which doesn't work well in large games, and replace it with randomised unit activations. In which case you wouldn't need to wait for you turn, and I believe it would make the game feel more interactive, because it would force players to react more to their opponents. The only purpose of saving throws is to give you a false sense of involvement in the other player's turn, and we could do away with all that with an alternating unit turn order. It would also remove the huge advantage certain armies get from taking the first turn.
Also Scenario Objectives should always be based primarily on the armies involved, and it doesn't make any sense that both armies should have the same objectives. It would arguably make for a better system if both sides received objectives tailored to their abilities, or received more points for objectives that were more difficult for them, based on the opposing player's army and the effective scenario.
Aside from all that, which belongs to a different sub-forum anyway, I would have liked to develop 40k into two different games; one squad level, the other platoon level. The squad level game could be a skirmish game suitable for tournaments, beginners and so on, with tightly balanced rules and restrictions so it doesn't allow for the sort of things which are now breaking 40k games, such as Lords of War units, non-canon allies, death stars and the other garbage.
The platoon level game should be more simplified than current 40k, but more suitable for scenario games with uneven sides, with tight, streamlined rules, less bookkeeping, less downtime. The core mechanics should be roughly the same, but the squad level game should offer more options and special rules, but with a smaller selection of special vehicles, weapon platforms, and other drastic, or unsuitable content, which on the other hand would be fine in the platoon level game.
As of right now, the rules delve more into the particular types of pistol you're allowed to issue to your characters, than the vehicles and titans of the game. And this feels very weird.
I think they've done immeasurably better this year but yes, like many other I'm going to make my final decision based on what 8th edition looks like. I'm honestly hoping for a simplification of rules similar to AoS. Not necessarily that extreme but something along those lines. 40k needs a reboot similar to it's 2nd to 3rd transition.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
hobojebus wrote: If 8th is bad I'm sure a fan made 9th will come about, the people did a great job with fantasy.
They showed us that if GW keeps failing we as a community can do better.
I didn't care for 8th or 9th Age. AoS with the Generals Compendium on the other hand has been excellent.
On the whole, I've been pleasantly surprised by so much of what they've done over the past year (especially after I'd basically written them off over the last few years.)
AesSedai wrote: - The releases of the past few years are of unparalleled quality. Even the packaging looks much better.
Sometimes it's worth to have a look outside the bubble.
In regards to the main topic, I've said this thing many times before and some other posters have already said it here so let's keep it simple: rules are still a mess (actually getting more and more bloated with every new supplement) and prices are still insane (actually getting even worse with every new release).
Okay... I'll bite. Which manufacturer offers (highclass) SciFi and (High-Fantasy) in plastic for a game with mini counts in the same area like WH40k or Aos?
Yeah, so, still waiting for you to dispel my notion...
SKR.HH wrote: Okay... I'll bite. Which manufacturer offers (highclass) SciFi and (High-Fantasy) in plastic for a game with mini counts in the same area like WH40k or Aos?
Does said manufacturer also have to be including at least five skulls per model?
I mean, I quoted a post that talked about "unparalleled" quality. Nothing was said about the material, or the genre, or the games intended to be played with said models.
Anyway, since you seem to be going down that route, I'd say Mantic. Just check the stuff they've been showing for their future Warpath release (there's a thread in the News & Rumours section if you want to see it there).
Have you seen Dreamforge's range? Or Frostgrave's plastic boxes? Or Perry Miniatures, whose minis can be used for fantasy settings?
If we move away from plastics, because you know, materials such as resin and metal are also valid for manufacturing miniatures, the list is endless. Hitech Miniatures (you may or may not like the style, but the quality is undeniable), Raging Heroes, Russian Alternative, MOM Miniatures, Avatars of War, etc etc.
If we only take model quality into account, and disregard settings, styles and materials... in my eyes nothing has still managed to beat some of the models Rackham released during the 00s. Back then they just made most GW sculptors look like pathetic amateurs. So when I read about GW's "unparalelled" quality I can't help but laugh.
As I said, it's very worthwhile to just have a look outside the GW bubble.
Mantic's best stuff is about on par with gw's worst. Dreamforge has a very limited and very generic aesthetic. Frostgrave is interesting but also quite generic. Avatars of war stuff looks good but they have major shipping issues.
Rackham was great but unfortunately no longer exist. Some of thier designers went on to work for gw.
What I like best about gw's current output is the boardgames. BAC, overkill, gorechosen and especially silver tower have been very well received by the wider boardgaming community.
With the prospero game, bloodbowl and more on the way this shows no sign of letting up.
I've seen tons of alternatives thanks to 9th age and the only companies that'd tempt me away from a GW purchase are Gamezone, Perry, Reaper and BlackTree miniatures. (Though metal models are a full stop on my enthusiasm)
That's just my view, of course. It's subjective like art, really. One man's GW figure is another man's Mantic and vice-versa.
Yup. You can probably find someone out there who perfers the taurox to the goliath, or thinks the old version of nagash is better than the new one. I dislike resin for the health issues and metal for the modeling issues. For me gw going all plastic was the best decision they ever made.
GW has finally made its presence known on social media in the last year, making them feel like a far less bitter, backwards, and impersonal company. The recent announcement of plastic sisters on facebook is a good example of modern marketing from GW.
This is where the smoke and mirrors come in. The illusion of change. So now that GW embraces social media it shows GW has changed. A Mugger can use social media. Does that make them a good person after stealing your money?
Seriously. My local tire shop has a Facebook page, and a Twitter account, and a Google+ page. Social media is part of the cost of doing business now. GW returning to social media isn't good, just less shameful.
Most of the changes over the past year have been along the same lines: small things to return to the baseline of a decently-run business. Everyone's all excited about mining old fluff and bundles with actual discounts. Meanwhile, prices keep increasing, and the rules, fluff, and profit continue their steady decline.
What would really impress me is if they released the next edition and updated every army simultaneously for the new edition. None of this holdover from 10 years ago nonsense.
What would really impress me is if they released the next edition and updated every army simultaneously for the new edition. None of this holdover from 10 years ago nonsense.
And berzerkers on juggernauts. *drool*
Would Bloodcrushers of Khorne help on the juggernaut front? Check AoS Khorne stuff if that sounds interesting.
I also agree that the 3rd edition approach of having army lists come out simultaneously with the edition release.
Upon thinking about this have had something of an epiphany. I honestly don't know!
I've played one game of 40k in the past two years, following on from a bad 6th run when my infantry were being carpet-bombed by Tomix toys (and I refused to partake in a new miniature range splurge to compete), a game every 6 months or so, after which time I'd forgotten how poor the experience was, I've sold all of my stuff. Had a quick try with AoS, not even on the same page as WHFB as an experience (I guess as it doesn't have any pages! ), I don't know how on earth people have replaced their former game with it.
As for the latest Deathwatch, Genestealers, Gorechosen etc. they all look really nice, lovely miniatures. But I have absolutely no compunction to play them! I've gone from being a humongous Black Library fan to not caring, the books have gone to charity shops.
Davor mentioned a few pages ago that Dakka is full of GW fans, waiting for the games to become better. And it's taken thinking about that to realise that perhaps I'm not any more, and haven't been for some time..
And with the non-GW games being kicked into touch at the bottom of the front page, Dakka not really doing much to sidle up with the growth of other parts of the industry, actually makes me wonder what I am doing here! And still posting..
Apologies for the self-indulgent brain dump. This has been a useful thread for me to read, this post possibly not so much for other people!
There's a whole world out there, friend. Being a hobbyist is all about enjoying the things you have a passion for. If your passion lies elsewhere you gotta follow it.
If you don't like gw stuff any more don't buy, dont play it don't post about it. Life is too short. I got out of the hobby for 10 years and only came back for the warhammer endtimes. The time away let me realise that I like gw for its combination of fluff, art, miniatures and gameplay. There are plenty of other games that do one of those things better than Gw but none that do them all.
Chikout wrote: Mantic's best stuff is about on par with gw's worst.
To a certain degree this is an issue depending on each one's tastes but... IMO such an statement merely proves you have a very limited knowledge of Mantic's catalogue. They've come a long way since some of their worst stuff. I'd insist you to check the Warpath thread in N&R and have a look at the latest pictures.
Dreamforge has a very limited and very generic aesthetic. Frostgrave is interesting but also quite generic. Avatars of war stuff looks good but they have major shipping issues.
I'd like to know what makes Dreamforge and Frostrave "generic" and large parts of GW's catalogue the opposite.
Hello, I'm such an unique and distinctive model design.
Once the company comes out with more models for cheaper prices as they once had, and supported more specialist games (Yes, the specialist games can be expensive, but plastic is a must) like Battlefleet Gothic, Necromunda, etc, as well as LOTR SBG, then I'll think about playing and actually buying models again.
(In case you're curious, yes, I do still buy Black Library. I love the lore.)
I really like Dreamforges Minaitures and Frostgrave, but Dreamforges entire army range is generic hightech powered guys and Frostgrave's entire line of models is generic fantasy figures, suitable for D&D and Frostgrave. Part of the appeal to both lines of minaitures is they are generic enough to use in other games.
Mitochondria wrote: They are like the cheating girlfriend who only fethed five dudes this last weekend, instead of the eight she fethed the weekend before.
It's funny you bring up the girlfriend analogy, because a lot of the complaining here sounds like a bitter ex complaining about the new girlfriend....
EVERY miniatures game has gotten expensive.
EVERY miniatures game has multiple editions with rules changes someone doesn't like.
EVERY game has an aesthetic that someone doesn't like.
EVERYONE has a different opinion on how GW should have done something.
Chikout wrote: Mantic's best stuff is about on par with gw's worst.
To a certain degree this is an issue depending on each one's tastes but... IMO such an statement merely proves you have a very limited knowledge of Mantic's catalogue. They've come a long way since some of their worst stuff. I'd insist you to check the Warpath thread in N&R and have a look at the latest pictures.
Dreamforge has a very limited and very generic aesthetic. Frostgrave is interesting but also quite generic. Avatars of war stuff looks good but they have major shipping issues.
I'd like to know what makes Dreamforge and Frostrave "generic" and large parts of GW's catalogue the opposite.
Hello, I'm such an unique and distinctive model design.
I didn't mean to be combatitive, so sorry if I made you angry. To answer your queries, the imperial guard are generic which is why I dont care for them, fortunately this is just one faction out of more than 40. Dreamforge's entire catalogue is like the space marines with the gothic element taken out.
That gothic element is what makes 40k appealing to me.
The frostgrave cultists pretty much conform to the sterotype of cultists complete with the pointy hats.
I have seen the Warpath stuff and it is better but still not there yet. I would love for a competitor to offer more amazing plastic minis but I haven't seen it yet. The coolmini stuff looks great but the detail looks a bit fuzzy on the final minis.
Chikout wrote: Mantic's best stuff is about on par with gw's worst.
To a certain degree this is an issue depending on each one's tastes but... IMO such an statement merely proves you have a very limited knowledge of Mantic's catalogue. They've come a long way since some of their worst stuff. I'd insist you to check the Warpath thread in N&R and have a look at the latest pictures.
Dreamforge has a very limited and very generic aesthetic. Frostgrave is interesting but also quite generic. Avatars of war stuff looks good but they have major shipping issues.
I'd like to know what makes Dreamforge and Frostrave "generic" and large parts of GW's catalogue the opposite.
Hello, I'm such an unique and distinctive model design.
I didn't mean to be combatitive, so sorry if I made you angry. To answer your queries, the imperial guard are generic which is why I dont care for them, fortunately this is just one faction out of more than 40. Dreamforge's entire catalogue is like the space marines with the gothic element taken out.
That gothic element is what makes 40k appealing to me.
The frostgrave cultists pretty much conform to the sterotype of cultists complete with the pointy hats.
I have seen the Warpath stuff and it is better but still not there yet. I would love for a competitor to offer more amazing plastic minis but I haven't seen it yet. The coolmini stuff looks great but the detail looks a bit fuzzy on the final minis.
I would say Kingdom Death are the only ones who have come close (and indeed, surpassed in some respects) to GWs hard plastics. Unfortunately they're only usable in a super expensive board game and not a war game :(
SKR.HH wrote: Okay... I'll bite. Which manufacturer offers (highclass) SciFi and (High-Fantasy) in plastic for a game with mini counts in the same area like WH40k or Aos?
Does said manufacturer also have to be including at least five skulls per model?
I mean, I quoted a post that talked about "unparalleled" quality. Nothing was said about the material, or the genre, or the games intended to be played with said models.
Anyway, since you seem to be going down that route, I'd say Mantic. Just check the stuff they've been showing for their future Warpath release (there's a thread in the News & Rumours section if you want to see it there).
Have you seen Dreamforge's range? Or Frostgrave's plastic boxes? Or Perry Miniatures, whose minis can be used for fantasy settings?
If we move away from plastics, because you know, materials such as resin and metal are also valid for manufacturing miniatures, the list is endless. Hitech Miniatures (you may or may not like the style, but the quality is undeniable), Raging Heroes, Russian Alternative, MOM Miniatures, Avatars of War, etc etc.
If we only take model quality into account, and disregard settings, styles and materials... in my eyes nothing has still managed to beat some of the models Rackham released during the 00s. Back then they just made most GW sculptors look like pathetic amateurs. So when I read about GW's "unparalelled" quality I can't help but laugh.
As I said, it's very worthwhile to just have a look outside the GW bubble.
I'll neglect your snarky remark at the beginning and the end (because going to discuss esthetics won't lead anywhere).
To explain the requirements I set:
1. For me building and painting is a very important part of the hobby and hardplastic offers me most of my "joy". Especially if I have lot's of bits lying around where I can think about how to build or modify something.
2. I WANT Fantasy or SciFi. I'm not interessted (at all) in historicals. Therefore I'm asking for proper alternatives.
Let's see your list:
Frostgrave: Yes, has potential. But currently offers only 4 different types of plastics AFAIK. If you'd like something outside this you're once more stuck with metal figures (with all of their advantages and disadvantages).
Mantic: VERY hit and miss. I backed five of their kickstarters. Quality in general is mediocre (lots of mold lines, stupid joints). Hardplastic is (a tad) better than their restics.The difference between their artworks (and often you have to decide based on this if you participate in a kickstarter) and the final product is often very large.
Dreamforge: Never tried that because I don't like their esthetics. But yes: heard only good about their quality.
Avatars of War: Have several of their metall chars and two boxes of dwarfs. While I do like the esthetics of them they have been a nightmare to clean. I really needed several tries (all of them aborted after half an hour) because their restic is bad. Besides that the esthetics is very incoherent if Felix is not designing them. Besides very slow in offering nex minis (and don't get me started about their Indigogo campaign)
HiTech: Never tried that because I don't like their esthetics. Heard mixed about their quality.
Raging Heroes: Backed their TGG campaigns. Quality is good but a tad fragile and limited possibilites to convert. But they're expensive as well.
Russian alternative, MOM: Never tried.
So it's funny that you are assuming that I never looked outside GW. Which is obviously not true as I already for so many different systems and from different manufacturers...
hobojebus wrote:If 8th is bad I'm sure a fan made 9th will come about, the people did a great job with fantasy.
They showed us that if GW keeps failing we as a community can do better.
Really? Why couldn't they do that now? We could have had a community rules set done for the last 20 years and not one showed up. All we get are "FAQs" by a few groups. So how come nobody has tackled the issue of actually making a AWESOME rules set? It can't be done. We the community would chew it up and spit it out. No we as a community can't do better that is why we stick to GW like a stray dog and only will play their rules. If not we don't we move on to other rule sets that are "official" from another company but will never play "an official" rules set done by us the community. We can't do it. Otherwise it would have been done by now.
Frostgrave: Yes, has potential. But currently offers only 4 different types of plastics AFAIK. If you'd like something outside this you're once more stuck with metal figures (with all of their advantages and disadvantages).
Russian alternative, MOM: Never tried.
So it's funny that you are assuming that I never looked outside GW. Which is obviously not true as I already for so many different systems and from different manufacturers...
Frostgraves Humans are good, but they are still about 10 years behind GW's current offerings, which means they are about level with GW's Bretonnain Men at Arms (a great kit IMO).
If you compared the new Frostgrave Gnolls to GW's Skaven they might be better than GW's multipart Skaven from the late 90's, but the Gnolls lag behind GW's 8th ed Skaven by miles.
Russian Alternative are very good, but then you are comparing Metal to Plastic, (I generally prefer to compare like vs like). I also paid over 20 Euro to get my Dwarf Character, which is not cheaper than buying direct from GW.
I also dabble in many different systems and with many different companies, and when others list off companies and claim that they are better than GW I would hope they actually have first hand experience with said systems or models or could they please leave a disclaimer 'I have not had first hand experience with said company/models but...'.
SKR.HH wrote:1. For me building and painting is a very important part of the hobby and hardplastic offers me most of my "joy". Especially if I have lot's of bits lying around where I can think about how to build or modify something.
2. I WANT Fantasy or SciFi. I'm not interessted (at all) in historicals. Therefore I'm asking for proper alternatives.
Well those are your specific, personal requirements. My original comment was on someone saying that GW's kits were of "unparalleled" quality, which I disputed. Nothing was said about materials, looks, etc. Of course if someone has very specific requirements, which mostly coincide with what GW offers, then they'll be likely attracted to GW's catalogue only.
Lastly, "Fantasy" and "SciFi" can mean a crazy amount of things. Even High Fantasy settings tend to have some human factions with medieval/renaissance looks, so historical models may well be considered too. In fact, the Perry's nowadays are probably among the best choices for WHFB's Empire and DoW, in regards to price/quality ratio.
Frostgrave: Yes, has potential. But currently offers only 4 different types of plastics AFAIK. If you'd like something outside this you're once more stuck with metal figures (with all of their advantages and disadvantages).
True, but in all fairness they've begun to produce plastic kits very, very recently. So far they have a pretty good record, and it seems they intend to keep going, which is great news IMO.
Mantic: VERY hit and miss. I backed five of their kickstarters. Quality in general is mediocre (lots of mold lines, stupid joints). Hardplastic is (a tad) better than their restics.The difference between their artworks (and often you have to decide based on this if you participate in a kickstarter) and the final product is often very large.
True again. Yes, Mantic is extremely hit and miss with their models. They've also gone down a very risky route with some of their designs (I'm thinking about fantasy elves and dwarves) which people seems to either love or downright loathe. Personally, I like their dwarves (although the models themselves are mostly lacklustre) and don't mind the elves (wouldn't buy them though). In any case "hit and miss" is what tends to happen when any company aims to have a wide catalogue and expand it quickly. GW's catalogue is exactly the same, with truly horrible models still available (or at least they were when I last checked).
Also Mantic are getting better. Some of their worst offenders (drakon riders, urgh) are already gone, and the new Warpath stuff looks excellent.
Avatars of War: Have several of their metall chars and two boxes of dwarfs. While I do like the esthetics of them they have been a nightmare to clean. I really needed several tries (all of them aborted after half an hour) because their restic is bad. Besides that the esthetics is very incoherent if Felix is not designing them. Besides very slow in offering nex minis (and don't get me started about their Indigogo campaign)
The metals are ace, the restic is crappy indeed. I backed the vestals crowdfunding and will probably end up selling the models. The production was also plagued with issues.
HiTech: Never tried that because I don't like their esthetics. Heard mixed about their quality.
I got one of their models recently and, as far as resin goes, it's top notch. Don't know about the past though, because some of these small companies have come a long way since they started (heard the same about Puppetswar).
Russian alternative, MOM: Never tried.
Russian alternative has both metal and resin. The metal stuff is high quality (I have several, ahem, evil dwarves to attest it), never tried the resin stuff. MOM is simply fantastic for the price, and it looks they're expanding their catalogue at a nice rate, which is very good news.
So it's funny that you are assuming that I never looked outside GW. Which is obviously not true as I already for so many different systems and from different manufacturers...
My apologies. I've encountered too many people who claimed GW's models were undisputably the best, and many of them had simply never bothered to check other companies before making such claims.
StygianBeach wrote:Frostgraves Humans are good, but they are still about 10 years behind GW's current offerings, which means they are about level with GW's Bretonnain Men at Arms (a great kit IMO).
If you compared the new Frostgrave Gnolls to GW's Skaven they might be better than GW's multipart Skaven from the late 90's, but the Gnolls lag behind GW's 8th ed Skaven by miles.
How do their humans compare to this? Mere curiosity.
I also dabble in many different systems and with many different companies, and when others list off companies and claim that they are better than GW I would hope they actually have first hand experience with said systems or models or could they please leave a disclaimer 'I have not had first hand experience with said company/models but...'.
Again, I didn't claim anyone was outright "better" than GW, I just stated that I could not agree with someone saying GW's models were of "unparalleled" quality. And I tend to make sure I have some experience with certain models/companies before commenting on them. If I say something about some models, be sure either I own them or at least I've seen them in the flesh and asked about them.
Mantic: VERY hit and miss. I backed five of their kickstarters. Quality in general is mediocre (lots of mold lines, stupid joints). Hardplastic is (a tad) better than their restics.The difference between their artworks (and often you have to decide based on this if you participate in a kickstarter) and the final product is often very large.
True again. Yes, Mantic is extremely hit and miss with their models. They've also gone down a very risky route with some of their designs (I'm thinking about fantasy elves and dwarves) which people seems to either love or downright loathe. Personally, I like their dwarves (although the models themselves are mostly lacklustre) and don't mind the elves (wouldn't buy them though). In any case "hit and miss" is what tends to happen when any company aims to have a wide catalogue and expand it quickly. GW's catalogue is exactly the same, with truly horrible models still available (or at least they were when I last checked).
Also Mantic are getting better. Some of their worst offenders (drakon riders, urgh) are already gone, and the new Warpath stuff looks excellent.
I'm still willed to get convinced on this (waiting on my Warpath pledge) but I'll wait until I have the models in my hands before revoking my judgement. Seeing artworks/renders doesn't convince me anymore. And they do still produce IMO horrible designs from time to time (like the elf chariots). Additionally the (technical) design ... leaves room for improvement...
Pacific wrote:Davor mentioned a few pages ago that Dakka is full of GW fans, waiting for the games to become better. And it's taken thinking about that to realise that perhaps I'm not any more, and haven't been for some time..
It's the same for me, although Blood Bowl seems to the game that could drag me back into GW land, and maybe the next Epic-like game (Adeptus Titanicus?). The old versions of both kinda died while still good (or at least feeling good) so there no lack of confidence in them. For their main games it feels like they had enough tries (years and version) to make things better (be it rules or the cost structure, or whatever is one's personal problem with the games). With these games, at least, I won't need to buy huge numbers of miniatures if I choose to buy into them so while not cheap they won't be "GW main game" levels of ridiculous expensive.
Mitochondria wrote: They are like the cheating girlfriend who only fethed five dudes this last weekend, instead of the eight she fethed the weekend before.
Damn. You don't have much luck with girls, do you? I feel sorry for you.
But here's an advice: forget her. Don't think or talk about her ever again. You'll feel so much better. Oh, and do the same with GW. Yes, it's hard to see all those dudes playing GW games every weekend - but you need to let go.
Mitochondria wrote: They are like the cheating girlfriend who only fethed five dudes this last weekend, instead of the eight she fethed the weekend before.
Damn. You don't have much luck with girls, do you? I feel sorry for you.
But here's an advice: forget her. Don't think or talk about her ever again. You'll feel so much better. Oh, and do the same with GW. Yes, it's hard to see all those dudes playing GW games every weekend - but you need to let go.
I don't get the "girlfriend" analogy at all.
1. If you behaved like this towards your (ex-)girlfriend it would be considered borderline stalking.
2. If you are lucky enough to get a girlfriend it should be a monogamous relationship. So, YOU should stop making (openly) around and checking what's available on the market as well.
If you compared the new Frostgrave Gnolls to GW's Skaven they might be better than GW's multipart Skaven from the late 90's, but the Gnolls lag behind GW's 8th ed Skaven by miles.
How do their humans compare to this? Mere curiosity.
I though people did not like the State Troops because of the Shoeless guy?
No Reichland General would have a Shoeless guy under his command, but I am sure an Ostland General would not care.
I have not had first hand experience with the State Troop Sprue, but from what I can tell from internet picture and youtube they are not quite as good as the Bretonnain Men at Arms, mainly due to aesthetics. I am not sure what your point is though?
How old is that State Troop Box now? 10 years?
Try Comparing the Frostgrave Cultists with the new Silver Tower Cultists, (probably not an entirely fair comparison because the Silver Tower cultists are not entirely human), but the GW sculpts are miles ahead.
Mere curiosity, what do you think of the Frostgrave Gnolls? I want to like them... but...
Try Comparing the Frostgrave Cultists with the new Silver Tower Cultists, (probably not an entirely fair comparison because the Silver Tower cultists are not entirely human), but the GW sculpts are miles ahead.
Mere curiosity, what do you think of the Frostgrave Gnolls? I want to like them... but...
Well, you did state North Star is ten years behind ... so you should compare them to State Troopers...
GW asked ffg to stop making x-wing and armada as they are eating into their sales, ffg of course refused as those games make way more than GW products do so GW pulled the licence out of spite.
FFG's got a backlog of GW stuff it's not released yet this was not something they saw coming.
hobojebus wrote: GW asked ffg to stop making x-wing and armada as they are eating into their sales, ffg of course refused as those games make way more than GW products do so GW pulled the licence out of spite.
FFG's got a backlog of GW stuff it's not released yet this was not something they saw coming.
Drama much?
If it was such an issue then the (5-7 year?) licence wouldn't have been placed with FFG? If FFG had a backlog of "products" then they would have been releasing those over the last year and a half rather than almost nothing on the GW licence aside from PDG RPGs.
The licence quite clearly came to a mutual end as FFG has been ramping down on GW licenced material for over a year. So yeah, you're talking nonsense.
Well progress, is, as ever a slow process and really think its a smidge early to judge
Whilst the assorted big boxes are an amble in the right direction they are still more or less giant 'Get Started' boxes with a game tagged on.
The first steps into Internet interaction and YouTube casts seems like a positive, hopefully the shouty fudgewits won't scare them off this time.
Personally I think the success or otherwise of 8th Ed WH40K will be the defining factor for nu-GW, the specilist games coming back will be funs but they are largely something we can get elsewhere from other providers
On the lore front, GW has finally acceded to fan demands and started progressing the story. Though the actual events have been lackluster, I think there's a sense that gak is finally going down in 999999.M41.
The Spoonfeed Brigade doesn't speak for all of us. Indeed for my money, the "advancement" is the sour part of the pudding, making it hard to enjoy the better stuff they've been doing.
On the lore front, GW has finally acceded to fan demands and started progressing the story. Though the actual events have been lackluster, I think there's a sense that gak is finally going down in 999999.M41.
The Spoonfeed Brigade doesn't speak for all of us. Indeed for my money, the "advancement" is the sour part of the pudding, making it hard to enjoy the better stuff they've been doing.
Seconded. I want a setting and freedomn into it. Not a story. The impeding doom of 40K makes sense as long as is impeding.
If you want to expand the setting, add more Xenos (like happened with tau back then), look at his rich history (Horus Heresy but there is more).
Furthermore, I am quite tired to see new stuff added (some I love, some I loathe) when we have half of the codex involved in rocket tag gameplay and the other half just mad of "have-nots" .
Many here seem to confuse "has gotten better" with "didn't change at all" or even "didn't do things exactly as I wanted".
GW has gotten a HELL of a lot better.
From releases to FAQ to money-saving boxes and actually communicating with the fanbase...
They improved a whole fething lot.
Did they change everything that is bad, like prices?
No.
But they have, without a doubt, gotten better.
Doesn't mean they're subjectvely good. Or an utopian rulership for us modeling peasants. BUT they improved.
They came from a pretty bad position (and no matter what some claim, it could have gotten worse) and have climbed up.
You can argue that several key factors still are missing and you wouldn't be wrong, but they show a promising trend. However it is not a valid argument to say "no they didn't improve because they didn't do X" because then you sound like the guys in the Life of Brian dissing the Romans.
What did GW do for us? New releases, FAQ's, new factions, good value boxes, communication? And what else? NOTHING!
They've done NOTHING for us!
I never felt better concerning GW. I hope they continue to improve.
FaQ are nice, yeah. Like 5 years late.
BUT! They do not fix the messy, faulty, bloated and still inbalanced ruleset. They're making it even worse by adding factions after factions after factions.
The rules are bad. FAQ do not fix that. They're a combination of very old rules which were designed for small skirmishes and super random stuff which is just that... random.
Prices... yeah a few factions have ONE starter set which still is way too expensive... What if I don't want the stuff in that? Oh right, all the other stuff did not get reduced.
All new released are more expensive than the older ones.
Yes, I think GW as a company present a much better image than they did at any time in the past decade. The big issue is that neither of their main 2 games have rules that are worth playing. If 40k was a joy to play, I wouldn't even care about 50 euro light vehicles.
Try Comparing the Frostgrave Cultists with the new Silver Tower Cultists, (probably not an entirely fair comparison because the Silver Tower cultists are not entirely human), but the GW sculpts are miles ahead.
Mere curiosity, what do you think of the Frostgrave Gnolls? I want to like them... but...
Well, you did state North Star is ten years behind ... so you should compare them to State Troopers...
That was my point by asking if they are 10 years old...
Thairne wrote: Many here seem to confuse "has gotten better" with "didn't change at all" or even "didn't do things exactly as I wanted".
GW has gotten a HELL of a lot better. From releases to FAQ to money-saving boxes and actually communicating with the fanbase... They improved a whole fething lot.
Did they change everything that is bad, like prices? No.
But they have, without a doubt, gotten better. Doesn't mean they're subjectvely good. Or an utopian rulership for us modeling peasants. BUT they improved.
They came from a pretty bad position (and no matter what some claim, it could have gotten worse) and have climbed up.
You can argue that several key factors still are missing and you wouldn't be wrong, but they show a promising trend. However it is not a valid argument to say "no they didn't improve because they didn't do X" because then you sound like the guys in the Life of Brian dissing the Romans. What did GW do for us? New releases, FAQ's, new factions, good value boxes, communication? And what else? NOTHING! They've done NOTHING for us!
I never felt better concerning GW. I hope they continue to improve.
Half of the FAQs made stuff worse. Think about Dark Eldar. Money saving box are a good thing, true. I actually kind of almost understand the pricing, maybe. The point is that along with high price I want high quality.
Both in rules writing, and in concepts, they still produce massive blunders and for what concern my personal tastes their shift toward huge models and wow-esque style in some model is not a good sing. Said this, I appreciated Mechanicus, Scions and much stuff. Heck, I even like the Taurox Prime if you modify it with the wheels!
They show, recently, good intentions but good will is not enough. If people ask for fixed CSM, you do not release 5 different books barely functional. Is the same with faqs. Is as if the true talents left the studio, or are overworked, or there is some problem in coordination and management. They lack vision and unity in design, that is needed in such huge range of models and rules. Good will is not enough.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
RoninXiC wrote: No, you missed my point. They tried to do stuff.
If I change the colour of my car while it's engine is still broken.. Nothing changed.
Yes, basically this. They behave like a kid that has the parents or the teacher asking him do do stuff. He is bad a school, does not behave well, etc..
So he studies a bit, studies for a "C", and shows that he is doing "something" so he will receive a present for christmas (our money). But there is not true attempt, is not heartfelt.
RoninXiC wrote: FaQ are nice, yeah. Like 5 years late.
BUT! They do not fix the messy, faulty, bloated and still inbalanced ruleset. They're making it even worse by adding factions after factions after factions.
The rules are bad. FAQ do not fix that. They're a combination of very old rules which were designed for small skirmishes and super random stuff which is just that... random.
Prices... yeah a few factions have ONE starter set which still is way too expensive... What if I don't want the stuff in that? Oh right, all the other stuff did not get reduced.
All new released are more expensive than the older ones.
NOTHING changed.
The FAQs do improve the rules. They don't fix them, no (assume you're talking about 40k), but it's an improvement.
ONE starter set with a great discount is better than NO starter set, or one with less discount (old ones). So again, a change for the better.
And old models did go down in price. AoS reboxings are cheaper per model. So again, a change.
And far from all new models are more expensive. Look at Deathwatch compared to Sternguard.
You also left out Specialist Games returning, the deluge of great board games with cheap minis, and above all the HUGE change in community interaction through Warhammer TV, AoS community-sourced rules and other things. This alone would constitute a huge positive change.
So saying NOTHING changed is patently false. There is no denying these things are a net positive.
Apart from the 25 start collecting boxes they have released in just nine months. GW have released 19 additional discounted bundles in 2016 for a total of 44 discounted bundles in 41 weeks. That's not counting the four board games.
RoninXiC wrote: So?
They used to have battleboxes for all armies. You saved money with them too.
Not complaining about those boxes... Its the additonal stuff which is an insult.
I was making two points. One, they are releasing these boxes fast. They have already done boxes for almost every faction in 40k. Two, it is not just start collecting stuff (which several people have been claiming) It is boxes like the death masque set or the recent strike force box or the beat claw raiders box etc, etc.
I'm not saying either that this is the best it's been but they are returning to doing some of the reasonably good stuff they used to do and they are doing it fast.
It has definitely gotten better.
But several of our players in our gaming group have abandoned buying GW products.
Some of them are still playing, mostly Apoc.
Deathwatch Overkill, Death Masque, Deathstorm all have "Death" in the name and considerable discounts on the models.
I'm not crazy that Metamorphs cost $8 a model, but Deathwatch Overkill is like getting FREE Deathwatch models.
Hell, Death Masque was like getting FREE Deathwatch models.
hobojebus wrote: GW asked ffg to stop making x-wing and armada as they are eating into their sales, ffg of course refused as those games make way more than GW products do so GW pulled the licence out of spite.
FFG's got a backlog of GW stuff it's not released yet this was not something they saw coming.
Drama much?
If it was such an issue then the (5-7 year?) licence wouldn't have been placed with FFG? If FFG had a backlog of "products" then they would have been releasing those over the last year and a half rather than almost nothing on the GW licence aside from PDG RPGs.
The licence quite clearly came to a mutual end as FFG has been ramping down on GW licenced material for over a year. So yeah, you're talking nonsense.
Nope. FFG and GW have parted ways because FFG will shortly be releasing RuneWars an unpainted fantasy miniature game which sort of will be straddling Warhammer/KoW and X-Wing and that apparently breaks their licensing agreement.
You can credit X-Wing and Armada for giving FFG the muscle and confidence to dare go face GW in their turf, but everyone in the industry knows that anything half decent and star wars related was going to be a massive hit just like LotR was back in the day.
It is my understanding that Wizkids' approach to game design is somewhat lax, and as a consequence the Star Trek version has suffered with crippling balance issues.
Wings Of Glory/War has perhaps suffered because its original producers went bust, I know I've tried to buy it in the past (even though I believe it is reprinted now) and not been able to track down a core set for reasonable money.
No doubt Star Wars is a huge draw, but there's probably other reasons that the other games aren't so high profile.
Thairne wrote:Many here seem to confuse "has gotten better" with "didn't change at all" or even "didn't do things exactly as I wanted".
True. Let's see how this goes.
GW has gotten a HELL of a lot better.
Hmmm.... so you accusing of people "didn't do thins exactly as I wanted" maybe GW did what you wanted?
From releases to FAQ
What FAQs? I don't see and new officialFAQs just first drafts. That is what about a month or so ago?
to money-saving boxes
Which a lot of people wouldn't have bought if they were not included or in single packs like they were before. Why are the prices are increasing when you are buying outside of these savings? So GW is not fixing and actually making worse for what a lot of issues people are having.
and actually communicating with the fanbase...
Actually they are not. When people ask for rules, non are give. "We will pass it along". So where is this communication? Where is this actual back and forth talk that is happening? Yes I see sneak peeks and teases now, and a few "one sentence" comments. One sentence comments is not communication.
They improved a whole fething lot.
You named 3 things. That is not a fething lot.
Did they change everything that is bad, like prices? No.
But they have, without a doubt, gotten better. Doesn't mean they're subjectvely good. Or an utopian rulership for us modeling peasants. BUT they improved.
They came from a pretty bad position (and no matter what some claim, it could have gotten worse) and have climbed up.
As I said in other posts, these are all "Illusions" of change. As you said prices are still bad. Really look, what has changed? Social media? Yes that is a change. Still that is not a lot of change. I am going by your terminology. You said a lot. If anything they have change little. Then again, little is good. It got me to spend so much for me in 2016 than I have in the last few years combined.
You can argue that several key factors still are missing and you wouldn't be wrong, but they show a promising trend. However it is not a valid argument to say "no they didn't improve because they didn't do X" because then you sound like the guys in the Life of Brian dissing the Romans. What did GW do for us? New releases, FAQ's, new factions, good value boxes, communication? And what else? NOTHING! They've done NOTHING for us!
Agree. Fully correct.
I never felt better concerning GW. I hope they continue to improve.
Again I agree and I really do hope so. Sadly I think it will take the 8th edition for 40K to really see the effects. GW had a great opportunity to change but with the release of Deathwatch and Genestealer Cult and the Chaos Space Marine and Blood Angel releases just shows it's the same old GW right now. They could have changed and they choose not to.
But let's look at the positive because for once it's great to fell excited for GW again. But at the same time let's be realistic as well. GW have improved a small amount not a lot or huge improvement as others claim.
Here is a thought. After rereading some of the comments I have changed my mind now. If GW has gotten better, how come I am not buying the individual kits? I have bought a lot of the starter boxes. Maybe 4 of them. Maybe more. Depression kicked in for me so I gave up on a lot of projects that I was excited for. For me that is a lot for others, it's nothing, I know. I have bought Silver Tower, Overkill, my Genestealer Codex twice (on on iPad other physical book), Chaos Stronghold set and a bit other things and books. For me I have spent Hundred's of dollars. Maybe a bit over a thousand. I don't know. For me as I said, that is huge. For others I know it's chump change and I didn't buy much.
Other than that, I haven't bought individual boxes. Now that I lost my job money is tight. So spending stopped in the last few months that wouldn't have happened if I was working. Might get some money next month and instead of buying individual kits for the Stealers, I am thinking of getting another Overkill set. I am sure it will be sold out by then, still thing is, if GW has changed how come I am spending a lot of money but it's not on the the individual kits?
On one end I see a softer kinder GW, so I am spending money but on the other hand I scoff at buying GW product because of the crazy prices or not worth the value that GW is asking of me to do so.
auticus wrote: And the games that shares engines (Star Trek, and the world war i aces game) aren't really played anywhere en masse.
So its not that the game is just so awesome that all versions of it are being played everywhere.
Its that the one with the star wars license has a huge IP to ride on top of.
Attack wing reused old models from a previous game, they had terrible detail a crap paint job and were not to scale so were not worth the price being asked.
On top of that the balance was non existent due to poor points costs the Borg with 360 movement and shooting as well as the most attack dice were broken for too long.
Then you have the BS with exclusives from events.
Plus with a new wave nearly every month you had to spend way more to keep up.
Much like heroclix, Mechwarrior and other games wizkidz mucked it up by not taking the time for balance and playtesting.
-models. their models are kick-ass and second to none, and they have backed off the precipice of releasing horribly tacky cartoonish models (very big fan of gene cult, mechanicus, and the heresy stuff is good)
-price. So many great deals this year, via the boxed sets.
However, they have one step left to go... rules. Still one of the worst rulesets out there.
bonus points for: new board games (although to my knowledge the rules haven't reached the level of greatness yet), excellent paint guides on warhammer tv and in the codexes, new painting products.
Sure they created some stuff they assumed would be popular like Genestealer Cults, knights etc. Sure they are returning to social media at a limited capacity, participating at conventions and reaching out a little to customers.
But everything GW does seems to be directed at selling more and not about creating a genuine relationship with their customers.
Yes it is a company and their purpose is to make money, but their business practices are deplorable.
GW as good as some changes may be have still not created a sensible edition of 40k. They still support Age of Sigmar, which is every bit as horrible as the day the released it. They haven't returned to games such as Necromunda, Mordheim and Warmaster. They mention they are getting into some Titanicus (Epic-like) game, but they are changing the scale to make sure all people have to start over with new miniatures.
One of the few good things lately is the return of Blood Bowl. But I still remember how GW gave us Dreadfleet and not a new edition of Man O'War.
And while some boxes and deals and a few prices here and there are dropping to entice more people to get stuck in, they are still charging a fortune for what is essentially plastic models.
For a decade they have done everything to bleed their customers dry and they even bragged about it in their yearly financial reports.
It will take a lot more for me to trust and respect GW as a company again. The only clear path is for them to release more wholesome games with thought-out rules and support them properly.
Remember GW created the foundation for "specialist" games such as Space Hulk, Blood Bowl, Necromunda, Mordheim, Epic and Warmaster. And today they can stretch themselves to do forgetable affairs such as "Gorechosen". Who will speak about that in ten or twenty years?
It is a bit like the Wizard of Oz; once you pull the curtain you see what is really going on. They are engineering their releases to such an extent to get a maximum $, I just can't see the game or the idea behind it at this point or the care for the customer.
Remember you still can't comment on their Youtube videos. 40k is for the diehards and is losing ground. AoS is a smoldering mess. Etc. etc.
I just can't get genuinely excited about GW at the moment.
And I don't agree with their business decisions.
GW had a unique chance in the marketplace to dominate in the gaming arena. Instead they dropped the ball. Lack of Epic opened up for games such as Dropzone Commander. Blood Bowl gave ground to Dreadball and tons of miniature makers with Fantasy Football minis, Warhammer Fantasy gave way to Kings of War, Warhammer Historical gave way to Mantic Historical, Warlord Games and many others, Mordheim gave way to Frostgrave, Necromunda to Deadzone .. etc. etc.
GW could have had a unique position and a great relationship with their customers. Instead the went the short-sighted route of raised prices and min-max all releases for years on years... to the degree their core games suffered. One can question if 40k is a game anymore, or a parade and display of miniatures.
They still support Age of Sigmar, which is every bit as horrible as the day the released it.
Disagree here. "Fun" rules clearly have been identified as not wanted and are not used anymore with new releases. I wish they would remove them from the legacy rules as well, alas, obviously you can't have everything. Besides they provide now points. So a way better stand than at the beginning.
Remember GW created the foundation for "specialist" games such as Space Hulk, Blood Bowl, Necromunda, Mordheim, Epic and Warmaster. And today they can stretch themselves to do forgetable affairs such as "Gorechosen". Who will speak about that in ten or twenty years?
It seems to me that you are ignoring that they produced loads of specialist games over the years. Most of them are today not widely recognized (anymore). Let's see for example how the Horus Heresy games are recognized in a few years time... Gorechosen is a small "snack" and not supposed to be at the same intensity as all the games you pointed out above. So it's comparing apples to oranges.
Not happy with GW changing the base size so not sure what to do with my armies, continue building with old base size or mix and match or put ones already done on new base size?
Asterios wrote: Not happy with GW changing the base size so not sure what to do with my armies, continue building with old base size or mix and match or put ones already done on new base size?
Asterios wrote: Not happy with GW changing the base size so not sure what to do with my armies, continue building with old base size or mix and match or put ones already done on new base size?
auticus wrote: And the games that shares engines (Star Trek, and the world war i aces game) aren't really played anywhere en masse.
So its not that the game is just so awesome that all versions of it are being played everywhere.
Its that the one with the star wars license has a huge IP to ride on top of.
Attack wing reused old models from a previous game, they had terrible detail a crap paint job and were not to scale so were not worth the price being asked.
On top of that the balance was non existent due to poor points costs the Borg with 360 movement and shooting as well as the most attack dice were broken for too long.
Then you have the BS with exclusives from events.
Plus with a new wave nearly every month you had to spend way more to keep up.
Much like heroclix, Mechwarrior and other games wizkidz mucked it up by not taking the time for balance and playtesting.
There's still wings of war, though.
The game is fine. Great fun to play, and has enough expansions.... but playing an obscure WWI (or 2) ace is not the same as playing a Han Solo millenium falcon with Lando vs Vader in his TIE and the Emperor riding his shuttle. I only played Wings of War with basically two mates, while as soon as Xwing was released just about everyone jumped in.
I have to credit FFG that the dial works much better than a maneuver deck, though.
Not having comments on is a universally recognized sign of cowardice, They don't really want to hear honest feedback on their products they just want fanboys to kiss their tucas.
Echo chambers are bad look what happened under Kirby he filled the company with yes men and no one spoke up against bad ideas.
Actually disabling comments on is becoming increasingly more common as companies and individuals realize that Youtube comments are basically the dumpster of the internet and provide zero value 99% of the time. Saying it's a "universally recognized sign of cowardice" is quite the exaggeration, especially considering there are so many other avenues to vent your feelings about GW.
My main issue, despite spending more in the past few months on GW products than in 15 years, is that it feels like an illusion. I am immensely enjoying AOS, but 40k is still a huge mess and they show little or no desire to fix it by continuing to pump out new factions that, while they might be cool (GSC spring to mind), continue to bloat the game and make it that much more difficult to actually fix things without invalidating them completely.
Being on social media isn't a new or revolutionary thing, and the fact GW is doing it now doesn't excuse the fact that they ignored it for many years. Prices are still stupid high, and the discounts that are available in boxes are nice but only go so far and they still have those ridiculous "web bundles" on the website that save $0. The paints are still too small, but it's nice the textures are now in larger bottles and different sizes. The spray is still ridiculously overpriced, as are the tools (nice as they may be). They still have the one-man shops with nothing indicating expanding back to the how it was before as an actual hub and not a glorified storefront with extras. They put out an FAQ, but really didn't address any of the main issues with the game and made some things worse with outright stupid rulings (see: Drop Pods).
Are they better than a couple years ago? Sure, but they were so bad a few years ago it would be hard for anything to NOT be an improvement. The stuff they are doing now are still several years after they should have been doing it.
Asterios wrote:Not happy with GW changing the base size so not sure what to do with my armies, continue building with old base size or mix and match or put ones already done on new base size?
I say leave them. Why waste all that time to put them on circle bases. If need be just put the circle base under them or leave them as is. You never know when you might need them on square bases again.
Wayniac wrote:My main issue, despite spending more in the past few months on GW products than in 15 years, is that it feels like an illusion. I am immensely enjoying AOS, but 40k is still a huge mess and they show little or no desire to fix it by continuing to pump out new factions that, while they might be cool (GSC spring to mind), continue to bloat the game and make it that much more difficult to actually fix things without invalidating them completely.
Same for me as well. I haven't spend so much money on GW in the last few years like I have since January of 2016. I say it's all smoke and mirrors. Same company still. 40K is still a mess. They had the PERFECT opportunity to improve 40K, but as GW have shown they are the same old same old, especially how they treat CSM players. Really could have shown they have changed and how they would improve what people find lacking and haven't really put any EFFORT into it. Just looks like same GW to squeeze more money from people.
Then add in poor rule writing again in Genestealer Cult codex, nothing has really changed for GW.
Being on social media isn't a new or revolutionary thing, and the fact GW is doing it now doesn't excuse the fact that they ignored it for many years. Prices are still stupid high, and the discounts that are available in boxes are nice but only go so far and they still have those ridiculous "web bundles" on the shop that save $0. The paints are still too small, but it's nice the textures are now in larger bottles and different sizes. The spray is still ridiculously overpriced, as are the tools (nice as they may be). They still have the one-man shops with nothing indicating expanding back to the how it was before as an actual hub and not a glorified storefront with extras. They put out an FAQ, but really didn't address any of the main issues with the game and made some things worse with outright stupid rulings (see: Drop Pods).
Are they better than a couple years ago? Sure, but they were so bad a few years ago it would be hard for anything to NOT be an improvement. The stuff they are doing now are still several years after they should have been doing it.
Well said. Even on social media, I don't see GW really communicating. Maybe I am old school and communication is actual more than a 140 characters and actual conversations. A lot of questions are asked, and most are not answered or "passed down the line" with no answer.
I just can't believe that GW improves a bit and some people think we should be kissing GW arse because they have improved very little bit.
I mean, don't get me wrong I do think GW is improving. A year ago I was very anti-GW. Now I go to the GW store more than the local game store, I haven't played Warmachine in 6 months but I eagerly talk about AOS and am likely going to start 30k soon.
I just think it's silly to gush over how good they are now, because they still aren't good. They are improving slowly, but the key issues where they could improve (i.e. rules and prices outside of start collecting boxes) aren't. For example, you still typically need to get 2 of the same box in 40k to get a second special/heavy weapon; that's ridiculous and feels like you're being mugged. AOS pricing isn't as terrible as it could be, given the size flexibility of the game, but it's not what I would consider "good" either.
Being on social media isn't a new or revolutionary thing, and the fact GW is doing it now doesn't excuse the fact that they ignored it for many years. Prices are still stupid high, and the discounts that are available in boxes are nice but only go so far and they still have those ridiculous "web bundles" on the shop that save $0. The paints are still too small, but it's nice the textures are now in larger bottles and different sizes. The spray is still ridiculously overpriced, as are the tools (nice as they may be). They still have the one-man shops with nothing indicating expanding back to the how it was before as an actual hub and not a glorified storefront with extras. They put out an FAQ, but really didn't address any of the main issues with the game and made some things worse with outright stupid rulings (see: Drop Pods).
Are they better than a couple years ago? Sure, but they were so bad a few years ago it would be hard for anything to NOT be an improvement. The stuff they are doing now are still several years after they should have been doing it.
Well said. Even on social media, I don't see GW really communicating. Maybe I am old school and communication is actual more than a 140 characters and actual conversations. A lot of questions are asked, and most are not answered or "passed down the line" with no answer.
I'm curious: Who does a better job on Social Media?
Being on social media isn't a new or revolutionary thing, and the fact GW is doing it now doesn't excuse the fact that they ignored it for many years. Prices are still stupid high, and the discounts that are available in boxes are nice but only go so far and they still have those ridiculous "web bundles" on the shop that save $0. The paints are still too small, but it's nice the textures are now in larger bottles and different sizes. The spray is still ridiculously overpriced, as are the tools (nice as they may be). They still have the one-man shops with nothing indicating expanding back to the how it was before as an actual hub and not a glorified storefront with extras. They put out an FAQ, but really didn't address any of the main issues with the game and made some things worse with outright stupid rulings (see: Drop Pods).
Are they better than a couple years ago? Sure, but they were so bad a few years ago it would be hard for anything to NOT be an improvement. The stuff they are doing now are still several years after they should have been doing it.
Well said. Even on social media, I don't see GW really communicating. Maybe I am old school and communication is actual more than a 140 characters and actual conversations. A lot of questions are asked, and most are not answered or "passed down the line" with no answer.
I'm curious: Who does a better job on Social Media?
Notice that for several of them the reasons they are on there is due to actually engaging with their customers beyond just sticking a video teasing their next thing.
Being on social media isn't a new or revolutionary thing, and the fact GW is doing it now doesn't excuse the fact that they ignored it for many years. Prices are still stupid high, and the discounts that are available in boxes are nice but only go so far and they still have those ridiculous "web bundles" on the shop that save $0. The paints are still too small, but it's nice the textures are now in larger bottles and different sizes. The spray is still ridiculously overpriced, as are the tools (nice as they may be). They still have the one-man shops with nothing indicating expanding back to the how it was before as an actual hub and not a glorified storefront with extras. They put out an FAQ, but really didn't address any of the main issues with the game and made some things worse with outright stupid rulings (see: Drop Pods).
Are they better than a couple years ago? Sure, but they were so bad a few years ago it would be hard for anything to NOT be an improvement. The stuff they are doing now are still several years after they should have been doing it.
Well said. Even on social media, I don't see GW really communicating. Maybe I am old school and communication is actual more than a 140 characters and actual conversations. A lot of questions are asked, and most are not answered or "passed down the line" with no answer.
I'm curious: Who does a better job on Social Media?
Notice that for several of them the reasons they are on there is due to actually engaging with their customers beyond just sticking a video teasing their next thing.
I was under the impression that we were comparing companies with similar background. Comparing GW to SpaceX seems ... odd.
Being on social media isn't a new or revolutionary thing, and the fact GW is doing it now doesn't excuse the fact that they ignored it for many years. Prices are still stupid high, and the discounts that are available in boxes are nice but only go so far and they still have those ridiculous "web bundles" on the shop that save $0. The paints are still too small, but it's nice the textures are now in larger bottles and different sizes. The spray is still ridiculously overpriced, as are the tools (nice as they may be). They still have the one-man shops with nothing indicating expanding back to the how it was before as an actual hub and not a glorified storefront with extras. They put out an FAQ, but really didn't address any of the main issues with the game and made some things worse with outright stupid rulings (see: Drop Pods).
Are they better than a couple years ago? Sure, but they were so bad a few years ago it would be hard for anything to NOT be an improvement. The stuff they are doing now are still several years after they should have been doing it.
Well said. Even on social media, I don't see GW really communicating. Maybe I am old school and communication is actual more than a 140 characters and actual conversations. A lot of questions are asked, and most are not answered or "passed down the line" with no answer.
I'm curious: Who does a better job on Social Media?
Notice that for several of them the reasons they are on there is due to actually engaging with their customers beyond just sticking a video teasing their next thing.
I was under the impression that we were comparing companies with similar background. Comparing GW to SpaceX seems ... odd.
It's painfully obvious practically every wargaming company out there does social media better than GW, to not see this is being wilfully ignorant as all are easily looked up.
I was under the impression that we were comparing companies with similar background. Comparing GW to SpaceX seems ... odd.
What a company sells shouldn't pose a barrier to how you interact with your customers. If anything SpaceX is so far ahead of GW as they have thousands to millions of people interested in their products despite the fact that the vast majority of those people are never going to be able to use those products themselves. GW often struggles to makes people who actually buy their stuff excited about their stuff.
Think of how many people would be interested in seeing little snippet videos of GW staff designing models, or the production process, or the single playtester crying helplessly into their hands that nobody ever listens to them?
GW is a bit unique among wargaming companies in that there are an unusually large number of people that really, really hate them.
While I agree that their detachment from social media is odd in this day and age, it's also fairly understandable. let's be honest, who among us would want to try to be a social media rep for GW?
The local stores have their own FB presence, with videos, pictures, events, etc.
But they earnt that hate and pretending it doesn't exist just feeds it, they need to rebuild bridges with ex GW customers or they'll continue to bash AoS and 40k when they come up.
Customers are your best recruiters, ex customers your worst enemy when you rely on word of mouth.
hobojebus wrote: But they earnt that hate and pretending it doesn't exist just feeds it, they need to rebuild bridges with ex GW customers or they'll continue to bash AoS and 40k when they come up.
Customers are your best recruiters, ex customers your worst enemy when you rely on word of mouth.
Only if at some point, the ex-customers start buying and recruiting again. Look at this thread, and see some of the people's demands for GW getting better... I don't see it happening.
Like I said, GW is somewhat uniquely indifferent to social media, but also uniquely disliked. There's no value to open comments if it's nothing but complaints about prices and demands to bring back squats.
It would take a really ambitious effort, and plenty of people willing to deal with it.
hobojebus wrote: But they earnt that hate and pretending it doesn't exist just feeds it, they need to rebuild bridges with ex GW customers or they'll continue to bash AoS and 40k when they come up.
Customers are your best recruiters, ex customers your worst enemy when you rely on word of mouth.
Only if at some point, the ex-customers start buying and recruiting again. Look at this thread, and see some of the people's demands for GW getting better... I don't see it happening.
Like I said, GW is somewhat uniquely indifferent to social media, but also uniquely disliked. There's no value to open comments if it's nothing but complaints about prices and demands to bring back squats.
It would take a really ambitious effort, and plenty of people willing to deal with it.
GW are not anywhere near uniquely disliked.
If United Airlines can continue to operate a social media presence after losing a 10 year old kid on a flight and the inevitable gakstorm that came their way because of it, then I'm sure GW can manage.
I don't know what social media you guys are reading. They solicit questions from FB for FAQs, they answer comments and private messages on FB (even rules questions), they film daily painting videos based on requests from the community, they ran a live streamed tournament from Warhammer World with commentary where they had GW employees answering chat questions live on stream... I'm assuming people condemning their social media presence simply missed all these things?
Mymearan wrote: I don't know what social media you guys are reading. They solicit questions from FB for FAQs, they answer comments and private messages on FB (even rules questions), they film daily painting videos based on requests from the community, they ran a live streamed tournament with commentary where they had GW employees answering chat questions live on stream... I'm assuming people condemning their social media presence simply missed all these things?
I think people find the lack of ability to comment unusual.
If United Airlines can continue to operate a social media presence after losing a 10 year old kid on a flight and the inevitable gakstorm that came their way because of it, then I'm sure GW can manage.
Sure, but I think you can agree that community engagement would be a pretty major task, right?
Mymearan wrote: I don't know what social media you guys are reading. They solicit questions from FB for FAQs, they answer comments and private messages on FB (even rules questions), they film daily painting videos based on requests from the community, they ran a live streamed tournament with commentary where they had GW employees answering chat questions live on stream... I'm assuming people condemning their social media presence simply missed all these things?
I think people find the lack of ability to comment unusual.
That's it? Disabling YouTube comments cancels out everything I listed? Pretty selective criticism if so.
hobojebus wrote: Not having comments on is a universally recognized sign of cowardice, They don't really want to hear honest feedback on their products they just want fanboys to kiss their tucas.
Echo chambers are bad look what happened under Kirby he filled the company with yes men and no one spoke up against bad ideas.
\
Absolutely agree with this. Even I take surveys to see what can be improved on within my holdings.
As Stated before. Until Kirby is completely gone from the company it will be business as usual in using the company as a ATM machine and therefore the same BS continues. Just done with different talking heads.
Why would I agree that GW is better? Forgetting the terrible mess of 40K and its rules for a moment (which have yet to be fixed - awaiting the rumoured 8th ed but will that actually fix the game?) and just looking at the codex for my army what do I see?
I play tyranids (not GSC) and my last codex was a garbage product mainly copy pasted from the previous garbage codex. Then updates, many which are poor, spread all over the place. We haven't seen a 7th edition tyranid dex to clean up the army (putting all the rules in one place) and overhauling the army/dex so that most units/biomorphs are decent options) even though it is desperately needed. An errata could easily fix many issues until such time as another dex came out - yet nothng for years. If over the last year GW actually is getting better then an errata (a real errata) for nids (and others) would be one of the simplest things as a start in the right direction - hasn't happened.
Tyranids have had a poor codex since 2010 - shouldn't that be a red flag to correct? GSC is great for those that love stealers and the cult but that is not tyranids. If GW wants me to see that they are getting better then actually do something about the real problems - overhaul 40K and put real effort into fixing and updating armies. With better 40k rules and a better internally and externally balanced dex (not perfect but reasonably balanced), then I may see GW as getting better and they may convince me to buy from them again.
Fenrir Kitsune wrote: The hobby is buying games workshop products. Decent rules are not a priority for the company.
Sadly, this is still true. Things like Stormcloud Assault and the other boxed game give you phoned-in rules to play with their models - they are NOT the driving force beyond pushing the models. And even their "discounts" on things like the Start Collecting boxes still make their models too pricey - just no longer absurdly so.
GW seems to be trying to slowly rise out of the muck, but so far only their forehead is sticking out, and everybody's been writing ugly graffiti on that forehead, or still angy enough to try and stomp them back under the quicksand. It's going to take them some time and a lot more hard work to win back a lot of their customer base - if they even truly have a chance of winning them back at this point.
Fenrir Kitsune wrote: The hobby is buying games workshop products. Decent rules are not a priority for the company.
Sadly, this is still true. Things like Stormcloud Assault and the other boxed game give you phoned-in rules to play with their models - they are NOT the driving force beyond pushing the models. And even their "discounts" on things like the Start Collecting boxes still make their models too pricey - just no longer absurdly so.
GW seems to be trying to slowly rise out of the muck, but so far only their forehead is sticking out, and everybody's been writing ugly graffiti on that forehead, or still angy enough to try and stomp them back under the quicksand. It's going to take them some time and a lot more hard work to win back a lot of their customer base - if they even truly have a chance of winning them back at this point.
I feel they are setting themselves up to basically grow a new generation of gamers for their products and that their throwback stuff has been heavily influenced around keeping the company afloat while they realign. I think they don't expect to grab back the super disenfranchised gamers (we've all seen examples of the unreasonable levels they'd have to go to get even a lot of people in this thread back). And honestly I don't think they need to. They can just outbreed them with new hobbyists if they do it right. We'll see how it goes but this feels like the direction they are heading. Especially when you look at what they've done with one of their two flagship games. You can get a Tournament level force built for AoS (2kpts) for less than $300 for most of the new factions either before or after discount. That's pretty huge for them. It's something we haven't seen in over a decade or so from them honestly.
But so much rests on what they do with 40k for 8th edition. I feel like a lot of AoS was a test bed for how to move forward with 40k for 8th and it did do a lot of things right (outside of points not being there on release).
Mymearan wrote:I don't know what social media you guys are reading. They solicit questions from FB for FAQs, they answer comments and private messages on FB (even rules questions),
And they are unofficial. It's been over a month now that they have asked all those First Draft questions. How come non of them become official yet? So no, they are not answering any FAQ questions at all. Just because Facebook told me, will not cut it for most people.
they film daily painting videos based on requests from the community, they ran a live streamed tournament from Warhammer World with commentary where they had GW employees answering chat questions live on stream... I'm assuming people condemning their social media presence simply missed all these things?
Part of social media is socialising isn't it? How come nobody can make comments as was said before? I like how you deflect that comment without answering what someone said. As for answering questions on a stream, it doesn't make everything go away that they still haven't done and keep continuing doing? GW burnt a lot of bridges down now. All they are doing is putting up a tight rope bridge. Still a long ways of building a proper bridge and GW needs to make an effort. So far their effort is proof in the pudding. 40K rules are still crap, they just released something for CSM and BA and GW did basically nothing to make that army great with excitement to play. GW is doing very little. Smoke and mirrors my friend, smoke and mirrors. If anything GW is giving the illusion of change.
Fenrir Kitsune wrote:The hobby is buying games workshop products. Decent rules are not a priority for the company.
Davor, have you tried to engage with the Facebook pages or Twitter? I have had rules queries answered on Facebook. I have engaged directly with the designer of Warhammer quest on twitter. I have asked question about miniature design and and had them answered.
YouTube comments are absolutely the worst place to have any kind of meaningful discussion. Facebook is moderated but I have seen posts complaining about prices or the killing of warhammer and they have not been taken down so long as the language is not nasty.
The changes that are happening at GW are a work in progress. There is still a long way to go.
A good example is bloodbowl. The specialist games stuff was one of Rountree's first decisions as ceo. They made it as fast as possible and it is only coming out now.
Would you want them to rush the next edition of 40k? Much better that they really take their time and make something special.
The unfortunate side effect of this is that we are going to get a certain amount of filler in the mean time.
The new 40k will absolutely be the litmus test for the new look gw. It could cement the new and improved image of gw or it could put their reputation right back in the gutter.
In terms of the massive pricing problem, the latest rumours from miniwars.eu sound encouraging. There will most likely be another black friday sale this year. They are also doing a range of start collecting premuim boxes, which will be bigger boxes with more minis and a similar percentage discount.
I don't think a single person on this thread has said that Gw models are cheap, or the social media is best in class, or the rules are amazing but they are gradually getting better in all those regards.
I got out of the hobby about ten years ago because I didn't see a future for gw. I am back in it again because I do see a future now.
Chikout wrote: Davor, have you tried to engage with the Facebook pages or Twitter? I have had rules queries answered on Facebook. I have engaged directly with the designer of Warhammer quest on twitter. I have asked question about miniature design and and had them answered.
YouTube comments are absolutely the worst place to have any kind of meaningful discussion. Facebook is moderated but I have seen posts complaining about prices or the killing of warhammer and they have not been taken down so long as the language is not nasty.
No I don't. Just went by what I read here. I keep reading how GW deletes a lot of posts so it seems more censoring just like GW of old. Since I don't have first hand experience I will say I am wrong, and will believe you then. This is really good to know. I will not use this argument no more.
The changes that are happening at GW are a work in progress. There is still a long way to go.
A good example is bloodbowl. The specialist games stuff was one of Rountree's first decisions as ceo. They made it as fast as possible and it is only coming out now.
Would you want them to rush the next edition of 40k? Much better that they really take their time and make something special.
The unfortunate side effect of this is that we are going to get a certain amount of filler in the mean time.
The new 40k will absolutely be the litmus test for the new look gw. It could cement the new and improved image of gw or it could put their reputation right back in the gutter.
Correct once again.
In terms of the massive pricing problem, the latest rumours from miniwars.eu sound encouraging. There will most likely be another black friday sale this year. They are also doing a range of start collecting premuim boxes, which will be bigger boxes with more minis and a similar percentage discount.
I really hope not. I rather have all models at a great price, not just sales or start collecting boxes. I already bought like 3 or 4 start getting boxes then realized I am back to square one when I want to expand from there.
I don't think a single person on this thread has said that Gw models are cheap, or the social media is best in class, or the rules are amazing but they are gradually getting better in all those regards.
Some of the way I have read the comments some people seem to place the blame or burden on us just because GW has changed a little bit, so that gets us more defensive having to defend our opinions on why we feel we do.
I got out of the hobby about ten years ago because I didn't see a future for gw. I am back in it again because I do see a future now.
I stopped a few years ago. The purchases I made since January 2016 till now is the most I have spent in years. So I do appreciate the changes GW are making. Sadly I just think it's an illusion, smoke and mirrors. Smoke and mirrors or not, eventually the smoke will clear and GW real colours will show. Until then I am enjoying the ride now and let time will tell if I am correct or not. Hoping I am wrong. Liked reading this post, will try and be less sour/negative now.
Sadly, this is still true. Things like Stormcloud Assault and the other boxed game give you phoned-in rules to play with their models - they are NOT the driving force beyond pushing the models. And even their "discounts" on things like the Start Collecting boxes still make their models too pricey - just no longer absurdly so.
Yup, these new standalone games seem to be purely a way to sell discounted models, rather than an attempt to make a good game.
I feel they are setting themselves up to basically grow a new generation of gamers for their products and that their throwback stuff has been heavily influenced around keeping the company afloat while they realign. I think they don't expect to grab back the super disenfranchised gamers (we've all seen examples of the unreasonable levels they'd have to go to get even a lot of people in this thread back). And honestly I don't think they need to. They can just outbreed them with new hobbyists if they do it right. We'll see how it goes but this feels like the direction they are heading. Especially when you look at what they've done with one of their two flagship games.
The throwback games are a sure-fire thing to get money from lapsed hobbyists - apparently when Space Hulk relaunched the stores were innundated with old gamers asking about it, only to be told that it was sold out. WHQ and Blood Bowl will be the same - loads of folk who don't play mini's games anymore will probably pick them up, because they remember playing them as a teenager.
I'm not sure how they are positioning themselves to target a new generation of gamers - their stores are moving to more obscure locations, they aren't actually advertising, their prices are still high. It's more likely now that people will be introduced to gaming though other games, which really hurts GW's main advantage.
You can get a Tournament level force built for AoS (2kpts) for less than $300 for most of the new factions either before or after discount. That's pretty huge for them. It's something we haven't seen in over a decade or so from them honestly.
When you can get a Tournament level force built for many other, better, games for $100-200, AoS is still a long way from being competitive in the market.
But so much rests on what they do with 40k for 8th edition. I feel like a lot of AoS was a test bed for how to move forward with 40k for 8th and it did do a lot of things right (outside of points not being there on release).
Definitely. 40K really needs an actual overhaul, and with AoS, GW should now have a pretty good grasp of how not to do it. I'm hopeful for it, but unless it's better than Bolt Action, I'm not getting back in.
Fenrir Kitsune wrote:The hobby is buying games workshop products. Decent rules are not a priority for the company.
Sarcasm or serious?
The company said itself that the hobby was buying GW products. Their rules speak for themselves.
Serious then. I know that was so stupid one of the reasons why I stopped buying. You going to publicly make us look like fools and idiots why bother having me as a customer then. No respect at all. I never seen a company have so much disdain for their customers. No wonder they don't make as much money as they did before.
hobojebus wrote: Not having comments on is a universally recognized sign of cowardice, They don't really want to hear honest feedback on their products they just want fanboys to kiss their tucas.
Echo chambers are bad look what happened under Kirby he filled the company with yes men and no one spoke up against bad ideas.
disagree, maybe in many instances but not all, look at Honest Trailers video of Ghostbusters, they closed comments on it not because they thought people would hate their video, but because of the hate inspired by the new Ghostbusters movie. and they just did not want to hear it. or detract from the video they made because of the comments section.
Bottom line, there's got to be better ways to get feedback than that cesspool.
It's not about feedback. It's about feeling part of a community. No company goes to Youtube comments for feedback, a good chunk of them are the internet equivalent of graffiti on toilet walls. But allowing people to engage in commenting makes your offering look less like an echo chamber.
Here is just one example from the aos Facebook page. Negative comments do not get deleted. Offensive comments do. If you write 'I think the 40k rules are bad' no problem. If you write 'the rule writers are idiots' it will get deleted.
If there are plastic sisters I will buy them no matter what so, yeah if they get that then I am out a lot of money lol While I am not a huge fantasy fan, 40k isn't all that bad.
Flying Monstrous Creatures are annoying, my Wolves did shoot a Tyrant out of the sky which was pretty funny.
Fenrir Kitsune wrote:The hobby is buying games workshop products. Decent rules are not a priority for the company.
Sarcasm or serious?
The company said itself that the hobby was buying GW products. Their rules speak for themselves.
Wasn't that Alan Merret, who left the company recently? If so, that horse is well and truly beaten to death.
Alan Merrett speaking as a representative of the company. Unless you consider him some sort of rogue agent that speaks something different to the companies attitude and culture?
And said guy being no more in the company doesn't matter how for the future of the company?
That's like holding Kirby's ridiculous speeches against GW now with a new CEO that does stuff differently.
He's gone. He said that, but his influence is past.
Heck, maybe such things were part of the reason he's gone.
Thairne wrote: And said guy being no more in the company doesn't matter how for the future of the company?
That's like holding Kirby's ridiculous speeches against GW now with a new CEO that does stuff differently.
He's gone. He said that, but his influence is past.
Heck, maybe such things were part of the reason he's gone.
He's been gone, what..........a couple of weeks? All of this product people are seeing as a return to form was developed whilst he was still there.
Isn't it said that he was opposing SoB and Mechanicus releases?
If that rumour was true, I'd guess he's been removed from relevant decisions for a bit longer than his direct exit date.
Thairne wrote:And said guy being no more in the company doesn't matter how for the future of the company?
That's like holding Kirby's ridiculous speeches against GW now with a new CEO that does stuff differently.
He's gone. He said that, but his influence is past.
Heck, maybe such things were part of the reason he's gone.
If he is gone or if he stays doesn't matter. GW approved of what he said. If GW didn't agree with it, then they would have made a statement that they don't agree with it and it was his opinion. So therefore GW agrees and accepts what he said. Now before someone comes in and says companies don't say these things yes they do. A worker has slagged a woman on a Canadian news outlet and it was found out he worked at Ontario Hydro an Ontario, Canada coperation for electricity. They fired his sorry ass and made a statement "that is not what the company represents and was his own opinion. That shows a company doesn't want to be associated with that kind of talk when someone who works there. So if GW doesn't say they don't disagree with the comment that means they do agree and accept what is said. So GW fully agrees what Kirby and who else says anything.
So things said in the past are still what they think of the future until GW says otherwise. So far GW has made no official statement on it. Maybe when GW starts reducing prices they will make a statement regarding past statements made from previous/current employees. We know GW stand on reducing prices, I am sure we still know how GW feels about us the customers.
If my memory serves right however, it was said under Kirby's reign and with his approval.
If you expect that they offer a official "apology" ... 2? years later after the incident because of a shift in the management - you are holding new GW up to quite impossible standards. It's a shift in the company. They won't go back through their history of PR and issue statements on year old sentences.
The negativity and the bitterness in this thread is astounding.
I might very well be counted among the "optimistic" ones, but so far the far majority of arguments against the improval of GW have been either ignorant (FAQ aren't official, therefore don't count and GW did not release good rules yet, therefore nothing changed), unrealistic (they didn't lower prices by xx% therefore nothing changed) or just spiteful.
-
Again, if you don't agree that GW got BETTER (not good, mind you, but BETTER) I would like to hear a logical argument why
- FAQs - advancing the storyline
- discounts on box sets
- revival of board games
- revival of specialist games
- new factions people have wanted for ages
- Warhammer TV
- FB pages for the branches of the company
do NOT count as BETTER. Nothing got worse. Above things objectively improved.
Please explain while having a first draft FAQ is not better than no FAQ at all. Or how Betrayal at Calth screwed you. How Demon Primarch Magnus is bad. Why Genestealer Cults are objectively a step back for GW. Why you do not want the Regimental Standard Blog. Why having a place to officially ask GW stuff is not an improvement. Why small painting tutorials via Duncan for things asked by the customers is an offence.
GW has been getting better slowly as it gets rid of the few problem people. It's still about the money, that's obvious, but at least seems to care somewhat about product now which is at least shifting away from the unhealthy short term focus it had under Kirby. Won't have speeches as good as these anymore though.
Tom Kirby, chairman's preamble 7/2015 wrote:I do not often talk about our products, partly because I think they speak eloquently for themselves, and partly because it is
important for everyone to remember (that’s owners, customers and staff) we are a business. We need to be here next year
if you want more of the exquisite models we make. To be here next year we have to do what all our customers want, not
just a noisy few, and find a way of making money doing it. This year, though, is an exceptional year. Not only have we just
opened a wonderful new visitor centre on time and under budget (take a bow, Tony) we have also relaunched
Warhammer.
The visitor centre is a cathedral of miniatures with the world’s largest and most spectacular diorama. Only £7.50 and a day
you will remember all your life.
The new Warhammer is new. The Stormcast Eternals now bestride the universe and nothing will be the same again.
Not even the front of our building. Buy Warhammer: Age of Sigmar when you come to the visitor centre or the AGM, and see
what we have done.
As I write the world is tumbling in chaos around us. Pundits discover they cannot predict elections, the Americans ride to
the rescue of world football (thank you, Uncle Sam), Sunderland escape relegation, again, the UK will split up into its
consistent parts, it will leave Europe; and yet we struggle on. Babies get born, the rain falls the sun shines and the plants
grow, our chickens keep laying, and Games Workshop still employs over 1,500 people, supporting 1,500 families all over
the globe, making the best miniatures money can buy, providing one of the best investments in our owners' portfolios, and
having a great deal of fun doing it.
Prices of new products and rules (specially for 40k) are getting worse with every new release. And those have actually been GW's main issues for a long while.
So yes, a bunch of minor steps have been taken in the right direction. But the main problems still stand, and aren't getting any better.
Thairne wrote: If my memory serves right however, it was said under Kirby's reign and with his approval.
If you expect that they offer a official "apology" ... 2? years later after the incident because of a shift in the management - you are holding new GW up to quite impossible standards. It's a shift in the company. They won't go back through their history of PR and issue statements on year old sentences.
The negativity and the bitterness in this thread is astounding.
I might very well be counted among the "optimistic" ones, but so far the far majority of arguments against the improval of GW have been either ignorant (FAQ aren't official, therefore don't count and GW did not release good rules yet, therefore nothing changed), unrealistic (they didn't lower prices by xx% therefore nothing changed) or just spiteful.
-
Again, if you don't agree that GW got BETTER (not good, mind you, but BETTER) I would like to hear a logical argument why
- FAQs - advancing the storyline
- discounts on box sets
- revival of board games
- revival of specialist games
- new factions people have wanted for ages
- Warhammer TV
- FB pages for the branches of the company
do NOT count as BETTER. Nothing got worse. Above things objectively improved.
Please explain while having a first draft FAQ is not better than no FAQ at all. Or how Betrayal at Calth screwed you. How Demon Primarch Magnus is bad. Why Genestealer Cults are objectively a step back for GW. Why you do not want the Regimental Standard Blog. Why having a place to officially ask GW stuff is not an improvement. Why small painting tutorials via Duncan for things asked by the customers is an offence.
40K improvements mean nothing when they ended my game of WFB by blowing it up.
Things have improved, as the more cynical ones would say: "being that low they could only go up!".
Never underestimate how much worse a situation can get.
So I will look at this as an actual effort to addressing lagging sales.
I cannot shake feeling like being the long abused spouse and they have had a good day and smiled at me... this is GREAT, now how long will it last?
Answer is probably however long it takes for my wallet to heal and that I have sufficiently doubled-down on new models so we can get back to the old abuse.
BTW do you have any idea on how hard it is to make a viable Deathwatch army?
My "fluff" side is loving it, my competitive side is saying "Nein! dummkopf!!" (he seems so much happier when I play X-wing...).
The starter boxes are a smart move, I find them hard to ignore for the "deal" they offer compared to normal pricing.
I have bought 3 of the bloody things to round-out stuff I had, the SM package works well with a couple Deathwatch packs.
These mini-game bundled packages have been awesome as starters all on their own.
The Imperial Knight / Chaos Knight bundle seemed like a steal for what you got, it even gave a slight boost to the much maligned CSM.
I even grabbed the Killteam rules, which come with a squad of Tau.... looking at that Tau starter army bundle.... not holding off very well.
To view this in the most critical in ways: I have bought probably over $1000 this year on GW stuff which is more than I spent in the last two years.
I would say their recent changes are a success based on my own spending.
Now if only they can look really hard at the rules and I could almost say I am "happy" rather than "grudgingly approve".
Prices of new products and rules (specially for 40k) are getting worse with every new release. And those have actually been GW's main issues for a long while.
So yes, a bunch of minor steps have been taken in the right direction. But the main problems still stand, and aren't getting any better.
The rules are getting worse? I concede the point that the rules are gak.
But they've been gak before. So they currently stagnate on the gakky level. I will refrain from judging that effort until 8th ed comes along, considering the BA supplement that had BS 3 scouts in it. That suggest it was done before the FAQ and only just released.
I don't see them getting worse, just staying gak.
If 8th comes out and no improvement to the rules is done, my optimism will come to a rapid end too.
Fenrir Kitsune wrote:
40K improvements mean nothing when they ended my game of WFB by blowing it up.
Kirby. Also happened before the new trend emerges.
Guess medicine didn't improve because people died of the black plague in the medieval ages
Mitochondria wrote:A gak sandwich without a side of pubes...is still a gak sandwich.
Yes, I see that logically laid out argument on why GW did not improve.
So right I have a question and I don't mean this to sound like I'm making a dig or being aggressive, just genuine curiosity...
If people are so fethed off and "done" with GW and it's practises, if you've walked away and said "I'm done with this mess" why do people still complain?
Like if you're done with something surely you'd want nothing else to do with it, but still whinging whenever the opportunity is given kind of just reminds me of my vegan friend who will always moan about us eating meat around him.
My apologies if this sounds harsh or something I don't mean it to, just trying to find out peoples reasonings and understand them really
Thairne wrote: If my memory serves right however, it was said under Kirby's reign and with his approval.
If you expect that they offer a official "apology" ... 2? years later after the incident because of a shift in the management - you are holding new GW up to quite impossible standards. It's a shift in the company. They won't go back through their history of PR and issue statements on year old sentences.
The negativity and the bitterness in this thread is astounding.
I might very well be counted among the "optimistic" ones, but so far the far majority of arguments against the improval of GW have been either ignorant (FAQ aren't official, therefore don't count and GW did not release good rules yet, therefore nothing changed), unrealistic (they didn't lower prices by xx% therefore nothing changed) or just spiteful.
-
Again, if you don't agree that GW got BETTER (not good, mind you, but BETTER) I would like to hear a logical argument why
- FAQs - advancing the storyline
- discounts on box sets
- revival of board games
- revival of specialist games
- new factions people have wanted for ages - Warhammer TV
- FB pages for the branches of the company
do NOT count as BETTER. Nothing got worse. Above things objectively improved.
Please explain while having a first draft FAQ is not better than no FAQ at all. Or how Betrayal at Calth screwed you. How Demon Primarch Magnus is bad. Why Genestealer Cults are objectively a step back for GW. Why you do not want the Regimental Standard Blog. Why having a place to officially ask GW stuff is not an improvement. Why small painting tutorials via Duncan for things asked by the customers is an offence.
I want a tight balanced ruleset for 40K. New releases (such as Genestealer Cults) don't help that, only make things more of a mess.
Fix the game before you start adding to it.
In addition, If you are going to release updates for existing factions, make sure they fix some of the long standing problems. Releasing Angels Blade with all of it problems doesn't inspire confidence.
KalexKurosaki wrote: So right I have a question and I don't mean this to sound like I'm making a dig or being aggressive, just genuine curiosity...
If people are so fethed off and "done" with GW and it's practises, if you've walked away and said "I'm done with this mess" why do people still complain?
Like if you're done with something surely you'd want nothing else to do with it, but still whinging whenever the opportunity is given kind of just reminds me of my vegan friend who will always moan about us eating meat around him.
My apologies if this sounds harsh or something I don't mean it to, just trying to find out peoples reasonings and understand them really
Because people don't want to be "done."
They still care, they likely still have a collection of models that represents a substantial investment of time and money. They probably still have good memories of the game and still have an interest in the lore. They might even still find a lot of the models attractive purchases.
Line all that up and place it on a collision course with a gaming experience that's become increasingly unsatisfying for many and a bunch of successive issues which seem to suggest GW is, perhaps actively, trying to drive customers away because they deviate so far from conventional approaches to running a successful business and you have a situation which generates a huge amount of frustration.
Talizvar wrote:Things have improved, as the more cynical ones would say: "being that low they could only go up!".
Never underestimate how much worse a situation can get.
So I will look at this as an actual effort to addressing lagging sales.
I cannot shake feeling like being the long abused spouse and they have had a good day and smiled at me... this is GREAT, now how long will it last?
Answer is probably however long it takes for my wallet to heal and that I have sufficiently doubled-down on new models so we can get back to the old abuse.
BTW do you have any idea on how hard it is to make a viable Deathwatch army?
My "fluff" side is loving it, my competitive side is saying "Nein! dummkopf!!" (he seems so much happier when I play X-wing...).
The starter boxes are a smart move, I find them hard to ignore for the "deal" they offer compared to normal pricing.
I have bought 3 of the bloody things to round-out stuff I had, the SM package works well with a couple Deathwatch packs.
These mini-game bundled packages have been awesome as starters all on their own.
The Imperial Knight / Chaos Knight bundle seemed like a steal for what you got, it even gave a slight boost to the much maligned CSM.
I even grabbed the Killteam rules, which come with a squad of Tau.... looking at that Tau starter army bundle.... not holding off very well.
To view this in the most critical in ways: I have bought probably over $1000 this year on GW stuff which is more than I spent in the last two years.
I would say their recent changes are a success based on my own spending.
Now if only they can look really hard at the rules and I could almost say I am "happy" rather than "grudgingly approve".
@KalexKurosaki, First off, nice title and welcome to the forum.
You should have seen the AoS Facebook announcement of points being added to the game, it was a laugh riot.
So many posts of "too late GW, I've moved on", " you can't win me back" or "I've already found better games than you". Just the idea that they already moved on to other systems, stalked the GW news rumors and got onto Facebook just to say they don't care what they do anymore is hilarious and so telling of how dramatic this fanbase is.
Azreal13 makes some really good points but it doesn't stop this stuff feeling like a cheesy soap opera.
Coming back into the hobby after a very long time away (Killteam). Struck by a few things.
first, oldoldold:
When did codexes become so laughably expensive?
What happened to the old Bogoff offers of my youth?
Hmm, Warhammer seems to have changed, no real opinion on it though.
Newnewnew:
Wow, those genestealer cultist kits are amazing. Deffo getting some neophytes for Christmas. Vs. What on earth are those squat little spacemarine helicopters?
These 'theme boxed sets' are very cool, but do they all have to be filled with space marines? Hopefully a guard one if they sell well?
I am very excited by the Sisters of Battle rumour though!
But if this is their comeback year, what on earth was 2015 like?
Books are cheap to design and quick, printing in bulk is fairly cheap and it's impossible to play without them so they generate large profit for little expensive on GW's part.
Once I'd collect every book when they were around a tenner, no way I do that at £30 a pop.
Compare it to fow where I got my armies book for £7 in colour it's clear how obscene the books prices are.
Fenrir Kitsune wrote:The hobby is buying games workshop products. Decent rules are not a priority for the company.
Sarcasm or serious?
The company said itself that the hobby was buying GW products. Their rules speak for themselves.
Wasn't that Alan Merret, who left the company recently? If so, that horse is well and truly beaten to death.
That's in their report to shareholders. Not stated quite so bluntly, but they make it very clear that they're in the business of selling "premium collectibles", not game design.
the only thing that GW has ever done that turned me off, was release Finecast....
that made me miss out on at least a dozen minis that i really, really wanted...
i am happy to see that they are not doing any new releases in that rubbish "resin"...
so, yeah, GW has gotten better in my eyes...
plastics are so much better to work with
I want a tight balanced ruleset for 40K. New releases (such as Genestealer Cults) don't help that, only make things more of a mess.
Fix the game before you start adding to it.
In addition, If you are going to release updates for existing factions, make sure they fix some of the long standing problems. Releasing Angels Blade with all of it problems doesn't inspire confidence.
And how would you propose they do that?
They are working on an 8th edition for all the rumors we heard. They regarded 7th as a failed edition.
Making a complete new 8th that is no 7th and just reiterates a few things of 6th and does what we all want, fix the ruleset, will take a LONG time.
What is GW supposed to to in that time, not release any new stuff and go into bankruptcy? Fire the model designers since they won't have anything to do?
GW is a company, not a garage store that can put out what YOU want in the blink of an eye. It takes time to turn a ship around. Rountree might have given the "order" to fix the rules, but you still won't know it until it arrives.
This kind of thinking really starts to bug me. Being a software dev, I know that things take time. Developing a new ruleset or a new big feature for your software are somewhat comparable.
If you criticize GW for something, think about it a few seconds. Is what you want even possible or are you just being a negative nancy because you're so bitter and disappointed with the past?
I still stand by it. Didn't see a good argument against it yet.
GW has gotten a lot better.
The rules is the last, big bastion they have to conquer.
Well, I assume that releases like the GSC and deathwatch *do* indicate the direction in which 8th edition will go. So for example formations and fliers (for DW) are included in them so I won't expect them to be gone.
Considering that many complain about them they *are* going to be disappointed again.
SKR.HH wrote: Well, I assume that releases like the GSC and deathwatch *do* indicate the direction in which 8th edition will go. So for example formations and fliers (for DW) are included in them so I won't expect them to be gone.
Considering that many complain about them they *are* going to be disappointed again.
I forsee many YouTube videos of melted armies if that is the case.
Thairne wrote: They are working on an 8th edition for all the rumors we heard. They regarded 7th as a failed edition.
I thought 6th edition was the failed edition. Since 7th edition is has been out twice as long as 6th edition, I wouldn't say that 7th edition is the "failed" edition. Maybe you are thinking of how GW thinks 7th edition is a "lame duck" as was mentioned a few months ago? That doesn't mean it's failed, that it's just no longer viable now where it was once before it was.
Thairne wrote:
They are working on an 8th edition for all the rumors we heard. They regarded 7th as a failed edition.
I thought 6th edition was the failed edition. Since 7th edition is has been out twice as long as 6th edition, I wouldn't say that 7th edition is the "failed" edition. Maybe you are thinking of how GW thinks 7th edition is a "lame duck" as was mentioned a few months ago? That doesn't mean it's failed, that it's just no longer viable now where it was once before it was.
Dunno where you're getting that from. Both editions have been out for the same length of time (2 years) as of right now.
Wow you are right Ruin. It just seemed so long ago that 6th edition came out. I guess I was thinking by the time 8th edition came out 7th edition would be a lot longer than 6th. 6th is what 18 months, by the time 7th edition comes out it will be 3 years, so almost double the time was my thinking.
Davor wrote: Wow you are right Ruin. It just seemed so long ago that 6th edition came out. I guess I was thinking by the time 8th edition came out 7th edition would be a lot longer than 6th. 6th is what 18 months, by the time 7th edition comes out it will be 3 years, so almost double the time was my thinking.
Thanks for the clarification.
No worries. I did have to check myself to make sure I was correct. 6th came out June 2012 and 7th was in May 2014.
This kind of thinking really starts to bug me. Being a software dev, I know that things take time. Developing a new ruleset or a new big feature for your software are somewhat comparable.
If you criticize GW for something, think about it a few seconds. Is what you want even possible or are you just being a negative nancy because you're so bitter and disappointed with the past?
The ruleset is still based on the big 3rd edition rewrite. They are not making completely new rules but updating them. That's, at best, like going from version 3.5.6 to 3.6.0 (and not 4.0) every few years while leaving people with old codex books for a lot of the factions. The problem is that things are not really improving and it looks like GW doesn't know what they want their rules to be.
Would you, as a software dev, accept an application that stagnates over a decade (removing and adding bugs at random, with questionable usability, and new features that demand even more expensive upgrades) while expecting you to pay for a new version every three to four years without perceivable progress? Wouldn't you be miffed too?
Thairne wrote: They are working on an 8th edition for all the rumors we heard. They regarded 7th as a failed edition.
I thought 6th edition was the failed edition. Since 7th edition is has been out twice as long as 6th edition, I wouldn't say that 7th edition is the "failed" edition. Maybe you are thinking of how GW thinks 7th edition is a "lame duck" as was mentioned a few months ago? That doesn't mean it's failed, that it's just no longer viable now where it was once before it was.
I think the best indication that 7th failed is the financial reports. Each year a new edition comes out comes with an uptick in revenue. Coming out of the LotR bubble bursting, 5th edition was big boost. When 6th came along, it was a boost again, not as big as 5th though. The year 7th came out was a year that revenue actually dropped, as was the subsequent year.
I think 7th was released because GW thought, "oh, people always buy the new edition and we need money, lets release a new edition now!". Except a lot of customers just went "What is this gak?" and left for one of the many other games that are on the market.
This kind of thinking really starts to bug me. Being a software dev, I know that things take time. Developing a new ruleset or a new big feature for your software are somewhat comparable.
If you criticize GW for something, think about it a few seconds. Is what you want even possible or are you just being a negative nancy because you're so bitter and disappointed with the past?
The ruleset is still based on the big 3rd edition rewrite. They are not making completely new rules but updating them. That's, at best, like going from version 3.5.6 to 3.6.0 (and not 4.0) every few years while leaving people with old codex books for a lot of the factions. The problem is that things are not really improving and it looks like GW doesn't know what they want their rules to be.
Would you, as a software dev, accept an application that stagnates over a decade (removing and adding bugs at random, with questionable usability, and new features that demand even more expensive upgrades) while expecting you to pay for a new version every three to four years without perceivable progress? Wouldn't you be miffed too?
You don't develop software, do you? Because that is exactly how it works in our company as well. We do have a system that is close to
20 years old and we are working on it on a daily basis.
Would you, as a software dev, accept an application that stagnates over a decade (removing and adding bugs at random, with questionable usability, and new features that demand even more expensive upgrades) while expecting you to pay for a new version every three to four years without perceivable progress? Wouldn't you be miffed too?
This kind of thinking really starts to bug me. Being a software dev, I know that things take time. Developing a new ruleset or a new big feature for your software are somewhat comparable.
If you criticize GW for something, think about it a few seconds. Is what you want even possible or are you just being a negative nancy because you're so bitter and disappointed with the past?
The ruleset is still based on the big 3rd edition rewrite. They are not making completely new rules but updating them. That's, at best, like going from version 3.5.6 to 3.6.0 (and not 4.0) every few years while leaving people with old codex books for a lot of the factions. The problem is that things are not really improving and it looks like GW doesn't know what they want their rules to be.
Would you, as a software dev, accept an application that stagnates over a decade (removing and adding bugs at random, with questionable usability, and new features that demand even more expensive upgrades) while expecting you to pay for a new version every three to four years without perceivable progress? Wouldn't you be miffed too?
You don't develop software, do you? Because that is exactly how it works in our company as well. We do have a system that is close to
20 years old and we are working on it on a daily basis.
I am a software developer too and I find this mentality to be ultimately destructive because you are never actually fixing stuff because nobody seems to understand that it does not really work
Thairne wrote:
They are working on an 8th edition for all the rumors we heard. They regarded 7th as a failed edition.
I thought 6th edition was the failed edition. Since 7th edition is has been out twice as long as 6th edition, I wouldn't say that 7th edition is the "failed" edition. Maybe you are thinking of how GW thinks 7th edition is a "lame duck" as was mentioned a few months ago? That doesn't mean it's failed, that it's just no longer viable now where it was once before it was.
I think the best indication that 7th failed is the financial reports. Each year a new edition comes out comes with an uptick in revenue. Coming out of the LotR bubble bursting, 5th edition was big boost. When 6th came along, it was a boost again, not as big as 5th though. The year 7th came out was a year that revenue actually dropped, as was the subsequent year.
I think 7th was released because GW thought, "oh, people always buy the new edition and we need money, lets release a new edition now!". Except a lot of customers just went "What is this gak?" and left for one of the many other games that are on the market.
That was my exact reaction I saw how incredibly lazy 7th was and stopped playing GW products, stopped all spending then played a bunch of other games.
Briefly tried AoS with stuff I already owned then went back to x-wing.
This kind of thinking really starts to bug me. Being a software dev, I know that things take time. Developing a new ruleset or a new big feature for your software are somewhat comparable.
If you criticize GW for something, think about it a few seconds. Is what you want even possible or are you just being a negative nancy because you're so bitter and disappointed with the past?
The ruleset is still based on the big 3rd edition rewrite. They are not making completely new rules but updating them. That's, at best, like going from version 3.5.6 to 3.6.0 (and not 4.0) every few years while leaving people with old codex books for a lot of the factions. The problem is that things are not really improving and it looks like GW doesn't know what they want their rules to be.
Would you, as a software dev, accept an application that stagnates over a decade (removing and adding bugs at random, with questionable usability, and new features that demand even more expensive upgrades) while expecting you to pay for a new version every three to four years without perceivable progress? Wouldn't you be miffed too?
You don't develop software, do you? Because that is exactly how it works in our company as well. We do have a system that is close to
20 years old and we are working on it on a daily basis.
I am a software developer too and I find this mentality to be ultimately destructive because you are never actually fixing stuff because nobody seems to understand that it does not really work
No, everybody sees that it does not work properly but they arrange with it. Building these things new from scratch is a) risky and b) high invest.
Quite similar here. People expecting to have a change from IGOUGO to something else are ignoring that this is not in the DNA of the game and the game developers. But I don't get it why people for example are still complaining that they are forced to have larger armies because the points per mini dropped. Why don't play "smaller" games instead? Why not play 1000 or 1500 points?
Harriticus wrote:I've been here bemoaning GeeDubs for years now, particularly during the dark days of 2013. Yet since Kirby got the boot as CEO, I've noticed that GW has gotten a bit better recently.
Better yes, but now I believe GW is still the same old same old. It's all smoke and mirrors. It's the illusion that they have changed but they are still the same.
On the gameplay/codex front, I think they've done a good job introducing new armies. Mechanicus (despite being unnecessarily split up into 2 codex's), Genestealer Cult, and Deathwatch codex's have all been solid releases.
Here is proof. How do you put in a negative when praising for something good they did? Right there the Mechanicus being split up is showing GW hasn't changed.
On the modelling front, I think they've also improved in the last year. The new models for stuff like Skitarii and Genestealers fit their themes quite well and get the job done without being overly complicated. It's a far cry from disasters like the Taurox. They're also giving fans what they want with regards to models: minis like Primarchs and plastic sisters. The "made to order" concept has fans quite happy, though of course cautious about the limitations of it.
Minis were always improving even under GW of old. As for Primarchs, plastic sisters and "made to order" it's a bit premature with that. Wait till it actually happens. Saying something how good something is before it happens is not a good debate.
GW has finally made its presence known on social media in the last year, making them feel like a far less bitter, backwards, and impersonal company. The recent announcement of plastic sisters on facebook is a good example of modern marketing from GW.
This is where the smoke and mirrors come in. The illusion of change. So now that GW embraces social media it shows GW has changed. A Mugger can use social media. Does that make them a good person after stealing your money?
On the lore front, GW has finally acceded to fan demands and started progressing the story. Though the actual events have been lackluster, I think there's a sense that gak is finally going down in 999999.M41.
GW has made several good decisions with its IP in the last few years. Warhammer Total War and Dawn of War 3 being the best examples. 40K comics by a third party are also returning, indicating they're a bit less paranoid about what is published in their name now. GW is also no longer attacking smaller companies with petty copyright claims, instead renaming their own mini's. While this is still juvenile overly paranoid protection of their IP, I think it's a step in the right direction.
You are forgetting 40K Plant vs Zomibes. For every good IP decisions there are many poor ones. Funny you don't talk about them. Leaving out facts doesn't make GW any better, just your argument false.
Of course they haven't been perfect. I find Age of Sigmar to be awful. The prices are still too high. Thus if GW's gak level was 9,000 in 2013, it would be 8,990 today. Nonetheless, I am cautiously optimistic about the future of Games Workshop
So you find Age of Sigmar to be awful prices to high should show you that GW hasn't changed at all then. So your are proving yourself wrong in your debate.
With that said, 2016 has been the most I have spent money on GW. I haven't spent this much on GW in a few years so this smoke and mirrors approach is working at least on me. Will it last? I don't think so. I see GW of old creeping back in. To keep playing GW is just the same. Prices are even getting higher. Only one buzz saw in a pack for genestealers cult sprues when the rules can have 2 in a unit? So it's back to same old GW where placing only one bit in a box but rules tell you can use a many.
Wayniac wrote:Better? Yes. But there was also no place to go but up from what they were doing before. However the proof will be in the pudding of how they actually want to fix things and they've shown zero desire so far to actually fix the mess that 40K is in, in fact they seem to want to do the opposite by putting out more and more stuff to increase the bloat and make it that much harder to fix later.
I agree. It will be the new 40K edition to see if GW has changed at all or not. Sadly still under a year away. Why wait? Right there should raise up RED FLAGS. Why wait over a year to fix their mess?
Bartali wrote:
On the gameplay/codex front, I think they've done a good job introducing new armies. Mechanicus (despite being unnecessarily split up into 2 codex's), Genestealer Cult, and Deathwatch codex's have all been solid releases.
Whilst on the flip side both Angels Blade and Kill Team have been lazy re-hashes.
I think a lot of people are waiting on 8th ed 40K before judging 'new' GW.
See perfect response right here. GW had a chance to fix the game but yet still does old GW tactics.
So while I Like the illusion that GW is putting out, it's all smoke and mirrors and GW is really the same old same old.
Joyboozer wrote:When those warhammer tv videos make a joke about the price they're charging for Kharn the Betrayer I'll agree with you.
What did they say? I missed it.
Speaking for myself I'm glad they split up Skitarii and Cult. I don't want their rules and therefore the book was cheaper to acquire.
You know, Day in day out I hear people complain that the core rules are so horrid the game can barely function, but at the same time, 30K/HH runs off the same core rules and runs like a dream (in my opinion).
I am starting to get the feeling that the issue isn't with the core rules at all but with the Codexes and Player base..
Would you, as a software dev, accept an application that stagnates over a decade (removing and adding bugs at random, with questionable usability, and new features that demand even more expensive upgrades) while expecting you to pay for a new version every three to four years without perceivable progress? Wouldn't you be miffed too?
I think the best way to look at the changes to GW in the last couple of years.
Two years ago GW was supporting 4 games systems, though the support of Lotr was dying.
They had gotten rid of the majority of the battle force sets.
They had 0 board games available to buy
They had no social media presence at all.
By the end of 2016 they will have released 4 major boardgames (with 2 more form last year still available) , 2 mini boardgames and 2 mini tabletop games.
They will be actively supporting 5 systems AOS, 40k, 30k, Lotr and blood bowl with 2 more next year. They also have 2 new ways of playing 40k in killteam and battle for vedros.
The discount sets are back and they are back on social media.
The fundamental change that really effects people is that GW has greatly increased the options available to play their games.
2 years ago you could by big expensive armies to play on big 6 by 4 tables or nothing.
Now there are many options available for those with limited money or space.
Living in Japan the second option is very important for me.
It seems undeniable that this is a change to the core business and not just smoke and mirrors. The social media stuff is just a nice bonus.
It's tempting to say GW is just as bad--their prices are still high, their fluff still mutilated, but damn if I'm not getting plastic Custodes and Sisters. Between this box and the Genestealers, I'm buying more GW than I have in years, even at the expense of all the non-GW stuff I would have bought otherwise.
jah-joshua wrote: the only thing that GW has ever done that turned me off, was release Finecast....
that made me miss out on at least a dozen minis that i really, really wanted...
i am happy to see that they are not doing any new releases in that rubbish "resin"...
so, yeah, GW has gotten better in my eyes...
plastics are so much better to work with
cheers
jah
While we agree on plastic, I had the opposite experience with Finecast. If the prices had been less bananas, I would have bought buckets full.
@Bob: you like bones, so that make sense...
i don't like any "restic" type material i've worked with...
i've only worked on Finecast for commissions, and every weapon, especially the blades have been horribly warped...
even the big stuff, like an Ogre sword, has waves in it, which are impossible to fix right...
the rest of the problems, like bubbles or the massive number of vents, are not a big deal, but the fact that Farsight's ankle cannot support the model for long is a deal breaker, no matter how much i love the sculpt...
even at 50% off i'm not buying it...
it's a shame, too, because i would like all three of the Ogre character, Farsight, and the three Space Wolves minis that came out after the switch :(
Chikout wrote: They will be actively supporting 5 systems AOS, 40k, 30k and blood bowl with 2 more next year.
Isn't that four, not five, or am I missing something?
Oops forgot Lotr. The upcoming two are the confirmed Adeptus titanicus and the heavily rumoured Necromunda.
I suspect a lot of people forget LotR/WotR/whatever-it-is-called-this-week
Though there's an argument that Blood Bowl should be looked at closer to WHQ than 40k - it is a board game with miniatures, after all, as opposed to the full-on wargames that the other four would be.
...I may need to go and put my flame-retardant suit on after pointing that out, though.
Chikout wrote: They will be actively supporting 5 systems AOS, 40k, 30k and blood bowl with 2 more next year.
Isn't that four, not five, or am I missing something?
Oops forgot Lotr. The upcoming two are the confirmed Adeptus titanicus and the heavily rumoured Necromunda.
I suspect a lot of people forget LotR/WotR/whatever-it-is-called-this-week
Though there's an argument that Blood Bowl should be looked at closer to WHQ than 40k - it is a board game with miniatures, after all, as opposed to the full-on wargames that the other four would be.
...I may need to go and put my flame-retardant suit on after pointing that out, though.
I put it in the Wargame category because it will have ongoing support with new teams expansions etc. Warhammer quest has had new box sets but in terms of actually playing the game only the white dwarf is new.
I'd describe BB as an expandable board game rather than a wargame.
There's a lot of games I'd actually describe as board games or miniature games rather than wargames, wargames I traditionally only associate with games that let you play decent sized battles. WHFB, 40k, Epic, Warmaster, LotR, that sort of stuff.
Chapter Master Angelos wrote: You know, Day in day out I hear people complain that the core rules are so horrid the game can barely function, but at the same time, 30K/HH runs off the same core rules and runs like a dream (in my opinion).
I am starting to get the feeling that the issue isn't with the core rules at all but with the Codexes and Player base..
It's more that 30k doesn't have formations, and its mainly marine vs. marine so less abuse. The biggest issue with the core rules are mainly a slew of random bullgak instead of player choice, and too many USRs. 30k fixes some of the abuse but its also the fact that a lot of people play 30k for the fluff/models, while there's still a good chunk of 40k players who are trying to play a competitive game with it.
Chikout wrote: I think the best way to look at the changes to GW in the last couple of years.
Two years ago GW was supporting 4 games systems, though the support of Lotr was dying.
They had gotten rid of the majority of the battle force sets.
They had 0 board games available to buy
They had no social media presence at all.
By the end of 2016 they will have released 4 major boardgames (with 2 more form last year still available) , 2 mini boardgames and 2 mini tabletop games.
They will be actively supporting 5 systems AOS, 40k, 30k, Lotr and blood bowl with 2 more next year. They also have 2 new ways of playing 40k in killteam and battle for vedros.
The discount sets are back and they are back on social media.
The fundamental change that really effects people is that GW has greatly increased the options available to play their games.
2 years ago you could by big expensive armies to play on big 6 by 4 tables or nothing.
Now there are many options available for those with limited money or space.
Living in Japan the second option is very important for me.
It seems undeniable that this is a change to the core business and not just smoke and mirrors. The social media stuff is just a nice bonus.
You summed it up nicely.
However, prices for regular units/models are still high and tend to go up steadily, like the new Kharn model.
Getting new (young) players into the game is still an illusion.
Not in theory... but they released some which are just plain stupid and break the point system way too much without any form of a negative aspect of being limited.
Perhaps not literally (although with GW not crediting their rules writes anymore, who knows?). They have made a complete mess out of 40K though and made it borderline unplayable so I'd agree with classifying them as of the devil.
And the web deal exclusive ones are the worst, it's literally pay to win you buy two assault squads and get a datasheet that lets you assault after deep striking.
There seems to be a lot of "NO!!! GW is terrible and can do nothing right till they: give my codex x/go in the direction I want". Worse still, there is some: "GW can never get better because they *insert grudge*".
Prices are bad, 40k is a mess and AoS did not launch well.
If 40k 8th is bad, I'm out. The point is that they are working on the problem though.
AoS is currently doing well and growing, because GW took note and changed what needed changing.
GW is not going in the direction you (or I) want; they are going in the direction that suits them and they have every right to. I the new direction does not suit you then it's up to you to change, not GW. Insisting that anyone does things MY WAY is childish and engaging with that mentality is fruitless.
DarkBlack wrote: There seems to be a lot of "NO!!! GW is terrible and can do nothing right till they: give my codex x/go in the direction I want". Worse still, there is some: "GW can never get better because they *insert grudge*".
Prices are bad, 40k is a mess and AoS did not launch well.
If 40k 8th is bad, I'm out. The point is that they are working on the problem though.
AoS is currently doing well and growing, because GW took note and changed what needed changing.
GW is not going in the direction you (or I) want; they are going in the direction that suits them and they have every right to. I the new direction does not suit you then it's up to you to change, not GW. Insisting that anyone does things MY WAY is childish and engaging with that mentality is fruitless.
"Get better" is subjective. So everyone is going to judge it by their own standards. For myself, GW hasn't gotten noticeably better. Warhammer is still dead. Their new models continue to get bigger and sillier (and more difficult to transport). The current 40K rules aren't enjoyable enough to play for me to pay the steep entry cost. If nothing they "improve" affects me, then naturally I won't consider it an improvement.
DarkBlack wrote: There seems to be a lot of "NO!!! GW is terrible and can do nothing right till they: give my codex x/go in the direction I want".
I think you missed the mark here. It's not "take my codex the way I want" it's "fix the bloody obvious balance issues" and "make my army not suck so I have a chance of winning a game without needing to get my opponent's to handicap themselves first".
Whether GW have improved or not is subjective because different people have different criteria, if someone's gripe was prices then they're going to have the same gripe now as they had before. Whether the rules for 40k are fethed or not I don't think is subjective, of course they're fethed, the only subjective part is how much you care.
I actually think that the prices are pretty reasonable... If, like me, you play Space Marines. You can get most of what you want in their various Box Sets that are coming out, giving incredibly good deals on models. (Calth and Prospero both cost roughly half the MSRB of their non-box-set counterparts, for example.)
I love the Deathwatch kits. I loved the Calth kits when they came out. The Prospero kits look really promising, too.
Is there rules bloat? Well... Yeah, sure, but at least at my LGS I've never considered that to be a problem. The owner comes up with silly, fun, fluffy campaigns. (Every tax season he comes up with rules that let us steal or remove parts of our opponents army, just for giggles.) Nobody plays to WAAC. I can regularly break out my Sisters of Battle or my Orks and still have a reasonable chance of winning, in part because I'm pretty good at the game but also because I don't have to worry about someone bringing whatever the most-powerful-possible-list of the day is.
40k has never, ever, ever been a competitively balanced army. I started playing in early 5th edition, and I've heard stories from 4th and 3rd that make it pretty clear that things weren't different before then. Blood Angels came out and trounced everyone. Then Space Wolves came out and trounced them. Then Dark Eldar was the best thing ever. (Remember when DARK FRIKKIN ELDAR was the best thing ever? It happened.) Then Grey Knights became completely unstoppable. 6th Edition rolled around, and Chaos Space Marines were briefly on top of the dogpile, along with Necrons. Then there was TauDar. Then there was... Crap, I don't even remember. Some other BS, I'm sure. Tau seems to still be on top.
The point is that, yes there's bloat now, but there's always been bloat. Having more units, more models, and more fun things to try out can't seem like a bad thing to me. I liked it when I got to fight Mechanicus for the first time. I enjoyed fighting Genestealer cults and Deathwatch. I'm looking forward to seeing Custodes on the board.
DarkBlack wrote: GW is not going in the direction you (or I) want; they are going in the direction that suits them and they have every right to. I the new direction does not suit you then it's up to you to change, not GW. Insisting that anyone does things MY WAY is childish and engaging with that mentality is fruitless.
I did, and so did my usual gaming buddies.
That doesn't mean we don't hold out hope that GW will move to form of decision making on prices, rules and models that we agree with and want to engage with. They have a great IP.
DarkBlack wrote: There seems to be a lot of "NO!!! GW is terrible and can do nothing right till they: give my codex x/go in the direction I want".
I think you missed the mark here. It's not "take my codex the way I want" it's "fix the bloody obvious balance issues" and "make my army not suck so I have a chance of winning a game without needing to get my opponent's to handicap themselves first".
Whether GW have improved or not is subjective because different people have different criteria, if someone's gripe was prices then they're going to have the same gripe now as they had before. Whether the rules for 40k are fethed or not I don't think is subjective, of course they're fethed, the only subjective part is how much you care.
No. Weather GW suits you or not is subjective. An organization can get better even if they have not addresses the issues that bother any particular person.
Waaaghpower wrote: 40k has never, ever, ever been a competitively balanced army.
The problem is 40k sells itself as a game that can be played competitively.
It has points values. It has victory conditions. It has a winner and a loser.
If there was a warning on the box "WARNING: This game is meant to be a joke and is completely unbalanced" then you'd have less complaints.... because many people wouldn't buy it in the first place
The problem is, unless someone tells you upfront right at the beginning that 40k is an unbalanced mess, your average gamer will be hundreds of dollars and hundreds of hours investment deep in the game before they figure it out themselves. It's not like a video game where you can play it for a few hours before figuring out that it's junk and the reason you're losing isn't because you suck and need to improve but rather because you chose a crap army that GW randomly decided was going to be Eldar's punching bag.
DarkBlack wrote: There seems to be a lot of "NO!!! GW is terrible and can do nothing right till they: give my codex x/go in the direction I want".
I think you missed the mark here. It's not "take my codex the way I want" it's "fix the bloody obvious balance issues" and "make my army not suck so I have a chance of winning a game without needing to get my opponent's to handicap themselves first".
Whether GW have improved or not is subjective because different people have different criteria, if someone's gripe was prices then they're going to have the same gripe now as they had before. Whether the rules for 40k are fethed or not I don't think is subjective, of course they're fethed, the only subjective part is how much you care.
No. Weather GW suits you or not is subjective. An organization can get better even if they have not addresses the issues that bother any particular person.
I disagree. If someone's core issues aren't addressed then any improvement the company makes is superficial while other issues have actually gotten worse.
Prices (especially regional prices) are worse than they ever have been, so if that's your criteria you can easily make the argument GW has gotten worse. WHFB is dead, so if you were a fan of WHFB you can make the argument GW has gotten worse for killing their longest running IP.
Waaaghpower wrote: 40k has never, ever, ever been a competitively balanced army. I started playing in early 5th edition, and I've heard stories from 4th and 3rd that make it pretty clear that things weren't different before then. Blood Angels came out and trounced everyone. Then Space Wolves came out and trounced them. Then Dark Eldar was the best thing ever. (Remember when DARK FRIKKIN ELDAR was the best thing ever? It happened.) Then Grey Knights became completely unstoppable. 6th Edition rolled around, and Chaos Space Marines were briefly on top of the dogpile, along with Necrons. Then there was TauDar. Then there was... Crap, I don't even remember. Some other BS, I'm sure. Tau seems to still be on top.
Unless the Dark Eldar thing happened in 4th edition, no, it didn't happen at least on a global level. It might have happened at someones meta level.
However, as bad as things were in 3rd and 4th edition, they weren't as astoundingly bad as they are now. Blood Angels beat everyone, but not to the point where it wasn't worth unpacking your stuff. Right now, balance has gotten so bad where that is now a reality.
Waaaghpower wrote: 40k has never, ever, ever been a competitively balanced army. I started playing in early 5th edition, and I've heard stories from 4th and 3rd that make it pretty clear that things weren't different before then. Blood Angels came out and trounced everyone. Then Space Wolves came out and trounced them. Then Dark Eldar was the best thing ever. (Remember when DARK FRIKKIN ELDAR was the best thing ever? It happened.) Then Grey Knights became completely unstoppable. 6th Edition rolled around, and Chaos Space Marines were briefly on top of the dogpile, along with Necrons. Then there was TauDar. Then there was... Crap, I don't even remember. Some other BS, I'm sure. Tau seems to still be on top.
Unless the Dark Eldar thing happened in 4th edition, no, it didn't happen at least on a global level. It might have happened at someones meta level.
However, as bad as things were in 3rd and 4th edition, they weren't as astoundingly bad as they are now. Blood Angels beat everyone, but not to the point where it wasn't worth unpacking your stuff. Right now, balance has gotten so bad where that is now a reality.
Maybe it was just my local meta with Dark Eldar, I didn't spend as much time on the internet talking tactics back then as I do now.
And... I can't say that I believe you about 3rd and 4th, from what I've read. Stories about Rhino Rushes that absolutely demolish opposition with total impunity (So much that they had to change how transports work in 5th to rebalance them,) or Space Wolf Guard with unstoppable amounts of heavy weapon firepower are pretty easy to find and read about. I don't think I ever won a game against Blood Angels with my Orks. (I did tie, once, but it was literally by having so many models that he couldn't kill enough to remove me from the objectives, I could not damage him in any significant way.)
And maybe it's the local meta at my shop, (Like I said, we're not uber-competetive,) but even looking at lists online, I don't see anything that seems totally unbeatable unless you have a completely counterpicked army and refuse/lack the models to use formations. Even then, it's mostly just a couple armies that are too strong, (From what I see, mostly Tau,) and a couple armies that really aren't usable, (From what I can see, mostly Tyranids,) and everyone else is doing fine in the middle. (Not perfectly balanced, but able to play without a guaranteed loss.)
The rebalance didn't happen in 5th, it happened in 3rd via Chapter Approved, where they added the rules for assaulting from transports and access points.
I didn't have too many issues with Rhino Rush, though the Chapter Approved article certainly helped. Space Wolves with laods of heavy weapons are the same problem of any army with loads of them (Iron Warriors from the 3.5ed codex were the same). If you have enough terrain, they're not that bad. If you have too little, they blow you off the table. The solution was adding more terrain to the game.
Both of those were both not as bad as you're making out, nor as bad as 40k has gotten now. Making a few more bits of terrain isn't the same as 90% of the Tyranid codex being unfeildable garbage.
DarkBlack wrote: There seems to be a lot of "NO!!! GW is terrible and can do nothing right till they: give my codex x/go in the direction I want". Worse still, there is some: "GW can never get better because they *insert grudge*".
Prices are bad, 40k is a mess and AoS did not launch well.
If 40k 8th is bad, I'm out. The point is that they are working on the problem though.
AoS is currently doing well and growing, because GW took note and changed what needed changing.
GW is not going in the direction you (or I) want; they are going in the direction that suits them and they have every right to. I the new direction does not suit you then it's up to you to change, not GW. Insisting that anyone does things MY WAY is childish and engaging with that mentality is fruitless.
Yeah GW going their own way sure did work out well over the last decade didn't it, oh wait no ignoring customers has them circling the drain.
We've zero proof yet AoS is doing better and won't till icv2 and the half year report comes out.
And we've seen them work the problem with the ghb and that's still an unbalanced rule set so excuse us if we don't hold our breath for 8th to be a panacea for all 40k's ills.
Yeah GW going their own way sure did work out well over the last decade didn't it, oh wait no ignoring customers has them circling the drain.
We've zero proof yet AoS is doing better and won't till icv2 and the half year report comes out.
And we've seen them work the problem with the ghb and that's still an unbalanced rule set so excuse us if we don't hold our breath for 8th to be a panacea for all 40k's ills.
We're not talking about the last decade, the point of the thread is that they are moving away from that.
I said AoS is doing better after they made changes to AoS ("GW took note..."), I based that on an increase in players in clubs that had not even considered it before GHB and on interest on social media,
The balance in GHB is not perfect, but it is adequate for what AoS is intended to be.
If someone thinks that differences in power between codices did not exist in 3rd, is deluded.
If someone thinks that the extent of the difference in power between codices in 3rd is the same as in 5th, and in 5th is the same as in 7th, is severely deluded.
DarkBlack wrote: There seems to be a lot of "NO!!! GW is terrible and can do nothing right till they: give my codex x/go in the direction I want".
If you are really into your 40k, you usually have a couple armies on the go at least.
What becomes an irritant is when say your second army has such a difference in power level they collect dust.
It isn't just that my wolfy-wolf army is not wolfy enough, it is important they can last 3 turns or so against Eldar or Tau (or insert an codex flavor of the month.
Worse still, there is some: "GW can never get better because they *insert grudge*".
Some of us have long histories with GW.
They have done fantastic things in the past, there is a tendency to ask why they do not keep track of the good and bad "lessons learned"?
Usually, people have so much invested in the game and can see many easy ways to improve the current state of affairs.
It would not be a "grudge" more like, "you got it right before, what is wrong now?".
Prices are bad, 40k is a mess and AoS did not launch well.
Prices had been prohibitive for new players and people like me who have been around a bit would REALLY like to see new players.
40k codex/rules are clunky and lack balance.
The rules can afford to streamline a bit (remove a few and less random).
AoS: I have no special interest in this: rarely played fantasy, but I can see the rage of throwing out the old system and messing up most people's fantasy armies.
I hear the rules are getting tweaked, so it may work out in the end, rules-wise.
If 40k 8th is bad, I'm out. The point is that they are working on the problem though.
I think the proper words are "they are working on 8th" not necessarily "the problem".
Rules updates are usually meant to make possibly a newer more interesting game or a multitude of tweaks.
BUT it has been demonstrated in some revisions it is change for change sake to promote sales of the Big Rule Book and/or push sales on a multitude of models like for this revision, playing more Apocalypse style games rather than a squad based game.
AoS is currently doing well and growing, because GW took note and changed what needed changing.
Of course it would grow, it killed most of everything and started over: it can only improve.
The real kicker is if we could compare the sales of the old fantasy game at a BRB update vs the new AoS.
GW is not going in the direction you (or I) want; they are going in the direction that suits them and they have every right to. I the new direction does not suit you then it's up to you to change, not GW.
"Voice of customer" is usually a driving force for any company.
It is important to try to find a way to go in the direction that suits them AND their customers.
Failing to heed that is foolish for a company and it is good that their customer base is willing to express their wants and preferences.
My prior "mature" response to them doing things their way was to not buy their stuff.
Insisting that anyone does things MY WAY is childish and engaging with that mentality is fruitless.
It is my money to spend.
They supposedly aim their product at hobbyists like myself.
GW was not producing things "my way" so I stopped buying.
Now they changed and are making a few things "my way" and I am buying again.
I see nothing childish about this and GW is "engaging" with their customer base who turned away a bit more.
I see nothing fruitless with the olive branch they are extending here.
I fully expect to see their annual financial report to reflect this.
DarkBlack wrote: Talizvar; I agree, but you're not the kind of person I was referring to.
Good to know there was a target for those notes.
I would just expect that a very emotional tirade against GW would be as well considered as with any other company: raging customers with no logical basis for their complaint = ignore.
I would focus on pointing out how helpful criticism can be fielded with the hopes for change.
I have found through the years the #1 effective means for change is hitting them in the pocket book: give them no money and they correct their issues rather quickly or die as a company.
Usually accompanied by some communication to this affect and some suggestions on how they can get your money in the future.
I rather fear for GW, every time they get it really wrong some of us eventually say to ourselves "aw, forget it" and go hunt down another game.
We are spoiled for choice lately and many players may not come back to them.
I am rather invested in this game way too much and have trouble fighting my feelings of entitlement.
Anyone who has played their games for a decade or two could easily point to how the "golden years" worked and how the last few years had not.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Zywus wrote: Perhaps because you were referring to a straw man?
Zywus wrote:Perhaps because you were referring to a straw man?
Spoiler:
Trondheim wrote:No they have not gotten any better, considering the insane prices, the less than stellar rules and their whole skulls on skulls on wolfes with skulls policy
AllSeeingSkink wrote:Well they killed WHFB just over a year ago, so it's going to take more than 1 year of incremental improvements before they ever see my money again.
Add to that...
- Prices are higher than ever, especially if, like me, you live in Australia (and say a prayer for those poor bastards in New Zealand).
- 40k is still a bloated mess of a game.
- They've reintroduced board games, but they still haven't brought back any specialist games which to me added a lot of flavour to GW's range back in the day. (Necromunda, GorkaMorka, Epic, Mordheim).
So GW have improved, just not in any way that I find significant.
Traditio wrote:The price of the new Kharne the Betrayer indicates that they aren't doing all that much better.
GW has finally made its presence known on social media in the last year, making them feel like a far less bitter, backwards, and impersonal company. The recent announcement of plastic sisters on facebook is a good example of modern marketing from GW.
This is where the smoke and mirrors come in. The illusion of change. So now that GW embraces social media it shows GW has changed. A Mugger can use social media. Does that make them a good person after stealing your money?
Mitochondria wrote:They are like the cheating girlfriend who only five dudes this last weekend, instead of the eight she the weekend before.
Better in a very subjective and narrow point of view.
Fenrir Kitsune wrote:Prices still absurdly high for little plastic men, so no, they haven't gotten any better.
Slaanesh-Devotee wrote:They kicked FFG to the curb and cut me off from more Conquest. Bugger them.
RoninXiC wrote:FaQ are nice, yeah. Like 5 years late.
BUT! They do not fix the messy, faulty, bloated and still inbalanced ruleset. They're making it even worse by adding factions after factions after factions...
NOTHING changed.
Bishop F Gantry wrote:When your scraping the underside of a barrel anything will "look" better...
Untill GW produces one edition with all codices acceptably balanced and non interpretive rules all they've accomplished is a fluke.
Davor wrote:
Gitkikka wrote: Sure, I guess. They still have years of ill-will to overcome, though.
This. So much this.
Draccan wrote:
I find GW to be severely lacking...
...For a decade they have done everything to bleed their customers dry and they even bragged about it in their yearly financial reports...
I just can't get genuinely excited about GW at the moment.
And I don't agree with their business decisions...
...GW could have had a unique position and a great relationship with their customers. Instead the went the short-sighted route of raised prices and min-max all releases for years on years... to the degree their core games suffered. One can question if 40k is a game anymore, or a parade and display of miniatures.
Ventus wrote:Why would I agree that GW is better? Forgetting the terrible mess of 40K and its rules for a moment (which have yet to be fixed - awaiting the rumoured 8th ed but will that actually fix the game?) and just looking at the codex for my army what do I see? ...
Mitochondria wrote:A gak sandwich without a side of pubes...is still a gak sandwich.
Zywus wrote:Perhaps because you were referring to a straw man?
Trondheim wrote:No they have not gotten any better, considering the insane prices, the less than stellar rules and their whole skulls on skulls on wolfes with skulls policy
AllSeeingSkink wrote:Well they killed WHFB just over a year ago, so it's going to take more than 1 year of incremental improvements before they ever see my money again. Add to that...
- Prices are higher than ever, especially if, like me, you live in Australia (and say a prayer for those poor bastards in New Zealand).
- 40k is still a bloated mess of a game.
- They've reintroduced board games, but they still haven't brought back any specialist games which to me added a lot of flavour to GW's range back in the day. (Necromunda, GorkaMorka, Epic, Mordheim).
So GW have improved, just not in any way that I find significant.
Traditio wrote:The price of the new Kharne the Betrayer indicates that they aren't doing all that much better.
GW has finally made its presence known on social media in the last year, making them feel like a far less bitter, backwards, and impersonal company. The recent announcement of plastic sisters on facebook is a good example of modern marketing from GW.
This is where the smoke and mirrors come in. The illusion of change. So now that GW embraces social media it shows GW has changed. A Mugger can use social media. Does that make them a good person after stealing your money?
Mitochondria wrote:They are like the cheating girlfriend who only five dudes this last weekend, instead of the eight she the weekend before.
Better in a very subjective and narrow point of view.
Fenrir Kitsune wrote:Prices still absurdly high for little plastic men, so no, they haven't gotten any better.
Slaanesh-Devotee wrote:They kicked FFG to the curb and cut me off from more Conquest. Bugger them.
RoninXiC wrote:FaQ are nice, yeah. Like 5 years late. BUT! They do not fix the messy, faulty, bloated and still inbalanced ruleset. They're making it even worse by adding factions after factions after factions...
NOTHING changed.
Bishop F Gantry wrote:When your scraping the underside of a barrel anything will "look" better...
Untill GW produces one edition with all codices acceptably balanced and non interpretive rules all they've accomplished is a fluke.
Davor wrote:
Gitkikka wrote: Sure, I guess. They still have years of ill-will to overcome, though.
This. So much this.
Draccan wrote: I find GW to be severely lacking...
...For a decade they have done everything to bleed their customers dry and they even bragged about it in their yearly financial reports...
I just can't get genuinely excited about GW at the moment. And I don't agree with their business decisions...
...GW could have had a unique position and a great relationship with their customers. Instead the went the short-sighted route of raised prices and min-max all releases for years on years... to the degree their core games suffered. One can question if 40k is a game anymore, or a parade and display of miniatures.
Ventus wrote:Why would I agree that GW is better? Forgetting the terrible mess of 40K and its rules for a moment (which have yet to be fixed - awaiting the rumoured 8th ed but will that actually fix the game?) and just looking at the codex for my army what do I see? ...
Mitochondria wrote:A gak sandwich without a side of pubes...is still a gak sandwich.
The salt mines run deep, indeed. All joking aside, asking "can we agree that GW has gotten better in the last year?" is stupid, because short of giving away 40k minis for free, some people will NEVER change their minds, no matter how much "good" GW does.
Zywus wrote:Perhaps because you were referring to a straw man?
Trondheim wrote:No they have not gotten any better, considering the insane prices, the less than stellar rules and their whole skulls on skulls on wolfes with skulls policy
AllSeeingSkink wrote:Well they killed WHFB just over a year ago, so it's going to take more than 1 year of incremental improvements before they ever see my money again.
Add to that...
- Prices are higher than ever, especially if, like me, you live in Australia (and say a prayer for those poor bastards in New Zealand).
- 40k is still a bloated mess of a game.
- They've reintroduced board games, but they still haven't brought back any specialist games which to me added a lot of flavour to GW's range back in the day. (Necromunda, GorkaMorka, Epic, Mordheim).
So GW have improved, just not in any way that I find significant.
Traditio wrote:The price of the new Kharne the Betrayer indicates that they aren't doing all that much better.
GW has finally made its presence known on social media in the last year, making them feel like a far less bitter, backwards, and impersonal company. The recent announcement of plastic sisters on facebook is a good example of modern marketing from GW.
This is where the smoke and mirrors come in. The illusion of change. So now that GW embraces social media it shows GW has changed. A Mugger can use social media. Does that make them a good person after stealing your money?
Mitochondria wrote:They are like the cheating girlfriend who only five dudes this last weekend, instead of the eight she the weekend before.
Better in a very subjective and narrow point of view.
Fenrir Kitsune wrote:Prices still absurdly high for little plastic men, so no, they haven't gotten any better.
Slaanesh-Devotee wrote:They kicked FFG to the curb and cut me off from more Conquest. Bugger them.
RoninXiC wrote:FaQ are nice, yeah. Like 5 years late.
BUT! They do not fix the messy, faulty, bloated and still inbalanced ruleset. They're making it even worse by adding factions after factions after factions...
NOTHING changed.
Bishop F Gantry wrote:When your scraping the underside of a barrel anything will "look" better...
Untill GW produces one edition with all codices acceptably balanced and non interpretive rules all they've accomplished is a fluke.
Davor wrote:
Gitkikka wrote: Sure, I guess. They still have years of ill-will to overcome, though.
This. So much this.
Draccan wrote:
I find GW to be severely lacking...
...For a decade they have done everything to bleed their customers dry and they even bragged about it in their yearly financial reports...
I just can't get genuinely excited about GW at the moment.
And I don't agree with their business decisions...
...GW could have had a unique position and a great relationship with their customers. Instead the went the short-sighted route of raised prices and min-max all releases for years on years... to the degree their core games suffered. One can question if 40k is a game anymore, or a parade and display of miniatures.
Ventus wrote:Why would I agree that GW is better? Forgetting the terrible mess of 40K and its rules for a moment (which have yet to be fixed - awaiting the rumoured 8th ed but will that actually fix the game?) and just looking at the codex for my army what do I see? ...
Mitochondria wrote:A gak sandwich without a side of pubes...is still a gak sandwich.
The salt mines run deep, indeed. All joking aside, asking "can we agree that GW has gotten better in the last year?" is stupid, because short of giving away 40k minis for free, some people will NEVER change their minds, no matter how much "good" GW does.
To be fair (I just went through this entire thread), the people who refuse to be pleased are a minority and there are plenty of people calling them out. There will never be unanimous agreement, but the consensus seems to agree with the OP.
Zywus wrote:Perhaps because you were referring to a straw man?
Spoiler:
Trondheim wrote:No they have not gotten any better, considering the insane prices, the less than stellar rules and their whole skulls on skulls on wolfes with skulls policy
AllSeeingSkink wrote:Well they killed WHFB just over a year ago, so it's going to take more than 1 year of incremental improvements before they ever see my money again.
Add to that...
- Prices are higher than ever, especially if, like me, you live in Australia (and say a prayer for those poor bastards in New Zealand).
- 40k is still a bloated mess of a game.
- They've reintroduced board games, but they still haven't brought back any specialist games which to me added a lot of flavour to GW's range back in the day. (Necromunda, GorkaMorka, Epic, Mordheim).
So GW have improved, just not in any way that I find significant.
Traditio wrote:The price of the new Kharne the Betrayer indicates that they aren't doing all that much better.
GW has finally made its presence known on social media in the last year, making them feel like a far less bitter, backwards, and impersonal company. The recent announcement of plastic sisters on facebook is a good example of modern marketing from GW.
This is where the smoke and mirrors come in. The illusion of change. So now that GW embraces social media it shows GW has changed. A Mugger can use social media. Does that make them a good person after stealing your money?
Mitochondria wrote:They are like the cheating girlfriend who only five dudes this last weekend, instead of the eight she the weekend before.
Better in a very subjective and narrow point of view.
Fenrir Kitsune wrote:Prices still absurdly high for little plastic men, so no, they haven't gotten any better.
Slaanesh-Devotee wrote:They kicked FFG to the curb and cut me off from more Conquest. Bugger them.
RoninXiC wrote:FaQ are nice, yeah. Like 5 years late.
BUT! They do not fix the messy, faulty, bloated and still inbalanced ruleset. They're making it even worse by adding factions after factions after factions...
NOTHING changed.
Bishop F Gantry wrote:When your scraping the underside of a barrel anything will "look" better...
Untill GW produces one edition with all codices acceptably balanced and non interpretive rules all they've accomplished is a fluke.
Davor wrote:
Gitkikka wrote: Sure, I guess. They still have years of ill-will to overcome, though.
This. So much this.
Draccan wrote:
I find GW to be severely lacking...
...For a decade they have done everything to bleed their customers dry and they even bragged about it in their yearly financial reports...
I just can't get genuinely excited about GW at the moment.
And I don't agree with their business decisions...
...GW could have had a unique position and a great relationship with their customers. Instead the went the short-sighted route of raised prices and min-max all releases for years on years... to the degree their core games suffered. One can question if 40k is a game anymore, or a parade and display of miniatures.
Ventus wrote:Why would I agree that GW is better? Forgetting the terrible mess of 40K and its rules for a moment (which have yet to be fixed - awaiting the rumoured 8th ed but will that actually fix the game?) and just looking at the codex for my army what do I see? ...
Mitochondria wrote:A gak sandwich without a side of pubes...is still a gak sandwich.
I've read the thread too you know.
Obviously there are people that do not consider GW to have gotten better at this point. And mostly, those who aren't singing GW's praises for introducing a few discount boxes etc. are acknowledging that some stuff has gotten better but simply points out that these improvements matters little as long as the main issues remain unfixed.
It's disingenuous to claim that people say GW can never get better/good no matter what they do.
I personally for example, have little hope that GW will ever turn around 40K into a rules system I'd want to play again. If they do though, I'll play it of course. Even if i'll probably never forgive GW for the AoS debacle.
Zywus wrote:Perhaps because you were referring to a straw man?
Spoiler:
Trondheim wrote:No they have not gotten any better, considering the insane prices, the less than stellar rules and their whole skulls on skulls on wolfes with skulls policy
AllSeeingSkink wrote:Well they killed WHFB just over a year ago, so it's going to take more than 1 year of incremental improvements before they ever see my money again.
Add to that...
- Prices are higher than ever, especially if, like me, you live in Australia (and say a prayer for those poor bastards in New Zealand).
- 40k is still a bloated mess of a game.
- They've reintroduced board games, but they still haven't brought back any specialist games which to me added a lot of flavour to GW's range back in the day. (Necromunda, GorkaMorka, Epic, Mordheim).
So GW have improved, just not in any way that I find significant.
Traditio wrote:The price of the new Kharne the Betrayer indicates that they aren't doing all that much better.
GW has finally made its presence known on social media in the last year, making them feel like a far less bitter, backwards, and impersonal company. The recent announcement of plastic sisters on facebook is a good example of modern marketing from GW.
This is where the smoke and mirrors come in. The illusion of change. So now that GW embraces social media it shows GW has changed. A Mugger can use social media. Does that make them a good person after stealing your money?
Mitochondria wrote:They are like the cheating girlfriend who only five dudes this last weekend, instead of the eight she the weekend before.
Better in a very subjective and narrow point of view.
Fenrir Kitsune wrote:Prices still absurdly high for little plastic men, so no, they haven't gotten any better.
Slaanesh-Devotee wrote:They kicked FFG to the curb and cut me off from more Conquest. Bugger them.
RoninXiC wrote:FaQ are nice, yeah. Like 5 years late.
BUT! They do not fix the messy, faulty, bloated and still inbalanced ruleset. They're making it even worse by adding factions after factions after factions...
NOTHING changed.
Bishop F Gantry wrote:When your scraping the underside of a barrel anything will "look" better...
Untill GW produces one edition with all codices acceptably balanced and non interpretive rules all they've accomplished is a fluke.
Davor wrote:
Gitkikka wrote: Sure, I guess. They still have years of ill-will to overcome, though.
This. So much this.
Draccan wrote:
I find GW to be severely lacking...
...For a decade they have done everything to bleed their customers dry and they even bragged about it in their yearly financial reports...
I just can't get genuinely excited about GW at the moment.
And I don't agree with their business decisions...
...GW could have had a unique position and a great relationship with their customers. Instead the went the short-sighted route of raised prices and min-max all releases for years on years... to the degree their core games suffered. One can question if 40k is a game anymore, or a parade and display of miniatures.
Ventus wrote:Why would I agree that GW is better? Forgetting the terrible mess of 40K and its rules for a moment (which have yet to be fixed - awaiting the rumoured 8th ed but will that actually fix the game?) and just looking at the codex for my army what do I see? ...
Mitochondria wrote:A gak sandwich without a side of pubes...is still a gak sandwich.
I've read the thread too you know.
Obviously there are people that do not consider GW to have gotten better at this point. And mostly, those who aren't singing GW's praises for introducing a few discount boxes etc. are acknowledging that some stuff has gotten better but simply points out that these improvements matters little as long as the main issues remain unfixed.
It's disingenuous to claim that people say GW can never get better/good [b]no matter what they do. [/b]
I personally for example, have little hope that GW will ever turn around 40K into a rules system I'd want to play again. If they do though, I'll play it of course. Even if i'll probably never forgive GW for the AoS debacle.
Is it? I've seen PLENTY of posts on this site from users claiming that 6th was the death of 40k, then 7th, and from what I can gather/read from other users, this happened even back with 4th.
Is it that disingenuous to imagine some people are so angry at a company they'd never give them a second chance (not you, specifically)?
It's been stated that prices will never be reduced in Australia and New Zealand, instead they have increased. It's wonderful some of you think this is an improvement, but here it still just means people look at the price and say the hobby is too expensive.
You can try and justify it with all the crap you can come up with, it makes zero difference when you can't play the game because you have no opponents.
I thought we'd covered that any of us discussing prices that don't have an Australian or NZ flag were talking about our price market. In which GW has generally gotten cheaper and more accessible.
Zywus wrote:Perhaps because you were referring to a straw man?
Spoiler:
Trondheim wrote:No they have not gotten any better, considering the insane prices, the less than stellar rules and their whole skulls on skulls on wolfes with skulls policy
AllSeeingSkink wrote:Well they killed WHFB just over a year ago, so it's going to take more than 1 year of incremental improvements before they ever see my money again.
Add to that...
- Prices are higher than ever, especially if, like me, you live in Australia (and say a prayer for those poor bastards in New Zealand).
- 40k is still a bloated mess of a game.
- They've reintroduced board games, but they still haven't brought back any specialist games which to me added a lot of flavour to GW's range back in the day. (Necromunda, GorkaMorka, Epic, Mordheim).
So GW have improved, just not in any way that I find significant.
Traditio wrote:The price of the new Kharne the Betrayer indicates that they aren't doing all that much better.
GW has finally made its presence known on social media in the last year, making them feel like a far less bitter, backwards, and impersonal company. The recent announcement of plastic sisters on facebook is a good example of modern marketing from GW.
This is where the smoke and mirrors come in. The illusion of change. So now that GW embraces social media it shows GW has changed. A Mugger can use social media. Does that make them a good person after stealing your money?
Mitochondria wrote:They are like the cheating girlfriend who only five dudes this last weekend, instead of the eight she the weekend before.
Better in a very subjective and narrow point of view.
Fenrir Kitsune wrote:Prices still absurdly high for little plastic men, so no, they haven't gotten any better.
Slaanesh-Devotee wrote:They kicked FFG to the curb and cut me off from more Conquest. Bugger them.
RoninXiC wrote:FaQ are nice, yeah. Like 5 years late.
BUT! They do not fix the messy, faulty, bloated and still inbalanced ruleset. They're making it even worse by adding factions after factions after factions...
NOTHING changed.
Bishop F Gantry wrote:When your scraping the underside of a barrel anything will "look" better...
Untill GW produces one edition with all codices acceptably balanced and non interpretive rules all they've accomplished is a fluke.
Davor wrote:
Gitkikka wrote: Sure, I guess. They still have years of ill-will to overcome, though.
This. So much this.
Draccan wrote:
I find GW to be severely lacking...
...For a decade they have done everything to bleed their customers dry and they even bragged about it in their yearly financial reports...
I just can't get genuinely excited about GW at the moment.
And I don't agree with their business decisions...
...GW could have had a unique position and a great relationship with their customers. Instead the went the short-sighted route of raised prices and min-max all releases for years on years... to the degree their core games suffered. One can question if 40k is a game anymore, or a parade and display of miniatures.
Ventus wrote:Why would I agree that GW is better? Forgetting the terrible mess of 40K and its rules for a moment (which have yet to be fixed - awaiting the rumoured 8th ed but will that actually fix the game?) and just looking at the codex for my army what do I see? ...
Mitochondria wrote:A gak sandwich without a side of pubes...is still a gak sandwich.
I've read the thread too you know.
Obviously there are people that do not consider GW to have gotten better at this point. And mostly, those who aren't singing GW's praises for introducing a few discount boxes etc. are acknowledging that some stuff has gotten better but simply points out that these improvements matters little as long as the main issues remain unfixed.
It's disingenuous to claim that people say GW can never get better/good [b]no matter what they do. [/b]
I personally for example, have little hope that GW will ever turn around 40K into a rules system I'd want to play again. If they do though, I'll play it of course. Even if i'll probably never forgive GW for the AoS debacle.
Is it? I've seen PLENTY of posts on this site from users claiming that 6th was the death of 40k, then 7th, and from what I can gather/read from other users, this happened even back with 4th.
Is it that disingenuous to imagine some people are so angry at a company they'd never give them a second chance (not you, specifically)?
Every edition sees people quitting the game since it takes it into a direction they don't agree with (which is simply the way of things). Some return in later editions, some never does.
There is a difference between quitting a game you don't like and refusing to give a company a second chance even after they've demonstrated that they've gotten the game right.
Even if 4th or 6th edition was the death of 40K to someone. That hypothetical player would be prepared to come back if 8th ed matches what they're looking for in a game. They won't give GW a second chance until they show they've learned to make a decent game and neither should they. But that doesn't mean there's nothing GW could do in order to win them back. There are of course people whom it doesn't make financial sense for GW to make the changes necessary needed to bring them back, but it's theoretically possible.
Has GW gotten better? Well I already said what I did there, but now seeing Planetary Onslaught, I swear Kirby is at the helm right now or whispered in the CEOs ear.
More proof of GW being Smoke and Mirrors? Didn't see the price for Planetary Onslaught but for GW to keep selling and regurgitating rules just seems like something Kirby would do. So same old GW showing their colours now?
Especially so close to a new edition. Didn't they do this in 6th edition combine two books nobody liked and then 7th came along invalidating the books? Stronghold Assault or something like that?
Every edition sees people quitting the game since it takes it into a direction they don't agree with (which is simply the way of things). Some return in later editions, some never does.
There is a difference between quitting a game you don't like and refusing to give a company a second chance even after they've demonstrated that they've gotten the game right.
Even if 4th or 6th edition was the death of 40K to someone. That hypothetical player would be prepared to come back if 8th ed matches what they're looking for in a game. They won't give GW a second chance until they show they've learned to make a decent game and neither should they. But that doesn't mean there's nothing GW could do in order to win them back. There are of course people whom it doesn't make financial sense for GW to make the changes necessary needed to bring them back, but it's theoretically possible.
Okay? Case in point, World of Warcraft has been dropping in players recently. The newest expansion, Legion, has been hugely successful and reinvigorated the player base. And yet, here's three threads from people saying it'll suck.
jreilly89 wrote: Is it? I've seen PLENTY of posts on this site from users claiming that 6th was the death of 40k, then 7th, and from what I can gather/read from other users, this happened even back with 4th.
Is it that disingenuous to imagine some people are so angry at a company they'd never give them a second chance (not you, specifically)?
GW has "gotten better" but for some: not where it matters.
I would say the greatest impact to 40k are those who quietly lose interest and get distracted by the various fabulous tabletop games out there.
6th and 7th are a bit hard to point to for a trend: they are not all that different and I think 6th and 7th are the closest BRB release dates we have seen to date.
I am unsure where people would have claimed 4th edition would be the death of 40k.
It was like an enhancement of the 3rd edition rules with all the "Chapter approved" stuff that was released.
The 4th edition vs 5th edition boils down to moving away from a tight tournament ruleset to casual so it really depends on where your gameplay preference lie.
6th and 7th only continues the trend almost to the max.
I would say the "anger" camp are the people who have much GW product and the game rules have evolved to something they do not like.
I would suspect for the "slightly competitive" would be the most upset.
The VERY competitive will just buy the best army and take it to the max no matter what the rules so it kinda has little impact on them.
You are left with those who like casual play and it works as long as you negotiate what "casual" means.
Being able to field whatever you want with no real balance in points makes for some extremely strange power level games.
The pivotal point in this discussion is if "pickup' games for mild "competitive" people and the mild "casual" folks can pick what they want as middle of the road and no-one gets tabled.
That requires us waiting for the BRB and the requisite Codex changes.
The model collecting folks will be just fine.
The models are good, there is a little less derp to any releases lately so all is well.
The mini-games will make people happy that wanted to "try" 40k but did not want to build/buy an entire army.
That too is going quite well.
Every edition sees people quitting the game since it takes it into a direction they don't agree with (which is simply the way of things). Some return in later editions, some never does.
There is a difference between quitting a game you don't like and refusing to give a company a second chance even after they've demonstrated that they've gotten the game right.
Even if 4th or 6th edition was the death of 40K to someone. That hypothetical player would be prepared to come back if 8th ed matches what they're looking for in a game. They won't give GW a second chance until they show they've learned to make a decent game and neither should they. But that doesn't mean there's nothing GW could do in order to win them back. There are of course people whom it doesn't make financial sense for GW to make the changes necessary needed to bring them back, but it's theoretically possible.
Okay? Case in point, World of Warcraft has been dropping in players recently. The newest expansion, Legion, has been hugely successful and reinvigorated the player base. And yet, here's three threads from people saying it'll suck.
C'mon man, it's not that hard to imagine that even if GW fixed EVERYTHING, there'd still be some salty players refusing to admit it.
Neither GW nor Blizzard can fix everything for everyone at the same time, because people have different conceptions on what "everything" is that needs to be fixed. That's not the same thing as people being unwilling to play the game regardless of changes. For many WoW players, Legion apparently was a change that they agreed with, but not all. Had a different expansion been made, there would presumably still be people saying it sucked but it would (partly) be different people.
A game can never be what exactly what every player wants simultaneously. You can appeal both to player A and to player B. But maybe not both at the same time.
Zywus wrote:Perhaps because you were referring to a straw man?
Trondheim wrote:No they have not gotten any better, considering the insane prices, the less than stellar rules and their whole skulls on skulls on wolfes with skulls policy
AllSeeingSkink wrote:Well they killed WHFB just over a year ago, so it's going to take more than 1 year of incremental improvements before they ever see my money again. Add to that...
- Prices are higher than ever, especially if, like me, you live in Australia (and say a prayer for those poor bastards in New Zealand).
- 40k is still a bloated mess of a game.
- They've reintroduced board games, but they still haven't brought back any specialist games which to me added a lot of flavour to GW's range back in the day. (Necromunda, GorkaMorka, Epic, Mordheim).
So GW have improved, just not in any way that I find significant.
Traditio wrote:The price of the new Kharne the Betrayer indicates that they aren't doing all that much better.
GW has finally made its presence known on social media in the last year, making them feel like a far less bitter, backwards, and impersonal company. The recent announcement of plastic sisters on facebook is a good example of modern marketing from GW.
This is where the smoke and mirrors come in. The illusion of change. So now that GW embraces social media it shows GW has changed. A Mugger can use social media. Does that make them a good person after stealing your money?
Mitochondria wrote:They are like the cheating girlfriend who only five dudes this last weekend, instead of the eight she the weekend before.
Better in a very subjective and narrow point of view.
Fenrir Kitsune wrote:Prices still absurdly high for little plastic men, so no, they haven't gotten any better.
Slaanesh-Devotee wrote:They kicked FFG to the curb and cut me off from more Conquest. Bugger them.
RoninXiC wrote:FaQ are nice, yeah. Like 5 years late. BUT! They do not fix the messy, faulty, bloated and still inbalanced ruleset. They're making it even worse by adding factions after factions after factions...
NOTHING changed.
Bishop F Gantry wrote:When your scraping the underside of a barrel anything will "look" better...
Untill GW produces one edition with all codices acceptably balanced and non interpretive rules all they've accomplished is a fluke.
Davor wrote:
Gitkikka wrote: Sure, I guess. They still have years of ill-will to overcome, though.
This. So much this.
Draccan wrote: I find GW to be severely lacking...
...For a decade they have done everything to bleed their customers dry and they even bragged about it in their yearly financial reports...
I just can't get genuinely excited about GW at the moment. And I don't agree with their business decisions...
...GW could have had a unique position and a great relationship with their customers. Instead the went the short-sighted route of raised prices and min-max all releases for years on years... to the degree their core games suffered. One can question if 40k is a game anymore, or a parade and display of miniatures.
Ventus wrote:Why would I agree that GW is better? Forgetting the terrible mess of 40K and its rules for a moment (which have yet to be fixed - awaiting the rumoured 8th ed but will that actually fix the game?) and just looking at the codex for my army what do I see? ...
Mitochondria wrote:A gak sandwich without a side of pubes...is still a gak sandwich.
The salt mines run deep, indeed. All joking aside, asking "can we agree that GW has gotten better in the last year?" is stupid, because short of giving away 40k minis for free, some people will NEVER change their minds, no matter how much "good" GW does.
To be fair (I just went through this entire thread), the people who refuse to be pleased are a minority and there are plenty of people calling them out.
Calling them out? Get off your high horse. You are strawmanning yourself in to the ground. Peoples' reasoning for not thinking GW have improved run deeper than your silly stating...
DarkBlack wrote: There seems to be a lot of "NO!!! GW is terrible and can do nothing right till they: give my codex x/go in the direction I want". Worse still, there is some: "GW can never get better because they *insert grudge*".
...
Insisting that anyone does things MY WAY is childish and engaging with that mentality is fruitless.
And then going on to quote people who made legitimate and well thought out reasons for feeling GW haven't really improved.
You created a strawman, pulled it down and now are acting like that strawman was the argument people were making. Stop. Please.
Sure, some people will never be happy.... but for feth's sake don't act like most people don't have good reasons for not being happy or not thinking GW are improving with silly arguments like that.
I think the answer to the OP's question is "no, we can't agree because different people have different metrics for judging improvement".
I think most people's metrics are similar we want more reasonable prices so the game starts growing again, and a balanced rule set that's not destroyed by codex power creep.
Current army deals compared to the early 2000's are a joke it's a token move, rules for recent games have all been bad it's actually painful watching people play lost patrol for example.
Until those things are fixed my money goes to their competition.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: I think the answer to the OP's question is "no, we can't agree because different people have different metrics for judging improvement".
That there is the point, saying that MY metric is the only on that matters is what I'm calling out. There are several metrics for improvement and each metric is more important to some and less important to others. Sure.
Refusing to acknowledge that there has been any improvement because your particular metric was not addressed is not helpful. I'm not saying you have to be happy with the state of things or say that GW is perfect now, but they have been doing better. Simply dismissing that is salty and toxic.
I like how they went to the old White Dwarf format, introducing new factions, return of specialist games (still waiting) and so on.
But price is still a big issue, you can use all the honey to try and lure me, but if smaller companies can make comparable quality sculpts/kits in a lower price range, then i will rarely buy GW stuff.
Jehan-reznor wrote: I like how they went to the old White Dwarf format, introducing new factions, return of specialist games (still waiting) and so on.
But price is still a big issue, you can use all the honey to try and lure me, but if smaller companies can make comparable quality sculpts/kits in a lower price range, then i will rarely buy GW stuff.
Or instead of having cheaper prices, actually make it worth paying the prices GW ask for. Sadly I don't find the value that GW asks for so therefore it needs lower prices because the value is not there.
hobojebus wrote: I think most people's metrics are similar we want more reasonable prices so the game starts growing again, and a balanced rule set that's not destroyed by codex power creep.
Current army deals compared to the early 2000's are a joke it's a token move, rules for recent games have all been bad it's actually painful watching people play lost patrol for example.
Until those things are fixed my money goes to their competition.
Isn't Lost Patrol more like the ONLY recent game with bad rules? Silver Tower, Gorechosen, Calth, Execution Force... all have good rules, if limited in some cases.
Jehan-reznor wrote: I like how they went to the old White Dwarf format, introducing new factions, return of specialist games (still waiting) and so on.
But price is still a big issue, you can use all the honey to try and lure me, but if smaller companies can make comparable quality sculpts/kits in a lower price range, then i will rarely buy GW stuff.
Or instead of having cheaper prices, actually make it worth paying the prices GW ask for. Sadly I don't find the value that GW asks for so therefore it needs lower prices because the value is not there.
Honestly the biggest thing that bothers me about prices isn't the price for me, because I make enough money its not all that big of a deal, its just mild irritation at poor product value and unfair pricing.
The real thing that pains is that the Argonak who started playing warhammer back in the 90s could never afford it now. He'd be left out in the cold. What would that argonak do instead? I guess he'd go buy a few xwing ships and play that happily. But he'd never build up an army of dawi to fight against his good friend's undead horde. That would have been impossible.
Inflation since 2000 in US dollars is like 40%. What have GW prices done in that time? Its ludicrous.
hobojebus wrote: I think most people's metrics are similar we want more reasonable prices so the game starts growing again, and a balanced rule set that's not destroyed by codex power creep.
Current army deals compared to the early 2000's are a joke it's a token move, rules for recent games have all been bad it's actually painful watching people play lost patrol for example.
Until those things are fixed my money goes to their competition.
Isn't Lost Patrol more like the ONLY recent game with bad rules? Silver Tower, Gorechosen, Calth, Execution Force... all have good rules, if limited in some cases.
Yes. Silver Tower especially has gotten good reviews from sites like shutupandsitdown and rockpapershotgun which don't have a Gw bias one way or the other.
hobojebus wrote: I think most people's metrics are similar we want more reasonable prices so the game starts growing again, and a balanced rule set that's not destroyed by codex power creep.
Current army deals compared to the early 2000's are a joke it's a token move, rules for recent games have all been bad it's actually painful watching people play lost patrol for example.
Until those things are fixed my money goes to their competition.
Isn't Lost Patrol more like the ONLY recent game with bad rules? Silver Tower, Gorechosen, Calth, Execution Force... all have good rules, if limited in some cases.
Nope, Lost Patrol isn't the only one with questionable/bad rules - at least with my experience with Calth and Stormcloud Attack. Calth has issues with the random factor of its card mechanics & its specialist dice mechanics and Stormcloud Attack is quite unfair without a points system for the various vehicles (and the mechanics have some issues as well). Lost Patrol is the hands-down winner though for being unwinnable as the marine player. The other games are playable, but have enough internal issues that their acceptable play value is short-lived. I'd say the rules are "phoned in" - they are clearly designed to sell on the models, and the rules just give you something to do with the box contents.
Would certainly agree that GW have gotten a lot better. As the OP mentioned, many of the new lines have been solid releases both model and rules-wise though they still do stink a little of a classic GW cash-grab.
The wide range of board games that they've brought out have also been nice to see, giving players new ways to get into or enjoy the hobby, and have normally come at fantastic value. Speaking of value, many of the recent releases and box sets (thinking of kill team in particular) have been exceptionally good value for money.
I'm mostly just happy that they "fixed" Age of Sigmar. I still don't forgive GW for abandoning traditional Warhammer - and won't until more people start playing Kings of War or 9th Age in my area - but it's good to have a solid and widely-used ruleset for my fantasy models and, I must admit, the ability to pretty much field anything and everything in games has allowed me to use the numerous miscellaneous models I have knocking about...
Here's a though: if GW has gone 5 steps back with the last 6 years or so of games, 6 months of 2 steps forward shouldn't earn accolades. Granted steps forward are steps forward, but I'm waiting for them to at least be on an even keel with where they were before I start patting their backs, OR their wallets.
The Shadow wrote: The wide range of board games that they've brought out have also been nice to see, giving players new ways to get into or enjoy the hobby, and have normally come at fantastic value. Speaking of value, many of the recent releases and box sets (thinking of kill team in particular) have been exceptionally good value for money.
The 'good' value for money of the new sets like Start Collection is still subjective based on considering those prices in the vacuum of GW only. Once you look at what they get you relative to an actual army, and compared to the competition, they're still terribly expensive. Not to mention it's an illusion to new people - once they've started with these cheaper introductory products, the other products are more expensive than ever.
You keep saying that but outside of some outliers like Kharn in genreal newer kits are cheaper or the same price as the current range. Example would be the acolytes and deathwatch. 2 years ago those kits would have been $50 and now they are coming out at 35-40.
Also I'd argue that AoS getting started do provide solid value. Generally being between 25% and 50% of a tournamen level list.
If you're talking about Australia and nz again then I canthink say but it's currently solidly cheaper on new releases than it has been and the upward pricing seems to have finally peaked and started to slowly roll back.
Hulksmash wrote: You keep saying that but outside of some outliers like Kharn in genreal newer kits are cheaper or the same price as the current range. Example would be the acolytes and deathwatch. 2 years ago those kits would have been $50 and now they are coming out at 35-40.
$50 is the Terminator price, Deathwatch never would have come out at $50 unless you can show me a similar kit for that price?
It's a 2 full size sprue kit elite infantry kit, so your comparison would probably be something like the Grey Knight models which are $33. Devestators are $46, but they're a 3 full size sprue kit (as are Terminators). Assault Marines are $41 for 2 sprues, but GW seem to classify them as larger models so charge more for them, the comparable Deathwatch equivalent is $45 but comes with a small upgrade sprue. The Ad Mech 5 man squads are $41 and $46, I'm not sure if they're slightly larger sprues. Harlequins dance in at $40 for 6. Then you have crazy stuff like Wulfen, $60 for 5 models, though I guess it's at least 3 sprues but it's still terrible.
That's just the ~5 man elite units. Monopose characters have been coming out at $30 for a single sprue model which is more expensive than resin, plastic or metal characters used to be. The old plastic Space Marine Commander came out on 2 small plastic sprues with actual options and not monopose and currently is on GW's site for only $22. The old Orc Warboss kit is $30 and comes with parts to make 2 models, a mounted Warboss and one on foot including weapon options and a BSB option.
Looking around I think the best you could say is they've plateaued, but plateaued at a high price and still have the odd outlier crazy priced kit.
I'm not that familiar with the Genestealer Cult models, but acolytes are $40 for a 5 man unit with 2 sprues, so I guess that'd put them on par with Scions that were $35 for 5 man sized elites on 2 sprues.
The Neophytes are $40 for 10 models on 2 sprues, I'm trying to think what GW have released more than a year ago that would compare to that.
Vulkite Berzerkers are 10 models on 3 sprues, but I try and not draw comparisons between 40k and AoS because it seems like maybe GW went for a lower model count with AoS which would justify a higher relative price (of course it's higher relative to something that's already really quite expensive so it definitely doesn't look good).
EDIT: Not all sprues are the same size, but generally I think GW sprues designed to fit in the same sized box tend to be similar size.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: I'm not that familiar with the Genestealer Cult models, but acolytes are $40 for a 5 man unit with 2 sprues, so I guess that'd put them on par with Scions that were $35 for 5 man sized elites on 2 sprues.
The Neophytes are $40 for 10 models on 2 sprues, I'm trying to think what GW have released more than a year ago that would compare to that.
Vulkite Berzerkers are 10 models on 3 sprues, but I try and not draw comparisons between 40k and AoS because it seems like maybe GW went for a lower model count with AoS which would justify a higher relative price (of course it's higher relative to something that's already really quite expensive so it definitely doesn't look good).
EDIT: Not all sprues are the same size, but generally I think GW sprues designed to fit in the same sized box tend to be similar size.
Except the Scions were a 2014 release and GW as sending prices skyrocketing with each new release. Also the Hybrids are larger than normal human models. A closer comparison would be the Sicarian Ruststalkers for $46US.
If you want an exact apples to apples comparison. Archaon and the Varanguard last year were $165 and $100 respectively. The recent Ironjaw release saw the Mawcrusher for $110 and the Gore-gruntas for $79. Same model count, same size sprues and sprue counts in each comparable kit.
Prices have been trending downward from their peaks of last year.
Hulksmash wrote: You keep saying that but outside of some outliers like Kharn in genreal newer kits are cheaper or the same price as the current range. Example would be the acolytes and deathwatch. 2 years ago those kits would have been $50 and now they are coming out at 35-40.
$50 is the Terminator price, Deathwatch never would have come out at $50 unless you can show me a similar kit for that price?
It's a 2 full size sprue kit elite infantry kit, so your comparison would probably be something like the Grey Knight models which are $33. Devestators are $46, but they're a 3 full size sprue kit (as are Terminators). Assault Marines are $41 for 2 sprues, but GW seem to classify them as larger models so charge more for them, the comparable Deathwatch equivalent is $45 but comes with a small upgrade sprue. The Ad Mech 5 man squads are $41 and $46, I'm not sure if they're slightly larger sprues. Harlequins dance in at $40 for 6. Then you have crazy stuff like Wulfen, $60 for 5 models, though I guess it's at least 3 sprues but it's still terrible.
That's just the ~5 man elite units. Monopose characters have been coming out at $30 for a single sprue model which is more expensive than resin, plastic or metal characters used to be. The old plastic Space Marine Commander came out on 2 small plastic sprues with actual options and not monopose and currently is on GW's site for only $22. The old Orc Warboss kit is $30 and comes with parts to make 2 models, a mounted Warboss and one on foot including weapon options and a BSB option.
Looking around I think the best you could say is they've plateaued, but plateaued at a high price and still have the odd outlier crazy priced kit.
The most direct comparison to Deathwatch (and the kit he was most likely referring to) are Sternguard, which are $50 for two sprues. That's why the Deathwatch price was a pleasant surprise.
silent25 wrote: Except the Scions were a 2014 release and GW as sending prices skyrocketing with each new release. Also the Hybrids are larger than normal human models. A closer comparison would be the Sicarian Ruststalkers for $46US.
The Sicarians are on 40mm bases and the Acolytes on 32mm bases, I don't think they're all that great of a comparison.
If you want an exact apples to apples comparison. Archaon and the Varanguard last year were $165 and $100 respectively. The recent Ironjaw release saw the Mawcrusher for $110 and the Gore-gruntas for $79. Same model count, same size sprues and sprue counts in each comparable kit.
True. Though perhaps I was a bit simplistic in my previous post, GW's pricing system has never at any point in history been simple, things like how imposing the finished model looks and how many points it's worth also play in to how much they end up charging for stuff. Maybe GW have decided the prices of those things were way too whacky or maybe their pricing formula just resulted in the Orcs coming out cheaper.
It's unfortunate GW don't reduce the prices on kits because it would be nice to see them knock $20 off the Wulfen (or whatever) if they've realised they priced them stupidly to begin with.
It's also unfortunate that they've completely messed up their regional pricing and that even their good deals like Start Collecting boxes aren't really all that cheap in the grand scheme of things (only cheap next to other GW models).
Who reeally cares how many sprues are in a box? half of the parts aren't even used for one of the two possible builds.
So thats 50$ for 5 miniatures.
5 plastic miniatures.
RoninXiC wrote: Who reeally cares how many sprues are in a box? half of the parts aren't even used for one of the two possible builds.
So thats 50$ for 5 miniatures.
5 plastic miniatures.
No really, 50$ for 5 plastic miniatures.
Yet you are obviously willed to shell out 40 $ for 3 (three) resin minis as well... so pricing don't seem to be the overall problem ..
Honestly I will pay more for plastic than any other material. Ease of assembly, avoidance of misscasts air bubbles etc and of course ease of conversion makes plastic a far better material for me. I'm not going to buy Leman Russ, but if they recast it in plastic and charged more, I probably would. It would be easy to fix that problematic leg.
SKR.HH wrote: May I ask why? When painted and in the cabinet I actually don't see the material in itself anymore.
Sure you do. Well-cast resin models will always look better than plastic. Plastic will always look better than finecast (not that you'd ever have a successfully built and painted finecast model). The higher costs of superior materials translate to increased costs. And then there's the willingness to produce the model in the first place. If I have a choice of paying more for superior materials vs. not getting the model at all because the profit margin isn't good enough to put it into production then I'll pay it.
SKR.HH wrote: May I ask why? When painted and in the cabinet I actually don't see the material in itself anymore.
Sure you do. Well-cast resin models will always look better than plastic. Plastic will always look better than finecast (not that you'd ever have a successfully built and painted finecast model). The higher costs of superior materials translate to increased costs. And then there's the willingness to produce the model in the first place. If I have a choice of paying more for superior materials vs. not getting the model at all because the profit margin isn't good enough to put it into production then I'll pay it.
The material itself won't make a better model. A better sculpt will make a better model. Crappy design in good material still results in a crappy model.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Chikout wrote: Honestly I will pay more for plastic than any other material. Ease of assembly, avoidance of misscasts air bubbles etc and of course ease of conversion makes plastic a far better material for me. I'm not going to buy Leman Russ, but if they recast it in plastic and charged more, I probably would. It would be easy to fix that problematic leg.
SKR.HH wrote: The material itself won't make a better model. A better sculpt will make a better model. Crappy design in good material still results in a crappy model.
It absolutely will make a better model, if you're using its full potential. Resin can give a higher level of detail than plastic (at least with GW's production methods, high-end historical kits get a lot closer to the level of resin) because of how the casting process works. Finecast models will always be trash, no matter how good the original design is, because the material is so terrible.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Chikout wrote: Honestly I will pay more for plastic than any other material. Ease of assembly, avoidance of misscasts air bubbles etc and of course ease of conversion makes plastic a far better material for me. I'm not going to buy Leman Russ, but if they recast it in plastic and charged more, I probably would. It would be easy to fix that problematic leg.
IMO the ease of assembly with plastic is incredibly overstated. It's easy if you're a 10 year old tearing parts off the spure and blobbing them together with a whole bucket of glue. If you're trying to clean up mold lines, fill gaps, etc, and get a high-quality finished product you're going to be spending quite a bit of effort on assembly. This is especially true since many GW kits seem to have very loose tolerances, which makes them easier for the 10 year old to "assemble" even if something is misaligned a bit but leaves obvious gaps that have to be filled. And no matter what you do the final level of detail is going to be lacking. Leman Russ in plastic would not look as good as the resin model.
I have so many resin minis where I had to clean and repair because of that *superior* material that I'll gladly take hard plastic instead even though it might have it's limitation in detailing.
SKR.HH wrote: I have so many resin minis where I had to clean and repair because of that *superior* material that I'll gladly take hard plastic instead even though it might have it's limitation in detailing.
Similarly, I have so many GW plastic kits that I've had to invest way too much time in cleaning up to an acceptable standard. If I'm going to spend a lot of time and effort on fixing flaws either way at least give me the resin model that looks better once it's finished.
I don't know what you had to do but I must remove some mold lines (which is IMO *tons* easier than with resin) and the connection to the sprue (sorry can't remeber the correct translation for "Angussgrat" ). Occasionally a little bit of liquid greenstuff.
All of this I usually have to do with resin as well.
But with latest GW releases I didn't have to
1. fill bubble holes
2. bend any spears, swords, guns into shape
3. fill any mayor gaps (so no need to work with Green Stuff)
4. pin the model to enhance the connection between two parts
5. Clean excessive resin films
6. Clean of release agent.
7. worry about mould slipage <-- this definitely ruined some minis for me as it was so evident that *I* couldn't salvage it...
SKR.HH wrote: I don't know what you had to do but I must remove some mold lines (which is IMO *tons* easier than with resin) and the connection to the sprue (sorry can't remeber the correct translation for "Angussgrat" ). Occasionally a little bit of liquid greenstuff.
Mold lines everywhere, often in complex detail areas where removing the mold lines cleanly is a huge pain. Large gaps between parts that require green stuffing (liquid or otherwise) and sanding. Warped parts that don't fit properly and only get more warped if you try to put them in hot water. Go try cleaning up the mold lines on the tracks for a Chimera or LRBT and tell me that plastic kits are "easy to assemble". I've had entire FW resin tank kits that took less cleanup work than those tracks.
Those are older kits. Newer GW plastic stuff is second to none and has insane detail. Obviously still not quite as sharp as resin but looking at the new Genestealer Cult models for example, they're truly astounding technically.
These models are how old? Yes, the Landraider and the Rhinos show their age.
But newer kits are way better. I build the complete GSC from the Overkill box and only had to do some greenstuffing on two or three minis. I build the Ork Bomma and my SM guppy flier and didn't need to do any major clean ups at all.
hobojebus wrote: I think most people's metrics are similar we want more reasonable prices so the game starts growing again, and a balanced rule set that's not destroyed by codex power creep.
Current army deals compared to the early 2000's are a joke it's a token move, rules for recent games have all been bad it's actually painful watching people play lost patrol for example.
Until those things are fixed my money goes to their competition.
Isn't Lost Patrol more like the ONLY recent game with bad rules? Silver Tower, Gorechosen, Calth, Execution Force... all have good rules, if limited in some cases.
Nope, Lost Patrol isn't the only one with questionable/bad rules - at least with my experience with Calth and Stormcloud Attack. Calth has issues with the random factor of its card mechanics & its specialist dice mechanics and Stormcloud Attack is quite unfair without a points system for the various vehicles (and the mechanics have some issues as well). Lost Patrol is the hands-down winner though for being unwinnable as the marine player. The other games are playable, but have enough internal issues that their acceptable play value is short-lived. I'd say the rules are "phoned in" - they are clearly designed to sell on the models, and the rules just give you something to do with the box contents.
The number of missions in the Assassin game is ridiculously low. Just compare with old games like heroquest. There, there was the plan of having a game, with a full story.
Not an excuse to sell models.
SKR.HH wrote: I have so many resin minis where I had to clean and repair because of that *superior* material that I'll gladly take hard plastic instead even though it might have it's limitation in detailing.
Similarly, I have so many GW plastic kits that I've had to invest way too much time in cleaning up to an acceptable standard. If I'm going to spend a lot of time and effort on fixing flaws either way at least give me the resin model that looks better once it's finished.
You must be unlucky with the kits you buy. I remember the old school rhino being an absolute nightmare to put together but in the last five years I have not had a single problem with any kit I have bought from Gw beyond the odd moldline. Gaps tend to be hairline and usually well hidden. They sometimes need a tiny dollop of green stuff.
Ultimately though it is down to personal taste. If you feel that the casting quality of resin is more valuable than the preparation problems then thats fine. For me I have stayed away from companies like corvus belli because of how much difficulty I have had with metal in the past.
SKR.HH wrote: These models are how old? Yes, the Landraider and the Rhinos show their age.
But newer kits are way better. I build the complete GSC from the Overkill box and only had to do some greenstuffing on two or three minis. I build the Ork Bomma and my SM guppy flier and didn't need to do any major clean ups at all.
I have some CSM Raptors I assembled from the dual raptors/warp talons kit released a few years ago. While it's a pretty good kit, some mold lines in there are certainly worthy of concern.
I have also seen some resin chinese knock-offs of that very same kit, the casting quality looked pretty much the same and the mold lines were less severe. Just sayin'.
The Shadow wrote: The wide range of board games that they've brought out have also been nice to see, giving players new ways to get into or enjoy the hobby, and have normally come at fantastic value. Speaking of value, many of the recent releases and box sets (thinking of kill team in particular) have been exceptionally good value for money.
The 'good' value for money of the new sets like Start Collection is still subjective based on considering those prices in the vacuum of GW only. Once you look at what they get you relative to an actual army, and compared to the competition, they're still terribly expensive. Not to mention it's an illusion to new people - once they've started with these cheaper introductory products, the other products are more expensive than ever.
Very true, but I am thinking less of the "Start Collecting" boxes and more of the board games and expansions. I do agree that, depending on the models, the Start Collecting boxes aren't necessarily very good for actually starting to collect but, even so, the Age of Sigmar ones all have a useable army for AoS and you do save money off buying the units individually - when Battalions and the like starting disappearing, I was worried that GW had done with the concept altogether, so I'm glad to see them back in some form, even if they aren't always the best starting point (though the Battalions and Battleforces weren't always either)
As I say, my reference to value is mostly aimed at the expansions. Take Kill Team for example. For £40 you get two squads of models, the rules for the main game and rules for an expansion (plus dice and other stuff if I recall). Now, you could argue that £40 for twenty plastic men and some paper is expensive, compared to cheaper models companies who provide their rules for free, but the sad truth is that GW will never be one of those companies. For GW, the value in this set, compared against buying the models individually, is very high. Certainly an improvement. I don't own the box set (yet), but I understand there's also a lot of guidance for getting started with your models, with Kill Team and with 40K in general included in the Box Set, which lends itself well to what can be viewed as a gateway into the hobby. It hasn't made GW one of the "budget" wargaming companies out there - and I'm afraid that GW is going to be the biggest and most expensive company out there for the foreseeable future, because it can afford to be - but it is a step in the right direction and does show that GW is prepared to offer quality and value, in its own way, from time to time.
Mymearan wrote: Those are older kits. Newer GW plastic stuff is second to none and has insane detail. Obviously still not quite as sharp as resin but looking at the new Genestealer Cult models for example, they're truly astounding technically.
it seems you only have only bought GW stuff yet.
regarding hardplastic models, GW has nice designs (regarding monopose models) but technically they are medicore at best
Mymearan wrote: Those are older kits. Newer GW plastic stuff is second to none and has insane detail. Obviously still not quite as sharp as resin but looking at the new Genestealer Cult models for example, they're truly astounding technically.
it seems you only have only bought GW stuff yet.
regarding hardplastic models, GW has nice designs (regarding monopose models) but technically they are medicore at best
it seems you only have only bought GW stuff yet.
regarding hardplastic models, GW has nice designs (regarding monopose models) but technically they are medicore at best
Care to elaborate? Who is better?
I am personally fond of the Gundam models from Bandai. Pieces fit together, great detail, articulation for different poses, etc. They come in different ranges, so you can pay as little / as much as you want.
in 28mm or 1/56 HIPS, Dreamforge Games, Rubicon Models, Perry Miniatures
Ignoring scale, than they have to face Gunpla and similar products.
looking at the new Mantic or Warlord stuff, they are equal to GW with the difference of monopose+more details vs multipose with less
PrivateerPress does not offer many HIPS kits yet, but what they have match GW in quality
and they also get better with every new kit
The material itself won't make a better model. A better sculpt will make a better model. Crappy design in good material still results in a crappy model.
That true but each material has a different strong side. Plastic is better for crisp surfaces with hard edges (see: Gunpla, tanks, and so on) while resin is better for more organic stuff. It also allows for more undercuts or even undercuts at all. GW doesn't use slide moulds so they have to work around that problem (see below for examples) or they have to do that with multiple parts which demands more space on the frame (they do that more for single pose models).
https://www.games-workshop.com/en-NZ/Space-Marine-Terminator-Squad : Take the 360° view (with the cyclone missile launcher) and look at the inside knee area. It's not crisp at all where the knee bit meets the ribbed area. The detail is a bit loose, and the same goes for the outside of the boots and leg armour. They need the purity seal and on the right leg this metallic connector to make it work.
You can see the same here: https://www.games-workshop.com/en-NZ/Space-Marine-Tactical-Squad-2015 (chose one of the 360° view thingies) The otherwise crisp kneepads become chunky when they meet other areas (instead of being a well defined plate) because they made the mould in a way that doesn't allow for crisp details in that case.
It's a trade-off between number of parts and type of detail and comes with the material. It also often makes GW hair, while being three dimensional, look kinda stiff and one directional (if it's made in one piece). Then there's stuff like cloth with overlapping folds made in one piece. For plastic you end up with these sine wave like stiff robes while resin and metal make natural or exaggerated folds much easier.
With resin or metal you have other problems but these materials can make better details easier to achieve in 28 or 30mm organic (and even inorganic) miniatures.
kodos wrote: in 28mm or 1/56 HIPS, Dreamforge Games, Rubicon Models, Perry Miniatures
Ignoring scale, than they have to face Gunpla and similar products.
looking at the new Mantic or Warlord stuff, they are equal to GW with the difference of monopose+more details vs multipose with less
PrivateerPress does not offer many HIPS kits yet, but what they have match GW in quality
and they also get better with every new kit
Having put together stuff from Kingdom Death from Wargames Factory (which does all of Dreamforge's stuff) and Perry's kits from Rendara, no, no they are not close to GW's plastic quality. The meshing of pieces together and use of cuts is far superior to either of those companies. Also, I have had to deal with warpage on WGF's pieces meaning they are not letting pieces cool in the mold long enough. Putting the Kingdom Death pieces together at the same time as the AoS starter pieces, there was no question which kits were better designed. I still love the KD stuff and pick up the new kits, but they are not close to GW.
Rendara's kits are nice, but simplistic. Again not pushing design at all. At the same level that GW was at back in the early 2000's.
Can't comment on PP's new plastics as all I have seen is more of their PVC crap which is earning a massive amount of loathing locally. No one has picked up the new plastics and I don't want to waste money to find out. They had a massive opportunity to make an impact with the new starters and instead stayed with the same old PVC. As far as I'm concerned their figure quality was leapfrogged by WGF with their plastics.
For companies making stuff for the tabletop, GW is still superior from all I have seen.
I think you are forgetting that Dreamforge and kingdom death are small operations so i forgive the occasional slip up the break up of a model kit (although the no building instruction for kingdom death is a no no)
And when you get 20 valkir Dreamforge for 45$ instead of 5 for 50 with GW then i think that is a good price/quality value.
The material itself won't make a better model. A better sculpt will make a better model. Crappy design in good material still results in a crappy model.
That true but each material has a different strong side. Plastic is better for crisp surfaces with hard edges (see: Gunpla, tanks, and so on) while resin is better for more organic stuff. It also allows for more undercuts or even undercuts at all. GW doesn't use slide moulds so they have to work around that problem (see below for examples) or they have to do that with multiple parts which demands more space on the frame (they do that more for single pose models).
It's a trade-off between number of parts and type of detail and comes with the material. It also often makes GW hair, while being three dimensional, look kinda stiff and one directional (if it's made in one piece). Then there's stuff like cloth with overlapping folds made in one piece. For plastic you end up with these sine wave like stiff robes while resin and metal make natural or exaggerated folds much easier.
With resin or metal you have other problems but these materials can make better details easier to achieve in 28 or 30mm organic (and even inorganic) miniatures.
True. But therefore I'm quite astounded about the possibilities that are currently provided (not only by GW but others as well) in terms of splitting up a mini on a frame and thus allowing for undercuts on the minis itself and avoiding mould lines in that process.
Thinking back to some of the first minis I had they were split halfways through the body (either horizontally or vertically) and they truly had limitations in their design (and resulted in very bad mould lines as well).
Considering the other things you pointed out I'm not sure whether this is eventually a consequence (or limitation) of the product or a deliberate design decision. For example looking at my GSC I clearly see that the bottom of the robes are not modelled in detail... because you usually can't see them. Fro the layout on the sprues I assume that would have been possible to do some modelling there.
I assume that GW features are often exaggerated by design (like in your example with the knee pads)... which helps average painters like me. And then we are back to aesthetics...
And when you get 20 valkir Dreamforge for 45$ instead of 5 for 50 with GW then i think that is a good price/quality value.
And we're back to square one because the inherent value is very subjective (--> you could offer me Mantic Basileans for a nickle and a dime and I wouldn't touch them with a bargepole... but that's a different story). That's why I wanted to concentrate on the technical aspects...
Technical aspects come in second to the initial judgement of aesthetic design. I very much dislike how GW's use of CAD sculpting is focused more on "how much crap can we layer on one guy?" instead of producing elegant sculpts. I don't care how well-made a plastic sprue is, if the models produced are overwrought eyesores like the Age of Sigmar stuff.
There are some exquisitely precise machine-tooled lugnuts out there too, but that doesn't mean I'm going to build an army out of them.
As far as the question in the title goes, yes, I can agree that GW is getting better...but that is an entirely comparative term. From the perspective of playing multiple non-GW wargames these days, GW is still a dumpster fire...but at least the flames are burning lower these days, I guess.
Technical aspects come in second to the initial judgement of aesthetic design. I very much dislike how GW's use of CAD sculpting is focused more on "how much crap can we layer on one guy?" instead of producing elegant sculpts. I don't care how well-made a plastic sprue is, if the models produced are overwrought eyesores like the Age of Sigmar stuff.
There are some exquisitely precise machine-tooled lugnuts out there too, but that doesn't mean I'm going to build an army out of them.
As far as the question in the title goes, yes, I can agree that GW is getting better...but that is an entirely comparative term. From the perspective of playing multiple non-GW wargames these days, GW is still a dumpster fire...but at least the flames are burning lower these days, I guess.
Don't get me wrong. The technical aspect don't come first for me as well. I buy minis I like. But if these are terrible to assemble then I certainly won't buy more. Because my hobby time is in fact limited. Best example (and already pointed out) are the AoW dwarfs. Because they have been such a pain to assemble I didn't buy any other (plastic) kits from AoW anymore.
What I take from this thread is that there are obviously many factors which attribute to the original question and we all seem to have a different weighing of them...
Note to myself: I got to look for a Gundam model (I like) because I would like to check those out based on the Feedback here.
Jehan-reznor wrote: I think you are forgetting that Dreamforge and kingdom death are small operations so i forgive the occasional slip up the break up of a model kit (although the no building instruction for kingdom death is a no no)
Not really joining the discussion on this as I think it all ends up being subjective when it comes to material, but I tend to take the opposite approach. Smaller companies, one in which I am employed in, have the ability to put extra attention and effort into each order/piece/widget which is an advantage, whereas a larger operation like GW has a larger capacity for production but economies of scale is a double-edged sword and production issues can slip through the cracks much more easily. Just my experience, take it with a grain of your preferred spice.
Mymearan wrote: Those are older kits. Newer GW plastic stuff is second to none and has insane detail. Obviously still not quite as sharp as resin but looking at the new Genestealer Cult models for example, they're truly astounding technically.
it seems you only have only bought GW stuff yet.
regarding hardplastic models, GW has nice designs (regarding monopose models) but technically they are medicore at best
I have and have seen plenty of other stuff. Show me better multi-layered and complex pose design that is better cut on a sprue to hide join lines and mould lines, maximise use of sprue space, allowing undercuts, and still being sturdy and easy to assemble, than recent GW kits.
kronk wrote: I am happier with the WD content, now.
Oh God yeah, how did I forget to mention this. Weekly WD and Warhammer Visions were both crap. I'm so glad it's back to the monthly version now, and, although it has - sadly - been a while, I think the content is even better than ever. Let's hope they keep it up.
kodos wrote: Dreamforge Dames Leviathan > GW knight, Eisenkern Valkir > Space Marines
Malifaux Models or Gundams too
So do those models do ALL the stuff I listed, and better than GW? You just listed some names but no reason why they're better. And you cherry-picked two specific GW kits that also happen to be a couple of years old...
), I don't know how on earth people have replaced their former game with it.
five dudes this last weekend, instead of the eight she 
- but it's good to have a solid and widely-used ruleset for my fantasy models and, I must admit, the ability to pretty much field anything and everything in games has allowed me to use the numerous miscellaneous models I have knocking about...
